Mafia 57.5

[House Stokeworth]

Definitely keep him. The FM won't know who to target (if he's not one of them)

I am off to bed. Be back in the morning. Hopefully everyone will have checked in and declared their (lack of)finderness.

[House Frey]

I'm going to start my rereads in about an hour...hopefully someone will be around to talk with then..

Alright, I guess a bit later....fuck, where is everyone?

[House Mooton]

I'm here and not the finder. I actually believe Wynch...well, I forgot he was even playing, but I also think...was there even enough pressure on him at the moment at which he claimed for it to even be considered pressure? Orkwood voted for him, basically for making one-liners and not being around a lot. (That seems to be a common pattern in this game, that and being called aggressive. :P) But does a lone vote from Orkwood, who isn't Well Liked by the more aggressive players (Saltcliffe anyway), even count as a real motivation to fake claim?

I'm going to hazard a guess of no.

[House Frey]

Probably true.

[House Frey]

I have a few questions for some people...
[quote name='House Sunderly' post='1535506' date='Sep 29 2008, 12.51']My impressions of Saltcliffe are of an agressive player not afraid to call anyone out. He's questioned a lot of statements and not let them slie without answering. IMHO, not likely Fm.

I have 9 more minutes, so I guess orkwood is next.[/quote]
[quote name='House Sunderly' post='1535527' date='Sep 29 2008, 13.02']Greyjoy starts off with a RP vote, engages in some RP, removes vote and leaves for 12+ hours. No read at all on him.
ok, time is up.
would vote for: Stonetree or Orkwood
no read on: Greyjoy
wouldn't be too happy to vote for: [u]Merlyn [/u]or Saltcliffe
be back as soon as I can to do the last 3[/quote]
You mention a few times that you wouldn't want to vote for Merlyn, Farwynd or myself. What specifically do you like (or did you like) about Merlyn and why didn't you post it like all of the other player rereads?

[quote name='House Orkwood' post='1536048' date='Sep 29 2008, 17.14']You re-read some members, you build a case against Botley, [u]I like your case against him to some extent, but what gives me a bad feeling[/u] about you is that you redeem 2 other players without even rereading them or giving any specific reasons
while you are ready to vote for Stonetree and me again without giving any good reasons, maybe you are trying to make some trust you then build cases out of nothing against other innocents get them lynched with the help of the ones you trying to get on your side? Sound too FMish if you ask me.[/quote]
This is a strange sentence here. Orkwood says he likes the case, then goes on to question Sunderly. Subtle defense of Botley, and also of Stonetree and himself.


[quote name='House Orkwood' post='1536433' date='Sep 29 2008, 20.33']Re-read on Stonetree:
Well I cant be against his late appearance as he explains it, but voting for someone who is posting and actually contributing is not wise in my book.
Well he never mentions what logic makes him go against Sunderly and Merlyn.
final thoughts: He hasnt posted much, maybe he is busy, but still [u]it makes me feel bad about him, I wouldnt still vote him [/u]I need stronger reasons for it.[/quote]
You feel bad about Stonetree, but you wouldn't vote him? Why?
[quote name='House Orkwood' post='1536433' date='Sep 29 2008, 20.33']Re-reading others.[/quote]
You only posted a reread of Wynch which lead you immediately to vote for him. Where are the rest of the rereads?

I'll have more to post sometime soon, I'd like to have some discussion before I lay it all out.

[House Clegane]

Morning folks! :cheers:


aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand


:cheers: :cheers: :cheers:


Beer - the breakfast of champions!!!!!!!!!!



I'm glad that the beer is still fresh and that I am alive. I'm also glad that Wynch revealed (I am not the finder) and that he investigated someone who wasn't NKed. Although investigating Saltcliffe was a mistake, since he was a likely target and also likely innocent.

Now we have two VPIs. I very much doubt that an FM would reveal that early on day 2, when there's a big chance that the real finder is still alive. Greyjoy has been killed, which is good since he was in my suspect pool as was Wynch. Leaves [s]Botley[/s]Stonetree , Orkwood, Farwynd and Sunderly.


Now it's time for breakfast.



Edit: Botley is apparently dead :blush:

[House Clegane]

[quote name='House Stonetree' post='1536703' date='Sep 30 2008, 01.57']I'm here and not the finder. I actually believe Wynch...well, I forgot he was even playing, but I also think...was there even enough pressure on him at the moment at which he claimed for it to even be considered pressure? Orkwood voted for him, basically for making one-liners and not being around a lot. (That seems to be a common pattern in this game, that and being called aggressive. :P) But does a lone vote from Orkwood, who isn't Well Liked by the more aggressive players (Saltcliffe anyway), even count as a real motivation to fake claim?

