Cold War Mafia - GAME OVER!!

[The Fonz]

I get the feeling there is something weird going on here. Think about it, there were tons of non Soviet or US nationalities flipped by then, so we can't reasonably suppose Feysal is 'East German Soviet Mafia' who thought that everyone was either US or Soviet. Gonnano claimed to be Hungarian, not Soviet or Soviet Hungarian. Therefore, it's likely that particular scum group knew all too well that the safe thing to do was to claim the nationality but not the soviet modifier, in which case he would just have claimed East German neighbor.

Feysal isn't a VI. It's not reasonable to assume he was scum who was unaware of the above. Therefore, the most likely reason I can think of to claim to be a 'Soviet Neighbor' is

that's what his PM actually says.

That leaves a couple of possibilities. Mod error, intentional bastardry, one or other didn't read the PM properly, or that Smargaret is lying.

The 'we should trust each other' thing does give me pause, and I'd like an explanation of that, but I'd also like both to request mod clarification here, because something isn't adding up. If Smargaret comes back and says 'Yes the mod has re-iterated that Feysal's rolename is East German' and Feysal comes back and says 'Mod has confirmed my rolename is soviet, not East German' then we have an either/or since the alternative would be directly lying to the players. But I want to exhaust all other possibilities first.

[smargaret]

Fonz, I was looking at my role pm when I wrote that post. Furthermore, Erich Honnecker cannot be Soviet in nationality - that just wasn't true.

[Sotty7]

7th vote count of day 4

Furcolow - 1 -

The Fonz

The Fonz - 2 -

Beasts of the Sea, Lowell

Enigma - 1 -

Scott Brosius

Feysal - 5 -

ThAdmiral, smargaret, Stephoscope, bvoigt, LynchMePls

Not voting - 5 -

Feysal, Enigma, Sathoris, Furcolow, PeregrineV

• With
  14
  alive, it takes
  8
  to lynch.
  
• Deadline for the end of Day four is Thursday 21st of April @ 11am CST

[The Fonz]

Fonz, I was looking at my role pm when I wrote that post. Furthermore, Erich Honnecker cannot be Soviet in nationality - that just wasn't true.

It just strikes me as a really, really bizarre kind of mistake for a remotely competent scum player to make.

[ThAdmiral]

Fonz, I was looking at my role pm when I wrote that post. Furthermore, Erich Honnecker cannot be Soviet in nationality - that just wasn't true.

It just strikes me as a really, really bizarre kind of mistake for a remotely competent scum player to make.

It's not so obvious that it would definitely have been picked up. I doubt if smarg hadn't mentioned it anyone else would have noticed.

[Beasts of the Sea]

Sorry everyone for being prodded again. Work and real life stuff is consuming my time. I should have a post up tonight or tomorrow at the latest.

[Furcolow]

Still waiting on Feysal before I vote his ass off the island
Feysal, you better make it good

[Sathoris]

Hate to be feysalling but I'm not sure where to place my vote.

I know for a fact that smargaret is Willy Brandt, West German neighbor, and she knows similarly who I am. While I'm at it, I can also reveal two clues I left to my role and nationality. The major one was in post #462, my second one in the game. Take the first letter of each sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and you get AUFERSTANDEN AUS RUINEN, the name and first verse of the East German anthem, which I rather like.


The key here is that I implied Bunnylover would be either Cuban or Soviet, not both. At the time, from my own role, I thought that Soviet townies would not have a nationality other than Soviet. My role has no mention of me being East German anywhere. It was not until VP Baltar flipped Vietnamese Soviet that I learned otherwise

Why would you leave such an elaborate clue that only you can find out. (Obviousy to reference back to as you're doing now) At the time when you knew your role never mentioned you as East German. Why not leave a soviet clue hidden somewhere?

[Furcolow]

That's a good point, Sathoris, it makes me not even want to be Fey-stalling with my vote

[The Fonz]

Fonz, I was looking at my role pm when I wrote that post. Furthermore, Erich Honnecker cannot be Soviet in nationality - that just wasn't true.

It just strikes me as a really, really bizarre kind of mistake for a remotely competent scum player to make.

It's not so obvious that it would definitely have been picked up. I doubt if smarg hadn't mentioned it anyone else would have noticed.

I completely disagree with this. I mean, it's pretty common knowledge Honecker was East German. My immediate reaction to a 'Soviet neighbor' claim was 'well that's weird.' More to the point,

a member of the Soviet mafia

was aware enough of it already to claim nationality-only.

