The MSG Secure Hospital for the Criminally Insane (MSGSHCI)

"We don't call them inmates, we call them patients."

 

Night was falling on the hospital.

"Alright, into your room, come on..." a Nurse chivvied one of the patients into his cell, who had his head down. He slowly obeyed, but the guard in the corner of the room watched carefully. The Nurse began to shut the door, when suddenly a scream came up from a nearby cell. The guard turned. The nurse shut the door quickly, and turned to leave.

The patient's eyes, previously dull and submissive, became alert. He looked up quickly, and reached through the small window in his cell door and quickly plucked a key from the Nurse's back pocket. He withdrew his arm quickly before she turned around to check the cell had locked itself. A quick tug at the door, and she was satisfied enough, hurrying off to deal with the other patients.

 

The sound of footsteps slowly echoed through the corridors of the institution, made by the few people who were left on patrol. The inhabitants of this miserable place were now mostly quiet in their cells. Those who refused to be quiet had been sedated, and a slow calm was descending upon the place. Water dripped slowly from a leaky water pipe above one of the corridors. It was in this corridor where that one patient stood up from his bunk, and quietly unlocked the door. Something was about to happen.

Edited August 16, 200917 yr by molestargazer

At least you're voting.

I always said I would.

 

Call me Mister Consistency.

I like all of the pressure on Falzis. I have always thought that by putting pressure on someone helps reveal who is who as things progress in the game. That said, I for one do not think that Falzis is guilty. No, I'm not saying that definitively as I have no special powers, but I do feel I have a pretty good feel on Falzis. The two arguments that are against him is that he contradicted himself and he tried to mislead us. I can agree that these things do stand out. I can see how people try to go on anything that they find to snuff out scum. With out a lot to go on we have to look for even the smallest clues. I still don't think he's guilty though and here's why.

 

Falzis has been very active and leads all of us in posts and activity. That always gives me good vibes. Remember junkaholic? Also his "attempt to mislead" can be written off as a simple mistake. I don't think a scum would risk his neck trying to fool us with that post. Is the gain even close to the risk? The other deal about the contradiction I don't see it as others do. After everything I've read from his posts I'm thinking he's pro town.

 

I also think that at least one of the people voting for him are scum. Out of the 3, I think KevinH is the most suspicious. It seems like he was just jumping on the wagon. He didn't really explain much when he was voting. He did give an explanation but when I went back and read it again it just seems like he was trying to find any other reason he could to pile on votes. I've been getting a weird vibe from KevinH for a while.

 

Vote: KevinH

FOS: Electric Mango and Falsis

If Sojourner had been lynched and found to be innocent, the suspicion would have been on them.

If I were scum, I would want to lynch somebody, anybody, day 1.

...

Regarding those that didn't vote day 1, I withdraw any previous FOS. It might as well have been a vote to no-lynch.

 

SFOS: Electric Mango and Falzis

One more vote at the deadline and he'd have been dead. That's not close?

Vote: Falzis

for attempting to mislead.

I think KevinH is the most suspicious. It seems like he was just jumping on the wagon. He didn't really explain much when he was voting. He did give an explanation but when I went back and read it again it just seems like he was trying to find any other reason he could to pile on votes.

SFOS: Electric Mango

Do my previous posts quoted above need more explanation?

The first quote is a big big WIFOM and what if. It's not even a soft evidence because sojo isn't dead, you don't know his alignment unless you know sojo to be mafia and you are protecting him.

 

The second quote is disputable especially when you are in the camp of "No Lynch" school of thought and a lot of other people are not, which is you being inconsistent since you FOS'd everyone before who didn't go along with your No Lynch idea but then withdrew it and only put it on us just because we let our vote stay, which is quite courageous you know since no mafia would dare give more information to townies on voting patterns or behaviors.

 

You're approach is just baffling.

 

The Kevin I know is more meticulous, hard evidence based, and comprehensive than that.

Flip-flopping? Can we get meticulous on that I would want to see specific examples instead of name calling me a flip flopper. And don't repeat the ones I've already answered.

 

The fact that you gave an "answer" doesn't mean that you answered the question or that your answer was satisfactory ...

 

That said ... at one point you stated that KevinH could be a SK and a "minute" or so later that Calderone could be a SK ... and almost FoSed Narsis o.0 ... without a, how did you call it, meticulous case or any case at all for that matter.

 

Faulty reasoning? Again, more point by point illustration so I can know what to defend myself against.

 

Well I think others wrote plenty on that subject ... but generally this as well: saying your statements are true or that your actions or reasoning have merit simply because a tendency was noted in Mafia wiki - that means nothing we can all read that, so why wouldn't scum choose actions that are a "sure" sign that your a townie, etc etc

 

Pro-lynch hardline ...

