Off-topic Mafia #9 Game Thread

[Levin]

Hmm, I suppose I should feel a little bit irresponsible after the last post. I apologize to the town if I end up lynched because of it. I just felt I needed to make a stand against Tohtori's tactics, because he makes me extremely uncomfortable (in the game Toht, not outside the game.. you corpse lover you!).

 

[kirennia]

Can we get a replacement for Rubric please? I know RL comes first ofc and he's a nice guy in the forums but 3 days inactivity with no 'afk for 3 days' warning which isn't hard to do and the fact that this isn't the first time he's done this.

If you aren't going to participate, don't sign up for this kind of thing; there is no way for us to tell if he's a townie or part of the mafia if he's absolutely silent and it's influencing the game...

 

[kirennia]

bah, can't edit.

Was going to post a vote tonight but wont until rubric has had a decent input in the game. Will be back at around midnight, might make a drunkard post then, if not, I'll vote in the morning.

 

[Levin]

Can we get a replacement for Rubric please? I know RL comes first ofc and he's a nice guy in the forums but 3 days inactivity with no 'afk for 3 days' warning which isn't hard to do and the fact that this isn't the first time he's done this.

If you aren't going to participate, don't sign up for this kind of thing; there is no way for us to tell if he's a townie or part of the mafia if he's absolutely silent and it's influencing the game...

I agree with this. I wonder if something unexpected happened? Either way, a replacement would be good. As usual, it's come to that the quiet people gets no votes and the active ones are getting suspected simply because they talk.

 

[Iceforge]

Can we get a replacement for Rubric please? I know RL comes first ofc and he's a nice guy in the forums but 3 days inactivity with no 'afk for 3 days' warning which isn't hard to do and the fact that this isn't the first time he's done this.

If you aren't going to participate, don't sign up for this kind of thing; there is no way for us to tell if he's a townie or part of the mafia if he's absolutely silent and it's influencing the game...

Need to give time for him to respond to the prod!

But if it ends in a player being dropped, I will try and get him replaced rather than modkill

 

[Golena]

From what i've read so far Toht's argument really comes down to the fact that he thinks I was after a no-lynch with my first post then posted against people who voted no lynch.

Lets see how he twists this one (there's a starter for 10 for you Toht.)

Now is it just me that thinks that saying we should consider a no lynch is NOT the same as saying I think we should no lynch?
Consider meaning discuss, consider the benefit of. Not just leap in and get day 1 out of the way.

Voting on people for flimsy evidence normally results in them trying to counter that vote, and you get evidence. Voting no lynch doesn't do that at all, since your not putting anyone in "danger".

It's very hard to "counter" your arguments if you start every argument on that false beginning, and refuse to accept otherwise.

Voting no lynch early doesn't gather information, if you want a no lynch why not provide some reasoning for it like Kirennia did? I've still to see any kind or argument at all saying why the initial no lynch vote makes sense, from anyone!

Why does it make me so suspicious to find their behaviour therefore strange since neither can provide a decent reason for it, and wanting to push them to try and gather some information on people that I find suspicious?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well evidently Levin you CAN'T see how it makes you look.

Not JUST about covering bases in this case. And no i don't think covering ALL bases is "normal".

That last post of yours looked like you wanted to rationalise your vote, if you happened to decide on voting for Golena, as in, making yourself look innocent as a mafia when killing an innocent.

You always say "look at it from my innocent perspective", so i urge you to look at it from a "looking at possible mafia" pesrpective now. That all.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Lets see how he twists this one (there's a starter for 10 for you Toht.)

Here's a starter for you, f*ck you.

Vote: Golena

I'm so tired of this "ou don't lsiten, you twist, you can't see reason" when i bloody well can and don't twist anything.

 

[Golena]

I'm going to post this question seperately in the hopes that Toht actually answers it in some form or another.

How does 5 people voting no-lynch on the first 5 posts at the start with no other information make sense from a town perspecive?

If you can answer that, then i'll accept that finding that strange behaviour might be a sign of mafia. Or does the fact that I said maybe we should consider a no-lynch mean that everyone voting no lynch is suddently acceptable without any explanation of their own?

Now if your not simply trying to get me to hang no matter what then i'd expect a decent answer of you. If you can't give one then i'll assume you just want me dead regardless and move on.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I've posted plenty of things; inconsistencies, wrong info, twisted words on your behalf yet you don't concern yourself with ONE of them and claim me of not addressing issues.

