TL Mafia XXVIII

On July 18 2010 09:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
If we randomly pick someone, we have a better chance of getting a blue then a red. Why don't we try voting for who we think is red? It's not like the game will automatically get easier for us as it goes on, since there aren't any clues. Also, at this point everyone's votes are spread out so we are nearly guaranteed an innocent lynch. Getting everyone to agree to vote for the random could be awfully tough.

IF we wanted to do the random thing, we could tie it in advance to something numerical in one or both of the playoff games tonight. Like number of factories made by WeMade players, or that number divided by two, or taking the number of letters in each winning player's ID and looping back to 1 if it goes over 30. It wouldn't be random, but we could independently agree on it, and none of us could influence it in advance. We don't know the distribution of red/blue/green in the list so it is almost as good as random unless the reds get us to agree on a bad number (like maybe they get us to agree on something times 2, which would never land on the first person on the list).

On July 18 2010 10:40 youngminii wrote:



If we lynch someone on the first day without any good reason there's a solid chance (12/15) that we'll hit a townie. That's 80%. There's also a better chance of lynching a blue than there is of scum. A no lynch is a gift that we should utilize instead of RVS.

On July 18 2010 13:45 tree.hugger wrote:

The reason it was introduced in the first place what completely ridiculous. Nothing smart about any of it. We should lynch people for good reasons, not dumb ones.

I'm still looking for more nominations for people to lynch. I think those three are a good start. Time to pick one, yes? How about I PM five people a list of the candidates in order, and then someone in the thread will choose a number from 1-3?

On July 18 2010 09:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:

IF we wanted to do the random thing, we could tie it in advance to something numerical in one or both of the playoff games tonight. Like number of factories made by WeMade players, or that number divided by two, or taking the number of letters in each winning player's ID and looping back to 1 if it goes over 30. It wouldn't be random, but we could independently agree on it, and none of us could influence it in advance. We don't know the distribution of red/blue/green in the list so it is almost as good as random unless the reds get us to agree on a bad number (like maybe they get us to agree on something times 2, which would never land on the first person on the list).

On July 20 2010 04:50 Protactinium wrote:
I kind of want to draw focus to the "Abstain" list.

I haven't seen or read too many Mafia games with the "Abstain" voting option; normally I just see people voting for themselves but that is not allowed in this game. Regardless, the six people on this list are all fairly inactive or haven't been contributing much, myself included. Though tree.hugger has brought up that Mafia will spread their votes amongst other people, I do think he's right in assuming that at least one Mafia member is abstaining, since it's the easiest way out.

When I went back and searched for the relevant posts people had made, I found that most of the above-mentioned do not have really any substantial or substantiating posts. Luckily, chaoser has saved me some time by notating the abstain votes here. Interestingly, or not-really-so-, enough, abstainers have a pretty low level of useful activity.

Let's start with Laxercannon. He doesn't really seem to make an effort in the game, and only has one post in which he types more than a line of text. He abstains but then doesn't make any effort to change it over the course of the next four or so hours. Also, his lack of attentiveness can be seen in his latest comment, stating that he wasn't following the thread enough. From reading a few past games he's been in, he seems to normally be more active. It's really too early, in my opinion, to draw some sort of conclusive read but I think it can be conclusively said that from the evidence given so far, Laxercannon is not playing very pro-town.

I've never seen tricode play a game before, but I think he's one of the older players, judging by his posting attitude. Out of the people on the abstain list, he seems to be the only one who isn't just posting spam (besides myself, since I only have two posts... though even those two don't add anything!). He votes for an abstain because he has to see his dad off, and then says that lynches have to be used, since saying "what if" loses the game. This is a good idea. tricode reads pretty town in my eyes.

chaoser doesn't really seem to be saying too much, looking through his posts, though he did compile the voting list afterward for the final few hours of the first day. He reiterates some old points beforehand, but I do like the list afterward. Will have to beware of 'paraphrased wording,' of course. chaoser seems to be playing pro-town, but he doesn't do the analysis himself, saying that "others can make use of [this information] however they want." Undecided.

Southrawrea has almost nothing of value posted, and he seems like a new player, in part because of the editing. He wants to 'take it easy' day 1 since there's nothing to go off of, but isn't it beneficial to the Mafia to have the town discuss nothing? Once again I can't say anything conclusively (even to myself) at this point, but Southrawrea isn't playing very pro-town.

Me... I don't feel like I should speak about myself. I just replaced in this game yesterday, caught up at the end of last night, and am making an attempt to PM and post now. I don't want to be an inactive bum, since that just benefits the Mafia. The less inactives there are, the fewer hiding spots the Mafia will have.

And finally, zeks. Votes for Hyperbola as a placeholder (why not abstain?) but then removes his vote after the rest of the votes for Hyperbola, disregarding Subversion's, have been cast. Doesn't really say anything of value, at most just reiterates some known things. Not very pro-town.

Will attempt to comment on other people later as I go along.

5] Hyperbola (Misder, Divinek, Pandain, Zeks, SiNiquity)
2] DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, citi.zen)
1] Amber[LighT] (jayme),
1] d3_crescentia (darthThienAn),
1] citi.zen (rastaban)
1] chaoser (~opz~)
1] Divinek (bumatlarge)
1] SiNiquity (Hyperbola)
6] abstain (BloodyC0bbler, LaXerCannon, youngminii, tricode, Pyrrhuloxia, Roffles)

On July 20 2010 10:27 Misder wrote:
Also, as many people already stated, Hyperbola was not screwed all the way. It was 6-5 for Hyperbola, a very close vote.

