MAFIA 79: The Price is Right! [GAME THREAD]

[Bonatogether]

I am so triggered by Koala's self voting. I'm probably going to be considered suspicious for this, but I don't care.

##VOTE KoalaAttack

Very cool!

Now, question for you sweetandcool – can you please explain for the group why my self-voting with over a day to go is so triggering for you?

Because you already relied on this annoying tactic once (yes, you claim reasonable reasons for the first day, which I have no way to verify either way). Add to that the huge amount of suspicion I already had and I'm finding it unbearable to refrain from voting Koala.

@Dousing, I'm pretty sure I've been the most outspoken critic of Koala so far. But I'm also the 5th voter for Koala. Does this make me a bandwagoner or a champion?

claiming credit for being a koala critic, when, not to too my own horn, i had wallposted at him and spent a while going in circles with him

[President Eden]

love watching bona have to finagle his way into setting up a bus on his teammate

[Bonatogether]

i'm not sure why everyone is convinced traitor was recruited

idk how to play around it if it's not recruit

i think daychat is the supreme advantage here

Idk man, if scum had daychat these claims would have been much less weird

not sure

scum almost certainly did not expect me to come up with a tracker claim that confirms eden being scum bar a rolecopping of me n2 or about

[Bonatogether]

love watching bona have to finagle his way into setting up a bus on his teammate

i am doing more work to solve this game then you are

[Bonatogether]

the stops are coming out

i refuse to lose this game if you're still alive

[Bonatogether]

That's fair enough, but if someone points something out (e.g. they claim you are contradicting yourself, you're baselessly pushing to kill someone, etc.) then you probably should at least spend a teensy bit of energy defending yourself.

No defense, but replying with an offense will always read Mafia to me. You can play that way, just know that ignoring defense completely is a good way to earn my vote.

Fair enough – please be so kind to remind me which specific contradiction you are referring to here and I'll address it.

Oh, those were just random examples. I really don't want to spend the time digging up my past anti-Koala moments, but I suppose not doing so will make me suspicious. I'll get back to with a list in a while, I guess.

meta moments are suspicious

[Chaqa]

OK I'm not reading 4 pages of Bona spam

[Bonatogether]

Fair enough – please be so kind to remind me which specific contradiction you are referring to here and I'll address it.

Oh, those were just random examples. I really don't want to spend the time digging up my past anti-Koala moments, but I suppose not doing so will make me suspicious. I'll get back to with a list in a while, I guess.

Yes, not doing it comes across as exactly the "generic-Shading-seeing-who-bites" that Dousing described. I'm looking forward to a real response when you get around to it. Everyone else, please take note.

[Bonatogether]

OK I'm not reading 4 pages of Bona spam

i'm going to make a tl;dr post at some point

[Bonatogether]

Oh, those were just random examples. I really don't want to spend the time digging up my past anti-Koala moments, but I suppose not doing so will make me suspicious. I'll get back to with a list in a while, I guess.

Yes, not doing it comes across as exactly the "generic-Shading-seeing-who-bites" that Dousing described. I'm looking forward to a real response when you get around to it. Everyone else, please take note.

I don't get where Dousing is coming from. My posts tend to have a lot of substantial content. I feel like I'm always justifying myself.

sad sack shit

town always justify themselves even if it's hokum

[Bonatogether]

Go to the peterbot. I have literally staked the anti-Eden wagon.

Let me be so bold as to put forward a definition we can mutually agree on:

to "stake" a wagon would imply ACTIVELY pushing arguments against someone to drum up votes against them. This also implies reinserting arguments against that same person into discussions if your arguments get buried under a mountain of shitposts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think that's a reasonable definition. So lets examine EVERY one of your contributions to the anti-Eden wagon and see if you've lived up to it.


Let's see...


...ah! Here's one instance!

This is why President Eden is actually tied with Koala as my number one suspect. When I was suspecting Fox, they swooped in and encouraged that. Then, somewhere along the line, I swear they did the same thing with damo, but I can't find it. And now they are supporting a push for Chaqa.

Kind of seems like they are happily encouraging momentum against different people without actually providing much original thought. Nobody suspects them because people feel happy to be validated by them.