That's a good point, Sathoris, it makes me not even want to be Fey-stalling with my vote

It's not a good point, regardless of what the role PM said, Honecker was East German, and lived his entire life in Germany/East Germany (apart from a year spent in Moscow) until the fall of the wall. If you're going to breadcrumb Honecker, of course you'd breadcrumb East German. If you breadcrumbed Russian, someone would go 'Why did you crumb Russian when your role is a German person?' and use that as an argument for him being scum. This just underlines my point- Feysal's crumb makes it explicitly clear he knew exactly who Honecker was, and what his nationality was.

In order for that to be a slip, Feysal would have to be paying absolutely no attention to the thread, and the scum would have to not have discussed fakeclaiming at all in their QT (or Feysal didn't pay attention there, too).

At the end of the day, if both players stick to their stories as stated so far, we've got no choice but to lynch Feysal. But it still strikes me that there's something fishy here.

[LimMePls]

At the end of the day, if both players stick to their stories as stated so far, we've got no choice but to lynch Feysal. But it still strikes me that there's something fishy here.

I'm not crazy about the "we've got no choice" bit here. It's preparing for a move to the wagon but if the flip goes the other way it's like "well, we had no choice...".

[PeregrineV]

@Feysal- I would still like some sort of explanation about this (Post 1938), since it seems fairly major. Would also like to hear your response to smargrets posts about the topic Post 1940.

@The Fonz- I have no idea why David Parker lied. Why do you think he lied?

[PeregrineV]

@Enigma- just curious how far you are into the thread read, and if you can see why EGL's activity raised hackles.

[Lowell]

Thought I posted this already; not sure what happened. I'm wavering on the feysal case, but fonz' "too dumb to be scum" doesn't fill me with confidence of feysal's innocence.

[Furcolow]

vote: The Fonz

I don't like the "we have to do this" or "we have to do that"
Hell, we can pick between them at LYLO for all I care.
Fonz is really being too close-minded.

[LimMePls]

Nothing new to comment on. Still like my vote.

[Beasts of the Sea]

Incidentally, I never said I didn't think Gonnano was scum. I had a neutral-ish, mildly scummy read on him, but thought others were much scummier and that the case on him was overblown. I said I thought Bvoight was explicitly town.

I read "gonnano isn't that scummy" as "he's not worth pushing a lynch on" and "he's not as scummy as everyone else thinks" and "he's pretty much not scum".

No, I'm not. You contended that I was pushing Furc to save Gonnano. I was using the exact same arguments to push Furc when Gonnano was at threat as when Smargaret was at threat. The Gonnano wagon was available when I voted Furc first, but I preferred the Furcwagon. To my mind, when you accuse someone of 'pushing X to save Y' it implies that saving Y is the major motivation behind your push of X. And that doesn't make any sense since I was pushing Furc with the exact same line of reasoning I was before Gonnano was in danger.

To point out that I am well aware of Furc's rep for idiocy and erratic play, and that that wasn't why I was voting him: specifically, that I felt his play in this game was specifically scummy even taking into account my meta knowledge of him

, because a) Despite all the stupid things I'd seen him do, lying as town wasn't one of them and b) his lies in this game seemed particularly survival-orientated and therefore scummy: claiming BP has obvious motive for scum wanting to avoid potential rival scum's nightkills, and claiming doctor when caught out seems designed to avoid getting lynched, and c) he didn't change his claim spontaneously, as you might expect someone just being erratic to do; he changed it in response to being caught in a lie, which is what you'd expect scum to do.

I think your are going out of your way to interpret your previous posts incorrectly. Your post here barely assigns motive only to his behavior being isolated to this game because you said "but this behavior is bad even for him". And that doesn't make any sense with your afterthought here.

The former is only really possible if LMP is his partner and decided that he was going down despite the claim so he might as well get some town cred. If the scum had actual watching results and LMP wasn't his partner, he wouldn't have got caught out on his claim.

You are downplaying the situation considerably. If gonnano wasn't lynched and was a claimed watcher how long do you really think he would have survived until endgame and never been revealed?

Claiming BS results and hoping no-one counterclaims them is incredibly risky relative to claiming actual watching results.

Which is why I asked you if you thought he was on a scum team with an actual watcher. Do you think that is the case or not?

I didn't claim a town read on both. The more town of the two imho (Bvoight) was the one people were trying to lynch first. The bolded doesn't even make sense. You think I'm scum with Gonnano, and was trying to use the 'Well bvoight was town so now I don' suspect Gonnano no more' kind of argument argument when I made quite clear I THOUGHT BVOIGHT WAS TOWN IN THE FIRST PLACE, and therefore never bought into any kind of 'Bvoight and Gonnano' theory?

I started looking at you more closely when I was reading back over gonnano, but as I said it isn't out of the realm of possibility that you may be scum with bvoit. In either situation you determining which order others find them scummy is scummy because you should have been advocating for your solid town read and the person who "isn't that scummy" to not be lynched; not weigh out the order in which people would like to lynch them.

