{Watch List} gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807
Register

User Tag List

Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. ISO #1

    gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    Account Name: gftgy
    Account ID: 1-S2-1-564449
    In-Game Name: Ercole Rizzo

    Account Name: Human
    Account ID: 1-S2-1-7818686
    In-Game Name: Michelagelo Pesci

    Crimes Committed: Griefing/Reactionary Game-Throwing

    Your Account Name: coffeeclubbr
    Summary: Tried to get the diablo killed, and offered no defense when trialed themselves.
    A few more people could be added but evidence isn't as definitive (no trial)
    Attached Files Attached Files

  2. ISO #2

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686

    SC ID Verification
    gftgy: Correct: 1-S2-1-564449
    Human: Correct: 1-S2-1-7818686

    Players Added to Report
    EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    Respective Hotkeys
    gftgy: Control + 4
    Human: 3
    EpicTimes: 8

    Was the Game Result Altered?
    Yes - they all griefed the player purely because of a Diablo model, and gftgy went out of their way to not help the Town when they were voted up.

    Previous Offenses
    gftgy: N/A

    Human:
    Leave Train (Watch-list x2)
    Leave Train (On-Hold)

    EpicTimes: N/A

    Player Offenses
    gftgy: Griefing, Reactionary Gamethrowing
    Human: Griefing (minor)
    EpicTimes: Griefing


    Summary
    There are only 13 players so they roll a 8-3-2 setup.
    gftgy rolls Doctor in slot 10, Human rolls Bus Driver in slot 13, and EpicTimes roll Crier in slot 4.

    Day 1, #8 has a Diablo model - this prompts some of the Townies to find the Diablo and lynch purely out of his model. However, EpicTimes went too far to the point were he literally says "lynch #8".
    Night 1, EpicTimes speaks during the night saying to lynch #8 for no reason other than because #8 is using a Diablo model. However, EpicTimes is shot that night and died. gftgy also heals #11 and Human swaps himself with #3.

    Day 2, people start voting up #8 purely on the basis that he has a Diablo model but he is not put to trial, even though a Sheriff claimed and said that he was non-suspicious. gftgy continues to push this facade, but nobody is lynched that day.
    Night 2, gftgy heals 6 and Human busses himself with #1.

    Day 3, they continue the same thing with #8, but they all get enough votes to put up gftgy to trial. He does not claim a role nor post his last will, as his defense was:

    "y'all would rather lynch me than the demon?"
    "what's wrong with this picture?"
    "he was in the hotseat yesterday and today"
    "and still no role"
    "yet you demand one from me?"
    "HE'S THE DEMON"
    "THAT IS ALL I NEED TO KNOW TO LYNCH HIM"
    "And if me wanting to lynch the demon"
    "is all you need to know to lynch me"
    "then do what you must"

    gftgy is voted Guilty by a 5-3 margin and flip Doctor.

    Night 3, Human swaps himself with #5. He also writes "Do not type last will here." in hist last will before night's end.

    Day 4, there are 3 Mafia vs 1 Mass Murderer vs 1 Survivor vs 2 Townies remaining. People vote up Human because the Town assumes that #13 is Mafia, and he is put to trial. He claims Survivor, saying "come attack me tonight" "i can prove it", however #9 counters his claim and Human is lynched due to that by a 6-0 margin, who flip Bus Driver.

    The game plays normal after that, with the Mafia having the majority and lynches the last Townie (Lookout), and then they kill the Survivor the following the night and lynch the Mass Murderer who could not get a single kill in the whole game. The game ends in perfect Mafia victory.

    ----

    EpicTimes, gftgy, and Human all clearly were part of the system to vote up someone purely because of a model that they wore and pushed on him for no reason. The fact that EpicTimes made himself obvious when saying "lets lynch #8" which explains why he got killed that night during the day and the night before the actions occurred (given #8 was Mafia). While the argument could be that they thought #8 was Mafia, I feel they were trolling the game and just found it more interesting to lynch someone purely over a model.

    gftgy also threw in reaction when voted up, refusing to go to the point of helping the Town despite being an important role and continued pushing on the same matter for no good reason on Day 2 and 3, which explains his lynch.

    I don't think Human gamethrew, there was a point where it was virtually two Townies and he had zero chances of winning, so he was using a strategy to claim Survivor and ask to be shot so he can swap himself with another player (which could be Mafia), but didn't work out as the actual Survivor counterclaimed. However, he was definitely part of the #8 lynch for the two days but stopped after that, and did not push it as much as the other two did. While he has 2 previous offenses I believe Watch-list x3 is more appropriate as this is much less severe, but still Griefing.


    Recommended Action(s)
    gftgy: Watch-list x2
    Human: Watch-list x3
    EpicTimes: On-Hold

    Additional Comments
    Thank you for this report!
    Last edited by Alright; April 12th, 2017 at 06:45 PM.

  3. ISO #3

  4. ISO #4

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    I understand that watch-list doesn't have any practical effect, but I am loathe to be labeled a potential toublemaker and I appeal this verdict on principle. I have over 800 games played (500 on this computer), and the fact that this is my first report should speak volumes to both my gameplay experience as well as attest to how I conduct myself in the game. Based on Alright's stated reasons for the verdict, it is apparent to me that they did not understand my actual intentions and reasoning in the game, which I will do my best to convey properly here. If possible, I would like to request SuperJack to handle my appeal, as I trust their understanding of meta-gameplay elements, which is key to my appeal.


    Firstly, this opinion may be unpopular, but I want to enter into evidence that the avatar one chooses - much like their name - can actually have an impact on the game. Some avatars may have a negligible impact (e. g. Hunk), while others, like the Demon here, will often have a considerable impact. In this replay, this is immediately proven at the start of Day 1, where no fewer than four people express an interest in the Diablo's death, even before any night actions have taken place. Other possible examples of an avatar impacting the game is someone with a basic male or female avatar pretending to be new, or someone making an authoritative appeal to their experience by showcasing a Protoss avatar, both of which are established tactics in SC2Mafia. Thus, regardless of the more traditional gameplay reasons I will now expand upon, I want to make it clear that I wholly reject Alright's notion that a decision should not be apparently influenced by someone's choice of an avatar. If, as moderators of the game, you feel strongly that avatars should not be considered in gameplay decisionmaking, I suggest you remove the offending avatars entirely, rather than attempt to change human nature (the observation and manipulation of which is, after all, the core gameplay element in Mafia).

    With that in mind, let’s recap the game. As the replay will show, at the start of the game I check the Help Menu to see the point distribution (and familiar faces) of players, which will shape my tactics and how I behave in this game.

    Day 1, three others (Dr. Progesss, bruh, and Dr. Prognosis, in that order) declare their dissatisfaction with the Diablo avatar. As far as I am concerned, the game has already started, even if nightfall hasn’t occurred. Exactly zero other sentiments have been expressed at this point, so I become the fourth person to share the same. In other games during the first day, sometimes people will lie and say that they’re the Godfather, others mention their favorite music; I’m personally fond of the “let’s lynch Diablo” tactic. This is Mafia gameplay.

    Night 1, the Crier/Judge (unknown at this time) further expresses that the Diablo, player 8, should be lynched come daytime. This is potentially Five persons with a publicly stated interest in lynching Diablo, possibly including a Judge. At this point, I have no way to know whether Diablo is good or evil, but I’m immediately thinking about how I can potentially manipulate the possible judge to lynch a fellow evil if I come to suspect Diablo of being one.

