First off - be well, Sage103082, hope you're all settled in soon; welcome gogtrial34987, looking forward to your input.


I haven't, I wanted to do a reread of the thread, which is now in order more than before, but fell ill and haven't done it yet. My line of questioning mchack is related to this, however.


Shouldn't the point of comparison be between trentonlf's usual, or at least D1, and Today's play? Same regarding flubbucket. I don't quite follow why you'd expect the two to act similarly.

Also, trentonlf is acting more differently how?


Except that it's clearly stated (rule #15) that we don't get a fixed deadline, just a 48hrs warning. So, saying we weren't yet at an imminent No-Lynch, and had you been online before Lifthrasil closed the Day you'd have hammered, doesn't quite cut it.

There's more behind looking to form a new wagon so close to Day-end than voting one's scum-suspect, or wanting to avoid a No-Lynch.


These are not your only options for a claim.


And you're doing a fine job contributing to it.


That hardly explains the emphatic tone of your post #837 stance.


Why are you pretty sure? You've been going through the game so far sharing nothing specific about the people you (allegedly?) scum-read. Given the situation we have at our hands at this point, the least you can do is state in a clear way specific arguments you have for him not only being scum, but on a 3-man cyborg team.


Being sceptical is acceptable, at least at first, if one was scum-reading him earlier, and before revisiting things and reading mchack from both sides (as Mason, as scum). Being as certain as you appear to be that it's a false claim without doing so is not, and it does raise my eyebrow.


Again, why are you so sure he's scum false claiming? Be specific.



I'm off to have dinner, then going to do a reread before commenting further, will take a good while as I'm not in good shape.

no-one counterclaims only you do (without doing it fully even)
where am I? (and I am really a mason.) it's either lynch vanilla (if indeed you are that crazy) and get lynched for it tomorrow (or out all other masons) or leave it be and let my claim be mistrusted, leading to my eventual lynch (or outing the other masons.)
If you are town vanilla you can't want either of these two conclusions, just to have your doubts recorded.
And how is lynching you and flipping town not giving scum exactly the time they need to convert?

So if you really are just a doubtful vanilla town, then please do claim honestly, remove your vote from me, say you are sorry and vote for someone you think is scum (beside me, preferebly one of wyrm, hsl or adalia), then we might at least lynch some scum today. And you'll see my flip soon enough and see that I am not lying.

if you are actually scum: just carry on and get lynched. I'm fine with that then.

You cannot know that. You are not a mason!

then why? why? do this. You cannot know that I am mason, since you aren't one yourself. You cannot know that I am scum. Why chance the whole game on the chance of maybe me false-claiming? Why? this is so stupid.

You are no mason. When you are at some other game you can show us exactly how it's done. Before my claim no mason was outed and one scum at least died (maybe by trying to convert a mason maybe scum maybe nk we can't know). But now that I claimed, there is no going back, but I won't help you out the other ones.

So I really, really don't want to mislynch today. If you really are town vanilla, that is just playing crazy then do everything in your power to convince us of that and try and lynch some scum (I am not scum).

Vote stays until you get to your senses or are lynched and flip scum.

We've played two. One night ultimate, and a later game (around March/April) where I got you to vote yourself but luckily doubted enough so didn't hammer you, and then was replaced by someone who correctly recognized the town-vs-town shenanigans for what they were, so town ended up with the win.

My blanco reads from following the thread superficially, not yet adjusted for the mason claim and not-quite-counterclaim (all of which I still have to process for the different light it'll likely cast on interactions), was that I found the back and forth between adalia and mchack scummy as hell, but that I've been burned on finding town-adalia scummy before, so was also trying to keep in mind they might be town-vs-town. I've had moments for each of trent, bookwyrm and HSL where I thought they were acting slightly uncharacteristically in one way or another (vague feelings this, which might not hold up on a reread), though for HSL at least I guess that could be sickness acting up (and I seem to remember multiple players suffering from this?)

