Mafia 116: Death Valley

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Strikered is an option due to low post count. He was actually my alternative target for last night as he too was tied at lowest post count.

A second power claim?

Dendrek is still my #1 scum suspect, but I'm not voting him on the grounds that the setup would be more meme-worthy if it was true. Because that's honestly a terrible reason. Even though we should all accept that is ultimately gonna be the objective truth of this scenario, and in the postgame Cruelle will be all like "yeah, it was random, but the draw too good, so I obviously kept that RNG" to hide the fact that this lot was entirely deliberate - I call Dendrek scum because narrative causality, dammit, but I refuse to case a vote because of it obviously being true. I want proof!

Would you explain WHY you have a scumread on Dendrek? I personally think he's the most town player here, having been unafraid to stick his neck out and call people out on their actions yesterday.

[Danner]

A second power claim?

Third if you include Marack. You should see what that means as well as I do.
Mine is... colored.

As for Dendrek, it's seriously just a meme.
During the West Wing game, Dendrek and I had a massive cat-and-mouse game that did both of us mental damage. He was town, I was scum. The ultimate setup is if this game is reversed, so that we get to re-do it with different sign bits. Meaning, I am town, he is scum.

That is seriously the ONLY reason I call Dendrek scum. And I know it is a terrible one. I will certainly not vote Dendrek based on that reason.
But I am entitled to a "I told you so" voucher at the end of the game when (not if) this meme turns out to be true.

- - - Updated - - -

Meh.
@Strikered: I am considering placing my vote on you today. Can you give me a reason not to?

[listo95]

So we have whatever Danner's role does, Zexism is saying we have a RB somewhere out there. If anyone else had something happen to them I think it would be wise to let it be said so we know of it.

[Lora]

great. just fantastic. this is going to be a hilarious game.

[Dendrek]

I'm honestly not sure if it's wise to admit this... but I woke up with a sore bum this morning.

Whether or not I'm talking about IRL I'll let you guys decide.

- - - Updated - - -

I was inclined to vote Crackle today. At least until I saw his failure to read the effect of the collar. It's the kind of read you just won't come up with if you are on a scum team; at least one player would have caught it and told the others during the night. And as I do not believe Crackle is making a fools play, I am thinking he is town at this point. Or a very clever actor. But I'm like 90% certain town.

Strongly disagree. The only thing it indicates is that you and he are not in the same QT. This is slightly mitigated by the fact that you were the first one to correct him (and the first one to respond after he said it) which could be a coordinated "slip" on his part that you suggested. Likewise you "clearing" him using this logic adds to my slight unwillingness to accept my own conclusion.

[Lora]

I'm honestly not sure if it's wise to admit this... but I woke up with a sore bum this morning.

Whether or not I'm talking about IRL I'll let you guys decide.

- - - Updated - - -



Strongly disagree. The only thing it indicates is that you and he are not in the same QT. This is slightly mitigated by the fact that you were the first one to correct him (and the first one to respond after he said it) which could be a coordinated "slip" on his part that you suggested. Likewise you "clearing" him using this logic adds to my slight unwillingness to accept my own conclusion.

trouble shitting/not enough lube with the pegging? always make sure to properly lubricate! sore bums are no fun, well. thats a lie. they can be really fun. this one time, at band camp...

anyway. i'll be back later on tonight. gotta get my steps in today.

[Dendrek]

To be slightly more clear: I disagree that scum would have discussed the collar. They likely would have if there's someone in the scum team who is highly attentive to details. If that's the case, then yes, he should have known your collar isn't normal. But as I've come to expect from most scum teams, in depth strategy and meta discussions usually don't happen unless someone among the team has the inclination to lead them. If I were scum, he would definitely have known. (Unless he refused to read my posts.) If you were scum, he would also have known. Beyond that, I'm not convinced your collar would have been discussed.

