Mafia Game 74

[House Yronwood]

I hate cases that hang on the existence of connections that aren't there. I didn't find much in your argument that was worth addressing as most of it involved conspiracy theory about me and Reyne.

Funny you should say that when a good part of what you have been discussing IS connections between people that may or may not be there (i-e Bracken-Tyrell and Grandison-Stokeworth).

I didn't pretend to make a "case", I just quoted while reading when I found something that looked odd/suspicious/jumped out to me, and it turns out that most

of what I quoted involves you. And no, not all of it involves a conspiracy theory (again a big word) with Reyne.

Besides, there were a few questions adressed to you that you didn't care to answer. Care to do so now? In particular, why do you think that if Stokeworth turns out guilty Grandi would be close on the lynch list?

People keep bringing up my early day one antics as if it has some sort of significance. Truth is, I was really excited to be playing mafia, the thread was a little quiet, and I just wanted a little attention. Is that so wrong? :P

Well, you succeeded, you have all our attention, so now you can work on digging yourself out of that hole ;)

The point I was trying to make was that I'm NOT worried about tomorrow, I'm focused on today.

Today we have someone who claimed FM and everyone is just letting it slide. Yes, he could just be an innocent who pulled a halo, but I've yet to see more compelling evidence today about someone's guilt than self-confession.

And yet you are not voting for Stokeworth. Why is that?

[House Connington]

One other thing I would like to point out:

At the time of Stokeworth's "confession" he only had 3 votes. Martell had 3 votes and some suspicisions as well.

Look at the vote count now. Martell only has one vote. He clearly seems to have benefitted from the chaos Stokeworth caused.

Still, I don't think 3 votes is enough for anyone to freak over, so this whole distration worries me that we are missing something.

I believe 100% that we need to lynch Stokeworth.

Anyone have any reason we should NOT do so?

edit: typo

This is what I meant when I said I should go back and reread the stuff after the reveal (but couldn't due to the time).

I didn't know what the vote count was at when Stokeworth made his reveal. 3 votes on Martell hardly seems like enough to require a symp sacrifice if you assume Stokeworth is Martells symp. Nor do 3 votes seem like enough to justify a FM freaking out and revealing his identity.

Of course, that's if you go by numbers alone and don't factor in sore feelings about the Grandison exchange, pressure from people who are looking in Stokes direction, etc. etc.

If it was a reveal to see people's reactions why would Stokeworth do it at a time when so few people were around to react?

And I actually do agree with Reyne about your fate Stokeworth. Even if you do manage to live out the day, you'll eventually be lynched for the reveal. If you are innocent you're the symp's best friend right now because they know they won't have to work overly hard to get you lynched at a critical moment. I'd just as soon lose you at a time when the stakes aren't quite so high.

[House Ashford]

I believe 100% that we need to lynch Stokeworth.

Anyone have any reason we should NOT do so?

Whatever: I am absolutely sure no FM would prepare that confession and then retreat in cold heart. Just no chances.

There is still a weak possibility of a breakdown, I can't exclude it entirely - but I see no reason for breakdown. He was at 3, and me also. He was in danger, but not so great one. And he didn't sound desperate at all.

And if you think he is my symp, sacrificing himself to let me go - just think 1) why he was one of the players building my train and 2) why I am refusing to accept such a sacrifice.

[Magic Mirror]

Dude, he had a whole exchange with Tyrell about symping and fake symping and how if Tyrell was FM he was his symp, otherwise not (somewhere around post 100).

I hate cases that hang on the existence of connections that aren't there. I didn't find much in your argument that was worth addressing as most of it involved conspiracy theory about me and Reyne.

People keep bringing up my early day one antics as if it has some sort of significance. Truth is, I was really excited to be playing mafia, the thread was a little quiet, and I just wanted a little attention. Is that so wrong? :P

The point I was trying to make was that I'm NOT worried about tomorrow, I'm focused on today.

Today we have someone who claimed FM and everyone is just letting it slide. Yes, he could just be an innocent who pulled a halo, but I've yet to see more compelling evidence today about someone's guilt than self-confession.

Yes but you were making it obvious to everyone that you weren't worried about tomorrow - it felt self-conscious and forced as if you really were worried about tomorrow but knew that you oughtn't to be (because innocents should generally say what they think regardless of the consequences for themselves) and so were deliberately trying to reassure people that you were just focussed as an innocent should be. Which is why I asked why you felt the need to do this.

One other thing I would like to point out:

At the time of Stokeworth's "confession" he only had 3 votes. Martell had 3 votes and some suspicisions as well.

Look at the vote count now. Martell only has one vote. He clearly seems to have benefitted from the chaos Stokeworth caused.

