Mafia Game 65.5: Twonnocent

[Magic Mirror]

Doggett, your 3/3/4 set-up terrifies me.

Me too...but the mod said it a couple of times...teams may be uneven, look at the numbers. But he could just be messing with our heads...and in that case, it worked.

[House Mooton]

Okay.

I've just realized some very messed up meta information. I won't post it on the thread, but I'll PM the mods about it.

Still going to make my Melcolm case when I have a chance.

[Magic Mirror]

Okay.

I've just realized some very messed up meta information. I won't post it on the thread, but I'll PM the mods about it.

Still going to make my Melcolm case when I have a chance.

Tease. :P

[House Ashford]

I've been pondering why no one has claimed my name, and I think I have a theory.

Acording to Dalt and Thorne my team setup was: Waterman==> Thorne==>Dalt==> Wagstaff

Acording to Wagstaff though he had Dalt's name. Now that disrupts the nice symetry that we had going on. Why would two people have Dalt's name? It doesn't make any sense. Now consider this: Wagstaff and Dalt both had each other's names. Wagstaff==><==Dalt. I'm pretty sure both are telling the truth,(Dalt was willing to lynch because of it, and Wagstaff could have easilly claimed me to avoid suspicion.) So what if Piper was lying afterall? What if he didn't have Dalt's name he had mine? He only claimed he was Dalt's because he was about to be lynched. Then the team setup would look like this: Waterman==><==Thorne Wagstaff==><==Dalt, which makes a lot more sense then two people having Dalt's name and no one having mine. I have to go now, I'll be back in an hour or two though.

[House Mooton]

Waterman, that actually makes a lot of sense. I'd need to reread Thorne to see if he acted like your symp, though. And I still don't know why he didn't list you in his group of three potential partners. He said his friend relationship was "definitely not reciprocal," after all, and you never really attacked him.

Tease. :P

Hey, I'd rather keep you all hanging than get modkilled :P.

[House Upcliff]

I've been pondering why no one has claimed my name, and I think I have a theory.

Acording to Dalt and Thorne my team setup was: Waterman==> Thorne==>Dalt==> Wagstaff

Acording to Wagstaff though he had Dalt's name. Now that disrupts the nice symetry that we had going on. Why would two people have Dalt's name? It doesn't make any sense. Now consider this: Wagstaff and Dalt both had each other's names. Wagstaff==><==Dalt. I'm pretty sure both are telling the truth,(Dalt was willing to lynch because of it, and Wagstaff could have easilly claimed me to avoid suspicion.) So what if Piper was lying afterall? What if he didn't have Dalt's name he had mine? He only claimed he was Dalt's because he was about to be lynched. Then the team setup would look like this: Waterman==><==Thorne Wagstaff==><==Dalt, which makes a lot more sense then two people having Dalt's name and no one having mine. I have to go now, I'll be back in an hour or two though.

Heck yeah it makes sense. Unfortunately it's unprovable. It's all supposition on your part. You can't make up stuff out of thin air to prove your case. Sorry, it doesn't fly with me.

[House Ashford]

Heck yeah it makes sense. Unfortunately it's unprovable. It's all supposition on your part. You can't make up stuff out of thin air to prove your case. Sorry, it doesn't fly with me.

It's not a case it's a theory; I'm not relying on this to prove my innocence. I'm just trying to help figure out the team composition.

[Magic Mirror]

I'll be back long before the day ends. :sleep:

[House Upcliff]

Waterman, if I count correctly, you have a total of 9 posts.

The first two, where you symp Wagstaff

:wideeyed: :drool: :bow: :smileysex:

Oh, and I claim finder :thumbsup:

Hearts are pretty <3

Here's the next one

:o I know you have to stretch for a day one case but, really? Your convinced I'm a FM because of two stupid role play posts I made? And what kind of moron symp signals his master so conspicuosly anyway? Do I really have to defend myself from this?

*checks vote count*

-_-

Apperently I do.

Where you claim not to be a FM.

Next where you "reveal" Thorne as innocent

Ah, screw it. Let’s see if the game really is broken or not.

Thorne is innocent, he’s on my team.

So you first symped Wagstaff then changed to Thorne with the reveal.

Here you explain your "reveal"

Sorry! I wasn't around for most of the day, and when I finaly caught back up I thought for sure you were going to be lynched so I dropped the bomb. I didn't notice the time or your post :dunce:

Then after Thorne is night killed, you give us this:

Frack.

I suck :(

That seems a little convenient. You reveal his innosence and he dies?

Throw away post

It's two A.M. and I need to go to sleep? :sleep:

Next you vote for your partner after he basically quits

This game is wonky.

Spicer

And finally the post up above where you make up theory where Piper convienently had your name, but told us Dalt instead.

None of this adds up to an innocent player. You have done nothing in the game. You are playing the under the radar baddie.

