Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 14:54:34

Onjit wrote:

Here the main conflict is between whether to send Kirby (who was one of the many players who contributed nothing to the game but was almost lynched Hell-1) or someone that is much more town-leaning in their posts.

That wasn't the conflict at all... Kirby was considered just as town as both Crybaby and I. The conflict was whether we wanted the useful players in heaven to make a better decision on judgement day or if we wanted the useful players still in purgatory so that they can help solve the rest of the game. I think what ultimately sealed the decision was acknowledging that we have plenty of time before any judgement day would occur.

Onjit wrote:

Trytu's reads/posts were somewhat bizarre compared to other people in the thread but that was either due to inexperience with mafia or a language barrier. As a result I figured he was a reasonable candidate for a lynch.

Your first sentences here doesn't justify the second. If you put his bizarre reads down to being inexperienced and having a language barrier, and not that he was aligned with the mafia, why does that make him a reasonable candidate for a lynch?

Onjit wrote:

neither of them have much desire to be cleared of suspicion and to actually help town by being sent to heaven?

What suspicion did I need to clear myself of? At this time, literally everyone town read me. And you know full well by your comment's on Crybaby that I wanted to stay in purgatory to help the town here.

Onjit wrote:

Devlin is suspicious to me for a few reasons: Voting to send Jawapa to hell and then later on instigating a wagon to send Jawapa to heaven but never actually voting for him

You say this as though I had a sudden change of heart towards jawapa. I was not suspicious of jawapa when I originally voted for him. The reason I did was that he was guilty of the same thing Kirby was being voted for and I found it suspicious that Kirby received votes so quickly. As for the reason I didn't vote for jawapa, I've already explained that. What are your thoughts on my explanation?

Onjit wrote:

Only really starts participating in his usual manner (novellas) once he's directly questioned by Proc.

Incorrect. That started with my case on you which was before Proc started questioning me.

Onjit wrote:

I'll give reads on the rest "later" (some time within the next 200 hours)

I'm hoping that 200 either accidentally has an extra 0 or is just a joke.

Crybaby wrote:

As suspicious of you as I am/have been in this game, Onjit, I do feel like your posts today are sincere.

I don't.

What I wanted from you Onjit was to prove that you've been trying to solve the game alongside baiting people into thinking you're scummy. So far, all you've done is outlined the events of the game and even got that somewhat wrong and the small number of opinions you have expressed are all unoriginal. Put it this way: your reads list better be damn good and detailed.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 15:06:48

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Did anyone else here also notice the invisible text? I find it unlikely that I'd be the only one.
I have no way to answer this. I wouldnt know. I wouldnt like to think you're the only one, but you're the only one that I can confirm have seen it

This was more of a question to everyone else. If someone else did see this next and not mention it in any way then their reason as to why could be the difference between me town reading them or scum reading them.

Processor wrote:

When Jawapa was persuading town to vote Crybaby or mutant, he put a little more emphasis on mutant, so under the two, I think mutant is a more likely mafia candidate.

Alternatively, he saw me as a bigger threat to the mafia and wanted rid of me most.

Processor wrote:

NorwegianboyEE's argument that sending mutant or Crybaby to heaven is a good thing for mafia, is unlikely.

Why? Heaven is the only way that the mafia can get rid of strong players since they don't have a night kill.

Processor wrote:

He wouldn't win by sending good players to heaven.

Why not? If all the good players are in heaven then they can more easily trick the bad players into sending the mafia there as well. If you're only fighting to send mafia members to heaven then the strong town players you haven't gotten rid of yet will pick up on that and end your whole career. You're only thinking short term.

Processor wrote:

I had Onjit at the bottom of my Mafia list, so did mrjawapa and the majority of town iirc.
Onjit was going to be our lynch target today. I was sure of that before mrjawapa flipped

Yes, he was on a lot of people's lists. But no one was serious about him, that's the point. No one was vocalising any strong desire for Onjit to die. Just because you thought he'd be considered today doesn't mean he did.

Processor wrote:

Jawapa framing Onjit is indicator that Onjit is town.

You don't know that jawapa was framing Onjit. That is your opinion. Your opinion is not based on anything and does not decide probability like you seem to think it does.