[Danner]

To be slightly more clear: I disagree that scum would have discussed the collar. They likely would have if there's someone in the scum team who is highly attentive to details. If that's the case, then yes, he should have known your collar isn't normal. But as I've come to expect from most scum teams, in depth strategy and meta discussions usually don't happen unless someone among the team has the inclination to lead them. If I were scum, he would definitely have known. (Unless he refused to read my posts.) If you were scum, he would also have known. Beyond that, I'm not convinced your collar would have been discussed.

Maybe that's just my ego tripping up again making me the centerpiece of everything in the world, but in my mind it goes:
- scum A: so, do we kill danner since he got the collar?
- scum B: can't, the collar gave him NK immunity for tonight. Read the RP.
At which point Crackle-as-scum wouldn't do that mistake of assuming I was lynch immune today.

Now, it may just be that the topic never came up. Everyone agree that they were to kill someone more low-key, or maybe some other more esoteric reason - f.ex all the scum except crackle-as-scum were awol. Regardless of reality, there is indeed some merit to your objection here.

However... it's not a binary game. I have to weigh these assumptions on likelyhood. There is a world where I can make the assumption that crackle is not scum, and there is the world where I cannot make any read. Which world do we live in? I do not know. But by game theory, I should assume the former, as it if true, will give me better information. And so, that's what I am going with, until better more conclusive information materializes.

My second thought also cannot help being skeptical of the person I have so blatantly and not-at-all-rationally declared as scum, being the one casting doubts on my townread. Because you know, that doesn't smell right. Especially since I rationally know you wouldn't do that kind of discrediting as scum; and certainly not on D2. I can make a read here that it's less likely that you are scum for that reason. Again, not conclusive. But by the method I just laid out, I can make a read that there exists a reality where you are not scum. Discreditable? Sure. Worth discarding? Not quite. Who would want to discredit it?

[Dendrek]

My second thought also cannot help being skeptical of the person I have so blatantly and not-at-all-rationally declared as scum, being the one casting doubts on my townread.

Is he a townread now?

[Danner]

Depends who you ask.

Danner's brain says it's very unlikely Dendrek-as-scum would blatantly discredit a townread, at least on D2. How to really interpret that I do not know. One way is to assume you are town. There may be other more likely reads.

Danner's heart says Dendrek is scum because memes. It's honestly a very weighty rationale, assuming narrative causality.

Danner's stomach says to sleep on it.

[Dendrek]

Maybe that's just my ego tripping up again making me the centerpiece of everything in the world, but in my mind it goes:
- scum A: so, do we kill danner since he got the collar?
- scum B: can't, the collar gave him NK immunity for tonight. Read the RP.
At which point Crackle-as-scum wouldn't do that mistake of assuming I was lynch immune today.

This is fair, although we're talking two "if"s which each have less than a 100% chance of occurring: 1) if anyone brought you up as a kill target, 2) if any of the scum actually saw and correctly interpreted that particular piece of RP.

Let's be clear here: You were in a bullet proof limo. This is enough to prove you should be NK immune. But there was no direct statement beyond that indicating that you were NK immune. It would be very easy to overlook.

Considering these two ifs are far from guaranteed, I'm not willing to give Crackle anything close to town credibility for his "slip".

- - - Updated - - -

Depends who you ask.

Danner's brain says it's very unlikely Dendrek-as-scum would blatantly discredit a townread, at least on D2. How to really interpret that I do not know. One way is to assume you are town. There may be other more likely reads.

Danner's heart says Dendrek is scum because memes. It's honestly a very weighty rationale, assuming narrative causality.

Danner's stomach says to sleep on it.

Did you misread my post? Although, I'm slightly glad you did, because your response to the wrong question is itself telling. You've kind of just indirectly said I'm a townread that you want to be a scumread.

[Danner]

Did you misread my post? Although, I'm slightly glad you did, because your response to the wrong question is itself telling. You've kind of just indirectly said I'm a townread that you want to be a scumread.

I guess I did misread it, wasn't aware you were talking about Crackleslap no.
But I said exactly the same thing in response to Val in #202. There is no big slip to be had here.

