Jump to content

Mafia's Diamond Jubilee - Game 60


HT Reddy

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Wolfson College' post='1625968' date='Dec 19 2008, 22.04']She is innocent, then? Are you at least 90% certain?[/quote]

Yes.

She claimed a role that King's claimed. She did it after when she really had no desire to do it. King's then went and killed herself and took a VPI with her. That makes King's likely to be the symp. If there was 3 FM and 2 symps, we'd have already won. We haven't, therefore there isn't. Claire is probably our innocent version and if she has another role that she loses when the vig is activated, then it's even more likely she's innocent. If Claire was a FM, she wouldn't have claimed the same role as King's. On top of that, Pembroke saw what the other role is and doesn't think it should be announced right now. He's innocent therefore we should trust his intiution on this one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sidney Sussex College loves to argue. I'm not going to quote all of the little disputes he gets into, because they aren't relevant. And really, thats the point, more than the exact content of the arguments - [i]they aren't relevant[/i]. He has spent much of the game fighting over stuff that is almost completely unrelated to how to catch the FM. Things like whether or not high posters are just as suspicious as low posters, or why he doesn't appreciate people telling him how to approach the game, or how he thinks Wolfson has a grudge against him.

He's either an innocent wasting his time, or an FM faking contribution. Thats point 1 against him.

Anyway, moving on....his first real case is against Wolfson and Girton. It was fine for day 1 speculation. Since neither is a main suspect or known FM, I won't bother quoting it either. The issue here is, he is almost completely consumed by his tunnel vision on Wolfson on day 1. He ignores the Selwyn case, along with a few other cases, for much of the day. Could be a convenient approach for a FM.

When pressed, he mentions Clare as another suspect.

When pushed even further, he admits that he does have tunnel vision and he knows its a flaw. He then proceeds to list pretty much every player in the game as a suspect. I remember taking note of the post at the time, and thinking it was strange. I'll quote it now -
[quote name='Sidney']It's still far too early for me to have a definitive suspect list, but right now I'm not liking those actions from people who seem to be following the route of acting so outlandish in their own way that they can later say, if accused, "why would I act like that if I were a killer?"

This list includes Emmanuel, Queen's, New Hall, and King's.

Then there are those who haven't really contributed at all, such as Clare, Cauis, Gonville and Robinson. Could be that they have RL things keeping them away, but the game has been on for a full 24 hours now, enough to merit more than 3-5 posts.

And, finally, those who have posted but I can't recall much about them. That's almost everyone else.

I don't like that Selwyn still hasn't shown up to defend himself, and if he has I don't recall it. Judging from the mob that is still on him, I'm not alone there.[/quote]
So he doesn't like Emm, Queens, New, and Kings. That seems to be his main suspect list, aside from Wolfson. But then he also lists people who haven't contributed enough to read - Clare, Gonville, and Robinson. And then on top of that, he lists everyone else. So everyone is a suspect? Seems like a relatively useless list. Also, he concludes with a throwaway shot at Selwyn - could be his first attempt at distance (along with listing Emm as a suspect).

When the vote count is 5 for Selwyn, 3 for Mags, 2 for Wolf/Clare/Sidney, he moves his vote to Selwyn.

[quote name='Sidney']That said, I will move my vote to [b]Selwyn[/b]. Wasn't he just here a little bit ago, anyways?[/quote]

When he's called out for voting with providing a reason, he posts this -
[quote name='Sidney']My reasons vary and have almost all been covered by other players, which I thought would be understood.

1) Iffy decision making, which has been covered plenty.

2) I'd prefer for the day to not last exactly to the deadline, so I'm going to hop on the bandwagon. I know there is still a lot of time left in the day so there is no rush now. I'm not advocating a bull rush to kill him. I would much prefer it happen sooner rather than later. This will sound horrible, and I've no doubt I'll have to defend it later, but a few deaths will give us something substantial to talk about. Right now we're mostly going around in circles. Sure, there's future evidence being laid out, but discussions don't have to end with the day. And really, is anyone looking forward to 20 more hours of "Oh yeah, well who are YOUR top suspects" and petty bickering?

3) Speaking of petty, I'm just really not looking forward to deciphering more of Selwyn's posts. Sorry Selwyn, no offense intended.[/quote]
Point 1 is the only one that has any merit at all. It pretty much encompasses the case against Selwyn. Whats strange is that Sidney has barely even mentioned the case prior to this post.

He then fights with Gonville about whether or not his vote was opportunistic. During the back and forth, he says -
[quote name='Sidney']Regardless, my vote will go onto any bandwagon that is most likely to succeed... as long as it's someone from the list I gave (Wolfson, Selwyn, Girton, New Hall, Clare).[/quote]
So basically, he leaves open the possibility of changing his vote. The fact that New Hall is on the list is especially interesting, since his bandwagon does surpass the Selwyn one at a later point.

Once the New Hall mob really gets going, Sidney says -
[quote name='Sidney']I'm still of the opinion that Selwyn is the best bet to lynch right now.

New Hall's answers and participation has done some to lessen my belief that he may be evil. But most important is that he has delivered answers and participation. Selwyn has done neither, which makes me believe he is either evil and hoping to lay low long enough for an opposing train to save him for the day, or he's innocent and swamped by the novels worth of reading that appears every time he turns around.

Either way, if he's not going to at least try to defend himself, then he's not just a possible lynch but also dead weight.[/quote]
He's pretty clearly stating that he wants to lynch Selwyn over New Hall. As I said in the Mags case, it can be difficult for a FM to leave the mob against his partner to vote for an innocent. Its very risky. That said, Sidney had set it up so he could make the switch. The fact that he shoots down the idea when presented with the opportunity may be a mark in the innocent column.

On day 2, he makes a relatively good case against Gonville. It gets pushed to the side by the Trinity and Emmanuel mobs, but its really not bad.

He leaves for a while, and when he gets back, Trinity is off the block, having revealed as a Friend. Sidney starts up a new case, leaving the Gonville one for a bit -
[quote name='Sidney']Of Corpus and Emmanuel, I'm more suspicious of Emm. The way he came out guns-a-blazin' on Day 1 didn't sit well with me at the time. He seemed like he was trying to provoke a lot of animosity which could later be used a reason to try and clear himself. I know this has been said of a few people and their actions, and apparently it's a ploy that's been used enough to have a name of its own, but I still didn't like it.

However, after thinking about New Hall's death, I see how it completely benefited one person. This person spent the latter part of yesterday being very vigilant in their opinion that in no way whatsoever would they vote New Hall because they believed New Hall was completely innocent. They repeated it several times, even when it seemed unnecessary. I'm speaking, of course, of [b]Lucy[/b].[/quote]
The parts on Emm are the most relevant for us now. He's basically saying that he suspects Emm more than Corpus. Good distancing. But then he shifts focus and tries to get us to look at Lucy. This is one of the first moves by Sidney that really screams suspicious to me. There are a few other things from earlier in the game, but this one is the worst so far, IMO.

And then Queens reveals, and we get yet another ridiculous time-wasting argument from Sidney, about how he doesn't want to say the sentence that has been requested by Wolfson. Going to skip over all of that.

On day 3, he makes a case against Corpus Christi and argues with Wolfson over whether or not he is holding a grudge. He also says he'd be willing to vote for Kings.

He suggests that quiet people are RI's who don't have much to lose or gain in the game, and that Queens should investigate more active players.

When Kings reveals as Vig, he suggests Clare, Robinson, and Mags as kill options. He doesn't mention Hughes.

Thats about it. I really don't feel like writing up a summary right now, but I will anyway.


[u]Summary[/u]

1) Possible fake contribution, with all of the meaningless arguments he starts.

2) Tunnel vision on Wolfson at the start of the game. FM often focus on just one suspect.

3) When pressed for more suspects, he basically lists everyone in the game (though admittedly, some were listed as bigger suspects than others).

4) Only votes for Selwyn once Selwyn looks like the most likely lynch, and doesn't provide much of a reason. Also, he barely mentioned the Selwyn case before that time.

5) Leaves his options open to vote for other people on his list. That said, it should be noted that he doesn't switch over to New Hall when given the opportunity. Instead, he says that New Hall looks more innocent than he had previously appeared.

6) On day 2, he says Emm is suspicious, but votes for Lucy instead. Could be an attempt at distancing.

7) When the Vig reveals, he suggests Clare, Robinson, or Mags as targets. He doesn't bring up Hughes.

