Anonymous Mafia - Game Over

[Aizen]

I very much agree with VT's assessment on Tail's use of emotion, however, I still think Tail's made good points, emotion or no emotion. I'm glad VT is more prominent now, because I think I was wrong in my assessment of he/she wanting to get people to like them.

I don't like Eternity for saying that they have a useless role and won't be a useful townie. Basically what VDC said.

Sundown is still sort of freaking out, and that claim is awfully convenient, but I think it's worth it if a townie could get killed.

##Unvote

##Vote: Eternity

I'm basically echoing Colin Mochrie and VDC here, but they make great points. that Eternity is voting people for the wrong reasons and apparently isn't going to contribute anything. I also don't like Eternity's vote on Shotta. It's way too easy to just vote for the most inactive person and tell them to exist. Lynching Shotta would give us very little info, and being inactive isn't usually scumtell.

[No Elimination]

Can't make up my mind on those recent Eternity walls. Not all of the opinions are the most original and I don't like how they say all that but keep their vote on an inactive after all those opinions on people you just showed us, but it is an improvement to the amount and I'd say quality of input he was putting in before. But if you are going to do stuff then you should be getting strong reactions. And saying all that about all those players just to vote an inactive I don't see how that is him scumhunting or really pursuing anything.

[Refakitty³]

ok, I don't really have a lot of time. I just think it's kind of bullshit, VOLT-TACKLE, that I'm scummy because I'm not writing long essays like some other people here and instead small clusters of posts that are 'waffley.' I'm writing down my opinions as they come to me and it's a stream-of-consciousness thing, yes, but im trying to avoid a fucking horrifically long essay post that's redundant anyway--in my experience, smaller clusters of posts are actually easier to read. but you can continue to be suspicious of me for a weak reason, i don't care.

i have to evaluate the eternity wagon--there have been great points made, but i dont know if i want to switch my vote yet atm. yoshimi's defenses against me are okay, i'm just still wary i guess. i don't remember a lot of actual content from eternity though until just now.

If you read my post you will see that I did not complain about him changing his vote; in fact, I complained about him having suspicions of Sundown but never voting on them. Disconnect between words and votes is scummy. The problem is that he talked a bit about the Sundown and Tails wagons, but avoided having strong opinions one way or the other--it was all this 'oh they're kind of scummy but maybe not' stuff. Basically, fluff that avoided taking a position.

Hi, Volt.

I think you're seriously misinterpreting something here. I'm posting my opinions as they go along, and those were my true opinions. I understood what everyone else was saying regarding the two wagons, but I eventually didn't see enough to vote them, ESPECIALLY analyzing how fast the wagons formed in the first place. I think you're searching for something in my thought process that isn't there--I never said Tails/Sundown were extremely scummy and not place a vote. I was wary, yes. but that's not enough. and i did take a position--i voted for yoshimi for actual reasons to back up my vote because i did not agree with any of the current wagons proposed. that is far from 'avoided taking a position' imo

[Refakitty³]

yoshimi jumping on the opportunistic bandwagon wheeee

[Refakitty³]

hmmm.

i would suggest that eternity not quote the entire posts. he writes less text to go along with the quotes and all of it makes his posts seem bigger than they actually are. i dont think it's a crime that eternity thought he would be useless though--that's a defeatist attitude that strikes me as town (sometimes defeatist attitudes mean scum but in these kinds of cases i just doubt it)

i just don't like that he drowns his posts in quotes to make them look like content

traf is starting to bother me atm. i guess that sounds kind of random but yeah. i think i might move my vote off of yoshimi when i get back.

[Aizen]

yoshimi jumping on the opportunistic bandwagon wheeee

I guess that's what it is, but I'm doing it for what I believe to be the right reasons.

