AGOT Mafia 50 - The Chef Battle

[House Sunglass]

[quote name='House Thorne' post='1314971' date='Apr 15 2008, 10.45']The "slip" is one point, but what do you think of the "contradiction"?[/quote]Nothing to object against the "contradiction". I just tried to be honest with Florent and to dismiss the argument which doesn't make sense... But there still are arguments which do make sense. I am still ready to vote him before leaving the thread.

[House Upcliff]

[quote name='House Thorne' post='1314904' date='Apr 15 2008, 16.00']Is Fell CI in your mind? Yes or No. We can talk about the details of your reasons after, but I want a straight Yes or No to this question.[/quote]

Fell is VPI. I forgot there's a chance fell could be symp totally. I really can't see fell as symp. If i turn out wrong, I'll kick myself.

To me, Fell is as close to CI as one can be without being in the spoilers thread. :P

[House Sunglass]

[quote name='House Corbray' post='1315025' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.15']I don't have a feel for Grandison. I will work on a re-read of him next.

I am still thinking about Wythers.

Also not sure about Erenford.[/quote]So wishy-washy, Corbray?

[House Upcliff]

[quote name='House Wythers' post='1314912' date='Apr 15 2008, 16.05']I dísagree. Fell made some symp clues to Plumm in the beginning. Since he pushed for Plumm's lynch later in the day, he obviously wasn't Plumm's symp. So why should a symp Fell signal to an innocent player, but go unnoticed for his master?[/quote]

Yeah, I sort of agree that Fell is all but CI. I just mean there's a minute chance of Fell Symp.

About as likely as a sudden surge leading me as the next President of the United States of America though.

[House Upcliff]

[quote name='House Thorne' post='1314971' date='Apr 15 2008, 16.45']The "slip" is one point, but what do you think of the "contradiction"?[/quote]

Which contradiction. I've already asked for a quote of it, as I can't work out what you mean

[House Wythers]

[quote name='House Stokeworth' post='1315016' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.09']Responding to Corbray's post from earlier.

First off, I'll say that I don't find the vote hopping to be suspicious.[/quote]

I don't usually find it suspicious, especially on day 1 when people are throwing votes around with little substance. However, in re-reading Wythers, it occurred to me that FM want to stay below the radar, but can't really accomplish that by not voting at all. So, sometimes they join innocent lynchtrains in an inconspicuous manner, sometimes they divide between two lynchtrains, and sometimes they split with one being a throwaway vote on a player with some arguable contradiction.

Ignoring Wythers behavior in this game, for the moment, Do you think that vote hopping would be another reasonable way for an FM to seem like he is contributing, without making commitments that can be held against him the next day? If I hadn't suggested this theory, who would you have said were Wyther's suspects on Day 1? Not Florent, who he mildly defended, not Mallister who had a case based primarily on lack of participation, not Pommingham because he didn't like the case. Maybe Tollett, Smallwood, or Corbray? But those cases weren't based on much besides blending in or random selection.

Anyway, all I'm saying here is that vote hopping, especially when they seem to come at regular intervals, seems to be a way of keeping from being tied to any commitments. Could be a coincidence.

[quote name='House Stokeworth' post='1315016' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.09']Now, regarding the Mallister vote issue...
It's possible. Perhaps he even thought that Mallister was going to be modkilled, and figured the lynch would be wasted on him.
But I don't know that it's probable. Seems like an awfully low payoff for doing something so suspicious (i.e. directly contradicting his earlier posts by voting for Pomm).[/quote]

The above quote was your response to the innocent Mallister theory. I agree that it is a low payoff if Mallister is innocent. It makes more sense if Mallister was guilty, to me, but it would probably be foolish to proceed only on the assumption that a silent player was evil. Nevertheless, it is a suspicious move whether the Wythers is innocent or guilty, and the explanation doesn't ring true. If I was in FM Wythers position before switching away from Mallister, and I was motivated to switch for any reason, the switch to Pommingham is the best alternative becuase Pommingham was the neext most likely lynch candidate at the time, and Wythers can always fall back on the "we can't afford not to get a lynch" argument. He also opened the door to switch to Pommingham in post 399.

[quote name='House Stokeworth' post='1315016' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.09']This explanation doesn't make sense. There was a post where Wythers was encouraging people to vote for Mallister over Grandison, Plumm, and Erenford. It came relatively late in the day. Why would he do something so risky if Mallister was his partner?[/quote]

The above quote was based on the guilty Mallister theory.
Perhaps it is risky, but there were only 3 votes on Mallister at the time, and no one was really rallying to the cause. Everyone was still holding out for better lynch candidates. His "encouragement" to vote Mallister was really quite mild. I think it was a low enough risk at the time, and still very unlikely to foment the lynch when he said it.