So thats the case. There are points that go either way. He's a suspect, but personally, I have to say that I'm still more suspicious of Magdalene.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been faking contributions, I just love to argue. Well, I guess I don't love to argue as much as it's incredibly difficult for me to not reply in an antagonistic way when I feel I'm being antagonized. I'll definitely try to work on it if I decide to play any further games.

Plus I enjoy a good back-and-forth. If I thought your case against me had any weaknesses, you'd learn just how much :P But it's pretty spot on. I will try to clear up some things though.

I think we were incredibly lucky on Day 1 to get a killer. The end lynch seems to usually come from a careless or not-thought-through remark made because there's not much else to go on. In the end, this is what got Selwyn. He just happened to be a killer.

- I didn't really bother with Selwyn before I decided to join his bandwagon because the case came across as just that: a case against a careless and not thought all the way through remark. Also, at the point I placed my vote I was just fed up with how eternally long Day 1 seemed to be lasting. If I had been the one with the most votes I would have begged you guys to put me out of my misery. The last few days have been much more entertaining.

- I had put everyone as a suspect because at that early stage in the game, everyone was a suspect. I hadn't seen enough from anyone to determine anything yet.

- My original plan after my Gonville case, since no one payed much attention to it and the Emm and Trinity thing happened, was to vote Emmanuel. First I wanted to float my thoughts on Lucy because something about her had been tickling my senses. I hoped a vote against her would actually make people pay attention.

- As for why I didn't bring up Hughes to the vig... had anyone else really said anything about Hughes before Peterhouse caught him up? I think you have made a case against him Pembroke (or maybe it was Lucy) but he was being logical and helpful enough that he was able to mostly sit in the room and not be noticed.

Any further questions you or anyone else has please feel free to fire away.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Pembroke College' post='1626028' date='Dec 19 2008, 23.16']Is anybody writing a case on Gonville? I really don't want to have to do it.[/quote]

I never got the time. I figured Sidney or Mags would and it seems they didn't. I can do it in the morning. I will say that I wrote up something earlier in the game about Gonville based on his day 1 behavior and it didn't look good as it was only based on Selwyn. If I can find that, quote it and then take a quick glance at day 2/3, I can write something up quick.

As for your case on Sidney, I don't like him. The one thing that you said could have marked him as innocent feels guilty to me. You are right when you say it's hard to move your vote when you're on your partner. If Selwyn died, was investigated or the whole mob was looked at again if New Hall got lynched, he'd be the prime suspect as a partner since he'd be the one to swing the mob. On top of that, my refusal to vote New Hall then your post afterwards stalled the lynch. It wouldn't get any further. And finally, Hughes was pushing New Hall hard. Would Sidney, if partnered with New Hall, really jump on to that as well? I even think Emms was on it too though I could be mistaken.

Of the two cases you've written up so far, I'd be more inclined to think Sidney was guilty over Mags.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Pembroke College' post='1625959' date='Dec 19 2008, 12.54']Yes, I know the 2nd role he claimed to have.

I guess it might be worth revealing it, because there is some discussion we could have about it. Hmm. I'll have to think about it.[/quote]
I saw it too. I'd suggest we don't reveal it today, because it may still come in handy, personally.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lucy Cavendish College' post='1626038' date='Dec 20 2008, 00.39']I never got the time. I figured Sidney or Mags would and it seems they didn't. I can do it in the morning. I will say that I wrote up something earlier in the game about Gonville based on his day 1 behavior and it didn't look good as it was only based on Selwyn. If I can find that, quote it and then take a quick glance at day 2/3, I can write something up quick.

As for your case on Sidney, I don't like him. The one thing that you said could have marked him as innocent feels guilty to me. You are right when you say it's hard to move your vote when you're on your partner. If Selwyn died, was investigated or the whole mob was looked at again if New Hall got lynched, he'd be the prime suspect as a partner since he'd be the one to swing the mob. On top of that, my refusal to vote New Hall then your post afterwards stalled the lynch. It wouldn't get any further. And finally, Hughes was pushing New Hall hard. Would Sidney, if partnered with New Hall, really jump on to that as well? I even think Emms was on it too though I could be mistaken.

