A History of Violence [Concluded]

[Lewwyn]

Do you mind my asking why?

Oh man, you and jarema, doing good guys.

[Jarema]

Oh man, you and jarema, doing good guys.

???


ANyway, I am vote: ATPG

[Askthepizzaguy]

Time you posted something super-townie, pizza - like the previous days?

Unfortunately, I have to be at work in 15 minutes; the day starts right when I go to sleep, and then I work an 8-10 hour shift. Any serious analysis would have to wait until I get home, which is going to be too late for most folks to even be able to read it and respond to it.

Given that SalmonSoil hasn't voted and has had the opportunity to do so, that makes me believe that Salmon is simply waiting to see which is the best wagon to leap onto to spare himself. That is going to be me, given Jarrema's no-reason vote.

I would like to vote for Jarrema because of his creeping through the game. last round, he simply hopped on the wagon with little further comment.

That said, the vote situation is 3 folks left not voting, two of them are being voted. If I vote for Jarrema, that means I have to hope that DaveShack and SalmonSoil are both townies and will not misvote. If even one of them is mafia, that's pretty much a guaranteed loss for us.

If Jarrema is mafia, I have to hope Salmon is his partner. If he's not mafia then I shouldn't vote him to begin with. The odds force my hand, and SalmonSoil waiting to vote, instead of declaring his suspects, coupled with his earlier vote for me on previous rounds, makes this real simple.

Vote: SalmonSoil

If you or jarrema are townies, we're losing this game. You have to convince me what is wrong with Lazy or DaveShack's play. I may switch my vote, but I won't be here to argue it out. You have to guess correctly AND convince me. Good luck.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Make that seven minutes,

[SalmonSoil]

Don't mind at all. My vote on you is because I'm fairly sure that 'lurky' Daveshack is as innocent as I am, which leaves two out of the remaining three of you need lynching asap. Moreover - Your polite enquiry does nothing at all in my mind to exhonorate you - merely adds more kindling to the fire. Who do YOU think is scum?

I agree that Daveshack is probably innocent. My inquiry wasn't to remove suspicion, at this point in the game, where lynching mafia is crucial, shouldn't we want to know everyone's reasons for voting? Which reminds me, Jarema it would be nice to know why you think Pizza is guilty.

I agree with Pizza on this, Jarema has only once actually given a reason for lynching someone. Lazy McCrow is also vague with his voting, although when asked he usually gives some reasons pretty quickly (10 minutes when I asked, 20 minutes one time earlier). This actually makes him more suspicious, as it seems he is closely watching this thread, always alert and ready to defend himself. It is possible though, that those are just the times he happens to be online. Also when he voted for Pizza and was asked to defend his vote he declined to give reasons.

So at the moment looks like I'm going to have to vote: Lazy McCrow

But if it looks like I'm going to be lynched by the end of the day I'm going to have to shift my vote to you, Pizza, simply because I am innocent and it is therefore better for me to see someone lynched who might possibly be guilty. Also I'm interested in Jarema's reasons for voting Pizza.

In defense of myself, the reason I only asked Lazy McCrow to give reasons for voting for me and didn't give my own suspicions at the time was that I was tired and just wanted to go to sleep. I thought that it would be best to give myself some more material to analyse when I woke up, and possibly also remove some suspicion from me.

[DaveShack]

That's a very interesting choice, and it makes my choice harder. Reading the thread sequentially I was ready to vote Jarema based on ATPG's observation about creeping. It's pretty late to be voting with no commentary. However, Lazy's previous answer could be interpreted as a mafia attempt to tag one innocent while appealing to the others' sentiments. After just inviting comments from the assumed super-townie who just happened to pick the same target.

What if our mafia pair is Lazy + Pizza? They're both active, not the stereotype of mafia, unless it's a super-townie gambit. In that case, today's posts make perfect sense. Or it could be Lazy + Jarema, with Lazy manipulating an innocent Pizza into voting SalmonSoil because the votes aren't there to aim for Jarema. Obviously Lazy + SalmonSoil doesn't make any sense, why bus your partner with the first vote. Likewise Pizza+Jarema and Pizza+Salmon don't make sense.

All that taken into account, all the most likely combinations come up with one partner in common. Vote: LazyMcCrow Let's just hope that everyone has behaved "normally" as appropriate for their role.

[Jarema]

I like your analysis, ATPG.
TBH, I did not have any real reason for voting for you. It was just a feeling that something is wrong with your gameplay.
Anyway, now I am torn between voting for Salmon and voting for Lazy.
Vote: LazyMcCrow, as this wagon has a chance of standing and hitting scum

[Nightbringer]

I would advocate voting salmon over lazy, but I am no expert. I feel that lazy has simply put himself on the line too much to be mafia. Maybe not, but it jsut seems too risky to me. Salmon on the other hand has played quite safe. + what ATPG stated.

I would tag Jarema as the possible second. He is doing a lot of agreeing then turning around and voting elsewhere.

[LazyMcCrow]

SalmonSoil and Jarema are the scum. The only other option is Daveshack & Pizza and I just don't buy that. SalmonSoil was practically holding Jarema's hand in that last post when he pulled his vote from ATPG to me. not to mention the (emboldened) clangers below:

I agree that Daveshack is probably innocent. My inquiry wasn't to remove suspicion, at this point in the game, where lynching mafia is crucial, shouldn't we want to know everyone's reasons for voting? Which reminds me, Jarema it would be nice to know why you think Pizza is guilty.

I agree with Pizza on this, Jarema has only once actually given a reason for lynching someone. Lazy McCrow is also vague with his voting, although when asked he usually gives some reasons pretty quickly (10 minutes when I asked, 20 minutes one time earlier). This actually makes him more suspicious, as it seems he is closely watching this thread, always alert and ready to defend himself. It is possible though, that those are just the times he happens to be online. Also when he voted for Pizza and was asked to defend his vote he declined to give reasons.

So at the moment looks like I'm going to have to vote: Lazy McCrow

But if it looks like I'm going to be lynched by the end of the day I'm going to have to shift my vote to you, Pizza, simply because I am innocent and it is therefore better for me to see someone lynched who might possibly be guilty. Also I'm interested in Jarema's reasons for voting Pizza.

In defense of myself, the reason I only asked Lazy McCrow to give reasons for voting for me and didn't give my own suspicions at the time was that I was tired and just wanted to go to sleep. I thought that it would be best to give myself some more material to analyse when I woke up, and possibly also remove some suspicion from me.

[LazyMcCrow]

Oh and Jarema? - There's something fairly fundamental you need to do in order to make your vote against me count - although with Daveshack buying into your garbage it makes little difference to the outcome now.

[Askthepizzaguy]

There's a work shift I don't ever want to have to go through again.

TBH I didn't expect such a fundamentally different vote setup when I got back. There should still be like three hours left so if anyone is awake and wants to help me analyze these developments, you're more than welcome to.

Dead folks especially, but reactions from the living are of particular interest.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Lazy if you're online, holler back at me.

[LazyMcCrow]

Yo!

[Askthepizzaguy]

I agree that Daveshack is probably innocent.

It's especially difficult in a vanilla game to remove someone from suspicion. In order for me to determine if this is genuinely a townie read of Dave or simply snuggling, I would ask you what DaveShack has done, specifically which posts/votes, that have convinced you he's probably innocent, and why.

My inquiry wasn't to remove suspicion, at this point in the game, where lynching mafia is crucial, shouldn't we want to know everyone's reasons for voting?

Probably, for analysis purposes. That said, going after someone for posting no reasoning is a reflexive "look at how townie I am" scum move. And sometimes townies just don't post their reasons.

In general I agree that we want to know the reasons.

Which reminds me, Jarema it would be nice to know why you think Pizza is guilty.

• Salmon, the thing which grabs my attention is the idea of you and Jarema being scum together. Especially in this vote setup.
• Jarema, same point, do you find each other suspicious at all?