N3:

First post

: I had posted that I thought he was clear (because of gonnano's pushing for his id). He disagrees, saying that he could have told his partners not to recognize him. He reveals a crumb from a power role - why were you looking? Fonz is town. EGL is scum and should be lynched,

unless we want to make him play for us

. Asks about informative roles. - WIFOM, pr hunting x2, then he disappears.

What does the bolded mean?

Regarding this whole neighbor thing I think (obviously) the the most condemning thing is that Feysal is claiming one nationality and has a mod confirmed (via smargaret) different nationality. I'd like to hear what Feysal's response to this is because it seems pretty bizarre but lying about faction is pretty clear cut; and as much as it pains me to say this, I agree with The Fonz that something seems a little fishy. I'm having a hard time swallowing smargaret's claim and interpretation at face value since she was so high on my scum list yesterday but I don't see the benefit to her setting up her neighbor to go down (especially when she was under no pressure) unless she they are both on opposing scum teams and she is on the bigger one and has information on Feysal and he must die... That is absurd though, and even by conspiracy theory standards is pretty bad. The other thing that is bothering me is why Feysalscum would point out PR crumbs to someone not on his scum team? What benefit did he get from that being scum?

Feysal and smargaret - did you guys ever discuss your own suspicions of each other? smarg - was there anything else to your vote on your neighbor besides what you said in 256?

[Scott Brosius]

The too dumb to be scum argument never flies with me. Scum are not these evil geniuses that never make dumb mistakes. Still holding off voting for Feysal until he returns to explain himself.

[Enigma]

About half way throughish.

Should have a lot of free time once next week starts as it'll be our

holiday

non-teaching period...

[The Fonz]

At the end of the day, if both players stick to their stories as stated so far, we've got no choice but to lynch Feysal. But it still strikes me that there's something fishy here.

I'm not crazy about the "we've got no choice" bit here. It's preparing for a move to the wagon but if the flip goes the other way it's like "well, we had no choice...".

I'm trying to work out what your actual problem is here. Do you not think you should always lynch in non-lylo situations where two players claim contradicting role information, especially when neither is a 'power role' per se? Is it not a no-brainer? And do you really think it matters whether I personally join this wagon or not? I have made quite clear that I have a town read on Feysal. Nonetheless, if this is

not

a case of player or mod error, we have two players claiming contradicting information.

@The Fonz- I have no idea why David Parker lied. Why do you think he lied?

The most obvious explanation would be to protect his buddy ThAd. The second most obvious is to buddy up to ThAd-town. Both of those are more likely than 'He really thought ThAd was town and it was worth the risk' because the risk there is HUGE for town.

Incidentally, I never said I didn't think Gonnano was scum. I had a neutral-ish, mildly scummy read on him, but thought others were much scummier and that the case on him was overblown. I said I thought Bvoight was explicitly town.

I read "gonnano isn't that scummy" as "he's not worth pushing a lynch on" and "he's not as scummy as everyone else thinks" and "he's pretty much not scum".

The first two follow, then the third is just a massive leap. If I thought he wasn't scummy at all, I would have said so. Look at my catchup post. I found his early behaviour troubling, but later on the arguments against him seemed to be blown out of all proportion. He was probably in the top half of scummiest players, but there were something like 4-5 people I wanted dead sooner, and I was uncomfortable with people trying to tie him to bvoight, who again, I read as town.

No, I'm not. You contended that I was pushing Furc to save Gonnano. I was using the exact same arguments to push Furc when Gonnano was at threat as when Smargaret was at threat. The Gonnano wagon was available when I voted Furc first, but I preferred the Furcwagon. To my mind, when you accuse someone of 'pushing X to save Y' it implies that saving Y is the major motivation behind your push of X. And that doesn't make any sense since I was pushing Furc with the exact same line of reasoning I was before Gonnano was in danger.

To point out that I am well aware of Furc's rep for idiocy and erratic play, and that that wasn't why I was voting him: specifically, that I felt his play in this game was specifically scummy even taking into account my meta knowledge of him

, because a) Despite all the stupid things I'd seen him do, lying as town wasn't one of them and b) his lies in this game seemed particularly survival-orientated and therefore scummy: claiming BP has obvious motive for scum wanting to avoid potential rival scum's nightkills, and claiming doctor when caught out seems designed to avoid getting lynched, and c) he didn't change his claim spontaneously, as you might expect someone just being erratic to do; he changed it in response to being caught in a lie, which is what you'd expect scum to do.

I think your are going out of your way to interpret your previous posts incorrectly. Your post here barely assigns motive only to his behavior being isolated to this game because you said "but this behavior is bad even for him".

Wait, what? This statement here is basically a paraphrase of 'his behaviour in this specific games stands out as scummy, even given his meta' and yet it's like you're trying to act like it's a contradiction of it. It implies knowledge of his meta, and that his play in this game stands out as being particularly bad ie scummy.

