Eor's Hellhouse Mafia - Night 2 (totally cancelled)

[KevinM]

And

Uber Fos: Gamefreak as well

keep a mafia member around wtf?

 

[Flipstar]

I don't understand why people are thinking that spam's logic is bad, his find was great, and his theory of "Lynch All Liars" is logical. KevinM, your Uber Finger of suspicion really caught my off guard. What's your reasoning?

@ commonyoshi: It doesn't change anything? <3 lied to us, even if he did screw up, he lied. Plus, i haven't seen ANY punishment from Eor since <3 broke his restriction(of course Eor doesn't have to tell us, but I don't know about this). I mean, if he breaks his restriction, what are the consequences?


Also, why vote smashbot. Sure Smashbot has been unhelpful, but has he been suspicious? In my eyes, voting for smashbot is just a reason to end day 1 due to the time it has taken.


I think that <3 screwed up his role, and is probably going to be punished by Eor (unforunately i can't verify that, like i learned before.) This punishment could be that <3's role could have been downgraded or removed because he screwed up his role condition. However, i still think that <3's post warrants a vote, until he defends himself.. Until i see a proper explanation from <3, i'm keeping my vote on him

 

[spam_master]

I think that while I would consider one or two slip ups in a post to be him simply messing up his role restriction, I consider an entire post to be what some call a freudian slip, because it would take more concius mental effort to remember your plan to talk in the third person than it would be if it was simply his role. i just don't see someone as festidious as <3 making that mistake if it was his real role restriction.

If you think there is at least a 50% chance that he was lying about his restriction and therefore role you should vote for him, I think that right now he is clearly the best option in terms of both likelyhood of being mafia and potential day one information, and unless someone can present to me a beter person my vote is permanent.

Also, Common I seem to remember another time when you defended someone who I had caught in a lie, didn't they turn out to be the godfather? And, kevinm how is my attack on <3 somehow worse than your attack on smashbot because he's dumb, At least I think my guy is mafia and have a reason why.

 

[smashman90]

No matter how you look at it, wether <3 really did have a restriction or if he's been lying the whole time, there's no other explaination for him speaking in first person other than a slip of the mouth/fingers. If he has a restriction then he obviously messed up. If he doesn't and has been lying he has still obviously messed up because there's no reason he should give up on his fabricated role so easily. That'd make him look scummy.

Well, if he was telling the truth then chances are that Eor will punish him(may it be verbal warning, replaced, modkilled, etc.) for breaking his restriction. And since that hasn't happened yet, it seems like that he lied about his restriction. And if he lied(which it looks like it seems to be the case so far), then he should be explaining to us why he lied(assuming he's town).

I will unvote <3 because I think I was a little hasty in my vote, but I expect an good explanation from <3 about this or else I will place my vote on him again.

*squints eyes in a suspecting way* commonyoshi, be you human or robot?

Unvote: <3

 

[<π]

You guys are idiots... and you don't read. <3 has slipped before as well, back at the beginning of the game, and made a big deal of it himself for that matter.

You know what... <3 isn't going to try and defend himself, what happened is pretty obvious. If there are consequences they will happen, If <3 is lying they won't. <3 is not going to go into detail about his role and every (or any...) aspect of it for reasons spread far and wide throughout the thread. If you don't know what that means reread the thread until you can figure it out.

Man; how dumb are you guys? READ!

 

[Yeroc]

So you try to dodge your accusations by telling us the answers are already out there and berating us for not adhering to a certain standard of activity?

Also, I agree with Spam on your efforts to divide the town and cause general confusion. It doesn't help your case that two people instantly leapt to defend you after you were accused, nor theirs either.

FOS: <3

 

[Yeroc]

Oops.

FOS: <3

 

[Mediocre]

****, I was going to post this last night, and then the internet just went down completely.

Anyhow, I really don't like <3's play style(especially since it seems to involve going after me constantly), but I don't think he's mafia.

First of all, he obviously messed up. Whether he was lying about his role or not, it's obvious that he wouldn't want to make such a glaring error. He's a smart enough player that he wouldn't intentionally make a move like that after setting up such a recognizable speaking pattern.

Either way, I think all this mistake tells us is that he messed up, not that he's mafia. I really don't see this as any kind of evidence of his scumminess. I think there are some pieces of evidence out there that might point to <3 being mafia, but I don't think this is one of them.

