Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

Norwee · 2019-11-05 16:09:15

The day ends in 42 hours or until a majority has been reached.
The majority for this day is [6]

[2] Peace: mutantdevle, Kira
[1] Mutantdevle: Peace
[0] ShadowsEdge:
Not voting: ShadowsEdge, ILikeTofuuJoe, Slabdrill, Taskmanager, Crybaby, ZeldaXD, eleizibeth

Minimania · 2019-11-05 16:11:18

You tried

rat, Slabdrill, ShadowsEdge

rat · 2019-11-05 16:14:39

Crybaby wrote:

Before Elei first posted, I had to beg her twice to make a post before she finally caved in. All she did was woot my posts. Her recent posts have had nothing of any real substance. She made a small mention to something I made in a previous post, something Slabdrill also did, and then said that she had scum feelings about me simply for getting bad vibes from me and being unable to trust me since last game. Aside from this, there was really nothing else to say about Elei other than being on the wagon against KirbyKareem and wooting some of my posts arguing against him. So, all of this begs the question: Why are you so sure that Eleizibeth is townie?

yeah man i mean im willing to make more posts when i actually have something to add, but I don't right now so don't expect too many posts, because the posts that I do make aren't gonna be all that helpful

also "I had to beg her twice to make a post before she finally caved in." caved in? is that really the best phrase? i just thought it would be funny to woot a post that complains about how i only woot posts and don't post anything myself. i did the same thing with Peace's post, don't look too far into it lmao

rat · 2019-11-05 16:17:18

now with that being said
i am most likely to vote for peace because i think the nominees are all town, just to confuse us

TaskManager · 2019-11-05 17:27:48

god what the **** i woke up to
mutant and crybaby are going insane again
i honestly cant be bothered reading through these enormous posts, just skimmed over them

peace wrote:

11: Taskmanager yeah politelync time? why? i see no **** logic behind policelynching sure its day 1 but cmon we have 62 **** horus to discuss yet we quick lyah an newbie who also is innonent

yeah i totally pushed the policy lynch all by myself

given how obvs of a lynch bait peace is, this coud be reverse reverse psychology

kira youre lame
do actually say something

rat

Kira · 2019-11-05 17:48:28

I have no opinion

Idk what to think rn

TaskManager · 2019-11-05 17:53:23

wow cool
when are we replacing tofuu

TaskManager · 2019-11-05 17:54:14

oh he legit posted nvm

peace · 2019-11-05 17:54:17

eleizibeth wrote:

because the posts that I do make aren't gonna be all that helpful

!vote ele

peace · 2019-11-05 17:54:38

**** nvm

rat

peace · 2019-11-05 17:55:36

crybaby/mutant can you 2 give TD;LS ofrouyr logn posts

rat · 2019-11-05 17:55:54

what are u doing peace lmao

peace · 2019-11-05 18:11:08

i wanted to vote you then after i clciked submti i was liek oh **** D2

Slabdrill · 2019-11-05 18:19:33

i didn't really intend for my last post to give people a townread (you should already know that i can't really do that even if i try; though i'll probably try in the future anyway); i just wanted to state my opinion so that people could consider it

my opinion is still the same btw. both mutant and shadows still seem like a potential maf (mutant moreso, because shadows has a townlean due to onjit)

peace · 2019-11-05 18:20:42

Slabdrill wrote:

both mutant and shadows still seem like a potential maf (mutant moreso, because shadows has a townlean due to onjit)

easy kill for maf to put e in t he list so you coudl be very well right altough it would be too mcuh risk IF thyere both maf tobth be in the list on the first nonomination

mutantdevle · 2019-11-05 19:36:33

Crybaby wrote:

You are 1 of 3 people on the chopping block today. I do not trust you and expect that none of the rest of the town does either. That being said, since you are one of the most competent players here, alongside being on the chopping block, I'm going to be reading every single word you say and dissecting it. I'm not going to let you get away with writing long **** posts and expecting them to make you look townie anymore, not like you've done in some previous games.

People haven't been automatically town reading me for long posts for quite a while now.

My issue remains that your excessive dissection of my posts does not seem like it is in good faith. If you were drawing conclusions then I'd understand your purpose behind it but at best you are dissecting for simply the sake of dissecting.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
I expected peace to be in the lynch pool because it's the meme-y thing to do. It's basically a free misslynch for the mafia.
I expected myself to be in the lynch pool because, again, it's a meme-y thing to do. Furthermore, putting a player who is unlikely to be lynched in the lynch pool focusses the lynch onto the other 2 players.
I expected us both to be in the lynch pool because, yet again, that's the meme thing to do. This forum is inherently meme-y. Wouldn't it be funny if the player people consider to be the strongest is in the same pool as the player who is considered to be the weakest?
When you put it like this, it's like you didn't even think about the selections. Assuming you, Shadow, and Peace are town, then the Mafia would sect you three deliberately. There is a very clear difference between the way you all play. The natural thing to do is to lynch Peace because he is the least valuable player (as again, you and Shadow both already pointed out). This is obvious. This is something everyone in the room is thinking. It's too obvious. The point of something like this is to make people second-guess themselves, and to lynch either you or Shadow instead, clearly more valuable players. This is all assuming that all three of you are town, which as I've said before, is possible, but is not the only possibility.

When I describe the selection as meme-y, I don't mean that it wasn't deliberate. They obviously made the choice intentionally and with their win condition in mind. Perhaps instead of using an adjective to describe why I considered it a strong possibility that peace and I would be in the lynch pool is as simple as I just think they would. I consider it a typical thing that people on these forums would do. I can't point to anything specific that would prove this but this thought is based on my experience both with this forum and specifically with mafia on this forum. It's intuition. And clearly my intuition is quite good because it turns out I was right.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
As I clearly stated, I had been thinking on the idea that myself and peace would be in the starting pool before the day even started. Why then is it so hard to believe that I'd come to this conclusion as quickly as I did?
So, what you're saying is, because you thought the Mafia would meme around and decide to specifically pick you and Peace and put you two as the only candidates for today, that that instantly clears you and Peace of all charges of being Mafia for today? Absolutely not. You're smarter than that, Mutant.

