Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
If you & I believe the same thing, and I'm guilty for it... what does that tell us about YOU?
And I didn't say you were guilty for believing that EAP was the inspector. I am suspicious of you because you were trying to make it look like her vote for Jack in the beginning of Day 1 was meaningful when in all likelihood, it wasn't.
Until I made my quadruple posts on Tuesday night/Wednesday morning, I thought EAP's vote for Jack was the most important thing.
You saw that I went back and did some more research. You saw me post what I found in the thread. You saw me deliberate further upon it as well.
I publicly walked through the process by which I came to mediate my decision. Changing one's position upon discovering new information is the essence of being rational and reasonable, is it not?
I'm sorry, but you can't say that I am guilty simply for adjusting my position in response to a changing situation. I am being diligent and deliberative as a good Townsperson should be.
I think my diligent deliberation stepped on Mafia toes, and I think that's exactly how I wound up in this runoff. I know I'm innocent, so I know somebody wants me dead.
NBF, I don't know exactly why the hell you think I'm guilty. I'll bet you the cost of a law school education that I'm a Townsperson, if you so desire.
I have done research into the game, and shown a willingness to change my mind upon new realizations. That's called rationality, not having an agenda. If I were hammering away at an agenda, I'd have written a few thousand more words against Jack after a day's absence instead of altering my position after further consideration. Note that I didn't. I gathered quotes of the Night One whacked player - a position traditionally occupied by an innocent player in this game. I came to the Inspector's defense when it became apparent that Mafia were steering the vote to kill her off. I could have just kept my mouth shut and let the Inspector die without any need of drawing attention to myself - would you have liked that? I feel I have answered every question posed to me, or at least made a good faith attempt. I have admitted where I may have made an error (and, quite frankly, I might not have made an error regarding Jack.) I feel I am working with the most reliable/relevant information that is available, the Inspector's identity, and using that as the foundation for my thoughts on the game. Again: what, exactly, have I done that makes you think I am Mafia?
I think I have done everything I can to demonstrate not only my innocence, but to help eliminate Mafia by building on the departed Inspector's revelations. Honestly, I don't know what else I can do to make you understand that I am just a Townsperson here.
I simply think you want me gone at this point. Your stubborn refusal/inability to listen to reason suggests you are guided by motives other than rationality and the preservation of innocent life.
To those players who DO trust me: When I die, I wish to be avenged... at this point, I believe that means going after NoAge & NBF.
I must say that this Kdogg v NBF title fight is fascinating. This Battle Royale is going to give me some things to think about. Like what your disagreement represents:
Post by NothingButFlowers on May 26, 2011 21:31:34 GMT -5
kdogg, I don't know exactly why you can't understand the difference between thinking you are guilty and just being suspicious of you. You make it sound as though I have my mind totally made up when I've tried very hard to make it clear that I do not. I have suspicions, but I'm not positive that you are guilty.
And as for you getting killed and needing to be avenged, I think you're a bit premature, as right now, you only have two votes against you while Jack has three. As for why I am suspicious of you, I tried to make it clear, but apparently I did not. I was/am suspicious of you because you took EAP's one vote for Jack and built a whole case around it, which seemed to be trying to direct other people's votes to another player based on almost no evidence. I know that you have said that you thought at the time that EAP's vote for Jack was the most important thing, but if that's true, that seems like pretty sloppy thinking.
However, I will say that I went further back. It's very rare for an inspector to vote for the person whose name he or she had in the first round, but EAP did it in both of the previous games in which she was inspector. (Actually, kdogg did it in at least one game when he was the inspector too.)
Options: Click more information to learn more about your access policy.
Click Continue to view the site now for work-related purposes.
Click Go Back or use the browser's Back button to return to the previous page. "
This is why my vote was late last round, just an FYI. I work five to six 12.5 hour night shifts a week and have a one hour drive to and from. The rest if my time is spent sleeping or taking care of kiddos. Usually I get on Inforoo at work, but the nuns have caught on to me and block the website now and I have to press that button that says I am using it for work related purposes, which gains me about 2 minutes of access at a time. I can't use the "quote" button either most of the time, so please forgive the way I am quoting people.
K-dogg: "I believe EAP was the Inspector. There was a guaranteed possibility of a real Inspector discrediting her claims. As Inspector, EAP definitely would have had knowledge about the status of one player. At the time she wrote that post, there were four people voting for EAP: Jack LLL NoAge Sarah"
I already explained why I chose EAP, you can refer back to that post of mine if you have any further questions. In hindsight, it may have been a mistake, but a first round run-off doesn't give you much to work with and I'm one of those people who aces all of her tests because I go with my gut and I don't change my answers unless I have REALLY REALLY strong contradictory evidence. You may not appreciate it, buy my GPA always did. And so I stuck with my first choice, for the reasons outlined in that post.
