OT: The SPF Mafia Game Round Three
- Thread starter skoolbus1
- Start date
Sir Lister of Smeg
New member
What exactly do you mean with the part that is not shown? Has this to do with people changing their minds over the course of the day? If so, is the vote displayed the initial or the final vote? Also, weren't there a bit more changes of mind? For what day is this list? What is meant with the vote in parentheses?
Tsk tsk... no sneaky edits Nikon, even if it's just adding a sentence.
I've looked up GoHabs posts to see if I can figure out what you're getting at. The only thing I've noticed is that yester-game-day he didn't abandon his Jaago vote. Earlier (I think it was the game-day before yester-game-day) he was willing to forgo a Jaago vote to bandwagon Moar.
Am I close?
I've looked up GoHabs posts to see if I can figure out what you're getting at. The only thing I've noticed is that yester-game-day he didn't abandon his Jaago vote. Earlier (I think it was the game-day before yester-game-day) he was willing to forgo a Jaago vote to bandwagon Moar.
Am I close?
Sir Lister of Smeg
New member
Wow, what an argument. Do you have any reason to suspect Nikon and unsuspect Sint or are you just a fellow mafiosa of Sint trying to protect him by starting another bandwagon?
As far as I can see, that list only includes yester-game-day's voting. The vote in parentheses seems to be the final vote (the one also showing up in the table).
Sir Lister of Smeg
New member
LORD NIKON
New member
No, because he started a third bandwagon. With 16 peeps, 9 needed to lynch and 3 targets you can be 95% sure there won't be a lynch.
@Lister: I don't think Thyiad is mafia. From what I've seen she's a townie. A bit deranged perhaps, but still a townie.
Looking back through the thread for GoHabsGo sightings, this is what stood out to me:
http://www.purediablo.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5781356&postcount=98
Rashiminos' post from Day 1 where he lists the players and their last activity times up to that point. GoHabsGo is listed as a 'newbie' to the game, and inactive for a while before skoolbus' last activity. Not entirely sure how to interpret this fully, but there were a few suggestions at the time that the lack of mafia activity could indicate that the mafia is largely composed of new players.
GoHabsGo's vote from the first day. Note the lack of reasoning, possibly relying on the town to assume he's following the normal arguments for no-lynch at the time. (There had already been a few people voting and arguing for no-lynch by this point)
Look at the last paragraph. Why, exactly, should Rashiminos be discouraged from defending himself? Because he's the best placed to do so? Or possibly because he's likely to be more verbose in his rebuttals? This seems to have resurfaced again recently, albeit from different mouths.
Here he accuses RK of being mafia. RK, who has since been unequivocally proven to be a townie. At the time as well, RK was making quite a strong case for mafia/VI with his unique style of posting, so it was an easy bandwagon to add a bit of momentum to. Although RK could possibly have been the VI, this would not have mattered because...
Note that here he says the town should focus on winning at any and all costs. Fair enough. Now look at the post script he writes. If he's wrong about Jaago being mafia, then he's definitely the VI... but we're not going to hold back on taking that risk regardless! Flawed reasoning here.
The final quote there is about two days old now, but is the last reasoning I could find for voting for Jaago. Later on that day he changes his vote to Moar when it looked like many people were voting for her. Yesterday he voted for Jaago with a short sentence referring back to the previous day's reasoning. Unlike then, however, he didn't change his vote when it appeared there was another candidate with a much higher vote total. Today he makes a vague comment about expecting a mafia member to comment quickly after the death... or was it just because his recent preferred target happened to be the first one to post?
I wonder if that comment would have been made had I decided to post sooner?
This day appears to be something more than yesterday mk. II. I should consider it as such.
Unvote: LORD NIKON
http://www.purediablo.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5781356&postcount=98
Rashiminos' post from Day 1 where he lists the players and their last activity times up to that point. GoHabsGo is listed as a 'newbie' to the game, and inactive for a while before skoolbus' last activity. Not entirely sure how to interpret this fully, but there were a few suggestions at the time that the lack of mafia activity could indicate that the mafia is largely composed of new players.
