Mafia 4 - Night 2, Deadline 10/7 9pm

[Z-licious]

Also, there's been a lot of action. You might wanna post an updated vote count Dan.

 

[Z-licious]

And unless I've missed it, Andy has never went after Josh, which would lead me to belive they could be playing to keep apart and if we get Josh, I'm likely hitting up Andy with Day 3 vote if I'm not killed off.

Come on AJ, in that scenario who do you think is gonna get the knife? I'm the first/only person to build a case against Josh. If he actually turns out to be Scum I'll be the first person turning up with a knife.

 

[Big Nate]

I just read through all the posting back to when Eddy joined.

Picklz has not quoted Eddy and even kind of probed him. Eddy has also not put the screws to Picklz. I sense and alliance be it town or scum time will tell.

 

[niterydr]

Jt Picklz Tom Nate AJ Jay Andy Kris/Eddy Josh Receiving
JT x x
Picklz x xx x x
Tom
Nate x
AJ x xx xx x
Jay
Andy x xxx x
Kris/Eddy x x
Josh x x
Casting


How is this for fact finding?

 

[Z-licious]

I just read through all the posting back to when Eddy joined.

Picklz has not quoted Eddy and even kind of probed him. Eddy has also not put the screws to Picklz. I sense and alliance be it town or scum time will tell.

Lol. Picklz hasn't accused me of anything and I have not seen any posts worth questioning him about. As soon as I see him crack I'll jump down his throat and ask the hard questions just like I have been doing to other people.

You may as well accuse me and Andy of being scum, or me and AJ.

 

[dmention7]

Seriously, stop. All that would accomplish is paranoia and fear mongering.

So you come in here and start throwing accusations at everyone and then get butthurt when I point out some sketchiness in your accusations?

If you're really against paranoia and fear-mongering, then kindly quit exaggerating and/or distorting my posts.

 

[Z-licious]

Jt Picklz Tom Nate AJ Jay Andy Kris/Eddy Josh Receiving
JT x x
Picklz x xx x x
Tom
Nate x
AJ x xx xx x
Jay
Andy x xxx x
Kris/Eddy x x
Josh x x
Casting


How is this for fact finding?

You might wanna post a pic of a spreadsheet, brosef.

 

[niterydr]

SOB let me try that again;

 

[niterydr]

Interesting voting pairs we have here, and some serious non voters. Haven't we stated that scum are probably laying low and watching?

I tallied bold votes, let me know if I missed someone.

 

[Picklz]

To echo what Eddy has said - his actions are speaking far more of town than many other people in here, yourself included Nate. His observations and questions are doing a lot to help town IMO and for that reason I haven't had the need to question him thus far. He's also only been in the game for a short period of time so I want to see how he plays as the game continues to evolve. Based on the rest of Day 2's actions and what happens at night will do a lot to determine how I feel about KrisEddy overall.

 

[Z-licious]

So you come in here and start throwing accusations at everyone and then get butthurt when I point out some sketchiness in your accusations?

If you're really against paranoia and fear-mongering, then kindly quit exaggerating and/or distorting my posts.

When have I accused anyone without something to backup my reasoning? I've questioned Tom, Nate, Josh, and now you but I've only voted for Josh because of the reasons I've listed. You saying "Eddy would make a dangerous scum" adds nothing to the conversation and I see no reason behind it beyond inciting paranoia in me. Why would you want to do that anyway? Scum can just knife me and town doesn't need/want to rely on paranoia.

 

[Workdawg]

Current Vote Count (2.3)

Picklz [0]
Tom [0]
Nate [1] - Andy
AJ [0]
Jay [0]
Andy [0]
Eddy [0]
Josh [2] - Picklz, AJ

Not Voting: Tom, Nate, Jay, Eddy, Josh

With 8 players alive, 5 votes are needed to lynch!

Deadline to vote: 10/5, 9pm.

You guys sure are demanding with these vote counts...

 

[Z-licious]

To echo what Eddy has said - his actions are speaking far more of town than many other people in here, yourself included Nate. His observations and questions are doing a lot to help town IMO and for that reason I haven't had the need to question him thus far. He's also only been in the game for a short period of time so I want to see how he plays as the game continues to evolve. Based on the rest of Day 2's actions and what happens at night will do a lot to determine how I feel about KrisEddy overall.

You probably mean well by saying this but I do kind of wish you and AJ would stop praising me for helping town. That paints a huge target on my back for a knife and I really feel no danger of being lynched at this point.

 

[AJ]

I didn't fully priase you, I just hope I'm not reading this wrong and you're not scum. If you're scum then I could very well see either Picklz or I being knifed by you during the night. Which would lead me to believe that the Vote you gave Josh was then in fact to start some misdirection as you've now resinded that vote, stating you are concerned about the day ending early. That seems like a ploy, and a good one if you and Swanny are working together and trying to put up a great front as well.

My vote as I said is staying, and at this time so do my original thougths on who I think are the potential Scum, the 4 i listed earlier... I don't care when the day ends, we'll see if I wake up for day 3 or in a pile of my dogs shit.

