This Town Ain't Big Enough Mafia

On February 25 2013 03:27 yamato77 wrote:
If anyone duels me this game, expect to get destroyed.

If we all agree on someone to lynch, I'll duel them and make sure it goes through.

On February 25 2013 10:05 iamperfection wrote:

this guy is the scummiest guy in the game so far in my view

says he is excited he is town
then proceeds to do nothing

discuss.

On February 26 2013 03:29 Snarfs wrote:

Lol, it was Sunday, I was out. Gimme a break, I'm catching up now.

so Oats, why so scared to attack marv?

On February 25 2013 11:16 thrawn2112 wrote:
I don't like how quickly Oats backed down on his suspicions of marv. He goes from "kinda suspicious" to


so Oats, why so scared to attack marv?

On February 26 2013 05:04 cDgCorazon wrote:


Are you serious? I went after the fact that Oats was being inconsistent. What I said had nothing to do with the back and forth and forth and forth between all the experienced vets (which I will get to reading right after I post this). That was a really weak point to bring up, and I'm really surprised that you've decided to focus on that instead of everything else that has gone on.

On February 26 2013 05:12 cDgCorazon wrote:


Maybe you haven't read the thread enough...

On February 26 2013 01:09 Keirathi wrote:
Holy thread explosion, Batman.

Sorry, I got super busy yesterday afternoon, then when I got home last night my power was out. Catching up now.

On February 26 2013 02:47 Keirathi wrote:

Remember, thrawn wasn't on-board witht he "two scummy people duel" idea. He said making all those policies was pointless.

So thrawn, why exactly do you want Hapa to duel? Do you think he is scum, or town? What is your ideal scenario for a duel? A strong townie vs a scum suspect? Or two scum suspects against each other?

On February 26 2013 07:44 Alderan wrote:


Ok so I made a post on my best read right now which is Dienosore. If I had to pick two I'd go with Snarfs.

Reason being I think early in the game your best chance to lynch scum is identify the low hanging fruit, ie. those that embody both scummy play and "noob" play. My idea is a bit WIFOM'y but anytime I've been mafia it's never been the experienced player that gets targeted early, it's always the seemingly "newer" player who leaves some subtle clue. Experienced players seem to make it through the first day without attracting too much attention, and as such need more time to evaluate.

Snarfs filter is tough because it's obviously limited (not that I have much room to talk) but the major issues are just the pure conjecture coming out+ Show Spoiler +
halfheartedly probing questions with no follow-ups

+ Show Spoiler +


And then, there's whatever the hell this is.

Reading through the thread in one sitting gave me the chance to see just how everyone's feelings have been progressing. Yamato and later Marv have been increasingly "suspected" as town, for better or for worse, and as such it seems that rather than getting in a pissing match with townies, Snarfs took the easy way out, the way that he thought would not garner that much attention.

But GAIZ!!111 He said he didn't want to "derail things". Let's think though, doesn't that sound similar to Dienosore's "muddy up the water" quote?

Spoiler
+ Show Spoiler +

Similar strategies, similar actions, and guess who haven't even mentioned each other yet this game.....

On February 26 2013 08:06 Alderan wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

What do you see in Keirathi's filter that you don't see in Thrawn's?

On February 26 2013 08:06 Hapahauli wrote:
Snarfs

I initially read his first post as enthusiastic, but the rest of his (short) filter reads as fake-contributions.


He offers a neatly packaged reason for why he wants me dead. No debate, no nothing, he just supports killing me right away in one small sentence.

He then moves on to "attack" thrawn in the weakest manner ever. He doesn't call thrawn scummy. He just "doesn't like" one of his posts and calls it "weird," which is hilarious considering he's attacking thrawn for the very same thing.

Notably, he's never mentioned thrawn in any of his posts afterward, or has attempted to follow up on his questions to thrawn.

In this post, he again takes this really passive questioning of another player. He seemingly has reasons to think Corazon is scummy, but drops it because "Marv and Yamato are happy."

On February 26 2013 11:54 cDgCorazon wrote:


If they do that we will all know they chose lynchbait and it will make them look even scummier.

If you want to ask your top two scumreads to duel, go ahead. Remember that they have to pull the trigger and if they don't, we can't lynch them. That's the dilemma provided to us by the set-up.

It's all just set-up speculation. None of us know how this process is going to go. I feel like there is no fair way to go about this whole "dueling" thing, but forcing one person to duel and letting them choose the other seems like the fairest way to go about things.

Of course if you don't want to do it fairly you need to convince the town on two scum reads, which seems a lot harder than what I proposed. Do you have any alternatives?

On February 26 2013 12:08 Acrofales wrote:

Only if a majority of town votes for the lynch bait. The idea is not entirely without merit. One of which is that we have no real way of preventing it.

Town has no way of forcing someone to duel (I presume, there may be powers of course), so whoever is going to duel will have to participate enough to challenge someone.