GoHabsGo's vote from the first day. Note the lack of reasoning, possibly relying on the town to assume he's following the normal arguments for no-lynch at the time. (There had already been a few people voting and arguing for no-lynch by this point)
Look at the last paragraph. Why, exactly, should Rashiminos be discouraged from defending himself? Because he's the best placed to do so? Or possibly because he's likely to be more verbose in his rebuttals? This seems to have resurfaced again recently, albeit from different mouths.
Here he accuses RK of being mafia. RK, who has since been unequivocally proven to be a townie. At the time as well, RK was making quite a strong case for mafia/VI with his unique style of posting, so it was an easy bandwagon to add a bit of momentum to. Although RK could possibly have been the VI, this would not have mattered because...
Note that here he says the town should focus on winning at any and all costs. Fair enough. Now look at the post script he writes. If he's wrong about Jaago being mafia, then he's definitely the VI... but we're not going to hold back on taking that risk regardless! Flawed reasoning here.
The final quote there is about two days old now, but is the last reasoning I could find for voting for Jaago. Later on that day he changes his vote to Moar when it looked like many people were voting for her. Yesterday he voted for Jaago with a short sentence referring back to the previous day's reasoning. Unlike then, however, he didn't change his vote when it appeared there was another candidate with a much higher vote total. Today he makes a vague comment about expecting a mafia member to comment quickly after the death... or was it just because his recent preferred target happened to be the first one to post?
I wonder if that comment would have been made had I decided to post sooner?
This day appears to be something more than yesterday mk. II. I should consider it as such.
Unvote: LORD NIKON
water_moon
New member
A little bit of grit: good. Too much grit: annoying.
Lord Nikon, you are either:
A) a cop attempting to convey dangerous info in the most annoying and corrosive way possible.
B) an innocent villager gone hostile
C) protesting too much, mr. godfather.
Right now you have the best chance of being lynched and if you don't think that being "different" matters this day and age, you haven't bothered to see any news, been on the internet, in a HS or out of your house for that matter in the last 30 years. Why else would you be on a forum if not to find like minded people? And not just one devoted to a single game but one devoted to a certian play style none the less!
A smart cop would have used more logic and less yelling.
Vote: LORD NIKON
Lord Nikon, you are either:
A) a cop attempting to convey dangerous info in the most annoying and corrosive way possible.
B) an innocent villager gone hostile
C) protesting too much, mr. godfather.
Right now you have the best chance of being lynched and if you don't think that being "different" matters this day and age, you haven't bothered to see any news, been on the internet, in a HS or out of your house for that matter in the last 30 years. Why else would you be on a forum if not to find like minded people? And not just one devoted to a single game but one devoted to a certian play style none the less!
A smart cop would have used more logic and less yelling.
Vote: LORD NIKON
water_moon
New member
Amendum: Whereas a smart mafia would have noticed everyone pointing out how the mafia lays low and suddenly upped their post count.
LORD NIKON
New member
First off, some people are just annoying. Hi Serdash!
Secondly, the thing that brings is to this forum is a game. Diablo 2. Some people like to play untwinked, some like HF rushing, different mods, etc. There are so many different types of players, only the game is the same. Not to mention the fact that we're not even close in location. IE: USA -> Eastern Europe. How like-minded can we be? We're literally from different worlds, and yet you assume we would do and say exactly like each other. How come?
Lastly, I'd like to say, you assume that all people are "smart".
Thank you.
LORD NIKON
New member
Sint Nikolaas
New member
Reach out for Brak:
All posts by brak.
#116: mainly saying it's likely to have a disorganised mafia based on night 1.
#150: Agreeing that using user profiles is cheesy.
#151: Bringing up lack of crooked cop in night 1.
#152: Addition to former post.
#157: Says he'll go after the people that haven't posted (drixx, neksja, jae).
#163: Votes for Jae. Trusts his gut feeling.
#176: Votes for Moar. Thinks she might be crooked cop.
#215: Insightful post on lynching in day 1. Jae and Nikon are suspicious, Skunk sounded agressive and was worried about Goltar confusing things. Votes Goltar.
#220: Votes Skunk to make him talk.
#230: Votes Jaago. Jaago's reasoning sounded off to Brak.
#234: Mentions not all votes are the same, also emphasis his pro-lynching.