It's certainly not good enough for it to be the only reason somebody votes for him, and a lot of people seem to be voting based simply on this slip.

 

[Mediocre]

Mostly, what I'm trying to say is this.

If <3 was mafia and lying, there would be no reason for him to stop talking in third person. If <3 was mafia and really did have this role restriction, there would still be no reason for him to stop talking in the third person. And if he was town, whether he was lying or not, there would still be no reason to stop talking in the third person.

It's obvious it's a slip-up, no matter what <3's alignment turns out to be. There are many things that make <3 seem rather scummy to me, but this is not one of them. I certainly wouldn't mind having <3 out of the game, but it should be for reasons that make sense, not reasons that can have no possible relation to his actual alignment.

If you actually think about the argument being made here, it really doesn't hold up.

 

[Wikipedia]

Your argument or the argument against <3?

 

[smashman90]

Man; how dumb are you guys? READ!

Says the guy that didn't reread his post for any errors before posting it. And quit berating people, it's annoying and it won't help your case if you keep calling people idiots.

 

[Eor]

Almost a month on Day 1.

Day 1 will end on January 3rd, at midnight. If someone isn't lynched, it'll be a no-lynch.

 

[spam_master]

You guys are idiots... and you don't read. <3 has slipped before as well, back at the beginning of the game, and made a big deal of it himself for that matter.

You know what... <3 isn't going to try and defend himself, what happened is pretty obvious. If there are consequences they will happen, If <3 is lying they won't.

Well if you've done it before then what where your consequences? I certainly didn't see any, and by your own admission if their weren't consequences than you were lying. TRAP SPRUNG!

I have been supcious of you lying since the first time you slipped up, and decided that if you did it again and the was no discernable punishment that you were probably faking the restriction, and I also knew that if I didn't mention when you did it beofre when I accused you that you would flip out about us not reading and make mention of when it happened the first time, providing me with a neat and nice little logic error about how you recieved no punish ment the first time. I wasn't expecting you to say that if there were no consequences then you were lying, that was like christmas all over again.

<3 constantly seems to be asking piles of questions but doesn't seem to willing to give many answers when questions are asked of him. So here are two.

What were the consequences whenyou first messed up and what are they now?
and
If you truly read everything then why don't you know that I also read and often re-read everything as well? I mean MAN; How dumb are you? READ!

 

[spam_master]

And, after reading eor's post, here is a third question.

If your so carefully analyzing everything that has happened so far, who do you recommend we lynch?

 

[commonyoshi]

@ commonyoshi: It doesn't change anything? <3 lied to us, even if he did screw up, he lied. Plus, i haven't seen ANY punishment from Eor since <3 broke his restriction(of course Eor doesn't have to tell us, but I don't know about this). I mean, if he breaks his restriction, what are the consequences?

Because you have no reason to believe he has lied. All we know is that he messed up; messing up does not mean he has been lying to us. If you ask me, it would be pretty stupid for there to be consequences for slipping up on the third person speach. How many posts is an active poster going to make in a game? A lot. It's obvious he is going to screw up so consequences for a slip here and there would be impractical. If he kept doing it on purpose about ten times in a short day we might have a case against him.

Honestly, if any of you were to make a role with this kind of role restriction, would you make it so that the player is punished for two or three slips in a day? I sure wouldn't.

I think that while I would consider one or two slip ups in a post to be him simply messing up his role restriction, I consider an entire post to be what some call a freudian slip, because it would take more concius mental effort to remember your plan to talk in the third person than it would be if it was simply his role. i just don't see someone as festidious as <3 making that mistake if it was his real role restriction.

That theory, is it a theory?, is unfounded. It can just as easily be said that if he was making the role restriction up and trying to fool the town he'd have more reason to watch himself. Therefore, since he messed up so many times in such a small post, he is not making this up.

If you think there is at least a 50% chance that he was lying about his restriction and therefore role you should vote for him, I think that right now he is clearly the best option in terms of both likelyhood of being mafia and potential day one information, and unless someone can present to me a beter person my vote is permanent.

See, we have absolutely no reason to either suspect or trust his role restriction so boiling his lynch down to this posses a problem. You have yet to convince me that he's been lying the whole game, and I doubt it's something that is even argueable. Give me other reasons to suspect him. None of this lying about his role garbage we cant confirm.