Also, the second run-off only provides a player with two choices. I don't see how you continue to ignore that fact. You were among the group who stacked votes very very heavily on a brand new player. It may very well be that ALL THREE MAFIA knew that Sarah was an easy pick off and stacked their votes against her. Or that EAP was Mafia trying to play the Inspector game and her two Mafia partners voted against Sarah, causing an imbalance in the number of votes for Sarah.
I'd like to note that one of the players who seems very very sure that EAP was not Inspector also voted for EAP. I don't know if they are Inspector or Mafia, but I'm pretty sure they are one or the other.
Also note this quote by K-dogg
Re: MAFIA 36!!! « Reply #238 on May 23, 2011, 1:54pm »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I still stand by asking about Jack or NoAge, or possibly using a guess to get to the bottom of the Bek/quacker situation.
Of course, I'm the Inspector just talking to myself and thinking out loud here.
C'mon Mafia, you know you want to whack me tonight... you're not going to like me any better in Day Two"
Awfully bold statment here. I can't tell if you are being gamey, trying to pull the Inspector card, or trying to protect EAP because you assumed that they were coming after her because she insinuated that she was Inspector.
There are multiple players trying to be crafty here. I'm not sure who is on which team though. However, as per this prior post of mine
Re: MAFIA 36!!! « Reply #258 Yesterday at 4:45am »
Yesterday at 3:58am, Mr. Forward wrote:EAP's voting record EAP >>> Jack >>> NoAge >>> null >>> Sarah
If EAP was Inspector (I hope not, because I'm going to feel pretty sh*tty having voted for her over a player that I am sure was a townsperson as well, but not as beneficial to have around as the Inspector ), yet I digress.
Anyways, if EAP was Inspector, I would imagine that one of her votes had to be the Mafia name she had in her possession. In a first round where so many players were changing their votes over and over again with little real rhyme or reason, it would have been easy, likely, untraceable and non-suspcious for her to vote for the name she had in hand. I could see that in a voting round that did not include such flip-flopping, the Inspector would have to lay low, stick with their voting partner initially so as not to raise any Mafia eye-brows.
The No Age and Jack vote and the mention of possibly voting for Quacker make me go "Hmmmmmmm". I think the Sarah vote was more of a "save yourself" vote, but that would be a name to consider as well. Not that it would matter much now that she is gone.
I 100% believe that in a first round with so many vote changes that EAP voted for the name she had in hand. I would bet a beer on it if not for that fact that I think Kdogg is with me on this. It is because of this that I say
We're all a mess of paradoxes. Believing in things we know can't be true. We walk around carrying feelings too complicated and contradictory to express. But when it all becomes too big, and words aren't enough to help get it all out, there's always music.
I must say that this Kdogg v NBF title fight is fascinating. This Battle Royale is going to give me some things to think about. Like what your disagreement represents:
I wouldn't be that certain. I got into a pretty lengthy debate with EAP a view games back and we both ended up being townspeople.
Speaking of which, I'm really having trouble with her silence at the end of round 1. I'm about 70/30 on her being inspector. It just seems so odd that she would just withdrawal like that. It's not like several players hadn't acknowledged what she was hinting at. She had to have known the Mafia would whack her. Why not just come forth and make the name she was given known.
Is it fair to assume that "inspector" EAP's silence points to Sarah as the name she got? Maybe she thought laying low might get her through the round? Hmmmm.
Last Edit: May 26, 2011 22:29:08 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
And LLL, I've been meaning to compliment you on your new avatar but get lost in the cornfield by the time I finish my post. I have a cousin with a nose that looks just like that!
Post by NothingButFlowers on May 26, 2011 23:02:35 GMT -5
As far as the inspector voting for the person whose name they have, I will say again, I went back through a lot of games today and it is very, very rare for the inspector's initial vote to be for the name they have. However, EAP did do it in both of the games that she was the inspector, although in the second, she voted HGH, who at that time, I think was her regular voting partner.
I appreciate your research and I'm keeping it in mind. That's about all we have because we obviously don't know what the whole truth is. I guess I'm just a little torn on what to do. I'm probable go with what my gut has told me for awhile, unless something new comes to the surface very soon.
As far as the inspector voting for the person whose name they have, I will say again, I went back through a lot of games today and it is very, very rare for the inspector's initial vote to be for the name they have. However, EAP did do it in both of the games that she was the inspector, although in the second, she voted HGH, who at that time, I think was her regular voting partner.
