|
This is a recap of day 1 voting that anyone can use. In the vote recap I added the time since that can be useful. The time is the number of hours and minutes since beginning of the day. Link to vote posts are compiled in the mafia votecount.
Day 1 final vote
barakos (8): raynpelikoneet, disformation, Breshke, Sulfurus, Rels, Damdred, n00bKing, NocturneMage
moosydoosy (2): ruXxar, Rels, Tictock, ruXxar
nocturnemage (0): Rels
ruxxar (0): n00bKing
barakas (0): Damdred
rels (0): n00bKing
rayn (0): ruXxar
Not voting (3): MoosyDoosy, Barakos, Flexes
Day 1 vote recap
H00M25 n00bKing voted for ruXxar
H09M19 raynpelikoneet voted for Barakos
H10M53 Rels voted for NocturneMage
H15M45 ruXxar voted for moosydoosy
H17M47 Rels unvoted
H17M47 Rels voted for MoosyDoosy
H18M59 Rels unvoted
H21M06 disformation voted for Barakos
H22M14 Damdred voted for barakas
H22M59 n00bKing unvoted
H22M59 n00bKing voted for Rels
H26M49 Breshke voted for Barakos
H26M57 Sulfurus voted for Barakos
H33M53 Rels voted for Barakos
H35M31 Tictock voted for MoosyDoosy
H39M06 ruXxar unvoted
H39M06 ruXxar voted for rayn
H40M12 ruXxar unvoted
H40M12 ruXxar voted for MoosyDoosy
H44M42 Damdred unvoted
H44M42 Damdred voted for barakos
H46M04 n00bKing unvoted
H46M04 n00bKing voted for Barakos
H46M20 NocturneMage voted for Barakos
|
Looking at the votes I don't have much to say, as the consensus is pretty clear.
Town leans from the Barakos' train are the early birds: rayn, disformation and Damdred. The other votes could be opportunistic.
What's more troubling are the non-voting guys: moosy and flexes. By refusing to vote, they're denying informations about their thought process (and, outside of this vote analysis, the two of them didn't clearly publish their reads).
In conclusion, not much infos from this vote I feel. Town reads on early voters + suspicion on non-voters.
I'll update the recap in future days with the flips.
|
On July 26 2015 18:29 raynpelikoneet wrote:
I still think Flexes is mafia.
There is no reason a townie would say "i am writing a reads post right now" if they are not doing so.
I find that impossible.
Like this game is pretty straightforward. People who do scummy things are usually scum. If someone thinks they themselves did a scummy thing they are scum. rofl. Saying you are doing something you actually aren't is a scummy thing.
Flexes is lying, as proven by the thread. It doesn't matter if it "makes sense for him to do that as mafia". It matters that no townie ever says they are DOING something they actually aren't.
Simple things are simple.
Agree.
But even if he's town, vig should shot him 100%. He had 3 posts and no vote D1. If he survives we're going to auto him D2 and that will be boring. People may start to be bored with the game and maybe won't be as active D3.
|
On July 26 2015 18:34 raynpelikoneet wrote:
btw in case i die DO NOT, i repeat DO NOT lynch into people who voted for Barakos.
It is WAY more likely there are zero, or at most one mafia in that pool.
I disagree. Barakos' last post was 16 hours into day 1, so we can assume he accepted his lynch by at most mid day. Every vote after that could be mafia, especially since reasonning is so easy to make to vote him. Actually people ONLY talking about him are suspicious. I'm thinking of sulfu who posted nothing for the first half of D1, then talked almost exclusively of Barkos on the other half.
|
On July 26 2015 18:48 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2015 18:43 Rels wrote:On July 26 2015 18:34 raynpelikoneet wrote:
btw in case i die DO NOT, i repeat DO NOT lynch into people who voted for Barakos.
It is WAY more likely there are zero, or at most one mafia in that pool. I disagree. Barakos' last post was 16 hours into day 1, so we can assume he accepted his lynch by at most mid day. Every vote after that could be mafia, especially since reasonning is so easy to make to vote him. Actually people ONLY talking about him are suspicious. I'm thinking of sulfu who posted nothing for the first half of D1, then talked almost exclusively of Barkos on the other half. That is WIFOM because you cannot prove Barakos went to scum QT and said "hey i am done here, bus me". If you cannot prove that you must assume he is coming back and going to contribute/defend himself, which makes it more likely mafia does not want to bus him at this point.