#241: Notes that pretending to be VI gets you nowhere.
#291: Votes for Rev. Rev didn't get killed at night while doing his VI play.
#310: Agrees with Jaago about Gohabs' reasoning about Rash being flawed. Also notes W_m was off-base with some reasoning and says ''Finally wanted to point out my CDRToast theory. There was a major movement to accuse latecomers of being mafia yesterday since they were inactive on night 1. The crooked detective is very likely detaining CDR to make it look like protection. This strategy was used quite a lot by the crooked detective in the last round. I personally find it flawed.''
#312: Makes an edit.
#316: Explains his voting for Rev more thouroughly.
#324: Disagrees with Gohabs (who was after Rash then), says Rash's behaiviour is ''troublesome'', ''but there's no link with Rev'' to whom he keeps.
#327: Clarifies something (a post count iirc).
#346: Says he'll keep a closer eye on Moar and that it's too bad mafia didn't kill Rev.
#349: ''Does anyone think we should give the mafia one more chance to whack RK or do we lynch him today?''
#383: Fixes something in a table.
#384: Unvotes Rev. Says he'll give the mafia another chance at night, says the inactive posters are suspicious.
#392: Notes Moar's absence.
#399: Agrees with Rash about keeping a look out for non-mafia roles.
#400: Votes Moar.
#420: Disagrees with Jrla but also says Jae is suspicious. Votes for Jrla.
#421: Changes his vote for Jae.
#478: Votes for Skunk, backs it up.
#491: Unvotes Skunk, backs it up.
#510: Gives some info during the Mason stuff.
#522: Agrees with Rash about town roles, mentions that the mafia is likely lying low.
#535: Says ToI is likely townie. Makes a list of suspicious people in order: Jaago, Goltar, Cygnus, Gohabs, Sitro, xDuck and Rev. Says: ''But I don't have any hard evidence for anyone on the list at hand, and I'm short on time right now. Just wanted to get this idea out there to mull around before it slipped away.''
#554: Says Skunk comes over suspicious although he can't put his funger on it. Tries to set up a tactic where everyone gives out 3 suspicious people. He says Thy is suspicious #2, but doesn't have #3.
#561: Makes a joke about Skool.
#568: Talks about his tactic after Jaago mentioned it, dismisses the idea since no one picked up on it.
#593: Agrees with Gohabs on the random accusations, says Moar didn't give him a mafia vibe, isn't sure on who to vote.
#594: Disagrees with Lister about Sint, mentions Sint didn't have much posts in other games. Says it's likely that the most talkative people are soon to be targetted.
#603: Votes for Lister: ''OK no time for a post here. But due to the conflicts of Lister's previous posts referenced prior I'm voting for him.''
#669: ''sorry too busy right now. Get back soon''
#682: Says that the people arguing are likely town. Votes Cyg, ''vote counts are a classic tell.''
#684: Says the low posters are probably mafia, votes Moar ''But I can get behind a Moar lynch since she's a lurker and has made a few noted slipups.''.
---
That's it, I'm watching a movie so I just did this trying to get the facts (and took a lot longer), so I'm not going deeper on it now, but I might later on.
All posts by brak.
#116: mainly saying it's likely to have a disorganised mafia based on night 1.
#150: Agreeing that using user profiles is cheesy.
#151: Bringing up lack of crooked cop in night 1.
#152: Addition to former post.
#157: Says he'll go after the people that haven't posted (drixx, neksja, jae).
#163: Votes for Jae. Trusts his gut feeling.
#176: Votes for Moar. Thinks she might be crooked cop.
#215: Insightful post on lynching in day 1. Jae and Nikon are suspicious, Skunk sounded agressive and was worried about Goltar confusing things. Votes Goltar.
#220: Votes Skunk to make him talk.
#230: Votes Jaago. Jaago's reasoning sounded off to Brak.
#234: Mentions not all votes are the same, also emphasis his pro-lynching.
#241: Notes that pretending to be VI gets you nowhere.
#291: Votes for Rev. Rev didn't get killed at night while doing his VI play.