I wouldn't be that certain. I got into a pretty lengthy debate with EAP a view games back and we both ended up being townspeople.
Yeah, I've seen that happen a number of times. It really wouldn't shock me if kdogg is not mafia, but I don't necessarily think that Jack is either.
I'm not certain on either. They've both made some compelling points but have also both made some rather odd commits, some of which you have already brought up. That might be due to over reacting because they know they are in danger. I'm going to scan back over before I commit further.
Bacon, I plan on voting tonight. No worries.
Last Edit: May 26, 2011 23:17:49 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
Kdogg, while I think you are dead on for many points, you are way off on suspecting me. All I did was change my vote after Sarah suggested it. I stuck with it because I really didn't know who else to vote for. If I was Mafia, there is no way I would have voted off EAP after she was not killed in the normal vote. It would make me look like a suspect.
kdogg, I don't know exactly why you can't understand the difference between thinking you are guilty and just being suspicious of you. You make it sound as though I have my mind totally made up when I've tried very hard to make it clear that I do not. I have suspicions, but I'm not positive that you are guilty.
And as for you getting killed and needing to be avenged, I think you're a bit premature, as right now, you only have two votes against you while Jack has three.
Suspicions are expressed in one's words; who one thinks is guilty is expressed in votes.
You said you think that EAP was the Inspector. EAP specifically named four players and said one of them was definitely Mafia. You might not be able to trust me, sure. I should hope that you should at least be able to better trust the player you are claiming you believe to be Inspector. In fact, I should hope you should trust EAP more than anyone here. Your vote does not reflect your words, however, and I have yet to receive an adequate explanation from you on this.
You had eight options, three of them being EAP's named players... yet you chose me. You willingly ignored a whacked Inspector's declaration and opted to go after me instead. It's not like you were forced to choose between myself and Jack in the runoff. The field was wide the fuck open when you voted for me.
Your words say you believe that EAP was the Inspector, but even when the field was wide open, you chose NOT to put your vote where your mouth is. You chose to put me in this runoff in lieu of what I (AND THE DEAD INSPECTOR) believe were more likely options. As such, I do not feel out of line subjecting you to greater scrutiny than other players. You have more than earned it in my eyes. I am in this runoff, yes... and I am here because of you. Don't think that I don't realize this.
What is it about me that makes me MORE suspicious than a group of players named by a whacked Inspector as definitely including a member of the Mafia? Why do you NOT want to go after a group of players named by a whacked Inspector as definitely including a member of the Mafia?
As for why I am suspicious of you, I tried to make it clear, but apparently I did not. I was/am suspicious of you because you took EAP's one vote for Jack and built a whole case around it, which seemed to be trying to direct other people's votes to another player based on almost no evidence. I know that you have said that you thought at the time that EAP's vote for Jack was the most important thing, but if that's true, that seems like pretty sloppy thinking.
Hey now, give me fair credit. My thoughts on Jack's guilt aren't bad. What you take issue with here is that my thinking there, as of when I posted it, was simply incomplete. My posts earlier today were an attempt to rectify this. Incomplete, yes; sloppy, no.
However, I will say that I went further back. It's very rare for an inspector to vote for the person whose name he or she had in the first round, but EAP did it in both of the previous games in which she was inspector. (Actually, kdogg did it in at least one game when he was the inspector too.)
So, are you FINALLY willing to admit there might be a flaw to your logic?
I ask you again, NBF: if you believe that EAP was the Inspector, and you saw EAP name (at least) one of four players as definitely Mafia... why did you not trust dead Inspector EAP enough to trust your vote to her recommendations?
Re: MAFIA 36!!! « Reply #238 on May 23, 2011, 1:54pm »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I still stand by asking about Jack or NoAge, or possibly using a guess to get to the bottom of the Bek/quacker situation.
Of course, I'm the Inspector just talking to myself and thinking out loud here.
C'mon Mafia, you know you want to whack me tonight... you're not going to like me any better in Day Two"
Awfully bold statment here. I can't tell if you are being gamey, trying to pull the Inspector card, or trying to protect EAP because you assumed that they were coming after her because she insinuated that she was Inspector.
My answer is in my emphasis.
I am not this game's Inspector, but I was willing to jump on a grenade for this game's Inspector. I did what I could.
While EAP was alive, I tried to be discrete about sharing what she had said. Y'all did notice my Dumbo picture back there doubled as a link to the post where she mentioned it, right? Y'all saw me post the WWII-era "Loose Lips Sink Ships" poster, right? I do believe I was the first to pick up on that, and I didn't want to be too obvious about it. I was trying to be discrete about it, and encourage others to do the same. My post history shows that. Unfortunately, EAP still wound up dead.