[quote name='House Stokeworth' post='1315016' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.09']This is the point that really strikes true with me. You're right, he was very careful to watch the votes throughout day 1. It doesn't make sense for him to suggest that he would pay less attention at the [i]end[/i] of the day, when the votes matter the most.

Here is Wythers' explanation -

So he relied on a post that came [b][u]2 hours and 34 minutes[/u][/b] prior to his vote? He treated that vote count as gospel, assuming that nobody had changed their votes during that time period? In spite of the fact that it was the end of the day....one of the times when the vote count is most important and most likely to change?
Wythers' explanation makes no sense. He wants us to believe that he completely missed the votes cast by Plumm and Fell against Mallister. I personally have trouble buying it.
[u]The problem is...I still can't figure out [i]why[/i] he would change his vote like that.[/u] What made him decide to all of a sudden vote for Pomm. Corbray's theory that he perhaps wanted to save a quiet player is possible, I guess. Like I said before, maybe he was banking on a modkill to cut out another player. But it just seems like a stupid move on his part, if that was his motivation.
So....I don't really believe Wythers. But at the same time, I can't figure out his motive for the vote change if he is evil.[/quote]

The stronger explanation, in my mind (to explain the vote switch), is that we got lucky with the Mallister lynch. If Wythers was guilty and Mallister was innocent, he would have been much better off leaving it alone rather than moving to Pomm. Considering this, I think it would be okay to leave Wythers for observation. If we did get lucky with the first lynch (statistically unlikely) we are doing quite well. If Mallister was innocent, then we might be wasting time on yet another irritating counting/re-read error by an innocent.

[House Wythers]

[quote name='House Pommingham' post='1315039' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.34']So wishy-washy, Corbray?[/quote]

It's early yet. Why don't you contribute something useful yourself instead of criticizing players who are trying?

I don't have a strong read on Grandison or Erenford yet. Is that wishywashy? We are talking about two players that have made minimal contributions. If you have some solid reads on these players, lay them out there.

[Lady Gaga]

[quote name='House Florent' post='1315043' date='Apr 15 2008, 18.37']Which contradiction. I've already asked for a quote of it, as I can't work out what you mean[/quote]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who has no clue about that 'contradiction'. :cheers:


Seriously, if someone wants me to answer to somehting, he best tells me what exactly he is speaking about. :tantrum:


Stokeworth, what about your contradiction?

[quote name='Stokeworth']This explanation doesn't make sense. There was a post where Wythers was encouraging people to vote for Mallister over Grandison, Plumm, and Erenford. It came relatively late in the day. Why would he do something so risky if Mallister was his partner?[/quote]

Yes, why should I do that?
[quote]So he relied on a post that came 2 hours and 34 minutes prior to his vote? He treated that vote count as gospel, assuming that nobody had changed their votes during that time period? In spite of the fact that it was the end of the day....one of the times when the vote count is most important and most likely to change?[/quote]

You know that our mods missed at least three or four votes. Fell forgot about his own vote on Florent. Merryweather didn't know that Fell voted for him on day 1. SO WHAT? :mad:

[House Payne]

[quote name='House Wythers' post='1315060' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.58']Stokeworth, what about your contradiction?[/quote]

What contradiction? I don't see one.


[quote]You know that our mods missed at least three or four votes. Fell forgot about his own vote on Florent. Merryweather didn't know that Fell voted for him on day 1. SO WHAT? :mad:[/quote]

Are you kidding? Please tell me you are kidding.

You claim you relied on a vote count that came 2.5 hours prior to your change in votes. You did so at the end of the day, when people commonly switch votes. You want me to believe that you never considered the possibility that somebody had changed his vote during those 2.5 hours?

You seriously don't see how ridiculous that sounds?

[House Frey]

[quote name='House Wythers' post='1315060' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.58']You know that our mods missed at least three or four votes. Fell forgot about his own vote on Florent. Merryweather didn't know that Fell voted for him on day 1. SO WHAT? :mad:[/quote]

What does me not knowing, on day 2, that Fell voted me, on day 1 during the joke stage have to do with you not knowing the vote count before you voted when you knew it all day long?

