Full Communications Mafia (Town wins)

[Cadmium]

Okay. Role received. So ... uuhh ...

confirm

, I guess.

[Cadmium]

Wow, that's at least 8 persons with night choices so far .

[Cadmium]

The severed head of a cow 8O?? What kind of a mafia is this? I think they've been watching too much Godfather and didn't have a horse at hand. What could this mean? Is the head just to juice up the story or does it mean more ?

I'll hold my vote for now. Maybe I can learn something from the gossip .

[Cadmium]

Okay, I'll take it that everybody's going downwards.

Let me go the other way around.

Vote: The Accountant

::knows there could be a discussion about this name::

[Cadmium]

Yeah, what The Accountant said.

Mith saying that a cop told him that IS is guilty, is out of the question. When you are a cop, you don't go and E-mail people you don't know to be innocent. If this cop investigated IS, he doesn't know wether Mith is innocent or not. So there is no cop telling Mith something.

So if Mith is telling the truth, that would make him the cop himself. But why would he do that? It would be obvious for everyone that he is the cop. I don't think that a cop wants everybody to know him. I mean, it is day one.

So there's one other option. Mith is just lying and wants to get rid of IS.

Unvote: The Accountant
Vote: Mith

[Cadmium]

Let me go over this *again*.

If

a cop investigated IS last night and found him to be guilty, there is absolutely no way that (s)he E-mails this information to someone not to be known as innocent. And (s)he wouldn't know wether Mith is guilty or innocent. This is what Mith has to say about it in his defense:

*If* I were Mafia, and I didn't do what the Cop told me to do, the Cop would have caught *two* Mafia.

Now, that total crap logic and you know it. If you were mafia and got that info from a cop, you would just wait and do nothing. With doing this, you'd force the cop to come out. If he doesn't, he'll be killed by you at night since you now know his identity. The only way of preventing this, is coming out in the open and asking for doc protection. I don't think a cop wants that to happen.
There's another reason why a cop doesn't E-mail someone on the first day. (S)he doesn't even know wether he's normal, insane, paranoid, naive or random. Why risk lynching an innocent? Would a cop really do that just to get some info on his role? I think the cop would keep his information 'til he knows what to do with it.
These two reasons are enough for me to reject the fact that a cop sent Mith an E-mail.

[Cadmium]

Why am I being accused of defending IS? Not one word in my posts was used to defend IS. Just read them again. All I responded on so far, is the fact that Mith claimed to have been E-mailed by a cop on the first day. I thought that he was lying and that's why I attacked him. I had a reason to vote for someone. All you guys did, was blindly following someone that claimed something unbelievable to me. What did you want me to do insted? Voting without believing the reasons?
I still don't believe Mith's claim of being E-mailed. We can go over this millions of times, but nothing is going to chance my mind on this. Fact is that he

did

give us a mafia member. There is a possibility that he is mafia and that he gave up IS in order to be believed, but I won't go into that. I trust him for now.
Now for my vote. I'm going to

vote: Roadbird

. He's just too silent and he didn't vote. And I think that's what I would have done if a family member is being caught.

[Cadmium]

Hey Roadbird, are you letting private things interfere with mafia ?

So, I guess there's only one thing to do:

Unvote: Roadbird

.

FOS: everybody else

.

[Cadmium]

My guess is that wherever the results came from, the source was just trying to figure out the mental side of his/her role. Since on the first day you normally don't have a clue and most of the times a random person will be lynched, (s)he probably figured it couldn't really hurt to try out the "guilty" result from the previous night in order to find out what kind of cop (s)he is.
To the cop (if there is one ): You probably figured this out yourself, but after lynching IS, you could either be normal or paranoid. If you got an "innocent" result last night, you can rely on your information. Like Mith said, I don't think there's a random cop in this game, so that would make you a normal cop.

[Cadmium]

Cadmium, I think, is another story. I'm still a bit irritated by the fact that he didn't just ask me in person. I've read back a little and came to the conclusion that there are a lot more players not posting and not voting for IS last round. Why vote me? And why not ask me in person?

Oh, come on. Why do I need to ask a person I vote for (because they're not letting themselves hear) why they didn't post? That a load of crap. I never did that in any game I played so far. So why should you be an exception? And by the way, you're being

so

hypocrite right now:

if you don't have the time to play I think you should let someone else take your spot. It's no fun when people don't play.

There you go. Something to think about. Come to think of it, you're trying to look for reasons to lynch someone a little too hard. Any reason for that? Or are you just irritated that I picked you over another silent player?

Vote: Patsy

And don't ask me why!! It should be obvious.

[Cadmium]

[Totally off Topic]

We'll battle it out over a Black Russian this weekend.

What's there to battle? Let's just have the Black Russian (and then some more ).

Roadbird, Cadmium, your little whatever you've got going has gotten rather silly. Evidently all you've succeeded in doing is irritating each other and confusing and annoying the rest of us.