Peace? Yes. Me? No. I've not said for a single second that this clears me as town; you're putting words in my mouth at this point.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
In fact, why do you even think it's so hard to come to instant conclusions, is that something you don't consider possible?
I never said that it was hard to come to instant conclusions. It's especially likely for newer players to come to instant conclusions based off of singular pieces of evidence. You are not a new or inexperienced player at all, nor do you have any evidence to suggest that they were even meming around when selecting you and Peace to begin with.

Why does experience affect how quickly you can come to conclusions? Surely all it affects is how accurate your conclusions may be. To be honest, I'd argue that someone is likely to come to conclusions quicker with more experience.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
My logic behind believing that peace and I would be in the pool together relies on the basis that the mafia are memeing. Aka they're not taking the pool too seriously. Hence, that naturally extends to the third candidate making it more likely that the third candidate is also town.
So I guess what I said earlier is true.
There is no evidence to suggest that the Mafia are making around, and I've already described some tangible benefits for the Mafia that could explain exactly why they chose who they did. Not only did I do this in this post, but also my earlier superpost.

And as I have made clear also in both posts, my belief is based on my theory. You need to shut down any conclusions in concerning.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
peace only even ends up in the lynch pool when he is town. As mafia, peace would be incredibly obvious. He'd be lynched very quickly if put into the pool. Then, forcing town to lynch peace on a day where we have full control of the lynch is obviously better for the mafia than wasting him in a pool lynch. For this reason, peace simply being in the pool made me conclude he was town. If you have any reason to believe scum would put scum!peace in the lynch pool then I'd love to hear it.
I will describe to you again why I think Peace is not 100% in the clear: His teammates. Peace's teammates are guaranteed already well aware the kind of player Peace is (considering Kareem is confirmed not to be scum, anyway), and may possibly have convinced Peace to take up this plan, figuring that the town might second-guess themselves and choose to lynch you or Shadow.
Even if Peace was a townie, this does not clear you or Shadow. Do not tie yourself to him. You and him are two entirely separate players.

Again, my point is that I think it's highly unlikely that peace would ever be put into the pool if he was mafia. So because I think that would be unlikely, I think he is town. Why are you so insistent that I shouldn't be making those kinds of conclusions? You don't need to be 100% sure of something to make a conclusion.

And I've never said that peace being town makes me or shadow also town. What I'm saying is that based on the pool composition (everyone in the pool) I think it's likely that the pool is 100% town. If I was not in the pool, and it was just peace with 2 other random people, I'd definitely not be saying the pool is all town. Though, I'd probably still say that peace himself was town.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Was it? Please point out where I lied.
The part where you said it was going to take a lot of convincing for you to vote for peace. Turns out, it really did not take a lot of convincing.

This was my full quote:

mutantdevle wrote:

Was it? Please point out where I lied. I made a statement, my statement turned out to be wrong. That's not lying, that's simply being wrong.

You've just clipped out the part where I explain the difference between a lie and a mistake to continue pushing your narrative that I lied. Shame on you.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
The fact that you're trying to frame this as a lie is incredibly manipulative. Furthermore, you were given full context as to why my mind changed. I didn't recall Onjit's post when making my previous conclusion. When I realised this information, it affected my conclusion. What part of that do you have difficulty with?
It would be, it it weren't actually a lie. You didn't even need anybody else to tell you anything, you just convinced yourself like 1 post later.

Are you serious?

mutantdevle wrote:

TaskManager wrote:
since onjit allegedly opted out because hes not mafia anymore
I had forgotten about this and it already makes me reconsider my stance. With both shadowsedge and peace looking so obviously townie I’m starting to think that perhaps the intention of this pool was to have me lynched.

I very clearly reconsidered based on what TaskManager said.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Okay, what's your point? This is a fact that I'm very aware of and has no impact on anything I have said.
To point out that we don't have the same viewpoint as you, so if you want us to believe you, then you better explain why you come to the conclusions you do, rather than just saying the conclusions you have without any explanation. For example, you claimed that you and Peace were cleared. Why? Because you believe the Mafia to be making a meme, and don't take the nominations seriously (an explanation you had to give after the fact.) Of course, there is no evidence to even back up your claim, but that's besides the point.

I have already thoroughly explained why peace is cleared. At no point have I ever claimed that I myself am cleared. In fact, I explicitly pointed out that my arguments rely on me being town and that today for me could be about me convincing people I am town. The only explanation that is necessary for my theories is the trust that I am town because my opinions are just what I think. If you are looking for hard evidence to back up anything then that is exactly why you have not come to any conclusions and nor would you ever. You have to make assumptions in order to make conclusions, that's a basic principle of mafia.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
As do you.
I can explain my conclusions with evidence. Where is yours?

Nothing you have said has contained any evidence. All you've done laid out possibilities and poked holes in what I have to say. Also, what conclusions are you talking about? You've not made any conclusions!

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Do you disagree that I'm a player that's generally considered harder to lynch? What do you think would be the reason that mafia would put me in the pool assuming I am town? I find it hard to believe that you'd come to a conclusion that doesn't match mine.
1. Yes. You are not invincible to being lynched, Mutant.