##VOTE President Eden

...and that's the end of it I believe!


So you've put a small explainer text next to your vote against Eden and call that "staking" a wagon?

I'd disagree; you need to actually follow up that text if you wanna truly "stake" a wagon against someone. After all, I could argue I "staked" an anti-Jamie wagon because I voted for them earlier as a laugh.

rdr and sno may have started the anti-Fox wagon, but I was the only one who really committed to it with arguments.

This is exactly my point, thanks for the help!. Your attack on Foxcastle is the exception that actually proves the rule. It was only after you were confident you can hide in the midst of a bunch of townies that you decided to target foxcastle.

Also you only "committed" to an anti-foxcastle wagon because Fox raised (justifiable) concerns about you. Doubtless, you would've just hid behind the townies had Fox not actively perused you (like a... fox... get it?)

***also GEE, when Foxcastle had "staked" a wagon against you, they actually--you know--PERUSED a line of inquiry!*** Did they simply go "I said my part, its up to the town to pick up the discussion from here"? Didn't think so...

Looking at Foxcastle's posts, I saw a genuine interest to get to the bottom of things. Looking at yours, I see lot of probing being done to feel whether anyone else picks up your argument. Two very different styles going on

And my actions garnered several sweetandcool votes on day 1.

Okay? That's because Fox was grilling you not because you heroically stood up to "stake" a wagon as you claim. That stuff kinda happens when suspicion is levied against you

What is this nonsense about me not sticking my neck out??

It's your incessant probing and probing and TL;DR

Your theories aren't organic and are overwhelmingly ephemeral; the only time you follow through on your probing accusations are when someone else takes charge.

As annoyed as I am that you are reading me so poorly, I can't really read you either way (that is, I'm neutral to you, but annoyed).

You make a good point about staking. It's unfortunate that others voted Fox before me, because from my point of view I was the first, and I certainly was the one carrying the case. Without me, I don't think the wagon would have grown to a MK. Obviously there is no way for me to prove this, but lack of peterbot at the time definitely made me feel like the first voter.

I don't recall now, but despite what I just said it is possible I did notice the other votes. However, I also caught onto the fact that a lot of the D1 votes were just jokes and nonsense in the first half, and I'm pretty sure those other two votes fell under that umbrella at the time.

Evidence: http://mafia.peterlund.se/e/web/msg?g=7 ... 1&var=vote

http://mafia.peterlund.se/e/web/msg?g=7 ... 5&var=vote

dousing vs sweetandcool is very interesting

s&c seems convinced that he deserves (needs?) more credit

[Chaqa]

I'm still mad about this tie.

[Bonatogether]

@ Sweetandcool I don't understand why you're so annoyed about being targeted when there's not a single vote for you

Because I'm well known for being a skilled analyst. And I've spent considerable effort on my posts. And I've at least put up real arguments, whereas a lot of other players just chime in with opinions with little to no given reason. And I totally drove the Fox wagon and it's a bit insulting to be told I was safely bandwagoning.

I just wish I had the charisma to convince you to stop wasting your time focusing on me

only the most chad of webdippians get this egotistical this early in their first game

[Bonatogether]

@ Sweetandcool I don't understand why you're so annoyed about being targeted when there's not a single vote for you

Because I'm well known for being a skilled analyst. And I've spent considerable effort on my posts. And I've at least put up real arguments, whereas a lot of other players just chime in with opinions with little to no given reason. And I totally drove the Fox wagon and it's a bit insulting to be told I was safely bandwagoning.

I just wish I had the charisma to convince you to stop wasting your time focusing on me

And I'm also sad that the players I want to trust the most are the ones that trust me the least (and I trust less too). Fox, Koala, and Dousing all write out detailed arguments. Even President Eden has charisma. And yet regrettably, Fox and Koala focussed on offense instead of defense, and Dousing is totally zeroed in on me, and I suspect President Eden even though I have little to go on.

refusing to recognize mistakes

[Bonatogether]

I like Snowy's increase in participation.

I dislike Rdr's absence.

Ghug is still in the top 5 posters and he's been dead for about 22 hours.