Honestly, enough is enough and i've done my decicion.

 

[Golena]

I'm so tired of this "ou don't lsiten, you twist, you can't see reason" when i bloody well can and don't twist anything.

So where did I say in the first several pages that I wanted a no lynch. If that isn't what your entire starting argument was based on, then what was it based on?

If your going to point out the same line again, then you twisted it. No fuck you's about it, you did.

 

[old.Tohtori]

How about you address an issue straight forward before asking me to do so.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Tohtori, I see the points you have for a Golena vote, and they do add up.

Ask Levin Golena, he seemed to get the other points, and i explained the point he was asking about.

 

[Golena]

I'll go back and try and find another one. Sorry but I am finding it difficult in your posts at the moment and try to address it. If you want a specific one addressing then post it here and i'll answer it.

If you could post it simply in a single form like post 103 (which I found much easier to read and answer than some of your others), which is the one i've just tried to address, then that would help me.

 

[old.Tohtori]

And by the by, i made long posts about you on pages 7-8, which you said only "confusing" and "i didn't find anything but you misunderstanding me on page 1".

I find it rather weak as an excuse to avoid all issues.

 

[Levin]

Well evidently Levin you CAN'T see how it makes you look.

I can see it makes me look guilty in your eyes. What i am doing is i am challenging your way of judging peoples guilt. We have have the right to an opinion. I am standing up for mine, just as you do for yours. I think we need to agree to disagree.

Not JUST about covering bases in this case. And no i don't think covering ALL bases is "normal".

What would be the point of covering just a few bases? That would seem pointless to me, but.. oh well.

That last post of yours looked like you wanted to rationalise your vote, if you happened to decide on voting for Golena, as in, making yourself look innocent as a mafia when killing an innocent.

Of course I did. I wanted to let people know what a tricky spot it was. How does that make me guilty? I don't see the correlation.

You always say "look at it from my innocent perspective", so i urge you to look at it from a "looking at possible mafia" pesrpective now. That all.

Anyone can say "I am innocent". Some are lying, some are speaking truth. If you think I "always" say it, you should know that by now I have always spoken the truth since I've never been mafia. Doesn't that kind of prove your point as moot?

 

[Levin]

Guys, while arguing is all fine, can we please skip the fuck yous and personal attacks? Please?

 

[Golena]

Ok i'll take your first post and try to go through it as slowly as possible

Interesting. Saying in one post that we should try to avoid a quick lynch, but also to give people the chance to speak up if they get the lynchvotes. Kinda contradictive, covering all bases incase anything happens.

I believe you mentioned you got a word wrong in this post. Could you clarify for me which one it was, because there's nothing contradictive at all that I can see in that first sentance. I want people to have the chance to speak up, and that we should avoid a quick lynch.. How does that possibly contradict itself?
Covering all bases in case anything happens.. Yes but not just for me but for everyone surely? Mainly based upon what happened last game where Levin declared himself as the cop as the last vote went in, and trying to avoid a repeat of that. Does that NOT make sense, to avoid the mistake made in only the last game?

But more i'm interested in you assuming the mafia block/kill at the same time when often that's not the case. Mafia tend to block one person they believe to be doctor/cop, and kill anbother, this is a twoshot thing as they get more info too.

I got info here, that you think the mafia would block someone other than they are killing. My basis was based on the fact that you just need to look through this thread at how defensive they are of themselves, and so the doctor would therefore be more likely to block himself as they want to stay in the game more than some other random. Also that you protected yourself last game. For me that would imply the mafia's best chances would be to roleblock the person they were going for, and so that's how I came across that conclusion. Since I believe the doc's best chance for the town is to protect someone other than them, I explained this reason to Levin later, then trying to convince the doc to not protect themselves would also benefit the town, no?

Again, interesting as such. Basing "evil" on voting for nolynch when just on previous post you said "we should consider no lynch very carefully as there's this and that reason for it".

I didn't base "evilness" on it. I thought it wasn't in the best interests of the town to no-lynch so early so wanted to push them to either providing an obvious reason for the vote that I had missed, or giving me a general "feel" about them. Yes I feel we should look at a no lynch vote carefully because there's this and that reason for it. I never said we should no lynch straight up without testing people tho!

