New York Jets Mafia Game Thread

[AVM]

Whats our unofficial tally right now?

I really don't buy him being scum--I'm completely sold on Pac, with the constant agreeing that such and such is a strong case against players A,B, and C, yet he doesn't change his vote from me, who he says is just among the muddled middle that he can't find much suspicion in? Just doesn't make sense.

How many times now has Pac posted something along the lines of "this makes a ton of sense, but I see nothing to change me from voting AVM," DESPITE saying he finds no one particularly scummy other than Vic?

Honestly seems like an attempt at distancing if I turn up good. Pac needs to go, IMO. If he doesn't die via lynch, he should be at the very least investigated tonight if not taken out by the Vig.

[CTM]

I didn't get that from any of his posts on the subject. If you could direct us to where he suggested that, that would be great. I saw it as wild speculation at best, or trying to talk up the idea that there is no serial killer -because it's him- at worst.

SMC is also more entertaining with a few votes on him.

Yes he is..

I'm still troubled by him not responding to my poking him however..

here's what I've got

1) AVM, altered play, potential newbie scum tell, early JVOR interaction is reminiscent to what JVOR did last game with scum partner

2) Slats - godfather or innocent, JVOR defended, suspicious prodding of Jets Babe lynch. Investigated by cop. Wouldn't touch today.

3) SMC - Not wanting to be vote Jets babe other then to position it as my idea, "robocop", and I'm surprised it took him this long to vote me after what happened last game.

4) Dan X - also prodded Jets Babe lynch suspiciously imo

I am amused by this axis of evil stuff, but I think it's being given too much credence. None of us have gotten a lot of traction on our most likely candidates at this point.. Maybe EY with SMC but that really took off when Vic voted him..

[AVM]

Yes he is..

I'm still troubled by him not responding to my poking him however..

here's what I've got

1) AVM, altered play, potential newbie scum tell, early JVOR interaction is reminiscent to what JVOR did last game with scum partner

2) Slats - godfather or innocent, JVOR defended, suspicious prodding of Jets Babe lynch. Investigated by cop. Wouldn't touch today.

3) SMC - Not wanting to be vote Jets babe other then to position it as my idea, "robocop", and I'm surprised it took him this long to vote me after what happened last game.

4) Dan X - also prodded Jets Babe lynch suspiciously imo

I am amused by this axis of evil stuff, but I think it's being given too much credence. None of us have gotten a lot of traction on our most likely candidates at this point.. Maybe EY with SMC but that really took off when Vic voted him..

You're awfully sold on me to be going on only what JvoR did last game as scum. We've already covered the altered play. Every time the JvoR point is defended, you hound back up on the altered play, and when the altered play is defended, it's back to JvoR. Even a bit of JB thrown in there, which was also defended, and then suddenly I wasn't in the big 3 you were talking about concerning JB anymore

[Bleedin Green]

Vote Count:

SMC (4) - EY, Vicious89x, slats, Norway'sWaddlingMarmaloof

AVM (3) - Pac2566, CTM, WoodyPaige

Norway'sWaddlingMarmaloof (2) - Doggin94it, Sharrow

Pac2566 (1) - AVM

CTM (1) - SMC

With 13 players remaining, it takes 7 votes to cut.

[Dan.]

Yes he is..

I'm still troubled by him not responding to my poking him however..

here's what I've got

1) AVM, altered play, potential newbie scum tell, early JVOR interaction is reminiscent to what JVOR did last game with scum partner

2) Slats - godfather or innocent, JVOR defended, suspicious prodding of Jets Babe lynch. Investigated by cop. Wouldn't touch today.

3) SMC - Not wanting to be vote Jets babe other then to position it as my idea, "robocop", and I'm surprised it took him this long to vote me after what happened last game.

4) Dan X - also prodded Jets Babe lynch suspiciously imo

I am amused by this axis of evil stuff, but I think it's being given too much credence. None of us have gotten a lot of traction on our most likely candidates at this point.. Maybe EY with SMC but that really took off when Vic voted him..

CTM, what do you think of Doggin's suggestion that we leave SMC alone for today, to lower the scum's chance of taking out the person Vicious investigates?

