Mafia 42: Italian - Game over!

[Yosarian2]

vote:LyingBrian

Voting for Baby Jesus day 1 is a scum tell.

[Yosarian2]

If I'm correct, I believe they can 'investigate' someone and discover if they have a gun of not. (Mafia and Vig have guns. Not sure if Cops would or not, some mods would say Cops have guns because they are police and police carry guns). I remember reading there was a gunsmith that said the masons had guns and the mason turned out to be a SK.

Yeah, when I've see the gunsmith role before, Vigs, mafia and cops all carried guns. And there was also a "paranoid gun owner' role in that game, just to make it more confusing.

[Yosarian2]

I hope we have a fair share of good pro-town roles, seeing as there was 3 kills, where we lost a doc and a smith

(shrug) Actually, if there's 3 different scum groups, that can increase the town's odds of winning.

On the other hand, there might just be a crazy vig.

[Yosarian2]

unvote

vote:Tony Montanna

[Yosarian2]

Lying Brian, why did you suddenly follow me onto the Tony Montanna vote? Are you just trying to push any bandwagon other then your own at this point, or did you have some other reason?

At this point I'm very tempted to move my vote back to you, but I'll give you a chance to explain first.

[Yosarian2]

the only thing i was trying to accomplish was to give someone else the same number of votes as me to generate discussion. i'm glad to see that worked.

Voting to "give someone else the same number of votes as you" is scummy; it gives the appearence that you're more interested in improving your own odds of not getting lynched then you are in finding scum.

[Yosarian2]

confirm vote:TonyMontana

I changed my vote to him earlier because I didn't like the vibe he had been giving off this game so far. One example of that is in post 27, where he tries a little too hard to sound like a townie (Oh no! Look at all the deaths! So terrible! I hope we have lots and lots of pro town roles!). Since then, he's just followed whatever bandwagon seems most likely to go somewhere, getting on the lying brian wagon as soon as it looked like was taking off, and now following the pooky wagon without giving any reason. I think he's scum.


For referecne, his post #27:

I hope we have a fair share of good pro-town roles, seeing as there was 3 kills, where we lost a doc and a smith

unvote: BabyJ

[Yosarian2]

I'm as big a fan of a random pooky lynch as anyone, but I really don't at all understand the reason behind the bandwagon. Basically, a bandwagon started up for no reason at all, Pooky attacked someone who was blindly bandwagon voting with scummy looking logic. Because of that BJ attacked Pooky for "being defensive". Here are the posts where the Pooky wagon started:

Good morning all.

This bandwagon on Lying Brian looks like pure crap to me.... I'm better off with

OMGUS Vote: Pooky

unvote, vote pooky. I can go for a pooky lynch here

vote pooky Why not? Also I don't really think Brian is scummy here

I really don't like this "random bandwagon to a claim" BS on day one. If you think someone is looking scummy, vote for them. If enough people think someone is looking scummy, and the person can't defend themselves, then lynch them. Don't vote for someone just because you want them to claim, on the theory that we'll keep going until we hit a basic townie or someone with a claim that dosn't make sense; that's just lazy, and leads to good guys getting lynched without the scum having to make any effort at all.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) I wouldn't be opposed to joining a jabroni wagon, based on his posts and actions so far today. I would still rather lynch TonyMontana, though.

[Yosarian2]

I think that would be a bad idea, Yosarian

I'm sure you do. However, if you want to convince me of that, could you perhaps contribute some content other then mindless bandwagoning?

[Yosarian2]

The logic has become illogical.

Too much pro-town is bad and too little is also bad. What about in between?
That would mean you're acting normal and people will wonder, "Eh! He's way too normal to be innocent!"

No matter what you do, some will always be suspicous.

(shrug) I tend to be suspicious of people who feel they have to jump up and down and yell "look at me! I'm protown!" on day one.

To be honest, that's not a very reliable scum tell in my experence, although it's better then nothing; my early vote was basically a "slightly better then random" vote for that reason, and a test to see what his reaction would be, which is why I didn't bother to expalain the early vote right away.