Like you said, we shouldn't assume anything.
So it's entirely possible zero, one or two mafias are on the barakos' train. My current thinking is Sulfu + Flexes, with moosy and noobking following.
|
On July 26 2015 18:51 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2015 18:51 Rels wrote:On July 26 2015 18:48 raynpelikoneet wrote:On July 26 2015 18:43 Rels wrote:On July 26 2015 18:34 raynpelikoneet wrote:
btw in case i die DO NOT, i repeat DO NOT lynch into people who voted for Barakos.
It is WAY more likely there are zero, or at most one mafia in that pool. I disagree. Barakos' last post was 16 hours into day 1, so we can assume he accepted his lynch by at most mid day. Every vote after that could be mafia, especially since reasonning is so easy to make to vote him. Actually people ONLY talking about him are suspicious. I'm thinking of sulfu who posted nothing for the first half of D1, then talked almost exclusively of Barkos on the other half. That is WIFOM because you cannot prove Barakos went to scum QT and said "hey i am done here, bus me". If you cannot prove that you must assume he is coming back and going to contribute/defend himself, which makes it more likely mafia does not want to bus him at this point. Like you said, we shouldn't assume anything. Not true. We should assume the most logical thing is the correct one.
Then for me the most logic thing is at least one mafia bused Barakos, and people only talking about it late in the day are suspicious.
|
I'm drunk and partying and I want to thankyou noobking for forcing me to take the time for this crap.
Alright it's going to be very simple. I'll even use quotes from your post.
Rels wrote: Never said his remarks required thought.
Rels wrote: As you say, each SEPARATE remark is a "off-the-cut instant reaction".
Not contesting each remark individually required thoughts.
Rels wrote: I'm not saying NocturneMage prepared his post before the game started.
I'm saying he thought long and hard before he posted it, instead of being free of mind and posting what he felt.
What I'm saying is his POST required thought.
So what you said:
"Rels said his post didn't require thought".
"Rels said his post required thought".
Is not what happened.
The situation is:
"Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not)
"Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects".
Final words: I do not care that each separate remark took thoughts or not, and only precised it when you accused me of "representating your position". My argument is that he posted on 3 different subjects in his first post.
I'll take the time to deal with you tomorrow when I have time. Unless you attack me again with things like that of course.
|
On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote:
So what you said:
"Rels said his post didn't require thought".
"Rels said his post required thought".
Is not what happened.
The situation is:
"Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not)
"Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself."
LOL
Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (=
Keep continue discrediting me tonight. Hopefully Flexes is vig'd and we can settle this tomorrow.
|
On July 27 2015 03:49 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:38 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote:
So what you said:
"Rels said his post didn't require thought".
"Rels said his post required thought".
Is not what happened.
The situation is:
"Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not)
"Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." LOL Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (= *eyeroll* Would love to see you try and explain how and why that isn't EXACTLY how a townie behaves. If you paid me 10 bucks to come up with a different reasonable reaction from a Town player, I'm not sure there IS one.
Don't have to look very far. Lying about me lying. Ad hominem attacks on me.
|
BTW can't believe you AGAIN attacked me with ad hom when you just had a big paragraph defending from my post attacking you for exactly that.
|
On July 27 2015 03:55 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:52 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:49 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:38 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote:
So what you said:
"Rels said his post didn't require thought".
"Rels said his post required thought".
Is not what happened.
The situation is:
"Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not)
"Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." LOL Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (= *eyeroll* Would love to see you try and explain how and why that isn't EXACTLY how a townie behaves. If you paid me 10 bucks to come up with a different reasonable reaction from a Town player, I'm not sure there IS one. Don't have to look very far. Lying about me lying. Ad hominem attacks on me. Accusing me of ad hominem is absurd. I attack your posts. Anything I say about your character can be freely discarded without it weakening my arguments against you one iota. And I am not lying about you lying. You're caught in a lie. And caught badly enough that you had to resort to a third retcon job.
Alright I hate how you play. You accuse me with arguments; I answer it with arguments; then you go around saying I lie as if what I said was worthless.
So I want you to do the following.
Describe very synthetically (1 sentence if possible) how I lied, without all the fluff that you usually post around it. Tomorrow I'll take the time to make a post explaining how you're wrong.
|
=D That made me laugh IRL.