 

Did you even read what I said about this ... I my self was against a no-lynch policy!?

 

You say everything I've done is pro town but only want to "appear" pro town.

Where exactly have I said that? Please read my statement again ... also posting frequently and/or aggressively means nothing at this point, especially if your posts lack substance ... that said, that's another reason why I think your scum/mafia, 'cause your posts only cause confusion and are more likely to do harm than good to townies. I mean you FoSed 5-6 people by now, without a hint of evidence, so half of all survivors (at this point) - so you only cause confusion --> therefore scum/mafia.

 

You say I point to mafia (when did I point because I don't know who the mafia is, I'm pointing to suspects) every time someone says something I don't like. Uhmm... that's called scum hunting and putting pressure on people. =.=

 

No it's not .... simply FoSing someone because you don't like/agree with what he's saying isn't scum hunting ... to me at least ... example I didn't agree with KevinH on his No-Lynch policy, that's no reason to FoS him ...

 

FOS: Theophilos for bandwagoning hastily and unmeticulously and unreasonably

 

Bandwagoning ... I think I was the second to vote for you, if that's bandwagoning ... hastily? Well if you think so ...

The Kevin I know is more meticulous, hard evidence based, and comprehensive than that.

 

Except ...

 

... in this case there is no hard evidence and I doubt there will be.

 

I know that both Falzis and EM would have voted to lynch somebody even if they were townie.

But if they were scum they would also have voted to lynch somebody.

 

Everybody else didn't vote to lynch somebody which is a pro-town act.

Could scum have not voted and pretended to be pro-town?

Yes.

 

But what else do we have to go on?

Voting for someone on day 1 is not a scum tell Kevin. Every other experienced player it seems like I have ever played with favor a day 1 lynch, as does the mafia wiki. You've played enough games with me to know that I ALWAYS vote to lynch on the first day. To say that I or others are scummy because we did that is not true. I'm not going into the whole lynch or non lynch debate again except to say that voting to lynch on day 1 is PRO TOWN.

 

As for Falzis, he's doing a good job for the town. He was accused of being aggressive and pointing the finger at many people, a scum tell in Theo's words. This is also wrong. Falzis is sticking his neck out and letting his opinions known. Scum would not want that. They want to remain as neutral as possible as to not draw attention to themselves. Also by attacking people you are generating new information. Vgmmaster is the winningest player in IRON mafia history and that's how she plays the townie role as well. I've seen days where she's voted and unvoted for 3 or 4 people just to create pressure and uncover clues.

 

There's nothing wrong in stirring up the pot. How else are we to base our votes if we don't have someone out front giving us something to talk about?

 

 

We need more people to vote. Scum are perfectly happy to just sit back, not say anything, and pick us off one at a time. The townies best weapon is his vote, let's use it before we lose it.

This game needs more activity if we're to win.

 

My personal thoughts so far.....

 

 

Theophilos - posting some

sojourner - haven't heard from in a while

Nerau - need more Nerau

Sir Jesus - WWJD? Need more posts to find out

Calderone partyin01 - Does he know we've started Day 2?

Narsis - Need more Narsis

Electric Mango - active

Martino - doing good

Falzis - highly active

Kaziocore - Can't remember anything he's said

KevinH - active

Aquinas - need more posts

want more Narsis?

 

to be honest this is similar to a few games ago where everyone seems to be playing it close to the chest. except for maybe Falzis, but i've got mixed feelings on the guy.

 

time to put the pressure on me thinks:

 

Vote: KevinH

 

want some hard-evidence? then put some pressure on. yes you've voted Falzis, but it has some pretty...flawed reasoning behind it. well not flawed necessarily...more...i dont know. can't think of the right word.

yea it seems no one want to give to much away so i can't get a read on anyone

 

plus i do not wish to join in on a bandwagon

yea it seems no one want to give to much away so i can't get a read on anyone

 

plus i do not wish to join in on a bandwagon

I think there has been enough discussion on D2 to allow you to post more than just this. For examplle, what is your opinion on the discussions involving Falzis and KevinH?

He was accused of being aggressive and pointing the finger at many people, a scum tell in Theo's words.

 

Wrong - I didn't say It's a scum tell because he's aggressive or because he's posting a lot. I said it's a scum tell, 'cause he's posts are often contradictory and more time than not confusing. I'm not sure how that can help us townies - ergo scum.

 

Falzis is sticking his neck out and letting his opinions known. Scum would not want that. They want to remain as neutral as possible as to not draw attention to themselves.

 

Yeah, that might be true if he didn't FoS or vote for half of all surviving players. So what does he think? Basically that every second person in the game is guilty or probably guilty!? That could as well be a tactic to draw attention away from him and his scum buddies ... My point is this - you can't claim a particular tactic of playing only for one side or the other.

