Trial of the Pariahs - Game Over

For your simulated organized crime needs.

Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Madge » Sat Aug 13, 2016 3:16 am UTC

OK, so, the way Sabrar answered my question about the question I got approval for has me convinced that it's probably phrased in a way that will result in me getting a deceptive answer:

To two decimal places, what percentage of factions present in the game (with each individual with an independent win condition counting as a faction to themselves) have three or more members?

I think the cause of problems here is probably the 'individual with an independent win condition'. You could see, for example, a mafia consisting of 2 normal mafiosi and 1 mafioso who has a secret win condition where they win with mafia OR if they are the last mafia member to die, or something else similarly random. Or my definition of 'independent'.

Candidate Questions:

To two decimal places, what percentage of the factions present in the game have three or more members at the start of the game?

To two decimal places, what percentage of the factions present in the game have the ability to recruit more members at any point during the game?
Problem: if there's no cult we've lost the denominator information. However, if someone has a recruiting ability (e.g. mason-like), we will be guaranteed a numerator of at least 1, which will give us hopefully good information. If a town-sided recruiter sees their claiming as worth the trade-off with this answer, it might be a good choice.

Also, I'll make my question decision privately out of a set of a few 'official' questions, just in case scum wants to second guess things somehow.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Sabrar » Sat Aug 13, 2016 5:29 am UTC

Deadline is in 2 and a half days. Please send me your night-actions (if you have any) before the end of the day!

Votals:
ConMan - 1 (moody7277)
dimochka - 1 (SirGabriel)
Madge - 1 (Suzaku)

Not voting: everyone else

Tied votals will result in a No Lynch.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Carlington » Sat Aug 13, 2016 6:36 am UTC

Hello all, sorry for the disappearing act. This post is an "I'm here and responding to modprod". Let me collate thoughts and post reads, should have a post up within the hour.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Carlington » Sat Aug 13, 2016 8:11 am UTC

Okay, reads time, starting from the top of page 2. Wall of text incoming.

jimbob: His initial reads post has a lot of summarising what's happened in the thread which is a good way to say a lot without saying much, but there's a liberal sprinkling of adjectives and opinions of his own in there, which is good, and long reads posts are jimbob-y enough anyway. Seems to value players giving their opinions highly, as well as players asking questions that will elicit opinions. That's a townie trait to me. Says he doesn't want to vote, which might imply his votes having greater potential power and thus greater potential harm for town. This would tend to imply, though, that there's also greater potential for harm to scum, if he's accurate in his reads. He continued to update his reads as the game progressed, showing a willingness to change opinions based on new information - another townie trait.

SirG: promised reads on other players, and provided them. I notice he's paying a lot of attention to the statements players made for lie detector testing. His reads seem well researched and well reasoned. I don't agree with all of what he says, but that's good since it means he's saying things I'm not saying and is not just parroting other opinions. Also seems pretty townie to me, based on his assertiveness and willingness to provide dissenting opinions.

Suzaku: disagreed with me regarding Madge and was in favour of lynching her today, but hasn't posted since Madge claimed so this may change. He's been quiet but this is due to RL. Did promise to have more content "later this morning", but it's well into the afternoon in his time zone and he's not been forthcoming. Still, I'm happy to wait a little longer, I see no reason to attack a lurker right now with 2 and a half days to deadline.

generalz: has been very quiet, and when I asked about this said they weren't a talkative person they were prodded for reads by more than one person, and when they provided them they seemed to be based off how much each player had revealed about themself - the more claimed, the townier. They later claimed that was just for their own benefit, and the reads were based on gut feeling. I have this written for them in my notes "Newbie, scum, or both?". That ought to give you a sense of my feelings on them.

dimochka: has backed right off moody, and seemed to be pushing the focus on to JackHK regarding the push on moody - whether this was intentional or coincidental is unclear. I, like others, didn't like his reasoning for keeping Madge alive. I have very little on him, and he's had plenty I time to give me things to say about him, which gives me bad feelings.

JackHK: also backed down on moody, putting emphasis on taking an evidence-based approach to this and being open to others' opinions and reasoning. This openness is promising. His reads post struck me as providing very few strong opinions and being a bit hedge-y, which I found mildly pingy. Asked when cops should claim, apropos of nothing.

moody: is characteristically succinct, but his reads seem well-founded and unobjectionable on the whole. He asked for more information from those who found me scummy, which shows that he's willing to change his mind if provided information or perspectives that he's lacking. That looks nice and townie to me.

Madge: has claimed her role, and it's a doozy. I see her as having great potential for helping whosoever she chooses to help, and withholding help similarly. That puts her in a powerful, but delicate position, as her fate rests on the goodwill of every faction. I definitely don't think we should lynch her without sufficient grounds. A side-effect of her claim has been to re-centre the conversation on her. There's nothing outright wrong with trying to come up with questions for her to ask, but we still need to hunt scum!

adnapemit: is fairly quiet as well, but her reads seem to be evidence-based and she is willing to offer opinions regardless of whether they agree with the majority. Doesn't like generalz asking if a doctor should protect Madge. The lack of content isn't awesome but what's there is decent, so on balance she's soft town.

ConMan: has some good reasoning about questions for Madge to ask and ways town can utilise Madge's power to her advantage, if she permits, and a whole bunch about Madge but no reads or scum-hunting to speak of. I reckon there's enough out there now to give some sort of opinions, which I await with great anticipation.

In summary:

Don't Lynch:
  • jimbob
  • SirG
  • moody
  • adnapemit
  • Madge

Lynchable:
  • generalz
  • dimochka

Convince Me:
  • matt96
  • Suzaku
  • JackHK
  • ConMan

Those groupings aren't ordered internally in any way.

Vote: dimochka

Since I can see generalz as being newbie, but dimochka isn't.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Suzaku
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:20 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Suzaku » Sat Aug 13, 2016 1:07 pm UTC

Well, that took longer than expected. Weekend getting in the way as usual. Anyway, let's see what's going on.

(Post count excludes confirmations, EBWOPs, one-liners, and other non-contentful posts.)

adnapemit (3 posts):
Summary: Worried about Madge, but thinks she is truthfully indie. Finds dim, and generalz slightly scummy, others neutral to towny. Argument answering generalz against NL.
Read: Neutral. Reasonable reads on dim and generalz. Good argument against NL.

Carlington (4 posts):
S: Madge telling truth. Keep alive as safe lynch later in the game. Conman shouldn't share role info. Not worried about moody. Keep Madge alive unless no better scum candidate. Finds generalz, dim, and (sort of) Jack scummy, others neutral to towny.
R: Neutral to very slightly scummy. SirG makes a couple of valid points about him; I did see the same things and kind of dismissed them as being too minor to worry overly much about. But at this stage in the day and with not a huge amount else to go on, wother an IGMEOY.

ConMan (3 posts):
S: Dull role, but one that relies on other roles for utility. Defends sharing. Tentatively OK with Madge's claim. Provides potential questions for Madge to ask the mod. Good (I think) advice on trying to get a solid answer rather than going for loop holes.
R: Slightly town. I didn't find his level of role share scummy, and think his interactions with Madge have been genuinely helpful for town.

dimochka (2 posts):
S: Joke vote on moody. Going to ignore Madge. Setup spec. Finds moody townie for standing out (admits it's a stupid reason). Doesn't like cults (hear hear). Keep Madge alive for fun.
R: Somewhat scummy. Initial attack on moody may well have been a joke, although I for one didn't read it that way. Turning around and saying 'Now I actually think he's town' seems off. Also agree with SirG that keeping Madge alive just for fun is a bad idea.

ganeralz (4 posts):
S: Not much to say/Not much of a talker. Minor spec on Madge/SirG. Sure Madge is telling truth. Wants to help find questions. Role summary and bare reads list. Finds SirG, jimbob scummy. Defends reads as gut feeling.
R: Scummy or Newbie. Difficult to judge whether it's play style or scumminess not having played with generalz before. Reads list is off, especially when justified as gut feeling, and especially the read on SirG.

JackHK (6 posts):
S: Agrees Madge is being truthful. Thinks ConMan shouldn't have shared. 2 once-per-game powers. Attack on moody for not including 'independant' in lie-detector claims. Doesn't buy moody's defence. 'Probably right' that he's jumping at shadows WRT moody. Fully recants attack on moody. One power related to who is on the waggon. Reads list, but seems to have everyone basically neutral. Defends role-info share. Asks about cop-like roles claiming.
R: Neutral to newbie town. Nothing that shouts 'townie' at me, but does seem to be genuinely trying to help. Willing to listen to others and adjust opinions accordingly. Seems to be trying to put information out there, which is townie.

jimbobmacdoodle (7 posts):
S: Ability (likely) related to vote. Proabably won't vote in the first few days. Setup spec. More setup spec. Reads list that finds everyone mostly neutral. Questions for others. Responds to specific questions. More inclined to believe Madge now. Would like to find out if there's a cult. Updated reads - now finds generalz scummy and a little suspicion on moody and Carlington. Further update on reads. Now adding ConMan and me to the scummy list.
R: Slightly townie. Very much in line with my recollection of his meta. Pushing at people, posting reads, and generally being quite helpful. Can't let him off completely, as that's his scum meta as well :lol:

Madge (8 posts):
S: Independant. Fun role. Don't care who wins. Will never care who wins. Can't screw with scum. Want to live. Appreciate notice before town kills her. Has to guess winner to win. Can ask mod question and get (we assume) a truthful answer. Wants to find out abouit kill numbers. More thoughts on questions. Further question thoughts. And more again.
R: Independant. Most likely (but not certainly) what she claims to be. I agree with ConMan that a simple question with an unambiguous answer is probably better than trying to cadge additional information with potentially misleading answers. My suggestion would be something like "Do any powers exist that are capable of altering a player's win condition?" or "Are there any non-town factions or individuals other than the Mafia with a kill?". Likely not scum, but still preferable to a town lynch if we have no better options. Good point from someone (jimbob, I think) that Sabrar has included true-independants as effectively town for lynch-ballance purposes in previous games.

matt96 (1 post):
S: Questions for Madge (this was before her full-disclosure post).
R: Good questions, but nothing else. Needs to be prodded and either modkilled or replaced if he remains unresponsive.

moody7277 (5 posts):
S: Setup spec. Willing to ignore Madge. Defends not including indie in lie-detector statements. Found small inconsistency with Madge's claims. Setup spec. Reads list with most neutral; only Madge lynchable. More comfy with Madge after claim. Asks why people find Carlington scummy.
R: Neutral. Nothing stands out either way to me at this point.

SirGabriel (9 posts):
S: Madge proabably truthful. Raises lie detector possibility. Role spec (non-vanilla jester). Spec on Madge's claim. Finds dim scummy, still very skeptical about Madge. Claim advice for cops. Believes Madge post disclosure. Would like to know about cults. Worst-case scenario questions possibly useless. Serious vote on dim. Further explains reasoning on Carlington.
R: Fairly Townie. Solid analysis. Raises good points regarding Madge and regarding dimochka. After rereading I seem to agree with most of what he says.

At this point I think we have better candidates than Madge for the lynch, so:
Unvote

Not lynchable:
SirG, jimbob, Jack, ConMan. Oh, and Suzaku ;)

Maybe, at a pinch:
moody, adnapemit, Carlington.

Lynchable:
generalz, dim, (Madge).

Insufficient data:
matt.


I'm wavering between dimochka and generalz for the vote. I think I will give generalz the benefit of the doubt and
Vote: dimochka



@generalz:
Please go through each player and try to find one reason for each why you believe they are scummy, towny, or neutral.

@dimochka:
Basically the same thing: what are your thoughts on the other players at this time?

@Madge:
Please consider going to a simpler, unambiguous question, rather than trying to squeeze as much info out as possible.

@Sabrar:
Request mod prod on matt, if one hasn't already been issued.
Pronouns: he/him/his > they/them/their >> it/it/its
Time Zone: JST (UTC+9)
─────────────────────────
Some guy on the Internet wrote:The thing about the inevitable, it has a bad habit of actually happening.

User avatar
Suzaku
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:20 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Suzaku » Sat Aug 13, 2016 1:13 pm UTC

Unofficial Votals:
ConMan - 1 (moody7277)
dimochka - 3 (SirGabriel, Carlington, Suzaku)

Not voting: adnapemit, ConMan, dimochka, generalz, JackHK, jimbobmacdoodle, Madge, matt96

Deadline in 2 days, 4 hours.
Pronouns: he/him/his > they/them/their >> it/it/its
Time Zone: JST (UTC+9)
─────────────────────────
Some guy on the Internet wrote:The thing about the inevitable, it has a bad habit of actually happening.