Also, Common I seem to remember another time when you defended someone who I had caught in a lie, didn't they turn out to be the godfather?

Your reasons were bad. You just happened to be right.
You know what? If you're right about this then from now on in this game I'll blindly follow you.

 

[commonyoshi]

Actually, I have a question for <3. You once said that you could easily write without even being forced to speak in the third person, thus hiding your restriction. Why didn't you do that?

If you've already answered it, answer it again.

 

[GameFreaking]

And

Uber Fos: Gamefreak as well

keep a mafia member around wtf?

whoa whoa whoa let's not jump to conclusions.

I don't want to keep around mafia members. and i was in no way defending <3.

Lynch him if you want, Im just sayign im not COMPLETELY convinced. and that should be ok with everyone. opinions should be welcome, and mine is that I wish to stick with a none lynch on day 1 then lynch someone for reasons i don't find thoroughly convincing.

so thats that. not protecting the mafia, just not sure whos being truthful and who is making **** up.

 

[spam_master]

You know what? If you're right about this then from now on in this game I'll blindly follow you.

I'm going to hold you to that.

 

[Mr.Lombardi34]

Okay. I am gonna have to completely disregard my last post for this, because I admit that I wasn't thinking about it very much.

I agree with mediocre on this. Either way, he wouldn't just stop talking like that. There is also NO way to know if he was lying or not. Basically, this slipup he had is almost insignificant in my suspiciousness of <3.

Now, as for that deadline: In my opinion, we need a lynch. We can't have this again on Day 2. No matter who we lynch, we will get information. From the lynchee's defense, his defenders, and those who quickly join the bandwagon, we will learn alot. Face it, we aren't going to come to a consensus on <3 in less than a week.

I say that the only safe choice right now is smashbot. He won't help the town no matter what. So far, we have poked at him a little and he has said nothing. He clearly doesn't care, and if he has a power role (On EITHER alignment) he will most likely hurt the town. Smashbot is the only one who we will be able to get lynched quickly and safely.

Vote: Smashbot226

 

[Flipstar]

<3, all i hear from you is "read,read,READ". I mean why should we go through all the trouble of reading through the whole thread, if you could bestow us with your answers right then and there? Are you afraid you might screw up in your answers? I know your frustrated that people aren't being active/reading, but there are times when people want straight answers. This is one of those times.

Oh yeah, it was a trick question too. Was gonna literally write "this is a trick question" but <3 changed his mind...
It sucks though if <3 wants to interrogate someone... like KevinM for instance... they can dodge the question and no one will think it is strange.

I think it's strange that you are dodging our questions.

Also about you making a "big deal" about your slip ups:
http://smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=3480361&postcount=229

that isn't a BIG deal post, i'm pretty sure a lot of skimmers wouldn't have even read that post. Hell i didn't even know you posted that until I looked back and reread your last posts. If you wanted it to be a big deal, you should of made it seem like your post was important.

Basically, that posts tell me your 3rd person ploy is a fake, there is no consequence and it is irrelevant to your role(IMO). Especially since you said yourself " <3 said I like 20 times". Now i ask you, why fake it? It seems to me that your trying to confuse the town, because we spent various pages trying to decipher your role. I'm not going to drop my vote, just because we're time limited. I don't want to vote for smashbot just because he was stupid.

 

[commonyoshi]

Basically, that posts tell me your 3rd person ploy is a fake, there is no consequence and it is irrelevant to your role(IMO). Especially since you said yourself " <3 said I like 20 times". Now i ask you, why fake it? It seems to me that your trying to confuse the town, because we spent various pages trying to decipher your role. I'm not going to drop my vote, just because we're time limited. I don't want to vote for smashbot just because he was stupid.

For crying out loud, you dont know that he's faking it.

If you're going by the fact that he hasn't been punished in some way yet, then that proves nothing because constantly speaking in the third person has a high chance of error. (I'm thankful I dont have a restriction like that.) There's no way any game mod would design the role with a punishment involved for messing up accidentally. So what if he messed up "20 times"? <3 has, from what I've seen, posted the most throughout this whole game. Of course he's going to mess up. I still dont see how these slip ups prove anything other than the fact that he slipped up. If you dont trust his role restriction then it shouldn't matter wether he slips up twenty times or none at all.