[Vicious89x]

If I die, the focus won't be on you. They'll just think you're an idiot, like they did last game. Heck, you even called yourself an idiot and clammed up for the rest of the game. You went hard charging after me, I proved I was innocent, then you got trigger shy at the end.

The thing is, the Axis of Evil can survive lynching an innocent. That's how they're good. They'll manipulate, spin, twist things to point in a different direction. Then if worse comes to worse, they offer up one of their teammates to show that they're on the town's side.

Going after me is a waste of time.

Like I've said before, call me an idiot all you want. My interweb ego can take it.

Quite frankly I don't care whether you live or die, it's entertaining to me

[AVM]

Like I've said before, call me an idiot all you want. My interweb ego can take it.

Quite frankly I don't care whether you live or die, it's entertaining to me

idiot

[CTM]

CTM, what do you think of Doggin's suggestion that we leave SMC alone for today, to lower the scum's chance of taking out the person Vicious investigates?

I think it doesn't fly well with his established philosphy of "investigate the most innocent"

Nor does it make any sense seeing as how Slats is already been released as innocent, so if I'm scum looking to kill off confirmed townies, I'm killing slats rather then taking a 1/3 shot at me, EY or doggin...

Btw, and again, the doc should not fool around and should absolutely protect Vicious tonight no matter what.

[CTM]

You're awfully sold on me to be going on only what JvoR did last game as scum. We've already covered the altered play. Every time the JvoR point is defended, you hound back up on the altered play, and when the altered play is defended, it's back to JvoR. Even a bit of JB thrown in there, which was also defended, and then suddenly I wasn't in the big 3 you were talking about concerning JB anymore

You were never in the big 3 concerning Jets babe and for my money you haven't succesfully defended either accusation..

like I said, right now, based on random draw, 25% chance you are scum. Maybe I have you at 40% right now, meaning you are one of my current favorites but by no means am I convinced..

[CTM]

also, one more thing about this "passive prodding" of a lynch we've been speaking about a lot. I forgot to clarify that I believe this to be a newbie scum tell, not necessarily a scum tell for a more experienced player. It's not often that newbie scum have the balls to commit and lead the charge on a lynch they know is innocent, so instead the get all mealy mouthed and leave themselves outs while they push the lynch.

[AVM]

You were never in the big 3 concerning Jets babe and for my money you haven't succesfully defended either accusation..

like I said, right now, based on random draw, 25% chance you are scum. Maybe I have you at 40% right now, meaning you are one of my current favorites but by no means am I convinced..

As for the altered play, you have beat it to death, and I don't know what else to say. I decided coming in I'd be more active, and I naturally make a lot of bad jokes. My lack of activity last game got me semi-speed lynched and I barely got what I wanted to say out. I understand it's suspicious, but I've been consistent all game.

As for JvoR...I guess it's just odd that you jump on me for playing differently, but JvoR MUST have been playing the same in your eyes.

[AVM]

also, one more thing about this "passive prodding" of a lynch we've been speaking about a lot. I forgot to clarify that I believe this to be a newbie scum tell, not necessarily a scum tell for a more experienced player. It's not often that newbie scum have the balls to commit and lead the charge on a lynch they know is innocent, so instead the get all mealy mouthed and leave themselves outs while they push the lynch.

So I suppose me pushing for Pac a page or so ago was just a lucky non-newbie move?

[slats]

CTM, what do you think of Doggin's suggestion that we leave SMC alone for today, to lower the scum's chance of taking out the person Vicious investigates?

Thanks for reminding me.

BTW, this post is why I unvoted SMC. We want to clear the underbrush for Vicious, not the mafia - at this point, lynching SMC gives the mafia a 33% chance of rendering Vicious' finding useless.

Doggin, what does this mean exactly?

If SMC is lynched, who's Vic investigating? And how does SMC's lynch help to render that finding useless?

[AVM]

Thanks for reminding me.

Doggin, what does this mean exactly?

If SMC is lynched, who's Vic investigating? And how does SMC's lynch help to render that finding useless?

Vic pretty much said he's investigating one of SMC, EY, Doggin', or CTM I think

at the very least, those are his 4 highest on suspicion list

[slats]

As for the altered play, you have beat it to death, and I don't know what else to say.

Is this your second game, too?

