Calgarypuck Mafia Game Thread

GGG---------HG
Seb----------GGG
Pux-----------EOJ
Biz------------Seb
Bond---------Biz
GGG---------Pux
EOJ----------Pux
Diss----------WF
Biz-----------Mrk
Fuzz----------------Mrk
Bond--------Ag
Drop---------Diss
Biz-----------Scorn
Diss----------Bond
Ag------------Bond
Fuzz----------Bond
GGG----------Ag
Pux-----------Bond
Drop---------Bond
Scorn--------Bond
I just wanted to take a look at the voting of the first day of known people. (I'm a visual person, so I just wanted to see if there was a pattern there)

I guess it won't make as much sense unless maybe you add in the person of suspicion Sorry to waste space.

I can appreciate the first part of Seb's post. I never really understood the votes I got. I admit, I don't add alot of cerebral posts and the turtle sex posts in past games may have muddied the waters but I didn't think it would have been ban worthy by a seasoned player.

[Hockeyguy15]

One thing that bugs me about crazy_eoj on day 1 is he doesn't seem to use logic to vote or he justifies his vote with ideas other people have put out there without doing any leg work on his own.

His vote on Puxlut - Revenge, piling on.
His vote on agulati - Brought on by arguments GGG made
His vote on GGG - Says something is off with GGG but that's it. It does seem like a pretty weak vote.

He also hasn't posted much, which could explain why it GGG was so sloppy. Day 1 Bonded is in trouble, eoj is not around. Day 2 GGG is in the cross hairs, eoj is not around.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by SebC

This has been a trip up for many of my ideas, and yet, I can't help but think that maybe they did. After all, they would not want to vote as a block all game, so the plan my have been to vote together day one, then split their votes later. So I did not let this idea weigh too heavily when going through my top suspects.

My top suspect, and my vote, is crazy_eoj. As I looked through the posts of my top suspects, none had the red flags that he does.

Behold, Day 1:







Here, crazy_eoj is is alignment with a known mafia.

Post #326

When crazy_eoj asks this, the votes are as follows:

Scornfire (4): Hockeyguy15, SebC, devo22, bizaro86
agulati (4): WinnipegFan, mrkajz44, Bonded, GGG
Bonded (4): dissentowner, agulati, Fuzz, Puxlut
hasn't voted (3): Scornfire, DropIt, crazy_eoj

Scornfire is not likely to vote for himself. It is likely that he gets to cast the deciding vote. Bonded is at risk of a lynch, and while a shift onto Scornfire would save him, it could be suspicious later. But if Scornfire will vote for agulati, then things are relatively peachy for mafia. A (presumably) villager will be lynched, and while the mafia were in on it, it's not that hard to justify lyching a villager Day 1. Thus, the information crazy_eoj is asking for is very useful to mafia. It tells them if they are okay, or if they need to start contingency planning. As a villager, unless you already had a strong read on the game (something that crazy_eoj did not seem to have), why would you really care which way Scornfire votes?

Then, after Scornfire replies non-committedly, crazy_eoj goes ahead and puts the 5th vote on agulati, putting him into the lead until DropIt and Scornfire put the nails into Bonded.

Behold, Day 2:

Five votes on GGG. devo22 wants to vote GGG, but not set up hammer, while I don't want to leave us with less than five for threshold at deadline. I come off, devo22 goes on.



First, interesting question mark. But also "can’t ignore the fact so many are leaning the same direction" is literally something that might've been said in the mafia chat if decided whether or crazy_eoj should vote on GGG or not. It would be a fine justification to vote on a teammate. He votes GGG, and it sets up hammer until devo22 pulls us back from the edge.

GGG then puts a vote on crazy_eoj, but he might already suspect he's hooped at this point, since there's been talk of keeping at least five votes on him. I do too, which was awkward, but it never gains more traction than that. IMO this is just as likely to direct us off his teammate than it is to be a legitimate hail mary.

devo22 then places the 6th vote, which I just noticed, WinnipegFan unvotes, re-votes, and GGG ends discussion by hammering himself.

Behold, Day 3:

crazy_eoj is currently voting on Scornfire. Scornfire, who I believe GGG inadvertently revealed to be town, particularly since GGG has flipped mafia. Scornfire, who cast the deciding vote against a troll. This is a poor vote. It would likely benefit the troll quite a bit if Scornfire were to be banned.

Behold, Conclusions:

crazy_eoj may be scum. There's at least enough reason to suspect him that it could be disastrous to leave him alive to the lynch-or-lose round. He needs to be lynched, and is unlikely to prove valuable later in the game as he is currently voting on a probable townie, so now is as good a time as any to ban him.

Too long to quote the whole thing but I'll try to respond to your allegations.

I think the main way to refute your line of thinking is that if I was an oilers fan, my game play would be just terrible strategy overall.

Day 1 - what point would there be to aligning with another oilers fan on the very first vote (puxlut)? Incredibly poor strategic move, that doesn't really provide any cover either.

My second vote on day 1 was similar to others, in that I was torn between agulati and bonded. Since I had decided not to vote for Scornfire I was hoping to have some indication if he was leaning one way or another to hopefully avoid being a tie vote.... assuming he would be voting for one of the two people I was considering anyways I would have swung to either. Since I was running out of time I wanted to ensure my vote counted and thus decided the case against agulati was more convincing to me and voted. Voting with ALL the oilers trolls would AGAIN be terrible strategy.

Day 2 - As mentioned I couldn't get on much over the weekend. And I took the small time I did log in to vote for GGG. If I was an oiler troll, this move makes zero sense whatsoever. There was definitely still time to build consensus for another vote, or not vote whatsoever.

Day 3- I still think that Scornfire's play indicates he is the final oilers troll. I've explained my reasoning and I think there's lots of evidence pointing to him. Not the least of which is the panic and anger he has displayed being targeting as the next lynchee.

And, as others have pointed out, there is a good case made against your own behavior, as well as some others.

So some questions for you:
Why/how do you think GGG showed Scorn to be a townie?
Why do you think Bizaro and Dissent were eliminated? If I was a troll, I don't see either of them ever focused on me?
Do you honestly believe GGG would have allowed such terrible strategic play from his team?

[devo22]

I still don't understand the timing of his GGG vote on day 2 ... that's pretty much the only thing that makes me doubt his Oilers affiliation at this point. But again, setting up hammer seems like a really bad idea after already losing an Oiler on day 1.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Scornfire

< Still want some context for post #15.



This is a post that bothers me both because it sets GGG up to try and pretend he's on our side via a discussion I had known to be taboo before we started, and it contains the word "Lynch" from a newbie on day 1, it's actually the first usage of the term

I don't think any context is required, this is an honest question on how these games work.

The term lynching was used and explained in the sign up thread when Oling was explaining the rules.

You'll note the term "meta" was never used until someone suspicious started throwing it around.....

[devo22]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Why do you think Bizaro and Dissent were eliminated? If I was a troll, I don't see either of them ever focused on me?

I think it's pretty obvious. biz is a strong player and somewhat gave GGG a town feel on day 1, so that was a solid try to take heat off him and get a strong player out of the game. diss simply was on fire this game and it made sense for the Oilers to kill him.

I doubt those kills had anything to do with you if you are indeee the third mullet. You managed to fly under the radar for quite some time.

[Scornfire]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I don't think any context is required, this is an honest question on how these games work.

The term lynching was used and explained in the sign up thread when Oling was explaining the rules.

You'll note the term "meta" was never used until someone suspicious started throwing it around.....

Plenty of context is required, it's a bad question and plays in GGG's favor.

The term "Meta" does not exist in a vacuum. I actually taught quite a few people the word judging by the reactions to it. The fact this is even a talking point is kind of hilarious, any roleplayer/movie buff will use the term liberally

I refuted basically everything you stated with regards to evidence towards me and called you out for using blatantly false arguments (One of which you've amended, but was still a brutal oversight, several others you've yet to follow up or expound on). Is there something else you'd like me to clarify? The fact you're redoubling on me even after a major trip-up like mis-quantifying the votes day 1 (When you were the banning Threshold vote on Agulati to begin with) seems a bit ham-fisted.

I don't particularly like your answer with regards to post #15 through the lens of being a potential Oiler, this is still extremely early in the game but GGG's over the top reproach makes it look very staged and you're the one who gets the ball rolling. Post #117 is particularly interesting to me since it takes you merely 4 minutes to place a vote on Puxlut after GGG nudges you to. This is an incredible coincidence midday on a tuesday if it's not pre-planned.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by devo22

I think it's pretty obvious. biz is a strong player and somewhat gave GGG a town feel on day 1, so that was a solid try to take heat off him and get a strong player out of the game. diss simply was on fire this game and it made sense for the Oilers to kill him.

I doubt those kills had anything to do with you if you are indeee the third mullet. You managed to fly under the radar for quite some time.

