Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

Norwee · 2019-07-28 19:20:11

@Processor
Like Mutant said, most of the points in his initial case (essay) can be countered by Onjit's trump card of "intentionally acting scummy". My main question is the why. Why did Onjit do this? He hasn't for a single moment, explained what this would hope to achieve. If he said he did it for the lulz, that would be better than nothing. But it seems like all Onjit has been doing this entire time is intentionally avoiding to answer.
He also said he would make a list of his town readings, yet we have not seen any of it.
These criticisms were mainly directed towards Onjit, but if you feel like you can answer them Processor. Go right ahead.

If Onjit mafia= He has made a good excuse for his scummy actions, and is now avoiding to answer anyone's digging questions because he knows he doesn't have much of a defense for his actions. Or he just doesn't care what happens anymore. Or he has employed fellow mafia to do the fighting for him.
If Onjit town= He has sincerely described his actions, yet doesn't reveal any of his results because he either A: doesn't care/busy with real life. B: doesn't want to reveal anything YET. or C: Hasn't actually found out anything.

mutantdevle, Slabdrill, 2b55b5g

TaskManager · 2019-07-28 19:46:59

mutantdevle wrote:

Did anyone else here also notice the invisible text? I find it unlikely that I'd be the only one.

I did see it the first time I read that post

mutantdevle wrote:

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.

If you mean "not mention it back when it was posted" then personally I chose not to because it's hidden for a reason which was probably that hopefully mafia will miss it and fall for the trick?

Processor wrote:

He may have unintentionally framed Onjit as the bad guy. But he still framed him.

If Jawapa did not intend to frame Onjit how does that prove he's town? What if it's a **** up caused by miscommunication between Jawapa & Onjit?

also

Kira wrote:

I am going to make a post concerning everything that happened in a few hours. Stay tuned.

This is from Kira's last post
It was 23 hours ago
:thinking:
Multiple people are trying to waste our time with "gonna do X soon" card at this point

Can we get a vote count pls thank

mutantdevle, Norwee, Slabdrill, 2b55b5g

Processor · 2019-07-28 20:01:20

I can't speak for Onjit. It's obvious that Onjit doesn't spend the necessary time to play mafia.
His silence is not helping his case. It's not helping him as a townie, it's not helping him as mafia.
If he doesn't explain what he is doing and give us reads, I won't be sorry for him if he gets lynched.

I am fairly confident in my read of Onjit as town. Yes, it's only based on Jawapa's last post. Yet, it's the piece of evidence with the highest weight. 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.

If it takes an Onjit mislynch for you guys to start suspecting mutantdevle, Crybaby and ZeldaXD, so be it.

NoNK was going to host a 9 player game with 3 mafia if not enough people volunteered for a 15 player game.
We have 3 mafia among 11 of us. So town is currently ahead of mafia in this game.

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.
So please read it, please read mutantdevle's posts, please read NorwegianboyEE's posts. They have made really good points.
Read them and decide if you want to vote for Onjit or not.

My vote is on Mutantdevle and won't switch to Onjit in this phase.

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.

NoNK · 2019-07-28 20:11:05

With 11 alive, it takes 6 votes to send a smiley to HELL.

Onjit [4]: mutantdevle, NorwegianboyEE, slabdrill, peace

mutantdevle [2]: Onjit, Processor

Not voting [5]: Everyone else

This phase will enter overtime in 27 hours.

Mod notes:

Your on fire!

Processor · 2019-07-28 20:14:37

mutantdevle wrote:

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?

A slip!

Not one, but two (Onjit hammering, Jawapa thanking Onjit)

Please, how ridiculous are your theories going to get? Jawapa 100% knew what he was doing when he thanked Onjit for hammering him.

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?

Processor · 2019-07-28 20:26:56

Onjit wrote:

I was 50/50 on Jawapa tbh, and intended to vote to put him on L-1 (which turned out to be the hammer vote because I didn't refresh the page for two minutes - yet more bad luck on my end haha)

You took 6 minutes to type and send your post?

Crybaby L-1'ed 6 minutes before your hammer.

https://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewt … 36#p756436

Processor · 2019-07-28 20:36:58

mutantdevle wrote:

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?

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

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.