Of the two cases you've written up so far, I'd be more inclined to think Sidney was guilty over Mags.[/quote]

You guys are more than welcome to lynch me and find out, since it's the only definitive way to clear me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lucy Cavendish College' post='1623281' date='Dec 17 2008, 22.06']Ok, so I just read Gonville. I have no idea if this was already said or not by Cath cause to be honest, I kind of skimmed her stuff while I was at work. Please note that I only read up til the end of day 1.

There are a few things which I don't like at all.

So Selwyn has a few votes. He's the current leader. Gonville then makes a case on Magdalena. Ok.

Sidney then votes Selwyn and Gonville's reaction is:



Fair enough. No real big deal at first. But then he spends the next several posts attacking Sidney, a voter of Selwyn.

After that, King posts a case on New Hall and he says he's quite happy to vote New Hall. New and Sidney are his favorites at this point, now Selwyn (main suspect).

He then goes on to explain why he thinks New Hall is suspicious but still has a vote on Magda. Then Magda comes back and votes Selwyn and Gonville prompts her about King's case on New Hall. Then he renews his case on Magda with yet another big post.

When I said that I highly doubt New Hall is a FM, he somewhat agrees yet he still says there is reasoning he disagrees with, leaving the door open to jump on.

He was willing to lynch St. Johns yet we still have no real mention of Selwyn, the main suspect. He then votes St. Johns.

So yea, he could easily be Selwyn's partner. He attacked people who voted Selwyn. He was fans of both Selwyn's alternative lynch partners in New Hall and St. Johns. He kept his options open with New Hall but turned to St. Johns well after we killed the New Hall lynch though he kept his options open with New Hall.

I could easily see him as evil. Easily. He's #2 on my list now.

Now I go eat before it gets cold.[/quote]

I'm lazy, tired and it's getting late so I won't be able to make a proper case with lots of pretty quotes and what not. I will, however, take a peak through his posts to see what connections he has to Hughes and Emms. But this is what we have from day 1 and his connections to Selwyn.

Give me a little bit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a search through Gonville's posts and his mention of Hughes is about as limited as you get. I think their interaction (at least from Gonville) consists of once or twice since the game started.

The other thing he did is say:

[quote name='Gonville']I think you guys will find profitable hunting on the Selwyn mob, as I've been saying for a while. Once my CF result comes back that will show all 4 of the St John's lynch mob to have been innocent. I'd say Magdalene in particular should look a fair bit worse because of that. Also, I really think someone should take a proper look at Peterhouse. I feel they've got something of a free pass just because they put Selwyn back over New Hall late day 1. I was planning on doing so earlier today but I went Christmas shopping instead.[/quote]

From a FM perspective, it's interesting to note that when this was said, both him and Hughes were off the mob. That leaves Sidney, Mags and Peterhouse as possible targets before himeslf.

I'll check for Emms next.

ETA: Sidney, feel free to write up a proper case. I'm just on limited time and too lazy right now to write it all out so I'm only looking for connections.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Gonville']Well, on reading the thread, (Yeah all of it!*) the thing that stands out most for me right now is Emmanuel's ridiculous tough guy act. Looks to me as an attempt to establish themselves as someone not to be messed with nice and early so as to discourage less assertive players from taking a look at them later. I should point out that I don't really consider rudeness bluntness to be a bad thing in mafia. I just feel Emmanuel's efforts so far come off as rather forced and not really warranted yet.

*Except pages 2-5. Laboured innuendo just isn't my thing.[/quote]

His first real post of the game. He goes after Emmanuel with the above post. He doesn't follow it up though. That was the last mention of Emmanuel until Queen's revealed.

So all in all, he has limited to no connections to the 3 confirmed FM.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll write up more of a case on Gonville, but I was hoping Pembroke would read my post about the day 1 vote analysis and respond to that, because that's what almost all my suspicion is based on. Even though Sydney was gunning for me yesterday as a vig target and that made me angry, I don't actually suspect him all that much, primarily because of his contribution toward the Selwyn lynch on day 1.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=360&p=1619603&#entry1619603"]Gonville's second post of the game[/url] - calls out old Emm for the tough guy act. This could be seen as a point in Gonville's favor as he mentions how the act could be used as a way to keep Emm clear later on.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=520&p=1620372&#entry1620372"]Fourth Post[/url] - the infamous defense of Selwyn. Better quoted than described:

[quote]As things currently stand of those four, I might be persuaded to vote for Selwyn because their bad spelling/grammar is annoying to read, but aside from that I remember thinking yesterday that most of their antics read like someone who hasn't really mastered the subtle art of not doing silly things on day one. I don't really think this is especially incriminating in a game with half again as many players as usual.[/quote]

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=560&p=1620387&#entry1620387"]Sixth Post[/url] - Calls out Wolfson for posting but saying nothing at all. A topic which has warmed my heart since Day 1.