That's not the point! I am harder to lynch than most players both because of my status and because of my ability to put up a fight. It's obviously not impossible to lynch me but that is not relevant. Pretty much everyone knows that and it is guaranteed to be in the mind of the mafia when targetting me for anything. Even you describe me as a strong player. Part of being a strong player is that you're harder to lynch.

Crybaby wrote:

2. I've already explained why. I've given multiple reasons why they would put town you with the others. People are going to be inclined to vote for Peace if you don't take alignment into account. Considering alignment possibilities, people can second-guess their decision to vote for Peace and instead opt to vote for either you or Shadow, instead. This is not something I say is happening right now, nor am I saying that it's 100% the truth, but it certainly is a strategy that could work if followed up with some kind of exposition. Another reason that I haven't yet given is that they could possibly be testing the waters. That is to say, they could be trying to gauge the town's reaction. Perhaps they want to see if people really will second-guess themselves, or possibly see how and what they can get away with for the next nomination stage.

So basically it could be WIFOM? You think the mafia would put me with peace banking on the idea that people would lynch me instead of him out of WIFOM? Sure, that is something that is possible, but do you really think that's likely? Do you really think that's the way that mafia would try to get me lynched?

Crybaby wrote:

3. Think about it from a perspective that isn't a town member's, then. Imagine you were a Mafia member. How would making the decision to put an alternative to town!you, Shadow, and Peace benefit the Mafia, given different alignments for each person? It is in this way that I think, and how I've come to the conclusions that I have. Consider, objectively, the pros and cons of the decision. Do not just assume that there are none, just because the decision confuses you.

I'm not sure what you're asking me here.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
- Peace is likely to be lynched in any pool regardless of his alignment.
- Peace is very obvious when he is mafia.
- Putting peace in the scum pool as mafia almost guarantees his lynch.
- Even if the mafia wanted to get rid of scum!peace, they'd prefer that he be lynched when we can choose anyone rather than just handing him over when they get to choose who the lynch candidates are.
- Any half-decent mafia would realise this.
Point 1: Everyone knows how likely Peace is to get thrown under the bus, regardless of his alignment. We've already pretty much satisfied anyone's desire to policy lynch by policy lynching Kareem on day 1. The decision to put Peace as a nominee on night 2 alongside you and Shadow was deliberate. They could have chose me, or anyone else who was more experienced for that matter, but instead they selected Peace, and you seem to think that this was just something they did for ****'s and giggles?

I hope my explanation of intuition better serves this point.

Crybaby wrote:

Point 2: All Peace has done today is claim that I was suspicious for fighting for a Kareem lynch, and say Ele is suspicious for wooting all of my posts. After I reassured him that the only motivation was to policy lynch him, and after he (presumably) read my super post, he immediately believed(?) everything that I said and instantaneously voted to lynch you, without giving any of my posts another second thought. Sounds like he's hopping beliefs to me.

I don't see how what peace has done today has any relevance to my point. My point is that peace looks obviously scum when he is scum. Unless you're trying to argue that you're scum reading peace based on his behaviour today? Because even if peace does become obviously scum by the end of today that doesn't disprove my logic that disproves my conclusion. It would perfectly highlight why mafia putting mafia!peace in the pool would be a stupid thing to do and would make me reconsider my stance on Shadow. I'd still be justified in town reading peace and I am perfectly happy to be wrong here.

Crybaby wrote:

Point 3 and 4: Given, and I'm not saying that Peace is 100% a member of the Mafia. But don't 100% assume that Peace is 100% town, either. This is (likely) what the Mafia want you to think.

Why am I not allowed to conclude that peace is town? Why is that something that bothers you? I'm not 100% assuming anything about peace I've just settled on the conclusion that he is town.

Also, do you have any evidence as to why you think the mafia are likely to want me to think peace is town?

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Y'all seriously underestimate how valuable it is that peace can become psuedo-confirmed town.
Yeah, that would be valuable, if people don't end up lynching Peace today. Even if it is valuable, we can't just say Peace is town just because it is. Peace being town would be a useful explanation to why certain decisions are being made the way they are, but that certainly doesn't mean he 100% is town.

I'm not saying that peace would be town just because being obviously town is useful. He first of all would have to actually be obviously town. This argument that you're critiquing was about why I originally believed Shadow should be lynched instead of peace. I concluded they were both town under separate logic and then conclude that peace was more valuable to keep alive because of his ability to become psuedo-confirmed.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Contributing to the game is obviously helpful but means nothing if your reads are wrong.
Yet another reason the Mafia should theoretically want to leave Peace out of the first nominations, and yet they haven't.

Which is evidence that he is town.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
On the other hand, when there's 1 less player we have to worry about trying to town read it makes finding and lynching mafia significantly and statistically easier.
This would be way easier to do if Peace were confirmed townie, but, again, none of you are confirmed town, so, yeah.

Yes, but typically there becomes a point in the game where peace is irrefutably town if he isn't lynched before then.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
What someone rolled before this life matters when they declare it in this game and claim it's changed in a way that looks honest. Again, you're welcome to disagree with my conclusion. However, do you think ShadowsEdge is mafia? Because if you have no reason to believe that he is then you also have no reason to disagree with my conclusion even if you think my logic is flawed.
I don't know whether he is or not, but I do not want people to give him the benefit of the doubt just because of something Onjit said, and I don't want you to do that either. I want you all to think for yourselves. Let Shadow build up his own rapport.

Well tough, I'm not going to ignore it just because you want me to. If you really want us to think for ourselves then why have you spent several long posts telling me I'm not allowed to think the things I do?

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Okay. Do you believe this? If so, why? If not, then why do you feel the need to bring up something you don't even agree with in order to try and discredit my read?
I do believe this, actually. Personally, I wouldn't put it past Onjit to lie about it if he turned Mafia. Asking for a replacement is a strategy that was already tried, that one game I was SK. It worked for Slabdrill because I did not suspect him, even though it didn't matter in the end.