I'm sorry if you were annoyed by our conversation. But I think you misinterpeted it. Our "little whatever we've got " is just us playing mafia. I assure you noone is irritated. I can understand your reaction but the fact that I know Roadbird well is also a factor here. When you know someone well, you sometimes take it a little further when you've got suspicions. I apologize if anyone was bothered by it. Now let's kill some mafia scum .
[/Totally Off Topic]

My vote for Patsy still stands. I think we have a greater chance of catching us some mafia when everybody actually posts. Plus it looks suspicious to me when a person is silent. As soon as Patsy posts, I'll unvote. But for now I'll keep it this way.

[Cadmium]

Eight days ago, I voted for Patsy because she was quiet. Well, that worked out okay. Thank you Patsy, for joining us again in this game . I guess I should change my vote since this isn't working.

FOS: discer, Dragon Slayer, JDTAY, joesatri, mikegoo, Patsy, quercitron, rOver

. Come on people, let's hear your votes.

Unvote: Patsy
Vote: Ambic

You say that you're suspicous of Jeep because he saw no reason to join the bandwagon, while there is an obvious reason. Please explain to me how that makes him suspicious. If he's mafia, he would have just voted for you. I mean, why try to start a new bandwagon when there already is one?

Let's get this day over with!

[Cadmium]

First of all, sorry for the silence from my side. Work, work, work . Now, let's get a complete review from this day. I missed quite a bit here .

First Mith, Ningal, Corsato and Roadbird vote for DS because he was looking for an excuse why he voted for an innocent. Here's his response:

I voted for ambic because Cadmium insisted that the people who hadn't voted yet should vote or else he'd get on our back. If yuo ask me he seemed a little impatient to get to the lynching or ambic. I havn't done anything except vote for the same person most of the rest of you were voting fro on the request of cadmium.

I never said I'd get on your back. I did say that everyone who hadn't voted yet, should vote. The reason for it was that nothing was happening and we needed to keep the game going. If I seemed impatient, you could be right, but it wasn't impatience to lynch ambic, it was impatience to get the day over with or at least to get the discussions back. I never asked you to vote for Ambic too. I just asked you to vote. You chose to vote Ambic on your own.
Now, it's seems suspicous to me that you used me to justify your vote. It looks like you're trying to hard to appear innocent. Why would you defend yourself like that with a bandwagon that's already near "lynching station". So

FOS: Dragon Slayer

for that.

After that, Discer, Joesatri and Polotet voted for BigFella since Jeep was the only one voting for him the previous day and he wound up dead. I don't think that's too suspicious. There's a bigger chance it's just a coincidence. After defending himself, BigFella attacked me:

This is due to the fact that he is usually a fairly vocal player, but hasn't said much lately. It seemed as though when he was under suspicion for defending IS, he became very vocal in his defense. But now that the limelight isn't on him he's keeping very quiet, more than likely to remain inconspicuous. So that's my two bits.

You're right, normally I'm a fairly vocal player. I didn't say much lately because of my work (I already apologized ). But there's one thing that struck me in your post. You say I was vocal when I looked suspicious defending IS. First of all, I didn't defend IS, I attacked Mith, but I only explained that two or more times before. Why remember, right? But okay, looking at the logic you used to vote for me, I'm mafia with IS. Here's another quote from your post:

And besides, if I were mafia with IS, wouldn't it have been more logical for me to cast one of the clinching votes in his downfall to make it look like I was all for it, and not have been as expressive as I was about it?

So that's my two bits. Take those two bits, put them together and what do you get? Someone that is looking for almost any reason to vote for a person, even using logic that he denounced himself earlier.

Vote: BigFella

[Cadmium]

What's the difference?? When you attack the attacker you are defending the person who is under attack. Why else would you attack the attacker?? If someone tells his investigations (or the investigations he found out), you either beleive him, and vote with him, or don't believe him, which implies that you believe the person who is under attack.

You've got a point there. I never thought about it that way. I was voting for Mith because I didn't believe the cop thing. I thought he was mafia, that's true. And that would make me someone who believed IS was innocent (I guess). Well, so be it. Mith proved me wrong. He told the "truth" and IS was guilty.

You are voting for someone just because he had a reason to vote for you ?? I don't get it. He gave a reason to vote for you, and I can quite agree with the logic behind BigFella's vote. The fact that you are busy IRL wasn't well known here.

The fact that I was busy IRL shouldn't have anything to do with this game. It's perfectly understandable that BigFella voted for me because I wasn't as vocal as I normally am. But that's not the reason why I voted for him at all. It's the part where he said that I

was

very vocal during the IS lynch. That was weird to me, since he did the exact same thing and defended himself for it too. So, it seems like he is voting for me with reasons that he is using for his own defense. And you don't find that somewhat strange at all?

[Cadmium]

After reading the whole thread again, I need to go over some things again. First, I'd like to

unvote: BigFella

. His vote for me was based on the fact that I

first

was very vocal when a guilty person was about to be lynched and

then

was very quiet. He made a good point there. It doesn't mean anything in this case, but it could have meant something. I voted for him because I thought he was attacking me with words from his own defense. That's the being vocal part. But I didn't include the fact that I

was

quiet after IS's lynch. So my vote didn't seem appropriate after reading it again.

I also took a look at the voting patterns. I found Corsato to be somewhat suspicious. Here are his all his votes (minus first day random vote):

Vote: IS

Allways follow the cop.....
....or the player he tells his investigations to

Vote: Ambic

, partly bandwagonning, partly for "accidentally" misquoting Roadbird.

Vote: Dragon Slayer

, basicly because mith did so, and I haven't got my own opinions . This might get the discussion started again. I've read through the thread, but couldn't find anything useful.

Now if you take a look at the time he's jumping on those bandwagons and the reasons why he did so, it seems like he's really eager to lynch someone (without a good reason). There is one thing though. He was second on the IS bandwagon. Do you think mafia will vote this soon for one of their own? It could be, but since I'm not sure, I'll just

FOS: Corsato

.

Vote: find a replacement for Patsy (last post was Tue Sep 10, 2002 4:02 am)

[Cadmium]

::wonders where BigFella's house is::

It would be "interesting" to see all those lovely ladies running outside screaming without any panties on.

Oh, and Mackay, how come you keep losing your underwear? I believe Roadbird still has a bra of yours somewhere (mini game 9 & 12 ).

[Cadmium]

Well, I can explain some of this, but not the whole thing.

I'd rather not tell you my role, but I guess I have to now. I'm a doc. I can protect someone else or myself. The first night, I protected IS, then Jeep and after that myself. Last night I protected myself too. That bit explains why I'm still alive. But I have no clue whatsoever about how DS got killed.
I think I'll protect myself from now on, until someone else needs protection. Then I'll flip a coin. This way, the mafia will probably kill someone else. They don't want to risk losing a kill.
I have no idea who to vote for, but still

FOS: Corsato

.

[Cadmium]

Any particular reason for the FOS??

Yep, for all the reasons given in the reply I posted on Thu Oct 03, 2002 4:15 am. Those voting patterns are just too suspicious. You posted my "behaviour" too, but that doesn't compare to yours (and I even "defended" a mafia member the first day). But since you didn't vote for me right after I revealed my role (which the mafia would do right away since killing a doc is always good for them), I'm somewhat convinced that you're okay. So, I'll

unFOS: Corsato

.

There isn't really much more I can say in my defense. This is simple, you either believe me or you don't. But just take a look at all the reactions on my role:

vote:Cadmium

, unless someone can tell me that self-protecting doctors are a lot more common than I believe them to be.

Vote: Cadium

, because I've never seen a self-protecting doc before.

They've been done, but are generally thought to be too strong.

All sorts of roles have been done, but that's particularly powerful

Seems to be a broken role if you ask me.

I've never even heard of a self-protecting doc before and looking at these reactions, I bet most of you never heard of it either. So why would I make up something like this? It doesn't sound believable at all. I'm sure I could do a lot better if I was mafia.

Eillid mentioned that she thought the role was too powerful for this game, but just take a look at DS's role. I mean, a townie with a shotgun and two kills? That's not a really common role either, right? And we don't even know anything about all the other roles left in this game.

That's about it. I have nothing to add to my role, I told you everything I know. Now it's up to you. You have to decide if you want to lynch a doc or not. I know you think there is a chance of me being mafia, but that still goes for Mith too. Why do you believe him to be innocent? There still isn't any proof for that, you know. But you don't want to risk losing a "cop". And I think you shouldn't take the risk losing a doc either. The way I see it, the chance of me telling the truth is way higher than me lying. But I don't have anything to say in this, so you decide.

[Cadmium]

Any way, a few questions/remarks:
1) I have a problem with the fact that your attacker is dead. That means you have not only the power to protect yourself, but you can kill your attacker as well. That part I find suspicious.
2) What happens if the player you are protecting is attacked. Will the attacker die as well in that case ??
3) Why were you protecting yourself, and not one of the other players??

1) You're the one with the problem? It looks to me that I'm the one in trouble because of this . Mainly because I can't explain this part. Nothing in my role description mentions this. So I know as much as you do.
2) Again, I have no idea. It didn't happen yet, so I don't know. This isn't mentioned in my role description either. All it says is that I can protect someone, nothing about killing attackers.
3) Like I said before, I started protecting myself on the third night. At that point I decided to attack some suspicious players. I was hoping to help the town and point at some mafia members so they would think I was a threat and want me dead. This way, I could prevent them at least once from killing. Plus, I wanted to see if this doc role could function right without being silent (and thus having a chance of being lynched). But the whole thing backfired at me, all I managed to do, was becoming more suspicious and finally getting a vigilante after me. But I think it was worth a try anyway.

I hope I won't be a doc next time, it's not a role fit for me .

[Cadmium]

::wonders if he missed something::

I don't know where you read Quercitron's death scene, but I can't seem to find it.

FOS: Jalyn