 

[Z-licious]

If you're scum then I could very well see either Picklz or I being knifed by you during the night.

Wait, could you explain this scenario a bit better? I do not follow the reasoning on why I would knife you or picklz if I were scum.

 

[niterydr]

View attachment 1484

See revision, I found errors.

Interesting notes:
AJ has yet to lead with a vote, only votes after someone else has voted.
Jay has yet to vote for, or get voted against, period.
Nate apparently has only made 1 official vote (bold)
Nate has received the most votes against him.

 

[dmention7]

When have I accused anyone without something to backup my reasoning? I've questioned Tom, Nate, Josh, and now you but I've only voted for Josh because of the reasons I've listed. You saying "Eddy would make a dangerous scum" adds nothing to the conversation and I see no reason behind it beyond inciting paranoia in me. Why would you want to do that anyway? Scum can just knife me and town doesn't need/want to rely on paranoia.

How is stating that a good player would make a dangerous scum any more or less factual than stating that a poor player would make a dangerous townie, or that a bad liar would make a bad scum or than voting to lynch someone because their intentions don't make sense? I'm not objecting to being questioned, but I am objecting to being characterized as attempting to incite paranoia for making an observation that seems logical enough to me.

What I have seen so far today is Eddy jump in and make a very strong showing. It's definitely digging up a lot of interesting leads, but the honest truth is that such a strong showing of posting by one person makes me nervous that that person's views and observations are going to be over-represented and potentially overshadow some more interesting subtlties.

Say Eddy is scum (insert paranoia-quelching disclaimer here), an EXCELLENT tactic would be to post about all kinds of interesting things in the hopes that more mundane details that might be damning to him go unnoticed or get glossed over in the flood of posting. Obviously that would apply to anyone who posts a lot, and is not an accusation in its own right, but something I feel compelled to point out. The main example is the bunch of quotes from Swanny. I have not had time to fact check that, but I fully intend to because of the strength of the case it seems to make and the potential for it to misrepresent Swanny by omitting a post.

I guess my point is that of playing devil's advocate.

 

[AJ]

Wait, could you explain this scenario a bit better? I do not follow the reasoning on why I would knife you or picklz if I were scum.

Because we sided with you, buy taking one of your "allies" out, you look more and more like a townie since a townie wouldn't take out someone who sides with them.

 

[Z-licious]

View attachment 1484

See revision, I found errors.

Interesting notes:
AJ has yet to lead with a vote, only votes after someone else has voted.
Jay has yet to vote for, or get voted against, period.
Nate apparently has only made 1 official vote (bold)
Nate has received the most votes against him.

:lol: Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator.

How is stating that a good player would make a dangerous scum any more or less factual than stating that a poor player would make a dangerous townie, or that a bad liar would make a bad scum or than voting to lynch someone because their intentions don't make sense? I'm not objecting to being questioned, but I am objecting to being characterized as attempting to incite paranoia for making an observation that seems logical enough to me.

Because stating that a good player would make a good scum adds nothing to the conversation.

What I have seen so far today is Eddy jump in and make a very strong showing. It's definitely digging up a lot of interesting leads, but the honest truth is that such a strong showing of posting by one person makes me nervous that that person's views and observations are going to be over-represented and potentially overshadow some more interesting subtlties.

Say Eddy is scum (insert paranoia-quelching disclaimer here), an EXCELLENT tactic would be to post about all kinds of interesting things in the hopes that more mundane details that might be damning to him go unnoticed or get glossed over in the flood of posting. Obviously that would apply to anyone who posts a lot, and is not an accusation in its own right, but something I feel compelled to point out. The main example is the bunch of quotes from Swanny. I have not had time to fact check that, but I fully intend to because of the strength of the case it seems to make and the potential for it to misrepresent Swanny by omitting a post.

I guess my point is that of playing devil's advocate.

Just yesterday before I joined the game Picklz was complaining in the chatbox that "shit's so quiet in mafia thread!". I jump in and stir things up, cause discussion to arise and generally try to get everyone talking. Don't you feel more engaged now? Isn't getting more people involved and talking a generally good thing for Town to have? In the famous words or Russell Crowe "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?!"

I'm putting myself out there by posting as much as I am. If I were scum there'd be much more chance of me saying something stupid, but I post because I want to get people talking. I ask questions because I want people to justify their words or actions. It doesn't matter if I live or die as long as my presence in the game has uncovered some truth that would help in the scum hunt.

While town and scum will look and play similarly on the surface, "ask questions, investigate, look for scum", the fundamental difference between town and scum is that town is not trying to survive, but to find lies, while scum is only trying to survive. People who put up the minimum effort to post thoughtful comments are more concerning to me than the people are posting a lot.

 

[Z-licious]

Because we sided with you, buy taking one of your "allies" out, you look more and more like a townie since a townie wouldn't take out someone who sides with them.

A scum wouldn't take out someone who sides with him either. Less chance of getting voted out if someone believes you're town when you're scum.

And as far as I'm concerned I have no allies. I see all of you as scum and will analyze your posts accordingly.