 

Also by attacking people you are generating new information.

 

Fair enough ...

That said ... at one point you stated that KevinH could be a SK and a "minute" or so later that Calderone could be a SK ... and almost FoSed Narsis o.0 ... without a, how did you call it, meticulous case or any case at all for that matter.

 

If this is flip flopping, I'm a fish. I made this way way back when people were enjoying D1 random and playful posts. Saying Kevin or Calderone could be an SK isn't flip flopping. It's just an either or which isn't flip flopping, fence sitting maybe but not flip flopping,

 

Almost FoS'd Narsis... hmm so why do I need to have a case when I just "almost" FoS'd him. Other people voted for him without even a case. I "almost" FoS'd Narsis and you're asking me for one? How unreasonable. And if I remember correctly, you are the one who joined bandwagon votes on D1 with hardly a case too.

 

 

Well I think others wrote plenty on that subject ... but generally this as well: saying your statements are true or that your actions or reasoning have merit simply because a tendency was noted in Mafia wiki - that means nothing we can all read that, so why wouldn't scum choose actions that are a "sure" sign that your a townie, etc etc

 

No one has rejected my assertion that tips on mafia wiki have merit. If you read it yourself, you can even see statistical analysis of a No Lynch strategy. If it's faulty reasoning support an argument from an independent and unbiased source such as mafia wiki regarding the No Lynch debate, then I'm guilty of it.

 

And there are no "sure" signs of being a townie. You have to take everything into consideration.

 

Did you even read what I said about this ... I my self was against a no-lynch policy!?

 

I was defending myself from your vote basis that I was a pro-lynch hardline. If you yourself is against a no-lynch policy, why did you use it as a basis for your vote? GLARING INCONSISTENCY.

 

Where exactly have I said that? Please read my statement again

 

Umm on your post voting for me. You said and I quote:

 

Finally the only vibe I'm getting from him is, that he wants to appear townie at all cost

 

... also posting frequently and/or aggressively means nothing at this point, especially if your posts lack substance ... that said, that's another reason why I think your scum/mafia, 'cause your posts only cause confusion and are more likely to do harm than good to townies. I mean you FoSed 5-6 people by now, without a hint of evidence, so half of all survivors (at this point) - so you only cause confusion --> therefore scum/mafia.

 

Wow... my posts lack substance. Wow... my posts cause confusion. What have you done my friend? I'm speechless and actually hurt after all the time I've spent trying to be active and prodding people and scum hunting. But oh well that's your read.

 

No it's not .... simply FoSing someone because you don't like/agree with what he's saying isn't scum hunting ... to me at least ... example I didn't agree with KevinH on his No-Lynch policy, that's no reason to FoS him ...

 

It's about putting pressure. And where are the FoS I made "just because I don't like/agree"? If that was so, I'm sure it was because I had a good reason which maybe wasn't clear to you.

 

Bandwagoning ... I think I was the second to vote for you, if that's bandwagoning ... hastily? Well if you think so ...

 

Yes. Bandwagon. Voted right away after Martino. If that's not jumping on the wagon, when it's running, I don't know what is.

Except ...

 

... in this case there is no hard evidence and I doubt there will be.

 

When I say evidence, I mean voting patterns and reaction posts. But guess what we have a scarcity of that because people didn't vote on D1, including you. And you like running possibilities, which you haven't done much until now.

 

I know that both Falzis and EM would have voted to lynch somebody even if they were townie.

But if they were scum they would also have voted to lynch somebody.

 

So where's the scum tell there for an FoS if there's an equal chance of us being townie and scum? FoS means you're leaning towards a scum tell.

 

Everybody else didn't vote to lynch somebody which is a pro-town act.

Could scum have not voted and pretended to be pro-town?

Yes.

 

No no no. Why are you always repeating your assertion that people who favor No Lynch is a pro-town tell? I'M TIRED OF IT. You are confusing the newbies and maybe even misleading them.

 

You are messing with people's head in this game with always trying to insert No Lynch vs Pro Lynch on D1 discussion. Stop it already.

 

But what else do we have to go on?

 

It's certainly not my fault. It would be the fault of people who didn't post, react, and vote. And you are most certainly one of them.

want more Narsis?

 

to be honest this is similar to a few games ago where everyone seems to be playing it close to the chest. except for maybe Falzis, but i've got mixed feelings on the guy.

 

Yes we want more Narsis!

 

Could you tell me why you have mixed feelings? So I could know and others would know. Would help the town a lot.

 

VOTE COUNT

Falzis (3): Martino, Theophilos, KevinH

KevinH (2): Electric Mango, Narsis

 

Not Voting (7): sojourner, Nerau, Sir Jesus, partyin01, Falzis, Kaziocore, Aquinas

 

With 12 alive, 7 votes are needed to lynch.