Then comes a long bout of arguing with New Hall about New's analysis.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=560&p=1620476&#entry1620476"]Lost track of which number post this is[/url] - Votes Magdalene as his biggest suspect, mainly for tunnel-vision on Wolfson when Wolf was the biggest suspect. Here's an important quote on the matter:

[quote]Essentially, they used a weak connection with Selwyn (our current main suspect) to justify their vote on Wolfson and since then... they haven't really managed to do much of anything than defend their theory against Queen's. Note also that they eventually removed their vote here, in a very unobtrusive manner.

I guess I don't like the initial jump onto Wolfson with weak reasoning while they were a top suspect and then the ignoring of anything not Wolfson related, followed by dropping the vote without any real justification. Currently they have no vote at all, which makes the retraction a little odder for me.[/quote]

Important in that is Selwyn was the main suspect, but Gonville tried to push Magdalene as more important.

Then comes an argument with yours truly about my vote on Selwyn without reasoning. This is a bit of a strong defense of Selwyn without actually defending Selwyn. There's not really any important quotes in there.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=600&p=1620660&#entry1620660"]This, however, seems important[/url] - King's asks Gonville why he was voting Magdalene, and if he'd be willing to vote New Hall. Gonville says he'd gladly vote New because the case is better than the one against Selwyn. New and myself are his favorite choices.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=640&p=1620759&#entry1620759"]Responds to Magdalene's case on Selwyn[/url] - not to the actual case, just asks what Mags thinks about King's case on New. Being that it was King who brought up the case on New now that I recall, it makes King's being the symp even more likely. Could King's earlier post directed to Gonville have been the symp's way of steering his master in a direction? I don't recall King's asking anyone else directly what they thought of his case.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=720&p=1620979&#entry1620979"]Another vote for Magdalene [/url] for trying to tie Selwyn and Wolfson together, but also for voting for choosing Selwyn as the only vote-getter worth voting for.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=720&p=1621066&#entry1621066"]Backs away from the New Hall lynch[/url] - says New Hall's participation and answers have helped his case some, but still doesn't like the reasoning used.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=720&p=1621091&#entry1621091"]Myself and Magdalene still his top suspects[/url] - but he'd vote St. John's. He's not a fan of the Trinity-defending-Selwyn mob, because the case on Selwyn was "pretty weak" which, to his credit, it was.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=760&p=1621104&#entry1621104"]Votes St. John[/url] with the only reason being he's not enthused about the New Hall or Selwyn lynches. Voting someone without a valid reason? Why does that sound familiar :P

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=920&p=1622027&#entry1622027"]Defends his not voting for Selwyn[/url] after we discover Selwyn was guilty. Jokes that his defense/refusal to vote will be the end of him.

[url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=960&p=1622189&#entry1622189"]Responds to my new suspicions of him[/url] with good humor. Two important quotes here, one of which furthers the case against him:
[quote]It's a little harder to question your motives for that vote in light of the CF, but I still think you'd struggle to find a shiftier way of placing a vote if you tried. But I have a feeling we've been over that already.[/quote]
The other defends it:
[quote]On the other hand, the St John's vote doesn't seem all that bad to me. I mean, I could quite easily have pushed the New Hall lynch if my motivation was primarily to see Selwyn survive the day. That would have had much more chance of being successful than putting the second vote onto St John's.[/quote]

Part 2 to come soon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Magdalene College' post='1626059' date='Dec 19 2008, 15.00']I'll write up more of a case on Gonville, but I was hoping Pembroke would read my post about the day 1 vote analysis and respond to that, because that's what almost all my suspicion is based on. Even though Sydney was gunning for me yesterday as a vig target and that made me angry, I don't actually suspect him all that much, primarily because of his contribution toward the Selwyn lynch on day 1.[/quote]
So your case depends on not one FM in a team of 4 voting for their partner on day 1 [i]in a CF game?[/i]. :|