Is Crackle a townread?
I believe he's likely town. I am assuming he is until otherwise disproven.

- - - Updated - - -

... and the same thing to Dupti in #200.

[Dendrek]

1) I guess I did misread it, wasn't aware you were talking about Crackleslap no.
But I said exactly the same thing in response to Val in #202. There is no big slip to be had here.

2) Is Crackle a townread?
I believe he's likely town. I am assuming he is until otherwise disproven.

1) The difference is context. Your answer to Val could be interpreted as playfully dodging the question. Your answer to me seems to be confirming the question while playfully pretending not to.

2) You believe he is likely town over what can barely be considered a slip? Is there more to your read on him than that? Are you really going to make such a strong read over a few sentences in one post?

In that case, please give me your top town reads in descending order.

[Danner]

I answered all of you in exactly the same state of mind. That includes you, Val and Dupti.

Top town reads:
- Crackleslap, for mistaking a fact I feel reasonably confident scum would be on top of.
- Zexism, for assumedly not killing anyone last night (it is likely he's not lying). Doesn't mean he's not scum though. But it's better than average odds.
- Lora, for wanting the collar before we knew what it did. Of course, that could also just be Lora wanting to be someone with attention. It's a weak reason, but it's better than nothing.

No, I'm not adding you. If I am to add a fourth player, it'd be Dupti, and I struggle to explain why rationally.

Top scum reads:
- Strikered, if scum hit a bottom-3-poster player, and assuming Zexism isn't scum. Also absconding. Or very drunk. One of the two, unless I missed something.
- Dendrek, for the meme reason; I know in my heart him to be scum. Danner's brain objects to this entry in this list.
- Kryllian/Listo. I am honestly not sure which yet. Dupti says Kryllian, I could certainly follow.

A fourth one would be val I guess? As I am ignoring Graeham deliberately, there isn't any other options.

[Graeham II]

It's possible that Crackle is third party. That might explain his disregard for the impact of his plan on both town and scum. If he's only in it for himself, then the chance of the random assignment screwing him over would be the absolute lowest it could be. Again, though, I might just be overthinking things.

[Dendrek]

I answered all of you in exactly the same state of mind. That includes you, Val and Dupti.

Top town reads:
- Crackleslap, for mistaking a fact I feel reasonably confident scum would be on top of.
- Zexism, for assumedly not killing anyone last night (it is likely he's not lying). Doesn't mean he's not scum though. But it's better than average odds.
- Lora, for wanting the collar before we knew what it did. Of course, that could also just be Lora wanting to be someone with attention. It's a weak reason, but it's better than nothing.

No, I'm not adding you. If I am to add a fourth player, it'd be Dupti, and I struggle to explain why rationally.

While I respect that you're sticking to your guns here, I do not like your reads here.

Crackle: I've stated my reasons for him. It's a naive read (and if you are scum then you clearing him obviously means nothing).

Zexism: Didn't perform the kill means nothing. Assuming even odds, that gives him at best a 1/3 or 1/4 chance of attempting the kill. But I think he'd be slightly too cautious to attempt the kill, both because he was very inactive D1 and because his skill level likely makes him a higher profile target for TPRs. However, he knows he was roleblocked, which indicates he has an ability which should give him feedback. It's unlikely he's an important TPR or it's unlikely he would have revealed that he even could be roleblocked (a proper TPR should have no reason to know this game may be filled with TPR-light roles, so admitting to having an ability for a normal TPR is a death sentence).

However, his willingness to admit it is actually a bad sign: 1) It does what you're claiming it did ("proves" he didn't commit the kill). 2) It shows that either he has such an inconsequential ability that he can correctly deduce there are probably a lot of TPR-light roles in this game or it shows that he knows there are a lot of TPR light roles -- the latter is more likely if he's on a scum team that has a lot of such roles. 3) It shows his willingness to claim he's not an actual TPR -- thus removing himself from the obvious scum-kill list.

I think it's fairly likely Zexism is scum.