Alright will check from time to time, but unless something big comes up, AFK until tomorrow.
|
Hello! Pretty pumped about no kill. (= Welcome scott!
I have a few things to post so let's start.
|
First, rayn has claimed veteran. What I'm going to say is pretty obvious, but better safe than sorry.
That means he's 100% confirmed town starting now.
If you (reading this obvious but amazing post) are either the veteran or the doctor, that means rayn is mafia and has infinite town credits. If that is the case, you need to claim now.
And the follow up to this rule is:
If someone claims veteran or doctor after the end of this day, they should not be believed and automatically auto-lynched.
|
Second, I was roleblocked.
My potential night actions were:
On July 26 2015 17:39 Rels wrote:
Alright first thing about actions:
If I was cop I would check noobking.
If I was vig I would shoot Flexes.
So I believe one of these two is mafia.
|
Third, after noobking affirmed I lied, I posted this.
On July 27 2015 04:00 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:55 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:52 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:49 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:38 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote:
So what you said:
"Rels said his post didn't require thought".
"Rels said his post required thought".
Is not what happened.
The situation is:
"Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not)
"Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." LOL Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (= *eyeroll* Would love to see you try and explain how and why that isn't EXACTLY how a townie behaves. If you paid me 10 bucks to come up with a different reasonable reaction from a Town player, I'm not sure there IS one. Don't have to look very far. Lying about me lying. Ad hominem attacks on me. Accusing me of ad hominem is absurd. I attack your posts. Anything I say about your character can be freely discarded without it weakening my arguments against you one iota. And I am not lying about you lying. You're caught in a lie. And caught badly enough that you had to resort to a third retcon job. Alright I hate how you play. You accuse me with arguments; I answer it with arguments; then you go around saying I lie as if what I said was worthless. So I want you to do the following. Describe very synthetically (1 sentence if possible) how I lied, without all the fluff that you usually post around it. Tomorrow I'll take the time to make a post explaining how you're wrong.
Amazingly, this may be the only post addressed to him he didn't answer. That is super suspicious.
So, noobking: please do what you were requested to. 1 sentence without fluff explaining my lie.
|
On July 27 2015 16:26 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 13:05 raynpelikoneet wrote:On July 27 2015 12:58 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 10:24 Tictock wrote:
Nice save medic!
Seems pretty likely that we have Doc/Cop setup going, slim chance of a Vigi who held their shot (which you shouldn't do if your a vigi). Guess Vigilante could also have been roleblocked. But yeah, Cop seems more likely. Then again, Doctor was more likely than Veteran, and we have a Veteran claim now, so you never know. How the fuck was doctor more likely than a veteran?!?!?!? Here's how: Veteran is given to a townie at random. A medic save can be directed. The list of reasonable NK targets is smaller than all the players in the game. Therefore the chance that a medic saved a potential NK target is higher than mafia randomly hitting a veteran.
I love when things stay the same. =D
On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think.
|
Finally, WTF ???
On July 27 2015 12:00 Tictock wrote:
Also I'm pretty sure rayn was making a joke.
Super weird.
OK we now have time to think and discuss. Available to discuss anything; in the meantime I'll reread filters.
Reminder: not available (outside of phone posting like yesterday) this evening and tomorrow evening.
|
On July 27 2015 16:37 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 16:25 Rels wrote:Second, I was roleblocked. My potential night actions were: On July 26 2015 17:39 Rels wrote:
Alright first thing about actions:
If I was cop I would check noobking.
If I was vig I would shoot Flexes. So I believe one of these two is mafia. Rels buddy I never doubted you're town! I'm so happy right now  Also multiple people said shoot flexes which is not why you hit role blocked. You got role blocked because mafia thought you were the cop. Who said that n00b was a good check this game? I think only you and rayn if I remember correctly.(he changed check later) (On phone can't check) You could also be role blocked simply for talking about cop checks. I will investigate this later tonight.
Hehe happy to be playing with you. (=
Of the top of my head I think only rayn and I suggested noob to be checked, and only I suggested him alone. May be mistaken though.
Of course I could have been rb for WIFOM, but if WIFOM means they didn't roleblock the veteran good for us. =D
|
@TT
On July 27 2015 12:00 Tictock wrote:
Also I'm pretty sure rayn was making a joke.
Can you expand on the reasons of you believing rayn was joking ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
