Mafia 48: Himalayan Mafia - Game over!

[RandomActs]

Random vote: Coolbot

because I'm envious of anyone cooler than me.

[RandomActs]

unvote

I think Fritz is the most likely recruitee. I'm guessing JamesSparrow the least likely, simply because he joined the game so soon before the opening.

[RandomActs]

My inclination to clear Sparrow is not a matter of him being new, but a matter of timing. There was practically no time at all between his confirmation and the game start. So it seems likely the scum had some forethought about who to recruit, perhaps even

decided

on a recruit, even before Sparrow was known to be in the game. And I doubt very much they'd recruit an unnamed player. I don't believe scum took the time to consult about him if he were their choice. Hence, I think he's the least likely to be recruited.

[RandomActs]

My inclination to clear Sparrow is not a matter of him being new, but a matter of timing. There was practically no time at all between his confirmation and the game start. So it seems likely the scum had some forethought about who to recruit, perhaps even

decided

on a recruit, even before Sparrow was known to be in the game. And I doubt very much they'd recruit an unnamed player. I don't believe scum took the time to consult about him if he were their choice. Hence, I think he's the least likely to be recruited.

Couldn't the scum have recruited the player that was replaced? Your logic is flawed.

Of course that could have happened. But then you'd have to assume they'd try to recruit an uncomfirmed player, which also would be problematic for scum, I would think. And rightfully so, because the player was indeed replaced. Besides I never claimed my logic was definitive. We are obviously (and always) dealing with probabilties, and especially on day 1. I only said he was, IMHO, the least likely recruit, not that he or anyone else was definitively cleared.

I really don't think this point is worthy of the attention it has drawn. It's just a minor point with limited helpfulness at best. You may take it or leave it, but please don't misrepresent it.

[RandomActs]

vote:Random Acts

Voting for players not in the game always seems rather suspicious to me.

Aha! Bravo Thoth! I have a mini game starting at the same time and posted the random vote here by mistake. I thought my goof might go by unobserved, but you busted me. Congratulations on your powers of observation, but truly, it's a simple mistake on my part.

[RandomActs]

I've got a really wacky idea.

How about we discuss amongst ourselves who's acting scummy until we reach a general consensus, and then lynch them?

Crazy, I know.

I do, as stated before, think we're much better off just playing normally than trying to mind-read people who we don't know who they are.

What? Play normally?? Dang, girl! You

are

nuts!

[RandomActs]

I'm not against pressure voting on lurkers, but I'm hesitant to join. The only time I was mafia, I targeted lurkers to get a claim (eventually) and hoped they'd goof up in their defense. Then lynch them. I made a splendid case about how lurkers hurt the town, but I was scum all along. So, forgive me if I'm not swayed by the anti-lurking rhetoric. I've used it myself as scum.

Hez's linkage theory makes psychological sense to me. I'm going to have to think about it some more, and look more carefully at some posts. But as for now, I'm swayed enough to offer my

FoS: tidus

[RandomActs]

I can appreciate that, Random, though it's hardly enough for a condemnation of all lurker-pressuring. (if nothing else, wth could someone claim in this game? "Oh, I'm scu... TOWN! TOWN!" ) Not that I think you were doing that, I just think it needs to be kept in mind.

My post was not meant as a condemnation of the anti-lurkers, only an explanation of why I'm not joining a bandwagon based on lurking alone. The arguments are not that persuasive to me.

[RandomActs]

you only wish I had claimed to be scum. Since the game had gotten through the first few pages before I realized it had started, I designed my first post purposefully, in order for people to catch it and start some real discussion.

I think MoS is too clever by a half. Reasoning in retrospect has its advantages, I guess.

[RandomActs]

I just want to understand Mr. Flay's logic here; it bothers me a little when the most experenced player in the game tries to imply that the scum are probably all new players, so I would like him to explain his logic here.

You're being far too diplomatic, Yos. You know very well why he might say this. If Flay turns out to be scum, WIFOM says the majority of the remaining mafia are experienced players.

[RandomActs]

@ Twomz: I'm sure TSAGod will feel alot of

pressure

from a vote that's says, "By the way, I'm not going to keep it here for long." If I were TSA, i'd just find a reason (or not) to disappear as well. Yeah it sucks that suspects disappear, and I hope TSA does indeed stick around and defend himself. But when you couch your vote that way, I'm not exactly pursuaded to sign on to that wagon.

[RandomActs]

Having read through . . again! . . . and paying particular attention to tidus' postings, I find the most suspicion falls on TheCesspit. In most cases, I would only offer an FOS on the level of evidence available. But this game is seriously stuck in low gear, and needs some action to get things going. Therefore I'm going to:

Vote: TheCesspit

[RandomActs]

unvote

Another first for me: being prodded by the mod. Usually not an issue for me, but with a scarcity of facts available, the game has come down to discussing variations in personal behavior, and I haven't played with enough of you to say who's acting strangely.