Anyway. I'm voting [b]Magdalene[/b] today. I think the assumption their case on me is built upon looks pretty weak, and I've been suspicious of them since day 1, really. I'm a little dissappointed Mags wasn't around before Peterhouse's reveal yesterday though. Would have been interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Sidney Sussex College' post='1626071' date='Dec 19 2008, 15.13'][url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=32757&st=760&p=1621104&#entry1621104"]Votes St. John[/url] with the only reason being he's not enthused about the New Hall or Selwyn lynches. Voting someone without a valid reason? Why does that sound familiar :P[/quote]:lol:

Well, voting for an option because I don't like the other two [i]is[/i] a reason. I can see why you'd find that particular post amusing though. :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, looking at Gonville on day one:

He doesn't like any of the main cases:
[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1620372' date='Dec 15 2008, 18.51']None of those really grabbed me, you know?

As things currently stand of those four, I might be persuaded to vote for Selwyn because their bad spelling/grammar is annoying to read, but aside from that I remember thinking yesterday that most of their antics read like someone who hasn't really mastered the subtle art of not doing silly things on day one. I don't really think this is especially incriminating in a game with half again as many players as usual.

And I'd have posted more if the thread didn't die pretty much straight after I showed up the first time and I didn't lose five hours of prime posting time last night with the board outage. Not much I could do about that. Still, I should be able to post rather more today, board willing.[/quote]
Says spelling/grammed is the only reason he can see to vote for Selwyn

[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1620420' date='Dec 15 2008, 19.26'][url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32757&view=findpost&p=1619226"]Here's[/url] where it seems to start with Pembroke and then St John [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32757&view=findpost&p=1619241"]chimes[/url] in later. I think that's pretty much it.[/quote]

again, he points out the case on Selwyn, but pretty much dismisses it.

Comes up with a case on Maggie:

[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1620476' date='Dec 15 2008, 20.28']Rereading [b]Magdalene[/b] makes me favour them for a lynch much more than our other suspects. Reading through them again throws up one major issue, namely how quickly they got tunnel visioned on Wolfson at a time where Wolfson was our main suspect. Essentially, they used a weak connection with Selwyn (our current main suspect) to justify their vote on Wolfson and since then... they haven't really managed to do much of anything than defend their theory against Queen's. Note also that they eventually removed their vote [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32757&view=findpost&p=1620326"]here[/url], in a very unobtrusive manner.

I guess I don't like the initial jump onto Wolfson with weak reasoning while they were a top suspect and then the ignoring of anything not Wolfson related, followed by dropping the vote without any real justification. Currently they have no vote at all, which makes the retraction a little odder for me.

Edited for: Inserted a 'not' in order to make sense.

Edit 2: Also, remember to log in anonymously. :)[/quote]


Has a pretty strong reaction to a vote on Selwyn that didn't give any reasons:

[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1620491' date='Dec 15 2008, 20.45']What are you [i]doing[/i]? Justify that shit, man.[/quote]


[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1620642' date='Dec 15 2008, 23.20']It was a completely unsupported vote on the current vote leader. If you don't see how that sort of play is bad, I don't know what to tell you. It provides nobody with any clues as to what you are thinking. I mean, you want a lynch. Great. So does everyone. You still kind of need to tell people what you are thinking beyond that obvious point.

Well, there's no time limits for the 24th-26th, but I don't know what the ruling on modkills is.

Again, an unsupported vote on the current vote leader. How is that not suspicious? You hadn't even mentioned the case on Selwyn before that beyond some nebulous wish that he post some more in light of the case on him. And yeah, I think it's worse to be jumping on a bandwagon for no real reason when there is 20 hours left than 20 minutes, simply because you still have time to explain why you are doing what you are doing with 20 hours left.

If you think about it, at least half the votes on the eventual lynch mob are made for honest reasons. And you're only telling us this honest reasoning after being called out for providing us with no reasoning at all which means I'm less impressed with the grabbing of the moral high ground than I could be.[/quote]

relinks his case on Maggie: might accept New or Sidney as an alternative.


[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1620660' date='Dec 15 2008, 23.44']Yeah, [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32757&view=findpost&p=1620476"]here.[/url] I don't like their actions so far.