[Magic Mirror]

[i]I apologize for not posting anything yet today. I have a test in 10 minutes and have decided that's more important at this exact moment. I should be posting in ~2 hours.[/i]

[House Frey]

[quote name='House Erenford' post='1315070' date='Apr 15 2008, 12.09'][i]I apologize for not posting anything yet today. I have a test in 10 minutes and have decided that's more important at this exact moment. I should be posting in ~2 hours.[/i][/quote]

I can't wait.

Good luck on your test.

[House Payne]

[quote name='House Corbray' post='1315049' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.47']Ignoring Wythers behavior in this game, for the moment, Do you think that vote hopping would be another reasonable way for an FM to seem like he is contributing, without making commitments that can be held against him the next day?[/quote]

I suppose. But I also think there's a perfectly legitimate explanation for vote hopping. Which is that the player wants to create pressure on a variety of players. Especially on day 1.

[House Tully]

Here is what I was able to get out of my reread of Fell.

His primary targets early in the day (once the RP wore off) were

Florent (posts #175 - #192)
Grandison (post #212)
Pommingham (post #250 - 281)

To me, it seems the most important post he made was [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=27658&st=290"]#291[/url]
Time is getting short. He agrees with Stokeworth and backs off his case on Pommingham. He then issues his list of suspects which pretty much reads as the list of low posters at that point. Connington and Plumm become his two primary targets. Secondary targets are Erenford, Mallister and Tollett. Grandison is back on the list as well.

[quote name='House Fell' post='1313386' date='Apr 14 2008, 08.26']<trimmed>

Pommingham- I'd still like them to respond to some of my questions and flesh out their thinking, but in rereading I am really not all that suspicious of them. I don't read any ulterior motives or anything in their posts, seems genuine which kind of surprised me. Connington and Plumm are the two that have been sticking out in my mind for that, and they haven't really done much else. Erenford, Mallister, and Tollett as well, and probably in that order of suspiciousness (most to least). Actually, throw Grandison in there too...I noticed their disappearing act with the Florent situation earlier and didn't like it much at all.

More and more I'm thinking the situation that makes the most sense is that the FM, but maybe not symps, would have just stayed out of the Florent debacle. I'm not NaKing anyone, but for purposing of limiting the lynch at this point that is what I am thinking.
<trimmed>[/quote]

I want to draw extra attention to the following, so I've partitioned it off. It is from the same post
[quote]<trimmed>

I think [b]Plumm[/b] is a good direction for my vote and perhaps the lynch, although not quite yet. Their post to Pommingham leaves a lot to be desired. Plumm also has an interesting post [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=27658&view=findpost&p=1312723"]here[/url] defending Grandison, put pushing Thorne for pretty much the same thing.[/quote]

The tide changes and changes dramatically. Now Plumm is full in his sights.
The argument against Plumm continues in post #322.

The second most telling post Fell made was #359. In that one, he backs off Pommingham, to some extent because 'bandwagon jumpers' Connington and Plumm are on the lynch.

He then goes away for awhile, but comes back for a discussion with Merryweather and then in post #439 hits Grandison hard, lamenting the lateness of the day and wishing there were time to build a train on Grandison.

He then pretty much takes charge at the end and runs the final votes through on Mallister in short order.

It seems more likely to me that if he was killed for his suspect list that it is the late list and not the early one. He also shows the ability to completely shift directions very quickly. Based on all of this, I would elevate the following suspects in my mind

Grandison
Plumm
Connington

I'd also slightly downgrade Pommingham and Florent, two players who had little to fear from Fell and more from others. I'd not PI them though - to many chances for WIFOM with a night one kill.

[House Wythers]

[quote name='House Stokeworth' post='1315075' date='Apr 15 2008, 12.14']I suppose. But I also think there's a perfectly legitimate explanation for vote hopping. Which is that the player wants to create pressure on a variety of players. Especially on day 1.[/quote]


Perhaps so. I am not much of a vote-hopper myself, so it always looks a little odd to me when the vote hopping continues past the RP stage. When I put a pressure vote on, I try to build the case a little better, and leave the vote in place for a longer period. Maybe it's just different playing styles in that regard.

[House Wythers]

To Wythers and Florent:

Check out posts 507-509 for the Florent contradiction.

Next time I have to do your thread research for you, I am charging.

[House Thorne]

[quote name='House Wythers' post='1314950' date='Apr 15 2008, 11.25']I know this must puzzle you, since you apparently have no suspects at all in the beinning of day 2 - or is there another reason why you still have a 'no vote'? :rolleyes:[/quote]


Can you give us a straight answer on why your vote is currently on Florent. I read your post where you placed the vote, "On principle" based on Florent's argument about what the FM may or may bot be thinking about their choice of Fell for the NK. But it's still not clear to me. Why are you voting for him? I haven't seen you make a case against him. All I've seen is you repeatedly defending him.

