TT; Book 1: Bible Verse Mafia - Game over!

[VitaminR]

/confirm

[VitaminR]

Hi all,

Random Vote: inHimshallibe

Hmm... oddly appropriate.

[VitaminR]

The VisMaior-thing seems to be the first marginally suspicious action, so I'm going to go with Kerplunk.

Unvote: inHimshallibe

Vote: VisMaior

[VitaminR]

Back from my holidays. I'll try to post something with coherency later. I don't have the time for a re-read at this point.

[VitaminR]

Right, found some time.

Armlx's comment doesn't strike me as particularly scummy to be honest. I'd rather judge his intentions by his actions than by an off-hand comment on his suspicions.
RoadBird doesn't stick out in his bandwagon jumping and I'm a bit weary of voting people based on issue posts at this point. There are too many people who have hardly contributed.
I don't see what the Coron wagon was based on.

VisMaior is still the only one who seems to have done something remotely scummy. His inconsistency indicates an ulterior motive. I'll stick with my vote on him for now.

Some other things that struck me on the re-read:
I was surprised by how fast the Coron wagon took off and how many people blindly followed mith. It also makes me slightly suspicious of mith, because he almost seemed to be directing the chaotic bandwagon voting.

Commodore Amazing, this is all you've posted in-game:

vote: Flying Dutchman

Flying Dutchman dead yet?

We're not. We're lynching Flying Dutchman.

Why?

[VitaminR]

And why?

No posts or few posts with no content.

Thanks.

Roadbird, this post started the Coron wagon:

Fair enough.

Vote: Coron

The Coron bandwagon is now boarding. Please proceed to gate 107 for departure. Thank you.

Also, the assignment-thing seemed to get way too much attention.
I am just suspicious of people who take control so easily and early in the game. But maybe mith is a good enough player to warrant blind following. I don't know, because I haven't played with him before.[/quote]

[VitaminR]

I think I'm going to switch to RoadBird. That 9th vote really struck me as scummy.

Unvote: VisMaior

Vote: RoadBird

[VitaminR]

Going back to my day 1 vote for now.

Vote: Roadbird

Armlx's verse reads like a townie to me.

[VitaminR]

I'm not sure I like the speed of the RB wagon, especially with some of the votes having very little justification, but I haven't seen better from RoadBird.

Sticking with my vote for now.

[VitaminR]

For me it was mostly his ninth vote on FD that struck me as scummy. Other than that, early bandwagoning and no real attempts to contribute.

I thought Coron and Kerplunk not posting for a long period and returning with a bandwagon vote and no content was also suspicious.

[VitaminR]

Hmm... just looked up his verse. I believe his claim.

Unvote: RoadBird

Vote: Kerplunk

For returning with a bandwagon vote without promised argumentation.

[VitaminR]

The role he claimed.

[VitaminR]

He claimed townie.
Although, re-reading it doesn't match armlx's verse at all. And that seems a lot more like what I'd expect from a townie.

Unvote: Kerplunk

What does everyone else think?

[VitaminR]

Yeah, I know and I agree with you. There is just something about his claim that makes me doubt myself. I can't really explain it at this point.

[VitaminR]

True, there is just something about his claim. It is very similar to my verse. But I'm not sure Cadmium would not foresee that kind of confirmation.

Thoughts?

[VitaminR]

I think Mith's interpretation of the 107 verses fits very well. I'm not sure how to value it in terms of determining alignment, though.

Vote: LyingBrian

[VitaminR]

I think Mith's interpretation of the 107 verses fits very well. I'm not sure how to value it in terms of determining alignment, though.

Vote: LyingBrian

[VitaminR]

the current play is totally not pooky.

This struck me as particularly scummy. Care to provide content at all?

Vote: Kerplunk

For lurking and for reasons stated earlier.

[VitaminR]

Well I want to give him the chance to provide more content than simply "the current play is not me." Comments like that really get on my nerves. It's right up there with "seriously, I'm a bad lynch" and "you guys don't want to make me claim."

Kerplunk has been more lurkish and less productive in my eyes. Also, he promised content yesterday and then simply bandwagoned RoadBird without providing any justification. I think he's scummier.

As far as LML's sanity goes, I think it's unlikely we can deduce anything from the actual text. The context seems more important. In this case, the addressee is King Solomon. Based on that, I think we can trust his results for now.