So you support a no lynch, yet you vote people for giving a no lynch? As did with ch3tan and threw suspicion towards fl3a:

I never supported a no lynch. I said we should consider it as an option, because I wanted other peoples opinions on it, they have already in this thread thought of pro's and con's that I hadn't to the tactic. That was what I was after, not saying no-lynch is a fantastic idea, lets go for it!

As said, mighty contradictive and covering all bases, with no lynchers and also with people who would hang someone for wanting a no-lynch.

It takes 5 votes to hang someone, I had plenty of time to retract my vote before they went splat, infact I was arguing that we shouldn't send someone splat too quickly. Someone needs to vote on someone to gather information tho. Why is voting someone to get a reaction covering all bases? What were you doing voting for me?

That's just silly, saying the town is better off with less people in it when with only 5, wrong vote gets your town killed. You're only better off with 5 then 6, if you hang a mafia on day one.

And if there's 6, and you hang an innocent, mafia kills one and you're left with 2vs2, it's not necessarily over then. With 5, you hang innocent and mafia kills and it's over straight up.

Illogical and rather confusing i'd say as a post.

I believe we've proved already that my logic here was actually correct and that you were wrong. So not illogical at all in fact.

Again, supporting lo lyncyh more, yet saying we should lynch at some point after some rabblerabble.

Again, I wasn't supporting no lynch.

And here we come to the last parts, saying things as "ooh shouldn't trust me", more cover and also doubting everything you yourself said, insace things go wrong. Just more deviant cover-up and securing that no matter what happens, you have the "i said so" right.

Again, misquoting me, I never said don't trust me. I said I wasn't aware of anyone trusting me. I was trying once again to say that I never said I supported no lynch, so arguing that me voting someone who no lynched was hardly me abusing their trust of me. See the difference yet, or should I explain this more?

 

[Golena]

I'll go back and re-read the page 7 and 8 ones.

 

[Golena]

Again with the same thing. Stop playing the confused card as it's getting old. There's nothing confusing and surely "" marks work for you. Read it again with thought if have to.

And i'm not forgetting, it's just easier, aLOT easier, then to pick out everything and quote everything. Also saves space. All were direct quotes from you.

Early morning was only an "excuse" for the wrong name there(aka fl3a).

I also said that it was early morning for me. Not only that but I had about 5 minutes total before I needed to leave for work, which is why I found skimming a post difficult, since "'s don't stand out as easily.

If there was any information, then it would make sense, and you bloody well can't vote for yourself. But the reasons are as flimsy as you yourself wanted people NOT to hang by.

You'll notice that I didn't vote anyone off tho. Voting for someone on a flimsy excuse gives them the ability to counter, and learn something from their response, and also who jumps on the bandwagon with you. If no-one started with a flimsy vote we'd just sit about for a week not doing anything.

Again, i did argue the logic, i posted reasons, i posted mafia side of things for it, i posted counter arguments on you wanting to out the cop, posted valid reasons why it amkes you seem like mafia. Convinient ignoring of post there.

I also posted the reasons that the cop coming out early would provide the town with advantages. Including the fact that we learn nothing if he gets killed before coming out, but learn at least one thing if he comes out after day 1. You don't have to agree with the reasoning, but there is reasoning there. At the end of the day we've both provided our arguments and it's up to the cop to decide which he feels is best given the knowledge he has.

Yes, it's not supposed to be read quickly, it's supposed to have information and not flimsy "he bad!" shouts. that's how i play when i don't try out a tactic. I observe, watch, post what i see as facts and try to work out things objectively.

And the last aprt, nice way to say "tohto is mafia" without saying anything. Covering all bases again it seems.

It was me saying that your arguments against me didn't seem as convincing as i'd normally expect from you. Probably because I normally read those arguments against someone I don't know is innocent so they come across differently, i'm not sure.
You keep saying i'm covering all bases as well. What does that mean?
That i'm trying to cover all the posibilities. Isn't that what a townie should really be doing? Maybe you mean something else tho, i'm not sure.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Can't be arsed to talk about the points all over again so, don't bother, the vote sticks.

 

[old.Tohtori]

3 people besides me think there's reason enough and even Levin, the one defending you the most(if any) stated i have good points.

About you Levin, it's simple, it makes you look guilty when you state something that makes you look innocent either way.

As in, won't take any chances, but IF one would take one, i don't wat to be ebil.

Innocents rarely need to do that kind of defending on their actions.

