Netherworld Mafia [Concluded]

Tally (through post #241):


Votes so far (16 of 30 possible):

TruePraetorian = 4 (CA, w&f, FH, EF)

CountArach = 3 (pever, NN, Ryth)

Fahad I = 3 (Kommodus, Drisos, Seamus)

Caius = 2 (GH, Fahad I)

Drisos = 1 (Mouza)

GeneralHankerchief = 1 (TinCow)

Kommodus = 1 (Tratorix)

TinCow = 1 (Andres)

Not Voting = 14 (Banana, Caius, CR, Hannibal, Ichigo, Joe, Mak', Omanes, Sara', Tiber', True', TB, Horus, Yaro')

Italics indicate that the person has not even attempted to lodge a vote (illegal, late or otherewise). Joe and True's attempts didn't work last time, but an attempt was made.

Fos: Rythmic
In your player analysis you pointed at a lot of people(including myself) because in the first round they didn't have a good reason for their voting whomever they voted for... were as your first vote=random just like everybody else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rythmic

As much as I'd like to follow Rule #1. I think the chances of Sasaki being Mafia again are incredibly slim. So instead I'll pick someone completely at random.

Vote: TruePraetorian

---

I believe Prol to be an innocent, so I'll Vote TP
Tally
TruePraetorian = 5 (CA, w&f, FH, EF, Hannibal)

CountArach = 3 (pever, NN, Ryth)

Fahad I = 3 (Kommodus, Drisos, Seamus)

Caius = 2 (GH, Fahad I)

Drisos = 1 (Mouza)

GeneralHankerchief = 1 (TinCow)

Kommodus = 1 (Tratorix)

TinCow = 1 (Andres)

Not Voting = 13 (Banana, Caius, CR, Ichigo, Joe, Mak', Omanes, Sara', Tiber', True', TB, Horus, Yaro')
EDIT: Seamus posted while I was writing my post(due to an interuption it took a long time to write) so I edited to correct tally

Vote: Kommodus

In capo he claimed he had a new formula that could identify mafia with no prior games and little evidence. Now he's got nothing. Sasaki's right about his MO as mafia.

EDIT:
Tally
TruePraetorian = 5 (CA, w&f, FH, EF, Hannibal)

CountArach = 3 (pever, NN, Ryth)

Fahad I = 3 (Kommodus, Drisos, Seamus)

Caius = 2 (GH, Fahad I)

Drisos = 1 (Mouza)

GeneralHankerchief = 1 (TinCow)

Kommodus = 2 (Tratorix, Crazed Rabbit)

TinCow = 1 (Andres)

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Vote: Kommodus

In capo he claimed he had a new formula that could identify mafia with no prior games and little evidence. Now he's got nothing. Sasaki's right about his MO as mafia.

CR

---

IIRC, he was also mafia in that game and put suspicion on hannibalbarc (including the new bit about Holmes) to take suspicion off himself. Since he was mafia in that game, it's reasonable to assume that he was lying about the new features.

That said, I still want something more concrete from Kommo. The path he is going down looks very familiar.

I'm going to read the last couple of pages of Capo to see if he said outright he was lying about Holmes.

-edit-

Okay, I couldn't find anything straight from the horse's mouth, but here was a comment from Seamus in his description of what everybody did:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Kommodus did use his cachet as “mafia hunter” to get HannibalBarca lynched, but was unable to save Tiberius of the Drake thereby.

---

I can't remember the exact sequence of events, but I think Kommo unleashed his "new version of Holmes" and got Hannibal lynched during the same day phase. Anyone want to feel like confirming?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief

I can't remember the exact sequence of events, but I think Kommo unleashed his "new version of Holmes" and got Hannibal lynched during the same day phase. Anyone want to feel like confirming?

---

I can confirm that Kommodus used his new Holmes on Hannibalbarc. He told me that it was a good read and that he believed that Hannibal was mafia.

Was that before or after he was revealed to be mafia?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief

Was that before or after he was revealed to be mafia?