[VitaminR]

I was and am annoyed by Pooky's comment and lack of content. I don't want to vote him based solely on that. Pressure voting is not productive. Like all the unvotes of Kerplunk now.

I voted Kerplunk for what he did Day 2. I'm not sure what the misdirection here is.

[VitaminR]

Pooky, I'm not entirely content with the bandwagon on you as I've said earlier, but your response is not justified.

How much have you honestly contributed to finding scum? Also, ranting about what the lack of productivity brings about is strange, because you have mostly only contributed to that atmosphere.

[VitaminR]

Pooky, calm down. Swearing and shouting isn't going to help nor is it going to make people listen.

You can't contribute in this environment? That is an excuse for a vicious circle of complete inactivity. There is always room for an attempt at productivity.

I don't like the dichotonous attitude, but DP is not the only one guilty of that as far as I can see.

[VitaminR]

I guess ur suggesting that I calmly fold my hands and sit down and try to use gentle logic to bring you guys around so that we can actually get a game going instead of shouting at the top of my lungs in fustration at the screen?

Oh wait, that's what I was doing for the last three weeks before I got angry and started ranting! As I remember, you guys just nodded alot and said vote: Pooky without actuaylly giving any reasons or logic.

Shoot that path sure turned out to be a winner no?

Could you please show me where you used to gentle logic to bring us around? Especially where you did over a period of three weeks.

For the record, my suggestion is that you stop ranting and play the game. Yes, the atmosphere isn't the epitomy of productivity. Well, let's try to change that by getting rid of some of this unnecessary hostility and actually looking for scum. This discussion isn't getting us anywhere.

If you want me to stop trying to wake the town up? You want the town to keep stumbling towards its grave in some sort of lethargic trance?

IF you don't, then post something more than a 3 lines which talks about productivity(which you haven't shown), telling me to quiet down(when really the problem is you being too quiet), and telling us DP isn't the only one guilty(duh we know, you're guilty of it too).

Simply ranting is not waking the town up. Productivity is waking the town up.

My statement about DP was meant to indicate that I don't think we can pin the dichotonous thinking on him when it is a prevailing attitude. Also, where have I shown it?

I don't like how you say "the problem is you being too quiet." It's a valid point about my productivity, but it is unrelated to the case against you.

InHim, could you outline some of your conclusions more clearly? I'm not sure I follow all of them.

[VitaminR]

I've also found VitaminR slightly suspicous but I haven't played with him enough to conclude anything definite on him. I find it very odd that it's so clear that if you compare post-by-post between me and DP that our posting history can be so similar with his being clearly worse than mine yet you've decided to go after me instead of him based on reasoning that is MUCH more applicable to him than me.

It's a separation effect that I believe could be very useful later in the game.

Eh? That's a blatant mischaracterisation of my actions. Where have I gone after you? I responded to your ranting because I didn't feel it was justified. I've never stated you were the most unproductive person in the game nor have I voted you for unproductivity. Why would DP need to be involved? I have not singled you out. I went into a discussion with you because I thought your position and attitude were unjustified and potentially harmful to the town.

Also, why me? Why not, say Glork (or even DP who is voting you for unproductivity when he is less productive)? He

has

voted you over DP for unproductivity. He has even declined to discuss it with you directly.

Unvote: Kerplunk

Vote: Pooky

For mischaracterisation and ignoring the actions of others to single me out unfairly.

[VitaminR]

That 2nd sentence in the quote isn't even about you, I'm addressing Glork in the post and that 2nd sentence is referring to HIM.

Only the first sentence is referring to you and I've certainly not mischaracterized you in that first sentence.

Fair enough. Could you explain why you are suspicious of me then?

I'd also like to see you respond to DP's question about the townie PM.

I'm not sure what to think of DP's claim. I'm beginning to think people completely missed my remark that my verse is similar to RoadBird's. I don't see a good reason to reveal the exact number at this point, although it should be obvious it is another 107. Weak masons make sense in that regard. And, might I add, the kind of creative use of the theme I would expect from our mod.

[VitaminR]

I can't believe Fritz missed a chance to shout "hammah!."

[VitaminR]

Job 14:14 seems like an odd verse for scum. No mention of sin at all. I'm inclined to go with Glork's interpretation. After all, the "renewal" mentioned can't apply to EnderX, because he'd simply be lynched if resurrected. A connection there seems obvious.