Now there's two scenarios:

1. The first duelist is town. In this case, it would be monumentally stupid play for a townie to duel someone he has a town read on. For instance, if Iamp is town, him dueling thrawn would be dumb, because he doesn't believe thrawn is scum (regardless of his reasons, you have to respect people's reads). Putting a townie in this situation is forcing that townie into a scenario he thinks is lose/lose: he chooses option C, to duel his scumread, the thread gets angry, lynches him and is down a townie.

2. The first duelist is scum. Lets assume the second scumread we want him to duel (assuming we can even agree on that) is a townie. Of course he agrees. He then tries his damndest to argue his way out of getting lynched. Maybe the fact that he was compliant persuades some townies to vote for his opponent. Now lets assume the second scumread is another scum. In this case the scum would be monumentally stupid to duel that opponent, as it is guaranteed scumdeath. He therefore picks his strongest scumread. How is this distinguishable from the town equivalent? Only by good analysis.

So, we need good analysis in all cases. Might as well do away with the bias from trying to force people to do shit they don't want to do. This way the scumspect also has to explain why he is dueling that person. And he'd better be convincing, or he'll end up being lynched anyway.

I like this plan quite a bit better than the original: this one has some of the kinks worked out of it

On February 25 2013 10:06 thrawn2112 wrote:


I'm not willing to commit to a read on cora yet. Nothing he's posted so far is all that alignment indicative, coming from him. As for yamato... maybe slighty town? I disagree with the logic behind nearly all of what he's said so far but he's acting in a townish manner.

Iamp could be scum. All he's done is drop off a town read and comment on how useless the thread is.

On February 26 2013 12:46 cDgCorazon wrote:


If we all agree dodging a duel is an automatic lynch all we need is one person to duel them and we just immediately kill who dodged the duel.

On February 27 2013 04:41 thrawn2112 wrote:
snarfs how do you feel about double lynching?

On February 26 2013 18:31 Sylencia wrote:
...

The sad thing is that I don't see Adam being scum, but just a detriment to town.

Regarding Keir, I feel like he's pretty much on the same area as I am, not much from him but the fact he's argued with Adam meant that he's been put up for a duel. I'm still null on Keir, but if this is the way Adam wants to play I don't think it's exactly going to help us out in the long run.

##Vote: Adam

On February 26 2013 16:37 Keirathi wrote:

I already said I would be fine dueling you. I still think you are scum.

On February 26 2013 15:45 Keirathi wrote:

Nothing else. I'm not entirely convinced Adam is scum, but I wanted some comments on it.

On February 27 2013 14:50 cDgCorazon wrote:
@Snarfs: I literally just said I have a good feeling that they are both town due to my read on Sylencia and his "on the middle of the fence but I'll vote for Adam just cause I need to vote". I'm voting for, in my opinion, is the more useless townie.

On February 27 2013 15:14 cDgCorazon wrote:


He said he had a "null read" on Keir and just voted before Keir did anything to swing that one way or the other.

On February 27 2013 15:19 yamato77 wrote:
I don't like trying to make Keir scum by association with a player we have no way of reliably determining the alignment of.

On February 27 2013 15:22 yamato77 wrote:
Yes, that's exactly what you're doing.

On February 27 2013 15:29 yamato77 wrote:

Only you're not just talking about Cora's vote...



Aside from the sentence I bolded, nothing is new in this entire post. I still don't agree that it is alignment indicative of Keir for him to be lurky, or indecisive about his early reads.

The only new argument here is that people should NOT vote for Adam because Sylencia IS, which is an association case that is very, very bad.

On February 27 2013 15:37 yamato77 wrote:
Have you proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Sylencia is mafia? No. Then it's a bad association case.

The guy does fuck all as town. I lost a game as town because of his propensity to lurk and be useless. There's zero indication to me that he's CONFIRMED MAFIA and we should get off the person he wants to vote for.

The only question here is if you're really dumb enough to push this sort of logic or if you're mafia attempting to manipulate the lynch.

On February 27 2013 15:46 yamato77 wrote:

...

WBG, I feel you.

On February 27 2013 15:50 yamato77 wrote:
I'm trying to tell you, that's a terrible reason to be using to figure out where to place your vote.

You seem pretty convinced of it, though, so at least I can assume you're probably town for it.

On February 27 2013 16:30 yamato77 wrote:

Your flawed premise is assuming that Sylencia is mafia. It's fine to read him that way, but when you start making decisions in the game based upon him being one alignment or another, you run into a multitude of problems, the biggest one being that despite your apparent conviction, the possibility exists that you are wrong, and Sylencia is town.

What Sylencia is doing right now is only useful for figuring out his own alignment, not the alignment of the people he is voting for.

On February 27 2013 16:48 yamato77 wrote:

I don't follow that logic at all.

I clearly just told you how someone could, and indeed should, ignore their read on Sylencia when factoring in who to vote for.

That's like, your whole argument.