Post by NothingButFlowers on May 27, 2011 0:09:20 GMT -5
Okay, kdogg, you want to know why I don't trust you? It's because of stuff like this. In post # 289, when discussing EAP's posts, you quoted her as saying this:
based on kdogg's explanation, one of the people who voted for me is DEFINITELY mafia.
When making your point, you took out the fact that she referred to you, which makes me suspicious that you were trying not to draw attention to that fact.
So, when I see stuff like this, it's hard for me to trust anything you say. Sorry if that bothers you, but that's the way it is.
You do realize that post occurred when she was still trying to hide her role, right? That I had written a post (the "double positive on Sarah" one) supporting her point of view without mentioning that I had a hunch about her role? In fact, that was the first post I wrote after I realized what EAP was trying to say.
I told you I was trying to be discrete about it, and it's not like EAP was going to step up and say "forget what kdogg says about Sarah, I know X is Mafia because I'm the Inspector."
I'm sorry it looks suspicious, but I was trying not to draw too much attention to the fact that EAP was Inspector.
Why do you say you think she was Inspector at the same time you're accusing me of being possibly in cahoots with her? How could EAP & I be Mafia in cahoots when you think EAP is the Inspector and not Mafia? How do you reconcile your suspicion of me with your belief that EAP was an innocent Inspector?
Okay, kdogg, you want to know why I don't trust you? It's because of stuff like this. In post # 289, when discussing EAP's posts, you quoted her as saying this:
based on kdogg's explanation, one of the people who voted for me is DEFINITELY mafia.
When making your point, you took out the fact that she referred to you, which makes me suspicious that you were trying not to draw attention to that fact.
So, when I see stuff like this, it's hard for me to trust anything you say. Sorry if that bothers you, but that's the way it is.
This kind of stuff bothers me too.
Like his post above where he talks about the links to the dumbo pic, etc. He says he was trying to be discrete about being the first to know about EAP. He flat out says he thinks EAP is the inspector 4 hours after posting the pic of Dumbo? That was before Bek and Jhamm voted. I don't know. It just sort of weirds me out and keeps me from casting my vote.
Maybe it's just all the flip flopping in the game and it's just hard to keep things strait. I know I'm having trouble keeping facts strait. It's just frustrating.
I see absolutely nothing here that gives any explanation as to what I've done to arouse your suspicion.
You don't have to actively DO anything to arouse my suspicion, if you passively receive a vote from the right player.
Simply put, Jack: I think what we have here is an Inspector that had your name, and perhaps you belong in Sarah's place. Either of these two, actually.
Edit: added quote and a little whining to piss off Bacon.
Last Edit: May 27, 2011 0:47:19 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
Post by NothingButFlowers on May 27, 2011 0:44:40 GMT -5
Like that. You just twisted my words completely. I did not say at all that I thought you and EAP were mafia in cahoots. My point was that EAP made a statement in which she specifically based her reasoning on something you had said and you quoted her but omitted the reference to yourself. My point had nothing to do with the possibility of you two working together. My point was that I thought you omitted the reference to you because you didn't want people to see how you had influenced her thinking. Not secret mafia in cahoots influence, public in the game influence. Because you do try to manipulate things. You are constantly telling people that they should vote a certain way (as in, a vote for jack means you believe eap was not inspector and a vote for kdogg means you think she was). I absolutely am open to hearing everybody's viewpoint, including yours, but at the end of the day, I'm going to make my own decisions about who to vote for, and I am naturally going to distrust anybody who tells me that I should just vote the way that person thinks I should vote.
As someone you have targeted for elimination, I think I deserve the right to confront my accuser(s). I don't think it's out of line for me to ask questions and get answers with an open mind. You're ignoring my questions and instead slinging more accusations at me.
This isn't how people mutually enter a discussion with open minds, so I'm not really believing you when you say this.
Now, for the 3rd, 4th, 5th, whichever fucking number of times you've refused to answer the question is... could you please explain to me why you think EAP is innocent yet presume I am guilty because of my association with her?
May I further ask how the omission of "based on kdogg's explanation" in EAP's post/quote alters the specific knowledge she received at the onset of the game? I don't think the conclusions reached would be that different from one another, "based on kdogg's explanation" or not. That statement, in full or in part, has the same conclusion either way, does it not? Someone please explain to me why this is relevant when it does not fundamentally alter the conclusions reached. The way I see it, either way you phrase this post points to the SAME FOUR PLAYERS. Now why the hell do y'all think I'm guilty for essentially saying the same thing our Inspector did?