Your past has nothing to do with it really, first time liar is still a liar.

But, like i said, i'm voting for golena and won't get into another debate since it won't change my mind. Time to play this game a bit more simple.

 

[old.Tohtori]

And Levin, i think a "f*ck you" is in order when someon pulls out yet again that twisting card. You'd do it too.

 

[Olgaline]

Quick word from me,

I havent disapeared, still slowly trying to read up on all the arguments,
but my heart isnt really in it atm, battleling a bad swollen toothache (since last evening)
and a new job kinda has me occupied. was gonna suggest that English take my spot, but with Rubric absent..well..you get the general idea

 

[old.Tohtori]

OOC: Apologies are in due here, i took it a bit with anger last post(f*ck you mainly and the "can't be arsed to argue points) and it was very poor sportsmanship.

Other computers HDD died out taking with it many many wonderful things.

I'm not pissed off, but it effected my posting here.

Back to business and hopefully no "hard" feelings.

Points stand thouhg

 

[Ch3tan]

Voting no lynch early doesn't gather information, if you want a no lynch why not provide some reasoning for it like Kirennia did? I've still to see any kind or argument at all saying why the initial no lynch vote makes sense, from anyone!

Why does it make me so suspicious to find their behaviour therefore strange since neither can provide a decent reason for it, and wanting to push them to try and gather some information on people that I find suspicious?

No lynch is a great strategy early on as it ensures only one innocent dying on the first day/night cycle (or none with the docs help). We have the least chance of catching a mafia on the first day. Now the argument that it makes it easier in following days with less players is exactly what a bad guy would say.

Look what you have made me do. Discuss game theory. pah. I feel dirty.

*whistles*

You enjoy getting things wrong don't you Golena? Like I said, you are either a mafia or dangerous through your incompetence.

By the way, we have all completely forgotten Rubric. Just so you know. He hasn't posted one single post in this thread.

You and a few others have said it was wierd for me to unvote Golena when he was on the brink of being lynched. Well I do not believe that you can form any opinion until everyone has spoken a few times. That is why I am very intrested to hear more from the inactive players.

mod Rubric is slowing this game down, please replace or modkill him, he has had 2 days now, and as others have pointed out, this is not the first time he has joined games and not participated.

 

[Golena]

I'll assume you meant page 6.

Don't vote ch3tan or Morphius on such small reasons. Golena voting for such small reasons, when advocating for reasoning more....come on!

You're doing the "quick get him he's different!" thing again.

I'm voting to try and get reasoning. My first vote was based on the fact that I didn't have any for Ch3tan's no lynch vote and so the vote was an attempt to prod him into providing some. Something he's still not done which is why my vote is still on him. If he provides some then i'll remove my vote, and

Now, why i think i should keep on Golena.

1: First thing is the upped i said, he8's hanging someone, even after the "let's push a bit" thing, for what? Honestly, look at the reasons, ti's flimsy at BEST. Voting order? Posting time? This is exactly what he uses to defend himself(as best defence really) and now votes as such?

I've read this 4 times now and still don't "get" it. Can you rephrase and i'll try to answer.

2: Yes, what Morpheus said "I should trust you as i've not been mafia before" is supicious. But it would be honest too(like we trust anyone here).

Guess it looks suspicious to you. I put out a theory about how I thought mafia might be most likely to behave to get a result. You said that's not true. Since you've been mafia then I assume you do know how you voted, and while you might not be telling the truth about how you did, then I really can't say "well your lying, they don't do that" now can I?

3: Golena still is covering all the bases and throwing out wron data, for example:

"I've still got a feeling that he was trying to encourage the doctor to protect himself, which would give the mafia a very slight advantage if they then followed up with a roleblock of their target."

Which wasn't at all what i was saying, when i was saying that the roleblocker doubtfully attacks the same as they kill, unless they know for SURE he's a doc. Because blocking another while attacking another, most likely shows them (in case of a non death) that there's another suspect for being a doc.

You can say it's wrong data, but that's only known to you. It's a theory based on how I feel. That can't be wrong, since it's how I feel. I also simply don't get your logic there. If they attack someone and roleblock someone else, all they know is that the person they roleblocked is the doc.. If they roleblock the same person they attack they know if they fail the person they attacked isn't the doc. Ok I get it now I think. I could therefore delete the last bit, but i'll leave it there since no-one else pointed this out as an argument to my reasoning, even when I had the discussion with Levin he missed it.