There hasn't been any obvious overplays yet. So I think the remaining scum are, if not more experienced, at least competent at what their doing. Tidus was the exception of course. His inexperience showed. I"m still hoping he left some indicators behind that might help identify the rest of the scum.

[RandomActs]

Ok, it comes down to this for me: I find nothing particularly scummy about DGB's behavior, but she is unorthodox to say the least. Furthermore, I think it's tech for scum to target unusual play because it's easier convince townies that it's scum behavior. Therefore:

Vote: LoudMouthLee

[RandomActs]

Hmmm...Random Acts has lurked pretty hardcore, and FOS's tidus but never voted for him.

Yeah, I think a RA-DGB scumgroup seems quite possible, with the way RA suddenly showed up to push the LML bandwagon once DGB was in danger, but just lurked up until that point.

This is pretty pathetic. You moan about people "lurking" when you've only taken this discussion down inane and pointless paths of illogic. Frankly, there's been very little to comment on, based on what you've offered. (see my post 447.) So when I finally decide to post based on my observations, and you don't happen to agree, you start seeing scum. I'm allowed my opinion. I've made it known, if you don't like it, I'm sorry. But that hardly makes me (or anyone who disagrees with you) scum.

[RandomActs]

Nothing to do if you agree or disagree with me, RA. It was more that, when I voted for DG, I was thinking that if DG was scum, that if it looked like she might get run up, her scum partners would probably suddenly jump in and back one of the other bandwagons to try and protect her. That was the behavior I was looking for. In fact, that was why I voted without giving a reason right away, was because I wanted to see how people would react.

I stated my reason for voting. It's not about protecting anyone in particular. It's about people running up bandwagons for no good reason. It's a simple explanation, and not nearly as finesed as your covoluted scheme. I think you're being too clever by half, Yos. Frankly my reason for voting has much more plausibility and than your over-zealous suspicions. In tetrospect, your defense of LML is duely noted.

[RandomActs]

(shrug)

Of course, if LML is scum, those who supported other bandwagons, including me, look more suspicious, and vice versa. Right now my primary goal is trying to generate information for later based on voting patterns. If DG turns out to be scum, then your vote might be an attempt to save her, or it might just be unlucky timing on your part. We'll see.

Indeed, we shall see. But your inclination to prematurely assign a scum label to someone who happens to disagree with you stinks of overplay, imho.

[RandomActs]

Lots of people disagree with me. That's irrelevent. The reasons you gave for voting are also mostly irrelevent, as the key factor isn't the reasons you gave for voting, it's the timing.

What I have done is noted a possible connection between you and DG, and also noted that you have not contributed much this game, and that your FOS on Tidus without a vote or an argument against him also looks suspicious. If you want to disagree with any of those points, go ahead and do so.

Timing trumps reasons?? Interesting. Sorry, I guess I'm in a different time zone than you are. But whatever timezone I happen to be in, reasoning will always stand taller than that intangible concept you call "timing."

As noted, my relative lack of participation is due to the inconsequential content of this game thus far. I noted the complaints about those not posting, and decided I should add what little comment I had. But when I began to post, you attack. I guess there's no pleasing you, is there?

Any connection you see between me and DGB is purely imaginary on your part. I simply noted there is no solid reason for her bandwagon. On the other hand, I note quite a bit of unison among those on her bandwagon. And this is also one reason I voted as I did. Odd to see such unity based on flimsy evidence.

[RandomActs]

I'm impressed. My scumdar is certainly not up to par with some other's. I didn't think there was enough on DGB. Kudos to those who nailed it.

I'm starting out with a

Vote: Twomz

I think it's unreasonable to name on a scum list those who initiated the wagon on DGB (MoS, LML, Fritz.) And although he also voted for DGB, it looks like he may have done so for cover, since her lynching was practically fête accomplished by that time.

[RandomActs]

I'm still very uncomfortable with RA.

He did only FOS Tidus, stayed off the initial goofball wagon on day1 and then put Lee at 5 votes to get him ahead of goofball while defending goofball during that crucial stretch b4 Goofball's lynch.

He fails to state why he thinks Goofball is innocent(or even bother to address the case that I made against Goofball based on Tidus's reaction to the Day1Goofball wagon, he pretends that Goofball's wagon is based solely on behaviour which it is definitely not and then votes for Lee without giving proper reasoning(With Goofball/Lee at that point tied at 4 votes each he knows that his vote will make a huge impact, his nonchalance while casting it makes me believe he is scum).

Considering that we were coming up on a deadline and the votecount showed Goofball/Lee at very close(6 and 5 votes) I think it would be silly to dismiss Twomz's vote as finishing something already done.

vote RandomActs

I think RA is the best play for today.