[C. C.]

still collecting my thoughts and going over all the information available at present. here are a few things that stuck out for me to comment on.

sorry got kinda distracted.

honestly i really dont like that sundown fishing. it really sets me off. like, ok, why does it matter to you if someone has info d1? you asked it in a really creeper way too, ugh.

but i wont vote. ill do a reread and see if i can catch anything else that hasnt had much attention paid to it

I actually thought it was an okay reaction to Trafalgar's vote, because no one would have any idea about how he'd have gotten whatever info. Then again, I've always been passive about things like that, so nvm.

not sure if i'm misreading, or if this was a mistake. i see no motive for eternity being deliberately misleading. all the context seems to imply what is being discussed is letters's first post of the game and the sundown reaction. i have no idea how my name got suddenly thrown into the mix here. i hope this is an honest typo, because being attributed to things i didn't do, whether for credit or for blame, rubs me the wrong way and gives me an uncomfortable itchy feeling.

i seriously think numbers was doing that, though.

a wagon on me is useless, sorry. i'm not going to claim today.

i'm not voting for sundown because i just don't think he's been acting bad enough to vote him, at least looking at his other stuff. also in the middle of my reread i fell asleep lol

i shouldnt play mafia at 5am anyway

the bold feels like a very anti-town stance to take, i am not going to lie. while there are certainly town roles where that would be a valid stance, and i have no way of knowing if yours is, this defense is incredibly forceful and incredibly early.

also, colin LOOKS like he's been helpful, but most of the posts i have seen from him have actually had little to do with the actual game. and when he voted eternity, he had one sentence to back it up.

ughhh.

back when my vote was still on colin, and i was reevaluating the situation, this was one of the first things i looked at. especially when juxtaposed with the post

When people make lone votes and then do not support their case, it is the same as not voting at all but looks more useful. No one is going to follow up on that, as they feel the current wagons are better. Your target will be under no pressure, just as they were before. They, like my bingo card, will ignore you.

however, despite being a lone vote, there was support for the case, and the push on their part has been an ongoing affair. i don't like how it was handled necessarily, being implicit as it was, but this fits neatly into colin's m.o. for the entire game of not spelling everything out completely, leaving some things to easy inference. (contrast how easy the inferences needed for understanding colin's posts are to the often incomprehensible leaps needed for letters's.)

also, most of colin's posts have shown a compelling grasp of not only general mafia theory, but emotion and logic separation, and impressive situational assessment.

also, don't get too twitchy asparagus, while it looks like i'm still very heavy on your case, that's just because it's easier and more productive to point out where i disagree and think you're wrong, on the line-by-line, than it is to simply quote posts of yours i like and agree with. so hold your horses while i continue to evalue all of the relevant developments along the sundown, yoshimi, volttackle, eterlnty, etc. directions.

[C. C.]

on volttackle: post 186 is actually solid and addresses many of the concerns i had been having initially. while letters may have had some points and reasoning behind his read, volttackle should be viewed as a minor concern considering the time remaining in d1, and the lack of association knowledge that we would be able to gather from a flip.

on eternlty: that shotta vote is really terrible, and does not contribute to a successful d1 endgame.

not sure if i'm misreading, or if this was a mistake.

i'm dumb. He obviously means "the trafalgar" vote. I didn't go back far enough in time. any lingering suspicion i had on that note is gone.

still not sure why colin focused on eternity out of the tails wagon, when compared to other choices, and unfortunately clarification won't happen as inactive/vacation or whatever the acronym prims used means again. eternity was the fourth and final to land. at that point i might be inclined to just assume sheep rather than mafia driving a counterwagon.

that said his defenses are very lackluster. need to do more thinking on this.

[Prims]

Shotta has been prodded, by the way.

