That picture is giving me seizures.

ok. so re-read done. took me 5 frigging hours which was unexpected but trying to take notes every other post is really time consuming. And I'm not sure that even helps. I still don't who's the bad guy. The only one to present scientific data is flubs in and he's also the only one that wants to be lynched [url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_51_the_greater_good/post95]#95.

Anyway what struck me interesting:

in #35 HSL points to the old game where I found most interesting that Trent was claiming Alarmist early on then, and I felt growing a bit red because I said before that was plain silly. haven't read the game though because I wanted to stay focused on this but would be interested how day 2 went with that setting.

Lift (and everyone) - Wyrm Debate: Nothing new to add there either but I do also find it interesting how Trent came up with his numbers on his vote in #81 (cult would outnumber us 3 to 1 when actually worst case is 3:2 (still lost) on Day 3 morning also the second assertion 2:2 with a correct lynch when it will actually be 2:3 then always assuming CL recruits successfully each time).
About Lift well his way was aggressive but I didn't see him trying hard to push for a mis-lynch. He conceded about everything in the end.
Hunter and Dedo were rather defensive of wyrm but also asking him questions. And Trent was everywhere, working pretty townish I feel. As for flubs, well he's very funny (it'd be a right shame to loose him really) but has his firm contributions (#143 as also pointed out by wyrm). As for HSL he was pretty much in the background but presenting a keen eye as always asking questions in long lists as usual. About Wyrm himself I think I explained what I think. His presentation of the case is pretty convincing, I guess we'll see tomorrow what came of it.

much later flubs made a very similar claim (in a very different way) "My talent will shine come Day Three" ... asks for lynching now. also "don't say I didn't warn ya." HSLs question to Lift is quite interesting in [url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_51_the_greater_good/post218]#218 "What is it that sets them apart"

[The whole RollCall thingie, is pretty surely irrelevant and I think everything has been said about it already but to recap: first real RC was by BookWyrm () and trent only answered it via quoting HSL ([url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_51_the_greater_good/post92]#92) which was even commented on by JMich ( "I hate Loopholes") first one to break the rule 19a was also Trent in post [url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_51_the_greater_good/post99]#99 (afterwards by my old ego and I at least know she was town) and he's gotten flak about it, but as has been said by lift and flub: if it were a hard rule it'd be gamebreaking and jmich basically confirmed it being flavor himself with #121
After that the accusations were merely about not reading the posts thoroughly. But if there ever was anything to the RCs (which I doubt) then I'd look at trent first. With that I'll drop the RC thingie completely (btw, HSL why do you keep starting all your posts with The Greater Good?)]

So as for as whom to vote for I can't say that I'm much clearer now than before the re-read. But I have my hunches now. (Everyone is possible though and it's purely without evidence, just gut feeling)

To further the feeling, I'd like to hear more from HypersomniacLive what he thinks is our best bet to hit scum today are.

Since they are flubbucket? Flubb has been harping on - and taking pride in - being useless for some games now. That isn't a friendly way to play the game since it doesn't exactly lead to teamwork. But he has done so as town in the past. Not directly asking to be lynched but stating that he is intentionally useless.

Bookwyrm demanded: don't lynch me until Day 3. Flubb demanded: lynch me now. ... I don't know about you, but I do see a difference between asking NOT to be lynched and the opposite. A CL trying to buy time with some play does make sense. A CL trying to get lynched, not. However, if you read flubb's statement, there is some truth in it. In the past games he was always intentionally useless on Day 1 and only became useful later. I don't know why he does this and why he doesn't change it for a cult game. But the point that he becomes stronger later in the game - at which point he will probably be cult - is still valid.

Now, of course, WIFOM. Flubb could have posted this request to be lynched as an example of reverse psychology for exactly the response I am giving. For the 'he wouldn't do this if he was CL' effect. So he still is a good fallback-solution for lynching.

But let me pose a counter question to both of you: if flubb's statement sits so wrong with you, why don't you vote him?

And especially HSL: you are, again, only asking questions and not contributing much from yourself. Who is your preferred target and why?

@hsl Post 199 fits with his usual town play imo, having been voted by Trent before in other games. That is what I meant by aggressive where he uses his vote to make scummy looking players sing and use that to figure out their alignment.

About lift’s second line
“If you DON'T want your play explained, don't explain it - and don't expect others to explain it either”
feels like something a town player wouldn’t say. He doesn’t explain his behaviour while saying that bookwyrm is not doing so. It’s a flimsy answer for the question asked of him. (About his inconsistency about wanting bookwyrm to not explain and later ask for an explanation for his play)

When I suggest we all vote to see where we stand your response is "The only real difference between acting now and near the deadline is that we'll probably have more time to react to whatever claim might come out of it. Is that the goal here? To get an official claim to get things going?" That to me reads as it doesn't really matter if we vote now or later, there's not much difference.

My response was that a claim is not what I wanted, I wanted us to work together to try and find the CL, your response was "Isn't that what we or at least most of us are trying to do? Almost everyone is pushing towards someone for whatever reason. Voting aggressively will only result in an earlier claim on D1, which yes, gives us something more substantial to work with, but then again you say that's not your goal. I'm on board with working together, but can you provide some example on what you would like us as a group to do that doesn't have work towards a claim?" That to me reads as, Unless you are voting to get a claim then don't vote because it's too aggressive.

