September Mafia: Viva La Revolucion!

Since wytyg never retracted her vote and I am both suspicious of her and petty as hell, I vote wytyg.

I dunno. I guess I was wrong about Yalta. I think DM might still be suspicious, but wytyg looks increasingly guilty too me. Eurgh. I guess I will hold off on voting for now. Hopefully someone will have an idea of what to do. We're really in the danger zone now.

Please be Loggins, please be Loggins... Yes!

The rebels gather together and string up their last victim, Ovi. He struggles to explain himself, but unfortunately for you, you do not listen. He is lynched.

As the mafia would outnumber you come a night killing, the game is over. The Secret Police win!

Serrland, TBD, and Angry Russian were mafia.

Oh, shit. I wouldn't have guessed that.

Well, I've not got much time to say anything right now, because I've chosen to check the forum just before I have to go offline for most of the day, but...
DM, I had you down as most guilty, and I was obviously utterly incorrect on that count. But everything kept on becoming self-confirming towards that end, as things went on...
TBD, I thought there was something wrong, but thought (at one point, until proven otherwise) it was because you were a Townie Role (e.g. Doctor) that you didn't want to expose too much.
What did I think of Serrland? Darnit, I can't remember, nor is there time to find my notes... Someone who knows what I pondered, semi-privately, in their direction can probably copy that in here, though. (All I can recall off the top of my head is that you were very quiet.)

Well played, all. Least-ways those on the winning side, at least. I actually think you killed me too early (although, for all practical purposes, it didn't matter) given the actual degree of accuracy of my interpretations of the game (once more, I could have been a good pro-Mafia townie, by dint of all the incorrect assumptions I could have misdirected my fellow Townies with), plus I could have sent even more secret code out into the aether in the process. (No, not part of my role, just me being short of anything more constructive to say, at the time.)

But, anyway, gotta rush.

While I had some last minute suspicion of Serrland, I genuinely thought DM and wytyg were Mafia. Apparently just misguided townies, like me.

Pffft, I'm sure I would have out-promafia'd you by miles...

Ah shit, you were right.Miscount on my part.

Ah well. I don't think it would've made much difference anyways.

Ok, tired as I was, yesterday, in both limb and spirit, I could only start my own proper end-summary before going to bed early. Any inconsistencies of thought in the following can be attributed to being authored by two people, separated by sleep.


Serrland, I picked up a concern (the "look at DM/Y'allt" comment) that reflected my inner thoughts. I was confused as to whether this was meant equally (rightfulyl or wrongfully) insightful fellow-Townie or well played Mafia. Now I know.

TBD, as mentioned, played... oddly. Unfortunately, I read it the wrong way (as also mentioned), as signs of innocence. (I'm not sure what that says about you, normally, TBD! But I think you'll not be too upset at the ramifications, right? )

Dya: Well, it wasn't much of an innings... To put it in the parlance of cricket. But (proving I overthink things) there was pretty much no Mafia involvement in securing your sacrifice. So it wasn't a sacrifice, but a valid Town move. OTOH, you temporarily set up Serr with an Alibi in the other direction, I note, when it's easiest to treat it as a throwaway move. (I think, my notes show an inconsistency somewhere.)

Ed: Slightly longer, but barely so. No comment that you haven't made yourself.

Jello: Blue-on-Blue victim, and the dice-rolls left you without a constructive counterpoint. Well, it's not unusual.

Me: I can't realistically pass judgement on myself. But I frightened the Mafia (without good reason), so I'm relatively happy. It could have been worse and the result of a Civvie Lynch on Day 3, as I fear it might have become.

Chand: I see you were... oh dear. Civvie-Lynched. Still, why would the Mafia interfere?

GD: Not sure why you were targeted (off-hand), but honourable mention for not voting wrongly (and on one occasion rightly), and maybe that's the reason.

The remaining shadowy ones stayed in the shadows during Day 4, leaving me to read too much into the Pre-revolution Civil War exchanges (that ended up becoming a stalemate).

I choose to believe that Doctor Y'allt was a lucky shot by the Mafia, but it's possible I missed the signs. Although having "played the Mafia move each time" (on the valid, but wrong, assumption that Day 1 was a deliberate Alibi establishment), I would probably have left them as a useful scapegoat, should a future distraction be necessary. Assuming there was no knowledge of the role, which at that point probably wasn't that useful (no real idea who to protect, still, although I suppose that could have changed in short order).

Ovi: At various points I thought conceivably mafia (mostly circumstantially and based off of a broken theory), but never actually so. But at various points before that final killing blow I'd labelled them as second most likely to be Mafia behind...

DM: ...who (for reasons that would probably bore you) just lit up the "guilty" light on my internal switchboard. A light that refused to be extinguished even up until the moment of the Reveal (although DM's unvote near the end confused me). So, chasing the scent of this Red Herring, I was distracted. But I don't think (without it) I would have caught onto the correct result.

Wytyg: Played blamelessly. If I were tactically playing, I'd have considered Wytyg a mid-game target to muddy the waters. Although it would have definitely been unnecessary in this case, such tables being turned.


Again, congratulations Mafia.

I figured that since I was once again mafia, that I wouldn't be lasting long, thus my best option for my team was to vote to lynch one of them.

Well, it's said that nothing makes poker players trip up more than playing with someone who doesn't play by the same standards. Because the game then doesn't go the way it would if were otherwise. That apparent flash of a tell on the face? Maybe they were just amused to have received four deuces, not four aces... The seriously impassive expression? They actually don't know whether a certain run of cards is good or bad, and certainly haven't been keeping a track of which segments of the pack are still in play to further refine this, but it looks like they're perfecting their literal Poker Face to hide something good or ill for their fortune. Randomised raising of the stakes appears to indicate serious strategies that just aren't justified...

I'm not saying I'm a good poker player (i.e. Mafia player... I'm not a poker player at all, and have probably hit or overrun the limit of how much I know about how that particular game of cards actually work). Indeed, I can muddy up my performance (intentionally or otherwise) with the worst of them... But I do tend to assume that everyone else is puts the most devious of motives behind every move. And one day, I'll be bang on the money! Until then, you now all know how to beat me!

In the meantime... *produces a pack of cards seemingly from nowhere and deftly riffles and cuts them, one handed* ...anyone for a game of Happy Families?