Stuff that leads me to that idea, the very next points SalmonSoil makes are directed at me and Jarema.

I'm voting SalmonSoil, Salmon doesn't react with OMGUS and agrees with my point about Jarema, but does not vote for Jarema.

Is this the behavior of a scum who is under pressure, and feels that joining the pizza wagon with Jarema would be too obvious? Take a look.

I agree with Pizza on this, Jarema has only once actually given a reason for lynching someone. Lazy McCrow is also vague with his voting, although when asked he usually gives some reasons pretty quickly (10 minutes when I asked, 20 minutes one time earlier). This actually makes him more suspicious, as it seems he is closely watching this thread, always alert and ready to defend himself. It is possible though, that those are just the times he happens to be online. Also when he voted for Pizza and was asked to defend his vote he declined to give reasons.

Ostensibly, Salmon finds Jarema suspicious here but doesn't act on it. Is it necessarily scummy of him to do so? That's harder to say. If Salmon genuinely finds Lazy to be more scummy than Jarema, it will all make total sense. Why, though, is Lazy more scummy than Jarema?

So at the moment looks like I'm going to have to vote: Lazy McCrow

Now, Lazy could be like me: I'm omnipresent when I am actually at home and awake. I'm usually watching movies online or browsing other games or designing my next one. I am always on, when I'm home. So, this particular tell isn't too strong. It largely depends on the person in question. I have actually seen Lazy online almost constantly, even at the odd hours I keep, probably since before this game. I'm not sure this is a good basis for a vote.

What has he done which is actually scummy, besides be online?
Which votes have had the worst reasoning?
Which posts feel fake?

Can those questions be answered? Probably not in the time remaining.

But if it looks like I'm going to be lynched by the end of the day I'm going to have to shift my vote to you, Pizza, simply because I am innocent and it is therefore better for me to see someone lynched who might possibly be guilty. Also I'm interested in Jarema's reasons for voting Pizza.

All so neutral, a townie will have to try to self-save, but a scum definitely will. This part feels as though Salmon is explaining in advance why he will shift his vote to me.

In defense of myself, the reason I only asked Lazy McCrow to give reasons for voting for me and didn't give my own suspicions at the time was that I was tired and just wanted to go to sleep. I thought that it would be best to give myself some more material to analyse when I woke up, and possibly also remove some suspicion from me.

I can't parse this. I don't know where Salmon is coming from and it feels odd. Dunno if it is scummy-odd, but it feels out of place somehow.



My current analysis of SalmonSoil is that Salmon has advocated my death before, and here when he has a golden opportunity to get me dead, he's sort of waffling over it. And there are little comments here and there which feel wrong.

If this is all I see and all I go on, my gut would suggest Salmon is guilty. But we're grading on a curve, and I haven't checked out the others in-depth yet.

Lazy, digest this and tell me your reaction.

[Askthepizzaguy]

(I seen you in the preview and I got the email notification. )

[Askthepizzaguy]

That's a very interesting choice, and it makes my choice harder. Reading the thread sequentially I was ready to vote Jarema based on ATPG's observation about creeping.

I know, that's the "kill it" reaction.

Because you are articulating the same sort of visceral reaction I'm getting from a sequential read, I would say that you're either a townie or imitating the townie brain wave pattern very well.

What if our mafia pair is Lazy + Pizza?

This is what I do, I try to match up remaining suspects and see if there is a link. Lazy and I have been dancing around killing each other but haven't done it yet, and for you to observe that as a possible tell also smacks of honesty. It's wrong conclusion-wise but it feels more real, like a real analysis, to me.

They're both active, not the stereotype of mafia, unless it's a super-townie gambit. In that case, today's posts make perfect sense.

I would do that as mafia. That's sort of my trademark. And yet I am not mafia with lazy, or at all.

Or it could be Lazy + Jarema, with Lazy manipulating an innocent Pizza into voting SalmonSoil because the votes aren't there to aim for Jarema.

