Mafia 40: The Worst Game Ever - Game over!

[Dranko20]

lol, i'm sorry to dissappoint everyone but i am not mafia

=( sad face

[Seol]

RotN has basically admitted RotW was lying when he defended Dranko. Why aren't we lynching him instead? In fact... what do we have on Dranko apart from RotW having defended him?

Aren't we doing this all arse-about-face?

[RangeroftheNorth]

I am not saying that RotW was lying. All I am saying is that I don't know why he defended Dranko. If I was mafia, how dumb would I have to be to have admitted that? I could have easily made some claim that would have given some reason for that defense and I would have been cleared of suspicion. Of course, I could just be saying that to get you to believe me. The reason I say we should lynch Dranko, is that I have been confirmed by a cop. If you lynch me, and discover that I am not scum, you will still have no reason to believe Dranko. If, however, you lynch Dranko, and he's not scum, you have no reason to disbelieve me.

[Seol]

I am not saying that RotW was lying. All I am saying is that I don't know why he defended Dranko.

Let's just say

I know he's a townie

, so stop harassing him.

If Roland wasn't lying, how did he know? If you're a townie, how could he have known?

If I was mafia, how dumb would I have to be to have admitted that? I could have easily made some claim that would have given some reason for that defense and I would have been cleared of suspicion. Of course, I could just be saying that to get you to believe me.

I'm not sure anything short of an information role would have explained it, and trying to fake-claim an information role at this stage of the game would be really dangerous. Plus, this is all a WIFOM, and you know it.

The reason I say we should lynch Dranko, is that I have been confirmed by a cop.

Yes, but there is good reason to suspect there's a Mafia Godfather out there somewhere (specifically, all our dead noobs are noob mafia goons, not just noob mafia - that implies there are non-goon mafia, which implies Godfather), so that doesn't prove your innocence.

If you lynch me, and discover that I am not scum, you will still have no reason to believe Dranko.

Nor would we have a good reason to disbelieve him - we don't really have a compelling reason to suspect Dranko without the connection between you two.

If, however, you lynch Dranko, and he's not scum, you have no reason to disbelieve me.

We wouldn't have a reason to believe you, but we would have a reason to disbelieve you: Either Roland lied when he said he knew Dranko was a townie, or you lied in your roleclaim. Unless, that is, I'm missing something.

[Dranko20]

/clap

vote: ranger

[RangeroftheNorth]

What you're missing is the reason I would have lied. Why would Roland, if he were the godfather, have claimed to have information about a townie? If you are just interested in lynching someone because they lied, you can lynch me, but keep in mind that it wasn't me who lied, it was Roland. I don't know that he lied, I just don't know why he said what he said. My best guess is that he knew there where townies left in the game, and that was what he was trying to confirm, but I don't know. I have been confirmed by the cop: if I was mafia, I would have to be the godfather. Dranko is also suspicious based on his voting history. I am less suspicious based on Roland's votes for Thok on day 3.

[Pie_is_good]

Votecount

Dranko-4 (Sineish, RangeroftheNorth, Windslicer, Vesuvan)
Astronaut-1 (Kerplunk)
Vesuvan-1 (Dranko)

5 to lynch.

Dranko needs to unvote before revoting.

[WindSlicer]

Should it be Dranko-4?

[Seol]

What you're missing is the reason I would have lied. Why would Roland, if he were the godfather, have claimed to have information about a townie?

Maybe he was protecting his scum partner? Maybe he wanted to make sure Wacky died that day? Maybe he wanted to use Dranko's innocence to further clear him at a later date? Maybe he had a specific clever roleclaiming plan? All speculation, though - with the first option being the most likely.

However, can you give me a reason why Roland would have lied about knowing Dranko's role

if he was a townie?

I can't think of one. Can anyone?

If you are just interested in lynching someone because they lied, you can lynch me,

Lynch All Liars is a very strong and well-known principle. Roland knows that, too - he's an experienced player - so he wouldn't just lie as a townie. I would most definitely be interested in using that as a reason for a lynch, especially at this point in the game.

but keep in mind that it wasn't me who lied, it was Roland.

So? You're both the same role. As far as I'm concerned, you're the same player.

Sometimes replacements can undermine the reason for suspicion, if it's based on playstyle or excessive lurking or whatever. Not when someone's been caught lying about role information, though.

I don't know that he lied, I just don't know why he said what he said. My best guess is that he knew there where townies left in the game, and that was what he was trying to confirm, but I don't know.

Roland said he knew

Dranko

was a townie. You say you're a townie, and therefore have no way of knowing Dranko was a townie. Therefore, either Roland couldn't have known what he was saying he knew- and was therefore lying - or you're lying about your role now.

I have been confirmed by the cop: if I was mafia, I would have to be the godfather.

Yes. So? Wacky was trying this one yesterday - "I'm not this sort of scum, therefore I'm a bad lynch" (paraphrased). We'd caught him in what looked like a lie, so had reason to believe he was scum, even if he "couldn't be n00b". Well, he wasn't a n00b, but he was scum.

So you can't be a goon. You're still scum. You've

admitted

that Roland lied, and you are Roland.

Dranko is also suspicious based on his voting history. I am less suspicious based on Roland's votes for Thok on day 3.

At the height of the bandwagon, yes. It's not unusual for scum to vote for themselves occasionally. Voting histories are not nearly as compelling a reason for a lynch as someone being caught in a lie.

Wacky tried that one yesterday too.

At this point, Ves is the only reason I am not voting for you.

[Pie_is_good]

Should it be Dranko-4?

yes.

[Astronaut]

Dude, you're digging your own grave.

Vote: Dranko20

[Pie_is_good]

Should it be Dranko-4?

No, it should be Dranko-5. Duh.

Dranko- Townie- Has been lynched

'tis night.

[Pie_is_good]

Day breaks in a disappointing lack of flavor text with

RangeroftheNorth

dead.

RangeroftheNorth- Townie- OMG PWNed, Night 8.

[Pie_is_good]

*poke*

I'm expecting this to run slowly over Thanksgiving weekend, so no deadlines be imposed. For future reference, please post here if you have limited access.

[Vesuvan]

Sorry - didn't notice the thread was back up.

Well, RotN being killed was about the last thing I expected. This would imply that the obvious option to lynch would be Astronaut, but I'm concerned that this becomes a little

too

obvious, and leads me to suspect elsewhere. I'm going to think on this a little longer, though would like to hear other peoples' input.

[Seol]

I'm really not sure what to make of the nightkill. I was convinced going into night that Astro and RotN were scum together, and Astro lynched Dranko to avoid talking about RotN any longer. RotN waking up dead shoots that theory out of the water, as does RotN being town.

If there are two noobs, we are now on lynch-or-lose, and two noobs is quite feasible at this point, although by no means guaranteed.

My suspicions are, to be nice and to the point, Sineish and Astro, with Astro being the more suspicious of the two. This is principally based on the Emptyger lynch day 1.

Everybody apart from Sineish and Astro didn't just vote for Emptyger, they cited reasoning why they were voting Emptyger and they voted him early (not technically true of myself - I didn't actually participat in the lynch, as Blackberry beat me to the vote, but I was also heavily aggressive towards Emptyger) - which is not typical behaviour between two Mafioso, to put it mildly.

Sineish and Astro, however, didn't vote Emptyger at all. They both have excuses (Sineish was Jadesmar at that point, who was lurking to the point of never posting at all, and Astro's "role", which I don't believe for various reasons), but the fact is everyone else has that piece of evidence in their favour.

One important thing to note:

Not counting Thok, who admitted being scum, the only votes against n00b mafia members have been from Dranko, Kerplunk, Seol, Vesuvan and WindSlicer, all of whom were voting EmpTyger on day 1. Since this was a more or less uncontended (at the time of the last day one bandwagon, none of the other players had more than two votes), quasi-random bandwagon, I'm not sure we should put much weight behind this. For the record: WindSlicer was #6 on the bandwagon, Kerplunk #7, Vesuvan #8, Dranko #10 and Seol #12. I wouldn't be shocked to find scum among these.

Those numbers are wrong. Vesuvan was #2, Kerplunk #3, and Windslicer (then Nanook) was #4. If it was a quasi-random bandwagon,

they're the people who made it a bandwagon

.