[House Ashford]

Waterman, if I count correctly, you have a total of 9 posts.

The first two, where you symp Wagstaff

Here's the next one

Where you claim not to be a FM.

Next where you "reveal" Thorne as innocent

So you first symped Wagstaff then changed to Thorne with the reveal.

Here you explain your "reveal"

Then after Thorne is night killed, you give us this:

That seems a little convenient. You reveal his innosence and he dies?

Throw away post

Next you vote for your partner after he basically quits

And finally the post up above where you make up theory where Piper convienently had your name, but told us Dalt instead.

None of this adds up to an innocent player. You have done nothing in the game. You are playing the under the radar baddie.

My first two posts were stupid role play posts, hardly proof that I was symping Wagstaff.(WTF what does saying hearts are pretty have anythhing to do with Wagstaff)

What do I possibly gain from claiming to be Thorne's symp and then killing him? That questions not rhetorical, I really want to know. It would only cause unwanted attention to be dumped on me. And have you seen anyone else claim Thorne? Surely if I was evil someone else would have claimed him. Are you saying that I just happened to pick the one person who had no symp?

[House Upcliff]

I can't speak to your motivations for killing someone, or what you thought you might gian from it. I would venture a guess that you didn't think about it at all. You simply got rid of an astute player.

All that aside, you certainly didn't have any attention dumped upon you for it. The attention came to you becuase no one has your name.

[House Mooton]

I can't speak to your motivations for killing someone, or what you thought you might gian from it. I would venture a guess that you didn't think about it at all. You simply got rid of an astute player.

...an astute player who was a huge suspect at the time.

I just can't wrap my head around that NK. It's so obviously tied to you that it's hard for me to believe you and Mexal would be that stupid. But you are really not helping your case right now.

[House Clegane]

Targ - the countdown timer is messed up.

[House Upcliff]

So if I was Mexal's partner, we'd kill Thorne when he had been attacking me? I wouldn't be that stupid and Mexal... never.

[House Mooton]

All right. It looks like House Targaryen isn't online, and probably won't be back until Euro morning. So I'll ignore the meta for now and post a case for a Melcolm-Spicer partnership. (Yes. It really did take me this long to write. And you wonder why I'm always two pages late?) I'm breaking it into three parts, because this is ginormous. I'll look at Waterman afterward.

(I will be honest. I almost feel reluctant to push a case, because there's so much conflicting information that I'm terrified of getting things wrong.)

1-The Reveal

I think Thorne's Day One case on Melcolm was dead-on. I'll admit that at the time, I sort of twiddled my thumbs, looked the other way, and made excuses for Melcolm. He was young! He was inexperienced! He didn't know any better! After all, there was a 75% chance that he was a teammate. I won't repeat the case, but here's a link.

Now, not every innocent player reacted the same way to the reveal. (Thorne looked pretty suspicious at the time, but we now know he was innocent.) We have only one confirmed example of an evil player's reaction to the reveal. Spicer never came forward and hinted at having a partner, although he claimed this was because he was busy. Furthermore, Mexal claimed to have been screwed by the set-up. It could have been an act. It also seems like a risky gambit for him to claim a random name, so I wonder if he was really given the name Wagstaff. But the most logical assumption is that the FM really do have less information than everyone else.

Finally, Melcolm was the very last person to claim a partner. He could have been waiting to slip his name into the chain and choose a convenient player to claim.

Still, none of this is conclusive. We don't know who knows what in this game.

2-The Melcolm-Spicer Interaction

Melcolm was conspicuously absent during Spicer's confession. Today, he made a cute point about distancing:

I honestly do not know what he was doing. It could be distancing -- dangerous distancing yes, since a third vote got put on and he didn't pull his vote off. Perhaps he was being risky because in other games we've had lately obvious distancing has gotten FM caught. He pulled out the same case on day 2. That was kind of pointless really, in my opinon, as in the end it didn't garner enough support lynch Waterman the first day. That really looks like distancing.

I will agree that Spicer didn't push his Day One Waterman case very hard. But what do you think of this post by Spicer when he sees Wagstaff has made a case on you?

I go out to get some food and I come back to you beating me to the punch. Melcolm was who I wanted to do my reread on, mainly because the Thorne kill doesn't make logical sense unless he was on to something.

My biggest problem with Melcolm is what Thorne pointed out...that all of the people he was willing to vote were people who had connections to each other. I think that seems a bit daft in a game where he knows another person from his own team.

At the same time, I had absolutely no desire to symp the person I know. If I was the only person with the information I had, I had no desire to draw attention to it. I want my team to win. Obviously that point is moot now that we know that FM are a part of the two teams, but at that time, it didn't make any sense. However, Melcolm's answer interests me as you pointed out. He said it didn't occur to him instead of saying he didn't want to do it because it might out himself, jeopordize his team, ect. It just doesn't seem like the most fitting answer for the question.