Anyway, I'd be quite happy to get rid of New Hall if that's where things look like going since the case seems pretty solid. I particularly like the first half, although the dichotomy between the vote analysis and New's voting is interesting as well. Probably New and Sidney Sussex would be my favoured alternatives right now.[/quote]

Trys to push the New case:

[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1620759' date='Dec 16 2008, 03.26']What do you think about King's case on New Hall?[/quote]

And again Back to Maggie:

[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1620979' date='Dec 16 2008, 08.27']I thought I'd take this moment to get out my thoughts on Magdalene in a proper case.

Magdalene's first post is the 4th vote on Wolfson. It is placed there ostensibly because Selwyn indicated suspicion of Wolfson but didn't vote. Magdalene decides that this suggests symping and votes Wolfson.

Magdalene gets rather taken with this little connection and spends quite a bit of time investigating it almost to the exclusion of all else. Notable conclusions include Selwyn not being savvy enough to fake symp someone, suggesting true partnership or symping. Alas Magdalene runs into slight difficulty with their case here:I think it's fair to assume that if this wasn't the case, then Magdalene would have mentioned it at some point. Ultimately Magdalene then removes their vote from Wolfson (although doesn't say why) but doesn't put it down anywhere else. This generally indicates that the voter is no longer suspicious of the votee. Really, I never saw this case as especially convincing based as it is on a single wishy-washy vote by a probable newcomer to the game.

The only real diversion from the Selwyn/Wolfson connection is a brief highlighting of some burger king themed RP, which is incriminating for Kings College. This is treated with the respect it deserves by the playing group.

The last section of Magdalene posts involves explaining to New Hall why their analysis is crappy, a task taken up by a lot of people, myself amongst them. Really, the [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32757&view=findpost&p=1620315"]points[/url] [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32757&view=findpost&p=1620351"]they[/url] [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32757&view=findpost&p=1620382"]raise[/url] are quite valid as far as I can see. However, I don't really think that poking holes in New Hall's analytical method says much either way.

Finally this is from Magdalene's next (and last) post:Now this post really rubbed me the wrong way. We've seen that Magdalene's Selwyn/Wolfson connection has pretty much run out of steam by their own admission. And yet, apparently despite the earlier retraction of their vote, Selwyn is the [i]only[/i] player with votes that they suspect? I don't buy it. And then there's the second paragraph which looks like they are covering their ass for Selwyn coming up innocent.

I think Magdalene's behaviour so far has been pretty shifty. All the signs were that their suspicion of the Wolfson/Selwyn connection was waning to the point where Magdalene actually retracted their vote from Wolfson and yet then they come back and say that Selwyn is the only suspect they are willing to consider, ignoring a few other cases, the New Hall one in particular.

My vote's staying where it is for now.[/quote]

Still doesn't consider Selwyn a good lynch option


[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1621091' date='Dec 16 2008, 09.54']Well, I still don't think much of Sidney or Magdalene, but I appear to be more or less alone in those right now.

I could lynch St John's. Trinity I'm not sure about, personally. I guess I just don't think someone defending/not attacking Selwyn is that much cause for alarm. The case on Selwyn isn't all that well defined at all and what there is of it is pretty weak.[/quote]


[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1621104' date='Dec 16 2008, 10.03']Ok, given my lack of enthusiasm for the two main lynches right now, [b]St John's[/b]. I'll be back in a while.[/quote]


Ok, he tries to push every case except the Sewyn one and never joined the mob. If he was a partner to Selwyn, he worked pretty hard to save him, but it is also rather obvious.

In reference to Emm, he has this to sat at the beginning:
[quote name='Gonville and Caius College' post='1619603' date='Dec 14 2008, 21.12']Well, on reading the thread, (Yeah all of it!*) the thing that stands out most for me right now is Emmanuel's ridiculous tough guy act. Looks to me as an attempt to establish themselves as someone not to be messed with nice and early so as to discourage less assertive players from taking a look at them later. I should point out that I don't really consider [s]rudeness[/s] bluntness to be a bad thing in mafia. I just feel Emmanuel's efforts so far come off as rather forced and not really warranted yet.

*Except pages 2-5. Laboured innuendo just isn't my thing.[/quote]

I don't see him mentioning Hughes at all.

So he says one FM is trying to hard; trys to distract the lynch of a second one and fails to mention the third.

Could be a good way to seperate himself from his teammates.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...