Plus, re: Astro, as I said earlier, I don't believe his claim. We have seen vote-restricted roles in the game, but the restrictions are role-activator restrictions, not strict liability obey-or-be-modkilled restrictions. We have no strict liability roles at all, for that matter. The role is a convenient claim to cover for lurking behaviour in the early game and not being on the Emptyger lynch, and is not supported reading Astro's early posts, beyond the fact he didn't revote. If he did have that ability and was pro-town, I would expect some hints to be dropped about the restriction early, especially when he goes straight into a random vote at the start of day 1. No such indication exists.

Process of elimination says -

vote: Astronaut

, with the intention to vote Sineish tomorrow.

[Astronaut]

After Seol's post #683, RoTN is the last person I'd nightkill if I were scum.

Those numbers are wrong. Vesuvan was #2, Kerplunk #3, and Windslicer (then Nanook) was #4. If it was a quasi-random bandwagon, they're the people who made it a bandwagon.

You're right. Can't understand how I managed to mess up those numbers so badly, must have skipped a page or something. Sorry. (And if you think that knowingly giving false info on votes is something I'd do as scum, you're wrong).

If we fear that there might still be two n00bs left, should we be discussing the possibility of a no lynch?

[Vesuvan]

After Seol's post #683, RoTN is the last person I'd nightkill if I were scum.

Yes, and given that eliminating RotN makes you the most obvious lynch, that's why I'm doubtful of you being scum.

Of course, it certainly doesn't clear you unless you're trying to pull a WIFOM gambit.

[Kerplunk]

I guess we have 1 n00b left. With 6 alive means we can lynch one more innocent. Then we should do a no lynch with 4 players I guess and then it's showtime.

I'm inclined to vote for Astronaut.

Vesuvan was I believe cleared by a cop (my memory does not serve me well in this game), however we could still have n00b-GF. And my gut kinda leans towards Vesuvan, but it's not based on any evidence or something.

On Windslicer, Sineish I have no read on.

Seol seems to me the player who tries his best to try and lynch scum. I consider him innocent. I think.

FoS: Astronaut

, likely to be turned into a vote.

[Astronaut]

I guess we have 1 n00b left. With 6 alive means we can lynch one more innocent. Then we should do a no lynch with 4 players I guess and then it's showtime.

Since we're an even number of players we have to do a no lynch sometime, wouldn't it be smarter to do so today? If we've got 1 n00b left, we could lynch today with 1/6 of hitting scum, then no lynch and then lynch with 1/3 chance. Alternatively, we could no lynch today, then lynch with 1/5 and then 1/3 chance.

If we've still got 2 n00bs left, we could lynch with 2/6 (=or 1/3 for those who've done advanced calculus) chance, or we could no lynch and have a 2/5 chance tomorrow.

I know that many people see me as the scummiest person at the moment, but this is not a scum plot to buy myself time. Whether I'm lynched today or lynched tomorrow doesn't matter to me, I'm only suggesting that we hold the lynches until we've got less chance of a mislynch.

[Seol]

After Seol's post #683, RoTN is the last person I'd nightkill if I were scum.

After my post #683, why did you vote Dranko for the lynch without even referencing the arguments I'd made?

You're right. Can't understand how I managed to mess up those numbers so badly, must have skipped a page or something. Sorry. (And if you think that knowingly giving false info on votes is something I'd do as scum, you're wrong).

I wasn't pointing that out principally because of the misrepresentation - and I'm sure you don't need me to point out that your "I wouldn't do that" argument is a WIFOM, but for future reference you can't always trust votecounts to be listed in the order the votes were placed (some mods do, some mods don't), that's where you got the order - but to highlight how the positions at which the votes were placed supports the townie credentials of Ves, Kerplunk and Windslicer.

Also, you didn't even reference my comments about why I don't believe your claim - and that, in combination with the way the day 1 bandwagon supports everyone apart from you and Sineish, were the reasons I'm voting you. So, you didn't really address my reasons for voting you.

After Seol's post #683, RoTN is the last person I'd nightkill if I were scum.

Yes, and given that eliminating RotN makes you the most obvious lynch, that's why I'm doubtful of you being scum.

One of two things is the case here - either I'm missing something, or you're using CrapLogic to defend a very likely scum.

If Astro is town, the scum don't have any particular reason to want to lynch him over any other townie - what they want to achieve is the lynch of an innocent. Could you please explain to me how, if Astro's a townie and the scum kill RotN as opposed to someone who isn't Astro or RotN, we're

more

likely to lynch an innocent? I would have thought that if both were alive today, it would be practically inevitable that one or the other would be lynched.

The reason Astro is the most obvious lynch is because there are a number of separate indicators that he is our most likely scum. At this point, I'd need something a bit more solid than paranoia (either something which exonerates Astro, This argument is a gambit, and one which you are assisting to perpetuate. Unless I'm missing something, of course, which is perfectly possible.

Of course, it certainly doesn't clear you unless you're trying to pull a WIFOM gambit.

I presume you meant "in case", rather than "unless", here?

One thing which may be worth considering is that if Astro is telling the truth, he has an inbuilt suicide mechanism, and we already know modkills don't end the day. What this means is that if we do decide to lynch him, he could then vote twice and allow us to effectively have a second lynch.

I think this is preferable to no-lynch, in that we end up losing who I consider our scummiest person rather than allowing the scum to pick and choose (and have the option of killing Vesuvan, as well).

[Seol]

Reading over my previous post, I think I missed out part of my chain of reasoning. The argument that RotN's being nightkilled indicates that Astro isn't scum is

superficially

compelling, but falls down under investigation.

There are two questions here - firstly, could it make sense that Astro would nightkill RotN, and secondly, if Astro

isn't

scum, could it make sense for the scum to nightkill RotN?

I can't see any reason in the second instance (the one where Astro isn't scum) for the scum to kill RotN, because Astro and RotN were by far the easiest lynches. It could be used to implicate Astro - but what need is there for that, when the outcome is more reliable leaving both alive and nightkilling someone who's not under such heavy suspicion already?

However, if RotN was alive today, the situation is slightly different. There were arguments against RotN independent of the Dranko connection, but whether or not that would end up more compelling than an Astro lynch once Dranko came up as town is debatable. However, if there is some reason to support Astro - such as the argument Ves is making - then that could be enough to keep Astro in the clear for one more day. If there are two scum left, one more day is all that's required.

Now, that's a pretty convoluted strategy, but nonetheless as I see it there's a thought process which explains the nightkill if Astro is scum,

but not the reverse

. It's tenuous, and I wouldn't say it's a particularly strong reason to suspect Astro - but it is, at least, enough to disregard the kill as suggesting Astro isn't scum.

[Astronaut]

If Astro is town, the scum don't have any particular reason to want to lynch him over any other townie - what they want to achieve is the lynch of an innocent. Could you please explain to me how, if Astro's a townie and the scum kill RotN as opposed to someone who isn't Astro or RotN, we're more likely to lynch an innocent?

In case you haven't noticed, I'm top of several people's list of scumminess, more so than RotN. Scum wouldn't dream of nightkilling me.

I'd really like to hear from our lurkers Sineish and Windslicer. The lack of participation makes me suspicious of both of them, especially Sineish.

[Seol]

If Astro is town, the scum don't have any particular reason to want to lynch him over any other townie - what they want to achieve is the lynch of an innocent. Could you please explain to me how, if Astro's a townie and the scum kill RotN as opposed to someone who isn't Astro or RotN, we're more likely to lynch an innocent?

In case you haven't noticed, I'm top of several people's list of scumminess, more so than RotN. Scum wouldn't dream of nightkilling me.

What does that have to do with the quoted section?

[Astronaut]

What does that have to do with the quoted section?

I was in a hurry when writing my previous post, and didn't notice that you'd made two separate posts. I mixed up this section:

I can't see any reason in the second instance (the one where Astro isn't scum) for the scum to kill RotN, because Astro and RotN were by far the easiest lynches. It could be used to implicate Astro - but what need is there for that, when the outcome is more reliable leaving both alive and nightkilling someone who's not under such heavy suspicion already?

with this one:

If Astro is town, the scum don't have any particular reason to want to lynch him over any other townie - what they want to achieve is the lynch of an innocent. Could you please explain to me how, if Astro's a townie and the scum kill RotN as opposed to someone who isn't Astro or RotN, we're more likely to lynch an innocent?

and one way or the other, I made it read something like "Why was RotN nightkilled before Astronaut?" In hindsight, it's impossible for me to reconstruct my thought process so don't even ask...just add 'bad play' on your list of reasons why I'm scummy.

I should stop posting the day before math exam, seems I can't think straight. But if you want me to tell you about Fourier transforms...