Mafia 73: Emergency is NOW!

[Allowyn]

Actually I'm going to lay my cards on the table and let everyone know what I know.

Vote: Dupti

What were you doing in the casino the first night, and why have you been visiting Reti ever since? I also assume that Kryllian chose you as his 'lovesick' partner for the game mechanic.

/stalk

[JynxieJ]

So there was my scream. I knew I was visited!

[dupti]

@Virothe, unless you believe I am mafia there is no need to. I currently believe you are more likely to be town (well at least not aligned with Danner), so I'm not really interested in questioning your motivations right now.
@Allowyn, casino? What are you talking about? Also why are you assuming that me visiting Ret twice in a row makes me suspicious? Did you miss the post yesterday when I told Ret that he most likely already know what my role is?

- - - Updated - - -

And I am not Kryllian's lover no. (unless largehorn didn't tell me about it)

- - - Updated - - -

Graeham, thoughts on Xan?

[Allowyn]

My role is the Town Stalker, because I'm hella creep yo.

But on D1 I decided to stalk you because of the consistent insistence that you were mason on D1, joke or not. Because I figured I could follow you around to see who was safe, vote for who you voted for, etc.

So N1: I get told that you and Kryllian went to the casino.

Now going along with the game, what would any good innocent town member have to do with the casino, especially on night one? And everyone who has flipped scum so far have been 'workers' and 'owners' of the casino. So I propose you're Scummy McScumerson and that you need to be today's lynch.

For N2 and N3 you went to Ret. And I doubt you would have known you were Kryll's lover.

"During Day 1, you may select one player to fall in love with. You will spend every night with this player for as long as you both shall live.

Any night action that may target your chosen player affects you as well. The reverse is not true."

It doesn't state you'd be told, but to be fair it doesn't state you wouldn't be.

Either way, you're mafia.

[dupti]

"Either way, you're mafia", lol Allowyn. I'm going to be honest, it was a pretty bad time to claim but this claim does make you more towny.

I visited Danner d1. Considering he flipped mafia, that might be why it told you I visited the casino. What else do you think it means? How does me 'visiting the casino' make me scum?

In either case, I might as well just claim. I see no real reason not to. I'm a town drunk.

Visited Danner n1, told him that I hope he dies. n2 I visited Ret, told him that he better be town. Last night I visited him again and sent him a poem.

[Allowyn]

Nah see I don't buy that. The visiting of Ret maybe, but not as a Town Drunk. I'm thinking as a Mafia Roleblocker or Framer.

Because why would it tell me you 'visited' the casino instead of who you visited. Because every other night it did when you went to Ret.

[Reticence]

It is however nothing I wish to pursue right now and I am more inclined to believe Celtic is not with him (so most likely town), but it is something that might be worth looking into later.

What do you think of my serial killer theory now that we've confirmed the existence of a mafia-opposed kill?

Anyway, @Reticence, thoughts on listo's #451?

I don't care for it much on principle, as I feel he should have voted regardless of whether or not his vote would be the one to make a difference.

Unfortunately, it's kind of par for the course for Listo, so I'm not sure it actually means anything. I will say his Arialla defense is what I expect from him as town, even if I'm not sure he isn't blinded by his personal feelings.

@Crackleslap, honestly you're probably scum but if you arent, plx do something.

Found this interesting. Was thinking something similar.

Also can it be said now that Arialla is unlikely to be mafia now? We ended up lynching a mafia cop instead of him. In theory if you ask me it would have made more sense for mafia to try and push the Arialla wagon ahead.

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that. Lots of eyes were on Danner yesterday, and the sort of gambit you're suggesting rarely pays off this early in the game. I think it may be more likely they didn't see him getting out of the bind he was in and bussed him early. That was part of my conversation with Dupti yesterday, if you'll recall, although I won't pursue him for it unless I have something substantial against him other than a paranoid theory, which I don't.

I would easily say why because it should be EXTREMELY obvious why he has a vote on you but... You know I shouldn't answer for him because that is bad or something.

Don't get me wrong, I think you're genuinely trying to be helpful, and that's good. That said, while I can't speak for everyone else, when I directly ask someone a question, I typically want them to answer it. I may want them to explain their thought process in detail. I may want to make them squirm, if I think they're suspicious.

Answering for the person can often allow them to just kind of piggyback off of your answer and say "what he said", or it can provide them an out that they otherwise did not realize they had. How the player answers the question is oftentimes just as important, if not more important, than the answer itself, and I want that result to be as untainted as possible.

@Soldier 76:

The section below contains replies to your comments from the end of yesterday, collapsed for anyone who doesn't want to read them. I didn't want to ignore them completely, partly because I found them to be unfair (and bullshit). More accurately, I struggled to ignore them because you hit on one of my pet peeves.

Spoiler: 

If you want people to be more engaged then indulging in circular arguments and lynching active players isn't the right way to go.

First, the nature of our arguments being circular has no relevance whatsoever to the inactivity problem. Our conversation did not have to be the only thing happening yesterday, and anyone could have jumped in and started a new thread of conversation at any time.

For the second part, I completely agree with the principle that killing off active players early makes the game less fun. If you'll recall, I was all for lynching a non-contributing player early last game instead of following my only lead because it was early and I didn't have much to go on. This time, however, it was D3 after a no-lynch and a mislynch and I felt I had a strong case on Danner. We were not in a position where I had the luxury to ignore that case in favor of a policy lynch just because other people decided not to play the game they signed up for.