Anyways... ITS 9:27!!!!!! WHERE IS THE DAY POST!!!!

On July 20 2010 08:07 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
When this supposed bandwagon started, I believe no one had more than one vote. I can't see more than one or two reds organizing a vote against youngminii in this situation. Reds bandwagon to save their own and no one was in mortal danger. Even if they thought youngminii was blue (I didn't see any reason to think that), they could kill him at night. Herd mentality isn't suspicious, it's par for the course.

On July 20 2010 13:11 Bill Murray wrote:
the day technically started at 9 pm est/10 kst
my girlfriend and i have been fighting, and i'm sorry that that inhibited my ability to resolve the night's action on time, but we really needed a night out together, and went to see the movie inception. i would like to add that i am now engaged to be married. i will make the day start from midnight tonight as a result. let me go through the actions and see who was to be killed/protected/etc.

On July 21 2010 09:09 Subversion wrote:


THANK YOU fucking hell. I played in ONE NIGHT of harry potter mafia, I got temp banned for some stupid joke and got replaced

This is my first game ffs, I didn't realise what I said would make it "oh gg, he's mafia lol, what a fkn moron". I was trying to be useful

Seems like everyone is jumping on my voting bandwagon, I get what I said was stupid now, although I still don't really understand why its a fucknormous mistake. I was simply stating what to me, was a fairly obvious fact. It was kind of a justification for my vote to be honest. I didn't see any major mistakes, I didn't have anyone I felt REALLY deserved a vote, but I didn't wanna abstain and I thought Hyperbola was fucked anyway. So I read what he said and what others said, there didn't really seem like any better choice, so I just voted for him. Like I said, I didn't really think my vote mattered much anyway. I also had Bill up my ass saying I was gonna be modkilled if I didn't vote!

I really don't want to be voted out here, I don't want to roleclaim either, but I can if necessary??

On July 21 2010 09:29 Subversion wrote:
Go back and look. There's a tally by someone saying 7-4, then after that my vote comes.

Someone stated afterwards that their was an error in counting somewhere, and there were 2 unvotes after that I didn't see.

My vote only looks suspicious due to really poor timing =/

On July 21 2010 09:42 Subversion wrote:


I've already defended this a million times now I told you, there was noone else that looked better, and I didn't want to abstain. Sure, maybe I should've just abstained, but everyone was saying abstaining is stupid and I'm new and I didn't want to fuck up. Lol, that's gone great so far

Also, why the fuck all the attention on my vote? Someone made a great post about how Hyperbola's fate was sealed in a block of 4 or 5 votes within an hour. Why is noone looking at those people? My vote came hours afterwards, when he was already circling the drain. It seems pretty clear to me that I'm just a n00b townie jumping on a bandwagon.

Why has everyone forgotten about the big group of people that STARTED the bandwagon in the 1st place?

On July 21 2010 10:12 Subversion wrote:
Your two reasons contradict each other imo.

You're saying that Hyperbola was a mafia vote - but you're also saying the people who started the bandwagon with 5 votes are likely not mafia?

That makes no sense =/

On July 21 2010 19:16 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
Now you may think that it is too obvious for the mafia to kill off someone who publicly calls them out. It's not. It's good strategy. In fact, I myself killed off Foolishness in a game I won because he was one of the few suspicious of me. If someone suspects you, they won't magically think you're innocent if you let them survive the night. People's heuristics for determining who they will vote for don't tend to shift too wildly over the course of a game. Even if people make a mistaken vote early, they will tend to justify it ex post facto and perhaps continue it (maybe what I'm doing here, but I think I have some good logic to back up my gut feeling). If you are mafia, and a member is getting 3rd/4th place in votes, even with just a couple, that member could be in 1st a few days later. By killing off the people who are suspicious of you, even if their reasons suck, you get talked about less and you literally shave off your vote total. It's not too bad of a strategy to just play whack-a-mole going after all your public detractors because you can always just say you're getting framed. I've been there, done that.

On July 22 2010 03:16 Amber[LighT] wrote:


If we play the game with this logic then BC should have been killed already, but he's still alive.

Opz is still alive, he's a strong player too.

What about Roffles, he's incredibly cunning and plays the part of mafioso and townie very well.

Pyrr should have been killed based upon this logic as well.

Infun should have probably been a good target.

You're playing the game very counter-intuitively. You're insisting that strong players should die, not suspicious players. DTA is playing the Chezinu card, which is common play. There's always guaranteed to be one of those idiot players in the game. The host himself has played this card before in games...

I can't believe the people that are coming forward insisting that killing subversion will gain no knowledge. Killing DTA just verifies his play-style. We can actually tie a connection between DTA and Subversion as well as the people who are trying to avoid talking about DTA at all, or those who are supporting one lynch target over another.

I'm not going to sit here and say killing DTA is wrong, he is still a target due to his play-style this game, but he's going to give us less information than lynching Subversion. Do whatever you want but don't justify your lynch vote by saying DTA is a good player and I think other people's opinions are strong, so this must be a good choice. Sheep.

If there are 13 votes for abstaining, then we accidentally end the day, correct? Please don't vote at all, or throw your placeholder vote on someone who is not going to carry the day in the end.