So I see you as trying to hold the vote off until the last minute and then you will make a push on someone when we don't have time to really discuss it or gauge reactions from a push, IMO it takes at least 3 days minimum to really talk things out because of time zone differences and life in general.

I guess we will just do what we always do and look at each other with suspicion wile throwing the occasional vote out there just for grins and giggles and then proceed to lynch a townie.

The very essence of Day One.

Vote: HypersomniacLive

Please do me a favour and read that exchange again. Either you misread it or you just skimmed it. If you don't even mis-represent it on purpose. That was neither what the question nor my reply was about. Bookwyrm asked me why I only present the possible scum reasons for his actions and not the possible town reasons too. And I replied to that.

@trent: I'm sorry, but you still feel too quick with your vote and too vote-hoppy to me. That's not exactly building pressure with your vote. It fells more like throwing it around and see where it sticks / looks most acceptable for others.

@flubb: why HSL?

Yes that's what I was doing, throwing it around to see where it would stick and not placing my vote on who I felt was the scummiest option. I mean I voted bookwyrm after his comment that I didn't like (and you followd not long after) and then removed the vote after I though about it for a night. Then to try and get the game to moving I encourage everyone to vote so we could see where everyone was at and put mine on Sage for floating along trying to hide in plain sight. I then moved it to you two posts later for casting shade again with your over eager comment as I found you to be the scummier option. I probably would have left it on you until dedo started with his comments that I felt were trying to make it look like waiting till the last minute to vote is what we needed to do, and that along with my overall bad vibe I am getting from him is why I moved my vote to him.

So sure I'm just tossing my vote around to see where it will stick because that's what town needs to win this (Total sarcasm)

What I was thinking is that you are correct about the fact flub kind of takes pride in being... "less active" that the rest and has stated so in the past. But, as you yourself said, flub does that. And as either alignment. So, I don't understand why him saying he should be the lynch today looks so townie to you. And if he was that fine with being the lynch wouldn't be pushing his own wagon?

I didn't ask why you aren't voting him for what he said, that's not a good enough reason to vote for someone in my eyes, but I don't get what is so townie about it either.

Regarding the second point of him being useful late game but that being a problem since he will most likely be cult - doesn't that apply to most if not all of the players here? I read your "promise", for the lack of a better word , of lynching him tomorrow because of that as tongue in cheek, but if it wasn't', I can't say I like the setup.


Even if holding the vote was my angle I wouldn't be able to do it since I'd be holding only mine. And forgive me if I don't go and push left and right by voting but I do like to talk to people and try to get some understanding of how they see the game, others and themselves. Just like you prefer to vote by instinct I like to take my time and vote only when I think I have a good enough candidate. That's why I don't take part in the RVS silliness.

Anyway, I'm not going to try and convince you of anything any further since your mind seems to be already made up.


As for holding my own vote, I wanted to hear from Sage/mchack since I still have that spot along with Lift as top suspects, and I also wanted to have control over it (as in get back from vacation which I just did).

Mchack came back with some observations and even though I hoped for a bit more I get more worried by Lift at the moment.


vote Lift


Is there a reason behind that which you want to share with the class?

My vote is based on the patented HypersomniacLive point/counterpoint avoidance system used for creating stance free dialogue.




Also there are no girls left for me to vote

Are you trying to motivate him or do you actually think he's trying to keep away for more nefarious reasons?

His reads and posts are very, very neutral. Overall...eh. I think I'm reading town there. But yeah, maybe he's sitting in a 1-inch deep raft and so very carefully not making any waves.

Glad I wasn't the only one seeing that. Of course, Flub might be making fun of someone, an excuse that I didn't have.

"firm contributions"

You've used the plural, and indicated one. Could you please indicate more than one, and what you gather from each of them?

I must be getting old and amnesiac. Could you please quote where I said don't lynch me until Day 3?

The Greater Good

The dialled back I mentioned didn't refer to your (not) voting.


Why is mchack in your top suspects?
While I was concerned about Sage103082, I don't want a piece of mchack Today.



My comment was not about you not putting out a lot of analysis, but about you hardly engaging others directly, unless it's to vote them. And your reasons form as they talk and engage others. Hence if everyone did what you do, our vote-posts would be something along the lines of "vote so and so, because... reasons". Can you see my point?

Anyway, since Lifthrasil's still in your suspects pool, I'd still like an answer to my question: Is there anything else besides the shade casting, which is the only thing you mentioned again in your post #234?



Is "conceding about everything in the end" something only a townie would do?


So, you not only consider his post #143 a firm contribution, but you've spotted more? Could you point me to them?


Heh.

I'm still waiting for a reply from Bookwyrm627 who hasn't been on since Friday, I believe, and I'd like to hear from him before saying anything.



Can you point me to where exactly he "demanded" not to be lynched until D3?


Here's the thing, you use their self-meta to condemn Bookwyrm627, but exonerate flubbucket. Then throw in some WIFOM arguments in what looks like an attempt not to appear biased.


This is actually not accurate. Going over his earlier games, he wasn't always intentionally useless on D1. Based on when the change first occured, I have a theory as to why he started playing "useless' on D1 as either alignment. But that's a subject for another discussion.


Is this for real?


Patience, I'm getting there.


That's pretty rich coming from you of all people, and about trentonlf of all people.



I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make. Can you break it down in plain English for my non-native English speaker self?

"Girls" are the old fashioned way we used to refer to boys without penises.

Nowadays I don't have a fucking clue what genders we're dealing with.....