 

[smashman90]

This is towards everybody who still is suspicious of <3:

I am surprised that nobody has mentioned this yet, but have you guys also considered the fact that <3 might not get punished until Nighttime?

Now me, I am still suspicious(but not as much as some of the others) of <3 mind you, but there is that possibility that if <3 is telling the truth about his role restriction then maybe he doesn't get punished til Night. I think I might wait till nightime to see if anything happens to <3.

Also, <3 I have a question for you. Why did you ask us to answer those questions? At first, I was thinking that it could've been a mafia ploy just to see who we suspect and trust and try to turn everybody against each other. But now I am not so sure as what I thought earlier so I hope that you will answer this question. And please do give us a real answer and nothing like "read! read! read!".

 

[Flipstar]

Messing up accidentally? What is he going to do it on purpose? Well, anyway common, your arguement makes sense. I guess Eor could have added that role restriction for fun, although it has nothing to do with the game. I still think <3 should answer our questions though, and not blow them off by saying "read". I'm going to take off my vote on <3 for now. However, i'm not voting for smashbot for the reasons brought up. He has nothing against him but being a stupid poster.

unvote:<3

 

[<π]

Well if you've done it before then what where your consequences?
Not answering it reveals too much about the role.

What were the consequences whenyou first messed up and what are they now?

See above.

If you truly read everything then why don't you know that I also read and often re-read everything as well?

If you did you'd of made a connection between that post and the original mistake; you never did. You don't read enough it been proven time and time again.

If your so carefully analyzing everything that has happened so far, who do you recommend we lynch?

Mediocre, but if you read you'd know that.

Actually, I have a question for <3. You once said that you could easily write without even being forced to speak in the third person, thus hiding your restriction. Why didn't you do that?

As said before. Some things don't need to be hidden and held back. Revealing the post restriction was a way to show that the aim isn't to hold back non community threatening information but to share everything that can be shared without endangering fellow townies.
<3 also wouldn't be able to be as active in the community... and frankly he feels they need him, lol.

Why did you ask us to answer those questions? At first, I was thinking that it could've been a mafia ploy just to see who we suspect and trust and try to turn everybody against each other. But now I am not so sure as what I thought earlier so I hope that you will answer this question. And please do give us a real answer and nothing like "read! read! read!".

hahaha, same reason said then. It is a way to profile people, a way to have lasting facts left as we continue into the next day. The mafia gains very little, but we on the other hand gain a lot from questions like "who do you suspect the least?" we instantly gain connections from one player to another, who they don't suspect, who they want to leave, etc.
As apposed to "you defended him here" you can say "He is on the list of people you suspect the least." Similar can be said for the other questions.

<3 trys to stress that you read so much because he doesn't want to have ownership over your opinions and ideas. You need to learn whats said on your own and work off that, not have someone feed information to you that can be twisted into mistruths or even simply misunderstood. You should reread because a lot of links from one player to another are back there as well as mistakes, etc.

 

[Mr.Lombardi34]

i'm not voting for smashbot for the reasons brought up. He has nothing against him but being a stupid poster.

I really, REALLY hate to say this, but: Man; how dumb are you guys? READ! XD.

My reasons are the following, put in black and white:

-He will most likely not help the town no matter what
-I don't see us coming to a consensus on anyone else by the third.
-We need to lynch someone or we will just have another day 1 on day 2. We will atleaset get SOME solid information by lynching someone

 

[smashman90]

Not answering it reveals too much about the role.

Did you mean to say "Not answering it because it reveals too much about the role"?

If you did you'd of made a connection between that post and the original mistake; you never did. You don't read enough it been proven time and time again.

Don't you mean that Spam did read it, but just didn't catch the hint?

Mediocre, but if you read you'd know that.

It would explain why you always mentioned Mediocre in a lot of your posts like how he was the only person to answer your questions, etc.

hahaha, same reason said then. It is a way to profile people, a way to have lasting facts left as we continue into the next day. The mafia gains very little, but we on the other hand gain a lot from questions like "who do you suspect the least?" we instantly gain connections from one player to another, who they don't suspect, who they want to leave, etc.
As apposed to "you defended him here" you can say "He is on the list of people you suspect the least." Similar can be said for the other questions.