I tried to. Not as well as I should have, certainly, but then I was hoping common sense would prevail and the people complaining about how 'boring' the game is would actually follow through on the elimination of a far less active player.

I'd be careful about trying to take the high ground, here, Graeham. I don't think you can justifiably accuse me or Dupti of not trying to improve the environment in which we play this game, because both of us have a steady track-record of it, both as player and moderator. Now, I know we're not even close to being the only ones; I would never claim that. However, once in a while I think I reserve the right to spend a little less energy trying to make sure the game is entertaining enough so that I can just play the game the way it was meant to be played, and I'd prefer to be able to do that without being talked down to for it.

I would prefer that you read it in full, but I won't be surprised if you don't. Either way, it's probably all I'm going to say on this topic. You're welcome to argue, but it would take some especially profound insight for me to not ignore it. I would much rather talk to you about the specifics of this game moving forward.

On that note:

If Danner flips Town, though, then I'm pretty sure Reticence, Celtic or both of them are scum. Just a hunch - and it could be a return of last game's paranoia but the last minute exchange with Arialla feels bizarre to me.

I know Danner flipped scum, so this is kind of moot, but please humor me. Which part did you find bizarre?

The exchange with Danner yesterday, I'm assuming. It certainly looks bad but I was genuinely concerned about the pool of active players declining and Danner managed to sway me towards trusting him after he began posting in-depth.

Eh, I don't blame you much. He started swinging back around to town-Danner near the end there, but that may have, as he said, been a direct result of Dupti asking him for a non-read analysis of the vote record. Regardless, that was enough to make me hesitate.

[Marack]

@dupti So did you enjoy that vodka?

[listo95]

Really the easy way to have figured this out would have been if dupti didn't say who he claimed to heckle last night. If he didn't do that we could verify if anyone did receieve a message. If someone did receive one it would have vindicated him and Allowyn.

[JynxieJ]

Alright, well I was left a note at my door last night. It told me of a person that had a guilty check on them, I'm guessing they gave it to me because I could be expendable if killed which is ok but they said they got a guilty check on


Vote Crackle

I am basing this off the info of what was left on my door plus you all seen the RP scream in the morning post that showed showed someone visiting me.

[Reticence]

Whoa. Catching up, one sec.

- - - Updated - - -

Dupti, when did you submit those actions?

[Virothe]

Either way, you're mafia.

He's mafia because the person he visited twice hasn't died? You do realize right that he could have actually been a major TPR like a Joat, Doc, Cop, Jk, Watcher....

Alright cool, He visited the Casino. But again no one died, you would have been a lot better off just keeping quiet and watching his interactions with people until he flipped or became you know... a good lynch target. But neither of these is a thing though.

[Reticence]

Nah see I don't buy that. The visiting of Ret maybe, but not as a Town Drunk. I'm thinking as a Mafia Roleblocker or Framer.

Because why would it tell me you 'visited' the casino instead of who you visited. Because every other night it did when you went to Ret.

Town Drunk... would be a pretty ballsy claim for scum.

[Virothe]

@Virothe, unless you believe I am mafia there is no need to. I currently believe you are more likely to be town (well at least not aligned with Danner), so I'm not really interested in questioning your motivations right now.

I don't think it really matters I was just saying what I did wasn't OMGUS since I didn't think what you were doing was stupid. I just thought it was an exploitative tactic based on trying to create a sense of fear so you could pursue your own agenda.

I don't know if I find you outright to be scummy though since this is the kinda stuff you always do.

[dupti]

Nah see I don't buy that. The visiting of Ret maybe, but not as a Town Drunk. I'm thinking as a Mafia Roleblocker or Framer.

Because why would it tell me you 'visited' the casino instead of who you visited. Because every other night it did when you went to Ret.

Yes, why would it tell you why I visited the casino? Please explain how that makes any sense given you believe that I am either a roleblocker or framer? Why would I as a framer also visit the same target two nights in a row?

[Reticence]

Alright, well I was left a note at my door last night. It told me of a person that had a guilty check on them, I'm guessing they gave it to me because I could be expendable if killed which is ok but they said they got a guilty check on

Just replying to this to acknowledge that it has been read, and I would totally believe that Crackle is scum. Gotta sort this Allowyn/Dupti thing out first, though.

[dupti]

Really the easy way to have figured this out would have been if dupti didn't say who he claimed to heckle last night. If he didn't do that we could verify if anyone did receieve a message. If someone did receive one it would have vindicated him and Allowyn.

That would only have worked if Allowyn didn't claim my targets.

- - - Updated - - -

Whoa. Catching up, one sec.

- - - Updated - - -

Dupti, when did you submit those actions?

Um, n3 I did pretty much straightaway. N1 and N2 were pretty close to the deadline I think.

[listo95]

That would only have worked if Allowyn didn't claim my targets.

Completely forgot about that -.- My bad.

[Marack]

dupti, I actually doubt you are a town drunk. The claim of visiting danner N1 and saying you hope he dies sounds a little fishy in my eyes. Searching for some town cred? I can however believe what you did N2/3.

[dupti]

@Listo and @Reticence, just to comment on the whole Arialla thing. I do not believe Danner's flip matters that much, but Dranx' does. I don't think Arialla is ever on that team and given his claim I think he is more likely to be town.