User avatar
Suzaku
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:20 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Suzaku » Sat Aug 13, 2016 1:15 pm UTC

EBWOP:
PSA and note to self: Deadlines are hard - no posting after that countdown hits zero, regardless of whether Sabrar has closed out the day.
Pronouns: he/him/his > they/them/their >> it/it/its
Time Zone: JST (UTC+9)
─────────────────────────
Some guy on the Internet wrote:The thing about the inevitable, it has a bad habit of actually happening.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Carlington » Sat Aug 13, 2016 3:46 pm UTC

Updated read for Suzaku: I liked that post, it was thorough and reasoning was given for the various reads. I notice that he seemed to put a lot of stock in SirGabriel's opinions and reads. While I think SirG is town, I want to caution against letting one player influence anyone too much. I'll provisionally move him from "Convince Me" to "Don't Lynch".
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
matt96
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:55 pm UTC
Location: A suburb of Boston

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby matt96 » Sat Aug 13, 2016 9:12 pm UTC

First, I am going to confirm that I am still alive, and have nothing to keep me away between a few hours from now and the deadline (other than sleep), but secondly I am rather interested in Madges question, more specificallyou, could it be used to reveal some of the roles that exist in the game?

User avatar
JackHK
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 7:47 pm UTC
Location: magic.catch.wolves

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby JackHK » Sat Aug 13, 2016 9:24 pm UTC

Okay. First, a reply:

Carlington wrote:JackHK: also backed down on moody, putting emphasis on taking an evidence-based approach to this and being open to others' opinions and reasoning. This openness is promising. His reads post struck me as providing very few strong opinions and being a bit hedge-y, which I found mildly pingy. Asked when cops should claim, apropos of nothing.


Having few strong opinions is simply evidence that I have very little clue what I'm doing. :D I have been hesitant to commit firmly to scum reads.

Now, unfortunately I have discovered that this is a rather busier tour than I expected. I don't think I'll be able to really post until at least Tuesday. I'll still try to follow the thread as much as possible.

I'm now convinced Madge is telling the truth. No helpful suggestions regarding questions to ask, sorry.

I've noticed the turn in opinion towards dimochka - not convinced yet, but need to think on in a while.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Madge » Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:46 am UTC

matt96 wrote:I am rather interested in Madges question, more specificallyou, could it be used to reveal some of the roles that exist in the game?


Yes, it can. I am sure a question of the type "is there a doctor" or "is there a power capable of revealing alignments" would be answered.

As interesting as finding out about the presence of a cult would be, I am not sure it would further my win condition all that much - if there is a cult and they go on to win, I've really got no way to estimate the day they do win as unlike town/mafia with flips to tell me how it's going, I have nothing from cult. So if cult exists I've got little hope of victory, so I'm just going to discard that right now and play as though they don't exist. Chances are with a cult I'll get culted sooner or later so I don't need to be too worried about my current win condition anyway.

So with that in mind I think I won't try and nest questions today.

I think I know which question I want to ask.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
dimochka
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:25 pm UTC
Location: A few different places->NYC->LA->NYC. He/Him/His please.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby dimochka » Sun Aug 14, 2016 1:22 am UTC

I unfortunately had a few things come up in real life (work related) and I may not be able to be very active for the next few days. I will make one big post tonight (and might partially claim to prove my townieness), but may not be able to do more. I will be available again after this Wednesday with a lot more capacity, but before that it'll be tough. I saw some questions aimed at me so i'll address those tonight too.
If you're curious about the origin of my avatar, google "Cheburashka".

User avatar
matt96
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:55 pm UTC
Location: A suburb of Boston

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby matt96 » Sun Aug 14, 2016 1:43 am UTC

What I was thinking was asking something along the lines of either the incredibly direct "Which role(s) used in this game is/are most likely to extend or shorten the game?" to find out whether we have any roles that would fall under the categories of mass killing (arsonist, jester bomb, PGO capable of killing multiple people in one night), mass role blocking, other third party roles that could win before the end of the game and be removed, etc. I also considered that you might want to ask for the first and last roles used alphabetically, giving a bit of insight into the set-up and ruling out the use of roles before and after those ones respectively.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Carlington » Sun Aug 14, 2016 4:17 am UTC

Madge has already said that she's pretty much decided what she's going to ask, so further focus on what Madge should ask tonight instead of analysis (especially for those players who haven't given any) will be considered scummy.
IGMEOY matt96, would consider switching my vote to you or generalz if dimochka's forthcoming post is good.

Don't Lynch:
  • jimbob
  • SirG
  • moody
  • adnapemit
  • Madge
  • Suzaku

Lynchable:
  • generalz
  • dimochka
  • matt96

Convince Me:
  • JackHK
  • ConMan

Changes in italics.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
matt96
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:55 pm UTC
Location: A suburb of Boston

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby matt96 » Sun Aug 14, 2016 9:00 am UTC

SirGabriel
Early spec focused on roles, either does not have a commonly seen role or is lying scum, or perhaps both, although at this point I'm inclined to think the former more likely, even considering that the statement about expecting non standard versions of investigative, protective and role-blocking roles seems like extraneous fluff already covered in the statement about rarely seen roles. Not expecting Madge's role to be an amalgamation of roles looks to be a strong indicator that SirGabriel is not independent. Nothing seems flawed about analysis, although I am a bit confused by one statement regarding cop claiming,
SirGabriel wrote:If you think you're likely to be nightkilled whether you claim or not, you probably should claim.
mainly because I'm not really sure how or why a cop would find themselves likely to be night killed before claiming, unless they are also an Adrenalin junkie (lives until the next night if NK'd), which I could see Sabrar thematically tying to an addictive cop (sanity messed up by being protected, naive if not targeted with nk but protected anyways, paranoid if saved from nk) Probably a useful, good scumhunting town player, but I don't know how he acts as scum to compare it to.

ConMan
I've thought of a combination of roles that would fit ConMan's description, and it could be very good if wholely unreliable if it is what I think it might be, good effort in trying to get the most out of Madge's question, although none of the suggested questions seem especially biased towards helping town more than any other faction concerned about independents/cult.

Carlington
While I was very much not convinced that Carlington's strategies would be beneficial for town, reads list seems rather solid especially concerning Sirgabriel and generalz, at least from what I can keep track of at 3 A.M. Does not like that I posted what amounts to a clarification and explanation to a question I had asked madge before analysis because getting a role as an answer is probably more useful than a binary yes/no as to whether a specific role exists, but I understand his point.

Madge
The main focus of much of today's discussion. I was not expecting my questions to be answered with a full claim, but it gave enough information for me to trust Madge's claim so long as something else does not prove it false. As long as Madge is relatively open with the information and is not provably wrong, I don't see anything going wrong for her being caused by other players.

moody7277
I don't like how moody currently only has players as townie or don't know after pulling back on Madge, I also find it wierd that moody brought up a bunch of possible powers that have nothing to do with the mafia universe role list that everone else is looking at for roles used, I am relatively suspicious of moody, but would like to wait for some sort of responce before acting on it.

adnapemit
Not much to go off of, although I don't think that a no lynch would be quite as bad as she asserted, given we know that Madge will have something for us, and given that more than 1/5 of the roles on the list Sabrar was looking at are informative, and that we would have a better idea of the power distribution after they get used, it might not be a horrible idea if there is no good lynch, which as of this point there may or may not be.

JackHK
Posts a lot, but seems rather new considering he mentioned reading through past games rather than mentioning participating in them, and I'm going to lean towards town for now based more on participation than the quality of the participation, but that could easily change.

Suzaku
Unlike most other players, I haven't found anything I see my self disagreeing with, other than not finding adnapemit's argument against No Lynching as convincing as he did. Much like the other experienced players I currently see as townie, being very good scum could explain his play just as well.

dimochka
supposedly has an incomming post and will not be around much until deadline, other than claims of this incoming post, he has one post that he claims was a joke, which seems a bit odd as later in the post where he claims it was a joke he defends his set up spec, asking for evidence of no cult rather than if anyone ha reason to believe there is a cult is also strange, the only thing that would surprise me about him flipping jester is his patience over the period where people mentioned having issues with what he was saying but not voting him yet.

generalz
very, very short posts, guessing alignment based on fractions of claimed powers is strange to say the least, I'd lean towards a generalz lynch today if nothing happens between now and deadline.

jimbobmacdoodle
Apparently long time player, good posts, but I hear that he does the same when scum, I feel that his set-up and power spec are likely to be on point, but I think avoiding voting seems like a bit of a cop-out to avoid taking the blame for if things go wrong unless he has a very good reason to do so, which I am not yet convinced that he does.

Feel free to ask questions if you want further explanations, but I really need to get to sleep.

User avatar
adnapemit
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 6:05 am UTC
Location: The wrong timezone.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby adnapemit » Sun Aug 14, 2016 1:26 pm UTC

Looking at posts since my last analysis:
jimbobmacdoodle:
FoS generalz and then FoS ConMan. @jimbob: If you did not have your role/ability would either these be a vote?

Madge:
More talk of questions and seems to be distracting from conversation. A lot of people seem to have be convinced she is telling the truth without even seeing if she can actually provide information. I am still greatly hesitant, while I am almost certain she is not town I still think it is greatly possible that she could be fake claiming.

ConMan:
Long post about questions for Madge. This is good for town IF Madge is telling the truth and IF she actually does share information. The lack of posts on anything else is why my current opinion of ConMan has changed to slightly scummy.

SirGabriel:
Post replying to Madge, votes dim. Explains further why he sees Carlington as scummy. I really must be reading Carlington's post in a different way because I can't see why the first one he references is scummy, but he does have a valid point for the second post he references. Still slightly townie.

moody7277:
Short post explaining reads list and asks what makes people find Carlington scummy. My opinion is unchanged, still neutral.

JackHK:
Post apologizing for absence, convinced Madge is telling the truth.

dimochka:
Apologizing for absence, still hasn't posted since. Since nothing has been posted to convince me otherwise. Scummy.

generalz:
Is still sort of new to mafia games. Questions possibly voting no lynch. Could be just new or could be scum.

Carlington:
Dislikes that Madge is distracting from other discussion. I also agree and maybe that's why he is looking townie to me.

Suzaku:
Good analysis post. Carlington remarked about him taking too much stock in SirGabriel's opinion. I think this was just more pointing to parts that he agreed with but I also second the warning about not letting other players influence you too much . Overall still leaning townie.

matt96:
Raises many good points in his post and has a clearly different opinion on things to others. I don't agree with a lot but I think the unique opinions definitely has made me think he is more townie than before his analysis post. He mentioned that no lynch might not be bad. I still don't think no lynch our best option, especially since we don't actually know Madge will have information for us.
Empress adnapemit "Nancy" "Time Panda"
[adnapemit|timepanda]
Does anyone actually read signatures?

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Sun Aug 14, 2016 4:35 pm UTC

Quick responses to latest couple of posts, followed by updated thoughts based on posts since my most recent. (Wall of text incoming)

adnapemit wrote:@jimbob: If you did not have your role/ability would either these be a vote?
In general, I will always vote for the player I find scummiest, so at the time of writing that post I'd have voted ConMan rather than simply FoSsing him. I'll make sure to make it clear who I'd vote for if I didn't have my ability at the end of this post, and my last post before deadline (hopefully I'll get a chance to post once more).

matt96 wrote: jimbobmacdoodle
Apparently long time player, good posts, but I hear that he does the same when scum, I feel that his set-up and power spec are likely to be on point, but I think avoiding voting seems like a bit of a cop-out to avoid taking the blame for if things go wrong unless he has a very good reason to do so, which I am not yet convinced that he does.
I'm actually surprised that nobody else has pointed this out yet. This was why I made sure in my very first post to say it, before people started wondering why I didn't vote D1, D2 etc. To be clear, there's a very good reason for me not to vote which ties into my role, which will become clear if I flip, or should I decide to claim. I don't see any real benefit in revealing any more info on that point at the moment though. With regards to my experience, I've been playing a little under a year. So far, I've only been scum properly once, and an independent turning into scum on one other occasion, and both those were in my early days playing here (see Draculafia and the big Smalltown game) - IIRC my first two games in fact.

Updated thoughts based on recent posts:

generalz: I can't fault his using gut feelings to drive his thoughts completely, as I often rely on it when making judgements. However, I feel it is unhelpful to other players to simply post them, without any explanations of where they come from. So, I think generalz needs to actually try to explain what gives him bad gut feelings about the players he dislikes in particular (plus if possible why he likes other players). Since he's new, I'm willing to cut him a little slack, but I expect more from him if he's going to have any chance of avoiding a lynch moving forwards. Regarding comparing to other games, comparing play is a reasonable thing to do, but be careful because some people play differently depending on the nature of the game, and others play almost the same as town and as scum.

Madge: I'm not sure what I think about Madge changing her mind about the recruits question, as I broadly disagree with her idea that knowing whether there is a cult or not won't help her win condition, but fine, whatever. As said already, I think too many people have been focusing on talking too much about her questions. At this stage, I still believe she is who she says she is, and will await the answer to her question with interest.

Carlington: I like his analysis post a lot. Many (but not all) of his opinions match or are at least similar to mine, but he explains them all, probably better than I do. Probably pushes him towards the town end of my list. I don't see the points made by SirG really, given the state of the week when Carlington made them.

Suzaku: I'm not sure I agree with all of his opinions on players (particularly ConMan and Carlington), but that doesn't make him scum, because they are at least justified. Seems genuinely concerned about content from Madge, generalz, Matt etc, which is a plus point.

JackHK: If I'm not mistaking, Jack is fairly inexperienced, so I can't fault his lack of strong opinions particularly. I found I had that trouble early on, so hence why I tend not to call people neutral these days, unless it's due to lack of content. Being willing to acknowledge this issue as well feels townie.

Matt96: I might be jumping at things a bit, but I reckon that Matt might be a second independent, because of this statement here:
matt96 wrote:Not expecting Madge's role to be an amalgamation of roles looks to be a strong indicator that SirGabriel is not independent
I don't see how anybody apart from another independent with an amalgamation of roles could make this assumption. Otherwise, I'm glad that he's finally posted a decent block of content. His points make sense mostly in that, and as noted, he pointed out the potential cop-out nature of my non-voting.

adnapemit: I generally find her thoughts sound, and agree with them as well. Nothing strikes me as scummy about her at all.

dimochka: not really posted anything useful since my last post, but I just wanted to comment that I don't agree with the idea that he switched his opinion on moody and then tried to cover it up by saying it was a joke, i.e. I think it was a joke in the first place (the "obviously" at the end of his explanation is what made me think that). His biggest issue to me is lurking, as well as lack of thoughts on other players, but I think there are worse candidates out there for this reasoning, specifically ConMan, because he has lurked as much as dimochka, and posted no thoughts on others, despite having had time to post a decent post on Madge's questions, whereas dimochka has claimed lurking due to RL issues. I'm slightly concerned that this bandwagon is being pushed by scum, except the only people voting for him are my Town reads :(

I don't think there's been anything else worth commenting on from the others.
Townie (in no particular order): SirGabriel, adnapemit, JackHK, Matt96, Suzaku, Carlington
Scummy (in no particular order): generalz (bad content), moody (some bad content, and not posted any updated opinions on players since his original list), ConMan (serious lurking, only focused on Madge), dimochka (lurking, no thoughts on most players)
Independent: Madge, possibly Matt

Rough Town to scum ordering:
adnapemit
Carlington
SirGabriel
Suzaku
Matt96 (if not independent)
JackHK
moody
dimochka
generalz
ConMan

If I were voting, I'd be voting ConMan currently. I think he could rectify this with some good content in the next few hours, but it would have to be well thought out and backed up opinions.
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
SirGabriel
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:54 pm UTC

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby SirGabriel » Sun Aug 14, 2016 5:00 pm UTC

Apparently I haven't posted in a few days, but I have been following the game, I just don't have anything new to add. Nothing that has happened since my analysis post has given me any reason to change my reads (although I suppose I should say, since some people are unsure whether generalz is scum or just newbie, I'm currently of the opinion that he's just newbie), and at this point I doubt anything short of a very convincing argument from dimochka would change my vote.

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby moody7277 » Sun Aug 14, 2016 6:04 pm UTC

Fighting off a bit of a head cold, please be patient.

Well, I don't think I should be seriously voting ConMan just because he says he has a boring role in a game guaranteed against such.

Unvote

Lot of reads posts recently. Coallating them seems to indicate that dim, ConMan, and generalz are people's favorite lynchables with SirG winning most townie looking. matt's was a bit harder to pull out his opinions from, except for a couple of players.

ConMan's posts

post 1: "My role seems a little dull." And then goes on to describe a complicated scenario that he dismisses the probability of happening.
post 2: lie detector statement. justification of role description. accepting of Madge with SK caveat.

A sufficiently suspicious person might consider him overreacting about calling role dull.

post 3: Pseudo mod questions, none of which are the type to likely get a useful answer, and wants to put them in Madge's mouth.

A rather fluffy post even though it looks like he's trying to be useful. Since this, he's gone dark.

dimochka's posts

post 1: lie detector post. semi-joke vote based off my variant version. some rolespec and response to rolespec.
post 2: response to Suzaku's concerns about his vote, unvotes, response to rolespec and wants to keep Madge
post 3: fluff
post 4: reasons for unavailability and claims to be able to prove his towniness.

Not much there, most people's bad reaction to him seems to be his voting for me based off my variant statement for the possible lie detector. His opinion that a role claim could prove his towniness seems a little optimistic given the wackiness scum could come up with.
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.


BoomFrog wrote:I still have no idea what town moody really looks like.

User avatar
dimochka
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:25 pm UTC
Location: A few different places->NYC->LA->NYC. He/Him/His please.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby dimochka » Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:05 pm UTC

I want to get a few things quickly out as I'm reading through and make a longer post, especially as we're getting closer to the deadline (yes, this is NOT the longer post).

First of all, regarding sir gabriel:
SirGabriel wrote:I disagree with him about moody: while moody's lie detector statements aren't evidence that he's independent or mafia, they're also not evidence that he's town, since they could just as easily be scum intentionally drawing attention to himself because everyone assumes that's exactly what scum wouldn't do.

Agreed, no evidence, and yet I don't expect him to do this. If mafia were 100% a game of logic, then it wouldn't be as much fun. Sometimes you make decisions based on perception reads, and that's exactly what I see here. And yes I definitely include meta when I consider those things as well.
SirGabriel wrote:I have nothing against making the game fun, but I think keeping Madge alive purely for the sake of fun is a terrible idea. If, as I suspect, she wins by either killing everyone else or predicting who wins, then she's probably got one of the least interesting roles in the game. And if she is a serial killer, letting her live is more likely to help mafia than town at this point, so I'm calling dimochka scummy. And if he dies and flips scum, maybe we should look closer at moody.

I actually really don't like this right back. #1 the point of this game was supposed to be fun. #2 I didn't suggest keeping madge around till end game, simply till at least D2. #3 I was the first person to mention that madge could be SK so throwing that back at me makes no sense. #4 you're linking moody to me through that? If I were scum and moody were my partner, one of the worst things I could do would be linking us together like that. So if anything, I'm watching you now.
The later posts from SG still focus on me for wanting to enjoy the game and the fun roles? If that's what I'm getting lynched for then great I'm glad to be out after this day.

Now reaction regarding others (in order of signup):
matt96 - very little content, other than focusing on madge he only had one actual post. The reads also are inconclusive in my opinions and echo sentiments of others (I'm not sure how much it has added to discussion on top of what was mentioned by others). Not necessarily scummy but not helpful. Neutral.

ConMan - Not much content except for questions at Madge (admittedly useful questions) and saying his roll is dull. Would really like to see more content. Seems to me like he could actually contribute more (in the posts he had created) and is not, something feels off. I will figure it out before deadline. I hope.

Carlington - voted me for inactivity which I don't particularly like but understand (and because I don't plan to back down from any of the statements I made prior to this post; I fully planned to do exactly what I did, and didn't have time to continue following up on it due to rl). Other than the fact that his read on me doesn't make sense to me, I actually see good reads, and the updates also make sense. But I'm going to get through his posts in more detail a bit later today.

Madge - already mentioned everything I wanted to about Madge. Yes I want to keep her around, yes I think she's useful overall, but need to be careful because she could shift things to help out scum with a win if it works with her wincon better.

moody7277 - initial read was townie, but I specifically wanted to push on that to see who reacts. Jack did, but he's also a new player, that's why I did not push on it more. Moody - whom do you want to lynch now? Initially you had madge as lynchable and asked questions about those who find carlington scummy, and now removed your vote off conman. Right now neutral (I'm trying not to let my initial read affect my current opinion).

adnapemit - her initial reads feel extremely safe. NL discussion appears in most games, and mentioning that it's not a good idea should not warrant townie points (because most people would say the same thing). 2nd reads list is more reasonable, and I did notice that too about ConMan but I'm reading this the other way. What's your opinion on JackHK? You seem to have skipped that. Neutral.

JackHK - I'd rather you don't reveal too much about your voting power, no reason for scum to know this. Little content but seems genuine to me. Neutral leaning town. Would really want to see a reads list as of now, but he may not be able to be on till deadline.

Suzaku - Probably most townie in my opinion, because I agree with most of them. There's an explanation to every point that I wanted to see. Suzaku - is there someone specific you want me to pay more attention to?

generalz - honestly I don't see why he's scummy. Low content sure, but his reads list resonates with me and he's been forthcoming with responses. I think he just needs to get into more games to respond more, but he's on the townie side for me, and I will not be voting for him this day. But I do need to review why others find him scummy.

jimbobmacdoodle - potential role discussion, voting-related role. I'm fine with letting him not vote unless it's needed to break a tie or something else. On the other hand could also be a scummy role (like you accumulate votes or something). I like his mention of not focusing too much on Madge. I'd be curious to see what you think of me now that I've posted.

I plan to have more in depth analysis later today. Also my role is an inventor, and I can obviously prove it.
If you're curious about the origin of my avatar, google "Cheburashka".

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Madge » Sun Aug 14, 2016 11:23 pm UTC

(side note, my question is 7 words long and contains 11 vowels, so you know I'm not making it up tomorrow morning)

No comment on everything else, I'll wait till D2 when I have actual information. Hate D1, etc.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
SirGabriel
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:54 pm UTC

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby SirGabriel » Sun Aug 14, 2016 11:41 pm UTC

I should be around the last few hours before deadline in case dimochka can make a convincing argument in that longer post he promised, but his most recent post has done nothing to change my mind about him. Also, as to his inventor claim: a quick search for "inventor" on Mafia Universe came up with 10 results, including False Inventor, so even if we let him live and someone received a gift from him, that wouldn't necessarily make him town.

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby ConMan » Mon Aug 15, 2016 12:01 am UTC

Just a quick post to say I've been prodded, and I appreciate that I've been bad at providing content so far, so I will try to get something with a bit more substance in before deadline, if for nothing else then at least to get an informed vote down.
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Carlington » Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:31 am UTC

After moody and dimochka's posts, I feel a bit less sure about dimochka being scummy. Deadline will be 2am my time, but I likely won't have much of a chance to be on again before deadline. I don't know that there's compelling enough reasons to switch votes now, depending on dimochka's long post there might be.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Sabrar » Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:55 am UTC

Deadline is in 11 hours. Please send me your night-actions (if you have any) before the end of the day!

Votals:
dimochka - 3 (SirGabriel, Carlington, Suzaku)

Not voting: everyone else

Tied votals will result in a No Lynch.

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby ConMan » Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:40 am UTC

With little time to do proper analysis (and with so many people already having contributed something resembling it anyway), I'm just going to do a ready through the thread and make a long bunch of ad hoc comments on random points in whatever order they come to me, hopefully followed by something of worth.

Carlington wrote:Town doesn't lie, so Madge is indie or scum to claim indie.

Well, town playing properly in most cases shouldn't lie, but I can imagine circumstances where they might. But, generally, not this boldly.

Carlington wrote:ConMan's sharing info about his role seems odd/unwarranted. If he's town, I think it's anti-town to volunteer information about his role and its relative power. Sure, maybe it spares him the lynch as scum look to hit more powerful roles, but we lose more powerful roles. He probably has a rationale, I guess? Still, I feel it would have been better to say nothing about his role, as I plan to do for the time being.

I think I already addressed this, but depending on the setup my role will probably have its greatest utility early in the game. And I wanted to drop enough clues about it early that if I'm forced to claim later on that people don't think "Wow, that's a weak role, must not be true because my role is so awesomely strong". But anyway, enough of that.

I've already said I'm not a fan of lie detector roles, and the jumping on moody provides a bit of an explanation of why - as soon as someone suspects there might be one in the game, suddenly everyone has to post a creed confirming their towniness, and anyone who deviates from the formula is set upon for not conforming, and the role essentially becomes a bog-standard alignment cop, thus removing what might have been interesting about the role. But anyway, what's done is done.

jimbob and moody have mentioned a few kinds of bastardry they think may or may not be in the game and for the most part I agree, but I'd like to add a couple more points:

Wouldn't be surprised if present:
Roles that suggest something about the setup which isn't actually true (e.g. "Can detect if a player is a werewolf" when there are no werewolves in the game, or "If your target has a protect ability, it becomes unblockable" when no-one has such an ability)

Unlikely but possible:
Anything that requires active work on the mod's part to balance (although Madge's ability basically falls into this, but I'm assuming there probably aren't more of those things, like a PM listener role or anything)

Would be surprised if present:
Anything that reaches outside the game in general, especially something like a "spoiler reader" (which has either been discussed or actually used in a game here before, and which is one of the upper-echelon bastard roles that you only allow in games where no-one is expecting a semblance of balance)

Madge wrote:Scum, cults, SKs who may be reading this: don't worry, I can't do anything to screw with you. I can't kill you, I can't block you. I can't decult, protect, or anything else that might be concerning to scum.