Ahh I see what you mean there.

@Lombardi

You seem to be forgetting that we also have numerous amounts of inactives to choose from also. We don't have to pick smashbot. Besides, I am not forsure if we even have enough active people to even do a lynch.

 

[Flipstar]

I understand that lombardi, but i still don't like those reasons much.

Reason1: how do we know that? What if he ends up helping the town? the answer: we'll never know if u don't let him stay. We can't just assume he'll be worthless just because of a few of his posts. You can't judge a book by it's cover.

Reason 2: We still have time, but not much, i agree we should start a vote to lynch SOMEONE, before the time limit ends. If think we still have a few days to discuss our options before we act hasty.

Reason 3: this is kind of repetitive, but yes we need to lynch someone. That someone is the key. I really don't like voting for smashbot, but if things don't start looking up soon, Everyone, including me, will have to come to a decision.

 

[Mr.Lombardi34]

That is true. I was sort of just using smashbot because he's just like an innactive.

 

[Pythag]

Just for you <3:
Who are the top 7 people you suspect? Why?
Mediocre, Smashbot, and Flipstar. Its not seven, but hey...
Mediocre's posts have always irritated me, I'm just getting negative vibes. Smashbot posts extremely little, and hasn't given any help to the town, Flipstar bandwagoned as soon as Spam made his findings evident.

After reading <3’s post would you like to try TMW’s plan? Why or why not?
I don't think that TMW's plan is even going to possibly happen, so I'll just not answer this

If you were mafia who would you kill tonight? Why?
Either an inactive or someone who kinda flies under the radar by not making gigantic posts.

If you were mafia who is the one none mafia member(not on your suspect) list you’d
be sure to keep alive? Why?
I'd keep someone alive that is relatively controversial. that would draw enough suspicion away from my own doings

How do you like the game so far?
This game has been irritating me, because there's just so much more reading than before. It's also hard to keep track of all the names of everyone and who hasn't dropped out. But I'm still enjoying it.

 

[tmw_redcell]

hahaha, same reason said then. It is a way to profile people, a way to have lasting facts left as we continue into the next day. The mafia gains very little, but we on the other hand gain a lot from questions like "who do you suspect the least?" we instantly gain connections from one player to another, who they don't suspect, who they want to leave, etc.
As apposed to "you defended him here" you can say "He is on the list of people you suspect the least." Similar can be said for the other questions.

I think answers to such questions would be extremely useful to the mafia. If there are townies that are largely suspected, the mafia could keep them alive so the town lynches them. If there's a townie that everyone trusts, kill them, because a trusted townie is very dangerous to them. And they'll learn who among them is suspected and who is trusted. They can do things like pushing for the lynch of their least trusted member, to gain our trust for the cost of the player who would likely be the least useful to them anyway.

It's the same sort of deal as just laying out every minor suspicion you have.

 

[Florida]

Actually, from what I gathered up:

Vote: Flipstar

You seem to vote on anyone and everyone that others are suspicious of as well. Creating the bandwagon, just for the sake of getting the day through, isn't a wise choice. Even though we only have a few days left, I still think it'd be best to vote for no lynch at all, instead of randomly choosing one of our suspects.

 

[spam_master]

Not answering, it reveals too much about the role.

I'm Calling B*llSh*t. My role restriction is significantly easier to abide by and even then the first time I break the restriction I only recieve a warning. Why would eor force you to recieve consequences for you first foul up and only give me a warning when yours is so much easier to mess up. It simply doesn't make sense unless of course you don't actually have a role that is restricted and therefore wouldn't know wether eor tended to give people a warning or immediatre consequences.

If you did you'd of made a connection between that post and the original mistake; you never did. You don't read enough it been proven time and time again.

Guess what? It looks like you didn't even read my post. I didn't make refrence to your first mistake in my initial accusation to see if you would in your rebuttle and to hopefully get you to step into my trap regarding the consequences for breaking your role restriction.

Oh and btw "time and time again" means that you've "proven" that I haven't read at least twice. I believe that is what is known as liable, considering I have read every post in this entire thread cover to cover. I challenge you to find when I haven't read excluding purposefully set traps.

Mediocre, but if you read you'd know that.

I do know that, but by making you restate it I have prevented you from claiming to have change your mind in between your previous accusations and now.