    Day 2, Dr. Prognosis is dead. bruh says that 8 is not suspicious. I actually state that I don’t think 8 is the Diablo, but that I would like to put 8 on trial, anyway. (If I recall correctly, my intuition at this time suggested that 8 may have been the Judge.) [At this point, Dr. Progress helpfully informs me that the player circle always starts at the very right with player 1, therefore making 8 at the very left the Diablo - something I had actually never figured out on my own despite my number of games played.] 8 defends himself by saying that I am trying to randomly lynch a ns person, and because I am interested in pushing 8 to trial, I try to manipulate public opinion which believes both that 8 is the demon, and has a stated interest in the demon dying. 8 receives 5 of the 6 votes needed for trial, as a couple other people have expressed their interest in lynching the Diablo, but successfully escapes into the night without being placed on trial. At this point, based on what 8 has said in chat thus far, that 8 was not voted up despite the court of public opinion, that 8 is apparently Diablo and that someone who wanted to lynch Diablo was shot by the Mafia, and that 8 was found not suspicious by bruh, I suspect that 8 is the Godfather, which I publicly claim before the day ends. To expand upon this, if the Diablo were not Mafia, I surmise that the Mafia would have wanted all townspeople interested in lynching Diablo alive, so as to prompt the town to mislynch Diablo, keeping Mafia safe. More damningly, if the Diablo were not Mafia, the Mafia would have every interest in following the publicly stated town interest and lynching (or at least voting up) the Diablo. Neither of these happened, so I presume that the Diablo is a member of the Mafia.

    To drive home this point, by the second day, I have CORRECTLY pinpointed a Mafia member based entirely on social cues and a sheriff’s claim that they were not suspicious.

    Night 2, There is no disturbing of the peace, but the Neutral Evil is still unaccounted for making Judge still possible. An Investigator AFK-suicides (this is important and not mentioned in Alright's summary), and bruh, another vocal proponent of lynching Diablo is shot by the Mafia.

    Day 3, At this point, with bruh dead, if I wasn’t sure that the Diablo was a member of the Mafia before, I am now. I push to have him lynched, but I am instead voted up by all four evils, and a couple naïve town members. This is where I really have a problem, because since I am on trial and Agosto suicided last night, there are only four town remaining to vote for my innocence, meanwhile there are four evils I can count on to vote against me, and a neutral benign. No invests have spoken up at this point, and two are in the graveyard, so I assume that none exist, making the sole town random likely a protective role. (This is my save, so I have the advantage of knowing the probabilities.) If I reveal as a doctor (for which I have no proof), the other two presumed protective roles will be doubtful, and if either speak up that they themselves are protective roles, I am certainly doomed. Furthermore, as far as I know, a Judge is fairly likely as there have been no kills from the neutral evil, no audits, no witching, and cult probability is too low to be worth considering (~4%), potentially resulting in myself being courted as soon as I reveal as town. Further still, even if I survive my trial, I can expect to be promptly murdered at night after revealing as a doctor. Since the town gov is dead, I can’t pray for a Mayor reveal to save me. My only hope for a successful defense is to deflect back onto 8, who has not defended himself at all this game other than to point towards me, and pray that the neutral benign would join my cause. This was a game-deciding moment that I did not take lightly (and it's only Day 3!), and I maintain that I provided the best defense I could have, given the circumstances. I am convicted guilty by a vote of 5 to 3, with one abstention from an AFK vigilante, who consequently suicides at night (also missing from Alright's summary). I successfully managed to convince the neutral benign to vote with me, and all (present) town except the one who has written this report.

    If coffeeclubbr had voted innocent with the rest of the town, I would have been saved, and the town potentially victorious. Considering that theirs was literally the only deciding vote, as all four evils were naturally voting guilty, this report is tainted by a clear conflict of interest. Furthermore, a review of this save from coffeeclubbr's perspective shows that they are already convinced that 8 cannot be Mafia, as they have updated their last will to say so. Therefore, with 20/20 hindsight, I believe that there is absolutely nothing I could have said to make coffeeclubbr think 8 was evil to save the town.