And that doesn't make any sense with your afterthought here.

Seriously, wtf? How does adding another example of erratic play that I'm aware of (therefore elaborating on the fact that I am all too familiar with Furc's meta) contradict

anything

in the earlier point? Essentially, my explanation here, being true, makes perfect sense. Your interpretation of it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Your argument is basically that I was doing the exact opposite of what I was actually doing: trying to get Furc lynched for merely being his erratic self when quite obviously, the whole point of bringing up Furc's erratic meta in the first place was to make clear that I was NOT doing precisely this- his play in this game stood out as scummy with full knowledge of his tendency to be erratic.

The former is only really possible if LMP is his partner and decided that he was going down despite the claim so he might as well get some town cred. If the scum had actual watching results and LMP wasn't his partner, he wouldn't have got caught out on his claim.

You are downplaying the situation considerably. If gonnano wasn't lynched and was a claimed watcher how long do you really think he would have survived until endgame and never been revealed?

Again, what's your actual point here? I said 'Well his partners would have known he was going down due to the watcher thing, and therefore it would have been really easy to bus.' Your counterargument appears to be 'No, it would have been really easy to bus anyway.' How does this make me not voting him any scummier? If anything, it just strengthens my point.

Claiming BS results and hoping no-one counterclaims them is incredibly risky relative to claiming actual watching results.

Which is why I asked you if you thought he was on a scum team with an actual watcher. Do you think that is the case or not?

And I thought i'd answered this. Emphatically not, for obvious reasons.

I didn't claim a town read on both. The more town of the two imho (Bvoight) was the one people were trying to lynch first. The bolded doesn't even make sense. You think I'm scum with Gonnano, and was trying to use the 'Well bvoight was town so now I don' suspect Gonnano no more' kind of argument argument when I made quite clear I THOUGHT BVOIGHT WAS TOWN IN THE FIRST PLACE, and therefore never bought into any kind of 'Bvoight and Gonnano' theory?

I started looking at you more closely when I was reading back over gonnano, but as I said it isn't out of the realm of possibility that you may be scum with bvoit. In either situation you determining which order others find them scummy is scummy because you should have been advocating for your solid town read and the person who "isn't that scummy" to not be lynched; not weigh out the order in which people would like to lynch them.

But again, this is a really reachy, confirmation bias-y argument. It's simple. I wanted the people attacking them to explain themselves, and commit to a position. Which is protown. It's like you read it and thought 'Well how can I make Fonz asking this question sound scummy?'

[PeregrineV]

@The Fonz- I have no idea why David Parker lied. Why do you think he lied?

The most obvious explanation would be to protect his buddy ThAd.

The second most obvious is to buddy up to ThAd-town

. Both of those are more likely than 'He really thought ThAd was town and it was worth the risk' because the risk there is HUGE for town.

So, by the bolded part above, you know ThAd is town?

[The Fonz]

@The Fonz- I have no idea why David Parker lied. Why do you think he lied?

The most obvious explanation would be to protect his buddy ThAd.

The second most obvious is to buddy up to ThAd-town

. Both of those are more likely than 'He really thought ThAd was town and it was worth the risk' because the risk there is HUGE for town.

So, by the bolded part above, you know ThAd is town?

Hi, blatant weaselly semantic misrepresentation!

The second possibility requires ThAd to be town, but the first requires him to be scum. The point being, it's really scummy either way. Can you not read, or do you just have dodgy motives?

[ThAdmiral]

Hate to be feysalling but...

People using my term. Yes!

That's a good point, Sathoris, it makes me not even want to be Fey-stalling with my vote

Oh snap, that's even better...


In other news:

@The Fonz- I have no idea why David Parker lied. Why do you think he lied?

The most obvious explanation would be to protect his buddy ThAd.

The second most obvious is to buddy up to ThAd-town

. Both of those are more likely than 'He really thought ThAd was town and it was worth the risk' because the risk there is HUGE for town.

So, by the bolded part above, you know ThAd is town?

This is a terrible twisting of words.

[bvoigt]

@The Fonz- I have no idea why David Parker lied. Why do you think he lied?

The most obvious explanation would be to protect his buddy ThAd.

The second most obvious is to buddy up to ThAd-town

. Both of those are more likely than 'He really thought ThAd was town and it was worth the risk' because the risk there is HUGE for town.

So, by the bolded part above, you know ThAd is town?

Why did you choose to say "Fonz knows ThAd is town" rather than "Fonz knows DP and ThAd are buddies?" If you misread the second sentence, I see no reason you didn't misread the first sentence in the same way.

[The Fonz]

There are fairly obvious reasons why PV isn't going to go with a 'Fonz knows DP was scum' argument.