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

[worcej]

Here's the votes so far
---------------------------------------
Koalaattack (2) Dousing, ghug,
Jamiet99uk (2) President Eden, Koalaattack
Bonatogether (2) damo666, Snowy
ghug (1) Chaqa
sweetandcool (1) Bonatogether

GM Note:
Probably "too much GM" again, but this is not actually accurate based on my following at this exact moment and I will remind the audience that only a GM provided vote count should be considered official or accurate.

[sweetandcool]

I guess my previous vote didn't count due to syntax error. In the meantime, I've changed my mind and decided to vote for another player, simply because I find their posts hard to understand and it's making my head hurt.

As for the koala situation:

Case 1: not mafia: then mafia hopes we pile up and vote koala. Bad mafia eagerly votes koala, good mafia takes a cautious approach and tries to be less enthusiastic without changing the result away from koala.

Case 2: mafia: koala hopes to survive the first vote, and hopes suspicion is drawn away from them, since case 1 seems more likely.

Conclusion: pay close attention to previous discussion related to koala, maybe there are clues.

##VOTE Bonatogether

finally, somebody with sense around here

evaluate Foxcastle’s reaction under this lens, please

Slogging through all posts related to koala, I observe the following:

Post #52: Jamiet immediately jumped on voting Koala.
Post #58: Fox shares a story about how in the past they would punish the behavour that Koala is demonstrating. The moral of the story planted the idea of voting Koala.
Post #59: Jamiet points out that Fox's logic doesn't make sense.
Post #81: Fox says it was a story they found interesting and relevant, that's why they mentioned it. Proceeds to question Jamiet's Post #52. Also points out how the play demonstrated in their story and Koala's current play have significant downsides.
Post #121: Dousing votes Koala to save their own skin.
Post #210: ghug chimes in with a vote for Koala, quoting Post #121.
Post #243: Jamiet doubles down on their Koala vote, referencing Koala's repeated self-vote declarations.
Post #245: damo asks Koala to stop this nonsense.
Post #247: Bozo is saying something about the Fox/Jamiet posts, idk what.
Post #etc: I don't think they are any more relevant posts and have stopped analyzing.


Conclusions:
I do not know the normal Jamiet/Koala dynamic, please evaluate whether Post #52 and #243 are suspicious. My gut says no, but I feel like a townie should immediately know that voting Koala D1 is a poor play (save it for D2, please (:)

Fox could have been telling an innocent story. Or we could be dealing with a clever Fox who wants to plant the seed of the idea to pile on Koala. A great play for the Mafia Traitor, since Mafia Goons should pick up on the communication. And after communication (Post #58), Fox can walk back and start playing devils advocate (Post #81), the role Jamiet immediately took in Post #59.


Take the following with a huge grain of salt:

I only referenced one damo post, but several of their posts make them seem super trustworthy. Which is actually a bit suspicious. It's probably nothing, but something to keep in mind. Also, ghug's Post #210 is bizarre and actually reads good mafia play. Wait quite a while and see that public opinion is tipping a bit in Koala direction, only then chime in to help seal the deal.

Lastly, wouldn't it be funny if Chaqa was the Mafia Traitor, and using the posts they didn't like as a form of communication? I only had that thought near the end, but it could be quite clever. Other's can provide analysis of their +1s if they feel like it.

[snowy801]

Here's the votes so far
---------------------------------------
Koalaattack (2) Dousing, ghug,
Jamiet99uk (2) President Eden, Koalaattack
Bonatogether (2) damo666, Snowy
ghug (1) Chaqa
sweetandcool (1) Bonatogether

GM Note:
Probably "too much GM" again, but this is not actually accurate based on my following at this exact moment and I will remind the audience that only a GM provided vote count should be considered official or accurate.

This is, in fact, too much GM.

No offense worcej, we appreciate you. But a line must be drawn.

[snowy801]

I guess my previous vote didn't count due to syntax error. In the meantime, I've changed my mind and decided to vote for another player, simply because I find their posts hard to understand and it's making my head hurt.

As for the koala situation:

Case 1: not mafia: then mafia hopes we pile up and vote koala. Bad mafia eagerly votes koala, good mafia takes a cautious approach and tries to be less enthusiastic without changing the result away from koala.

Case 2: mafia: koala hopes to survive the first vote, and hopes suspicion is drawn away from them, since case 1 seems more likely.

Conclusion: pay close attention to previous discussion related to koala, maybe there are clues.

##VOTE Bonatogether

finally, somebody with sense around here

evaluate Foxcastle’s reaction under this lens, please

Can you explain the "sense" in this?

[President Eden]

Weak shade.
Weak.
Very weak.

What is the basis of your supposition?

~vibes~

You seem off this game.

I’m torn between wanting to reward you for avoiding tedious arguments over irrelevant minutiae and the nagging feeling that you’re able to do so because you have the answers

[worcej]

Here's the votes so far
---------------------------------------
Koalaattack (2) Dousing, ghug,
Jamiet99uk (2) President Eden, Koalaattack
Bonatogether (2) damo666, Snowy
ghug (1) Chaqa
sweetandcool (1) Bonatogether

GM Note:
Probably "too much GM" again, but this is not actually accurate based on my following at this exact moment and I will remind the audience that only a GM provided vote count should be considered official or accurate.

This is, in fact, too much GM.

No offense worcej, we appreciate you. But a line must be drawn.

GM Note:
Your opinion is noted.

[Jamiet99uk]

Here's the votes so far
---------------------------------------
Koalaattack (2) Dousing, ghug,
Jamiet99uk (2) President Eden, Koalaattack
Bonatogether (2) damo666, Snowy
ghug (1) Chaqa
sweetandcool (1) Bonatogether

GM Note:
Probably "too much GM" again, but this is not actually accurate based on my following at this exact moment and I will remind the audience that only a GM provided vote count should be considered official or accurate.

##CALL GM:

If you are only going to provide 2-3 Vote Counts per phase, it's pretty poor form to criticise players for posting unofficial Vote Counts.

Ideally, remembering how it used to be done, if the Bot is not operational, you should be looking, between you and your co-GM, to post a Vote Count at least 6 - 8 times per phase.

[sweetandcool]

Too many conclusions in that last post, so we'll make the final conclusion a call to action for the players:

Calls to action: Vote Bonatogether to save me a headache. Vote Fox for being the best candidate for Mafia Traitor. Vote Jamiet because they might be a dumb Mafia Goon jumping on the Koala bandwagon. Or vote damo because they seem too trustworthy.

[Jamiet99uk]

~vibes~

You seem off this game.

I’m torn between wanting to reward you for avoiding tedious arguments over irrelevant minutiae and the nagging feeling that you’re able to do so because you have the answers

I’m torn between wanting to reward you for avoiding tedious arguments over irrelevant minutiae and the nagging feeling that you’re able to do so because you have the answers

[worcej]

Here's the votes so far
---------------------------------------
Koalaattack (2) Dousing, ghug,
Jamiet99uk (2) President Eden, Koalaattack
Bonatogether (2) damo666, Snowy
ghug (1) Chaqa
sweetandcool (1) Bonatogether

GM Note:
Probably "too much GM" again, but this is not actually accurate based on my following at this exact moment and I will remind the audience that only a GM provided vote count should be considered official or accurate.

##CALL GM:

If you are only going to provide 2-3 Vote Counts per phase, it's pretty poor form to criticise players for posting unofficial Vote Counts.

Ideally, remembering how it used to be done, if the Bot is not operational, you should be looking, between you and your co-GM, to post a Vote Count at least 6 - 8 times per phase.

GM Note:
I'm actively following the game to the best of my abilities while working a full time remote job that has traveling components to it. To say that the bot being down is a bad thing is an understatement.

However, I will provide counts as requested during the first 75% of the phase and anticipate them ramping up tomorrow.

Editting to add: I wasn't criticizing Dousing, just reminding people that unofficial tracking is not necessarily accurate and to refer to any VC by myself or Darg.

[snowy801]

Here's the votes so far
---------------------------------------
Koalaattack (2) Dousing, ghug,
Jamiet99uk (2) President Eden, Koalaattack
Bonatogether (2) damo666, Snowy
ghug (1) Chaqa
sweetandcool (1) Bonatogether

GM Note:
Probably "too much GM" again, but this is not actually accurate based on my following at this exact moment and I will remind the audience that only a GM provided vote count should be considered official or accurate.

##CALL GM:

If you are only going to provide 2-3 Vote Counts per phase, it's pretty poor form to criticise players for posting unofficial Vote Counts.

Ideally, remembering how it used to be done, if the Bot is not operational, you should be looking, between you and your co-GM, to post a Vote Count at least 6 - 8 times per phase.

I am more concerned that a vote count has been corrected.

If a player chooses to lie, mislead, or simply be innocuously mistaken about a vote count it is not a GM's place to intervene in that arrangement.

[Jamiet99uk]

Too many conclusions in that last post, so we'll make the final conclusion a call to action for the players:

Calls to action: Vote Bonatogether to save me a headache. Vote Fox for being the best candidate for Mafia Traitor. Vote Jamiet because they might be a dumb Mafia Goon jumping on the Koala bandwagon. Or vote damo because they seem too trustworthy.

