Mafia Game 78 - Tales of the Malazan Book of the Fallen

[House Redfort]

I will admit that while I like Rake, I am getting some 'Reasonable Reyne' vibes from him. Can't see myself voting that way though.

Can you explain what you mean by this? What gives you the "reasonable" vibes?

The only reaction I have from reading through that thread is that Fiddler needs to be lynched today and Kalam is innocent.

Can you back this up for me? I am not seeing the problem with Fiddler, at least no more so than 90% of the players.

[House Redfort]

That's because my mindset hasn't really changed. It's Day 1. Onos said it best: We will kill someone today. There are no good reasons for lynching on Day 1, but it will be done anyways. Someone's gotta die.

My only concern at this point is that it's not me.

I dislike this reasoning. While I would say "Yes, it's true" it is followed by a great big BUTT, a huge BUTT in fact: You still TRY and find some sort of reason, otherwise we might as well roll a die.

UNVOTE

[House Frey]

This game is kind of at a bad time for me. Unfortunately, this will be my last big post for a while, because I'll have only intermittent phone access for most of the day. But I'll be back long before the lynch.

I really want to hear some actual suspects and cases from Tehol instead of theory discussion.

Hey, Onos, what makes you know so much about the theory behind day 1? It's not to knock--it's just that you seem unfamiliar with terms like OMGUS and squirrel reasoning. Unfortunately, I'm no longer confident in my meta read.

(Also, I didn't say that I was voting Sandy BECAUSE of OMGUS--but it's natural to feel worse about unfair attacks made on yourself than on someone else. So I was bending over backwards at first not to vote him, just in case I was being pissy.)

Fuck, I'm running late right now, and no time to respond to Sandy's latest or weigh in on the Anomander vs. Silchas back-and-forth. Maybe I'll do that from my phone on my lunch break. In a nutshell, I am feeling worse about Anomander, because I find some of his points contrived. But just to answer a few questions:

I assume this is to me?

ETA: On second read. No, it probably wasn't. Oh well.

Actually, it was to you.

I find Sandalath absent. Hopefully they are about to wake up or finish work and can do something worthwhile. Do I think they are more likely FM than the four other names you mentioned? Yes. Quiet players are more likely to be FM. Noncontributing players are more likely to be FM. Do I think Sandalath is more suspicious than say Dassem? No.

Actually, that's not true at all.

He posted AFTER things heated up, and then did something legitimately suspicious. That's not at all similar to someone like Dassem, who hasn't been around since the RP phase. Not all low posters are interchangeable.

Do you disagree with me that what Sandy actually posted was scummy? Don't use the "He's a low poster" defence.

I mean characterising Apsalar as 'consistently fluffy', while accurate, is a bit of a misleading way to describe someone who made 2 posts at a time where being fluffy is entirely acceptable and hasn't posted since.

Okay, have we been reading the same thread?

Firstly, Apsalar cast an avatar related voted several pages AFTER the seriously discussion had begun. I have no clue how anyone could characterize Apsalar as not fluffy, never mind call my characterization "misleading." Am I going crazy, or have multiple people attacked Apsalar for the same thing? How come every time I mention someone in a bad light, you show up and say something like, "Are you sure that poster is that bad?"

But secondly, that's completely irrelevant, because I'm not even voting Apsalar. I just used him as an example of why I find Sandalath worse.

In addition QB appears to be ignoring the fact that things are much more obvious with a personal involvement when he says Santagars Sandalath's joke vote looked HORRIBLE but struggled to believe that a serious reaction to an obvious joke wouldn't sound bad from the other point of view. I guess it seems a little contrived to me.

I'm trying to figure out what you're saying here, but I can't. In the post you quoted, I'm basically saying I find it suspicious that he weighed in on nothing else in the thread, but decided his "joke" vote was serious.

Maybe I'm just biased, but when I look at my one-line comment to Sandy, I honestly don't see what the "overreaction" is. Seriously. It's at worst null. Okay, I didn't get it was a joke. But that post didn't sound anything like a joke. Why, did you figure out it was one?

I don't seem to be explaining myself well, so let me try again. Sandalath apparently cast a joke vote rather than react to the actual action (which unfortunately, half the game is guilty of), but then made it serious when I questioned him. Basically, I don't buy that my comment was the most suspicious in the game. It looked like he didn't have an overall picture of the game, and was just reacting to whoever mentioned his name. I also find it a slight evil tell to be reluctant to move one's vote early on (so that you don't have to justify moving it). For early Day One, that's enough to earn my vote.

I don't know, why doesn't my logic seem to make any sense to anyone this game?

[House Targaryen]

It is day 1.

16 players remain: Anomander Rake., Apsalar, Dassem Ultor, Fiddler., Gruntle, Icarium, Kalam Mekhar., Karsa Orlong, Onos T'oolan, Quick Ben, Sandalath Drukorlat, Silchas Ruin, Tehol Beddict, Toc the Younger, Trull Sengar, Yedan Derryg.

9 votes are needed for a conviction or 8 to go to night.

2 votes for Kalam Mekhar. (Fiddler., Karsa Orlong)

2 votes for Sandalath Drukorlat (Toc the Younger, Quick Ben)

2 votes for Trull Sengar (Apsalar, Onos T'oolan)

1 vote for Anomander Rake. (Icarium)

1 vote for Fiddler. (Yedan Derryg)

1 vote for Onos T'oolan (Kalam Mekhar.)

1 vote for Silchas Ruin (Anomander Rake.)

1 vote for Yedan Derryg (Silchas Ruin)

5 players have not voted: Dassem Ultor, Gruntle, Sandalath Drukorlat, Tehol Beddict, Trull Sengar.

Day ends in 11 hours.

[House Yronwood]

Sorry for the long absence. The power went out earlier and I feared I lost the post I was working on. Luckily I didn't.

...that was a grueling slog to get through. I have more posts to respond to, but for the sake of my life outside the game I may just ignore them.

Troll,

I got to say, I think it is super rare for someone to do something truly suspicious on day 1, but did you just openly speculate on whether someone has a role????

I was being at least half-facetious when I said it. The FM don't need my help to pick up on slip-ups that may occur on thread, and I think it's to the innocent's detriment if we don't discuss in the open what the FM are likely already thinking to themselves.

That said, I don't think Karsa would be so dumb as to point out they have a role on the thread.

And then this?!?! Why are you giving the FM tips about how to disassociate from each other?

What exactly are you accusing me of here? OK, I admit it: I'm totally the symp this game.

Again, see my answer above. I'm going to call out things that I see as helping the innocents, and noting the exchange between Quick Ben and Kalam as being unlikely if they were FM partners is one of them. I also got a similar impression from the exchange between Fiddler and Rake (posts 121 onward).

The FM are welcome to try to distance themselves that way --in fact, I'd encourage it as they run the risk of slipping up or coming off as less then genuine when they attempt it. Both cases I site above appear to me to be genuine.

I was going to leave my vote on Fiddler as it looked like that lynch train might still be growing, but this is the last straw from you. I hate when people do this. Plus you are killing the Fids lynch train. Trull Sengar Also Apsala doesn't like your picture, and so far, I like Apsala the best of all of you people.

I DON'T like leaving my vote on people when I'll be away from the thread for a long period of time. If I'm a member of a lynch mob I want my vote to be deliberate and not just something for others to take advantage of. I also don't really suspect Fiddler anymore. I would have taken my vote off sooner had I a better place to put it.

I'll be honest, I really don't like your attitude Onos, but I suspect you're innocent. I agree with your assessment of Apsalar even if it's for horrible meta reasons, but other then that I think you're being brash and bullheaded without actually contributing meaningfully to the discussion.

[House Pommingham]

Sandy,

I dislike this reasoning. While I would say "Yes, it's true" it is followed by a great big BUTT, a huge BUTT in fact: You still TRY and find some sort of reason, otherwise we might as well roll a die.

Yes, please let's roll a die. I would wager it has a better chance of hitting an FM than an organic day 1 lynch. Though I agree that it leaves you in a worse position on day 2.

Plus I don't trust any of you to roll a die, though we could easily get around that problem by say using the lotto numbers on a drawing occurring sometime today, etc. Amusingly though, we have the next best thing to a random die: a brand new player (Apsalar) voting for someone (Troll) based on his avatar. :lol: Though there's bias there as not everyone had posted by then.

Quickie,

Hey, Onos, what makes you know so much about the theory behind day 1? It's not to knock--it's just that you seem unfamiliar with terms like OMGUS and squirrel reasoning. Unfortunately, I'm no longer confident in my meta read.

Dude, I'm like 300,000 years old. I know a lot. Re: meta. Sometimes even a blind squirrel finds a nut. More often he gets eaten by a bear.

I don't know, why doesn't my logic seem to make any sense to anyone this game?

It's day 1, there is no logic. Haven't you been paying attention?

[House Redfort]

Since Karsa bothers me, I did a reread to try and find a solid reason why.

He comes in and places a RP vote on Trull, does another RP posts and 30 minutes after his first post, makes the one below:

Am I allowed to catch up on the thread and read my role before I comment further? Or I can just continue this way. Your choice. Don't make me drink blood-oil. You wouldn't like me when I drink blood-oil.*

*too late, I already am.

I just can’t get past the idea of posting without reading your role. What I really feel is that he wants it on record that he has a role.

More RP; Then he has the post where he quotes all of Kalam’s posts and calls it:

Is anyone really that impressed by this prattle? Seems like a lot of noise to get a high post count, yet remain pretty safe. Kalam Mekhar. The underlined erm -redacted- line in the first post really rubs me the wrong way.

I am also not a fan of Onos T'oolan (Tool). Wicked middle of the road.

2 things bother me about this: the list of quotes with just a comment about it’s general lack of content instead of individual comments, and 2) the almost “afterthought” of the Onos comment, with nothing to back it up.

For the most part, the rest of his posts are a combination of fluff and asking others questions. He agrees with Anomander Rake about Silchas being wishy-washy (a child of 10 would be wise enough to agree with that)

I definitely would lynch Karsa.

[House Yronwood]

Because on the face it would look like I'm trading OMGUS for OMGUSmore. Tool, if you must know. Opportunistic voting. Same as Kalam. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

Please stop using nicknames. There's already enough weird names to remember for those of us unfamiliar with the series, using nicknames just complicates things.

I mean, I realize now 'Tool' refers to Onos, but can we just say Onos? I literally went half the readthrough not knowing who people were referring to.

[House Redfort]

General Impressions I got while rereading:

I have that Gruntle is still a no show; Aspalar, Dassem, Icarium, Tehol and Yedan are all below the radar; Karsa, Onos, Silchas and Trull all seem suspicious; I have an "ok" by Anomander, Fiddler, Kalam, and Toc---with Ben in the middle. I still say he overreacted. I know the squirrels say that is ok, but it bothers me.

The "ok" list would be my least favorite to vote for.

I am going to add some comments a bit later, but wanted a full list while the reread was fresh in my mind.

I won't me gone more than a few hours.

[House Thorne]

Right, last post for a while.

Actually, it was to you.

Well, that's nice.

He posted AFTER things heated up, and then did something legitimately suspicious. That's not at all similar to someone like Dassem, who hasn't been around since the RP phase. Not all low posters are interchangeable.

Do you disagree with me that what Sandy actually posted was scummy? Don't use the "He's a low poster" defence.

I guess I disagree with you then. I don't think Sandawhatsit's post was much of a tell and certainly not as HORRIBLE as you claim. Hopefully I'll have explained this adequately by the end of the post.

Firstly, Apsalar cast an avatar related voted several pages AFTER the seriously discussion had begun. I have no clue how anyone could characterize Apsalar as not fluffy, never mind call my characterization "misleading." Am I going crazy, or have multiple people attacked Apsalar for the same thing?

To describe Apsalar as anything other than 'quiet' with two posts under their belt seems a stretch to me. The same applies to Dassem etc. Also, just because a group of people had begun serious discussion in no way means everyone had the time or inclination at that point to do so. I really don't see a great difference in fluffiness or lack there of between Sandazsdfltd and Apsalar at least up until Sandy's latest posts.

How come every time I mention someone in a bad light, you show up and say something like, "Are you sure that poster is that bad?"

I don't know. :dunno: Probably because that hasn't really happened?

Seriously, I want examples of this other than our present little discussion, because... I don't know where that's come from at all. Unless I misremember my posts I can't recall acting as some sort of crusader against your suspicions, and for you to characterise me like that is more than a little misleading. And a little suspicious.

Maybe I'm just biased, but when I look at my one-line comment to Sandy, I honestly don't see what the "overreaction" is. Seriously. It's at worst null. Okay, I didn't get it was a joke. But that post didn't sound anything like a joke. Why, did you figure out it was one?

Well, yeah, I read it as tongue in cheek. It obviously wasn't serious. You can tell by the way it's a little bit silly?

I don't seem to be explaining myself well, so let me try again. Sandalath apparently cast a joke vote rather than react to the actual action (which unfortunately, half the game is guilty of), but then made it serious when I questioned him. Basically, I don't buy that my comment was the most suspicious in the game. It looked like he didn't have an overall picture of the game, and was just reacting to whoever mentioned his name.

Ok. But people naturally blow things out of proportion when they are involved. That's the point I was trying to make. Both of you thought the other did something suspicious; you reacted to a joke vote in an unexpected manner so the person who made the joke thinks you looked suspicious, which you in turn find HIGHLY suspicious. As I say, it feels like a stretch for either you or Sandy to come away from that exchange and believe it's the most suspicious thing that's happened. So I poked you about it.

Edited for Clarity

[House Tyrell]

Silchas Ruin

FM wants to look like town. So they also look for the person to attack.

I'm the easy target. If you don't know whom to attack and want to attack somebody, you should find the person who is not here.

And the reasons are obvious. I can't help the city if I'm not here.

FM looks for easy targets. Easy to vote out.

[House Yronwood]

Nope. I say in the very post where I put him in Tier Fiddler that I also see his post as something of an over reaction. Seeing as Tier Fidd exists because of over reaction, role fishing and minor over reaction pretty much match major over reaction right now.

Franky my reaction was that of bafflement. Karsa's first post was one word, a quote I made and then a vote for me.

I thought he might be quoting something that he didn't want me to be able to edit out --I had no intention of doing so-- so I asked for elaboration. All that's null now though because it appears it was based on RP. (I really do need to read those books... why does GotM have to suck so much?).

[House Yronwood]

Another problem is that if we vote someone off because they are dead weight, we can't then analyse their train properly once they flip.

Personally I'm willing to make that trade-off. I think it would be a big mistake to vote of someone like Kalam or Fiddler over a more low profile poster; I'd much rather have talkative players we have something of a read on in an endgame situation then low posters whose lynch may cost us the game.

[House Tyrell]

Ok. But people naturally blow things out of proportion when they are involved. That's the point I was trying to make. Both of you thought the other did something suspicious; you reacted to a joke vote in an unexpected manner so the person who made the joke thinks you looked suspicious, which you in turn find HIGHLY suspicious. As I say, it feels like a stretch for either you or Sandy to come away from that exchange and believe it's the most suspicious thing that's happened. So I poked you about it.

I do like it. And I agree. Don't try to find a catch where there isn't a catch.

[House Baratheon]

Silchas Ruin

FM wants to look like town. So they also look for the person to attack.

I'm the easy target. If you don't know whom to attack and want to attack somebody, you should find the person who is not here.

And the reasons are obvious. I can't help the city if I'm not here.

FM looks for easy targets. Easy to vote out.

I place a vote on you because I didn't like your attitude in your previous posts and wanted you to actually contribute. Instead of actually contributing you give me a retaliatory vote while defending your lack of contribution and actually trying to claim your lack of contribution makes you innocent while making me guilty?

Now you're not just lacking contribution but you're also lacking sense.

If I were FM and I wanted easy I'd have jumped on the Fiddler train. The guy was way too overly defensive and if I wanted to take advantage of that it would have been easy to.

[House Wythers]

I place a vote on you because I didn't like your attitude in your previous posts and wanted you to actually contribute. Instead of actually contributing you give me a retaliatory vote while defending your lack of contribution and actually trying to claim your lack of contribution makes you innocent while making me guilty?

Now you're not just lacking contribution but you're also lacking sense.

If I were FM and I wanted easy I'd have jumped on the Fiddler train. The guy was way too overly defensive and if I wanted to take advantage of that it would have been easy to.

Looks strongly overdefensive.

Perhaps I should switch to you.

I also like Trull much lesser after his recent posts, but I am still uninterested in lynching him for today.

[House Tyrell]

I place a vote on you because I didn't like your attitude in your previous posts and wanted you to actually contribute. Instead of actually contributing you give me a retaliatory vote while defending your lack of contribution and actually trying to claim your lack of contribution makes you innocent while making me guilty?

There is no catch too. I just think that you're guilty.

And, why are you so nervouse?:)

I had mentioned you and you were here in 30 mins. Defending yourself.

If I were FM and I wanted easy I'd have jumped on the Fiddler train. The guy was way too overly defensive and if I wanted to take advantage of that it would have been easy to.

Don't show us your emergency exit.:)

[House Baratheon]

Looks strongly overdefensive.

Perhaps I should switch to you.

Overdefensive how? Because I'm incredulous at his response?

There is no catch too. I just think that you're guilty.

And, why are you so nervouse?:)

I had mentioned you and you were here in 30 mins. Defending yourself.

Please don't try to make a a timing coincidence into something that it's not.

Why do you think I'm guilty? I mean, besides the fact that I voted for you?

[House Tyrell]

Please don't try to make a a timing coincidence into something that it's not.

Yes, you are not overdefensive at all.

Why do you think I'm guilty? I mean, besides the fact that I voted for you?

Why not? It's mafia. The presumption of guilty governs here.

But if you so interesting in that:

I do not like your posts I have the bad impression at you and your attacking me looks suspcious for me.

[House Wythers]

Overdefensive how? Because I'm incredulous at his response?

Because your responce to him looks... rather, um, whining. And insincere.

Ok, since a few players said they won't vote Rake and Silchas looks worse now - Silchas Ruin.

I'll leave again in about a hour and, most likely, won't return until the end of day.