[C. C.]

on yoshimi: the vote by asparagus was because he struck out from established wagons to try something new. i'd be a hypocrite if i accepted that as legit. the second vote was sparrrow, shamelessly sheeping. what's worse is that when yoshimi actually took a stand and chose one of the wagons sparrrow shoots back the following

also i don't really like yoshimi's vote on sundown. seems like opportunistic bandwagoning and he admits that he's giving the same reason as everyone else. sundown might very well be scum but i think yoshimi is too.

damned if you do, damned if you don't, eh?

that said, yoshimi's full-player-reads list based on iso was poorly executed, and he seems to be floundering more and more, so maybe there is something to this pressure?

on sundown: i still feel like this is a mountain-out-of-molehill affair, and in light of his claim, am not super eager to switch a vote to him, although in the event of a town flip we probably would get the most information out of the aftermath of his lynch. i'm especially curious on where he would switch his vote to, though, or if he plans on keeping it on letters. i would heartily welcome another post by him on such matters.

also, dammitall if i can't help but feel like i'm going about things all the wrong way here. it seems like the more i dig, the more i find reasons not to lynch various people. i'm probably being just overcautious, and this is pushing me into stagnancy. i need to take a break here and go clear my head.

[Kamina]

well you all are no fun

[All Might]

Eternity's posts are not great but he seems to be getting a bit more active and is responding to things, so I would prefer to wait on him until he's done more. Also saying you're going to be useless isn't really a scumtell because townies do it too at times. It just depends on the player's personality.

I just think it's kind of bullshit, VOLT-TACKLE, that I'm scummy because I'm not writing long essays like some other people here and instead small clusters of posts that are 'waffley.'

I don't care if your posts are long or short, I care about whether they contain meaningful content. You talked about the Sundown and Tails wagons multiple times and switched back and forth between thinking they were suspicious and thinking they weren't, never having much of a strong position--that is, you were waffly. Note also that I am accusing you of avoiding a strong opinion on those two wagons specifically, so your Yoshimi vote isn't related. And regarding your Yoshimi vote...

yoshimi's defenses against me are okay, i'm just still wary i guess.

Are you backing off him when his defenses are in your own words just 'okay'? And then:

traf is starting to bother me atm. i guess that sounds kind of random but yeah. i think i might move my vote off of yoshimi when i get back.

You seem to be easily going from one suspicion to the next without much conviction.

Yoshimi has made a good number of posts, but after iso'ing him, he hasn't actually said very much. Both his Sundown vote and his Eternity vote basically just adopted others' suspicions, and in both cases he hadn't previously been suspicious of the person (for Sundown, he had previously felt that Sundown was not rolefishing; for Eternity, he had barely mentioned him). List post was large but the reads in it were fairly weak/basic. And in spite of doing his iso's and reads list, his votes are still based on others' reasoning and not his own observations. Not liking him at the moment.

I think Sundown still has the most votes atm, and I really don't want to lynch a lynch bomb claim. People still voting Sundown: do you think he's fakeclaiming, and would you consider another lynch?

[Refakitty³]

the bold feels like a very anti-town stance to take, i am not going to lie.

HAHAHAHAHAHA NOPE

What the fuck are you even doing at this point, anyway? I can't hear any other of your suspicions over your incessant tunneling on me. it's really perturbing.

i would rather not lynch sundown

i think people should look at yoshimi and traf more

[Olivier]

I asked him because I wanted to know if he was serious or not. If he actually had info, he clearly isn't making any effort to hide it, since he's subtly hinting it in the first post. If he really did have genuine reasons, then the fact that he announced it in the first post implies that he doesn't desire to conceal it. If he doesn't have his reasons, then it means I can disregard it as a joke post. You said that both responses were beneficial for the Mafia. For the first response, I never asked him to claim, and even though it may benefit the Mafia nonetheless, it was his choice to post "I have my reasons" and make us curious. The second response, of him not having info, tbh I never actually thought about whether it'd be beneficial for the Mafia or not until now, but I don't actually see how not having reasons to vote for someone as the first post of the game makes you a less priority target. In fact, as far as my memory is concerned, I only remember ONE Mafia game where a player claimed to have reasons for suspecting a target before the game started, with Prims attacking Bizz in Draft Minimafia with some pretty stupid reasoning that was based purely on meta (not present in an anon game) and the drafting mechanics of the game (also not present in this game).

And really, when I made that first post, I never actually thought about whether it's beneficial for the Mafia or not. All I thought was "He says he has his reasons? Eh, he probably isn't serious. Early D1 is usually filled with fluff like this. Still, though, if he really is serious, it could become useful data later on, so let me just inquire him about it." That was my thought process. I didn't think about whether my post was scummy or not, or about whether NE#'s response would hint at his role or anything like that. I did not expect the huge reaction that came out of it (like I said, I thought the early reactions to my posts weren't serious either). I just wanted to know if there was a serious post amidst the D1 fluff, and the only early posts that could have been serious was NE#'s first post and the Survivor Miller claim, both of which I still think of as joke posts, but for some reason, neither of those players seem interested in talking about those, so I was forced to treat it as D1 fluff... until I got attacked for it.

You're repeating yourself within the same section again and you fail to recognize that asking someone who claims reasons in the very first vote of the game to elaborate/share is tantamount to asking them to out the info from their role or to back off. One gives the mafia a priority target, the other reduces the pool of possible info roles by a margin and gives the poster some scum cred, which the scum can use to mislynch. Also PEMN.

Fail to ask Mochrie about what? What accusation/reasoning are you referring to? I actually forgot that you're not allowed to claim your true identity (scummy reason, I know, sorry), but I saw a SF username and was wondering why CM would mention Manix.

The first word of the CM quote, after he votes (which you cut out). I like how you apparently fail to see the one word that's been hounding you since the moment you were voted.

Caps represented key words to my reasoning, not emotions. Before I get to tails' post, I should let you know that I never once talked about motive, whether true or false, though I may have implied what I thought his motive was through my vote. My post was purely on reasoning, not motive. There was no assigning false motives or anything like that. As for tails post, here's how my thought process worked:

Motives was probably a bad word choice. My bad. I meant you burdened them with a false reason.

I perceived this as irrelevant fluff.

Yes, and? Why bring it up? It's a throwaway comment.

I perceived this as him stating his opinion that CM looks the most Townish for that post.

Yes. Move along.

I assumed that the "which means" was a follow up to the previous sentence about CM looking Townish. He didn't use the word "so" but "which means" implies the same thing. Oh, wait, his previous sentence didn't actually mention CM being Townish, but rather, he just pointed out that his strongest Town read was here in a specific quote. So this next line must be about the previous quote. Which is why I was suspicious. It would have looked okay if I hadn't looked at the timestamps, but when I noticed the inconsistency, I couldn't understand tails's actions. I mean, seriously, think about it. If tails was reading the thread, found the CM post, copied it to his reply stating that it was his strongest Town read, and then scroll up, find Trafalgar's post, copying it to the reply stating that it's the worst vote because of the aforementioned Town read? You can't accuse someone for voting due to a Townish post that came later on.

And if the CM quote and Trafalgar quote are unrelated and that the CM quote was not his involved with his thoughts about Trafalgar's quote being the worst vote, then why would he write "which means"??? I'm not the one who is falsely claiming that tails was connecting CM's quote with Trafalgar's quote, it was tails himself that connected them through the words "which means". When you say "STATEMENT C which means STATEMENT E", it implies that your reasoning behind STATEMENT E came from STATEMENT C. C was about CM's quote being townish, E was about Trafalgar's quote being the worst vote, so tails was implying that Trafalgar's quote was the worst vote BECAUSE CM's quote looks townish. Which doesn't make sense if CM's quote came AFTER Trafalgar's quote.

I don't understand why you're so obsessed with the timeline of the events. I didn't even say that the two statements were not related. What I did say was that Tails did not say that the vote was scummy. Tails said that the vote was bad, and I agree seeing as CM was already towntelling IMO before the quoted post. The quote is really irrelevant aside from providing an example of why she was towntelling.

I assume he's referring to my unintentional rolefishing, which I explained already. He doesn't want to vote for me, though, because I have enough votes. Reasonable.

Yes, so they vote someone else they find suspicious. The reason is "I'd like to vote USER, but they have enough pressure now so let's vote someone else and put pressure on them, while USER's situation works itself out, for better or worse." And so they did.

Okay, so he explained why he isn't voting for me. His next step was to vote Trafalgar. Nothing to imply that this vote was random. Of course, failure to mention anything relevant about the user you're voting generally implies it was a random vote, but he did refer to Trafalgar's quote earlier. My thought process was that after tails decided I had enough votes on me, he decided to go for a different target, choosing Trafalgar because of that quote which he referred to as the "worst vote". You, Perseus, on the other hand, seem to believe that he chose his next target randomly, without any proper reasoning, but I fail to see any evidence supporting your theory. It most certainly isn't "very clear" from my point of view. True, he did not outright say that he found Trafalgar scummy, but he quoted his post and gave a negative opinion on it. As far as I can deduce from his posts, the only players he didn't like were me and Trafalgar, which would logically explain his non-random vote for Trafalgar. Before you attack me for my response, I would appreciate it if YOU could tell what you think went through tails' head while making that post.

First of all, I already explained what I thought Tails did and why they did it (hence the comments of my defence), so the last sentence is irrelevant.

No, what I said was that it was part of the RVS, not that it was an absolutely random vote. RVS is scumhunting, not throwing random votes on to people for the hell of it. Tails later mentioned scumhunting in the post that drew flak from the 1/2 of the bandwagon that wasn't you or sparrow ,so I'm using that as the reasoning behind the vote. The reasoning behind the recipient of the vote, or the choice, was Trags because of that quote. One of us is reading in too deeply on the vote itself, and it's not me.

The last part of the post I don't really need to respond to seeing as it's more directed towards Letters.

Oh, what the heck, I might get hammered, so I might as well just claim right now. A Lynch Bomb that kills the last player to vote for it. I'd consider this a negative utility role, but Prims probably doesn't mind putting negative utility roles. Either way, I doubt such a claim would get any votes off of me, so I would prefer it if the 8th person to vote for me is somebody scummy. The last thing you want is for two Townies to die when the second Townie's death doesn't add much data as to why it happened.

OK, so you're at four votes, and you claim because clearly 4 votes means you're getting hammered. Overreaction much?

And no, I'm not going to apologize for anything aside from being a horrible Mafia player. I still don't see anything wrong with a) wanting to know whether a specific post was a serious post or a joke when there are doubts about that, and b) assuming that the phrase "which means" indicates that the following statement is directly supported by the preceding statement. If those two are actually scummy, I apologize, because clearly something must be wrong with how I think this game is to be played.

This post reeks of self-deprecation and appeal to emotion, IMO.

Anyways, I still want to lynch Sundown because I think the claim is rubbish, but I'd like one of Traflagar, Yoshimi, or Sparrrow to hammer it. In the event that Sun is legit, that gives us another flip to mull over while I argue for my life on Day 2.

[Prims]

Asparagus (3) - Shotta, VoltTackle, Trafalgar

Eternlty (3) - Colin Mochrie, Vanilla Diet Coke, Yoshimi

Sundown (3) - Perseus, tails1996, Daniel Craig

NE93B27J3U (2) - ILoveTangerine, Sundown

Yoshimi (2) - Asparagus, Sparrow

Shotta (1) - Eternlty

VoltTackle (1) - NE93B27J3U

Not Voting - None!

With 15 alive, it takes 8 to hammer. You have 6 hours left in the day (countdown).

[All Might]

@Perseus--I still think the risk with lynching Sundown is too high, but if the last vote is Yoshimi I might be able to get behind that. Reading Sparrow as Town so I don't want him as the last vote though.

In any case I feel like all I've seen from you for a while is arguing with Sundown, what's your thoughts on other players?

[Aizen]

Yoshimi has made a good number of posts, but after iso'ing him, he hasn't actually said very much. Both his Sundown vote and his Eternity vote basically just adopted others' suspicions, and in both cases he hadn't previously been suspicious of the person (for Sundown, he had previously felt that Sundown was not rolefishing; for Eternity, he had barely mentioned him). List post was large but the reads in it were fairly weak/basic. And in spite of doing his iso's and reads list, his votes are still based on others' reasoning and not his own observations. Not liking him at the moment.

You are partly correct. Regarding Sundown, I didn't catch the rolefishing, but I thought his subsequent defense wasn't good and he seemed to "squirm"(Oh gosh is that what I look like now?), leading to my vote. As for Eternity, I voted for them because I felt strongly about their vote on Shotta(a reason that nobody else cited, fwiw).

[Refakitty³]

(a reason that nobody else cited, fwiw).

lol aren't you special

[Aizen]

lol aren't you special

If you're going to tell that all I'm doing is adopting other people's suspicions, I feel the need to cite my own accomplishments.

[Olivier]

@Perseus--I still think the risk with lynching Sundown is too high, but if the last vote is Yoshimi I might be able to get behind that. Reading Sparrow as Town so I don't want him as the last vote though.

In any case I feel like all I've seen from you for a while is arguing with Sundown, what's your thoughts on other players?

First line: I think that's exactly why he claimed a role like that - to discourage people from lynching him out of fear for a unfortunate death. Luckily we do have ways of getting around the threat (letting someone scummy hammer and act as a double mislynch if the sunset is legitimate), and I think we should employ them.

I dedicated a whole post to addressing other people how dare you tell me all I've been doing is arguing with Sundown!!!!!!! OK so maybe you have a point, but I have been slipping in reads here and there throughout my verbal sword thrusts, including the bomb candidates. Here are a few more:

Eternity is behaving anti-town by announcing that he as a useless role and being really indifferent to the prospect of being lunched. If you don't want to be useful, then don't play the game. Easy as that.

Null read on Vanilla Diet Coke since on one hand he led the Tails Blitz, but on the other hand they recogniz that Eternity is a problem, despite being almost as inactive as said eternal user.

Shotta needs to exist, and not just tunnel on our vegetable friend.

As for Yoshimi, well, the thing that really bothers me about that list is that he echoes me on the sundown read, but says I didn't do anything notable. This makes me feel as if I'm being set up for a D2-3 where I'm accused of talking a lot, but saying very little during D1. To say I'm skeptical of his cleanness is an understatement.

[Refakitty³]

If you're going to tell that all I'm doing is adopting other people's suspicions, I feel the need to cite my own accomplishments.

I never actually said that myself; I'm more on you for how halfhearted your opinions seem to be sometimes

except on the people who are voting for you

[Refakitty³]

also yeah, shotta and vanilla diet coke both need to exist more.

[Aizen]

@Perseus

When I said that there wasn't anything noteworthy about you, I meant that in a positive way. Nothing seemed abnormal at all. I noted other people on the Sundown wagon, but forgot to note that for you, so hopefully you can forgive me for that.

@Asparagus

You are the only person voting me who I'm remotely suspicious of, so I'd call it an isolated case.

[Olivier]

@Perseus

When I said that there wasn't anything noteworthy about you, I meant that in a positive way. Nothing seemed abnormal at all. I noted other people on the Sundown wagon, but forgot to note that for you, so hopefully you can forgive me for that.

Noted. I'm still suspicious, but, as is probably obvious by now, there are bigger fish to fry for now.

[Refakitty³]

Noted. I'm still suspicious, but, as is probably obvious by now, there are bigger fish to fry for now.

basically doing the same thing people are suspicious of me for