Just to clarify, you are saying that Shadow is mafia? I can't tell if you just saying "I do believe this" is you saying you think it is theoretically possible (which is not what I was asking about since that's irrelevant).

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Incorrect. This is by no means a prime strategy. Doing this risks exposing the mafia members.
Unless the Mafia members... draw no special attention to themselves? You think they'd go around waving big signs saying "hey look, we aren't a part of the pool, so vote for us!
But really, think about it. Every even numbered day, the Mafia vote for three candidates. Assuming all candidates are town, this means that the Mafia will be guaranteed 3 kills every day, whereas on odd-numbered days, there is no guarantee that we'll hit a Mafia member at all. In fact, the nominees from the round prior are still up to question, too. The mere act of nominating someone puts then under a spotlight and forces the town to look at that person. If someone survives, then that person is still going to be looked at even when they aren't a nominee anymore. Even if Peace is lynched today, this does not clear you or Shadow at all.
If we mislynch today, then it is likely because all three nominees were town. If we mislynch tomorrow, then we've just given the Mafia an extra kill. Lynches on odd-numbered days are really important, because they are likely the only days where we can lynch a Mafia member. Assuming the Mafia only nominates town members, and replaces lynched nominees with new town members every even-numbered day, this means that the Mafia are getting a free kill every other day, while also not giving the town much information at all.
Crybaby wrote:
mutantdevle wrote:
Deciding what ratio of town to scum to put into the pool operates as a risk/reward system. There's no set way to do it, no set amount of scum to put in the pool that's optimal. Sure, always putting only town in the pool would be the prime strategy if the town were brain dead, but that simply isn't the case. Later on in this post you act like it's the intelligent thing to do that only experienced players would think of to put 1 or 2 scum in the pool but that simply isn't the case. Any half-decent scum would know that they should be nominating themselves.
The optimal amount of scum to nominate is 0, because there is 0% chance scum will flip. Simple as that.
This is an incredibly narrow-minded way of looking at it. Do you not understand that the more town the scum put in the pool inherently increases the chance that the scum players would be scum read by the other players? Put it this way, in a normal game of mafia, do you think it would be optimal for the scum team to never bus or vote for each other or paint each other in a negative way? Of course not! Theoretically, this would give them the best chance of winning because it reduces the number of players willing to vote for them or encouraging votes on them. But it just doesn't work out that way as the scum members would become suspected together. Bussing is part of the game as it makes other scum members look townie. The optimal strategy for any scum team (in almost any game) would be to get one of their scum team so town read that the town never lynches them. There are 2 ways of achieving this that I think would be far more effective strategies than simply putting all town in the pool every night. First of all, they could get a scum member town read by putting 2 (or even 3) mafia in the same pool and have that player town read off the back of the other scum player's lynch. Secondly, they could put one of their scum members in the pool every single time in order to make them look townie. However, since the scum's ability to survive in a lynch pool highly depends on how town read they are compared to other members in the pool there isn't actually any set optimal formula on how many scum to put in the pool - instead, it is entirely circumstantial. So I'm sorry, but you are just fundamentally wrong.
Crybaby wrote:
mutantdevle wrote:
If you believe this, why do you criticise me for coming to this conclusion? Especially when you're clearly of the mindset that I'd think 3 town in the scum pool is the optimal way for the scum to play. This isn't actually what I think, but the fact that you believed it was calls into question why you didn't then think that this could be my reason for thinking that all the people in the pool are town.
Mutant, I'm actually disappointed in you for not coming to this conclusion. I am of the mindset that 3 town in the nominees is the optimal way for scum to play. This ensures that no scum are going to die that night. In two days from now, it will be easy for them to place you and Shadow in the pool again, this time picking a different townie member in replacement for Peace (assuming he gets lynched tonight.)
And here you have totally ignored my point.
If you think the optimal strategy is to put 3 town in the pool. And you think I would be fully aware of this. Why did you question the fact that I considered all 3 players in the pool to be town? You did not know at the time that this wasn't my reason for thinking this. Yet you criticised me with seemingly full confidence that I had no reason to be town reading the entire pool. If you genuinely believe all this, and it's not just stuff you made up on the spot in order to criticise my post, why is it that this wasn't something that crossed your mind as to my potential reasoning?
Crybaby wrote:
mutantdevle wrote:
By making it explicitly clear that I think everyone in the pool is town but that I still have to vote for one of them?
Fair, but your reasons for clearing them are certainly not sound. They have no evidence behind them.
If you honestly expect sound evidence behind every conclusion then you are playing the wrong game.
Crybaby wrote:
mutantdevle wrote:
It isn't fair on who? Why am I not allowed to form a read based on something that very clearly implicates Shadow as town, do you expect me to just ignore it?
I do not expect you to ignore it, but I certainly hope you don't plan on basing your entire read on Shadow on something he didn't even post. Giving him the benefit of the doubt opens him up to being town-cleared, something that should not even be possible in this game. This is unfair for Mafia assuming town!Shadow and unfair for the town assuming scum!Shadow, because nobody is supposed to be cleared.
Again, Onjit's post is not the entire basis for my town read on shadow. But it is the basis on which I think it's better to lynch peace than shadow.
You say he'd be town-cleared from it as though you believe that Onjit's post makes him confirmed town but that you just don't want to listen to it. Being confident enough in my town read to consider them lock-town is by no means a 'clear'.
Crybaby wrote:
mutantdevle wrote:
Also, could you explain to me why this:
TaskManager wrote:
I believe 1T2S pool is very unlikely
Is a reasonable thing to say without an explanation where you don't feel the need to ask for one, but this:
mutantdevle wrote:
in the unlikely case that shadowsedge is mafia
Is unacceptable without elaboration and requires an explanation as to why it's unlikely.
In both instances, we are simply giving theories about what we personally believe is or isn't likely yet only one of them bothers you.
TaskManager's theory isn't based off of a hunch. The Mafia giving the town a 66% chance to lynch one of their own is not optimal, no matter how you flavor it.
You are assuming that 3 town in the pool every day is the optimal. You have no evidence for it. So, therefore, saying that it's unlikely that there'd be 2 scum in the pool is also assuming it's not possible. There is no evidence in any of this it's purely theory and speculation. (Note: this is not something that I'm criticising Task for).
Crybaby wrote:
mutantdevle wrote:
Y'see, what you've just done is you've gone through my posts and over-criticised every aspect of them you could find
Yep, because you're on the chopping block, and I don't trust a single person on the chopping block, so if I hope to make the right decision and influence others to making the right decision, I damn better. I would do the same to Shadow and Peace too if they had actually given me something to work with.
You probably should have used this reasoning for the previous instead of trying to say that your theory is somehow evidence when mine is not.

But your analysis is pointless! You're not achieving anything. You're offering nothing new yourself. All you've done is repeated your mantra that you want people to think for themselves whilst simultaneously telling me what to think and implying that no one should listen to me.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think you've formed any reads based on your close analysis of my post
I haven't, yet.

So what is the point?

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
What was the motivation behind your post?
mutantdevle wrote:
what was the point?
To give people my own thoughts, and to try to steer them into the direction of thinking for thenselves.

Your thoughts offer nothing new. If you have to tell people to think for themselves then they're obviously not thinking for themselves. What you've done is laid out the different possibilities, told people they shouldn't agree with me, and then offered no alternatively viewpoint.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
You hint towards thinking that both I and Shadow could be scum but you don't commit to it.
Yeah, I hint at the possibility with what's given, but I'm not confident enough to pin Mafia on either one of you, given the chances that none of you are, so why would I?

What was the point of mentioning it? Also, given that you agree that the chances everyone is in the pool is town, why are you criticising me for coming to same conclusion and why aren't you willing to commit to reading us as town?

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Instead, your analysis of my post aims to discredit almost everything I had to say and shade me along the way.
Okay, if you haven't noticed, you're one of the three being nominated for a lynch right now, so what you say kind of really matters. I have no qualms with investigating your logic to ensure the right decision is made and I hope none of the rest of the town has a problem with that either.

Why is me being in the pool a reason to discredit everything I have to say? Is your point that since I'm in the pool nothing I say is worthy of any trust and that you should just ignore my opinions? Investigate my logic, sure. **** all over it, claim it's baseless, accuse me of lying, and shade me every chance you get? That's not simple investigating. You clearly have other motives.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
In the process, you establish principles that you then don't stick to.
What are those principles? That the most likely scenario is that all three of you are town? I certainly have not given up that possibility at any point. If not, then I'd like to hear your explanation on this.

When I say "don't stick to" I guess I kinda mean 'contradict'. The fact that you think the most likely case is that all 3 of us are town, but then won't commit to any reads and criticise me for coming to same the same conclusion with different logic would suggest that your principle doesn't apply when it comes to criticism. Similarly, you're criticising me for not having any evidence behind my theories when your theory that the optimal scum strategy is to put 3 town in the lynch pool is not backed by evidence either.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
You then lay out several possibilities as to what could be the case but you don't really give your opinion on which you think it is (if your criticisms of me are anything to go by then it would appear that you don't think people should be making any conclusions on these theories at all).
The theories are just that: theories. I want people to think for themselves with what I have given. I don't want to tell people how to think and what decisions to make. I want them to make their own conclusions, and possibly catch and fix any problems with my own. And, your thinking that I am targeting you is right, but not for the right reason. You are simply the only person here with any motivations to speak of. Neither Shadow nor peace have come up with anything worth this kind of analysis, in my opinion. It is not because I think you are Mafia. If you disagree, and think that there is something in their posts that can be taken apart, then feel free.

The fact that you are shutting down my own theories every chance you get would suggest that you don't want people to think for themselves because clearly you don't want them to agree with me. Laying out the different possibilities is pointless, do you really think people are incapable of thinking about them for themselves. It honestly just strikes me as if you are trying to look like you are contributing without actually doing so.

Crybaby wrote:

mutantdevle wrote:
Basically, what I'm trying to ask is: why should I, or anyone else for that matter, not scum read you for this post by you when your aim was seemingly not to form your own reads but rather discredit mine?
1. If I was a scum, I would not be trying nearly as hard to solve this game.

Sure, let me just take your word for it.

Crybaby wrote:

2. I am behaving much differently than I ever have in any games previous to this, as you suggest. I have been town in a few games. I was always killed within the first few days. The last game I was town, I was killed for doing nothing but **** on night 1, something I've never done before at all. The time before that, I was only trying to not draw so much attention to myself, and even said that I was okay with dying if it gave the town more information. That did not work out. So, I'm trying out this new thing. I hope you consider it as constructive as I do.

If you are genuinely town here, then no, I do not consider this constructive because it ultimately achieves nothing. But I'm not going to take your word for it that this is simply a new playstyle until you've used it in multiple games.

Crybaby wrote:

3. If I was scum, then why am I offering what I think the most optimal scum strategies for this gametype so publicly? I certainly would not share my strategies and thoughts this extensively considering how little anything I have posted on this night helps the Mafia in any way.
4. Because my posts intend to get people thinking, to get people talking, and hopefully to allow us to get more reads on other players, too.

You'd do both of these things as scum to look like town. Scum don't just look like scum.