You are so focused on this one factor that is at most slight proof that Onjit is town. You are yet to explain why you think it trumps all the other reasons that Onjit is considered scummy.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 18:55:35

Processor wrote:

Jawapa explicitly thanks Onjit.
He is framing Onjit as the bad guy.
If he only wanted to thank a teammate, he would do so in mafia chat.
Jawapa framed Onjit. That's not my opinion. That's fact. It's based on a concrete post. You cannot dismiss it like that.
---
I have explained why I think it's more likely that Onjit is innocent and (double) WIFOM is not at play here through logical arguments, which you have not touched at all.

Jawapa framing Onjit is not a fact whatsoever. If it was, you'd be able to definitively and objectively prove it. You cannot just say "this post means it's fact" because you can't prove the intended meaning of the post.

How do you know that jawapa's intention in that post was to frame Onjit rather than just a general friendly/jokey thanks? Mafia members do not consciously plan out every detail of every post they make. It is entirely plausible that jawapa intended no meaning behind his post whatsoever. Frequently, when I've been mafia in previous games, it has been very fun to watch town over analyse things that meant absolutely nothing.

Furthermore, if it is intentional, there is no way you can concretely rule out WIFOM as definitively as you have. It's not something that can be proven either way and hence whichever side you choose to believe is opinion.

I'd argue that given the mountain of evidence there is towards Onjit's scummy behaviour, it is more likely that he is not being framed. Additionally, anecdotal evidence of my experience playing mafia both here and on mafiascum would suggest that the technique of WIFOM is used far more commonly than actively trying to frame people.

Oh, and you want more evidence of Onjit being sketchy? I saw Onjit online twice today on 2 separate occasions. On the second occasion, I watched a 10 minute youtube video before refreshing the page and he was still online. I had hoped that he was writing a post in that time but quite clearly I guess this thread isn't important enough for him.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 19:00:59

2B55B5G TNG wrote:

Eh ok. Still confused but I guess that's fine.

Just watch this video:

2b55b5g, Norwee, Minimania, Slabdrill, Raphe9000

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 20:10:40

Processor wrote:

That shows he is inactive in mafia. So what?

Do you really need me to explain to you why avoiding the thread is a scummy thing to do?

Processor wrote:

He may have unintentionally framed Onjit as the bad guy.

If you can admit that the post may have been unintentional, how can you be sure he didn't accidentally make his buddy look bad?

Processor wrote:

So how about this: Instead of overanalyzing individual sentences of mine, you focus on the overall points that I am making.

I have no idea what you are on about. I have addressed ALL of your points SEVERAL times. You keep going on and on about the same points over and over again and not only have I provided responses to them but I've also provided several different possibilities, all of which you refuse to deny the plausibility of. You've essentially just responded with "no" to a lot of my arguments. I've acknowledged that it is possible that jawapa could be framing Onjit, but that I don't think it's likely given all the other factors surrounding Onjit - all of which you refuse to acknowledge. Even in the post you are replying to you have ignored half my points and you seem to treat anything other than your own opinion as impossible.

Processor wrote:

Yet, it's the piece of evidence with the highest weight.

You have convinced a grand total of 0 people that this is the case. I also don't see how a single action by someone else trumps all of the actions of the person in question.

Processor wrote:

All other heuristics that mutantdevle is using are just guesses too. I've gone through some of them and explained why they don't hold any water in this post.

My 'heuristics' are not guesses, they are the analysis of Onjit's behaviour. And you explained why you thought a small and specific part of my case doesn't hold water. You ignored most of it. You even ignored most of my post against that.

Processor wrote:

I don't claim to be the best in mafia, I don't claim to have the best people reading skills out there.
However I have still shared my opinion with all of you to read and interpret.

This is completely fair enough. But my issue is the way you are going about it. You don't seem to be receptive to other people's ideas and think that you have to stick by what you say. I'm not saying that my case on Onjit HAS to convince you, but it doesn't feel like you're even listening.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 20:22:07

Processor wrote:

A slip!

?

Processor wrote:

Please, how ridiculous are your theories going to get?

What is ridiculous about it? Because it was 2 things that happened? I've told you several reasons why Jawapa's post means nothing and I've told you several reasons that Onjit could and would hammer. What about them do you not understand?