Do you think there was a "Koala Bandwagon" when I voted for Koala?

[Jamiet99uk]

GM Note:
Probably "too much GM" again, but this is not actually accurate based on my following at this exact moment and I will remind the audience that only a GM provided vote count should be considered official or accurate.

##CALL GM:

If you are only going to provide 2-3 Vote Counts per phase, it's pretty poor form to criticise players for posting unofficial Vote Counts.

Ideally, remembering how it used to be done, if the Bot is not operational, you should be looking, between you and your co-GM, to post a Vote Count at least 6 - 8 times per phase.

GM Note:
I'm actively following the game to the best of my abilities while working a full time remote job that has traveling components to it. To say that the bot being down is a bad thing is an understatement.

However, I will provide counts as requested during the first 75% of the phase and anticipate them ramping up tomorrow.

Editting to add: I wasn't criticizing Dousing, just reminding people that unofficial tracking is not necessarily accurate and to refer to any VC by myself or Darg.

##CALL GM

I request a vote count.

[Jamiet99uk]

I am more concerned that a vote count has been corrected.

If a player chooses to lie, mislead, or simply be innocuously mistaken about a vote count it is not a GM's place to intervene in that arrangement.

Agree.

[worcej]

##CALL GM:

If you are only going to provide 2-3 Vote Counts per phase, it's pretty poor form to criticise players for posting unofficial Vote Counts.

Ideally, remembering how it used to be done, if the Bot is not operational, you should be looking, between you and your co-GM, to post a Vote Count at least 6 - 8 times per phase.

GM Note:
I'm actively following the game to the best of my abilities while working a full time remote job that has traveling components to it. To say that the bot being down is a bad thing is an understatement.

However, I will provide counts as requested during the first 75% of the phase and anticipate them ramping up tomorrow.

Editting to add: I wasn't criticizing Dousing, just reminding people that unofficial tracking is not necessarily accurate and to refer to any VC by myself or Darg.

##CALL GM

I request a vote count.

[sweetandcool]

Too many conclusions in that last post, so we'll make the final conclusion a call to action for the players:

Calls to action: Vote Bonatogether to save me a headache. Vote Fox for being the best candidate for Mafia Traitor. Vote Jamiet because they might be a dumb Mafia Goon jumping on the Koala bandwagon. Or vote damo because they seem too trustworthy.

Do you think there was a "Koala Bandwagon" when I voted for Koala?

Goons want a townie voted for. Koala asked to be voted for. Dumb goons would eagerly jump on the offer. And later on, after a 2nd player had voted for Koala, Koala started voting for themselves, making three votes. Then you decide to double down with your vote, after the bandwagon had formed.

So yes, I think there was an obvious potential bandwagon when you initially voted, and there was an actual bandwagon when you decided to vote Koala again.

And your argument with Fox definitely is not evidence that you are not Mafia. Playing devil's advocate and pointing out flaws in reasoning and even asking about whether a bandwagon had formed are all things someone trying to not be suspicious would do.

All of that being said, my gut says you are not a dumb goon.

[Jamiet99uk]

##CALL GM

Thank you for trying, but I don't know what the fuck that's meant to be.

It's not a proper vote count. Please would you have another go?

[Jamiet99uk]

Goons want a townie voted for. Koala asked to be voted for. Dumb goons would eagerly jump on the offer. And later on, after a 2nd player had voted for Koala, Koala started voting for themselves, making three votes. Then you decide to double down with your vote, after the bandwagon had formed.

So yes, I think there was an obvious potential bandwagon when you initially voted, and there was an actual bandwagon when you decided to vote Koala again.

I'm fairly sure the first vote for Koala was cast by Koala.

No?

[sweetandcool]

##CALL GM

Thank you for trying, but I don't know what the fuck that's meant to be.

It's not a proper vote count. Please would you have another go?

GM just said they were busy, and provided a nice picture showing vote history.

But since you can't read, here you go:

3 votes for Jamiet: ghug, President Eden, Koala.
3 votes for bona: damo, snow, sweetandcool.
1 vote for koala: Dousing.
1 vote for ghug: Chaqa.

[sweetandcool]

Goons want a townie voted for. Koala asked to be voted for. Dumb goons would eagerly jump on the offer. And later on, after a 2nd player had voted for Koala, Koala started voting for themselves, making three votes. Then you decide to double down with your vote, after the bandwagon had formed.

So yes, I think there was an obvious potential bandwagon when you initially voted, and there was an actual bandwagon when you decided to vote Koala again.

I'm fairly sure the first vote for Koala was cast by Koala.

No?

Huh, somehow my eyes glazed over at the very beginning and missed that. I could have sworn that Koala only encouraged a vote for themselves, but I guess they actually did.