---

Well if you know the dates of the reveal...
I asked Kommodus about this and he answered 10 Feburary 2008 at 02:26 CET.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane

Well if you know the dates of the reveal...
I asked Kommodus about this and he answered 10 Feburary 2008 at 02:26 CET.

---

Capo Story post, February 20th:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Story thread

Fermanagh smiled.

“But we did eliminate some of the scum too. Kommodus was a Mafia Luca – one of their special protection thugs, and Omanes Alexandrapolites was a DON!

---

So he was still masquerading as a townie then, which means we're still not sure that he was telling the truth about Holmes v2.0. :wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief

So he was still masquerading as a townie then, which means we're still not sure that he was telling the truth about Holmes v2.0. :wall:

---

Why would he lie to his Don?

Oh crap, forgot about that. Disregard everything I said.

Vote: HannibalBarc

Both due to Holmes readings and previous specified reasons.

I also am concerned about GH, as previously stated - HannibalBarca followed him at first, and now he's trying to protect him. Is this a mafia partnership?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omanes Alexandrapolites

I also am concerned about GH, as previously stated - HannibalBarca followed him at first, and now he's trying to protect him. Is this a mafia partnership?

---

No, I'm just trying to prevent lynches of newbies that are without basis. I've always done this.

Quote:

---

I very much disagree that my reason for voting for GH is a bad one, though. The write-ups are the only hard evidence available to us at the moment. GH is not an inexperienced player. From what I understand, he created this entire game at the Org. I find it very unlikely that he would simply skim the write-up if he were pro-town. Like the rest of us, he would be looking at it for details that could help us win. The only reason to skim it is if he already knew what it would say.

---

But it's simply not true that experienced players don't skim the write up, and it's even more untrue that a good player would make a case that could be disproved by the write up if he'd read it. It is bad reasoning.

Does anyone know if rythmic is usually this pro-active?

I always skim writeups, unless there's discussion on them and I want to let the wrath of my intuition come upon them. I think many do. no direct reason for suspicion. Let's not lynch the remaining active players just yet eh? (*looks at the number of lurkers*..)

I've got to say Rythmic is doing a nice job summarizing, but don't recall him to be that active either? aw well, capo 2 was the first game in a while that I played, I missed a lot games before that..

btw, I never actually heard what 'holmes' is/how it works, whatever, but how accurate is it? Omanes claims that it's pointing to hannibalbarc,.. and our current lynch target are mostly shots in the dark anyway.. I'm in doubt who to vote!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

But it's simply not true that experienced players don't skim the write up, and it's even more untrue that a good player would make a case that could be disproved by the write up if he'd read it. It is bad reasoning.

---

I see your point, and perhaps I am a bit biased because I read everything by habit. Still, if what you are saying is true, then GH should have switched his vote off Caius when I pointed out that the write-up disproved his reason for voting for him. GH has been active in this thread since that time and has not changed his vote. I would like to see some explanation for that before I change my own vote.

TC, if it would be a maybe-deciding vote I'd agree, but it makes no sense. His vote is as useless as is an 'abstain', since Caius isn't going to be lynched. Why would he keep a 'suspicious vote' on someone, when it doesn't help anyway? makes no sense..

FoS: Everyone who bandwagoned TP after my ghost vote. My reasoning wasn't very strong yet it was latched on to pretty quickly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CR

Tally
TruePraetorian = 5 (CA, w&f, FH, EF, Hannibal)

---

Those three stand out to me for now

My vote on Caius was not because I believed him to be responsible in a series of Capo-vengeance killings, it's because he hadn't said anything of consequence. This is still the case. Thus, my vote stays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief

My vote on Caius was not because I believed him to be responsible in a series of Capo-vengeance killings, it's because he hadn't said anything of consequence. This is still the case. Thus, my vote stays.

---

Re-reading you vote post, I see this now. I will therefore retract my vote. Of the other likely lynchees, I see little more than 'instinct' type reasoning given for voting for TP and CA, so I don't think worthy of lynching at the moment. I will thus go for Fahad I, since he's the other high-vote option and Rythmic makes an interesting point about his posting style.