Fair enough for Madge, less fair for us. I suppose this is similar to when she wound up with the Gambler role in my Two Rooms and a Boom game, and frankly her best play is pretty much what she's doing - wait just long enough to have a decent chance of picking right, and/or making deals with anyone who might be able to provide a little extra certainty. Assuming her claims are true, then she's not an immediate threat to town, and the information she gets could be *incredibly* useful, but by golly we're in trouble if we get close to *yLo with her still alive. As such, I do worry about people who say that Madge is a "safe" lynch, because that can affect how we think about her, and it's possible that we start counting her as "practically town" or "not really in the game" in some sense and then it just takes one miscount and we've thrown the game - basically what jimbob said.

There is definitely something going on with both dimochka and generalz, I'm just not sure whether to label it "scummy" or not. There isn't any super-strong buddying going on, but dim is pretty much the only person backing generalz up against a large number of "not sure if newbie or scum" accusations.

I'm not getting any strong hints from anything, which is typical for a D1. I have a few suspicions about some abilities, but they're pretty much hunches at this point. I also have grand plans for a huge diagram of who thinks who is what, which I will probably never actually get around to. In any case, I have about as strong a feeling as you might get on D1 that dimochka is looking suspicious, so I guess that's where my vote will go.

Vote: dimochka
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:53 am UTC

Dimochka's reads post seems no better or worse than most others at first glance. I don't agree with everything he said, particularly about generalz (opinions alone are unhelpful to me). However, he does have reasonable reasoning, and I'm willing to shift him a bit in the direction of town.

I see I'm going to need to try to compare all the reads lists in a bit more detail soon. Unfortunately, time will likely not allow for this before deadline, so it'll have to be a D2 thing, if I live until then.

I honestly don't follow what everyone has against dimochka. I know all three voting for him posted reasons at the time, but he has now posted more, so can I ask the three dimochka voters (SirGabriel, Carlington and Suzaku) to explain their current reasons for their vote. I'm concerned that one or more of them is a scum player who's seen something small they can latch onto to push a mislynch.
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Mon Aug 15, 2016 8:01 am UTC

EBWOP: Ninja'ed by ConMan. Need to think about that post a bit more before responding.
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Carlington » Mon Aug 15, 2016 8:57 am UTC

I kinda wish that post from ConMan had had analysis. I didn't like it much at all. I think it's pretty weak to be able to be almost at the point of active lurking the entire day, and then not have time to post analysis right before deadline. Too much time spent focusing on questions for Madge, I think. dimochka's reads post was decent, if a bit reticent about giving strong opinions but it's D1. Given that the lack of content is all I really had on dimochka, I'm going to

Unvote

Vote: ConMan
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
adnapemit
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 6:05 am UTC
Location: The wrong timezone.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby adnapemit » Mon Aug 15, 2016 12:02 pm UTC

dimochka wrote:What's your opinion on JackHK? You seem to have skipped that. Neutral.

I wrote that post when I was very tired. He hasn't posted much between my analysis post so my opinion is mostly unchanged and he is still slightly townie.

Currently my decision for voting is between ConMan and dimochka. After thinking and rereading through all the posts they appear the most scummiest to me.

Something does feel a little odd with ConMan's last post.
It might be the lack of analysis...
I would have at least liked a comment on everyone or a simple ranking if he didn't have enough time. His only opinions seem to be for Madge, generalz and dimochka. A few comments on what Carlington said and moody jimbob are only mentioned to add setup speculation.

dimochka finally posted a fair amount. I can't see anything that makes me feel he is less scummy. His reads seem reasonable but his opinion puts everyone as neutral or town(He mentions uncertainty with ConMan but not a clear opinion). dimochka then claims his role at the end of his post and that he can prove it. This seems to be from the pressure from having the only three votes at the time of his post.

Vote: ConMan

I just have a feeling he might be scum.
(Of course if everyone wants to vote dimochka, I'm fine with that too, if I could I'd vote for both of them)
Empress adnapemit "Nancy" "Time Panda"
[adnapemit|timepanda]
Does anyone actually read signatures?

User avatar
Suzaku
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:20 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Suzaku » Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:45 pm UTC

Unofficial Votals:
ConMan - 2 (Carlington, adnapemit)
dimochka - 3 (SirGabriel, Suzaku, ConMan)

Not voting: dimochka, generalz, JackHK, jimbobmacdoodle, Madge, matt96, moody7277

Quick post as I've been sick all day and really tired as a result.

dimochka has gone up in my view with that long post as it contains reads and reasons for those reads, and ConMan has gone down after his, basically because it doesn't.

Current votals put me as the tie breaker between those two, so I have to decide whether the change is enough to swing my vote.
Also note that dimochka doesn't have a vote down (pending the promised analysis post that his long post wasn't, I assume), meaning scum!dimochka could vote at deadline, if he's on, to tie and grab an NL, which would likely benefit scum. Of course, we'd lynch him straight up D2, but scum may find that a reasonable trade depending on powers and other knowledge they may have that we don't. Scum!ConMan is already voting for dim, so he couldn't do this.

Tough call, but I think the right move's to switch.

Unvote
Vote: ConMan


Unofficial Votals:
ConMan - 3 (Carlington, adnapemit, Suzaku)
dimochka - 2 (SirGabriel, ConMan)

Not voting: dimochka, generalz, JackHK, jimbobmacdoodle, Madge, matt96, moody7277

I'm off to bed now so this will be my last post before deadline and D2.

Reminder (if Sabrar's aren't enough) to get your night actions in before deadline also. Unless you're scum, then feel free to forget :)
Pronouns: he/him/his > they/them/their >> it/it/its
Time Zone: JST (UTC+9)
─────────────────────────
Some guy on the Internet wrote:The thing about the inevitable, it has a bad habit of actually happening.