Shouldn't the fact that a whacked Inspector is siding with me tell you something, too?
May I further ask how the omission of "based on kdogg's explanation" in EAP's post/quote alters the specific knowledge she received at the onset of the game?
You know that wasn't her point, so why even ask that? Her point, as I understand it, was simple. It's a little shady to try to attribute something directly to another player and omit your name from the same sentence you are quoting.
It doesn't make you guilty. It just seems a odd. Even if your omited sections of a sentence to drive a point home to your fellow townspeople, it's still shady. Plus, we don't KNOW EAP was inspector. We can only take from her posts. Her agreeing with you isn't hard proof of anything.
I was planing on voting Jack before the round started. I'm pretty sure I'm the first person to bring him up as in anyway suspect. The only reason I haven't voted are the things like what NBF and I (in my last post) have brought up. You are going a little over board on some stuff. Just sayin'
Last Edit: May 27, 2011 1:43:18 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
May I further ask how the omission of "based on kdogg's explanation" in EAP's post/quote alters the specific knowledge she received at the onset of the game?
You know that wasn't her point, so why even ask that? Her point, as I understand it, was simple. It's a little shady to try to attribute something directly to another player and omit your name from the same sentence you are quoting.
It doesn't make you guilty. It just seems a odd. Even if your omited sections of a sentence to drive a point home to your fellow townspeople, it's still shady. Plus, we don't KNOW EAP was inspector. We can only take from her posts. Her agreeing with you isn't hard proof of anything.
I was planing on voting Jack before the round started. I'm pretty sure I'm the first person to bring him up as in anyway suspect. The only reason I haven't voted are the things like what NBF and I (in my last post) have brought up. You are going a little over board on some stuff. Just sayin'
I am still asking y'all to tell me what difference it makes. Look, I understand why you think this looks suspicious. I'm asking you to look at whether what we're wasting so much time arguing makes a lick of difference to the game.
i'm nulling my vote until someone gets some sense.
THANK YOU KDOGG. i promise you guys i am not leading you astray.
i would actually like to propose that bek change her vote to sarah. i think that quacker is just being kind of out there (sorry dude ) and is just saying what he thinks first. i don't think he's really done anything too suspicious (yet???).
based on kdogg's explanation, one of the people who voted for me is DEFINITELY mafia.
bacon i think it obvious who i will vote for, but can we please wait for bek and quacker jhammet to check back in????
EDIT: sorry, meant to put jhammet instead of quacker, to respond to kdogg's request.
I think it's fairly apparent to any player who wants to quote this that you're going to have to pare this entire post down to get your point. We all know what it's like to quote another's post. I read until I got to the point I was trying to make, highlighted everything from that point back to the beginning of the quote command & deleted it. Then I highlighted everything after the post & deleted it too. NBF, you of all people know what I'm talking about. You just did it yourself.
As far as whether or not we know EAP is Mafia... c'mon, man. It has been pointed out several times, and not solely by myself, that there was definitely definitely definitely an Inspector alive when EAP made her claim. Nobody alive (which was everybody at that point) stepped up to do anything. Nor have we seen, as we normally would, an instance of anyone trying to make a competing Inspector claim this round now that EAP is dead. That just supports my point - I would imagine we'd have seen something drastic and Inspector related otherwise. Not to mention the fact that innocents get whacked in Night One so frequently that it's assumed to be the case every other time it happens - and I can't think of an example of Mafia whacking themselves in the night this early either. Can anyone else?
Now, can someone who is riding my ass about this issue please explain the difference between this...
one of the people who voted for me is DEFINITELY mafia.
The same four players are pointed to either way you say it. There is not one possibility present in one phrasing which is excluded from the other. Any of you looking at this with an open mind will find the same thing, unless you have an agenda. The only thing I am guilty of is being careless with how I edited the post. Unless someone has a logical, reasonable explanation as to what difference this actually makes in the message conveyed or its strategic implications - and it does not - you are wasting your time here.
Now, to show just how harmless this statement is - I wholeheartedly endorse either version, truth be told - I'm going to repeat it until y'all are sick of it:
We're all a mess of paradoxes. Believing in things we know can't be true. We walk around carrying feelings too complicated and contradictory to express. But when it all becomes too big, and words aren't enough to help get it all out, there's always music.
We're all a mess of paradoxes. Believing in things we know can't be true. We walk around carrying feelings too complicated and contradictory to express. But when it all becomes too big, and words aren't enough to help get it all out, there's always music.
:format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(40)/discogs-images/R-1417367-1217939740.jpeg.jpg)
) and is just saying what he thinks first. i don't think he's really done anything too suspicious (yet???).