Unvote: GeneralHankerchief
Vote: Fahad I

Vote: Omanes

He's voting Hannibal on the basis of a supposed Holmes reading which was from last game - not this one..... looks much too much like just latching onto the most convenient target and not really trying to follow thread at all.



(sorry I'm going to have to come back to do Tally in later post)

I got it for you, Makanyane.

Tally:

TruePraetorian = 5 (CA, w&f, FH, EF, Hannibal)
Fahad I = 4 (Kommodus, Drisos, Seamus, TinCow)
CountArach = 3 (pever, NN, Ryth)
Caius = 2 (GH, Fahad I)
Kommodus = 2 (Tratorix, Crazed Rabbit)
Drisos = 1 (Mouza)
TinCow = 1 (Andres)
HannibalBarc = 1 (Omanes)
Omanes = 1 (Makanyane)

Thanks - I was just getting there but trying to preview to check no votes changed in mean time was starting to be a pain as site is lagging for me....

I came to same conclusion based off Seamus's last version, think that leaves:

Not Voting = 10 (Banana, Caius, Ichigo, Joe, Sara', Tiber', True', TB, Horus, Yaro')

Ok, just to set the record straight:

1. I did add a new feature to Holmes prior to CDTC II. I had used it in a couple of small games prior to Capo, with promising yet mixed results.

2. In Capo, I really did believe Hannibalbarc was guilty, as Sigurd says. Seamus believed I was just making the whole thing up, but unfortunately that wasn't the case - I simply made a bad read. It happens.

3. It's true that Fahad I is new, but I still don't trust him. He seems to be lurking in the thread, and his responses seem dodgy and evasive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Makanyane

Vote: Omanes

He's voting Hannibal on the basis of a supposed Holmes reading which was from last game - not this one..... looks much too much like just latching onto the most convenient target and not really trying to follow thread at all.

---

It seems I missed a portion of page three (on my set up). Regardless of the Holmes reading, it's more on the reason I stated before really - he seemed too willing to follow GH's theory that a bandwagon equalled higher discussion levels without actually understanding what it meant. This could be a new player trying to follow a more experienced one, but I do doubt it.

I am also weary of GH since HannibalBarca seemed to follow his idea and later he moved in to protect him. The former could just be coincidence, or it could be a fairly new mafioso following his buddy.

Fahad I also seems rather suspect - his posts are short and he is not responding to the comments of others against him. This is one of the two extreme forms of mafia tactic - either responding violently to everything directed against you violently, or ignoring it/classifying it trivially. This could be a sign of inexperience though, so probably isn't solid enough considering stronger other leads.

What is Holmes?

@ Omanes, but you stated

Quote:

---

Both due to Holmes readings...

---

It looks fairly obvious to me unless I'm missing something that the only Holmes reading claim against him was for Capo, you latching onto mere mention of that so readily is tending to look like a scummy deflection attempt! Pure carelessness maybe..... but doesn't seem a good sign.

EDIT: above was response to Omanes pre-edit response - seems he's now claiming to not have seen part of thread.... think I'll leave figuring this out further to some of more experienced players for now, I'm still not entirely convinced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gibsonsg91921

What is Holmes?

---

Holmes is an advanced program designed by Kommodus to assist in mafia detection. You can find more details on its strategies and methods here.

~:)

Also, may I add that, I wasn't guilty when Kommodus first accused me of being mafia, I guess it was stupid of me to get into trouble after that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kommodus

3. It's true that Fahad I is new, but I still don't trust him. He seems to be lurking in the thread, and his responses seem dodgy and evasive.

---

Don't most new players lurk, from what I've seen they do, and being new myself,
I would say that if a new player starts posting a lot, he'll probably get himself lynched pretty fast whether he was guilty or not.

.
Unvote: Drisos
Vote: Abstain

I'm a simpleton. I don't get this terror going on. All I want is to survive another night. ~:mecry:
.