Possible, but I don't like the idea of being manipulated. I prefer to pull the strings.

Obviously Lazy + SalmonSoil doesn't make any sense, why bus your partner with the first vote.

To look really, really like you're not partners, thus defying all analysis, would be my first thought.

Likewise Pizza+Jarema and Pizza+Salmon don't make sense.

I could and would bus a partner here, but Jarema and Salmon both know my suspicion on them is genuine and not something we planned together.

I fell you're drawing the correct conclusions from a kind of analysis I think is flawed, but I won't quarrel with you over theory.

All that taken into account, all the most likely combinations come up with one partner in common. Vote: LazyMcCrow Let's just hope that everyone has behaved "normally" as appropriate for their role.

Here is the issue. It looks like everyone alive is willing to kill Lazy.

Knowing I am innocent, means that either Lazy is being bussed hardcore and for no reason, by his partner, or we've got the wrong man.

And me saying that likely ties me to his death, because it will be assumed I am his partner. I'm not, I calls them like I sees them.

The other conclusion is that Lazy's partner is already dead. This is a hopeful conclusion and one I can buy if the game ends with his death. But I cannot believe in rainbows and sunshine and close my eyes to the more dreadful and likely possibility.

I don't think I support Lazy's lynch here, at all. In spite of our friction this game, something about the situation doesn't feel square.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Chewing on everything further, I believe that one of SalmonSoil or Jarema are guilty, or both.

Both is less likely, but a possibility given the way the votes have fallen.

I do not believe it is DaveShack or LazyMcCrow.

That said it is two and a half hours to round end and there's hardly a darned thing that can be done about it.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I would advocate voting salmon over lazy, but I am no expert. I feel that lazy has simply put himself on the line too much to be mafia. Maybe not, but it jsut seems too risky to me. Salmon on the other hand has played quite safe. + what ATPG stated.

I would tag Jarema as the possible second. He is doing a lot of agreeing then turning around and voting elsewhere.

You think Salmon over Jarema, or Jarema over Salmon?

[LazyMcCrow]

You think Salmon over Jarema, or Jarema over Salmon?

Jarema over Salmon

[LazyMcCrow]

You think Salmon over Jarema, or Jarema over Salmon?

Daveshack is the problem for me now - same as I obviously am for him. so yeah
unvote: SalmonSoil
vote: Jarema

[Askthepizzaguy]

The question I have now is why Jarema over Salmon?

Suppose they aren't mafia together. it may matter which one we lynch. What makes Jarema worse?

[LazyMcCrow]

The question I have now is why Jarema over Salmon?

Suppose they aren't mafia together. it may matter which one we lynch. What makes Jarema worse?

I will re-read and reformulate - I seem to recall that Jarema's posts have been consistently 'exciteable'. I thought you were scum yesterday though so... wadevs. (Just caught up with the Time travel thread and am at work so may be a few more mins)

[LazyMcCrow]

OK - Just skim-read both SalmonSoil and Jarema's posts. SalmonSoil does indeed stick out - but Jaremas' posts whiff to me in general. He must be incredibly excited to have got this far. Posts 54 & 90 stick out particularly awfully.
I'm happy with either, but if you've pulled the wool over my eyes - just to say in advance: it has been a pleasure to drink the Chateux-Neuf-de-pizza.

Anyway - To give myself a slim chance of saving my sorry hide, I shall unvote: Jarema & vote: SalmonSoil again. I'd be happy to flip again if you prefer Jarema. I hope Daveshack has a chance to change his vote.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I don't think Dave is going to be on, but I will be, until round end.

I am on the phone, I haven't decided which one I prefer.

[Nightbringer]

I'm not on the level of either of you two, but from reading over the last series of posts again I am feeling more and more in agreement that Jarema and Salmon are definitely scum buddies.

When ATPG accused salmon, he quickly deflected attention by agreeing about Jarema, saying he didn't explain his votes, then went off on lazy and suddenly voted for him. Why do this when you agree with a case agaisnt jarema, and have a possibility of getting support in votes against him.
Additionally, he tries to give himself a safety net to jump onto the other possible non jarema target, ATPG.