What does FoS stand for?

Also, Krypsyn: I haven't looked at your unofficial vote counts in detail; are they intended to be accurate (with sure, underlining mistakes and so on), or are you intentionally slipping in any kind of commentary which becomes clear when comparing actual events to your record of it? I'm hoping the former so I can use them as a shorthand during my reread for following the action, but wouldn't put it past you for the latter case to be true.

I think you misunderstand me, I wouldn't expect them to act similarily. The question was why I would vote trent but not flub. I said trent because there was more of a change in his style from yesterday to today, then there was a change in flub from yesterday to today.
As for now, no, actually. He seems back to normal, what his plan was earlier today... I could see it in certain situations that I had not considered before.

I don't see how whether the deadline was fixed or not makes a difference, we knew about how much time we had left. When I voted you there was still around 24 hours left, if I remember correctly.

No problem.

?
If there are 3 masons, any mason has to have 2 buddies. If I don't see mchack having two buddies that could be masons... he couldn't be a mason.


Ok, here goes. Based on my conclusion that he is false-claiming mason (see above), he must be scum. Being scum, he is either on mutant or cyborg team. We already know Hunter was on mutant team. The general consensu (and one I agree with) was that Hunter was not NK'd, but rather killed in a bad conversion attempt. Therefore, since there were no other kills during the night, cyborg team must have (successfully) converted. Therefore, we come to the conclusion there is mutant team with one member, cyborg team with 3.
Now, back to Hunter being dead. It seems clear that in order to maximize conversion attempts, a player with more suspicion would be the one to use their attempt. Therefore, Hunter's player must be someone without much suspicion, as he (Hunter) did not have much suspicion. Mchack was very suspect during the first day, ergo, he must not be Hunter's team member. Therefore, since we have come to the conclusions that:
1)mchack is scum
2)mchack is not on Hunter's team (mutant)
3)there are 3 members on the cyborg team.
The obvious final conclusion is that mchack is part of a 3 man cyborg team.

Sorry, I'm not going to be more specific, especially not when asked by you, I'm afraid. As I have said already, I could not see two players being mchack's partners.

I know, I know, I know, I KNOW.
@*#^&#@%*^#!!!!!

Of course, not! The thing is, I never expected it to come to this point. From my view, I was sure other players (both the actual masons, and other vanilla players that followed the same lines of logic as me) would find your claim suspicious. The fact that no-one else has expressed such doubts... well, I don't know what to think.


Sure, why not, I doubt it can't hurt. No, I'm not mason. I'm a boring ol' vanilla town.
Unvote: mchack
It's certainly not doing any good where it is.
Vote for scum to follow.

Of course I can't know. But that doesn't mean that there is not still a pro-town outcome from being suspicious of a mason claim.

Well I can *beep* see that now, but only because no one else is suspicious of your claim. Which I didn't think would happen.

Good. For goodness sake, let's save what we can from this mess.

On it.

Vote: adaliaboooks

After doing some re-reads, I'd say my original vote from day 1 is our best shot to hit scum. Why? Because I don't think adaliabooks is vanilla. If he's not vanilla, he's either mason, or scum. If we assume that mchack is, in fact, mason, it's pretty clear that adaliabooks cannot also be mason. Therefore, he is scum.
So why is adalia not vanilla? Let's do a little digging shall we?
Interesting. So at this point we can see that adalia knows the reason for Krypsyns vote, and apparently why. Well, why is Krypsyn doing what he's doing? He pretty much tells us in posts and [url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_52_shodans_children/post311]311. He's voting whoever has the most votes, trusting that the Masons will be able to use their powers for good, and direct town to at least a safe lynch. Well, if adalia knows that, he also knows we don't want to lynch mason today. Yep, this is confirmed in adalia's post 50
. Adalia certainly isn't feeling suicidal though, ( and [url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_52_shodans_children/post118]118). Post , interesting I wonder what these strategies are. [url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_52_shodans_children/post243]243, he (along with dedo) is quite sure that a mason won't be the lynch. , huh, happy to accept volunteers, ok. [url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_52_shodans_children/post265]265, here it is, he thinks it's a good idea to lynch flub, who he believes is claiming vanilla.