#310: Agrees with Jaago about Gohabs' reasoning about Rash being flawed. Also notes W_m was off-base with some reasoning and says ''Finally wanted to point out my CDRToast theory. There was a major movement to accuse latecomers of being mafia yesterday since they were inactive on night 1. The crooked detective is very likely detaining CDR to make it look like protection. This strategy was used quite a lot by the crooked detective in the last round. I personally find it flawed.''
#312: Makes an edit.
#316: Explains his voting for Rev more thouroughly.
#324: Disagrees with Gohabs (who was after Rash then), says Rash's behaiviour is ''troublesome'', ''but there's no link with Rev'' to whom he keeps.
#327: Clarifies something (a post count iirc).
#346: Says he'll keep a closer eye on Moar and that it's too bad mafia didn't kill Rev.
#349: ''Does anyone think we should give the mafia one more chance to whack RK or do we lynch him today?''
#383: Fixes something in a table.
#384: Unvotes Rev. Says he'll give the mafia another chance at night, says the inactive posters are suspicious.
#392: Notes Moar's absence.
#399: Agrees with Rash about keeping a look out for non-mafia roles.
#400: Votes Moar.
#420: Disagrees with Jrla but also says Jae is suspicious. Votes for Jrla.
#421: Changes his vote for Jae.
#478: Votes for Skunk, backs it up.
#491: Unvotes Skunk, backs it up.
#510: Gives some info during the Mason stuff.
#522: Agrees with Rash about town roles, mentions that the mafia is likely lying low.
#535: Says ToI is likely townie. Makes a list of suspicious people in order: Jaago, Goltar, Cygnus, Gohabs, Sitro, xDuck and Rev. Says: ''But I don't have any hard evidence for anyone on the list at hand, and I'm short on time right now. Just wanted to get this idea out there to mull around before it slipped away.''
#554: Says Skunk comes over suspicious although he can't put his funger on it. Tries to set up a tactic where everyone gives out 3 suspicious people. He says Thy is suspicious #2, but doesn't have #3.
#561: Makes a joke about Skool.
#568: Talks about his tactic after Jaago mentioned it, dismisses the idea since no one picked up on it.
#593: Agrees with Gohabs on the random accusations, says Moar didn't give him a mafia vibe, isn't sure on who to vote.
#594: Disagrees with Lister about Sint, mentions Sint didn't have much posts in other games. Says it's likely that the most talkative people are soon to be targetted.
#603: Votes for Lister: ''OK no time for a post here. But due to the conflicts of Lister's previous posts referenced prior I'm voting for him.''
#669: ''sorry too busy right now. Get back soon''
#682: Says that the people arguing are likely town. Votes Cyg, ''vote counts are a classic tell.''
#684: Says the low posters are probably mafia, votes Moar ''But I can get behind a Moar lynch since she's a lurker and has made a few noted slipups.''.
---
That's it, I'm watching a movie so I just did this trying to get the facts (and took a lot longer), so I'm not going deeper on it now, but I might later on.
How about a town outing ... possibly a nice picnic. Providing we don't take any knives. Or forks. Straws would be out, too. No glasses. Nuts would be a problem; death by allergies. Obviously, no tomato. Probably nowhere where there's combining. Or water. Hills could cause death by exercise.
If we could overcome those problems, I think we'd be able to come together more as a town.
If we could overcome those problems, I think we'd be able to come together more as a town.
Snippet from Sint's table showing last two days' votes:
Thy 5, goltar 5, nikon
cyg 4, moar 9, nikon
skunk 5, rash 3, nikon
muzz 6, rash 3, nikon
rash xx, moar 9, lister
goltar 5, thy 2, thy
xduck 9, moar 1, sint
moar 3, nikon 1, nikon
jaago 12, moar 4, sint
nikon 4, moar 16, sint
gohab 8, moar 2, jaago
w_m 7, gohabs 1, rash
sint 17, jaago 9, nikon
lister 13, sint 7, sint
sitro 6, jaago 7, nikon
CDRT 4, moar 1, sint
Those not voting for Sint or Nikon yesterday: w_m, gohabs, goltar, rash
Those not voting for Moar the day before: sitro, lister, sint, w_m, goltar, muzzz, skunk, thy (and moar didn't vote for herself, naturally)
Time to play Sherlock
1. It is highly unlikely that *both* Sint and Nikon are mafia
2. The mafiosi would like to lynch an innocent person during the day to not lynching anyone at all. Two important factors here: they want to maximise the chance of lynching the witness, and they want to put the vigilante/doc/cop out of play asap
3. The mafiosi and innocent townsfolk run the risk of lynching the VI. But a no-lynch citing this reason doesn't get either group anywhere, as argued several times by several people already in the thread