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby moody7277 » Mon Aug 15, 2016 2:49 pm UTC

Pretty sure SirG and Suzaku are town. Taking Madge at her word re her role. I revise my previously neutral or not enough data reads:

adnapemit: reads post has SirG and Suzaku town, dim and generalz scummy, everyone else neutral. Answers generalz on NL, revised reads list with a few more definite opinions. Votes ConMan over dimochka. leaning townie

ConMan: only post after my summary of him is a lot of setup spec (bit late for this), some discomfort about Madge at endgame, and a vote for dim. based on my previous post and this, I find slightly scummy.

dimochka: first pingy thing on him was his opinion on keeping Madge around. Having fun is all good, but I figure town's position is to simplify matters (or as much as possible in this setup). Then we have his promised long post and partial role claim. Some discussion with SirG re me, in which dim is antagonistic to SirG and disturbingly positive to me. reads post that is uncomfortable about ConMan, neutral on most other people. role claim is inventor, which could be a useful discriminator on his status. possible candidate for D2.

generalz: some short posts, followed by a reads post that has SirG and jimbob scummy, asks about NL (twitch), which adnapemit set him straight on. I know short posters can be annoying (anyone remember ajh?), but aside from his variant reads, I don't see anything particularly scummy.

matt96: was going to suggest him for a lurker lynch until his resurgence (insert pot/kettle jokes here). some interesting role spec, reads list shows some depth of thought on players, verdicts were sprinkled through the summaries instead of at the end which explains my concern in my earlier post. leaning town.

Vote: ConMan
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.


BoomFrog wrote:I still have no idea what town moody really looks like.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Sabrar » Mon Aug 15, 2016 3:03 pm UTC

Deadline is in 3 hours. Please send me your night-actions (if you have any) before the end of the day!

Votals:
ConMan - 4 (Carlington, adnapemit, Suzaku, moody7277)
dimochka - 2 (SirGabriel, ConMan)

Not voting: dimochka, generalz, JackHK, jimbobmacdoodle, Madge, matt96

Tied votals will result in a No Lynch.

User avatar
dimochka
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:25 pm UTC
Location: A few different places->NYC->LA->NYC. He/Him/His please.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby dimochka » Mon Aug 15, 2016 3:23 pm UTC

I'm trying to get a last post in right now, I should have time to finish it before deadline. (within next hour).
If you're curious about the origin of my avatar, google "Cheburashka".

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Mon Aug 15, 2016 4:57 pm UTC

Unfortunately, work was too busy to get my reaction to ConMan's post in until now on my way home, and what I've been thinking is broadly the same as what others have already posted. In particular his lack of any serious player analysis is a major flaw, despite there being plenty of content to look at, and yet he found time to comment on virtually everything else.

His vote on dimochka is almost unexplained. From what I can see, he found him suspicious and thought that there might be a bit of buddying with generalz, the latter point being fair. However, he doesn't explain his suspicions otherwise, so he could easily have voted for virtually anyone else with the sane reasoning, but dimochka was the one with votes on, which seemed a little opportunistic.

I don't have time now to really look at people's reactions to that post unfortunately, so that'll have to wait until D2, assuming I don't die overnight.

If I was going to vote today it would definitely be for ConMan for focusing too much on the wrong things - not quite active lurking, but close enough.
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
dimochka
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:25 pm UTC
Location: A few different places->NYC->LA->NYC. He/Him/His please.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby dimochka » Mon Aug 15, 2016 5:34 pm UTC

Ugh as usual got caught up with things (as I said may happen till Wednesday). So I'm going to try to get a few short posts in. Also, I'll use my power tonight to give someone something. We can discuss on D2 whether or not that person should claim (and if so, whether to claim they received an item or what specifically they received)... optimally don't immediately claim, it's worth at least a quick discussion because I'm unsure. ALL - what item do you think is worth giving to someone? I can do anything normal like doctor/cop/tracker/watcher/protection.

Conman - role effective with multiple scum around, could be useful. but otherwise will likely do nothing? that sounds a bit farfetched. His retort is a bit weak: "And since my ability has limited use, I may as well point out when it might be useful," but we still don't really know how it's useful. Later offered very few opinions and his vote on me had 0 backup. He does feel more indie to me than scum, but better that than town.

Carlington - so when I was reading Conman (and I was doing it specifically because I woke up and saw lots of votes on him), this stood out to me:
Carlington wrote:ConMan's sharing info about his role seems odd/unwarranted. If he's town, I think it's anti-town to volunteer information about his role and its relative power. Sure, maybe it spares him the lynch as scum look to hit more powerful roles, but we lose more powerful roles. He probably has a rationale, I guess? Still, I feel it would have been better to say nothing about his role, as I plan to do for the time being.

I didn't like that he automatically said that he will say nothing about his role, but I continued reading through and I didn't actually find anything else scummy. Carlington - two questions. 1. what did you mean by that statement? That you won't share anything about that role? Or that this was the wrong time? 2. can you explain why you find matt scummy?

Gonna look at my other questionable reads next, hoping I don't get distracted by client emails.
If you're curious about the origin of my avatar, google "Cheburashka".

User avatar
dimochka
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:25 pm UTC
Location: A few different places->NYC->LA->NYC. He/Him/His please.

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby dimochka » Mon Aug 15, 2016 5:59 pm UTC

Only have 3 minutes so posting the only other one I got to:

generalz - first page nothing except lie detector stuff. thinks sirg is lie detector (i would tend to agree if i thought he were town, but i think he could also be scum and using this as a way to cover up his tracks). doesn't think madge is scummy. the presence of reads is good but I don't see the tie-in between the reads and the resulting scumminess level. Now that I went through it I realize that I was a bit biased based on his specific reads matching some of my thoughts, but I really want to see more content D2 otherwise even if he's town he's not being helpful as of now.
If you're curious about the origin of my avatar, google "Cheburashka".

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Sabrar » Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:04 pm UTC

Night has fallen.

Final votals:
ConMan - 4 (Carlington, adnapemit, Suzaku, moody7277)
dimochka - 2 (SirGabriel, ConMan)

Not voting: dimochka, generalz, JackHK, jimbobmacdoodle, Madge, matt96

ConMan has been lynched. Please refrain from posting until D2 starts.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby Sabrar » Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:42 pm UTC

ConMan is dead. He was a Silencer, aligned with Town.
dimochka has been arrested. During D2 he may not vote and he cannot be lynched.


It is now Day 2. Deadline is set at next Monday 6pm UTC.

11 players alive, 6 votes required to hammer.

generalz
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:18 am UTC
Location: Central Europe

Re: Trial of the Pariahs - Day 1

Postby generalz » Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:07 pm UTC

Quick reply from my phone (on holiday)
Damn :( At least we didnt lose anyone during the night (and should find out how)
I think i should reveal my role now: Dreamer. I can either reveal 1 town or get the name of 3 people, at least one of each being Mafia.
I chose Dream of 3 and got the names of Madge, SirGabriel and JackHK.
More to come later...


Return to “Mafia”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests