EPTIncognito's TL Mafia XVI - Page 20
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
789
United States959 Posts
| ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
On January 21 2010 12:23 Abenson wrote: I'm so confused right now.... The clues don't seem to tell anything in the Day 1 post... D; Anyways.... I think that we should stick with hard facts for now, and I really think T_co is extremely suspicious like most of you, but I think we should observe before doing anything rash. The fact is we must lynch someone, these are the rules. It is simply a matter of who is the best candidate. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On January 21 2010 12:29 citi.zen wrote: The fact is we must lynch someone, these are the rules. It is simply a matter of who is the best candidate. Exactly. Also, when does the day end? 9pm est tomorrow? | ||
|
Abenson
Canada4122 Posts
I'm just kinda worried about getting kicked because of inactivity or not voting | ||
|
Zona
40426 Posts
I disagree that vote histories aren't important until we suspect an elected official is mafia. I think they're the best thing the town has, other than clues. Also - since the mafia know who each other are, are coordinating, and would greatly benefit from having mafia members in positions where they can't be rolechecked (and get triple vote power to boot), it is highly likely at least one of the candidates is a mafia member. I actually think all candidates should go through some major scrutiny. In the worse case, it would be awful if both DrH and meeple were both mafia and were elected. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
1. The mafia probably won't go all-in on one candidate. More than likely they will spread their votes to cause confusion. Meaning if we find out that a mafia voted for someone that isn't really a good indicator that they were a mafia candidate. 2. If all candidates appear to be innocent, then their voting histories aren't very telling. However, if we have other reasons to believe they might be mafia, then their voter histories will become important. 3. If one of the candidates is mafia, that doesn't incriminate everyone who voted for them, rather we should compare those voters to all the clues and scrutinize their posting histories. However, at the moment, I don't see much information being gleaned from voting history. I do, however, see potential information being gleaned from it. On January 21 2010 12:27 Incognito wrote: Vote update: meeple: (8) Abenson DoctorHelvetica BillMurray citi.zen [NyC]HoBbes Jayme Zona Mystlord citi.zen: (1) Hyperbola t_co: (4) magicbullet Faronel StimiLant kane]deth[ DoctorHelvetica: (13) 789 meeple flamewheel91 CynanMachae keit tredmasta derfboy Ser Aspi meeple The_Master Fallen_Ark Jugan dinmsab If anything is wrong here, please let me know. | ||
|
t_co
United States702 Posts
On January 21 2010 12:31 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Exactly. Also, when does the day end? 9pm est tomorrow? I find it highly suspicious that meeple/DoctorH/Bill/citi.zen are cross-referencing and cross-posting each other so much. Note that they all began to cross-post (and offer each other support) right after the role PMs were announced, implying that they began the game trusting each other. WHY? Why would they do that? I find it funny that somehow me trying to push for a strategy that can keep the mafia from being able to use the mayor's office against the town is grounds for suspicion. Note that I am the only person who has not called for ANYONE to be lynched. I keep reminding people that it's too early in the game to lynch, and somehow this is suspicious? So I ran for sheriff, and now citi.zen, DoctorH, and meeple have explicitly stated that they will do whatever it takes to keep me out of office. Doesn't this strike anyone as odd? Why would those three band together and trust one another so soon? And it's not like I was losing badly when I made the post calling for a mayor lynch--I was only down 1 vote. In fact, if you guys elect me mayor, lynch me. Although that probably won't happen because the DoctorH/meeple's gang, once they become mayor, seem hellbent on making me the Day 1 lynch. Needless to say if I flip green/blue then doctorH/meeple are in doubt. They should be lynched but I doubt that will happen if they are elected sheriff/mayor as they can simply outvote and, sadly, outpost the inactives. | ||
|
t_co
United States702 Posts
On January 21 2010 12:43 DoctorHelvetica wrote: They are important to note, but I don't see how we could serious guess who is mafia and who isn't based on vote histories alone for the following reasons: 1. The mafia probably won't go all-in on one candidate. More than likely they will spread their votes to cause confusion. Meaning if we find out that a mafia voted for someone that isn't really a good indicator that they were a mafia candidate. 2. If all candidates appear to be innocent, then their voting histories aren't very telling. However, if we have other reasons to believe they might be mafia, then their voter histories will become important. 3. If one of the candidates is mafia, that doesn't incriminate everyone who voted for them, rather we should compare those voters to all the clues and scrutinize their posting histories. However, at the moment, I don't see much information being gleaned from voting history. I do, however, see potential information being gleaned from it. Note that what DoctorH is basically saying here is that he and meeple will scrutinize anyone who votes for me. This is politicking at its best and shows that they are the real ones who are trying to split the town. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