Fritzler's "miscount" does make me uneasy. It's an easy excuse. I agree with Glork that CA's comment there is strange and that sort of implicit defence is suspicious.

I think we're in a good position. Looking at the players alive:
Ameliaslay (replacing Coron)
Commodore Amazing
Dragon Phoenix (replacing Mastermind of Sin) - claimed Townie
Fritzler
Glork (replacing Kerplunk)
inHimshallibe - cleared by LML
LoudmouthLee (replacing Iammars) - claimed cop
mith - 107 verse/cleared by LML
RoadBird - 107 verse
the silent speaker - Job 14:13 - resurrected night 4
VisMaior - claimed power role/cleared by LML

I'm inclined to trust DP, because there was no pressure to claim (though I still feel it was ill-advised) which leaves four players for the moment. I'm hoping LML's result will help further.

[VitaminR]

Fritz, could you explain it then?

[VitaminR]

Not entirely sure what's going on, but I can't see this as a scum gambit.

Vote: VisMaior

And VM, I don't see what's stopping you.

[VitaminR]

VM claimed Day 1, Glork.

[VitaminR]

Just pointing it out.

Pulled up his claim for convenience:
Psalm 32:7

You are my hiding place;
you will protect me from trouble
and surround me with songs of deliverance.
Selah

[VitaminR]

Umm... aren't those the same results you gave Day 3?

[VitaminR]

Can someone explain to me what happened Day 4?

[VitaminR]

I'd personally prefer to hear from Fritzler and LML before deciding on anything.

[VitaminR]

I'm assuming nothing at all after happened the first three nights?
Any idea how LML's power loss fits in and whether is it permanent?

It seems odd that a cop would be recruitable, but not a doc. I don't think Fritz is lying, though. That would be too obvious.

[VitaminR]

Except of course if VM wasn't a doc, but a hider.

That does seem likely, especially when looking at Glork's verse:

"Stretch out your hand to heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus."

Reads like a doc to me.

[VitaminR]

Mackay, a mason recruiter and a four-person "weak" mason group does strike me as odd, but I find it hard to believe that a cult recruiter would reveal his recruitment in-game. Especially with his willingness to out last night's recruit. That was, however, gut feeling.

I'm still inclined to think Fritz is at least not aware of his cult leader status if he is cult, but CA's claim does present solid evidence that is hard to get around.
His role just doesn't make sense if there's not something fishy there. Especially with the ambiguity in his verse I don't believe he had an ability that could possibly be detrimental to the town. That leads me to the conclusion that bringing LML out of the "masonship" was good for the town.

Vote: Fritzler

[VitaminR]

Because I was able to be recruited to Fritz's Masonry, I MUST be a naive cop. Rationale: Vis was a doc and he was UNRECRUITABLE. I investigated someone whom I was sure was scum last night, and they came innocent.

#2) I am a naive cop. (90% sure)

This confused me yesterday. Who did you investigate whom you were was scum? And if it gives you certainty, where does the 90% come from?

LML, could you clarify?

[VitaminR]

I think if we follow the cult there is at least a chance of a town victory. I'm not sure how town would win with the cult, but lynching a cultist seems to spell certain doom for us.

Vote: Mackay

[VitaminR]

Mith is lying. I am the final cultist. He turned up unrecruitable last night. LML specifically stated it wasn't mith was so that we could attempt to recruit mith and mith wouldn't be able to counterclaim me the next day. That way, if mith turns out town, cult has a majority and if mith turns up scum, he can't counterclaim. A win either way.

Mith is our last killer.

Vote: mith

[VitaminR]

I've already addressed LML's comment, and it's motivation. The two of us were so pissed off at Fritz that we had agreed to attempt to survive the game together and draw. He was trying to keep me alive (and got himself killed for it).

Addressed? Why would LML say that? Shielding is nonsense, there was no need to shield. Think about this CA and Amelia, why would LML make that comment? Why make a future claim more difficult if mith was his cult buddy?

Crossing out mith in thread and attempting to recruit him guarantees a win.

1. How would SK mith be able to come up with such a claim as a same-verse mason *before* one of the other masons came out? Not I only would I have to come up with the idea for verse-confirming masons on day 1 (otherwise, why choose that verse to plant?), I'd have to *find* verses like that, get quite lucky in them actually turning up in the game, and get even more lucky in not claiming one that someone else actually has. All so I could come out and save Roadbird at the last moment. Yeah, that makes sense...

Once Roadbird had claimed though, it would be a simple matter for VitaminRscum to look at the chapter, notice how there's 4 verses the same, and start hinting at being one of them (not ever actually claiming which). I pinned myself to one from the start, before I could have even known about them. This should be plenty on its own.

A simple matter? An easy way of fitting in far-fetched speculation. Interesting also how you discounted RoadBird picking up on your role hints in your claim then, yet now find it likely that I did. You're twisting the perspective to fit your interpretation.
This puzzled me too, until I noticed you gave it away yourself in your claim:
[quote="mith]"Psalm 107:31. There's four identical verses in Psalm 107; I think it might be some sort of weakened mason type role. I wouldn't put it past Cadmium to have left one as

a safe scum claim

, though I'm not sure how this would've been done considering all anyone was sent was a verse and whether they needed to send a choice. Even so, I see no reason to lynch Roadbird today. I expect to die tonight for this, but a clever scum probably would've picked up on what I was hinting at anyway.[/quote]
And honestly, how does your role-hinting make sense otherwise? Why would a townie want to breadcrumb his verse? It makes perfect sense for scum setting up a claim.

2. The first point was "I claimed first", and the second is like it: I claimed cultist first.

Let's say I'm the SK, and I want to come out as the last cultist to try to get the real cultist (or anyone, for that matter; the SK wouldn't care) lynched. I have three choices I can go after. But if I pick the wrong one, the real cultist comes out, and I get lynched. That didn't happen. Either I got pretty lucky... or I really am the cultist.

VitaminR on the other hand, claimed after me. He knew who the real cultist was, and his only option (well, other than the ones I mentioned at the start, which were to him equally futile, and did not have the plus of casting doubt on my cult claim) was to go after me. There's no chance involved here; after my claim, he already knows who tried to recruit him, and doesn't have to guess.

That's a weak argument. I couldn't have claimed earlier, I wasn't on.
You had three choices to go after? That's just misrepresentation. CA was confirmed by LML. 50% chance. The point is, mith, you had no other option. LML's comment prevents an effective counter-claim. The only way you would appear believable was if you guessed and claimed first. Gutsy, but ultimately the only viable option.

3. And the third reason... I have chat logs with LML. It seems unsporting to actually use them, but if the mod approves and the town insists, I will.

Now this is really cheap. You have been around long enough to know the rules about outside and inside thread communication. Purposefully naively pretending in order to score credit points.

[VitaminR]

Hi, I'm here. I'm going to do a reread, but before I make the final vote I want a couple of things clarified.

VitaminR, if you haven't claimed your original role (can't remember), please do so.

VitaminR, what night were you recruited? Who else was part of the cult?

Psalm 107:21.

I was recruited night 5. I was told I could communicate with Fritz and LML.

[VitaminR]

I was hoping to be able to respond to mith's post tonight, but I'm not yet halfway and I have work to do. It'll have to wait for tomorrow, sorry.

[VitaminR]

I have decided to cut the quotes in order to address everything in a clearer structure. Hope the clarity is preserved.

LML's comment

Mith, I know you already put forth shielding as a justificiation, but it doesn't make sense. Why would LML need to protect you? Give me one clear reason. What specific action does it prevent? The cult buddy getting night-killed is an advantage to the cult because it leaves LML, confirmed and trusted by the town, alive.

Claiming/breadcrumbs

I had the line in my head, not the verse number. That's why I didn't see the similarity until I saw the content of the verse.

You're assuming I looked up RoadBird's verse, somehow knew that there were identical psalms (how would I know this?) and decided to gamble on a weak mason interpretation. Then why didn't I bring it up? Why would I hold back information? Also, if I was setting up a fake claim, wouldn't I take care not to look hesitant?

Your interpretation seems to rely on unbelievable ingenuity on my part, yet hinge on my hesitancy in it.

Safe claim

I don't see how you can exclude safe claims based on the rules. This is a fallacy, because you're leaping to a conclusion that is not supported by the warrant properly. You have not provided a reason why it should be stated in the rules. You have also overlooked the perfectly reasonable explanation that the SK was given a mason safe claim to gain an edge.

Math

I really can't follow your numbers. It is based on several assumptions that have no evidence for them and it present a skewed perspective.

Similarly, you could look at the situation before you claimed and list this:
1. CA SK, VitaminR Cult. 1/12
2. CA SK, mith Cult. 1/12
3. CA SK, Amelia Cult. 1/12 etc.

Or after you claimed:
1. mith SK, VitaminR Cult. 1/2
2. VitaminR SK, mith Cult. 1/2

The numbers are in your favour in your example, because you choose a perspective that allows you to draw in other possibilities concerning my claim but not concerning yours. It does not establish anything other than the fact that you claimed first.

I will build my case against mith in the following post, also for clarity reasons.

[VitaminR]

Ameliaslay and CA, ask yourself these questions:

1) Why would LML rule out mith? What purpose does this comment have? It obstructs mith's claim for a reason. Because it was intended to do so.

2) Why did mith claim so early? If he is cult, he knows the SK (because of LML's comment) has a false idea of who the remaining cultist is. If he waits, the SK will slip up in the claim and out themselves. He claimed early because he had to claim. As SK, taking the gamble was his only shot.

3) Why is mith leaping to poorly supported conclusions, drawing in skewed probability scenarios and trying to muddle the factual evidence by offering to invent paraphrases of night conversations?

The only answer that fits these all these questions is the simple truth:
Mith is the SK.

LML and I set it up so well and I feel I'm screwing it up, but it's still possible it won't cost us.

[VitaminR]

Post them. I'd like to see what you've come up with.

[VitaminR]

LML's comment

Why would he have that assurance with you? You say he needed you alive, but there still isn't an action you're preventing. My point was, why would scum night-kill LML's cult buddy?

Claiming/breadcrumbs

It is a possibility that someone would set up like that, but it doesn't fit my later behaviour. Coming out with a hesitant claim and waiting for someone else to give it the weak mason interpretation is a huge risk. Also, how would I know there were similar verses out there?

Math

The assumptions do not matter. It is the fact that you choose to depict a situation where the numbers suit you above situations where the numbers are equal for no good reason.

[VitaminR]

Thought I'd post that since I had already typed it out, even if it was fairly useless.

[VitaminR]

CA, you realise you still lose, btw?

[VitaminR]

You're most likely unrecruitable for the cult. Amelia and mith win.

[VitaminR]

Oh, deal. Definitely. I don't see why not. I have no real incentive to stab you in the back. It does not give me a win and it is the cult's plans I want to thwart.

[VitaminR]

Even if Ameliaslay does not cooperate, we can force a tie.

Unvote: mith

Vote: No Lynch

[VitaminR]

CA, what do you have against mith's plan?

If you're recruitable, you win. If you're unrecruitable, you draw. The same thing happens if we follow your plan.

[VitaminR]

I was hoping you'd try to recruit CA straight away, but I guess there was always the fear of backstabbing.

Vote: No Lynch

[VitaminR]

Woo!

Good game guys. Enjoyed this one immensely.

Thanks for modding, Cadmium.

[VitaminR]

I'd like to debate the use of chat logs in this game. Should I bring that up here or start a thread in the mafia discussion forum?

[VitaminR]

Should I bring that up here or start a thread in the mafia discussion forum?

Start a thread, I was going to start one myself anyway, just haven't gotten to it. I'll start a thread on playing for secondary goals, as well, since that came up too.

It didn't matter here, of course. CA could've offered his deal without knowing for sure which of us was the SK, and I would've done the same thing from there.

Oh, btw. Were you a Psalm verse, VR, or something else?

I think I'll start a thread. It didn't really affect this game.

I had a psalm verse safe claim. Nowhere near as ingenuitive as you made me out to be, so I think most of the praise I'm getting is a bit unjustified (though thanks, Mackay. Great avatar, btw!).

I'll post some comments and explain my choices later.

[VitaminR]

LML could have revealed me as the cultist in hopes that I would get killed and fail in my recruit; I don't know if VitaminR was unsure who the cultist was or what, maybe he would've killed LML anyway, but maybe not.

He also could have sold me out and gotten me lynched, while pointing out Mackay as one scum and shooting for some variation of a Prisoner's Dilemma, but that would've been risky.

I was convinced Amelia was the cultist. I thought the argument I used about LML's comment actually applied and that he made it to recruit you and foil a potential counterclaim. Also, if Fritz tried to use his role investigatively, Amelia is a logical choice.

I considered night-killing Amelia because of that (with you being recruited as I presumed I would lose anyway so my only chance was to stop the recruitment), but decided in the end that the recruitment probably wouldn't be stopped and that my best shot was hoping that I was wrong and counter-claiming.