I gotta say, I'm not buying this altered play stuff. I know it's a load of crap when referring to me, and as a result I consider it to be a load of crap for anyone else in their second game. Still learning the game, you're going to start doing things differently as you learn new things. That alone is no reason to go after any player.

[AVM]

Is this your second game, too?

I gotta say, I'm not buying this altered play stuff. I know it's a load of crap when referring to me, and as a result I consider it to be a load of crap for anyone else in their second game. Still learning the game, you're going to start doing things differently as you learn new things. That alone is no reason to go after any player.

Yep. You, me, and Dan are all playing our 2nd game.

My beef with CTM and Pac isn't that they're voting me--it's that their reasoning is so weak, yet other options keep coming up that are "good" in their own words...but they "see no reason to change their vote"

[Dan.]

Whats our unofficial tally right now?

I really don't buy him being scum--I'm completely sold on Pac, with the constant agreeing that such and such is a strong case against players A,B, and C, yet he doesn't change his vote from me, who he says is just among the muddled middle that he can't find much suspicion in? Just doesn't make sense.

How many times now has Pac posted something along the lines of "this makes a ton of sense, but I see nothing to change me from voting AVM," DESPITE saying he finds no one particularly scummy other than Vic?

Honestly seems like an attempt at distancing if I turn up good. Pac needs to go, IMO. If he doesn't die via lynch, he should be at the very least investigated tonight if not taken out by the Vig.

I'm starting to see an actual case against Pac, too. At least I'd like him to explain himself better ...

To be honest I'm a bit surprised how quickly Doggin and SMC voted Vic. That more than anything is what's caused me to hold off on him for the time being. If one or both of them is scum that wouldn't be good for the town... at all.

Here's the first time he says he's suspicious of Doggin and SMC, a quick mention which is fine for the first time, I suppose.

No offense but this is like your 7th post... How can you say I haven't added anything to the game when I've been active throughout? Your definition of "adding to the game" may be different than mine. At this point all I can do is voice my concerns, ask questions, and vote... all which I've done.

Pac says this to Sharrow after simply "+1"-ing two of Sharrow's posts the night before. Weird.

I think SMC's Robocob fiasco is much ado about nothing.. he was simply hypothesizing about possible roles IMO.

I'm still weary of Vic but didn't like that doggin and SMC jumped on within minutes of each other.

Without a strong vibe on anyone else I have to stick with AVM for the reasons I mentioned earlier.

Here he again says he's suspicious of Vicious, Doggin, and SMC, but doesn't offer anything new from the last time he brought it up, aside from saying he doesn't get the ROBOCOP argument.

sensory overload.. too much info to process while still looking busy for the peering eyes of my co-workers. I certainly plan on re-reading in detail once I get home but for now it's nice to see the game is in full swing. hopefully Vic is on the up and up but since he's been chomping at the bit to get this out for about a week I'm inclined to believe him.

This is the one time Pac seems to outright believe Vicious. He doesn't touch upon this argument again.

Fact of the matter is I don't feel "comfortable" about any one of you- including our new hero Vic...

Now it's a vague feeling, while sarcastically referring to Vicious as a hero (as if no one else had been questioning him).

That's my problem and why my vote on you has to stay... No one besides Vic, ironically enough, has done anything overtly scummy to me.

Yet somehow Doggin and SMC were so troublesome to Pac, it stopped him from voting for Vicious. Does he see something scummy there? Maybe? We really don't know because he never elaborates.

There's that magic word again... substance. As if spending an hour drafting a 5000 word manifesto containing far-fetched possibilities somehow legitimizes my posts. Truth be told I'm no more more convinced of anyones guilt now than I was on 4/15. I'm also not ready to wrap my finger in Vic, or anyone elses, belt loop and blindly succumb to their every desire.

As I mentioned earlier, the times I've gotten into trouble in this game are when I let the David Koresh posters sway my decisions. I made a conscious choice not to allow myself to be "led" but instead form my own opinions based on the evidence in front of me.

I get that everyone wants to hoist Vic on their shoulders and sing for he's a jolly good fellow but in the meantime nothing I've seen makes me want to change my vote on AVM.

I'm also inclined to agree with SMC... The case against him was largely done with smoke and mirrors and I don't know that his lynch is most beneficial for the town.