I'm going to hazard a guess of no.[/quote]

There was a decent chance that he was lynched today.

[House Wythers]

Good morning

[quote name='House Orkwood' post='1536482' date='Sep 29 2008, 21.30']Farwynd doesnt give anything to grasp in his posts, makes him somehow very armored against suspicions, he could be a PI
or a FM at the same time considering his posts, if he is a FM he is doing a good job I say.
But this post of him gives me a bad idea of him, why he asked us if we wanted a vote for Botley? trying to fake innocence?
Im not sure but this gave me a pause, I hope he explains it.[/quote]

This merits some explaining, I was thinking big game (I rarely play in games with so little people) and thought my vote might be needed to get a lynch. I wasn't even aware I had put the killing vote on Botley until I re-read the thread this morning. Anyway, I don't think he was a bad day one lynch so I don't feel bad for pulling the trigger.

And I'm not a finder either.

I'm going to do some re-reads and will try to make a long post now, because I'll likely be busy later on.

[House Dondarrion]

[quote name='House Saltcliffe' post='1536709' date='Sep 30 2008, 00.28']I have a few questions for some people...


This is a strange sentence here. Orkwood says he likes the case, then goes on to question Sunderly. Subtle defense of Botley, and also of Stonetree and himself.



You feel bad about Stonetree, but you wouldn't vote him? Why?

You only posted a reread of Wynch which lead you immediately to vote for him. Where are the rest of the rereads?

I'll have more to post sometime soon, I'd like to have some discussion before I lay it all out.[/quote]
1- I said I liked it to some extent it means some parts of it are true and other parts lingering, about the defense I should say
well, he really wasnt giving any convincing reasons to suspect me or others, as much as I dont like to be trusted for nothing I dont want to be on others list without any reasons.
If you carefully read my posts you can see I re-read Stonetree, Wynch, Farwynd, and was rereading others when Wynch
revealed and after that I had to go so its not like what you say.

[House Frey]

[quote name='House Orkwood' post='1536727' date='Sep 30 2008, 03.18']1- I said I liked it to some extent it means some parts of it are true and other parts lingering, about the defense I should say
well, he really wasnt giving any convincing reasons to suspect me or others, as much as I dont like to be trusted for nothing I dont want to be on others list without any reasons.[/quote]
[quote name='House Sunderly' post='1535516' date='Sep 29 2008, 12.55']Orkwood does not give me that warm fuzzy feeling. not sure, but he seems a little defensive when not really needed. I'd be willing to vote him.[/quote]
There's the reason he gave right there. Merlyn, of course, had his reasons as well which likely played a part as Sunderly seems to trust him.

[House Wythers]

Okay, if we decide to relieve Wynch (which I guess we’re all likely to do without a counterclaim) then our situation isn’t at all bad. I have two CIs and the knowledge that I’m innocent. If Botley was guilty then yay, but even if he wasn’t I have only 4 players to choose from of which 50% are guilty (on a normal nine player game balance). That’s good odds of making a right choice today if we didn’t do so yesterday.

These 4 players are Merlyn, Orkwood, Stonetree and Sunderly. Of these four the one I trust most is Sunderly. I agreed with his stance on Botley and when he was attacked yesterday by Orkwood and Stonetree I also found myself agreeing with his answers.

So lets turn our attention to the other three players, as I’m sure FM can be found there.

Orkwood:

Tends to use WIFOM arguments, which is something I don’t like:
[quote]That would be stupid of the FM team to kill someone who stated points against them, I mean I wouldnt just kill the guy who was suspicious of me right away[/quote]

[quote]If I was a FM I would try to actually impact others and tempt them to join me in a crusade against an innocent[/quote]

And displays rather outlandish logic:
[quote]As I mentioned in my other post I like player who are contributing even if they maybe evil, I like a contributing evil more than an inactive innocent, you can disagree but thats my opinion.[/quote]

The idea of not voting for active players appears a great deal in his posts, making me wonder if he’s trying to be active himself and post lots as a way to appear innocent (or defend a partner who happens to be an active player). He also made the case against Wynch that “forced” him to reveal. Again, Wynch was probably the least active player of the initial nine.
Merlyn:

My main suspect yesterday. I think he has far too many posts that say little of use. He also tends to suspect people that end up dead the next morning or revealing as finders.

Stonetree:

Hasn’t really posted much at all as Orkwood points out:
[quote]final thoughts: He hasnt posted much, maybe he is busy, but still it makes me feel bad about him, I wouldnt still vote him I need stronger reasons for it.[/quote]

I liked his post with the questions, but the rest I don’t feel so good about. I didn’t like his reaction to the reveal, as it seems like a rather blurry stance. I could also see an Orkwood-Stonetree connection, maybe slightly obvious on Stonetree’s side but distancing would probably be a low priority for an FM on a CFless game.