I purposefully find mediocre to be not very suspicious at all. I am curious as too whether or not you can even remember the posts he made that roused your suspicion.

hahaha, same reason said then. It is a way to profile people, a way to have lasting facts left as we continue into the next day. The mafia gains very little, but we on the other hand gain a lot from questions like "who do you suspect the least?" we instantly gain connections from one player to another, who they don't suspect, who they want to leave, etc. As apposed to "you defended him here" you can say "He is on the list of people you suspect the least." Similar can be said for the other questions.

If you knew anything about this game you would know that accusations aren't worth a wooden nickel in this game when it comes to discerning motives. I would never use a list as evidence because if the person is mafia I can gaurantee you that he is going to have all mafia on his most suspicious list and all townies on his least supicious list. It is only who a person attacks with intent to kill and who a person sticks there neck to defend that can really be trusted.

Also, how do public proclamations of suspicion levels help anybody but the mafia. They provide an excellent guide for who should be nightkilled, what mafiats the rest of the group should distance themselves from, Who the mafia can safely openly attack during the day, and even what desperate people th mafia can save from alynch in order to earn their almost permanent trust.

I haven't answered your questions simply because I believed they would have a negative effect on the town, but was under the impression that your role could discern certain truths from lies but now that I believe you are infact a mafiat, and most likely the godfather I encourage people to at least not answer the suspicion questions, if any at all.

 

[<π]

Actually, from what I gathered up:

Vote: Flipstar

You seem to vote on anyone and everyone that others are suspicious of as well. Creating the bandwagon, just for the sake of getting the day through, isn't a wise choice. Even though we only have a few days left, I still think it'd be best to vote for no lynch at all, instead of randomly choosing one of our suspects.

flip isn't mafia.

 

[tmw_redcell]

flip isn't mafia.

Oh, okay then.

 

[Rupus]

And you would know that how, <3?

 

[Rupus]

Oh, what happens on Jan 3rd if there's no majority vote?

Does the person with the highest number of votes get lynched, or does no one get lynched?

 

[smashman90]

I think nobody gets lynched but I am not forsure on that.

 

[Flipstar]

Actually, from what I gathered up:

Vote: Flipstar

You seem to vote on anyone and everyone that others are suspicious of as well. Creating the bandwagon, just for the sake of getting the day through, isn't a wise choice. Even though we only have a few days left, I still think it'd be best to vote for no lynch at all, instead of randomly choosing one of our suspects.

If it's best to vote for no lynch, why are you voting for me? Your logic doesn't make sense.. I still think we have time, just like you, and we should find a sensible suspect to vote for. I disagree with no lynch, due to the said reasons.(read,read,READ)

flip isn't mafia.

Oh, okay then.

It's funny how people listen to <3 like he's a god (although i thank him for the defense), he's just a regular person like you and me. Like <3 would say :

You need to learn whats said on your own and work off that, not have someone feed information to you that can be twisted into mistruths or even simply misunderstood. You should reread because a lot of links from one player to another are back there as well as mistakes, etc.

 

[Mr.Lombardi34]

TMW was using sarcasm there. That was extreamly weird for <3 to just go out and say that. I'm sure everyone else has noticed the change in <3's playstyle. At first he was like a fountain of accusations, spitting out suspiciouns left and right. Now however, he never votes for anyone and only says "Read read read!". Spam, you have also provided us with some new information. Since noone seems to be listening to my smashbot idea, I think we should probably do something about <3 soon. Considering innactives, defenses, and disagreements, five days is very little to lynch anyone.

I say that we should make our final choice today.

 

[GameFreaking]

I still think we have time, just like you, and we should find a sensible suspect to vote for. I disagree with no lynch, due to the said reasons.(read,read,READ)

Who would you sugest?

im trying real hard here not to jump on any bandwagons, but the guilty party hasn't presented itself in a way I deem lynchworthy. Thats the onyl reason I remain NO LYNCH.

However, my true duty is to aide my fello townines, so if you see fit for a lynch, and on someone particular, I need GOOD REASONS WHY. otherwise i can just wait till day 2 and make more assumptions on my own. I won't lie and say certain people are acting screwy, but Ive just been reading and thinking and Ive chosen a few suspects who have been the most supspicious, and I have to say even their antics haven't merited a lynch. just not yet...