TL Mafia XXVIII - Page 6

There's no way of us knowing whether or not the claim is true or false. There may or may not be one or two Vigis and even then 2 scum can step up and counter claim.

I actually disagree here. If 2 scum step up and counterclaim it exposes them in the open under public scrutiny. We can lynch the first claimant (the one who fired the shot) and see if he told the truth. Then we can have the other two shoot each other during the night with their vigi shots. If neither of them dies then we know they're both lying.

On July 23 2010 17:58 Subversion wrote:
Also, isn't there a situation where Tricode and BC could BOTH be lying?

Seems like we've just blindly accepted Tricode's claim as fact here.

But BC could be lying, and so could Tricode.

I guess that would be risky though since the real vig could counter-claim.

On July 23 2010 15:54 chaoser wrote:
Vigi should 100% claim. Let's first look at the facts:

1) Two real hits went down last night, one on Roffles, one on Jayme
2) BC says he got hit
3) The only way that can happen is through Vigi

Two cases can happen:
BC is lying
BC is telling the truth

In that first case, the only way it would work is if a fake vigi claims. If no real vigi claims then we know BC is 100% lying. If a fake vigi does claim,,then both BC and Vigi who claims are both liars, they are now 100% linked to each other. Now, they both can't be GF and in this situation, the vigi will be GF because, like you said, he will be checked next night. So we check BC instead. If he's red, both go down. Even in the case BC is GF, they have no idea who we're going to check, it's a 50/50 risk for them that we will find out. That's not a risk they probably want to take. The final reason mafia wouldn't do this is because I don't care about using the vigi as a confirmed townie, I just want information on what happened like night, which two the mafia actually hit, and which one was hit by vigi.

Now, on to the BC tells truth. Well in that case, a fake vigi can claim first or a real one can. If the real one does first, then that's that. If the fake one does, the real one can just claim and there will be a 1 v 1. Even if the real one claims first and then a fake one claims, we're still left with a 1v1 and a dead mafia sooner or later.

for all other counter claims. people ready stated it:


I actually do feel like I left something out so if anyone else can think of it, please help, I'm suppose to be asleep right now, if my parents catch me up i'm fucked. I'll write more tomorrow

Subversion Korea (South). July 19 2010 09:16. Posts 732 PM Profile Blog Report Quote #
##Vote: Hyperbola

Not really convinced by him, and there's not really any other clear choice for me right now.

Subversion Votes for Hyperbola with a one liner as night approaches, 45 minutes before the deadline. The vote was previously tied at 5-5. There wasn't a vote count with the Jayme mistake in it, as Jayme voted in between the Last Non-Final Vote Count (4.5 hours before deadline) and the Final Vote Count. It could be a freak coincidence, and had it been left at tied Hyperbola would've won, as he achieved more votes first. But maybe it was too close for comfort, as it was 7 - 5 before two people unvoted Hyperbole. Who's to say another wouldn't have jumped ship? Putting it 6-5 made it more secure.

Now, that's not a reason, and furthermore, that's a lie. There's at least one other choice that's close, and several others getting votes. This vote is highly influential, but nobody really caught onto it at the time. But if youngminii is mafia, then that's a direct implication of subversion as well.

Curious-er and curious-er.

Also, I'm going to put in my vote for Subversion. So far I don't know how I feel about BrownBear. At first I wanted to vote him. He's been playing badly and didn't do anything day one. But then at the same time people jumped all over voting for him in the beginning until just recently when people switched to Subversion, or at least it feels like that.

Subversion's little mafia mistake statement is just weird all in all and was part of that voting block (everyone's already mentioned this) so I'll put my vote on him for now but I'll have to see. Still a full day left.

##vote Subversion

On July 20 2010 14:03 tree.hugger wrote:

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. I have never, ever seen a townie say something like this. So narcissistic you had to complement yourself?

GG.

On July 23 2010 12:51 Subversion wrote:
so excited to see who died.

even tho i really think it might be me, lolz.

chaoser United States. July 23 2010 12:58. Posts 765 PM Profile Quote Edit #
On July 23 2010 12:51 Subversion wrote:
so excited to see who died.

even tho i really think it might be me, lolz.


what a scummy thing to say...

On July 23 2010 22:50 citi.zen wrote:
This is actually pretty cool. Both d3 and BC claimed veteran. Nobody else came forward. No reason not to trust them if no counter claim comes by the end of the day. Then we also confirm the Vigi. There are two DTs alive who performed 2 checks each - so possibly 4 more confirmed townies for a total of 7 confirmed townies. Not bad!

On July 24 2010 01:55 Protactinium wrote:

There's nothing to gain from this for the Mafia except for confusion. As it's already been said, at most one of them can be Godfather. It's a huge risk right there to assume neither of them have been checked in the four checks total. Even if that goes through, what do they gain? They don't cast suspicion on anybody in the town. Even so, as already pointed out lynching the one who claims Vigilante does not tell us anything about the person claiming to have taken the shot. I don't see a plausible reason why Mafia would do this, since even if both are not lynched today, there's nothing they can do about Detective checks in the night, and at that point the Suicide Bomber would have to kill one of his Mafia buddies for the "two-fer."

Ah, I just thought about how the suicide bomber plays into all of this. Will think about it because it can potentially change the "why" and "what has to be done", but guests have arrived. Toodles for the day.

On July 24 2010 02:11 rastaban wrote:


I like the idea, but just wanted to point out a couple caveats.

1. He isn't 100% confirmed it is risky. As of yet there is no evidence at all that the hit ever happened beyond both there words. While it is unlikely is it worth exposing both DTs to this possibility?

2. What if he gets a mafia claim? if the mafia claim fast then if 1 of the DTs isn't active he may go ahead and exchange the names. Even if all three go through would he then share them all, tell us who the three were?

On July 24 2010 02:41 rastaban wrote:
Sorry that first line should have been:

it is not nearly as risky a mafia play as you are making it to be as there are other possibilities.

On July 24 2010 03:57 rastaban wrote:


BM, I was wondering if you could clarify the majority part?

The OP lists "48 hour days, 24 hour nights", I didn't see anything about majority and since it can be anti-town it would be nice to have the extra time.

Thanks,

It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed.