Mini 722: Neapolitan Mafia (Over)

[Isacc]

(that is, assuming there are 2 scum and an SK)

Why do you keep assuming there are two scum? All logic and deduction would have us expect three scum, so why are you so sure there are 2?

I mean, everything logical would suggest three scum (most mini games have three man scum teams, the 1/4th rule of thumb also suggests three). I can't see ANY reason to think 2 and 1 sk.

FoS: Percy

[McNuke]

Right now I am thinking worst case scenario which would be 3 scum and 1 SK(or some other combination of 4 non-town players). I am not sure everyone is considering how drastically important it is for us to hang scum tonight. Right now we have nine people left.

If we mess up and hang town, that brings the game to 4-4(town-not town) before NKs. If a scum or SK night hits a town, then town is in the minority; we loose.

If we do hang scum that will put us at 5-3(town-not town) which will be a nice buffer zone before any night kills.

Because this is a very probable worst case scenario I want to ensure a scum lynch tonight. I support the mass claim.

[PsychoSniper]

Psycho, stop your overdefensive tirade.

You asked me a particularly NOT neutral question, and pushed suspicion. I pointed out that assuming anything OTHER than what I said, would be anti-town, as it would be risking too much. It's not that hard to comprehend.

I am not threatening you, so calm down. I am saying that there is no point in considering that there might not be 3 scum, because that would be anti-town.

I love how you keep trying to paint people as "over-defensive" or "stupid/retarded" everytime they post something against you. Like you're doing now.

That's

the mark of someone being over-defensive.

I didn't say one had to be scum, that was actually someone else. After awhile I agreed it was likely (that's all). It was their actions that made me find them scummy. Also, don't twist words, I said I'd consider voting for myself, not that I would.

Arguing semantics now? Why would a town player even consider voting for himself when he's the one person who knows he's not scum? Anyway, I brought that up to remind everyone how much good you did when you start acting on your assumptions as of they are all but confirmed.

Actually, if I remember correctly, I wasn't the one who pushed for the massclaim originally. Might wanna check your facts. Also, pushing heavily? No more than other people, that's for sure.

You're the only one who said that you don't see any other way for town to go. Who else is there? Rice and Percy just voted against massclaims. tyhess said that he wasn't sure massclaim is helpful. Rogue disappeared. McNuke said nothing about massclaim except he agreed with nameclaiming. Phate said he doesn't care either way (lynch or claim), except we have to move on. The only one who seems supportive of that is B_B, and he doesn't sound anywhere as sure about it as you did. So yes, you

have

pushed more heavily than everyone else.

I downplayed the significance of names BECAUSE THEY DON'T MEAN ANYTHING. And, because, AS YOU POINTED OUT, they are most likely fake if they are scum. Thus, names are pointless.

This from someone who falsely accused me of twisting facts. You and Percy pointed that out, not me. Don't put words into my mouth.

And, BehindtheName is a reputable site, which I use for all my name generation, as I am a writer.

I wasn't disputing the credibility of the site. I was just pointing out that it seems awfully coincidental that the one name who doesn't exist on the site belongs to the guy who quoted the site. Even the players who are dead happen to have their names on that site. And how that same person couldn't seem to find anything other site about that name until someone else quoted a site that links his name to being Italian.


Anyway: against massclaim.

[PsychoSniper]

Ok, I wrote that before I saw McNuke's post, but he hadn't pushed for massclaims until now, so my point still stands.

[PsychoSniper]

I'm asking the mod again about this, because I thought I understood it.

... I'm also not liking BB trying to discredit my claim.

Did you get an answer?

[Isacc]

You're the only one who said that you don't see any other way for town to go. Who else is there? Rice and Percy just voted against massclaims. tyhess said that he wasn't sure massclaim is helpful. Rogue disappeared. McNuke said nothing about massclaim except he agreed with nameclaiming. Phate said he doesn't care either way (lynch or claim), except we have to move on. The only one who seems supportive of that is B_B, and he doesn't sound anywhere as sure about it as you did. So yes, you have pushed more heavily than everyone else.

Umm, did you actually go back and look, because you are dead wrong.

Post 733: I say I will start considering it, weighing options and such.

Post 734: Percy says we definitely should massclaim (kinda odd, considering nothing has changed since then but now he wants to lynch Rogue again...I'm suddenly very worried about Percy)

Post 736: B_B says we should go for a massclaim.

It's not till 749 that I have started supporting it. So already, your claim that I'm the only one pushing hard for it seems kinda off. Note that even on the next page, post 754 is Percy saying again that it's definitely the best option.

So how have I been the only one pushing?

This from someone who falsely accused me of twisting facts. You and Percy pointed that out, not me. Don't put words into my mouth.

Sorry my bad. For some reason I kept thinking you were the one who posted that fake claim scenario, instead of Percy. My apologies.

Though admittedly, my point still stands that names are essentially going to be useless unless we were lucky enough for a scum to have claimed his real name.

And how that same person couldn't seem to find anything other site about that name until someone else quoted a site that links his name to being Italian.

The point I was making was that nothing about my name related to my role. That's the only thing I meant when I said I hadn't found anything about my name.



Anyways, in my reread to disprove the "Isacc is pushing the massclaim" accusation, I noticed something interesting. You may have noticed it too, as I pointed out part of it already.

Percy was very sure that a name claim was superior to lynching rogue. He outlined nearly the exact same situation as I did, in that if we are wrong about Rogue, we are probably in LyLo or else we lose. Look here, 747:

I'm thinking that this game needs more info rather than more waiting, because it's entirely possible that we'll be in lylo tomorrow and a claim would be entirely necessary at that point.

Supports roleclaim.

Here, he also says he believes both Rogue and Matt, 734:

The name smells insane. It also doesn't match the flavour of the SK, and I'm inclined to believe both Rogue and evilmatt.

Seems like Percy is on the side of massclaims. He is also emphasizing the fact that it seems like both Rogue and our odd-day cop are telling the truth.

But now, what do we hear?

I don't think we're at lylo. If Riceball is right, and R_S is the SK, then we'll be in a fantastic position. If he's not, then we'll kill riceball. The only way we can arrive at a losing position (that is, assuming there are 2 scum and an SK) is if both R_S and RBT are town. I don't think that's going to happen.

It really is that simple, I've decided. We risk lylo if we're wrong about RBT, but he seems pretty certain, and he's almost confirmed town. We take his word for it, for the moment. It's the best shot we've got. Roleclaiming probably has about the same chance to work, in my mind, as acting on this info (if I'm feeling generous). This way, however, we get to withhold role information for one more day.

This seems almost the opposite of before. Nothing has really changed in the particular scenario, that I can see (we still have a cop that doesn't know if he's sane or not, and we haven't received any more info on Rogue), and yet

now

Percy thinks we're safe lynching rogue? Why? Why is he suddenly changing his mind so much?

Not to mention, as I pointed out in my last post, we are NOT going to assume there are only two scum, as that would be extremely foolish. Why? Because if we are wrong we have fucked ourselves. However, if we assume 3 scum and 1 SK, being wrong doesn't kill us. (Ironically, he points out a few posts above this that if his assumption is wrong, it's dangerous, but then still pushes for it anyways?)

Also, a little interesting tidbit I found on my reread, Percy 747:

I find tyhess' shifting attitudes and posting behaviour today kinda scummy. I'll put a better case against him together tomorrow.

Any reason this case never came? I didn't even see you address the issue again.

With these things in mind, I will

Vote: Percy

for what seems to be flip-flopping on the massclaim issue.

And,

I'm for massclaim. I'll even go first.

[tyhess]

I'm for a massclaim

[Riceballtail]

I'm asking the mod again about this, because I thought I understood it.

... I'm also not liking BB trying to discredit my claim.

Did you get an answer?

Yeah, I can only choose the who, the rest is not a choice. It would have helped if I'd have had that idea too.

I also do not have the entirety of my own PM, so this could be part of it.

[Beyond_Birthday]

Vote count for full claim.

Yes (4) -B. Birthday, McNuke, Isacc, tyhess,
No- (3) -RiceballTail, Percy, Psychosniper,
With 9 alive, it takes five to MC/not.

-as a side note: I am okay with a mass claim. Worst case tomorrow is losing if we are particularly unlucky.


To Rice: Look, all I am saying is that the flip flopping is a bit...well...suspect. However, if we do lynch Rogue (which is likely unless in our discussion we come to a point where we find a better lynch.) It should confirm or discredit your position as cop.

Question: Percy, why are you assuming 2 mafia and 1 sk?

[Percy]

Thanks for misrepresenting me, Isacc.

Initially, there was doubt as to whether the result was sane. I didn't want to act on insane information. I concluded that a massclaim was a good idea, because we had no other means of getting information.

Now, we have riceball saying that he's sure that his result is sane:

My power is to search alignment, name, or both and one may not be sane (only if I choose both). I only searched Rogue's name, got Theodore Kaczynski, as EEM claimed.

I am certain that this is a sane result

.

Emphasis mine.

We now have the situation where it's either riceball or R_S who is scum. Therefore, I now want to act on the information we have, than give up our

biggest secret

in the

hope

that we get information that is better than what we have now.

Your seemingly deliberate attempts to ignore both this information and the context in which my words were spoken, added to the horrible disaster that was yesterday, have pushed you to the top of my scum list. Nevertheless, I think lynching Rogue is the best idea.

If we are in the situation where there is 3 scum and 1 SK (rather than, say, a vigilante, or the thousands of other combinations that seem to escape analysis using "[a]ll logic and deduction"....!!!!), then a mislynch on day 1 (entirely likely) will probably lead to 5 townies, 3 scum and an SK. If a townie is lynched again, the most likely scenario is lylo. Are you honestly proposing that the

most likely scenario due to setup

is lylo on day 2? Or even if you dispute "most likely", it's pretty damn likely. Most games I've been in don't lynch scum until well into the game.

Oh, but the power roles, I hear you cry. The town is all powered up! But you're the one ignoring the information we get from said power roles. You are disregarding the information we have been provided as irrelevant.

Don't massclaim, guys. We've got info right here. Let's lynch Rogue, then either Riceball if he's lying, or Isacc if he's telling the truth. Save the massclaim for later.

[Phate]

I vote against massclaim.

Percy's completely right. It's down to Rogue or riceballtail. At least one of them has to be scum. Rogue's scummier. Let's lynch Rogue, then Isaac if Rogue flips scum and riceballtail if Rogue flips town (Then we can lynch Isaac the next day).

[Beyond_Birthday]

Hmmm... I love it when people make sense. (Is now able to focus more on this game then skim reading, yay!)

Either we catch Rice or RS and since it isn't lylo (I was stupid), we should definitely lynch RS.
Still, we should get a roleclaim and have Rogue present, non?

Prod Rogue

If it hasn't been done.

[UnofficialRulerOfEveryone]

*SNIP*

I will prod both tyhess and Rogue Shenanigans. (tyhess and Rogue Shenanigans prodded 2/5/09 at 5:15 PM (USA) [Rounding to nearest 15 minutes], they will be replaced on 2/10/09 at 5:15 PM (USA) [The timers don't count over the weekends]. I am sorry for their extended absence due to my laziness when it comes to activity checks, but I just prodded them now, so I have to be fair.)

Riceballtail, your latest vote doesn't count, please see the rules post.

[Isacc]

Percy, there was no misrepresentation done.

Riceball says he's sure he is sane, but so did Evilmatt at first. Why is he believed now, but couldn't before we doubted him? I don't see any confirmation, what I see is a person who is more confident than the last person, but still has no guarantee on whether or not his result is sane. Thus, we are basically at the same position as we were.

If we are in the situation where there is 3 scum and 1 SK (rather than, say, a vigilante, or the thousands of other combinations that seem to escape analysis using "[a]ll logic and deduction"....!!!!), then a mislynch on day 1 (entirely likely) will probably lead to 5 townies, 3 scum and an SK. If a townie is lynched again, the most likely scenario is lylo. Are you honestly proposing that the most likely scenario due to setup is lylo on day 2? Or even if you dispute "most likely", it's pretty damn likely. Most games I've been in don't lynch scum until well into the game.

This paragraph doesn't really make sense, and doesn't correctly address the issue. Let me spell it out for you.

It's likely that the situation is currently 5-1-3 (5 town, 1 SK, 3 scum). Assuming that it isn't will cause us to take more risks than we can probably afford, so the only intelligent move is to assume we are at 5-1-3.

Now, if we mislynch, that puts us at 4-1-3. Next we have TWO potential night kills, due to the scum and the SK. The SK wants to hit scum (cause otherwise he loses), but there is a decent chance he screws up and hits town. If the scum and SK both hit town, then it's 2-1-3. Game over. If he hits scum, we are still safe (3-1-2), but ONLY if he hits scum

Let's consider a successful scum lynch. Let's assume Rogue is correctly scum. Then night starts at 4-1-2. This doesn't sound so bad, except that there are still two kills. If the SK fails to hit scum in this scenario, that puts us at 2-1-2, which is still screwed town (if not game over...I'm having trouble working out if that can still continue that way or not...I don't think it's game over).

See my point though? This is the situation we are at right now. Whoever the SK is will need to hit scum tonight, regardless of the lynch, if we plan to win. If the SK hits town, the town is pretty much guaranteed screwed.


Anyways, Percy your intentions in your post make me feel a little less bothered by you, and I'm also considering again that you are the other italian immigrant, which makes me want to think you are a similar role to mine...so I'm going to

Unvote

.

Speaking of that,

Is anyone else an Italian Immigrant?

If your role-pm says this then please speak up, as otherwise I am making a pretty bad conclusion here.


Phate's post also bothers me. He's scum, for sure.

And, I agree, Rogue should be present for his own wagon. I want to give him a chance to claim and/or defend himself before we just quicklynch.

[Riceballtail]

*SNIP*

I will prod both tyhess and Rogue Shenanigans. (tyhess and Rogue Shenanigans prodded 2/5/09 at 5:15 PM (USA) [Rounding to nearest 15 minutes], they will be replaced on 2/10/09 at 5:15 PM (USA) [The timers don't count over the weekends]. I am sorry for their extended absence due to my laziness when it comes to activity checks, but I just prodded them now, so I have to be fair.)

Riceballtail, your latest vote doesn't count, please see the rules post.

My one vote should have followed the rules... what did I do wrong?

[UnofficialRulerOfEveryone]

8. For your vote to be counted, it must be bold, and in the form

%% Vote: PLAYERNAME

.

[Riceballtail]

I did not have any notification about any roles besides my own investigation last night, so I do not know if I am a twin, but I do know that my name is also Ed.

I don't know why EEM backtracked. I'm guessing he questioned his own sanity though. I don't, because I understand what I'm doing here, and that rogue needs to go today. Massclaim tomorrow.

%%VOTE:Rogue

This is not right?

[UnofficialRulerOfEveryone]

I did not have any notification about any roles besides my own investigation last night, so I do not know if I am a twin, but I do know that my name is also Ed.

I don't know why EEM backtracked. I'm guessing he questioned his own sanity though. I don't, because I understand what I'm doing here, and that rogue needs to go today. Massclaim tomorrow.

%%VOTE:Rogue

This is not right?

I'm sorry, I mixed you and Percy up, I knew I had seen an incorrect vote. (I counted your vote in the last vote count, too, I don't know why I mixed you up.)

In that case,

Percy

, your latest vote does not count, see the rules post.

[Beyond_Birthday]

Actually, I think that better than lynching mafia is lynching the serial killer in this situation. We will be in lylo tomorrow, but it seems fairly obvious to me that even if Rogue is mafia, the serial killer plus mafia kill leaves a pretty fair shot at town living another day into 4 vs 3, though this assume that a serial killer exists.

Since I am thinking about it, I am wondering why Isacc is so sure that Rogue is mafia and not a serial killer as the name Theodore whatever suggests. Other than that, the rest of the posts have been fairly tame.

Anyway:

%%Vote Rogue

I think that is three votes, with five being a lynch. So, L-2, right? in any case, I think this should be enough unless we just decide there is no point in Rogue claiming. (Which, honestly, I think may be the case. We learn more from knowing Rogue's name and alignment. However, if we mislynch, that would spell obvious disaster. Anyone else have a thought on this?)

[Isacc]

I think this should be enough unless we just decide there is no point in Rogue claiming. (Which, honestly, I think may be the case. We learn more from knowing Rogue's name and alignment. However, if we mislynch, that would spell obvious disaster. Anyone else have a thought on this?)

FOS: Beyond

[Beyond_Birthday]

As a thought on why I am okay with voting, a quick lynch shouldn't lead to mafia win.
5 v 1 v 3
Mislynch:
4 v 1 v 3--->

3 v 1 v 2 <--obvious not lost yet. Just a bad situation like today.
OR
2 v 1 v 3<---Since kill factions exist, town is in bad shape, but only loses if they lynch the serial killer. Odds are in favor of lynching a mafiaoso, which leads to:

2 v 1 v 2---> 0 v 1 v 2 OR 1 v 0 v 2 OR 2 v 0 v 1 OR 1 v 1 v 1 which gives the town a 1/4 chance of living to day 4 with 1/2 of those being moderately okay and the other becoming the prisoner's dilemma.

On the otherhand, if we lynch the sk, which I think the name suggests and I hope that is who Rogue is:

5 v 0 v 3---> 4 v 0 v 3 which is lylo, but not too bad of chances for town.

If we lynch mafiaoso:
5 v 1 v 2 ---> 3 v 1 v 2 OR 4 v 1 v 1 OR 5 v 0 v 1 (This would be so win.)

In other words, lynching mafia is actually better. Hm... didn't realizes that till I did the numbers... although, it does range from far left (not really good at all) to far right (which is simple win).

I like town's odds right now.
In any case, the sk situation doesn't look too bad to me, and if he is mafia like Isacc consistently suggests, then I think that has a decent shot of being in our favor as well. (Plus, the information gained should make up for our losses if we mislynch or end up in a less favorable one of the outlined above positions tomorrow.)

[Phate]

I hatehatehate that Isacc's 'cases' are basically fluff. It sounds like he's casting around for reasons to vote people rather than looking for scum. When Zach confronts him on this, he rapidly backpedals, saying he thought they're scummiest but doesn't necessarily want them lynched (saywhat?). Having momentarily muddled the issue, he immediately FoSses Zach in what is a total OMGUS.

Also, here's something new: you notice that everyone who's been arguing hard for Isacc's lynch was town and is now dead? That by itself is enough for an Isaccvote.

Two were by lynch. I am NOT scummy for being wrong about a lynch, and they were misrepping and pulling a ton of bad moves. I now regret that their idiocy seemed scummy to me, which was definitely my fault, however, the fact that they were lynched doesn't automatically make me scum.
...
However, I am pleased that at least someone is attacking me for my plays day 1. The fact that no one did has me worried, honestly, and I find your intentions largely protown for attacking me. I was worried about Nikelaeos, due to not a whole lot of reads, but now you've made me feel much better.

That said, I think Isacc's 882-3

(should be 832-3)

is very telling. It looks like he has a name he knows is scummy, and is trying to minimize the impact by calling it Danish/also Danish/primarily Danish. I think scum is more likely to act that way than town.

Also, Phate, why are you so eager to push a lynch?

I vote against massclaim.

Percy's completely right. It's down to Rogue or riceballtail. At least one of them has to be scum. Rogue's scummier. Let's lynch Rogue, then Isaac if Rogue flips scum and riceballtail if Rogue flips town (Then we can lynch Isaac the next day).

Phate's post also bothers me. He's scum, for sure.

Isacc changed directions on whether he thought I was scummy very fast with no stated reason except that my post 'bothers' him, and that he thinks I'm 'eager to push a lynch'. The reason he hasn't elaborated on what about my post bothers him is that there's nothing against which he can argue. He can disagree on lynching himself, and he could point out that my post is basically an agreement with and paraphrasal of the post above mine, but he can't touch the actual logic of the post. Methinks he's trying to defend a scumbuddy and distract attention without having to provide reasons. As for being 'eager to push a lynch'.... IT'S PAGE 36... ON DAY TWO... WAIT FOR IT...

IN A MINI

. This game is dragging overlong, and all most have you have been doing all game is arguing in circles. Almost the only exceptions are dead now, and were town.

Really, the only reason I can see for the flip-flop is complete OMGUS. This is especially funny because he calls everyone who argues against him 'overdefensive'. Can anyone else see how stupid this is? He attacks someone, and if they defend against his attacks they're 'overdefensive'.

Because at least one of riceballtail and Rogue_Shenanigans has to be scum, and RS is much scummier, I'm for lynching Rogue today...

Unvote
%%Vote: Rogue_Shenanigans

...but I look forward to seeing Isacc lynched.

[Isacc]

Flip flop? There was no flip-flop. I thought your FIRST argument against me had pro-town intentions. All your other ones are garbage. No flip-flop.

Your arguments hold no water. Your name argument is crap. Your flip-flop argument is mega-crap. Your arguments against me are not attacks on anything legitimate, just more attempts to try to make me

look

stupid. Why do you need to make me look stupid? So you can convince others to lynch me. You think I am an easy target, but I'm done playing your games.

Phate is scum.

Oh and why did I give no advanced reasoning? I am sure you're scum, and your little games bore me.

[Isacc]

and if he is mafia like Isacc consistently suggests,

Umm. Where?

[Phate]

Flip flop? There was no flip-flop. I thought your FIRST argument against me had pro-town intentions. All your other ones are garbage. No flip-flop.

Your arguments hold no water. Your name argument is crap. Your flip-flop argument is mega-crap. Your arguments against me are not attacks on anything legitimate, just more attempts to try to make me

look

stupid. Why do you need to make me look stupid? So you can convince others to lynch me. You think I am an easy target, but I'm done playing your games.

Phate is scum.

Oh and why did I give no advanced reasoning? I am sure you're scum, and your little games bore me.

See, the thing about this that you've spent an entire post saying nothing again. The entire post can be summed up as "NO U." You've stated my arguments are crap. Okay, I see you disagree with them. I don't really understand what you're talking about with the "YOU'RE MAKING ME LOOK STUPID" thing is, but I can roll with it. And I definitely get that (alluvasudden) you think I'm scum.

But you still haven't told me why my arguments are crap, or why they're just to make you look stupid while your posts give you the right to say I'm scum with no reason whatsoever, or why you're so sure I'm scum for calling you scum when you thought it made me protown a few pages ago.

That's why I'm so sure you're scum. If you were town, you wouldn't let it sit at "I'm sure you're scum, and that's good enough for me." You'd be making cases, interacting with the town, saying

This is what I believe and this is why I believe it and here's why you should believe it too and now here's what we should do with this information

. 'Cuz that's what townies do.

You, though, you just lash out at everyone who agrees that you're scummy, like a weasel in a hole. You're not playing to win for town, you're playing to stay alive. You're not interested in who's scum, you're just interested in deflecting enough attention to cloud the issue and get someone other than yourself lynched.

Over and over throughout the last few pages, you brand anyone who attacks you as scum, for no other reason than that they're attacking you.

Diescumdie.