Why people keep posting about my absence when I am not lurking? I have posted ten times today and I adressed anything I have been asked. I don't usually post more then this and if you want a 50 posts a day requirement put this on the signup and I won't sign.

I think Snowy is tryng to shade me and last time he did this he was scum.

To be fair, this may be the most words you ever had in a post. You also did have some small interesting things to say D1, so there is that.

shitting on rdr like this i think means they can't be scum together

[Bonatogether]

You need to look at more than just vote history. Look at Fox's threads and then look at mine. I was calling them best candidate for Mafia Traitor on page 18, they voted for me on page 21. I changed my vote because of their response to my accusations was not a defense, but rather just dismissing my argument out of hand and then going on the offense against me. So their response to my accusation convinced me I was correct. Their vote against me was not the convincing part.

Okay yes, I see your point but Fox's argument was that you were already steering the vote with flimsy evidence (Koala's self-vote which you've never seemed to let go of).

Truth be told, Fox was correct in their assessment and let's not forget their final words shall we?

MY final thoughts;

The first game I played, I rolled scum, and then my entire scum team was caught, one right after the other, the first four days of game. I went on to win, it was pretty glorious, but then a couple games later, there was another newbie player, and I could just tell he was scum because he was playing the same game I did when I was new. And I was right about that, and that's also what I'm seeing in Sweet. 
Rdr, I can't find it, but I know in past games we have done this exact thing before where you say you don't like my play and then I end up town. I can't find the specific post in a previous game where I told you to remember that, but if you message me your address, I will hand embroider a pillow cover that says "Note to Self: I can't read Foxcastle at all and I should stop voting him on Day 1."

Eden, Damo, and Bozo would be where I look after Sweet. 

Also: Really interesting how Eden went from being "tied with Koala as my number one suspect" to completely forgotten about as soon you realized nobody is biting

I'm glad you're at least starting to at least understand me a bit. You're right that I've put my suspicions of Eden to the wayside, and you're right that it is because nobody has decided to talk about it. When I already have a stronger Mafia suspect (Koala), I don't feel the need to pursue my 2nd suspect. I will happily make further claims against Eden if more evidence shows up, especially if I no longer have Koala as suspect number one.

In the meantime, you keep tunneling on me and despite being aware of my thoughts about President Eden you have refrained from actually commenting on it.

Could you actually be productive and comment on President Eden? I don't care if it is positive, negative, or neutral, but something would be nice instead of this constant useless whining about me not crusading against them.

justifying ignoring eden is a massive red flag

[Bonatogether]

s&c is it your belief that dousing is likely scum?

Just curious

I think they are severely misguided. I wish they were Mafia so that I could vote them. The fact they have been misrepresenting my actions against Fox is the main point against them, but I'm chalking it up to boneheadedness. It's also regrettable to me that I mostly find their reads on the entire table backwards.

So no, I don't currently think dousing is scum.

'i'm so sad that the person scumreading me is town'

another major red flag

[Bonatogether]

In case anybody cares, my ranking list is:

Townie:
Bonatogether

Neutral-Positive:
Jamiet
Dousing
bozo

Neutral/Null:
chaqa
damo

Neutral-Negative:
rdrive
President Eden

Mafia:
Koala
Snowy

Now I'll do a proper investigation on Koala, though it will probably be in a few hours. Who knows, maybe my opinion on them will change.

i think this tracks with an eden/bozo/s&c world

[Bonatogether]

he does NOT have demonstrated town paranoia

[Bonatogether]

wdym

not to be a dick to y'all but a lot of dousing/s&c and you/koala is tedious to get through

i guess part of it is that i independently TR 3/4 of y'all and haven't made up my mind on koala yet

starting to appreciate why people glazed over when i used to get in arguments

Also, I really don't feel like doing what Koala wants and restating my position on them. It just seems like a big waste of time. But I feel like not doing so will discredit me.

Do you think I ought to do as Koala requests? Or will it reflect poorly on me if I don't? I think it's fair to Koala to at least have another look to make sure I'm being objective, but is a detailed post really necessary? Especially since I've already been detailed in the past?

on assumption the world is s&c/eden - this confirms no daychat imo