Lora: This is the only read of yours I'm slightly inclined to agree with. His overall play style, though not strongly town, does give me the impression he might be town. It's a weak read so I'm not willing to put much weight on it.

Dupti: Considering his ability, a gut-feel read on him is so incredibly unreliable that I'm surprised you'd even mention it.

[Cruel2u]

Day Two Votes:

Zexism  : 1 Kryllian#192
Kryllian: 1 Dupti#198

I know probably not needed, but going to get some sleep. So suck it up.

[Danner]

While I respect that you're sticking to your guns here, I do not like your reads here.

Crackle: I've stated my reasons for him. It's a naive read (and if you are scum then you clearing him obviously means nothing).

I hope I am not clearing Crackle. I am reading crackle. That's a major difference. My logic is there, you disagree with it, or in your case, not.
Alignment does not matter (much) when it comes to logic-based reads. You go after the logic, the logic doesn't change regardless of alignment.
Are you confusing Crackle and Zexism? Because I am collaborating on Zexism, but not on Crackleslap.

Zexism: Didn't perform the kill means nothing. Assuming even odds, that gives him at best a 1/3 or 1/4 chance of attempting the kill. But I think he'd be slightly too cautious to attempt the kill, both because he was very inactive D1 and because his skill level likely makes him a higher profile target for TPRs. However, he knows he was roleblocked, which indicates he has an ability which should give him feedback. It's unlikely he's an important TPR or it's unlikely he would have revealed that he even could be roleblocked (a proper TPR should have no reason to know this game may be filled with TPR-light roles, so admitting to having an ability for a normal TPR is a death sentence).

Disagree that he didn't kill doesn't mean anything. I agree it doesn't mean he's not scum.
Many scum teams tend to send out the lowest key player to do the kill. That would in virtually all situations be Zexism, shouldn't it?
I would also add that if Graeham or Lora is scum, they would likely insist on doing the kill. If you or Dupti are scum, you would likely try to break that trend.
So yeah. not conclusive. But it's something. And that's what I am on. Something beats nothing.

I am semi-confirming Zexism's story, but it's not conclusive.

In Cruelle's last game were roleblocked players informed? Gonna have to check that up.

However, his willingness to admit it is actually a bad sign: 1) It does what you're claiming it did ("proves" he didn't commit the kill). 2) It shows that either he has such an inconsequential ability that he can correctly deduce there are probably a lot of TPR-light roles in this game or it shows that he knows there are a lot of TPR light roles -- the latter is more likely if he's on a scum team that has a lot of such roles. 3) It shows his willingness to claim he's not an actual TPR -- thus removing himself from the obvious scum-kill list.

I think it's fairly likely Zexism is scum.

The most likely reason to deduce the game is filled with low-key TPR abilities isn't to be scum and somehow know it (rolecop?) - though that is possible indeed. The most likely reason to deduce this is if you read your rolecard and you see a power like the one Crackleslap had. I'd expect that to be the first reason to listen?

But yeah, I think this is for Zexism to answer. @Zexism; why did you so eagerly claim to be blocked?

--

Personally, I was hoping someone would claim to not be a TPR in the ensuring debacle. Val kinda did, but also didn't. Not sure I can use it.

Dupti: Considering his ability, a gut-feel read on him is so incredibly unreliable that I'm surprised you'd even mention it.

[/quote]
Hey, I like dupti's playstyle, unreadable as it is. And if you noticed, I managed to mention everyone except myself. The game isn't that big.

--

Thinking about it, a scum rolecop seems likely given Marack's role. I again have to question why that or something like it is your first theory.

- - - Updated - - -

Meh. Can't find anything on the blocking-notification-even-if-you-dont-have-a-informative-role angle.

[Graeham II]

@Danner

It's likely going to be very easy to claim X, Y or Z in this game. Especially as scum. I can't be certain just yet since we've only seen a single role card but Cruelle games tend to be like your games in regards to every role having something special to bring to the table even if it's fairly minor and very niche.

[Danner]

I certainly concur with that, Graeham.