Classic. Just classic. It was not my intent to prove DGB innocent. All my post said was that I didn't think there was enough evidence to wagon her. And it's very naughty of you, Pooky, to twist my wording around. Others have confirmed that Twomz vote was practically after-the-fact. I believe my reasoning is sound on that point.

@Fuldu - What can I say? I was wrong about DGB and was sincerely impressed that others caught onto her when I didn't have a clue. It was my mea culpa, if you will, and a pat on the back to those who got it right. If that sounds scummy to you, then that's really your problem more than mine.

[RandomActs]

Look RA, you either think some1 is innocent or some1's guilty. In your post not only did you fail to explain why you thought goofball was innocent but you barely state why you think Lee is guilty.

Incredibly wrong here. The world is never as black and white as this, especially in the world of Mafia. We have suspiciions, we have hunches. But nobody here is absolutely certain about anything except the scum.

At that point in the game where the players are at 4-4 and we are close to a deadline, your vote is VERY important.

By choosing Lee over Goofball you are saying that you think Goofball is innocent and Lee is scum, there is simply no other interpretation of that vote.

You can't just say that there isn't enough evidence, you have to actually refute the evidence cited.

No other interpretation?? Wow, do you have blinders on? Or do you simply not want to hear other interpretations?? Let me tell you what my vote

really

said. It said "There's no solid evidence in this game. I have very little on which to base a vote. But I find it suspicious that others can be so certain about DBG when I'm still unconvinced. Knowing that scum will often try to build mountainous case with molehill evidence, I decided to vote again the mountain builders, because all I'm seeing is molehills." Was I certain of that vote? Nope. But that was my reasoning, and was my best hunch at the time.

Why do you believe what I laid out against Goofball was wrong? What makes you think Lee is scum? These are things that you simply do not address in your posting!

Did you consider these things at all? It seems from the way you've posted that you have not, that could only be if you are Goofball's scumpartner who was concerned about saving his scummate or a very very irresponsible townie.

I never said you were wrong. I merely said I was unconvinced, which I might add, were all but 7 of us at the time of the deadline. Now, in fairness, are you going to grill the other nine of us too, the ones who didn't vote with you??

[RandomActs]

What I actually said:

I'm impressed. My scumdar is certainly not up to par with some other's. I didn't think there was enough on DGB. Kudos to those who nailed it.

verses how you twisted my words:

"Gee, shucks, I guess I was wrong. What can I say?"

If you really want it sound scummy, I guess you have to alter what I said, just as you have done. If you're going to condemn me, at least do it base on what I actually say, please??

I've explained my vote. Now move along.

[RandomActs]

Funny that you said nothing about my vote at the time I casted it. I have certainly explained my vote. You may not like that answer, but there it is. You don't like the timing? It was nearly TWO DAYS before the deadline and more than EIGHT HOURS BEFORE your own vote on DGB. Hardly the last minute/under-the-wire vote you suggest it was, especially with 6 undecided votes left out there.

You are most definately overplaying this Pooky. You may not like my reasoning, but I am most definately town. If you succeed in lynching me, your own bandwagon is going to return with a vengence. I don't believe you're scum, so consider this a friendly warning. You should really move along.

[RandomActs]

Vanilla townies have no scum partners, Pookie. Take off your blinders and find a real scum to go after.

[RandomActs]

Well, my lynching seems to be a foregone conclusion, and you will soon realize you made the first mislynching of the game. Let me say this for the benefit of the town while I'm still able to speak: If it is revealed at some point that Pooky is scum, please take a very hard look at Twomz. I believe what prompted Pooky's wagon on me was not my vote yesterday (since he said nothing of it then) but instead my vote on Twomz today. I believe he was protecting him.

Lynch as you please. I've already stated my reasons for my actions. Disbelieve me at your own cost.

(And by the way, if Pooky/Twomz are the remaining two mafia, Pooky was definately the recruited scum.)

[RandomActs]

RA, I would be really upset at the way you've been playing if you actually turn out to be protown.

Oh? Not so sure now? Interesting.

My defense makes perfect sense to me. I saw a bandwagon with very litle evidence behind it. You just said yourself you were not sure if DGB was guilty. So why do you fault me for casting a vote that expressed my own doubts regarding her guilt/innocense? It's as simple as that.

So don't get angry at

me

when you find out I'm town. Kick yourself for your own crap logic.

[RandomActs]

okay well theres only one way to prove RA wrong or right, and i will switch back to pooky if RA comes up innocent. i take to heart LML's words that RA is the right lynch. and i also don't like all the angry-ness coming from RA, so without further adeu

vote:RA

I don't get where you and neon get all this anger coming out of me. I think you read more in my posts than is actually there. I'm a nice, laid-back guy. Really, I am! Well,

was

a nice guy. I'm dead now. Go town!