Actually, I would vote to lynch Hobbes over you since he at least has connection to the clues. Do I trust you? No. Am I hellbent on getting you lynched? Not even. Because some people in the town agree or trust eachother you're trying to point fingers already and you're being extremely aggressive about it. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On January 21 2010 12:45 t_co wrote: Note that what DoctorH is basically saying here is that he and meeple will scrutinize anyone who votes for me. This is politicking at its best and shows that they are the real ones who are trying to split the town. Note that that is complete bullshit and what I'm saying is that we should not scrutinize voters until we have good information on one of the candidates that points toward them being mafia. I don't think we should lynch anyone who doesn't have a clue pointing toward them at least. | ||
|
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
On January 21 2010 12:23 Abenson wrote: I'm so confused right now.... The clues don't seem to tell anything in the Day 1 post... D; Anyways.... I think that we should stick with hard facts for now, and I really think T_co is extremely suspicious like most of you, but I think we should observe before doing anything rash. Yes, thinking and observing before doing anything rash is always a good idea. I agree 100% | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On January 21 2010 12:44 t_co wrote: I find it highly suspicious that meeple/DoctorH/Bill/citi.zen are cross-referencing and cross-posting each other so much. Note that they all began to cross-post (and offer each other support) right after the role PMs were announced, implying that they began the game trusting each other. WHY? Why would they do that? I find it funny that somehow me trying to push for a strategy that can keep the mafia from being able to use the mayor's office against the town is grounds for suspicion. Note that I am the only person who has not called for ANYONE to be lynched. I keep reminding people that it's too early in the game to lynch, and somehow this is suspicious? So I ran for sheriff, and now citi.zen, DoctorH, and meeple have explicitly stated that they will do whatever it takes to keep me out of office. Doesn't this strike anyone as odd? Why would those three band together and trust one another so soon? And it's not like I was losing badly when I made the post calling for a mayor lynch--I was only down 1 vote. In fact, if you guys elect me mayor, lynch me. Although that probably won't happen because the DoctorH/meeple's gang, once they become mayor, seem hellbent on making me the Day 1 lynch. Needless to say if I flip green/blue then doctorH/meeple are in doubt. They should be lynched but I doubt that will happen if they are elected sheriff/mayor as they can simply outvote and, sadly, outpost the inactives. In response to the bolded section. The mayor HAS to lynch someone. Do you not understand this? Someone is getting lynched. So, yes of fucking course we should be discussing who should be lynched. | ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
Needless to say if I flip green/blue then doctorH/meeple are in doubt. Don't forget me too! Not only that, but I would think the people who voted for you might be relatively safe. It would be one heck of a strategy for the mob to put up 3 competing candidates, but what the heck, it could happen! On the other hand, if we lynched you and you turned out red, we'd have a lot to talk about. Basically I think lynching is about revealing information. I don't think killing anyone else would give us as much to go on as lynching t_co. We could go with Hobbes based on clues, but even if he turned red, that would be a dead end. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
1)t_co is lynched and turned red 2)t_co is lynched and turned blue or green In the first scenario, then I guess we should start by comparing people who voted for him/defended him against clues and such. Not much else to do at that point. If he turns blue/green that's much more interesting. For one, his theory about meeple/me/citi.zen being in some sort of alliance will be given a bit more credence. I still think we should lynch hobbes. I'm reluctant to take too risky a move on the first day. if t_co is a townie or a blue, he is clearly very aggressive and active and that is the kind of person I want on the towns side, even if he suspects me. I think we should play it safe until we get some more information from the second day. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On January 21 2010 13:03 Bill Murray wrote: stimilant both voted for t_co and fits a clue, that's a double whammy if i ever saw one I don't think so really. Hobbes voted for meeple, right? | ||
|
blue_arrow
1971 Posts
and I am still unsure as to who to vote for; however, i'm in support of the future mayor lynching hobbes; as DH said, he's our best guess right now | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
| ||