My main reason for being suspicious of him now and for keeping my vote on him is the way he quietly joined two major bandwagons while giving little to no reason. That does look scummy to me.

[Yosarian2]

All right. Interesting points, and Illumina hasn't been doing much to defend himself, so

fos:illumina

. Might turn into a vote later, depending on how he acts.

Meanwhile, out of the major bandwagons, I still like the Jabroni one most, and am not sure how he got off the hook for his earlier scummy behavior, so

unvote:tony

vote:jabroni

to keep the pressure there.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, no sense lynching someone on day 1 with a claim as easily provable/disprovable as that.

I'm happy with my Jabroni vote right now.

[Yosarian2]

Ok, before the end of the day, I want from Illumina a detailed discription of what his role does, exctally. A cowardly reporter is a role that has been used before, but that dosn't mean he has the exact same role; I want him to be very specific on exactally what his role is and does. Once we have that, we can formulate a plan on how to test his role. If the role is what I think it is, it should be possible to test it in multiple ways, but that can wait until Illumina gives us a very precise discription of his role.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, that sounds good. Basically, we'll be able to test his claim with a vig, and over the course of the game he'll have to produce info which will be another way to test him. Unless the mafia has both a doc and a mafia investigator, it should be really hard for him to fake both for the length of an entire game.

[Yosarian2]

Very true. Did you get night 1 results, Illumina?

[Yosarian2]

Ok. TSA, can you confirm that?

[Yosarian2]

how long does DAY 1 normally take in a game this size?

(shrug) You never know. I've seen it take as long as a month.

[Yosarian2]

All right, Jabroni looks clean, or at least confirmable.

unvote

Illuminia, they have a good point. Why didn't you reveal your results sooner, if you are "required" to reveal your results?

[Yosarian2]

I've got to say that I don't really like the idea of lynching a claimed information role on day 1, especally when his night 1 information seemed to have checked out.

[Yosarian2]

It's up to you Blackberry; none of the rest of us really have enough information to give good advice.

[Yosarian2]

one game where a GF was able to do this.

Mafia Vengeance (Misetings). Godfather also roleblocker.

Hate to say this, but agree with BabyJesus.

Then again, being a godfather and a roleblocker still wouldn't give you the information you'd need to pull off a fake "is X out of his house or not" every night. In order to properly fake that claim, he'd have to be a godfather who knew he was proof against nightkills and also be an investigator, or be scum buddies with an investigator.

[Yosarian2]

I did think Jabroni was acting rather scummy earlier today, but he claimed searching mason, and Vesuvan seemed to back him up on that.

[Yosarian2]

Probably important to point out: this new Jabroni wagon is the scummiest action all game.

Unvote, Vote: JSexton

Actually, that's a good point.

unvote

Vote:Jsexton

[Yosarian2]

Probably important to point out: this new Jabroni wagon is the scummiest action all game.

Unvote, Vote: JSexton

Actually, that's a good point.

unvote

Vote:Jsexton

interesting....out of all the people that voted jabroni you single out jsexton...any reason why, or just a bandwagon hop?

(shrug) The way he jumped onto a bad bandwagon, (lynching someone who might be a confirmed mason tommorow seems like a pretty bad idea)makes him look suspicious; I tend to be more suspicious of the people who eagerly jump onto bad bandwagons without giving a good reason. Honestly, some other people on the bandwagon look just as bad, but meh, we've got to focus pressure on someone if we're ever going to get anywhere.

[Yosarian2]

Completely forgot about his claim. Grumble.

unvote

.

I would like to say that I gave reasons for every single one of my three (?) votes, though. You're free to dispute my reasoning, but don't misrepresent me as an eager bandwagoner, 'cause it just ain't true.

A bandwagon appeared really quickly, with several votes in a row, on someone who seems like a bad lynch, and you jumped on with this as your only justification.

I'm up for a Jabroni wagon.