I was hoping that your answer to this question would be an explanation as to the town motivation behind you criticising and pulling apart my posts in the way that you are. But so far you've not provided an adequate explanation as to the purpose of your posting.

(I guess this is a TLDR)

Crybaby, if you are town here, then I feel that perhaps you have not understood as to how I've got to the conclusions that I have. So let me spell it out for you:
- I considered it a possibility during the night that peace and I would be in the pool together, or at the very least, one of us would be (favouring peace). I believed this based on my own intuition.
- Upon learning I was correct, I figured that the 3rd person would also likely be town as I found it unlikely that the mafia would put one of their own in a pool with peace and I. (again, intuition).
- I believed that peace should be the one to keep alive because him becoming obvious town from his posting was more valuable to me than shadow's contributions as I did not believe that my conclusion of the 3rd person being town was completely foolproof.
- The only thing that I thought would make me reconsider my stance was if it became obvious that peace was mafia and that my intuition was actually ultimately wrong. I believe peace should be read on an "assume he's town until it's clear he's not" basis especially in light of him being in the pool.
- I then noticed TaskManager's post where he mentions Onjit's claim. This, combined with my opinion on the pool being all town, gave me enough confidence in my town read on shadow to consider it just as unlikely to be wrong as my read on peace.
- Hence, with Shadow and peace both looking as equally townie as each other, the obvious action to take is to instead lynch peace as he no longer has that advantage over shadow that I considered him to have originally.

Now here's why I scum read you Crybaby:
- You have stated that you also think that the pool is likely to be all town.
- This means that you agree with my conclusion but not with my reasoning.
- You then attack and try to disprove my reasoning.
- As town, you'd have no reason to do this. So what if my logic is flawed? It results in the same reads as you.
- Why would you try to debate me on my reads if you agree with my reads?
- All of your comments towards my theories seem to be made with the intention of either trying to get me to reconsider my reads / have anyone reading the argument think I'm scum for the way I've formed my reads.
- Why would you want me to reconsider my reads if you agree with them?
- Why would you want people to think I'm scum if you think I'm town?
- If you didn't agree with my reads, and instead thought that Shadow or peace were mafia, then I'd understand you trying to deconstruct my opinion to this level. But at the moment, based on what you've said of your own opinions, you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.
- You've seemingly picked up a mantra that you want people to think for themselves so you provide them with theories that you don't believe in (things they can easily think about themselves without you needing to point them out).
- It's like you don't want people to come to the same conclusion that you did.
- This LAMIST approach of "I'm not influencing people's opinions!" just looks like attempts to look busy and contribute to the game without really adding anything.
- Everything you've done just feels like a setup to put enough doubt into Shadow and I that after today's lynch it would be reasonable to still consider us for lynches later on.

Note that although you have not explicitly stated you town read me, peace or Shadow, your belief that the pool being all town is the optimal way to play for scum and hence what the mafia have most likely done would suggest that you do. And you have not explicitly said that any of us are scum either.

Norwee · 2019-11-05 19:42:27

Please use spoiler tags when writing very long posts from now on.

rat, Minimania

peace · 2019-11-05 20:27:11

mutantdevle wrote:

- Hence, with Shadow and peace both looking as equally townie as each other, the obvious action to take is to instead lynch peace as he no longer has that advantage over shadow that I considered him to have originally.

yheadn and you dotnt usggest yourself you dont want me lycnhed becuas eim obv to read but you want to lynch me over shadow becuase you THINK onjti quit because he rolled town? maby onjit didnt like his teammates like he wasmaf wiiht ILikeTofuuJoe and someone liek zelda who is inactive mutant the maf want medead obv becuase htye know town wouldnt vote a srong player we may NOT town read shadow based on onjits quit that has noathign to do wiht the game and are just asumptions

Minimania · 2019-11-05 20:31:28

I'm almost home from class. When I get to it, Im just going to write a response to the tl;dr. Yes, I did read his entire post.

Minimania · 2019-11-05 21:51:51

▼Hidden text

mutantdevle wrote:

Crybaby, if you are town here, then I feel that perhaps you have not understood as to how I've got to the conclusions that I have.

Unless it isn't more than your intuition that the Mafia aren't taking the nominations seriously, logic I consider flawed, then by all means, tell me more.

mutantdevle wrote:

- I considered it a possibility during the night that peace and I would be in the pool together, or at the very least, one of us would be (favouring peace). I believed this based on my own intuition.

This is, from my point of view, a very odd conclusion to make, and a very specific one at that. Please understand this.

mutantdevle wrote:

- Upon learning I was correct, I figured that the 3rd person would also likely be town as I found it unlikely that the mafia would put one of their own in a pool with peace and I. (again, intuition).

How do you know that you are correct, or how did you learn that you are? This is a legitimate question, not an attack. Because if there is some sort of pool of evidence that you're drawing from, then I would love to study it. Unless that was just a figure of speech, in which case, I will ignore the first sentence.

You say that intuition led you to believe the Mafia would not put one of their own as a nominee with you and Peace. This is another conclusion I find oddly specific. Given that it's based off of intuition, I don't think that conclusion is foolproof- you don't either.

mutantdevle wrote:

- I believed that peace should be the one to keep alive because him becoming obvious town from his posting was more valuable to me than shadow's contributions as I did not believe that my conclusion of the 3rd person being town was completely foolproof.

I agree in that Peace is the one I want to keep alive the most out of the current nominees, but only in that sense. I just simply town-lean him more than either you or Shadow.

Why? Because, as you describe, Peace is easier to read than you or Shadow.

mutantdevle wrote:

- The only thing that I thought would make me reconsider my stance was if it became obvious that peace was mafia and that my intuition was actually ultimately wrong. I believe peace should be read on an "assume he's town until it's clear he's not" basis especially in light of him being in the pool.