Jarema then plays into his role perfectly, giving a nonchalant post that appears to be paying little attention to the details of the game. Like Salmon, he also voices support for your argument, trying to fit in, then goes off and votes for lazy. This time claiming to do so simply because it is the vote that has a wagon.

Why do both of these two agree with the arguments against each-other, then jump to vote against lazy. Especially in Jarema's case because the case against lazy was made by someone he agrees is a possible scumbag.

In my mind, the only way their behavior can be explained is if they are scumbuddies.

I say stay on salmon for now just to decrease the odds of voting confusion. I just hope dave comes back!

[SalmonSoil]

It's especially difficult in a vanilla game to remove someone from suspicion. In order for me to determine if this is genuinely a townie read of Dave or simply snuggling, I would ask you what DaveShack has done, specifically which posts/votes, that have convinced you he's probably innocent, and why.

I'm removing him from suspicion for the same reason as Lazy McCrow, because he is too lurky, and I don't think mafia would stay that lurky the whole game (I am far from an expert, though) I should have stated that. Of course that will be embarrassing if we're wrong.

Probably, for analysis purposes. That said, going after someone for posting no reasoning is a reflexive "look at how townie I am" scum move. And sometimes townies just don't post their reasons.

I presume they would this late in the game, and it seems like I've prompted Daveshack to provide some analysis with his vote, which is nice.

Ostensibly, Salmon finds Jarema suspicious here but doesn't act on it. Is it necessarily scummy of him to do so? That's harder to say. If Salmon genuinely finds Lazy to be more scummy than Jarema, it will all make total sense. Why, though, is Lazy more scummy than Jarema?

The truth is I find Jarema as suspicious as Lazy, however at that time he was the only player not voting for me, if it looked like I was going to be lynched later in the day I needed somewhere I could place my vote to try and protect myself. Realizing I may need his vote, I pointed out what I thought needed to be pointed out about him but didn't make any direct accusations.

Now, Lazy could be like me: I'm omnipresent when I am actually at home and awake. I'm usually watching movies online or browsing other games or designing my next one. I am always on, when I'm home. So, this particular tell isn't too strong. It largely depends on the person in question. I have actually seen Lazy online almost constantly, even at the odd hours I keep, probably since before this game. I'm not sure this is a good basis for a vote.

Fair point.

All so neutral, a townie will have to try to self-save, but a scum definitely will. This part feels as though Salmon is explaining in advance why he will shift his vote to me.

Again, I know a lynch on me is a wasted lynch, while a lynch on someone else might catch a scum. I was giving you fair warning.

I can't parse this. I don't know where Salmon is coming from and it feels odd. Dunno if it is scummy-odd, but it feels out of place somehow.

My current analysis of SalmonSoil is that Salmon has advocated my death before, and here when he has a golden opportunity to get me dead, he's sort of waffling over it. And there are little comments here and there which feel wrong.

I'm new to this, my play style will probably feel odd. You seemed suspicious yesterday, less so today.

I am actually willing to change my vote to vote: Jarema, but if it looks like I will be lynched I will have to change back. I will be here until voting closes

[Askthepizzaguy]

Is unvoting a requirement for a new vote to take effect in this game?

[Nightbringer]

Is unvoting a requirement for a new vote to take effect in this game?

•You will vote for players you want lynched during the day, using the format, Vote: Visorslash. Votes must be in bold to count. If you wish to unvote, simply: Unvote; Vote: ATPG. You don't need to do a semicolon, I just think it looks nice.

That sounds like it to me.

[Visor]

Yes. Unless it is on me or completely invalid like Vote: Sheep

And if you Vote: Sheep I will WoG you so ing hard.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Yes. Unless it is on me or completely invalid like Vote: Sheep

And if you Vote: Sheep I will WoG you so ing hard.

I call your bluff, host man.

Vote: Sheep