Now then, more to the point of why Golena.

4: Simple really: "The cop coming out on day 3 makes no sense to me since at that point it's too easy to counter claim and you're left with a coin toss.
The cop if he's going to come out has to do so before your in a last chance situation, so a counter claim even if sucessful will still end up with them being hanged the next day."

"Come out come out whereever you are" anyone?

There is NO reason for the cop to come out before they have a mafia name or they are dead certain people will believe him when about to hang innocent. Even then, it's just giving the mafia the next nightkill. Tell someones innocent, they kill that person or the cop. Not to mention people rarely believe you as the cop.

There's also no real reason for the cop to come out when the mafia member they expose can simply say, no i'm the cop and you've got to get the descision right. If the cop comes out the mafia can't counter claim without giving themselves away. I've posted plenty of reasons why the cop coming out before it's last ditch scenario and he had info makes sense, yet you say there's NO reason for him to come out and your only argument against that is. "come out come out whereever you are"?

What the cop role DOES give, is one vcote for the town that is not suspicion. As in, you can defend with conviction against hanging someone when you know they are innocent, or vice versa.

If the cop knows someone is innocent after day 1, he can out himself and you've got 2 innocent people, unless the mafia counter claims. If the mafia does counter claim then you've narrowed down one member of the mafia to 2 possible suspects. That's a reason right there. Knowing people as innocent is almost as powerful as knowing people are guilty as we proved last game when you proved you were innocent and 2 sucesful lynchings followed based on that information.

So with such "logic" in play, Golena advocating for an earluy outing of the cop is silly. Mafia could just roleblock and keep the cop around forever, while efficiently keeping the doc focused on protecting the cop, and killing of others because you "never know if this night they kill the cop", but can block him for good.

Think about it people.

One innocent person known to all is still a town advatage. Maybe not as much as a hidden cop role can provide. I argued for the cop coming out early last game as well, and was innocent. I know that's not proof that i'm innocent but surely it's also proof that it can't be used to prove my guilt?

Now, for the statistics that have been scewed to say the least:

(without doc saving)

Day one, 9 people: 2/9 chance to catch mafia, 1/9 chance to hang cop(wrong golena), 1/9 chance to hang doc. 7/9 to hang townie in general.

Again those statistics are based upon the 2 mafia members not knowing who each other are. But they do which means the numbers you just posted are incorrect. Or do you really think a mafia member is just as likely to cast a 5th vote on another mafia member as a member of the town is?
All your other numbers fall down to exactly the same arguments.

Don't think fl3a of Morphius should be hung on such flimsy reasoning, ESPECIALLY since Golena is advocating those hangings with the same reasons he wants you NOT to hang him.

No-lynch gets us nowhere.

So you don't think that Fl3a or Morphius should be hung with flimsy reasonings. Where did I say I wanted to hang them based on those reasonings. I've found that taking people to 3 or 4 votes is the best way of getting information on day 1 (how else would you do it, after all, people can talk the same way if they are mafia or not, votes actually mean something).

I've already pointed out i'm quite happy to hang if we learn who the mafia is because of it. If the town wouldn't learn something from a 5th vote i'd vote for myself right now just to prove that.

 

[Golena]

You've argued why you think a no lynch is a good idea. You've not argued why you think a no lynch before any other discussion or voting has taken place is a good idea.

Are you trying to say you knew as much on your first post as you do now?
Do you not think the last 10 pages have told you NOTHING?
It's not the fact that you argued no lynch that i'm arguing against, it's the fact that you made it so quickly.

If the no lynch argument you had holds true, why arn't you still voting that way? Do you think that you've learn't something that you wouldn't of otherwise that meant an early "before anyone has voted" no lynch would be a bad idea?

Can you not see why i'd also think that, and pull you up on it?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Ok Golena i think you've done it long enough and could you post some results for it now?

You know what you're doing.

 

[Golena]

And Levin, i think a "f*ck you" is in order when someon pulls out yet again that twisting card. You'd do it too.

In the spirit of sportsmanship since it's just a game then i'll appologise if you took offence at it.
In my defence I did point out which line I wrote and how you changed it to mean something different from what I had intended, and how it was written. It wasn't a Toht is twisting stuff argument I was using, it was a person X had twisted line Y and here's the line and response to it, argument I used.