    In the graveyard, I am immediately told that it was a good defense, so I actually take offense to being reported for “game-throwing” and “offering no defense when trialed.” To lend credence to everything I’ve stated above, and that I haven’t just made it up to defend this report, I even explain that I couldn’t have revealed as a doctor in the graveyard of this replay, while several people, including the still-alive survivor, state that it was obvious that 8 was a member of the Mafia, so I find it shortsighted that Alright assumes we had no basis to push for a lynch, particularly after both investigative roles and the town gov turned up dead. Surely Alright doesn't expect town to just sit around and die?

    At any rate, I object to being reported for “griefing” for my (otherwise successful) attempt to have a Mafia member lynched, and I object to being reported for “gamethrowing” by the one townsperson that didn’t recognize an evil and was arguably the consequent cause of our loss. Additionally, I expressly state in the replay that I am actually targeting player 8 specifically when I am unaware that they are the demon, and my behavior remained consistent with my goals and knowledge as clarified in this post.

    So aside from the question to staff about my appeal, the question I have after all this is: Did coffeeclubbr even notice after the game that 8 was Mafia when they wrote this report?

    EDIT: Went overboard with the colors for clarity because I'm really worked up about my first report. I figured in a game like this it had to happen sometime, as emotions often run high, but I really think the verdict was delivered without a complete analyses of the situation.

    EDIT EDIT: Oh god what have I done. I'll fix this, I swear!

    EDIT EDIT EDIT:
    Account Name: gftgy
    Account ID: 1-S2-1-564449

    Crimes Committed: Color Abuse
    Last edited by gftgy; April 17th, 2017 at 02:19 PM.

  5. ISO #5

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    As an addendum, I think it would also be appropriate to remove Human's Watch-List, as after viewing the full replay, they seem fully cognizant that 8 was Mafia, explaining their desire to lynch 8, and only stopped attempting to lynch the Mafia when Evils took the majority, thereby aiming to avoid being lynched in the hope of bussing Mafia into killing themselves to claw back to a town victory. Human erasing his last will is not an indication of griefing or game-throwing, as last wills typically help the majority, which town was no longer a part of. I will frequently amend or erase my last will when town loses its majority if I am hoping that town might still win, and I don't think it is relevant to to be included in the report.

    In short, by the third day everyone except the person making this report realized that 8 was a member of the Mafia. Considering that there were fewer than 9 town to begin with, and that two town AFK-suicided, it is incredibly disingenuous to place any amount of blame on the players who cooperatively attempted to properly lynch the Mafia, according to their win-condition. If there must be blood for this game, it should be from the two townspeople that AFKed, or from the one townsperson that worked against the town and wrote this report.

    (I'm not actually insinuating that their should be blood. This is Mafia and gambits fail all the time. coffeeclubbr was manipulated by the Mafia as was appropriate for Mafia's goals. I'm just upset that they didn't realize it even after the game ended, and that they decided to report everyone else for what I would consider their own shortcoming, and that we have been summarily punished for it.
    Last edited by gftgy; April 17th, 2017 at 03:05 AM.

  6. ISO #6

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    Quote Originally Posted by gftgy View Post
    If I reveal as a doctor, the other two protective roles will be doubtful, and if either speak up that they themselves are protective roles, I am certainly doomed. Furthermore, as far as I know, a Judge is fairly likely as there have been no kills from the evil, no audits, and cult is incredibly unlikely, potentially resulting my myself being courted as soon as I reveal as town. Furthermore, even if I survive my trial, I can expect to be promptly murdered at night after revealing as a doctor.
    I operate on the basis that the role and last will should be the FIRST thing somebody offers when they are voted up. Your reasons for not providing it are stretches at best.
    To your first point, if only one prot spoke up, you can claim second prot. If two prots speak up, you can claim town random.
    To your second point, surviving trial and getting killed at night is MUCH better then getting lynched, and somebody else getting killed at night.

    Furthermore, it was clear there was a split between you and 8. Clearly either the evils were driving attention away from themselves by lynching the demon, or the evils were trying to protect their fellow mafia (8). If you were to claim doc and get voted innocent, I as a lookout would have a good chance of finding a killer if I was to watch you the following night. As such, I would likely have voted innocent.