Anyway, both my case on Waterman and your case on Melcolm are still pretty weak. I feel like they're day 1 cases yet worse. I'd still vote for both though.

This is textbook distancing. Shawney mentioned it before: an FM likes the case on his partner, but votes for someone else. Spicer slightly defends Melcolm in this post when his partner was in serious danger. In fact, it's so obvious that I'm actually wondering now if this is some convoluted attempt at fake distancing. But Melcolm obviously is on the look-out for distancing. I think there's a very good chance that Melcolm's assertion that any distancing we do see would be emphatic is very self-serving.

Also, not to appeal to authority or anything, but I'll quote the late Whiskeyjack on this one:

]You start off by making a few points against Melcolm. 1) He had a reason to kill Thorne, and 2) he was saying that connections between people are suspicious, which makes no sense for an innocent in this game.

But then you make a point in his favor - though to be honest, I'm not exactly sure what you're saying there. I'm just judging from the tone and the words 'at the same time' that you think its something in his favor.

And then you conclude that the case on Melcolm is weak. But you'd still vote for him. As far as I can tell, you keep going back and forth during your post. Which is wishy washy.

Also, you admit that your own case on Waterman is weak, backtracking on that a bit.

3-Melcolm Himself

Okay, I know that conclusions based on players' behaviour are always subjective. (Just look at my track record with Wagstaff, Doggett, and Shawney--assuming they're innocent, that is.) But it's like...come on, just read his posts! I almost feel silly going back and finding hard evidence that he's guilty. He's practically dancing around the thread with a sign that says "I'm evil" around his neck! If he's not evil, then he is a very inexperienced player. And he's made hints to the effect that he's been around a while. Between his tunnel vision on Waterman, his inability to understand why someone would protect their teammate, and his lack of connection to what is going on, something is off about him.

[House Mooton]

I just want to add that many of my points on Melcolm could be applied to Waterman. Spicer is also a bit wishy-washy on Waterman, although not to the same extent as Melcolm. I'm too tired to reread now, though.

There is one explanation for a Waterman-Spicer partnership Waterman has been a low poster. I suppose Mexal could have decided to cut his partner loose early on, thinking his odds were better alone. Still, Spicer placed the first vote on Waterman, and didn't make an effort to divert the mob elsewhere when votes began piling up on his "partner." At the very least, Spicer could have changed his vote for Thorne afterward. I'm going to reread the end of Day One tomorrow.

And I will admit that Melcolm being an FM means the logic puzzle doesn't work. But if we don't have all the information we need, it's safest to go for someone who looks guilty rather than lynch based on false assumptions.

I can definitely rule out Vikary and myself as Spicer partners. So I'll look at Doggett, Wagstaff, and Shawney tomorrow morning.

In the meantime...Wagstaff. Melcolm. Waterman. I don't suppose you'd be willing to encrypt the name of your factions into your posts, would you? Or if you aren't, would you just come out and say if you're on Team Aegon or Rhaenyra?

Also, to Melcolm: are you really symping Doggett?

I'm off to sleep now. I'll place my vote in the morning.

[House Ashford]

I can't speak to your motivations for killing someone, or what you thought you might gian from it. I would venture a guess that you didn't think about it at all. You simply got rid of an astute player.

All that aside, you certainly didn't have any attention dumped upon you for it. The attention came to you becuase no one has your name.

:lol: So, basicly you've got nothing?

I don't know why no one has my name, but do you realize how improbable it is that I am a FM? I'm guessing you do, seeing as how you completely ignored half my post. Ignoring the fact that Spicer tried hard to lynch me AND that my actions have no logical purpose if I'm a FM, I would still have needed to pick out the one guy who had no symp. :rolleyes:

[House Upcliff]

In the meantime...Wagstaff. Melcolm. Waterman. I don't suppose you'd be willing to encrypt the name of your factions into your posts, would you? Or if you aren't, would you just come out and say if you're on Team Aegon or Rhaenyra?

Also, to Melcolm: are you really symping Doggett?

I'm off to sleep now. I'll place my vote in the morning.

Team Rhaenyra. Yes, Doggett is really the name in my PM.

[House Ashford]

In the meantime...Wagstaff. Melcolm. Waterman. I don't suppose you'd be willing to encrypt the name of your factions into your posts, would you? Or if you aren't, would you just come out and say if you're on Team Aegon or Rhaenyra?

I'm off to sleep now. I'll place my vote in the morning.

Oh what the hell, I'm on team Aegon.

[House Wythers]

Earlier I had doubts about our healers, but now I think I trust them. Which means we don't really need to work hard to win this game. We have three suspects only and enough time to lynch all three, in any order.

My own preference is Dogget, for gut reasons, but I'll be content with Melcolm.

How much time left?