You know what? I am too. At first, I just assumed he voted me just to see how I'd react, which seemed like legit scum probe. Now that he's just left it sitting there, I don't know what he was doing, which makes me wonder.

vote: jabroni2000

You joined a quickly growing bandwagon simply because the target of the bandwagon was voting for you, and had not removed his vote from you. OMGUS voting is a pretty weak justification to join a bandwagon, especally when you waited until the bandwagon was underway to be suspicious of him for voting you and keeping his vote on you.

I believe that you may have forgotten about his claim, but that dosn't make your post look any less scummy, and neither does jumping off the bandwagon as soon as pressure is applied to you.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) I understand the reasons for the Fritzler bandwagon, and we could do worse then lynch a claimed townie, but I am going to at least wait until I get an answer from Jsexton to my last post before I move my vote off of him.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) I understand the reasons for the Fritzler bandwagon, and we could do worse then lynch a claimed townie, but I am going to at least wait until I get an answer from Jsexton to my last post before I move my vote off of him.

What's the question? You restated your reasoning for voting for me, but that's all I see.

There was no question, specifically. I guess what I really do want is a defense, or a reaction of some sort, to my accusations in that post. After all, half the reason to attack someone on day 1 is to guage their reaction, and the reactions of others.

Specifically, from the post I quoted, it sounded like you jumped onto a quickly growing bandwagon basically as an OMGUS vote, which seemed suspicious, as you didn't OMGUS vote him until there was a bandwagon on him. Was there another reason for your vote? Why, exactally, did you want to get onto that bandwagon at that monent?

[Yosarian2]

Woah...sorry I haven't posted today, I forgot about this game until just now.

After a read-thorough, I like the gonzo bandwagon. I was wondering about him a little yesterday, too. I'll just

fos:Gonzo

him for the moment, because this bandwagon is moving rather quickly, but that might turn into a vote soon.

[Yosarian2]

All masons claim now, por favor, if I were god, lol.

Um, no. Don't do this. Confirmed innocents are more useful late-game then early game, and revealing masons now would just get them killed before we got to a late-game point where the confirmed innocents would really be useful.

[Yosarian2]

I don't think we should let Gonzo loose... if we continue this EVERYONE has claimed and nothing happens...

SO...what do you suggest? That we lynch a claimed mason?

You know, you were looking pretty scummy day 1, too.

vote:zu_Faul

[Yosarian2]

Well, the suggestion that there is a second scum group, like a cult or a second group of mafia, is a suggestion that can be very useful to the mafia, because then the town would be more likely to lynch, say, a person who played a major part in lynching a scum. After all, just because he wasn't in a scum group with person X, he might still be in a different scum group/cult/ect, right?

If there is only one scum group, suggesting or hinting at the existance of a second scum group and/or a cult can be used as a scum tactic to confuse the town's analysis and to make it more likely that townies will get lynched. Of course, that dosn't mean that a townie can't, or shouldn't, ever suggest the possibility that there might be a cult or a second scum group, but when someone does it without a good reason, some people do consider it a scum tell.

[Yosarian2]

I understand the lying brian bandwagon, but I'd still rather lynch Zu_Faul. Just go back and read his posts (it won't take long) and you'll see why.

[Yosarian2]

Zu Faul: (shrug) I didn't like the way you voted for a claimed mason, no, which was why I went back and re-read your posts, and that set off my scumdar. Almost every post you have made all game has been a very short post which jumped onto a bandwagon.

[Yosarian2]

Um, the above post was directed at Zu_Faul, in case that wasn't clear.

[Yosarian2]

I don't like it to make a post just consisting of Unvote, Vote, so I'll give a comment.

It's not the comments that I find scummy. It's the way you blindly followed the crowd from one bandwagon to the next for most of day 1, while doing and saying next to nothing else.

[Yosarian2]

You haven't convinced me that he is scum. I'm not going to lynch someone just because you claim to have seen a tell. That may be good enough for some people, but unless you give me more, I'm not buying it. I'll vote for him if I you tell me what the tell is so that I can evaluate it for myself, or if I see signs of his scummyness. I'm not going to accept your tell on blind faith.

ok, guy. We'll rememeber how you defended scum tomorrow.

And we'll remember how you used vauge threats like this to bully everyone into voting for pooky.