And again blatantly exaggerates everyone's reactions towards Vicious. Also questions EY for the second time (first time was a much earlier post when EY voted for Pac), yet none of these people are suspicious to him.

Really, it seems to me that all Pac has been adding is repeatedly announcing that he sees nothing scummy going on except with the same two people. Despite pages of discussion on more people than that, including people who Pac himself has brought up multiple times. And I don't like that he keeps misrepresenting people's attitudes towards Vicious.

At this point, I think I'm deciding between Pac and SMC. Norway still needs to say more, too.

[Doggin94it]

I think it doesn't fly well with his established philosphy of "investigate the most innocent"

Nor does it make any sense seeing as how Slats is already been released as innocent, so if I'm scum looking to kill off confirmed townies, I'm killing slats rather then taking a 1/3 shot at me, EY or doggin...

Btw, and again, the doc should not fool around and should absolutely protect Vicious tonight no matter what.

On blackberry, so I'll ne nrief. Investigate the innocent only applies if there's someone seeming innocent. Right now, everyone is suspicious

[AVM]

I'm starting to see an actual case against Pac, too. At least I'd like him to explain himself better ...

Here's the first time he says he's suspicious of Doggin and SMC, a quick mention which is fine for the first time, I suppose.

Pac says this to Sharrow after simply "+1"-ing two of Sharrow's posts the night before. Weird.

Here he again says he's suspicious of Vicious, Doggin, and SMC, but doesn't offer anything new from the last time he brought it up, aside from saying he doesn't get the ROBOCOP argument.

This is the one time Pac seems to outright believe Vicious. He doesn't touch upon this argument again.

Now it's a vague feeling, while sarcastically referring to Vicious as a hero (as if no one else had been questioning him).

Yet somehow Doggin and SMC were so troublesome to Pac, it stopped him from voting for Vicious. Does he see something scummy there? Maybe? We really don't know because he never elaborates.

And again blatantly exaggerates everyone's reactions towards Vicious. Also questions EY for the second time (first time was a much earlier post when EY voted for Pac), yet none of these people are suspicious to him.

Really, it seems to me that all Pac has been adding is repeatedly announcing that he sees nothing scummy going on except with the same two people. Despite pages of discussion on more people than that, including people who Pac himself has brought up multiple times. And I don't like that he keeps misrepresenting people's attitudes towards Vicious.

At this point, I think I'm deciding between Pac and SMC. Norway still needs to say more, too.

+1

[Dan.]

As for the altered play, you have beat it to death, and I don't know what else to say. I decided coming in I'd be more active, and I naturally make a lot of bad jokes. My lack of activity last game got me semi-speed lynched and I barely got what I wanted to say out. I understand it's suspicious, but I've been consistent all game.

As for JvoR...I guess it's just odd that you jump on me for playing differently, but JvoR MUST have been playing the same in your eyes.

I think we've already seen that JVoR was not playing the same way he did the last game, haven't we? Much chattier, actively pressuring an innocent, etc.

[AVM]

I think we've already seen that JVoR was not playing the same way he did the last game, haven't we? Much chattier, actively pressuring an innocent, etc.

Not according to CTM. He seems to be rather set in certain directions unless he's forced otherwise (Vic's reveal).

[CTM]

Is this your second game, too?

I gotta say, I'm not buying this altered play stuff. I know it's a load of crap when referring to me, and as a result I consider it to be a load of crap for anyone else in their second game. Still learning the game, you're going to start doing things differently as you learn new things. That alone is no reason to go after any player.

The idea of altered play is that as scum you are hiding something and have to act differently, newbie scum tend to exaggerate this effect.

I've caught people with it in the past, and whether you believe me or not, JVOR stood out like a sore thumb last game due to it..

[Doggin94it]

Vic pretty much said he's investigating one of SMC, EY, Doggin', or CTM I think

at the very least, those are his 4 highest on suspicion list

If SMC is lynched, the mafia can assume vic is investigating one of the 3 of us and NK us with a 33percent chance of NKing vic's investigation target (and thereby rendering his result useless). In the alternative, they could just kill you

[CTM]

If SMC is lynched, the mafia can assume vic is investigating one of the 3 of us and NK us with a 33percent chance of NKing vic's investigation target (and thereby rendering his result useless). In the alternative, they could just kill you

And why not slats?

