Jump to content

Archived

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

House Targaryen

Mafia Game 73 (Mk. II)

Recommended Posts

Dayne still is my main suspect. I don't like looking for symp clues, I don't like his answer to my vote, I don't like his third vote on Inchfield.

Initially I disliked Inchfield also (because of him following Dayne), but his vote on Clegane made me feeling better about him, not worse.

I am also not suspicious of the fact that Vance easily stopped being rude. Thanks, Vance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, looks like Vance discovered an easy way to traumatize your team members when playing WoW. :P

I'm glad that Dayne was speaking about Vance being the symp. It didn't really make sense the other way around.

I don't like Vance's reaction, and not because of the Capitalized Letters Clusterfuck That Damaged My Brain Irremediably.

A bit to agressive this reaction, isn't it? I'd expect a more relaxed defense by an innocent (and Vance already showed that he is a carefree and funseeking person which also doesn't fit together with his reaction). When I read stuff like this I usually translate it as "Well, I am evil but you're still completely wrong with what you're saying, idiot! Get out of my way with that perverted little theory of yours!") It could have ben an overreaction by Vance or an attempt to settle the conflict before it becomes the "theme du jour".

Anyway, it's only a stretched theory but enough for me to vote Vance.

Bleh. Wouldn't this make more sense if it was me being attacked / voted for? Rather than just being put as a symp?

If I was evil, then;

1) If I was his symp, I would have been more careful than to actually make a symp clue, even inadvertently,

2) If I was his partner, I would have been more careful than to actually make a symp clue, even inadvertently,

3) If I was either a symp or FM and not teamed with him, then I'd be happy for him to swing today, thus painting me in a better light when he came up good.

Either way, going to try to catch up with the rest of the thread before popping out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the posting style, I didn't realise HOW irritating it was until everyone jumped on it. It was more to mask than anything else, so once I knew it was bugging people I cut it out.

I'm here to play Mafia, not to needlessly irritate people. :-p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is day 1.

12 players remain: Clegane, Connington, Dayne, Inchfield, Karstark, Kettleblack, Lannister, Mallister, Redfort, Royce, Tollett, Vance.

7 votes are needed for a conviction or 6 to go to night.

3 votes for Inchfield ( Lannister, Tollett, Dayne)

2 votes for Dayne ( Royce, Vance)

1 vote for Clegane ( Inchfield)

1 vote for Connington ( Clegane)

1 vote for Karstark ( Mallister)

1 vote for Redfort ( Karstark)

1 vote for Vance ( Redfort)

2 players have not voted: Connington, Kettleblack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bleh. Wouldn't this make more sense if it was me being attacked / voted for? Rather than just being put as a symp?

If I was evil, then;

1) If I was his symp, I would have been more careful than to actually make a symp clue, even inadvertently,

2) If I was his partner, I would have been more careful than to actually make a symp clue, even inadvertently,

3) If I was either a symp or FM and not teamed with him, then I'd be happy for him to swing today, thus painting me in a better light when he came up good.

Either way, going to try to catch up with the rest of the thread before popping out.

So you chose the "easy" defense. Of course you're right, my theory of you being an FM makes only sense if you're partnered with Lannister. Well,if you are an FM, then we're talking about a probability of a partnership with Lannister that is about 10 percent. That's enough that you can't just wave off my argument.

Your point 2) is an excellent example of adjusting one's arguments to reject an accusation. Remember your first defense? This here:

Wow, Seriously? o.O

Bleh. If You Really Think Symp Clues (And A Master Acknowledging The Clue With A Nod Back To Me No Less!) Is Something That Would Happen In A Modern Game, Well... It's Hard To Argue Against Idiocy.

Apparently you thought that no one (innocent) would look for symp clues. Given that you're innocent, that statement represents your true PoV on this issue. Now would that PoV change if you were evil? I doubt so. Eventually, Dayne's observation has been a very farfetched one, I doubt that anyone else would have interpreted your post as a possible symp clue. That's why I think it's likely that you never thought of your post as a possible symp clue.

Hmmh, so far you only explained why you wouldn't make a symp clue if you were evil. You failed to explain though why you (over-)reacted to Dayne's case and missed thus a major part of my argument.

ETA: Unless I missed something, Clegane is voting Vance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

A tiger is a large stripy cat. Africa is a continent.

Tigers are not indigenous to Africa.

Therefore you would not expect to see a tiger in Africa.

The sentence thus becomes an expression of disbelief.

Somebody already asked this but I'll repeat, what were you expressing disbelief about?

And why did you use that particular phrase? It's not as if it is very common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Dayne's theory. Lannister.

Nothing actually. I wanted a reason to vote.

Just so I'm clear, you didn't actually like Dayne's theory? You just wanted an excuse to throw down a vote? Was any vote for any reason equal in your eyes (meaning you just wanted a random vote), or was there extra reason to choose that particular vote against Lannister (reasons other than suspecting Lannister)?

Why was it weird? Why would you check to see if there was a House Swann? I understand the whole Swann thing but nothing Vance did, especially as a first post during RP, suggests that he's going for a Swann defense. Jumping the gun a little bit?

I really don't like that post.

Clegane. I would put money that by the end of this, when you are lynched, you will flip evil.

I think the people saying Inchfield tacked on his 'non-committal' accusation are wrong. I think his question of 'why was it weird' does head in that same direction.

Inchfield, are you really so confident that Clegane is evil? Based on what?

And if you aren't really so confident, then why did you say that you were?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody already asked this but I'll repeat, what were you expressing disbelief about?

And why did you use that particular phrase? It's not as if it is very common.

You see nothing more important to talk about, at this stage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You see nothing more important to talk about, at this stage?

So you just decided to ignore my next post? Why? You can't really say you cross-posted, since your one line post came 3 minutes after mine.

Anyway, yeah, I see plenty to talk about. I started discussing it with the post you ignored, and I'm going to continue to comment on it throughout the day (but it may not all be immediate, since I'm at work and pretty busy).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With a call and response like that they're either both guilty or neither is. I doubt either is framing the other.

I meant that based on the "clue" they're either both guilty or it isn't a clue and it makes neither look guilty. Obviously either could be independently guilty once you set the clue aside.

On reflection, and now that I believe I misunderstood what Dayne was saying, I'm thinking that if the clue really was a clue then it is possible that Vance is guilty and not Lannister (fake symping), but if Lannister is evil and it is a clue then Vance is definitely also evil.

Why did you initially dismiss the fake symping option? And what changed in between these two posts, that made you reconsider the fake symping possibility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good thing I managed to restrain myself from saying, "Hey guys, do you think there'd be a symp in a twelve player game?"

In any case, I didn't notice the no fear connection (and wouldn't have had I been FM). Vance rhymes with dance, and Lannister rhymes with canister...okay, it was funny in my head.

Right now, most people seem to be picking at random stuff to get things moving, so it's hard to sift the forced cases from the genuine. I'll reread before voting.

Unvote for now, because there's an actual wagon on Inchfield and I'm still on the fence about him. (I'll be very interested in hearing his responses to Kettleblack's questions, because I can see Inchfield's behaviour making sense for either a shit-stirring innocent or a lazy FM/symp.)

It was more to mask than anything else, so once I knew it was bugging people I cut it out.
Why exactly would you try to mask your identity in the first place? To make yourself harder to read?

Initially I disliked Inchfield also (because of him following Dayne), but his vote on Clegane made me feeling better about him, not worse.
What in particular do you like about his vote on Clegane? You haven't attacked Clegane once in your posts, but you still bring up Inchfield's vote on Clegane.

For the record, I'd also like to hear an answer from Connington on the Africa comment, because he's been less than helpful and his answer didn't explain anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so I'm clear, you didn't actually like Dayne's theory? You just wanted an excuse to throw down a vote? Was any vote for any reason equal in your eyes (meaning you just wanted a random vote), or was there extra reason to choose that particular vote against Lannister (reasons other than suspecting Lannister)?

I chose that vote because it was the first serious case of the day and I wanted to throw down a second vote. It didn't matter what the case was. I wanted to see reactions.

For the record, I think looking for symp clues is idiotic and counter-productive as you will never find them because symps do not leave clues, at least not as blatant as that. The only way to find a symp is to see who they're protecting.

Inchfield, are you really so confident that Clegane is evil? Based on what?

And if you aren't really so confident, then why did you say that you were?

What is the point of this question? To me, it feels like your gauging my reaction to see if I will continue to push against Clegane. It doesn't make any sense in determining my guilt, at least not that I can see.

But if it makes you feel better, I am as confident as I can be about anyone 24 hours into day 1. And you already know the reason as you just posted a statement about it.

Oh and one more thing. I do not like Tollett at all. He was quick to jump on me and he stretched his case against me based on fictional facts and theories. I would vote him too but alas I only have one vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you chose the "easy" defense. Of course you're right, my theory of you being an FM makes only sense if you're partnered with Lannister. Well,if you are an FM, then we're talking about a probability of a partnership with Lannister that is about 10 percent. That's enough that you can't just wave off my argument.

Your point 2) is an excellent example of adjusting one's arguments to reject an accusation. Remember your first defense? This here:

Apparently you thought that no one (innocent) would look for symp clues. Given that you're innocent, that statement represents your true PoV on this issue. Now would that PoV change if you were evil? I doubt so. Eventually, Dayne's observation has been a very farfetched one, I doubt that anyone else would have interpreted your post as a possible symp clue. That's why I think it's likely that you never thought of your post as a possible symp clue.

Hmmh, so far you only explained why you wouldn't make a symp clue if you were evil. You failed to explain though why you (over-)reacted to Dayne's case and missed thus a major part of my argument.

ETA: Unless I missed something, Clegane is voting Vance.

You are right, if I was evil I might not have expected an innocent to look for symp clues.

However, I like to think I would have been more careful in general to avoid any such links. Of course, you are right. I might have been so blind to the mere idea of symp clues that I did it anyway... Totally naturally not even realising that it could be seen as a symp clue. That allows for us being teamed I guess. Still, my other arguments on how in the majority of scenarios it makes no sense for a guilty me to over react stands.

And you say I over reacted. I don't really feel I did. Nothing I can really argue there I'm afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You see nothing more important to talk about, at this stage?

I don't like this deflection. If he feels it was important, and it may turn out to be so later, why should you, a third party, deflect the question?

Why exactly would you try to mask your identity in the first place? To make yourself harder to read?

That's not a question I'm comfortable answering, thanks. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is day 1.

12 players remain: Clegane, Connington, Dayne, Inchfield, Karstark, Kettleblack, Lannister, Mallister, Redfort, Royce, Tollett, Vance.

7 votes are needed for a conviction or 6 to go to night.

2 votes for Dayne ( Royce, Vance)

2 votes for Inchfield ( Tollett, Dayne)

1 vote for Clegane ( Inchfield)

1 vote for Connington ( Clegane)

1 vote for Karstark ( Mallister)

1 vote for Redfort ( Karstark)

1 vote for Vance ( Redfort)

3 players have not voted: Connington, Kettleblack, Lannister.

We have recieved a replacement request. We do have someone on our replacement list but we are waiting to hear confirmation from him/her/it. If there is anyone watching who would like to be a potential replacment (just incase the person/alein/robot/god can't take over) please PM the mods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still of the opinion that Clegane is voting for an FM Vance.

I'm more satisfied with Vance's recent answer, some lingering doubts remain though. :worried:

Have to check the Inchfield case in detail now. :read:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't like the Inch case at all. It basically boils down to him changing his mind too often, during the first stage of serious posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like this deflection. If he feels it was important, and it may turn out to be so later, why should you, a third party, deflect the question?

Why not? If I, personally, don't find it to be important? May I ask him to explain why it might be important?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not? If I, personally, don't find it to be important? May I ask him to explain why it might be important?

Because that's not what you did.

If you asked him why it's important, that's fair enough. Even then, I'd really rather you let the person asked the question answer it first though, then ask.

What you did, however, was outright deflection. You asked if he didn't have anything better to be concentrating on. In other words, telling him to drop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point of this question? To me, it feels like your gauging my reaction to see if I will continue to push against Clegane. It doesn't make any sense in determining my guilt, at least not that I can see.

I think your statement that you are so confident he is guilty looks ridiculous. I understand the point you are making against Clegane, but I don't think its something that should have made you convinced he is guilty. Since your strong feeling looked out of place, I wanted to pin you down now on whether or not you really felt that way, so you can't later claim you were just exaggerating.

But if it makes you feel better, I am as confident as I can be about anyone 24 hours into day 1. And you already know the reason as you just posted a statement about it.

I know what you were trying to accuse him of, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I agree with it. He said he agreed that Vance's post was weird, and that he checked to see if there was a Swann in the game (to receive a Swan Lake symp clue). I don't think any of that is troubling or non-committal. The only real point you have against him is that he didn't vote, and that isn't a very strong point in this case (its not as if he posted a huge attack against Vance/Lannister and failed to vote).

So I know what your reasoning was, but I don't think your reasoning was very good and I see a disconnect between your evidence and the level of your confidence in your suspicion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×