You're not accepting that mafia are doing their best to avoid mistakes, and are usually good at doing so.

mutantdevle wrote:

How can you possibly know that?

100% is a number rounded up (i. e. the probability is less than 0.5%).
The number comes from my understanding that mafia make as little mistakes as they can.
Jawapa fooled us all by playing really well. Onjit isn't playing his first mafia game either.

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

Processor · 2019-07-28 20:48:52

Similarly, writing long walls of text won't reveal mafia.
Because mafia aren't making that many mistakes.

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.

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.

peace · 2019-07-28 21:55:51

will read mutans post tomorrow but heres what i think: if onjit mi=maifa porc=mafia if onjit is town mutant=sus

Minimania · 2019-07-28 22:12:17

For the record Processor, I havent actually voted for Onjit and in fact have asked someone else to remove their vote from Onjit so they wouldnt get hammered. In addition, even thought it's just a coincidence, the person who removed their vote was ZeldaXD, yet another person you suspect. My vote for Onjit strictly relies on the post that they promised us. I still feel suspicious towards Onjit, sort of have the whole game, but I am not at all above reasoning and logic, and should Onjit finally deliver on his promise, my opinions on him may be changed. However, seeing time run out while he isnt typing a post, and instead spends it watching videos, doesnt really help

mutantdevle · 2019-07-28 22:26:35

How do you know he's watching videos?

Norwee, Slabdrill, 2b55b5g

Processor · 2019-07-28 22:27:43

My reads on you (Crybaby), mutant and ZeldaXD are highly volatile

I currently suspect mutantdevle the most.

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.

Processor · 2019-07-28 23:45:07

mutantdevle and Zelda's reads will go back to where they were before if Onjit flips mafia.

Processor · 2019-07-28 23:45:27

Both town / townish, that is

2b55b5g · 2019-07-29 06:12:17

I keep switching thoughts about Onjit :/

peace · 2019-07-29 10:17:09

NoNK wrote:

With 11 alive, it takes 6 votes to send a smiley to HELL.
Onjit [4]: mutantdevle, NorwegianboyEE, slabdrill, peace
mutantdevle [2]: Onjit, Processor

thisvote counts explains more i think onjit and porc re on same team so i think lynchign onjjit give sinformation ojnjit town=proc town=mutant sus onjit mafia=proc mafia =mutan town(ish)

peace · 2019-07-29 10:19:01

ZeldaXD wrote:

!unvote
Onjit is L-1, dont want to risk a hammering

why did you vote in the first place then? vote to unvote when someone in L-1? why?

Norwee · 2019-07-29 10:29:20

I don’t think Onjit is going to say anything. I’ve seen him online like 5 times and he’s not posting, we’re also starting to run low on time. No point in waiting anymore if you ask me.

Onjit · 2019-07-29 10:43:41

!vote onjit

dude just send me tbh - even if i post reads its not like you guys are going believe me lmao

Norwee · 2019-07-29 10:45:21

You should post reads anyway. If you get voted and flip either mafia or town, your reads list might be useful.

Norwee · 2019-07-29 10:48:46

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#626 2019-07-28 19:20:11

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#627 2019-07-28 19:46:59

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#628 2019-07-28 20:01:20

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#629 2019-07-28 20:10:40

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#630 2019-07-28 20:11:05

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#631 2019-07-28 20:14:37

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#632 2019-07-28 20:22:07

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#633 2019-07-28 20:26:56

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#634 2019-07-28 20:36:58

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#635 2019-07-28 20:48:52

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#636 2019-07-28 21:10:28

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#637 2019-07-28 21:55:51

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#638 2019-07-28 22:12:17

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#639 2019-07-28 22:26:35

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#640 2019-07-28 22:27:43

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#641 2019-07-28 22:51:36

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#642 2019-07-28 23:45:07

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#643 2019-07-28 23:45:27

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#644 2019-07-29 06:12:17

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#645 2019-07-29 10:17:09

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#646 2019-07-29 10:19:01

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

!unvote

#647 2019-07-29 10:29:20

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#648 2019-07-29 10:43:41

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

!vote onjit

#649 2019-07-29 10:45:21

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

#650 2019-07-29 10:48:46

Re: Mafia 27: PurgatorEE [GAME OVER!]

/Unvote

Board footer