EPToh and robik survived n1 gg, clear mafia
Alright, looking at nightkills, Eden is the super obvious choice, doesn't change much for my analysis. In fact, it just cuts out the comments I was going to make about Eden.
Day 1 is characterized by what I feel are three MAJOR events.
1) The OK lurker policy, Robik's wtf, and the subsequent push onto Cavalinho for following Robik on it
2) My own fail post and the subsequent shitstorm.
3) The Cavalinho parity claim.
I think the first two situations have been beaten to death, though I'll answer any remaining questions people have about the second point. The brunt of my analysis will be on
Cavalinho put out the parity cop claim just to spite fking Eden, and I can understand it. More than understand it, I did the same thing because it was fking tiresome.
Let's look how people fell on that.
Pixalated wasn't online at the time because Singapore.
Eden kept pushing, and was tunneling on Cavalinho and Robik being scum together (this is a clusterfuck I want to return to later when I have more time to analyze the slapfight more throoughly).
Robik posted a spirited defense of Cavalinho, saying we shouldn't lynch the parity cop claim. Also yelling at Eden. I still don't understand how the parity cop claim can just sort itself out before Day 3, and even then it doesn't necessarily become useful.
Valenius states that:
On March 28 2014 06:07 Valenius wrote:
In light of this..
My vote isn't moving. I don't believe LT is mafia, so i'm not going to move my vote on to him.
In light of this..
My vote isn't moving. I don't believe LT is mafia, so i'm not going to move my vote on to him.
Which is actually a pretty bold statement since no-one else had said anything decisive, and I think it leans town.
I do want an explanation as to why you didn't move it onto Cavalinho, however, as while I understand why you didn't move it onto me, but not Cav. You just over half-an hour stated that:
On March 28 2014 05:28 Valenius wrote:
I really want to keep my vote on sqrt, but it doesn't look like it's going down that way.
Out of Cav/LT, i'd be voting for Cav.
I really want to keep my vote on sqrt, but it doesn't look like it's going down that way.
Out of Cav/LT, i'd be voting for Cav.
Then, RolandJarvis is online and posts:
Posting to say I'm refreshing from work and I'm aware of current events.
He doesn't explicitly take a side here (instead keeps on voting Cavalinho).
And what were your thoughts about the whole affair? You didn't post any thoughts about it despite being online at the time.
OK then posts that he disagrees with Robik's reasoning that "the parity cop claim will sort itself out". He doesn't take further action outside of this, as of yet. Likely thinking over his course of action.
RJ then posts this:
On March 28 2014 06:34 RolandJarvis wrote:
I am nervous about who won't be around and the possibility of no accountability vote switches in the name of not lynching the claim.
I am nervous about who won't be around and the possibility of no accountability vote switches in the name of not lynching the claim.
I believe everyone in the game has by this time been accounted for outside of myself (I noted previously that my phone was dead), and Pixalated (who stated he was sleeping and wasn't around for the lynch). It seems to imply that you still wanted to see Cavalinho lynched, as you were worried about vote switches off of him?
Then we get
On March 28 2014 06:37 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
The question is, do we believe the cop claim or not? It's doubtful, but possible.
The question is, do we believe the cop claim or not? It's doubtful, but possible.
Which is fking useless. No stand, no reason to post it outside to basically signal hes online and aware of what's happening, and just makes town more confused and uncertain. He doesn't change his vote on Cavalinho. Scummy or useless town contribution.
Valenius responds to it and says:
On March 28 2014 06:38 Valenius wrote:
Shit, i wish someone had wondered this earlier.
Shit, i wish someone had wondered this earlier.
Which raises the question as to why you don't post anything afterwards regarding the Cavalinho lynch (either changing your play, taking a firm stand on it before Day 1 ended, or commenting on later actions), as you were clearly online at the time.
I then make a post that states I have a short amount of time to check and reply to the mafia thread + Show Spoiler [RL reason] +
the kids I was tutoring got disciplinary action so I had half an hour to fuck around
OK then posts his vote switch from Valenius to Cavalinho, specifically citing RJ's concern that people would vote-switch off of Cavalinho because of the claim, and stating he doesn't think it can resolve itself.
At this point I finally finish skimming the thread, have no fking clue what to say about the claim, and thought to myself: I might as well consolidate because I basically think there's no fking way this will end well because it's a fking parity cop, and we could be LYLO if we try to accommodate it.
I DISAGREE THAT THIS IS A TOWN PLAY. Neutral play at best in my own review of the action, since it was posted after OK posted his justification (I posted I was online probably like 15s before he posted his justification and voteswitch).
I'll say this: I disagree with OK's assessment of LT late vote on Cava looking good because why would mafia want to draw attention to themselves. I disagree because if LT is mafia, and he's one of the other wagons, he has to make sure that he's not lynched based off of a late vote-switch based off of the claim. Thus it makes sense for him to make sure that the lead wagon is as far ahead as possible.
I agree with this, though at the time there were 4 votes on Cavalinho, so it would take 2 vote switches, as opposed to 1, to see myself lynched. I actually like the skepticism here. I don't see how it can be anything but a neutral at best move, especially as I did telegraph that I was most likely not going to be able to post again before the deadline.
tl;dr???
I feel really scummy about sqrt's post for obvious reasons. It doesn't discuss "what should we do", it just incites doubt about "is he REALLY a cop?" (like we're going to fking know until he flips). He doesn't change his vote or anything, so I'm really not sure what to make of it.
Valenius' posts confuse me here and I'm not sure how to interpret his play; his first post seems towny to me, but the second, combined with a lack of followup, confuses this read: especially as he said he didn't mind voting Cavalinho over myself.
RJ voiced a valid concern about possible vote-switching off of Cavalinho (but apparently did not foresee the vote-switching ON to Cavalinho), and seemed to be for the continued lynching of Cavalinho claim or no claim. I agree with it, but I can't read much else from him here.
OK does voteswitch onto Cavalinho first (followed by myself like 5 minutes later).
I am uneasy about Robik's play, and will be posting another analysis of it later today. This was already more work than I intended.
I have more general reads and proposals coming in the next wall-o-text
. Ok, I kid, but it was based off something which can readily be falsified with a single glance at his filter at the time. Like, it's SUPER obvious, and really, why would I as scum try to link myself to my scum partner so early (and vice versa), and with something so easily disputed? Neither does this say that he's town if I'm scum (when I "downgraded" him and gave the actual read, Eden was on the Tolkien/Cavalinho 4eva pairing at the time, so I would have no incentive to change anything about Valenius), just that this is a useless line of inquiry.