4. Nikon was only two votes away from a lynch, Sint three.
Conclusion:
w_m, Habs, goltar and Rash either:
1. Didn't check back in time to change their vote, or
2. Are innocent (doesn't explain why they preferred a no-lynch)
The previous day, it depends on whether or not Moar is guilty. If she is guilty, I'd expect those who voted for her lynching to be innocent. She was fairly close to getting lynched, and any last minute vote changes against her lynching would have attracted too much attention. If she is innocent, I'd expect one or more of those who voted for her lynching to be mafia members.
Thy 5, goltar 5, nikon
cyg 4, moar 9, nikon
skunk 5, rash 3, nikon
muzz 6, rash 3, nikon
rash xx, moar 9, lister
goltar 5, thy 2, thy
xduck 9, moar 1, sint
moar 3, nikon 1, nikon
jaago 12, moar 4, sint
nikon 4, moar 16, sint
gohab 8, moar 2, jaago
w_m 7, gohabs 1, rash
sint 17, jaago 9, nikon
lister 13, sint 7, sint
sitro 6, jaago 7, nikon
CDRT 4, moar 1, sint
Those not voting for Sint or Nikon yesterday: w_m, gohabs, goltar, rash
Those not voting for Moar the day before: sitro, lister, sint, w_m, goltar, muzzz, skunk, thy (and moar didn't vote for herself, naturally)
Time to play Sherlock
1. It is highly unlikely that *both* Sint and Nikon are mafia
2. The mafiosi would like to lynch an innocent person during the day to not lynching anyone at all. Two important factors here: they want to maximise the chance of lynching the witness, and they want to put the vigilante/doc/cop out of play asap
3. The mafiosi and innocent townsfolk run the risk of lynching the VI. But a no-lynch citing this reason doesn't get either group anywhere, as argued several times by several people already in the thread
4. Nikon was only two votes away from a lynch, Sint three.
Conclusion:
w_m, Habs, goltar and Rash either:
1. Didn't check back in time to change their vote, or
2. Are innocent (doesn't explain why they preferred a no-lynch)
The previous day, it depends on whether or not Moar is guilty. If she is guilty, I'd expect those who voted for her lynching to be innocent. She was fairly close to getting lynched, and any last minute vote changes against her lynching would have attracted too much attention. If she is innocent, I'd expect one or more of those who voted for her lynching to be mafia members.
Sir Lister of Smeg
New member
<part before here left out>
1. Agreed, it's more likely that both are townsfolk than that both are mafia.
2. Sounds correct indeed.
3. Partly correct. Both sides can assume that the village idiot is playing to win and is not a real idiot. If that's not correct, then there is no way of detecting the village idiot. Since every night the chance for the village idiot to be murdered instead of lynched increases, this means that the village idiot has to make him- or herself suspicious early on. Since the townies tend to be very good at making themselves suspicious, it's up to the mafia to murder the village idiot at night during the first few days. A no lynch during those first few days can thus be in both sides' interest. I think that by now those first few days are over. Note that a no lynch is preferable for the town over a clueless lynch, but by now any lynch won't be clueless anymore.
4. Didn't count, but I assume you're correct.
Here I have to disagree for several reasons:
- 1. and 2. do not exclude one another
- for all I know one of them could be the cop and have investigated both of them and found both of them to be innocent, in which case there is a very clear reason why they would prefer a no-lynch, this can hold only for one of them of course.
- for some other reason they think both are innocent, voting for someone just to have a lynch while thinking that person is innocent makes no sense either
- they could suspect both of being village idiot candidates and prefer to have them murdered by the mafia and only want to lynch one of them when/if he survives for a long time.