[House Clegane]

[quote name='House Tollett' post='1315087' date='Apr 15 2008, 12.25']Here is what I was able to get out of my reread of Fell.

His primary targets early in the day (once the RP wore off) were

Florent (posts #175 - #192)
Grandison (post #212)
Pommingham (post #250 - 281)

To me, it seems the most important post he made was [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=27658&st=290"]#291[/url]
Time is getting short. He agrees with Stokeworth and backs off his case on Pommingham. He then issues his list of suspects which pretty much reads as the list of low posters at that point. Connington and Plumm become his two primary targets. Secondary targets are Erenford, Mallister and Tollett. Grandison is back on the list as well.



I want to draw extra attention to the following, so I've partitioned it off. It is from the same post


The tide changes and changes dramatically. Now Plumm is full in his sights.
The argument against Plumm continues in post #322.

The second most telling post Fell made was #359. In that one, he backs off Pommingham, to some extent because 'bandwagon jumpers' Connington and Plumm are on the lynch.

He then goes away for awhile, but comes back for a discussion with Merryweather and then in post #439 hits Grandison hard, lamenting the lateness of the day and wishing there were time to build a train on Grandison.

He then pretty much takes charge at the end and runs the final votes through on Mallister in short order.

It seems more likely to me that if he was killed for his suspect list that it is the late list and not the early one. He also shows the ability to completely shift directions very quickly. Based on all of this, I would elevate the following suspects in my mind

Grandison
Plumm
Connington

I'd also slightly downgrade Pommingham and Florent, two players who had little to fear from Fell and more from others. I'd not PI them though - to many chances for WIFOM with a night one kill.[/quote]

Very nicely done, and while I may not be the best of players and have a bit too much work this week, I am certainly not dumb enough to target a person who voiced a suspicion against me.

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

Right now I am leaning towards Wythers. I like the cases on him that I have read, but I want to read the source quotes in context tonight before I vote.

I'll still be popping in and out, so I can respond, but don't have time until later for the research needed to put together a case.

[Lady Gaga]

[quote name='House Stokeworth' post='1315065' date='Apr 15 2008, 19.03']What contradiction? I don't see one.




Are you kidding? Please tell me you are kidding.

You claim you relied on a vote count that came 2.5 hours prior to your change in votes. You did so at the end of the day, when people commonly switch votes. You want me to believe that you never considered the possibility that somebody had changed his vote during those 2.5 hours?

You seriously don't see how ridiculous that sounds?[/quote]

The only vote I missed was Plumm's vote on Mallister.

But Jesus, yes, you got me: I pushed for Mallister so that I would look clean if a finder would investigate him. Yes, some might say that nearly no one had an interaction with Mallister, and that there was absolutely no need to riskto draw attention to my non-posting partner, but I say BS, you have to be prepared for every coming twist of the game. Then I realized that my case against Mallister got some steam, yeah, shouldn't have asked everyone to join the mob on him and I shouldn't have kept my vote on him that long. No, I decided not to wait for my symp to get things right, and I saw no need for a clever argument to vote for someone else, since I thought that the lot of you had acted that stupid before, that no one would notice my little vote switch.
:bang:




Oh, and here is your contradiction:

By your own standards I cannot be a FM, because I led a crusade against 5 players early on day 1. You CIed Merryweather, Smallwood, Tollett, Fell and yourself because no FM would have joined the front against Florent. Either you're not the best at logic, or you try to fool us. :P

[House Thorne]

[quote name='House Florent' post='1315036' date='Apr 15 2008, 12.32']Fell is VPI. I forgot there's a chance fell could be symp totally. I really can't see fell as symp. If i turn out wrong, I'll kick myself.

[b]To me, Fell is as close to CI as one can be without being in the spoilers thread.[/b] :P[/quote]

Yes or No. Pretty simple. And your analogy makes no sense. Fell is in the spoilers. The DEAD are in the spoilers, not just the innocent.

[quote name='House Florent' post='1315040' date='Apr 15 2008, 12.35']Yeah, I sort of agree that Fell is all but CI. I just mean there's a minute chance of Fell Symp.

About as likely as a sudden surge leading me as the next President of the United States of America though.[/quote]

Again with the oddly coy answers. I can't take anything you say to worth anything because every response is qualified.