That is possible.

However, it's also true that Bizaro voted for:

1) SebC
2) Mr Kajz
3) Scornfire


Dissent voted for

1) WinnipegFan
2) Bonded
3) GGG

Some consideration should be made for the suspicions they had?

[Scornfire]

To be fair, on some reflection I don't think there's any answer I'd find agreeable with regards to that whole exchange from any of the people involved, I might be focusing too much on that one

[mrkajz44]

Originally Posted by devo22

I still don't understand the timing of his GGG vote on day 2 ... that's pretty much the only thing that makes me doubt his Oilers affiliation at this point. But again, setting up hammer seems like a really bad idea after already losing an Oiler on day 1.

Agreed - I think the Oiler strategy later in day 2 was to wait until it was close to deadline and do the fake mod reveal. It was a pretty good plan and might have worked, but the plan was dependent on GGG not getting hammered and actually getting the fake mod post out there.

A few people who where not voting for GGG at the time of Crazy's vote had already expressed their interest in voting for GGG, so hammer was a real possibility. Just seems like way too bold of a move to make when they already lost Bonded on Day 1.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Day 3

With 11 posters, it takes 6 votes to ban user prior to deadline. It takes at least 4 votes to ban user at the deadline. A tied vote at deadline results in no banning.

Vote Count:

Votes Hockeyguy(1): agulati

Votes Sebc(2): DropIt, mrkajz44

Votes Scornfire(2): crazy_eoj, WinnipegFan,

Votes crazy_eoj(2): Scornfire, SebC

Hasn’t Voted (4):
Puxlut, Hockeyguy15, Fuzz, devo22,

Deadline is Wednesday, January 30th at 10:00 PM Mountain Time.

[Oling_Roachinen]

I think the Day 3 votes are correct, I made a mistype earlier.

Night will be Thursday. Since people expressed concerns with weekend schedules I will increase the next "day" so it's from Friday-Sunday.

[devo22]

that should be SebC who votes for for crazy_eoj, not crazy himself.

[Scornfire]

I still think they had prepped it to ban asap if things went sideways with the mod reveal as a contingency plan. There were several of us who were ready to look elsewhere before Fuzz stepped in, I'm doubtless someone who didn't actually state their own reasoning for a vote would have little concern with switching it once the rest of us got the momentum moving elsewhere, in the meantime the self ban was their safety net to try and keep the proxy as safe as possible if things went south. It was looking very grim for GGG when Eoj (and WF) jumped on the wagon with no input of their own, when Fuzz corrected things GGG lept right for the self ban as soon as Fuzz started talking about the proxy. They then banned the guy who'd been playing the best of all of us

WF pulls his vote right after the GGG "reveal", perhaps hoping to initiate the pile-off, puts it right back on after Fuzz's reveal, despite us already being at Threshold

Both votes look suspicious to me

Vote: mrkajz44

[devo22]

tough vote. Like I mentioned, I'm not completely sold on crazy_eoj based on the timing of his GGG vote. WinnipegFans style grinds my gears and his GGG vote looks suspicious, but I still feel he might be just an emotional townie. Seems like he stepped into the inexperienced "You voted for me so you must be scum" trap that I myself stepped into in previous games - certainly doesn't help town, mind you, but I'm leaning town. I have some doubts about SebC and mrkajz, but they seem to actively hunt and provide input. Puxlut ... I don't know.

[Scornfire]

Post pending Pux?

[agulati]

Seb has a very interesting, detailed and insightful post. I believe there is one oversight which could have furthered his case. GGG was very protective of new players right from the get go. This can potentially point towards both the mafia members being new to the game. That can fit to the idea that crazy is also a mafia. What concerns me though is if the oversight was intentional, so that another townie will comment on it, and be compelled to throw a vote in that direction, since they are also contributing to the theory.

I’m still weary of Seb and HG, but crazy does indeed move up my charts, based on Seb’s post.

I’m going to leave my vote on for now.

[agulati]

Seb has a very interesting, detailed and insightful post. I believe there is one oversight which could have furthered his case. GGG was very protective of new players right from the get go. This can potentially point towards both the mafia members being new to the game. That can fit to the idea that crazy is also a mafia. What concerns me though is if the oversight was intentional, so that another townie will comment on it, and be compelled to throw a vote in that direction, since they are also contributing to the theory.

I’m still weary of Seb and HG, but crazy does indeed move up my charts, based on Seb’s post.

I’m going to leave my vote on for now.