Mafia 72.5 - Down In The Projects

[House Stokeworth]

Funny that my H1N1 infected computer saved your life last night, and today your list of suspects matches mine. (Avon was my other choice) Guess it was an ok thing not to kill you. :P

:cheers: to the computer that saved my arse!!!

[House Clegane]

Anyway, the most suspicious thing I've seen so far is McNulty

Is' most typical OMGUS I've seen in ages. :)

Why, good officer, did you think we should have ignored this rather vital piece of information, unless you had something to hide?

Ok; you wanted so badly to know which kill is which. You've got this knowledge, due to SK's confession (I see no reason to distrust D'Angelo on this point). Now, show me please how to use this rather vital piece of information?

[House Corbray]

:cheers: to the computer that saved my arse!!!

:lol: but seriously, no self respecting man should be named "Bubbles"; your name makes me think of Pebbles, but your av is very much at odds with this and it confuses me (ok, maybe not really confuse, but it is bothersome); and my 3rd reason: killing you would not lead back to me. I NEVER kill those who are hot on my tail, unless truly necessary.

[House Redfort]

Anyway, the most suspicious thing I've seen so far is McNulty and his bizarre insistence that we could learn nothing from the night kills, to the point where he voted for the people who were discussing them. Why, good officer, did you think we should have ignored this rather vital piece of information, unless you had something to hide?

A Day 1 NK is vital information on Day 2? Are you familliar with the term WIFOM?

And, again, I hate that last line. It is like the "git r done" as in "insert relavent point/analysis here because I can't think of one" (instead of punchline :) ).

Bubbles, your case reads like someone that did a read through with a conclusion before you started. You may have decent points in there but it is hidden largely by bias.

[House Clegane]

Bubbles, your case on Moreland contains both rather good and rather bad points.

I'll comment on one bad point, leaving another to Moreland himself to answer.

Being too sure of Greeves' innocence could be a sigh of guilt in two-sided game, but in three-sided such argument looks very forced and artificial. Even if Moreland was FM, he couldn't be sure Greewes wasn't SK before Angelo's confession, could he?

[House Corbray]

Bubbles, your case reads like someone that did a read through with a conclusion before you started. You may have decent points in there but it is hidden largely by bias.

Aren't most of the cases done this way? You find that you are suspicious of X, so you read through and find out WHY you were thinking X was suspicious?

It is how I do it. Sometimes it pans out, other times I change my mind.

I find your rejection of the case strange.

[House Corbray]

Bubbles, your case on Moreland contains both rather good and rather bad points.

I'll comment on one bad point, leaving another to Moreland himself to answer.

Being too sure of Greeves' innocence could be a sigh of guilt in two-sided game, but in three-sided such argument looks very forced and artificial. Even if Moreland was FM, he couldn't be sure Greewes wasn't SK before Angelo's confession, could he?

I am not familar with the show: who is Greeves?

[House Clegane]

I am not familar with the show: who is Greeves?

I am not familiar with it also, so keep confusing names. I meant Greggs.

[House Stokeworth]

And here's Avon a whole lot of not a lot:

:leer:

But anyway. Greggs, because keeping the SK alive early on sounds like a terrible idea. There's probably a place for it near the end of the game should we decide on who the SK is, but right now that strategy makes no sense, and for lack of anything better to base a vote on, voting for someone whose ideas suck isn't any worse than a random vote.

I have no idea what early game serial killer behavior is like, and I'm not even very good at playing this game (as opposed to The Game, in which I am quite clearly a kingpin :P) but what I meant was, I could theoretically envision a scenario in which the innocents and SK (presumably one who was about to be lynched, and revealed) colluded at the end in order to kill off the mafia, or something, but I don't think it is in the interests of the innocents to try to deliberately avoid killing the SK hoping that this situation will come up.

And hey, a man must vote for someone, re-reading the thread right now to see if anything else sticks out to me now that that nasty-ass Red Bull I just drank is overcoming my drowsiness.

To be perfectly clear? I don't actually suspect Greggs any more than I suspect anyone else, and her 'lynch someone random and see what happens' strategy seems fair enough to me. The only reason I'm voting for her right now is that I wanted to start some shit with her about strategy and voting for someone is a good way to call someone out. It's a "random" vote, meaning I don't actually care who dies today yet. (ETA: I reserve the right to start caring later on. ;))

<wishy-washy statement that can be taken as a defense of another player>

And while I'm adding in random thoughts, I might as well note that I currently don't find D'Angelo any more suspicious than others, because his thought process as describe in his posts so far is very similar to mine. :dunno:

</wishy-washy>

Technically someone called me suspicious earlier (AND NOBODY FUCKS WITH AVON BARKSDALE). And told me my reasoning was crappy. I'm not "backing down" because my argument is pretty much the same as it was an hour ago, or whenever I voted. :dunno:

WELL NOW YOU'RE JUST SHEEPING ME.

Seriously. I already said that. :rolleyes:

All of the above quotes show Avon talking a lot but saying little. He's voted for Gregg because her logic is poor and there's little else to go on. Then he's just voting her because... I don't know if this is an attempt to look like he's doing something, but if it is he hasn't put alot of effort into it. His lack of suspicion of D matches his lack of suspicion of Gregg, who he's voting for anyway...confusing

Me too. I've got shit to do. Like ask my #2 man who needs to die.

ETA: Rawls, you can read my posts all you want. Just don't call Avon Barksdale anything but a self-analytical man.

He perks up here with a few jokes, there's more enthusiasm for playing around then for forming some concrete suspicion.

Gah. Completely missed the end of the day for a terribly stupid reason--I have been working like crazy this week and missed Lost last night and forgot when the end of day was. Let it be known, however, that I probably wouldn't have voted for D anyway, and my vote wouldn't have been enough, so maybe I don't feel so bad now after all. :devil:

I actually would have voted him to get the lynch, but I don't suspect him. :worried:

ETA: This timeline really has me fucked up, I apologize. The game started much sooner than I expected it to and apparently I didn't actually note when the day started/ended.

Poor confused Av. he's not too sure what he's doing again and contradicts himself. I don't really think this looks particularly bad, unless its more fluff to look like he's participating.

Not that I have a leg to stand on here....but is this rash decision you refer to something about trying a last-minute swing of the vote?

Well, I suppose, since I need some sleep anyway. I was just gonna say that if any game potentially needed some random swings of the vote on day 1, this game would probably be it. Until I, you know, disappeared for 12 hours and missed the end, I was hoping to stir some shit up a little. Best laid plans and all that.

Finally some interest in following a direction, but it's not the time and his plans have gone awry.

The most suspicious thing about Av is the fact that he's managed to say a lot of nothing. Hopefully when he gets back he starts stirring that shit, because what's here is not really enough to get a good handle on him either way.

[House Stokeworth]

A Day 1 NK is vital information on Day 2? Are you familliar with the term WIFOM?

And, again, I hate that last line. It is like the "git r done" as in "insert relavent point/analysis here because I can't think of one" (instead of punchline :) ).

Bubbles, your case reads like someone that did a read through with a conclusion before you started. You may have decent points in there but it is hidden largely by bias.

I was suspicious of Morewell. The more I read of him the more suspicious I became. I think the points I've made are fairly good ones.

I just did a reread of Avon and there wasn't much there, but the feel of that read was very different from Morewell because there wasn't much to go on. The case on Morewell may sound biased to you, but it's strong because there was so much material there to fuel my suspicions. You are free to make your own judgement. If you don't like my case I think you should have a look at him for yourself with your fresh and unbiased eye and maybe you will reach the same conclusion I did.

[House Redfort]

Aren't most of the cases done this way? You find that you are suspicious of X, so you read through and find out WHY you were thinking X was suspicious?

It is how I do it. Sometimes it pans out, other times I change my mind.

I find your rejection of the case strange.

It simply read different to me. Perhaps it was some of the snarkiness that weakens the case for me. The following I found to be less than impressive, which ultimately ends up being much of the case.

"Aww, he's so nice, but is this a recruitment drive?", "A reread of Freamon is something an FM would have to do anyway, to make sure they're not implicated. A convenient choice for an investigation if you're FM, killing two birds with one stone as they say.", "Is he feeling paranoid? Is that why he feels the need to go on with this line of thought. "This post creeps me out, it's him I tell you, him ", "Cocky bad guy?"

[House Stokeworth]

Bubbles, your case on Moreland contains both rather good and rather bad points.

I'll comment on one bad point, leaving another to Moreland himself to answer.

Being too sure of Greeves' innocence could be a sigh of guilt in two-sided game, but in three-sided such argument looks very forced and artificial. Even if Moreland was FM, he couldn't be sure Greewes wasn't SK before Angelo's confession, could he?

Hmmm, I agree that he couldn't know this but I don't think it changes the fact that he was overly sure she wasn't FM. He places a cheeky little wager on her being a careless innocent which doesn't rule her out as a potential SK, but shows he thinks her an unlikely candidate. This fits in with the possibility of him being an overconfident FM who is voicing his thoughts aloud.

[House Velaryon]

Whoa - freaky shit happening. I just have time to catch up right now, not to go back and really digest it or throw out opinions. A couple of thoughts -

Holy crap, a vig too? SK confession confirms it - nice.

Leaving the SK alive goes against better judgment, but am willing to let slide today. I promised Omar I wouldn't let a SK live, but ... tempting. However, I haven't forgotten the debacle that is Cerwyn from last game. He was let to live as a 'lesser evil' until too late. Personally, I don't see why D'Angelo has any incentive to work with us. If he lets the FM live (instead of tamely killing them for us) then there are more kills and he gets to end game faster. The FM can't kill him so he has no fear there - he just has to look like he's helping while possibly steering us in the wrong direction. Not that he knows any better than any of us, but it's in his best interest if we DON'T hit the FM at first.

Suspects right now before I have the chance to really re-read are retreads from yesterday - Avon and Greggs. Avon for the same reasons D'Angelo looked bad and Greggs for lack of substance and bad reactions. I'll have to look around and see what else shakes out.

[House Stokeworth]

It simply read different to me. Perhaps it was some of the snarkiness that weakens the case for me. The following I found to be less than impressive, which ultimately ends up being much of the case.

So you don't like the way I've phrased my concerns. I like Mooreland, I just think he's evil. Again, maybe you should have a look at him with your pure and untarnished eye and see what you think. If you read the quotes and disregard my remarks you can decide for yourself without being put off by my opinions, it's all there and I think it speaks for itself.

[House Connington]

Just checking in to remove vote. I fully support us using the SK to take out a suspected killer before killing him ourselves.

I also really didn't like Moreland's fishing for a healer reveal. It stunk of FM. I liked Bubbles case, but would like to properly re-read him myself before I go so far as to add another vote to him.

I'll be busy for an hour or two, but once that's over I'm anticipating an active evening.

[House Redfort]

Hmmm, I agree that he couldn't know this but I don't think it changes the fact that he was overly sure she wasn't FM. He places a cheeky little wager on her being a careless innocent which doesn't rule her out as a potential SK, but shows he thinks her an unlikely candidate. This fits in with the possibility of him being an overconfident FM who is voicing his thoughts aloud.

This is a pretty common occurence towards the beginning of games. Really not out of the ordinary unless you are looking at every post from the perspective of an FM making it instead of looking at it from all sides.

[House Clegane]

Suspects right now before I have the chance to really re-read are retreads from yesterday - Avon and Greggs.

Rawls, what do you think about Bubbles and his case on Moreland?

[House Stokeworth]

This is a pretty common occurence towards the beginning of games. Really not out of the ordinary unless you are looking at every post from the perspective of an FM making it instead of looking at it from all sides.

That's fair enough and I see your point. I discussed it from the perspective of an FM making it to show that it can still make sense from that angle and because Morewell is my top suspect. Even if you take this for a null tell there plenty of other causes for concern reqarding Morewell.

[House Stokeworth]

I have to go. I'll try and stick my head in but I won't have much time until about four hours away from days end. I'll have a look at Gregg and some others then or earlier if I can find some time.

[House Dondarrion]

Anyone who thinks that we should trust an evil player should be transferred to Baywatch. :rolleyes:

D'Angelo is toast. He knows that. He is free to do whatever he wants to. He can help the innocent faction, he can help the FM. It's his choice not ours. I don't want to rely on the choice of someone who has good reasons to hurt the innocents. Especially when his only chance to win this game is not to kill an FM.

If you're still not convinced I say two words:

Eddard Stark