I want to look for possible links to and from Botley, but that will have to wait until this afternoon.

[House Dondarrion]

[quote name='House Farwynd' post='1536745' date='Sep 30 2008, 02.08']These 4 players are Merlyn, Orkwood, Stonetree and Sunderly. Of these four the one I trust most is Sunderly. I agreed with his stance on Botley and when he was attacked yesterday by Orkwood and Stonetree I also found myself agreeing with his answers.

So lets turn our attention to the other three players, as I’m sure FM can be found there.

Orkwood:

Tends to use WIFOM arguments, which is something I don’t like:[/quote]
Well, sorry you dont like my style of posting and reasoning, that I cant help.
[quote name='House Farwynd' post='1536745' date='Sep 30 2008, 02.08']And displays rather outlandish logic:


The idea of not voting for active players appears a great deal in his posts, making me wonder if he’s trying to be active himself and post lots as a way to appear innocent (or defend a partner who happens to be an active player). He also made the case against Wynch that “forced” him to reveal. Again, Wynch was probably the least active player of the initial nine.[/quote]
I dont want to appear active, because Im active, anyone who skims the thread can see it, I usually try to post with logic
and not some speculations or copy pasting others thoughts.
I defended my partner which is very active in my rereads and he is Saltcliffe which was founded Innocent, so you dont have a case here.
Now you blame me for building cases against others? Well excuse me but this is Mafia you should do rereads and buld cases on players who are most suspecting, and he was suspicious to a great sum before revealing.

[House Clegane]

Orkwood is right that we have to build cases. It is true however that he tried to blend in the crowd in the beginning, and got a bit more involved later on day 1.

Unfortunatly I have a super busy Tuesday and will probably back in around 8 hours. I'm going to have a look at Sunderly when I am back, since he's still a blank spot to me.

[House Stokeworth]

[quote name='House Saltcliffe' post='1536709' date='Sep 30 2008, 02.28']I have a few questions for some people...

You mention a few times that you wouldn't want to vote for Merlyn, Farwynd or myself. What specifically do you like (or did you like) about Merlyn and why didn't you post it like all of the other player rereads?[/quote]

I did. He was first.

[quote name='House Sunderly' post='1535488' date='Sep 29 2008, 12.39']I've looked at Merlyn since that post bothered me so much. I don't think he is quilty. (after initial one liners, I do agree with his later reasoning)

Want to look at Saltcliffe now before lunch is over.[/quote]


Right now, I would say the person bothering me the most Orkwood. It will be lunch before I can reread him. busy day at work today.

[Shadowbaby]

It is day 2.

7 players remain: Farwynd, Merlyn, Orkwood, Saltcliffe, Stonetree, Sunderly, Wynch.

4 votes are needed for a conviction or to go to night.

1 vote for Wynch (Orkwood)

6 players have not voted: Farwynd, Merlyn, Saltcliffe, Stonetree, Sunderly, Wynch.

[House Stokeworth]

Today it looks like I have Orkwood and Stonetree and the primary suspects.

The problem with Stonetree is his 6 post only (5 are substantial). He started with a vote on Saltcliffe for being too aggressive, his second post ask a lot of questions, but he starts with a little over defensiveness about my not liking his first post.

[quote]Did you even read my post? I explained why I would only have one post until then. As far as I'm concerned, starting a game starting well before one of the players has told the mods they would be available is a reasonable excuse for not posting. And Saltcliffe...I don't know, I just had a bad feeling about him, like his many day 1 posts seemed a little forced. There wasn't much else to go on at the time, although I'll be the first one to admit that first impressions can be wrong.[/quote]

When asked why he wasn’t suspicious of Merlyn (by Saltcliffe) he replied:
[quote]QUOTE (House Saltcliffe @ Sep 29 2008, 11.09)
Why aren't you suspicious of Merlyn for his suspicion of Orkwood? How is Orkwood's post about Greyjoy/Farwynd relevant to suspecting Merlyn or me?

I actually am suspicious of Merlyn for that reason too...I just forgot he had said that in addition to some of his other suspicious things, and that it wasn't just Sunderly who thought like that.

I dunno, a small part of me is wondering about the possibility of Sunderly/Merlyn. I have some convoluted logic that supports that idea, in addition to the main reason of 'I don't like either of these people much, so they must be partners.'[/quote]

Just going back to what he said about Orkwood:

[quote]3) Sunderly- Why are you going after Orkwood, but not Merlyn or Saltcliffe, when Orkwood was the first to bring the Greyjoy/Farwynd theory to everyone's attention? The only difference I can see between Orkwood and the other two is style; Orkwood does everything less aggressively than the other two. Aside from that, I'm suspicious that you're so suspicious of him.[/quote]


[quote]Bah. I was hoping to get to post before the end of the day (stupid work requiring....working ) but I see you've lynched Botley already.