Okay

mutantdevle wrote:

- I then noticed TaskManager's post where he mentions Onjit's claim. This, combined with my opinion on the pool being all town, gave me enough confidence in my town read on shadow to consider it just as unlikely to be wrong as my read on peace.

Okay

mutantdevle wrote:

- Hence, with Shadow and peace both looking as equally townie as each other, the obvious action to take is to instead lynch peace as he no longer has that advantage over shadow that I considered him to have originally.

I'm going to ignore that I don't agree with the evidence that otherwise townclears Shadow for a bit. There still isn't any super solid evidence that confirms you as town, aside from the likeliest scenario in my opinion that the nominees today are all town. Again, my disagreement on Onjit's intentions aside, you're the greatest unknown in this scenario. Besides intuitions, there has been nothing to grasp to gain a solid read on you until our discussion picked up.

mutantdevle wrote:

- You have stated that you also think that the pool is likely to be all town.
- This means that you agree with my conclusion but not with my reasoning.

Yes.

mutantdevle wrote:

- You then attack and try to disprove my reasoning.
- As town, you'd have no reason to do this. So what if my logic is flawed? It results in the same reads as you.

You ever come across a weird instance in a math test where you use the incorrect formula to solve a problem, but by chance, you get the right answer anyway? This is why I attacked and tried to disprove your reasoning. I think that it is flawed, and even though we come to the same conclusions today, that does not mean we will come to the same conclusions in the future.

Mutant, you're a strong player, wouldn't you say? You have a lot of outstanding experience in this game. Your words are a lot more easier to trust, because they come from someone who has experience in the game. Perhaps, even, people might try to emulate your playstyle to better themselves at the game. I don't want people to mindlessly just take your logic and reasoning at face value and believe it as if they are rules or something like that. I provided my own alternative viewpoint. It is not up to me to decide if people believe it or not. Some already seem to, some seem to disbelieve it. It's more like I'm checking you.

mutantdevle wrote:

- Why would you try to debate me on my reads if you agree with my reads?

I am trying to debate you on your logic.

mutantdevle wrote:

- All of your comments towards my theories seem to be made with the intention of either trying to get me to reconsider my reads / have anyone reading the argument think I'm scum for the way I've formed my reads.

I am trying to get you to reconsider the process you used to acquire your reads. Your leans today just so happen to be the same as mine, so why would I tell others to scum read you for them when they're the same? I'm trying to debate with your logic.

mutantdevle wrote:

- Why would you want me to reconsider my reads if you agree with them?

I am trying to get you to reconsider the process you used to acquire your reads. I'm trying to debate with your logic.

mutantdevle wrote:

- If you didn't agree with my reads, and instead thought that Shadow or peace were mafia, then I'd understand you trying to deconstruct my opinion to this level. But at the moment, based on what you've said of your own opinions, you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

I'm trying to debate with your logic.

mutantdevle wrote:

- You've seemingly picked up a mantra that you want people to think for themselves so you provide them with theories that you don't believe in (things they can easily think about themselves without you needing to point them out).

Having more than one point of view and multiple theories to kick-off ideas can help people do that. I have much less ideas for today than I would for tomorrow. I don't even agree with all of the theories that I gave.

mutantdevle wrote:

- It's like you don't want people to come to the same conclusion that you did.

I do not want to decide for people what choices they make, or what they believe. I want to challenge them to make their own choice with what I think is logical. And if you disagree with the logic, that's fine. Bring it up, talk about it. I'm trying to debate with your logic.

mutantdevle wrote:

- This LAMIST approach of "I'm not influencing people's opinions!" just looks like attempts to look busy and contribute to the game without really adding anything.

I don't claim to not have an influence on people's opinions. If I wanted to have zero influence, I would say nothing.

mutantdevle wrote:

- Everything you've done just feels like a setup to put enough doubt into Shadow and I that after today's lynch it would be reasonable to still consider us for lynches later on.

That does sound reasonable. Living today does not clear you of all charges. We have had instances in past Mafia games where someone who was high-profile before a deciding lynch lived to see the next day, and then something happened that took the town's attention away from that person, and then the high-profile that person had attained was suddenly forgotten. It's happened with TaskManager and (ironically) Shadow within memory. I said on day 1 that just being nominated does not town clear you. If it wasn't fairly obvious, living an even-numbered night doesn't town clear you either. So, I have no problem with this point you made at all.

mutantdevle wrote:

Note that although you have not explicitly stated you town read me, peace or Shadow, your belief that the pool being all town is the optimal way to play for scum and hence what the mafia have most likely done would suggest that you do. And you have not explicitly said that any of us are scum either.

There are a few things keeping me from outright making a decision on all three of you, or at least, that have done so. The first thing I wanted to know is the reactions I got. Shadow seems to agree with what I have to say. Peace read some of what I said and was turned away from what he had originally believed in, enough to make me one of his only town reads. You are on the complete opposite side of the spectrum, in that you disagree.

Well, I've actually come to a conclusion now, and believe it or not, I scum-read Shadow more than I do either you or Peace, but I'm still convinced that all three of you are more than likely town.

Why do I scum-lean Shadow the most?
- He has only agreed with me and nothing more. With this, he has left me not much room to dissect his posts.
- I think Onjit's story is a burning pile of ash.
- He has historically been hard to read for us simply because of his relatively new arrival to our forum Mafia games and I'm not fully confident in his playstyle, and I might not be alone in this.

However, I do suspect that scum!Shadow would try to agree with me and try to be on my radar least. I had suspected that you (MutantDevle) regardless of your alignment would heavily disagree with me, beyond just me attacking your logic, and would question what I had to say. Lastly, I think we all by now would have guessed what Peace would have done.