Processor wrote:

Jawapa 100% knew what he was doing when he thanked Onjit for hammering him.

How can you possibly know that?

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 21:10:28

Processor wrote:

You're not accepting the fact that Onjit was the most suspicious player in the game already in the heaven phase.

I've told you, that's not the impression I got. And neither of us have asked people on whether they thought Onjit would be the next candidate for hell. But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what everyone else thought - it matters what Onjit thought. Nothing Onjit said or anything anyone said towards Onjit makes me think that he'd have thought he was too suspicious. And your recent post just highlighted that he thought his vote was the L-1 vote. I had missed that previously and I think you did too since you're bringing it up now. He didn't intend to hammer. Does that not change your stance knowing that he didn't vote thinking he'd look overly scummy for it? Clearly, Onjit has experienced some miscommunication.

Processor wrote:

You've theorized that mafia is disorganized and that's why scum Onjit hammered on Jawapa instead of jawapa hammering on himself, despite the latter being better for mafia.
You're now theorizing that mrjawapa accidentally thanked their colleague in the open.
Both these accidents are possible, but each on their own is unlikely, the combination even less likely.

So now that we have proof from Onjit himself that the hammer was accidental, that second accident suddenly looks more likely. Also, my argument isn't necessarily that jawapa thanked his buddy in this thread rather than his PT, but rather that jawapa didn't realise his post would be so significant.

Processor wrote:

You're interpreting anything that doesn't fit your opinion as a mistake by mafia.
Mafia isn't making so many mistakes, any one mistake will cost them their life. See: Zoey2070

Your first sentence is right to a certain extent. My scum read on Onjit has influenced the way I look at this specific situation. But that's because I don't see the alternative (jawapa framing Onjit) being likely enough to invalidate all my other analysis of Onjit's posts. I've played as mafia numerous times, you're constantly making mistakes throughout the game. Most of them go unnoticed and you usually get lynched for the wrong reasons but right conclusion. Unfortunately for Zoey, hers was very obvious and her response was weak. If she had admitted 'yeah I did try to lynch Kirby' and justified it well she might have survived the phase.

Processor wrote:

Similarly, writing long walls of text won't reveal mafia.

The reason I write walls is A) The forum rules aren't lenient enough for me to use a single post for each point and B) I'm in the habit of having a lot to say as on mafiascum you could expect to have over 500 posts in a single day.

Processor wrote:

Looking deep into a few interesting interactions will reveal a lot of information.
Far more than: (in order)
- complaining about a valid question they asked, about the setup, at the start of the game.
- complaining they just stated the obvious.
- complaining about another valid question they asked about the setup.
- complaining they just stated the obvious again.
- complaining they are trying to "look townie" for stating it's L-1.
- complaining they just stated the obvious once again.
All that won't prove someone is scum.
Focus on the things that matter.

"Looking deep into a few interesting interactions" is exactly what I did to make every single one of those conclusions that you've just deceivingly labelled as 'complaints'. In all of those things, I asked myself "why would he say this, what's the motive"? What you've done, is looked at all of those things in isolation and gone "this isn't that bad". But when in combination with each other you have to start asking yourself why in so much of what they say being mafia is a plausible alternative. Every post matters processor.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 22:26:35

How do you know he's watching videos?

Norwee, Slabdrill, 2b55b5g

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 22:51:36

Processor wrote:

I currently suspect mutantdevle the most.

I suspect that your read on me will be entirely dictated by the way Onjit flips.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-29 19:25:42

Processor wrote:

Mutant and others are getting behind the wagon since Onjit is not providing them with a read list.

Not once have I said that people should join the wagon because he's not providing a read list. I would very much have liked to see him produce a reads list - though I do doubt he ever would have provided one.

Processor wrote:

As if getting assigned mafia suddenly makes you incapable of writing good read lists...

I mean, yes, it kinda does... If you already know people's alignments then you may struggle to write a convincing explanation as to why you read someone a certain way. Sure, mafia are capable of faking it. But it is significantly harder for mafia to justify reads than it is for town.

If Onjit is town then he 100% deserves this lynch anyway - especially since he self voted. You shouldn't be intentionally scummy if you're not willing to later put the effort in to convince people you're town. I've seen no evidence that he's been trying to solve the game and I see no explanation behind any of his given reads that are without a doubt genuine. And I know that he's capable of both because I shared a PT with him last game - the kind of thing I'm asking from him here he happily gave me there without much delay. He quite clearly doesn't have a specific reason as to why he took so long to answer here so obviously something else must have changed between those 2 games.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-29 19:26:44

Processor, do you expect us to town read you if Onjit flips scum?

mutantdevle · 2019-07-29 20:06:43

Welp, I apologise for not listening to you Processor, but I still believe I was justified for my reasons for wanting Onjit dead.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-29 20:07:52

Processor wrote:

I've stayed loyal to my read on Onjit till the last second of the night.
What do you make of that?

I'd not have expected anything else.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-29 20:08:51

Processor wrote:

Not giving a **** about the game was what he was doing.
It's not indicative of scum.
Hey NorwegianboyEE, I'm most confident in your townness, can we send you to heaven pls.

Not giving a **** about the game very much can be a tell. But I do agree that it's probably much less of a tell on this forum.

I agree with sending Norweiganboy to heaven.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-29 20:21:05

Kira, Crybaby and Zelda are my other options (in that order).

Unlike Noerweiganboy, I have at least 1 issue with all of them though.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-30 12:37:56

To be honest, I'd actually prefer Proc in heaven than being in purgatory if y'all consider him so townie. He's shown that his reads are good but that he's not necessarily good at arguing his point. I'm sure I don't speak for just myself when I say his defence of Onjit and arguments for lynching Zelda were never very convincing. Even now that most people town read him no one is convinced by what he says about Zelda. Because of that Proc would be more useful in heaven than down here. If we got to the point where judgement day matters, Proc seeing something that the rest of us didn't down here could be our saving grace.

That said, I'm personally not entirely convinced that proc is town. But if everyone else does then y'all should definitely strongly consider him for heaven.

What do you think Proc?

peace, Slabdrill

mutantdevle · 2019-07-30 21:37:35

TaskManager wrote:

@Mutant to me that sounds like you're trying to get rid of Proc, especially considering he voted you in the past phase

I understand why you'd think that.

Proc's vote doesn't concern me. He thinks I'm mafia and there's nothing I can do to change that so I'm not even going to bother trying. I'd only become concerned if the rest of the town thinks I'm worth sending to hell.

Processor wrote:

The problem isn't that I'm not convincing.
I have literally explained everything I had on Onjit, there wasn't more to my read than what I have posted here.
You just had to read it and agree with my conclusions.

You can't just state your point and expect people to agree with you lol. If you don't understand that then it's pretty clear you don't know what it takes to convince people of your opinion.

Processor wrote:

You didn't agree with my conclusions, why is that?

You gave me no reason to trust you, you never explained why my own evidence was wrong, the way you worded several events in the game came across as manipulative, and repeating your points like I'd never addressed them whilst blatantly ignoring several of my own points made me feel like you weren't really listening to me. Why would I trust your conclusions if I don't think you've factored in any of my own points?

Processor wrote:

I observe that you guys
- think quantity matter over quality (longer posts are considered "evidence")
- ignore facts that don't fit your story
- semi-blindly follow people who talk a lot (mutantdevle)

I don't think anyone here is valuing quantity over quality. My posts being longer was not the only difference between you and I.

Who do you think is ignoring facts that don't fit their story? As far as I'm aware I'm the only person you've criticised for that. And again, I was never ignoring facts that didn't fit my story. This is exactly what I'm on about when I say that you weren't listening to me.

People don't semi-blindly follow me because I talk a lot. You talk a lot, crybaby talks a lot, and there was a stage when Kira was talking a lot.

Processor wrote:

you'll still lynch the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
Silencing me by sending me to heaven won't save you from that.

Lynching the wrong people for the wrong reasons is exactly why I'd want you in heaven. Because if we are consistently wrong, then I'd trust town!you to get it right. I, personally, have no desire to send you to heaven simply because I don't trust you to be town. But if you are indeed town, then your capabilities in this game are much better suited for heaven than purgatory.

ASDruska

mutantdevle · 2019-07-30 21:42:16

I think peace is a decent candidate for hell to be honest. He's demonstrated that, despite what he might seem from his typing style, he is actually a competent mafia player. As a result, it's not just a case of waiting for him to undeniably slip like it would be for players like Anatoly. Players like Slabdrill and 2B55 do need to step up a bit though as I think we're nearing the stage where people are looking suspicious by process of elimination.

ASDruska

mutantdevle · 2019-07-30 21:46:28

@2B55: what's your opinion of peace? In your personal opinion, how would you rate him as a mafia player? Has your opinion of him changed since previous games?

ASDruska

mutantdevle · 2019-07-30 22:02:09

peace wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
I'd only become concerned if the rest of the town thinks I'm worth sending to hell.
i do think youre a bit sus cuase of onjit

You thought Onjit was town too. Do you not apply yourself to the same standard? or am I the exception because I was the one to speak up and question those who thought he was town?

mutantdevle · 2019-07-30 23:20:09

^^ My primary option is Norweiganboy. Unless that wasn't the point of the vote count?

mutantdevle · 2019-07-31 12:22:12

Processor wrote:

I don't need you to trust me to read what I say.
In this game, only mafia knows who's who. Town has no clue whatsoever.
So the only people's word you can "trust" is mafia, they know who's who, they know what they're talking about.

Trust is not irrelevant when it comes to reading what people say and believing them. If I don't trust that your opinion is coming from a place of genuinely trying to solve the game then why would I listen to it? It's not about being right, it's about showing that you're genuine in your motives. And it's concerning that you think only the former matters.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-31 12:27:03

2B55B5G TNG wrote:

My opinion of peace has changed.

2B55B5G TNG wrote:

If Peace is town then his reason is pretty normal, and my opinions on him might remain unchanged but I’ll see.

Ahh right, so are you saying that if peace is town then your opinion of him is unchanged because he's still just as noob-y as he was previously? I guess it makes sense that his recent actions are only more advanced if he is indeed mafia.

peace wrote:

honestly idk hwo to defend myself here cause if im gonna say im town send me to heaven none is goign to belive me with like 0 edivice eventhoguh i want to say it i like it down ehre to discuss thigns but im fine wiht goign up aswell maby im better there keppingme down here is goign to benefit the town more then for exmaple someone liek you mutant (if ur really town)

You can't defend yourself because there's not really anything to defend against. Thanks for making it clear though that you have a desire to go to heaven though.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-31 12:28:37

NorwegianboyEE wrote:

Mutant, what is your sus list right now?

NorwegianboyEE wrote:

Mutant, what is your sus list right now?

I'll answer this within the next 12 hours.

mutantdevle · 2019-07-31 19:07:00

Processor wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
If I don't trust that your opinion is coming from a place of genuinely trying to solve the game then why would I listen to it?
Because if you're suspicious about me, you have even more reasons to listen to what I'm saying

Listen in the sense of trying to figure out your alignment? Sure. But you're clutching at straws at this point if you're seriously trying to say that I should follow your opinions if I don't trust you.

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#51 2019-07-28 14:54:34

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#52 2019-07-28 15:06:48

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#53 2019-07-28 18:55:35

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#54 2019-07-28 19:00:59

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#55 2019-07-28 20:10:40

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#56 2019-07-28 20:22:07

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#57 2019-07-28 21:10:28

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#58 2019-07-28 22:26:35

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#59 2019-07-28 22:51:36

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#60 2019-07-29 19:25:42

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#61 2019-07-29 19:26:44

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#62 2019-07-29 20:06:43

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#63 2019-07-29 20:07:52

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#64 2019-07-29 20:08:51

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#65 2019-07-29 20:21:05

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#66 2019-07-30 12:37:56

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#67 2019-07-30 21:37:35

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#68 2019-07-30 21:42:16

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#69 2019-07-30 21:46:28

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#70 2019-07-30 22:02:09

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#71 2019-07-30 23:20:09

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#72 2019-07-31 12:22:12

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#73 2019-07-31 12:27:03

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#74 2019-07-31 12:28:37

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#75 2019-07-31 19:07:00

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

Board footer