Answer to Saltcliffe: No, I don't think Orkwood can do no wrong, I just didn't understand why his great offense seemed to be...ah...laid-back-ness.[/quote]

Laid backness was never the issue with Orkwood.

Nice final post, but he does accept Wynch’s claim rather easily. This always worries me. We should never blind accept what people say at face value.

All in all, I would say quiet, overly defensive and a somewhat subtle defense of Orkwood. Not the best of combinations for an innocent person.

[House Stokeworth]

BTW, this is how I arrived at my current top 2 suspects:

I went on the assumption that Wynch was telling the truth (I do reserve the right to change my mind about this), sothat made him, Saltcliffe and myself as Innocent, leaving me with Farwynd, Orkwood, Merlyn and Stonetree to pick from. Since not a lot has changed since yesterday, I narrowed it down to two (Farwynd and merlyn not being suspected by me yet)

[House Frey]

[quote name='House Orkwood' post='1536783' date='Sep 30 2008, 06.33']I dont want to appear active, because Im active, anyone who skims the thread can see it, I usually try to post with logic
and not some speculations or copy pasting others thoughts.
[u]I defended my partner which is very active in my rereads and he is Saltcliffe which was founded Innocent[/u], so you dont have a case here.
Now you blame me for building cases against others? Well excuse me but this is Mafia you should do rereads and buld cases on players who are most suspecting, and he was suspicious to a great sum before revealing.[/quote]
What the hell are you talking about Orkwood?

[House Mooton]

[quote name='House Sunderly' post='1537156' date='Sep 30 2008, 09.19']When asked why he wasn’t suspicious of Merlyn (by Saltcliffe) he replied:[/quote]

Is this supposed to have a comment attached to it, or did you just quote me for no reason?

[quote]Nice final post, but he does accept Wynch’s claim rather easily. This always worries me. We should never blind accept what people say at face value.[/quote]

I calls 'em as I sees 'em, Sunderly. If others are allowed to make sweeping generalizations about the guilt or innocence of players based on their activity level, I reserve the right to make judgement calls on claims based on actual [i]logic[/i]--especially right before I'm going to bed, when I won't be able to comment for a while.

There's a bunch of people you've said you have good feelings about--Farwynd and Merlyn being two of them, since you want to vote me or Orkwood today. You also said earlier that most of your statements have been backed up by actual evidence from the thread, but when I go back and look, I still can't find any good explanations from you about why you don't suspect Farwynd or Merlyn.

[quote name='Sunderly']I've looked at Merlyn since that post bothered me so much. I don't think he is quilty. (after initial one liners, I do agree with his later reasoning)

Want to look at Saltcliffe now before lunch is over.[/quote]

That's not reasoning.

[quote name='Sunderly']Farwynd: While I didn’t care overly much for his RP vote (the explaining that it was elaborate joke) I am satisfied with his responses and don’t think I’d vote him today.[/quote]

Neither is this.

So I do think it's dangerous that people seem to think you're innocent (and possibly respect your opinion?) when you haven't actually provided any reasoning on thread that isn't gut feeling. Maybe you have some, but haven't had time to post it...so...can you?

Edit: I will be back in ~2 hours.

[House Stokeworth]

[quote name='House Stonetree' post='1537289' date='Sep 30 2008, 13.32']Is this supposed to have a comment attached to it, or did you just quote me for no reason?



I calls 'em as I sees 'em, Sunderly. If others are allowed to make sweeping generalizations about the guilt or innocence of players based on their activity level, I reserve the right to make judgement calls on claims based on actual [i]logic[/i]--especially right before I'm going to bed, when I won't be able to comment for a while.

There's a bunch of people you've said you have good feelings about--Farwynd and Merlyn being two of them, since you want to vote me or Orkwood today. You also said earlier that most of your statements have been backed up by actual evidence from the thread, but when I go back and look, I still can't find any good explanations from you about why you don't suspect Farwynd or Merlyn.



That's not reasoning.



Neither is this.

So I do think it's dangerous that people seem to think you're innocent (and possibly respect your opinion?) when you haven't actually provided any reasoning on thread that isn't gut feeling. Maybe you have some, but haven't had time to post it...so...can you?

Edit: I will be back in ~2 hours.[/quote]

What is your criteria for thinking someone innocent other than a finder saying so?

I have a couple of things: Knowing that I am innocent, finding someone who's thoughts match mine is one of them. Accepting that someone has explained his actions to my satisfaction is anothere reason.

Please explain how those are not valid and are not based on the information on the thread?