So, my reasoning, if this occurs to adalia so quickly, why didn't he offer himself up to start with? I came to the conclusion that he was in fact, not vanilla. This is actually the reason I chose to vote mchack today, I was pretty sure adalia was not vanilla, but there was a chance he was a mason, a chance I did not want to risk taking. As I'm sure is obvious, I didn't think mchack could be a mason. Since it's clear they can't both be masons, and I doubt adalia is vanilla, we have my vote.

I realized you might now be asking about specific feedback on the current situation, rather than just the general reads which you wanted from Sage before: I've been thinking about it, and I'm a bit of two minds about it. I understand everyone presumably reading Leonard's actions as pure scum (and I read his behaviour before as a bit floaty), but the pile on of votes without explicit thought process is also bothering me a bit - and I'm also reminded of the one other time I've seen someone publicly disbelieve a PR-claim, namely drealmer's false PR-claim at the end of the 1st day in smurfia, and one person in there backing off, and then re-voting, because they really didn't believe it - correctly so. I found that re-vote scummy, but hey, they turned out to be correct. Of course, that was at day's end, where this wasn't.

Trent, dedo, ZFR: You all voted Leonard immediately after his "Not going to answer this question." in #854. Was that presumed attempt at leaving wiggle room the major reason for voting, or would you likely have been getting around to voting him without it, too? If so, then why?

Ah, finger of suspicion. Thank you mafiascum.

Yes.

Have we met before?

I wanted Sage103082 to say something. I know her meta fairly well, and I wanted her to say something, anything. Your answers are very useful, but they are only half of what I was after.

thank you. still might be scum but at least we don't have to "policy lynch" you now and maybe just get a town flip out of it. I'd really hate to see a town flip today.

unvote leonard

I can't think of any, but I might be biased by knowing it to be a true claim

---------------

*ftfy*

hmm, ok. Didn't think adalia was vanilla myself either with the way he went on about them muddying the waters. And it is easy to convince me about adalia, since I basically read him scum the whole game... which might be bad, but I do think it is time to find out for sure (if the other players are fine with it, unless they find another scummier in the 3 (no chance of hitting mason in there, that at least is for sure))

vote adaliabooks

[insert appropriate meme here]

*makes note to self to find time to go peruse all votecount posts separately*

Sadly no, but your name has been mentioned often enough by others, that together with what I've seen from you so far in here, I have some idea of what to expect anyway. :)

Nah, I was just being ambiguous to be a jerk ;). The vote-counts have been as accurate as I can make them, without any conscious/intentional hidden messages. Obviously a couple of them early on (random names added, giving everyone a nickname) were not 100% serious, but I was still trying to keep the useful parts accurate. All told, I have done a fairly poor job of getting them right the first time. :(

I'm not sure what I'd have done had he said something else. But the way he answered meant I had to vote him.

For the moment:
unvote Leonard

Since I don't know you, but think I recall it having been mentioned that you played back when: how many mafia games have you played here? And how many of those as scum?

Meh, the reread is going more slowly than I'd like. Lots of mudied waters and back-and-forths to check up on. Not even halfway through at present, but I'm really needing to knock off, as I have a long and exhausting day tomorrow.

As mentioned previously, expect me to be gone all day tomorrow, and to only be back on Wednesday.

Thanks.

Phew. If you were deliberately altering those vote counts I'd flip the proverbial table. :P

*old Grandpa voice*
Well back in my day...

First game was #27 back in April, '15. Looks like I played in 7. Rolled neutral survivor once and scum once... in the all scum game.