Edited June 19, 200917 yr by molestargazer

Wrong - I didn't say It's a scum tell because he's aggressive or because he's posting a lot. I said it's a scum tell, 'cause he's posts are often contradictory and more time than not confusing. I'm not sure how that can help us townies - ergo scum.

 

You're repeating assertions. Back it up with a blow by blow account. And you're the only one confused.

 

Yeah, that might be true if he didn't FoS or vote for half of all surviving players. So what does he think? Basically that every second person in the game is guilty or probably guilty!? That could as well be a tactic to draw attention away from him and his scum buddies ... My point is this - you can't claim a particular tactic of playing only for one side or the other.

 

If you think about it, why shouldn't I be suspicious of everyone? I don't know anyone's alignment except my own. I am sure I am townie. I'm not so sure about anybody else. Even if EM has defended me, I can only lean on the side of caution that he is more likely a townie than a scum.

 

He might be scum playing on the other side of scums that are breathing on my neck. I should know it can happen, since Kevin and Narsis did just that in the most recent previous Mafia game (though I died early but I did keep tabs on what was going on).

 

So what if I FoS people even half of the players? It's about putting pressure. It's about me saying hmm you look suspicious, defend yourself.

 

You can claim a particular tactic as playing for one side or the other, in terms of the probability and reasonableness of a scum or a town doing it.

You're repeating assertions. Back it up with a blow by blow account. And you're the only one confused.

 

Offcours I'm repeating my self, 'cause you keep missing the point ... 'nuff said.

 

I can't tell you how happy I am and will continue to be if I'm the only one confused ...

I keep missing the point because you keep on escaping the fact that you haven't shown me what my "confusing" and "contradictory" posts are. I've explained the one pointed out by Martino and pointed by you on page 17. Are there any other posts you'd like me to explain?

 

Repeating your accusations without giving the opportunity for the accused to respond is unfair and untownie.

It would be the fault of people who didn't post, react, and vote. And you are most certainly one of them.

I'm posting. I'm reacting. I'm voting.

This seems like another attempt to mislead.

 

Two more points

• Don't believe everything you read.
  
• If you reference something, reference it accurately.
  

"The appropriateness of this strategy has been much debated, but it generally comes down to two things: preserving favorable voting ratios ... or waiting for investigations." No Lynch on Mafia Wiki

 

My strategy of keeping more votes and waiting for an investigation is recognized as valid. Hmmm

I'm posting. I'm reacting. I'm voting.

This seems like another attempt to mislead.

 

Two more points

• Don't believe everything you read.
  
• If you reference something, reference it accurately.
  

"The appropriateness of this strategy has been much debated, but it generally comes down to two things: preserving favorable voting ratios ... or waiting for investigations." No Lynch on Mafia Wiki

 

My strategy of keeping more votes and waiting for an investigation is recognized as valid. Hmmm

And a few lines later it is shot down:

 

It has been argued that in the early stages of the game, if it is known that the Mafia has fewer members than the town, it can be a valid tactic, for those with a good knowledge of math at least, to let the night phase go and handle investigations. For example, if it is known that there are 15 Town and 4 Mafia, the odds of lynching a townie on day one with limited information are much higher, therefore giving an extra kill to the Mafia. However, this is not the case. Voting No Lynch in the early game causes the town to lose one possible lynch, so instead of having 3 chances to find the mafia, they only have 2 chances.

I'll do a vote count, then send out necessary prods. Look to the top of the page for your vote counts, which will continue there as they did D1.

 

PRODS ARE BEING SENT TO:

sojourner

Sir Jesus

partyin01

Kaziocore

Aquinas

 

Seriously, people, that's crap. Get posting.

Edited June 19, 200917 yr by molestargazer

And a few lines later it is shot down:

 

 

Kevin blamed Falzis for trying to mislead. Looks like the pot calling the kettle black.

I don't know Kevin's previous way previous games if when he voted No Lynch on D1, that he kept on continuing the discussion about its merits on D2. Can anyone who played with Kevin before tell me?

Yes we want more Narsis!

 

Could you tell me why you have mixed feelings? So I could know and others would know. Would help the town a lot.

 

i like that you are posting a lot...but some of the things you are saying/how you are reacting is coming off as a little...off. maybe i'm just reading into too much. hence the mixed feelings.

 

as for Kevin...i know he has advocated his follow-the-cop strategy after day 1, but i don't really understand why he would continue to do so now. we lost our cop so what's the point of debating the no lynch strategy?

I think Kevin mentioned somewhere that there might be more than one cop or something along those lines. I think he didn't explain his thoughts further than that ...