Unless I missed some important tell on Shadow in previous games, then I have no belief that his agreeing with me is town-motivated, and I believe he is trying to fly under the radar. (I've already dissected a few posts. Most of them were from you, Mutant, but one or a few were from Peace. I don't have much reads on Shadow. He is a stronger player than Peace, and yet has less to say than him.

Objectively, ignoring alignments, Peace is the best lynch for tonight. However, I am suspicious of Shadow the most out of this group.

!vote ShadowsEdge

ShadowsEdge · 2019-11-06 03:21:57

Sorry y'all I got home late today, but I wanted to address the accusations Crybaby is making against me.

Crybaby wrote:

- He has only agreed with me and nothing more. With this, he has left me not much room to dissect his posts.

Just gonna say this now, this is a lie. I do agree with things you've said, but I provided my own parts to it. Just because I used your reasonings to back up my own ideas does not mean that my posts are only agreeing with you and nothing more. I will admit, I haven't said much that's gamechanging, but what do you expect me to do? Just magically have all the answers that reveal that this person is mafia and this person isn't?

I say what I feel I need to say, I semi-sheeped you because your points were mostly what I agreed with, and it would be stupid to make an entirely new post just to restate the same ideas, and then get called out for the same exact reason I'm getting called out for now. I've also made it clear that in semi-sheeping you, I did not intend it to be only echoing your thoughts. I intended it solely to back up my own points that I wanted to present, albeit they weren't anything gamechanging, as well as set my stance in where I feel the situation is.

Crybaby wrote:

- He has historically been hard to read for us simply because of his relatively new arrival to our forum Mafia games and I'm not fully confident in his playstyle, and I might not be alone in this.

That's on purpose, I try to keep to a relatively similar playstyle through most games, but with differences in how I go about it. Just makes the game more interesting than just "Oh I'll just play this game exactly like how I played Game X, and it'll go similarly to how I played Game X."

And to add onto that, you're literally one of the best people in the Forums to read me. You're the one who has known me the longest out of everyone here, and if others can develop a sense of my own playstyle, then I think you can do the same. (Ex. Zelda's read on me in Mafia 33)

Crybaby wrote:

He is a stronger player than Peace, and yet has less to say than [Peace].

The whole thing with Peace having more to say is only him sheeping your ideas, with some places where he provides his own input. Im not saying that because Peace is sheeping you that it's a tell that he's scum, since I'm being suspected for sheeping you. Peace does that in every game he plays (From what I've noticed), I'm just pointing it out to say that your idea of Peace having "more to say" than me, is just him echoing your own ideas.

One of the things I don't like, though, is that Peace is blatantly trying to throw the suspicion onto Mutant and I. He's been doing it for the entirety of the day, and it's because he doesn't want to be lynched. I can understand it from the perspective of both sides, but I just don't like how Peace is trying to shade us. From how I've seen the entirety of the day going, he's been just showing off reasonings of why he thinks that Mutant and I are more suspicious than himself, rather than creating his own defense for himself.

I still hold onto my original lean of him, but I just hate that Peace's way of going about defending himself is to just show off reasons why the other people are better candidates to take the rope.

I can go into specifics about my stance of Mutant, if you want, but reading Mutant is different than reading Peace, which is why I'd rather do that in it's own post.

Anyway, I won't be going to sleep for another around 5 hours, so I should have time to post again later if I'm needed.

ILikeTofuuJoe · 2019-11-06 05:29:50

!vote peace

rat · 2019-11-06 07:26:54

tofuu why are you voting for peace?

peace · 2019-11-06 08:31:57

ShadowsEdge wrote:

is that Peace is blatantly trying to throw the suspicion onto Mutant and I. He's been doing it for the entirety of the day, and it's because he doesn't want to be lynched

well thi spool is setup to lynch me out mafia wants that mafia wants us to vote me they want the town to let them vot eon me becuase why wooudl town sac 2 storong twon players? i feel bad abotout this an dhoneslty as a VT i really fihgt bacck form my postions whereas if i was a cop i wouldve maby shared my info by now and thinkoh well i helped the town i haeve to say i enjoy mafia games and want to surivvivle to the end if possible but ti seems liek th ois game gives exceptions because of **** nominations anyways gtg

ILikeTofuuJoe · 2019-11-06 10:53:03

eleizibeth wrote:

tofuu why are you voting for peace?

Because I think this is most likely a 3t0s pool and I think lynching peace would be the best option. I was going to make a longer explanation but when I clicked submit the browser crashed.

rat

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#101 2019-11-05 16:09:15

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#102 2019-11-05 16:11:18

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#103 2019-11-05 16:14:39

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#104 2019-11-05 16:17:18

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#105 2019-11-05 17:27:48

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#106 2019-11-05 17:48:28

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#107 2019-11-05 17:53:23

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#108 2019-11-05 17:54:14

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#109 2019-11-05 17:54:17

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#110 2019-11-05 17:54:38

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#111 2019-11-05 17:55:36

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#112 2019-11-05 17:55:54

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#113 2019-11-05 18:11:08

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#114 2019-11-05 18:19:33

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#115 2019-11-05 18:20:42

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#116 2019-11-05 19:36:33

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#117 2019-11-05 19:42:27

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#118 2019-11-05 20:27:11

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#119 2019-11-05 20:31:28

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#120 2019-11-05 21:51:51

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

!vote ShadowsEdge

#121 2019-11-06 03:21:57

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#122 2019-11-06 05:29:50

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#123 2019-11-06 07:26:54

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#124 2019-11-06 08:31:57

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

#125 2019-11-06 10:53:03

Re: Mafia 35 game thread [MAFIA WINS] (GAME OVER)

Board footer