Surprisingly Normal Mini Mafia III - Page 2

On June 07 2011 11:16 youngminii wrote:

Actually the names were all the people that were voting Sinani.

I absolutely 100% support Kavdragon's post against OriginalName. Not only is his analysis spot on, the information that we get from lynching him is amazing. If he ends up flipping scum, then based on the votes from day 1, we can easily narrow down the remaining scum. In fact, if OriginalName ISN'T scum then all we have to do is step back and re-evaluate everyone. That sounds confusing but I'll explain.

At the end of Day 1, it had essentially become Sinani V OriginalName plus a few ragtag votes (almost all of which were by people under the radar) among other people. There were some people that switched from Sinani to ON that could be regarded scummy but that's for another discussion.

Right now we know that Sinani was town. In fact, the fact that he was a vet made him an extremely important target for the mafia to snipe during the day. As such, it leads me to believe that at least 2-3 people that had originally (before moving over to ON) voted for Sinani were indeed scum. As more and more townies jumped on the bandwagon, the scum felt relatively safe. Then an opposing bandwagon started on ON. If ON is scum, then the vote on Sinani became even more important, as Sinani was the only other option. If ON is scum, then everyone on the Sinani bandwagon becomes even more suspicious than they are now, to the point where they become lynchable/vigi targets (imo). This is actually the most likely scenario, since mataza/palmar are both on my scumdar and steff/prplhz are both pretty scummy too.

Now if ON is actually a townie, then this means that mafia didn't actually have to do anything really for Day 1. I mean, they COULD have started the Sinani bandwagon so it doesn't really clear them. But if ON is town, then why would the people that voted for ON have even bothered? Why would I go for ON if he's just going to end up town? The bottom line is that there is no reason for myself or anyone else that went for ON (originally) to risk ourselves when we have a perfectly valid Sinani lynch. If ON ends up townie, it most likely means that the people with ragtag votes on other people could very well be mafia just laughing as town kills each other. This is actually the most unlikely outcome, but it's still a possibility.

So basically, ON is almost definitely mafia, but if he's not we still gain a ton of valuable information.

OriginalName has played enough games to know better than that.

On June 07 2011 09:24 Kavdragon wrote:
I feel irish, cause I just found GOLD. (So much so that I'm going to forego my usual analysis formatting)
Check this out: Sinani asks if vets can be lynched (something that was an obvious vet claim to me at the time) and three posts later, OriginalName posts this jem:




Look at this post: There is more in that post explaining why sinani is innocent than there is condeming him. Is there really? Here's what I see.. "sinani is an okay lynch since he's useless, all he's doing is writing lists which make you seem pro-town but actually isnt. i'll go with his lynch for now but I'm open to alternatives as his lynch won't give us a lot of info".. Where exactly is this majority that talks about sinani's innocence?He says that "Sinani is a ok lynch target only because hes being completely useless" That's ONE reason for why sinani should be lynched. He later says " nobody is really connected to him" and " hes probably being thrown under the metaphorical bus". TWO reasons why sinani is town. Anyways, it's not about percentages of points, it's about the fact that he brings up these points as to why sinani is town, then votes for him.The last paragraph in particular is condeming. "I'll go along with it for now..." He says that he'll go along with is, but he says it really reluctantly. If you are reluctant to vote someone, why are you voting them!? On a day1 lynch, uncertainty is not unheard of.. In fact it's probably the most common sentiment out thereYes, I would agree that uncertanty is common especially, as you say, day one. But you have to look at it in comparison to the vote he made on steff. There was no hesetancy in that vote. He seemed quite sure of that read, yet he went with something that was obviously a weaker read in sinani."But I would like to consider somwhere else as nobody is really connected to him and hes probably being thrown under the metaphorical bus" He even defends him, pointing out the two things that were wrong with the lynch, and procedes to vote him!.

This is EXACTLY the sort of thing that you look for afterwards. What he says in his post and what he proceds to vote are a COMPLETE CONTADICTION. He cannot say with conviction that Sinani is scum, because he knows that he is not his scum buddy!
Or perhaps he can't say it with conviction because it's day one, and nobody knows anything.
Again, compare it to steff.
Let's also look at who he pulled his vote off of in order to vote sinani: Steff. Up to this point he's said that mataza has been playing badly and at least insinuated that he was scum, along with palmer. However, he's never felt strongly enough to vote them. He voted Steff:


He says that "his opinion from yesterday still stands" implying that he though that steff was lynch worthy for the past two days. (one game day). The key thing here is that he "highly suggests lynching [steff] unless he really steps it up." Steff didn't step it up, yet he pulls his vote off of him ONE POST LATER, and reluctantly votes for Sinani. This makes no sense. He shows that he actually has very little conviction behind what he is saying, and is not conserned with who is lynched. Classic scum mentality.

I disagree here as well. Before ON's post, steff posted 4 times, all of which were pretty much useless "im drunk lol" posts. After ON's post (before ON switched to nani), steff posted 8 more times, with at least 3 solid player opinion posts (and some other junk). I'm not sure what your definition of "stepping up" is, but I think this qualifies.I missed a few posts from steff when looking over, but I think that the point still stands. He never said anything about steff shaping up when he switched votes. On the contrary, he called himself a hypocrite.

Looking past the sinani vote, in all of his posts up to the lynch (when people are trying to push the lynch onto him) he never once denys peoples accusations, and instead of defending himself, he just pushes for sinani harder. That's not how townies play. Townies don't lynch other people just so that they stay alive. Actually, that's exactly how townies play. You even said so in the next sentence. If someone accuses the hell out of me, I can defend myself all I want, but if I don't give an alternative, that's all pointless. Alternatives and analysis are key to any townie defense. Not just shutting down attackers arguments as that won't convince anyone, even though you're green. Remember this game isn't about what's true, but about what you can make people believe. Alternatives are important, I agree. But it's the alternative that he chooses that is scummy. Look at what he accuses sinani of: Being useless. Is that honestly the most scummy thing he could find out of everyone's play? His accusation of sinani is the weak accusation of a scum player who knows that he's innocent. Not that of a townie looking for real scum to substitute. You look for someone else who looks like scum (steff)and push for that instead of the person you think we should not be focusing on (sinani). OriginalName has played enough games to know better than that.

---

This is about as clear cut as it gets folks. OriginalName is the obvious choice for a day 2 lynch.

On June 08 2011 03:28 Kavdragon wrote:
Sigh. Jee Jee. Get some coaching from someone. I suggest foolishness or BloodyC0bler depending on who has time. You've got good intentions, but you're doing it all wrong. I'll explain later in the game-day, but honestly, you're hurting the town much more than you are helping it right now.

On June 08 2011 05:43 Kavdragon wrote:


What do you think of OriginalName's defence? In your own words that townies need to suggest alternatives, but it seems like all he's willing to do is sit back and call a general BS on my arguments. He's been around since I made the accusations, why isn't he responding to the points I make, and why is he not trying to contribute?

On June 08 2011 03:51 Kavdragon wrote:
OriginalName, where are you?

I feel like that's been the theme of your play this game. Say one thing, do the opposite. Why are you not defending yourself?

On June 06 2011 09:25 sinani206 wrote:
It doesn't matter who I vote for because I'm going to die. Whatever. GG. I was Veteran.