- even if they don't think both are innocent, they could prefer to vote for one they think is guilty. It could be they find one or both suspicious but others more so, thus preferring to vote for those others, even if it's clear it won't lead to a lynching.
Your options are both real options, but they're not the only two, and for your second option I can think of several reasons, as I've tried to expand upon above.
Sounds reasonable.
Time to play Sherlock
1. It is highly unlikely that *both* Sint and Nikon are mafia
2. The mafiosi would like to lynch an innocent person during the day to not lynching anyone at all. Two important factors here: they want to maximise the chance of lynching the witness, and they want to put the vigilante/doc/cop out of play asap
3. The mafiosi and innocent townsfolk run the risk of lynching the VI. But a no-lynch citing this reason doesn't get either group anywhere, as argued several times by several people already in the thread
4. Nikon was only two votes away from a lynch, Sint three.
1. Agreed, it's more likely that both are townsfolk than that both are mafia.
2. Sounds correct indeed.
3. Partly correct. Both sides can assume that the village idiot is playing to win and is not a real idiot. If that's not correct, then there is no way of detecting the village idiot. Since every night the chance for the village idiot to be murdered instead of lynched increases, this means that the village idiot has to make him- or herself suspicious early on. Since the townies tend to be very good at making themselves suspicious, it's up to the mafia to murder the village idiot at night during the first few days. A no lynch during those first few days can thus be in both sides' interest. I think that by now those first few days are over. Note that a no lynch is preferable for the town over a clueless lynch, but by now any lynch won't be clueless anymore.
4. Didn't count, but I assume you're correct.
Here I have to disagree for several reasons:
- 1. and 2. do not exclude one another
- for all I know one of them could be the cop and have investigated both of them and found both of them to be innocent, in which case there is a very clear reason why they would prefer a no-lynch, this can hold only for one of them of course.
- for some other reason they think both are innocent, voting for someone just to have a lynch while thinking that person is innocent makes no sense either
- they could suspect both of being village idiot candidates and prefer to have them murdered by the mafia and only want to lynch one of them when/if he survives for a long time.
- even if they don't think both are innocent, they could prefer to vote for one they think is guilty. It could be they find one or both suspicious but others more so, thus preferring to vote for those others, even if it's clear it won't lead to a lynching.
Your options are both real options, but they're not the only two, and for your second option I can think of several reasons, as I've tried to expand upon above.
Sounds reasonable.
Rashiminos
New member
After reviewing the posts of the most recently deceased and combining the implications with my own, I have determined to
Vote: Moar
today.
OT: Fall Semester has started for me this week at Salisbury University, and now I'll be getting to a less abundant amount of time for reading and replying to this thread. Go Sea Gulls.
@Lister: My eyes still see a noose around your neck.
Vote: Moar
today.
OT: Fall Semester has started for me this week at Salisbury University, and now I'll be getting to a less abundant amount of time for reading and replying to this thread. Go Sea Gulls.
@Lister: My eyes still see a noose around your neck.
Rashiminos
New member
As for not changing my vote yesterday, I was about to as I was making a vote count
Then skoolbus ended the day 3 hours earlier than I expected (17 hours from a related post and not 20) while I was checking the last page's votes.
I think lynching Moar and Lister will win us the game, but I've probably missed something.
Code:
lister: 1 (Rash)
sint: 5 (nikon, cdrtoast, lister, xduckster, jaago)
rash: 1 (w_m)
jaago: 1 (gohabsgo)
thyiad: 1 (goltar)
nikon: 7 (muzzz, skunkbelly, moar, sint, cygnus, thyiad, sitro)
moar: 1 (brak)Then skoolbus ended the day 3 hours earlier than I expected (17 hours from a related post and not 20) while I was checking the last page's votes.
I think lynching Moar and Lister will win us the game, but I've probably missed something.
My extensions to days are approximate. I let you know when I think I'll be ending them to give you a general idea, I'm not quite able to forsee my future and know exactly when I'll be on the computer again. Also, I believe it was a day extension, so you guys should have done all your business in the first 48 hours.
On a related note, not everyone is voting... So I'll extend today by ~ 16 hours.
In short, VOTE!!!
On a related note, not everyone is voting... So I'll extend today by ~ 16 hours.
In short, VOTE!!!