[AVM]

And why not slats?

Why not kill slats?

[AVM]

Why not kill slats?

As in is that what you're asking?

[Norway'sWaddlingMarmaloof]

I'm starting to see an actual case against Pac, too. At least I'd like him to explain himself better ...

Here's the first time he says he's suspicious of Doggin and SMC, a quick mention which is fine for the first time, I suppose.

Pac says this to Sharrow after simply "+1"-ing two of Sharrow's posts the night before. Weird.

Here he again says he's suspicious of Vicious, Doggin, and SMC, but doesn't offer anything new from the last time he brought it up, aside from saying he doesn't get the ROBOCOP argument.

This is the one time Pac seems to outright believe Vicious. He doesn't touch upon this argument again.

Now it's a vague feeling, while sarcastically referring to Vicious as a hero (as if no one else had been questioning him).

Yet somehow Doggin and SMC were so troublesome to Pac, it stopped him from voting for Vicious. Does he see something scummy there? Maybe? We really don't know because he never elaborates.

And again blatantly exaggerates everyone's reactions towards Vicious. Also questions EY for the second time (first time was a much earlier post when EY voted for Pac), yet none of these people are suspicious to him.

Really, it seems to me that all Pac has been adding is repeatedly announcing that he sees nothing scummy going on except with the same two people. Despite pages of discussion on more people than that, including people who Pac himself has brought up multiple times. And I don't like that he keeps misrepresenting people's attitudes towards Vicious.

At this point, I think I'm deciding between Pac and SMC. Norway still needs to say more, too.

What specifically do you need me to comment on Dan?

[CTM]

Not according to CTM. He seems to be rather set in certain directions unless he's forced otherwise (Vic's reveal).

Uh, yeah. Jvor changed the 1 critique he asked me for and I provided post last game. That's not exactly shocking and doesn't mean that he'd change everything.

And again, I'm not sure why you are acting like I'm convinced about you or are campaigning for people to vote you, cause I'm not. I've stated my POV, provided posts, people aren't buying, what am I going to do? I've stated that I was willing to vote any of my favorite 4 and over the course of the day it's been widdled down to you and SMC.

[CTM]

As in is that what you're asking?

Yes, doggin doesn't want to lynch SMC cause it will raise the odds from 25% to 33% that the scum will kill an investigation target, yet, he's completely ignoring that Slats is hanging out as a confirmed innocent and is an easy surefire kill tonight...

[CTM]

Yep. You, me, and Dan are all playing our 2nd game.

My beef with CTM and Pac isn't that they're voting me--it's that their reasoning is so weak, yet other options keep coming up that are "good" in their own words...but they "see no reason to change their vote"

A) Don't ascribe pacs mammerings to me

If my case on you is so weak, tell me how your case on pac is any stronger? Cause I don't see it.

[AVM]

A) Don't ascribe pacs mammerings to me

If my case on you is so weak, tell me how your case on pac is any stronger? Cause I don't see it.

I'm not the one that every other page it seems like is saying "this is a convincing case" like you are against a few players. I've stuck with 2 players, you and him, the entire time.

As for Pac, agreed that you're seperate, but I see you both as scum right now, so I lump you both together.

[CTM]

I'm not the one that every other page it seems like is saying "this is a convincing case" like you are against a few players. I've stuck with 2 players, you and him, the entire time.

As for Pac, agreed that you're seperate, but I see you both as scum right now, so I lump you both together.

Your playing the newbie card a little to strong now. The two players voting you are both scum huh?

0% chance

[AVM]

Your playing the newbie card a little to strong now. The two players voting you are both scum huh?

0% chance

You're just now picking out that I've been focusing on pretty much just you two the entire day in terms of guiltiness?

[CTM]

You're just now picking out that I've been focusing on pretty much just you two the entire day in terms of guiltiness?

Of course, the fact that Pac and I were suspicious of you yesterday and are voting you today wouldn't have ANYTHING to do with that, right?

[AVM]

Your playing the newbie card a little to strong now. The two players voting you are both scum huh?

0% chance

So my suspicion of the two of you has a 0% chance of being true, yet you're 100% right about JvoR? Ok buddy