Still, I don't think 3 votes is enough for anyone to freak over, so this whole distration worries me that we are missing something.

I believe 100% that we need to lynch Stokeworth.

Anyone have any reason we should NOT do so?

What are your thoughts more generally about the game Reyne? I know you want to lynch the Stoke today, and I agree, but you seem obsessed here, like you are trying to force people to agree to your plan without too much more discussion and making people justify not lynching Stokeworth rather than the reverse. Let me ask you - do you have any reason why we shouldn't keep discussing with as much time as we have and think about other potential suspicious people?

I'm being pretty hypocritical here, as I haven't really commented on very much apart from Stokeworth, and I haven't yet reread the thread (and I don't take in very much the first time round). I am sorry for that. I will say that I really do think that discussion of connections and symp clues at this stage in the game is going to be completely unfruitful - 99% of FM don't have any particular plan on day 1 apart from 'contribute and seem natural' so I find the idea of it being possible to spot insincere inteactions at this stage implausible. Which is partly why I still think Stokeworth is our best bet for the lynch.

This is what I meant when I said I should go back and reread the stuff after the reveal (but couldn't due to the time).

I didn't know what the vote count was at when Stokeworth made his reveal. 3 votes on Martell hardly seems like enough to require a symp sacrifice if you assume Stokeworth is Martells symp. Nor do 3 votes seem like enough to justify a FM freaking out and revealing his identity.

Of course, that's if you go by numbers alone and don't factor in sore feelings about the Grandison exchange, pressure from people who are looking in Stokes direction, etc. etc.

If it was a reveal to see people's reactions why would Stokeworth do it at a time when so few people were around to react?

And I actually do agree with Reyne about your fate Stokeworth. Even if you do manage to live out the day, you'll eventually be lynched for the reveal. If you are innocent you're the symp's best friend right now because they know they won't have to work overly hard to get you lynched at a critical moment. I'd just as soon lose you at a time when the stakes aren't quite so high.

Yes, sorry Stokeworth, but you something of a liability. Which is why I'm keeping my vote where it is - I may not be back before day's end I'm afriad.

[House Velaryon]

What are your thoughts more generally about the game Reyne? I know you want to lynch the Stoke today, and I agree, but you seem obsessed here, like you are trying to force people to agree to your plan without too much more discussion and making people justify not lynching Stokeworth rather than the reverse. Let me ask you - do you have any reason why we shouldn't keep discussing with as much time as we have and think about other potential suspicious people?

I'm being pretty hypocritical here, as I haven't really commented on very much apart from Stokeworth, and I haven't yet reread the thread (and I don't take in very much the first time round). I am sorry for that. I will say that I really do think that discussion of connections and symp clues at this stage in the game is going to be completely unfruitful - 99% of FM don't have any particular plan on day 1 apart from 'contribute and seem natural' so I find the idea of it being possible to spot insincere inteactions at this stage implausible. Which is partly why I still think Stokeworth is our best bet for the lynch.

Yes, sorry Stokeworth, but you something of a liability. Which is why I'm keeping my vote where it is - I may not be back before day's end I'm afriad.

I need to see the lynch CF and the night results, then I will be able to move on. Sorry, but it is hard for me to judge things in a vaccuum. I know I will not let go of this, and it does blind me, but that is my personality. Take care of one thing, see the results, then made decisions.

If I had to make a list of everyone suspicious, it would be the majority of the players.

[House Connington]

Funny you should say that when a good part of what you have been discussing IS connections between people that may or may not be there (i-e Bracken-Tyrell and Grandison-Stokeworth).

First off, you're referring to an early day one post where I mentioned I'm still trying to wrap my head around things. They were brought up more for discussions sake than anything else.

That said, the Bracken-Tyrell thing was pretty out in the open. It wasn't me filling in gaps with false conclusions, just interpreting what was said literally.

As for Grandison-Stokeworth, I believe my case was more centered on Martell. I thought he'd make a good CF result for being in the center of two central arguments, not just one.

Again, early day one stuff... there wasn't much else to go on.

Besides, there were a few questions addressed to you that you didn't care to answer. Care to do so now? In particular, why do you think that if Stokeworth turns out guilty Grandi would be close on the lynch list?

I skipped over a lot of people's questions, most of which I had every intent on answering but to do so would mean I'd still be writing my first post even now.

If anyone feels I've made a gross oversight of an important question, state the question succinctly -- ie, not in the middle of a huge wall of text -- and I'll answer to the best of my ability.

And yet you are not voting for Stokeworth. Why is that?

That's a good question. I'm wondering that myself.

...I can't answer myself just yet either.

[House Connington]

Yes but you were making it obvious to everyone that you weren't worried about tomorrow - it felt self-conscious and forced as if you really were worried about tomorrow but knew that you oughtn't to be (because innocents should generally say what they think regardless of the consequences for themselves) and so were deliberately trying to reassure people that you were just focussed as an innocent should be. Which is why I asked why you felt the need to do this.

I've got nothing :dunno:

It's not like I want to be lynched tomorrow -- it's preferable to being lynched today mind you ;)

[House Pommingham]

hm... Reyne is still awfully defensive...

Yes, sorry Stokeworth, but you something of a liability. Which is why I'm keeping my vote where it is - I may not be back before day's end I'm afriad.

but I can see this, too... Something about Stokeworth and that early stuff doesn't sit right.

As for Grandison-Stokeworth, I believe my case was more centered on Martell. I thought he'd make a good CF result for being in the center of two central arguments, not just one.

Again, early day one stuff... there wasn't much else to go on.

<snip>

That's a good question. I'm wondering that myself.

...I can't answer myself just yet either.

Martell seems a little random and vaguely harmless. but why wouldn't you be voting for Stokeworth with no reason... unless you know something. I am just not sure if that makes you or Stokeworth more suspicious!

[House Connington]

Martell seems a little random and vaguely harmless. but why wouldn't you be voting for Stokeworth with no reason... unless you know something. I am just not sure if that makes you or Stokeworth more suspicious!

Could you clarify what you mean here?

I also don't like the fact you took that part of the quote out of context and skipped the part where I said it was an early day one lynch suggestion.

[House Pommingham]

Could you clarify what you mean here?

I also don't like the fact you took that part of the quote out of context and skipped the part where I said it was an early day one lynch suggestion.

I just went back and re-read your post, and you're right I did kinda take a piece out of context. My apologies, I did miss that line about the early day one lynch suggestion.

I'm thinking myself in circles, that's all. I have a nagging suspicion about Stokeworth and am just trying to convince myself one way or the other. I think Stokeworth and Reyne are at the top of my list.

[House Wythers]

I'm back, but without much to say. I'm pretty dead-set on lynching Stokeworth. I think having his "reveal" hanging over our heads can't help the innocents' game, so to the noose with him, I say. My gut dislikes Connington, so I will switch my vote to Connington if it's him or no lynch, but unless something fantastic happens, I don't intend on budging.

So yeah, I began looking at [Connington] harder. Now that I have, I'm baffled as to why so many people seem to be saying he's playing a solid game.

Compared to Stokeworth, I think he's been playing pretty good. :P I understand that you've a case on Connington, and I think it's pretty good, but you're letting Stoke go on account of being too meh? Why is it so suspicious to pick a lynch, especially with some 20 hours left in the day, based on how useful a CF result would be? I've no talent for vote analysis myself, but I can see how on Day 1, when everybody's pretty much as suspicious as the next guy, one would want to at least lynch someone for ease of vote analysis.

Look, I think Connington's posts have been, as you put it, "soft" as well, but frankly, I think it's scummy to go guns a'blazing on another target when you're at all on the fence about Stokeworth, irregardless of Stokeworth's faction.

To sum up my thoughts thus far, as is obvious from my previous post (at least I hope so), Connie was on my radar prior to Stokeworth’s reveal, both for actions on his own and for his interactions with Reyne.

I want to reread Stokeworth. I don’t know what to make of him, but if he’s innocent I think it was a horrible move, enough to want to lynch him today. Because I’m afraid I will regret it if we don’t, unless Stokeworth can somehow prove his innocence.

The only player I’m feeling good about is Wythers, though that’s mostly because I agree with him.

Tyrell and Swyft have both pinged my radar, though only slightly.

And I don’t have a real read on any of the others.

So... why's your vote on Martell still? It's not like the killers are going to swoop in and drop more votes on Stoke for an insta-lynch. Why hesitate? I understand that you've been busy today and might not've had the time to come up with a solid opinion on everything that's happened, but overall, your thoughts amount to not much.

I use my gut for half my suspicions myself, but this is one hell of a wishy-washy uncommittal post even in my book. Please tell me that you'll have more time tomorrow to collect your thoughts. I'd appreciate it.

And if you think he is my symp, sacrificing himself to let me go - just think 1) why he was one of the players building my train and 2) why I am refusing to accept such a sacrifice.

2) Because that would be the scummy thing to do, and you can bet your ass that it'd be one of the featured points a case against you.

[House Reed]

I'm sorry to Crakehall for not following through on my promise to write a Connington defence. I was exhausted and fell asleep in the middle of writing it. It's hard for me to substantiate with concrete evidence, but it's just his whole style of reacting to things. It comes across as sincere, and off the top of his head, and unscripted. His explanations for his behaviour in regards to Stokeworth also seem real. I wish I could find something more persuasive than this.

Ugh. I was GOING to question people last night and attack suspicious behaviour...including Bracken's original bizarre half-serious, half-flippant response to my questions. Instead my entire window of free time was wasted by this stupid incident.

Now we've all spent hours going back and forth on the WIFOM involved in doing something like this, and I have to waste even more time answering questions about this that I could have spent catching up, and nothing new has been learned about anyone's alignment. Horrendous play from Stokeworth, regardless of his alignment.

My reaction to Stoke's retraction was a bit over-the-top and hyperbolic, but sincere; I really did want to smack Stokeworth upside the head for giving me false hope like that and making me look like an idiot. I already wrote a huge post here (EDIT: forgot the link) explaining my turnaround on Stokeworth, but since people are still asking...yes, my opinions really did swing that abruptly. And I think that even though my reactions were extreme, they were based on very strong evidence.

It had occurred to me that it might have been a lame and unfunny joke, but he didn't immediately correct himself when people took him seriously. I have seen an FM reveal on Day Two when he thought he was trapped. I have seen FM self-hammer on sites where self-voting was allowed. There's something about being an FM under pressure that makes some people roll over and die.

(I was a little sceptical of his claim that he'd never made it past Day One as an evil role, though.)

But then when he said all that stuff about reactions, everything clicked instantly into place in my mind, and I realized just what he'd been trying to pull.

It's all in the execution. Just compare his long explanations of his behaviour to his one throwaway sentence saying, "Yeah, you got me, I'm evil." If one part of his play is a lie, I'd go with the evil claim.

The overall pattern of his behaviour fits far better as an innocent attempting a stupid gambit than as an evil who decided to give up when he was under pressure...and start fighting again when he was under even more pressure. Only for the WIFOM factor...and I don't get the impression that Stoke is trying a double-gambit.

==========================================================

My problems with Crakehall were 1) he seems a bit dispassionate and middle-of-the-road, 2) his reactions to Stokeworth's claim were in line with what I'd expect from someone who knew he was lying, and 3) some of the arguments he's pushing have come across as superficial (for example, I didn't find anything that interesting in Connington's post about Tyrell/Bracken, and am not sure why Crakehall kept harping on it). But the way he keeps poking at Connington gives me the impression he's really trying to find out his alignment, as opposed to just digging up dirt on him. So I'm no longer willing to vote for him today.

============================================

I did not say that I think Swyft is not unlynchable but really he is and I'm only saying he's unlynchable to prevent him being shot at night.+

Swyft has made a rather good post. I won't vote for him today, but he's still (at the bottom though) on my suspect list.

I should be flattered, but something about this leaves me feeling manipulated and fake-symped. Um...I'm at the bottom of your list because I made one post at the end of the RP phase that asked Connington about . I kind of agree with what Wythers said before that I could have faked that (although maybe I'd have been a teensy bit less cavalier about the "vote for me!" part). But lots of other people made better posts since then, and I've made more posts since then. You should not be clearing me this easily.

Swyft, was this vote from genuine suspicion of Connington? It doesn't really sound like it, from the post.

I've already said that although I was poking at him, I was never all that suspicious of him. In all honesty, I was partly teasing him, partly being curmudgeonly about his attitude (because I thought his tactic wasn't the most effective way of getting things moving), partly wanting to get a better read on him, and partly trying to make the game serious more quickly.

So what's your point?

Martell...eh. I'm having trouble articulating a case on Martell that won't make me sound like a lunatic, but I have been leery of his behaviour this game. At first it was his flippancy early in the day when attacked. But now something about his long rereads of popular suspects pointing out every comment they've made as scummy feels off. I'd vote him over Stokeworth or Connington.

I can agree on lynching Swyft, if Connnington's train would stuck. At least, he should explain his too radical change of mind about Stokeworth.The rest of him doesn't look to me terribly suspicious.

This just sounds very insincere. I'm much more sympathetic to Wythers and Greyjoy saying they thought my reaction looked contrived. But focusing on the fact that I changed my mind...and saying you'd change your mind if I'd explained it?

If you want to lynch me solely for something like that, my explaining it WHEN I'VE ALREADY EXPLAINED IT IN A GINORMOUS WALL POST shouldn't make you turn around and say, "Yeah, good point."

Swift: can you please explain your reason for removing your vote from Stokeworth? Look at the exchange below and see why I have a problem. You clearly believe that if Stokeworth is innocent that he would continue to be a distraction. Why keep a possible evil player around?

<snip>

Look at your comments I have highlighted. Please explain why you have removed vote. You even say you are likely wrong to do so.

Annoyingly, all the quotes within quotes are omitted when I hit reply. I explained why I removed my vote above, so I won't repeat myself. But basically, much of my shift in perspective was because I'd assumed that if he was innocent, he'd just taken his ball and gone home for the sake of ruining the game. "Hey, guys! I'm an FM. Oh, did you lynch me? LULZ, JUST KIDDING!" Hence why I made quotes like this:

If you're innocent, then I am personally never playing another game with you again for pulling this stunt. But I'm not going to take shit like that as a joke.

And you'll notice that in those quotes, I mention that I'm so confident of his guilt because he didn't immediately clarify that he was innocent.

Since Stokeworth hasn't taken the chance to correct himself, I'm going to act as if he's 100% confirmed evil. As in, if he flips innocent, I'll assume he's a symp.

When he came back to the thread with an explanation that fit with all his prior behaviour, then I knew it wasn't either an FM giving up or an innocent throwing a tantrum. Like I said above, everything clicked into place in my mind.

====================

More coming soon. I'm going to stop trying to convince people that Stokeworth is probably innocent and look more at actual suspects.

[House Connington]

How much time is left in the day? I'd really rather avoid a last minute speed lynch.

[House Wythers]

How much time is left in the day? I'd really rather avoid a last minute speed lynch.

Five and a half hours.

http://www.timeanddate.com/counters/customcounter.html?day=3&month=11&year=2010&hour=0&min=0&sec=0&p0=0

[House Payne]

Sorry, due to some RL problems (car-garage-f...) I only returned now. I have to eat something first and will have a look at the thread afterwards.

[Gertrude]

eep

[House Thorne]

Connington, what specifically was the symp clue in the Tyrell/Bracken case? Your answer above is pretty vague, so give me a specific quote. (and I want to hear it from you)

[House Connington]

I think I given it enough thought and my vote will remain on Stokeworth. I'm less convinced that lynching him is the right move than I was 12 hours ago, but I figure it's now or at a critical juncture in the game when his true alignment will make all the difference.

And no, I'm not saying I think he's innocent. There's nothing in his posts that I've seen since his reveal that convinces me he's not just a FM doing damage control.

[House Connington]

Connington, what specifically was the symp clue in the Tyrell/Bracken case? Your answer above is pretty vague, so give me a specific quote. (and I want to hear it from you)

Why won't you let this go?

I've already explained that it was using early day one logic meant for discussion more than anything else. A fact supported by my following post in which I ask whether or not anyone else found the exchange suspicious or whether I was 'missing something'.

Anyway, here's the wall of text you ordered:

Btw, someone might have been fake-symping me. The first who finds out whodunnit gets a Garfield shirt! :)

That would be me. Can I have the shirt in white?

<snip>

And, was it fake-symping?

Well, obviously. I mean, unless you're FM, in which case it would have been real symping. Are you?

No. :dunno:

You? :wideeyed:

Neither!

That's -2 to the suspect pool. Or -1 if you happen to be either of Bracken or Tyrell. Not bad at all, if I may say so myself.

It was about time to have some progress in this game. :thumbsup:

Now please do tell me what profound insight you gleam from my, again, EARLY DAY ONE suspicion or drop it already. I guarantee that unless you're the symp you're wasting your time.

[House Yronwood]

So... why's your vote on Martell still? It's not like the killers are going to swoop in and drop more votes on Stoke for an insta-lynch. Why hesitate? I understand that you've been busy today and might not've had the time to come up with a solid opinion on everything that's happened, but overall, your thoughts amount to not much.

I use my gut for half my suspicions myself, but this is one hell of a wishy-washy uncommittal post even in my book. Please tell me that you'll have more time tomorrow to collect your thoughts. I'd appreciate it.

Stokeworth is the obvious choice because he will be a distraction for all the game, but I didn't find him suspicious till the reveal, and after rereading him, I still don't think he was more suspicious than many of the other players. And I hate to lynch someone for those reasons alone.

Connie and Reyne, I'm more suspicious of. I've said why.

Now I want to take some time to read things properly before making my final decision, and have a look at players I don't have a read on. I'll be here till the end of day (or nearly), that's the only time of the day I'm really available to play.

Connington, in my last post, I asked a specific question that was not hidden in a block of text, you quoted it yet you didn't answer it. Crakehall's question was also one I asked. Be kind enough to answer.

ETA: I see you partially answered; Except the question was about the "original symp clue", the one that prompted that exchange.