On February 28 2013 00:54 Acrofales wrote:

Then explain to me the town motivation for knowing what you did is anti-town:


Yet being completely and utterly willing to do it again:


Given the rest of his play, I cannot reconcile a scum mindset. Given this play I cannot reconcile a town mindset. That leaves 3P with a wincon requiring him to win X duels, participate in X duels or something. This wincon would also explain how he got all triggerhappy and jumped in before Thrawn could: he needs to get those duels done.

Is it a bulletproof case? No. He could be a townie being a stupid, egotistical, twat. However, I have no evidence from any previous games ever that Adam is a stupid, egotistical, twat (and I've played in like 4 games with him). So I'll go with something that is consistent of what I know about Adam, the player: he has some funky wincon we don't know about that will force him to disrupt this town again and again.

Anyway, answer me this: what exactly would you need as "evidence" of a 3rd party? In a game where scum numbers are unknown, scum kp is unknown and the presence of 3P is explicitly made possible in the town wincon?

On March 01 2013 18:05 Oatsmaster wrote:
Is that all you got from 247 posts?

Who is scum snarfs and why? You have been not involved in this game and town needs you. Unless you are scum. :D

On March 01 2013 18:23 Acrofales wrote:
@Snarfs: Yamato gives a hypothetical for why my actions this game can be explained as scum. However, here is a town explanation:

I refused to believe Adam would do something that stupid as town, so I first saw him as scum, and later as a 3P to explain it. I was (probably) wrong.

Now tell me why Yamato's explanation makes more sense and what in my filter actually pushes a scum agenda, rather than a town one.

That, and a ridiculously high standard for my D1 reads are all I have found in anybody's suspicion of me.

On March 02 2013 00:28 cDgCorazon wrote:
@Syl: If we lynch Dieno, we are going to know his alignment. The problem with finding out his alignment first is that it is going to open us up to a ridiculous amount of association cases between me and you. Do we really want that? I don't think so.

On March 02 2013 02:12 Acrofales wrote:
Anyway, I've caught up on Dieno and Sylencia's filter and found nothing new. I am up for lynching Dieno. However, I do still want to hear from Zarepath and Snarfs what their opinions are, so lets lay off on the voting.

On March 02 2013 04:11 Alderan wrote:


We're at 5 votes right now correct?

On March 02 2013 08:47 cDgCorazon wrote:


No not really, I've kind of grouped him in with the other two when it comes to their play (especially the lurking). But the fact that you think he's scummy for wanting a double lynch and that I'm not scummy for wanting a double lynch is a bit inconsistent. However, you probably have good reasons for it.

If you only lynch Dieno are you going to just ignore me and Syl and go after Zare next?

On March 02 2013 16:34 Adam4167 wrote:


I dispute this point.

Two people were calling Deino town and 'top 4 town' at the end of N0.

Go filter dive if you cant remember who they were.

They're the two last scum by the way.

On February 26 2013 01:31 zarepath wrote:
I can see scummy motivations for your posting behavior -- seeding cases but not making them, then telling other people to quit asking you about them; lots of short posts that ask things of others but don't present content or arguments yourself. I can see scum motivation for all of those things.

I'm not calling you anything; I'm looking at your behavior. I don't have to label you in order to talk about you. Feel free to make a case on me instead of just calling me scum.

On March 01 2013 09:01 zarepath wrote:
I'm just popping in to say that I have a busy night and won't be able to check up on things much. But I'm encouraged that Syl and Dieno are here, and reiterate that I would love to see a list of their scum/town reads and who they'd prefer or not prefer to duel.

Thanks everyone for holding off on early-day duels, and nobody forget about Snarfs.

On March 02 2013 07:00 zarepath wrote:
Hhonestly guys, I haven't had time today to keep up on the thread. I see a really easy Dieno lynch, and before the duel that would have been my inclination, but now I kind of want to double lynch just to be sure. Part of me says that we can't afford the potential double-mislynch, but even then we'd know exactly who to look at from there. And I'm pretty sure at least one of them is scum.

On March 01 2013 15:10 Hapahauli wrote:
Hm Adam, that's an interesting take on Syl. Gonna sleep on that one.

On March 05 2013 04:13 zarepath wrote:


I'm pretty sure the only thing I said was for people to make sure to not forget about you even though you hadn't posted for a while, which is plenty worthwhile to call out (like 8 people have done it since I went AFK). I'd hardly characterize that as using it as a weapon against you; I don't have a scum read on you and haven't presented one.

On March 07 2013 00:40 cDgCorazon wrote:
Yes I'm claiming Blue. I protected Adam last night and since there are no notifications I'm not sure if it worked but I could guess that it did.

I have to go to school now, sorry =(

On March 07 2013 00:51 Acrofales wrote:
Dafuq?!

Snarfs: explain your night actions :O

On March 07 2013 00:56 Oatsmaster wrote:
Why Yamato? He isnt exactly a high priority nightkill.

On March 07 2013 05:37 VisceraEyes wrote:

I think you played really well. FWIW I think you're going to be beastmode when you ARE town again because of being scum so much. Mark my words.