    Basically, by not giving your role and LW you made me sure that it was the evils trying to waste the town's time by lynching the demon.

    EDIT:
    Quote Originally Posted by gftgy View Post
    If coffeeclubbr had voted innocent with the rest of the (present) town, I would have been saved, and the town potentially victorious. Considering that theirs was literally the only deciding vote, as all other evils were naturally voting guilty, this report is tainted by a clear conflict of interest.
    This logic is somewhat in reverse. The lack of a "normal" defense while you were on trial ultimately lead me to vote guilty, so any conflict-of-interest (which I don't believe there is as the report is independently reviewed) would be created by your actions.
    Last edited by coffeeclubbr; April 17th, 2017 at 03:48 AM.

  7. ISO #7

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    Hi, coffee! Thanks for chiming back in!

    As you've just stated, you believe that I should have behaved differently so that the game could have proceeded according to your expectations. You're upset because you didn't like the way I played the game, and want to blame me for our loss, despite that two townspeople AFK-suicided and that you were the only person who didn't realize 8 was evil. You're claiming that I gamethrew because I didn't offer a sufficient defense to be voted innocent, when yours was the only vote that determined my guilt; thereby meaning you chose whether I was found guilty or innocent, and now you are attempting to punish me because I was found guilty. That is a textbook case of conflict of interest, where you are seeking to derive benefit (my punishment) from actions or decisions made in your official capacity (you voting me guilty). If we take the more liberal definition of "a situation in which the concerns or aims of two different parties are incompatible," it is abundantly clear by your reply that we took different approaches to playing this game, and that you view mine as incompatible.

    You're really not being fair to me here, saying that I should have acted in a very specific manner to achieve a very specific result through a very specific set of circumstances where any number of things can (and did) go wrong. I'm not psychic, I can't know for certain how you would react to something. I didn't even know you were the person I had to convince (I thought you were probably an evil!) Even if I did know how you would react, I still have to weigh that against how I think others would react. Add this to the immediate time pressure I was faced with, as me being put on trial was remarkably sudden, and I would challenge anyone to do better. I had to go through all of the reasoning I outlined above in seconds and formulate a winning defense with a losing set of cards. I'm sure you could have done it, but maybe I just haven't gotten as good as you in the ~650 more games I've played.

    I disagree with the piddling conjectures you've made in an attempt to refute my appeal. They are overall ignoble, and do not shake the core claims of my appeal. I don't see any benefit in trivializing this argument to petty hypotheticals when you neglected to answer whether you even knew 8 was a member of the Mafia when you wrote this report.

    Regardless, I feel I have sufficiently defended my position, both with regards to topicality and with refuting the claims made against me with concrete evidence taken from the replay itself. You can speak about how you would have reacted differently had I behaved in your expected manner, but that only A: proves the conflict of interest, B: neglects the fundamental aspects of Mafia (that people won't always behave as you expect), and C: ignores that every other present townsperson and the neutral benign voted for my innocence, which is the "proof in the pudding" that my actions did not constitute gamethrowing.

  8. ISO #8

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    Quote Originally Posted by gftgy View Post
    You're really not being fair to me here, saying that I should have acted in a very specific manner to achieve a very specific result through a very specific set of circumstances where any number of things can (and did) go wrong.
    While I get your point, it would be a stretch to say that giving a role and last will while on defense is some sort of very specific defense.

  9. ISO #9

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    You really have it out for me, huh? Everything is a "stretch," right?

    Firstly, I never said "very specific defense," since you not viewing things from my perspective is crucial to the case at hand, it is apparent I may need to correct your comprehensive mistakes.

    Secondy, "providing my role and last will as the FIRST part of my defense" is very specific. Traditional, perhaps, but remarkably specific. I don't want to be mean to you here, since you were also confused by the conflict of interest, but is English your second language? And did you or did you not realize that 8 was a member of the Mafia when you wrote this report?

    At this point, I have spent an inordinate amount of time refuting a half-true and misleading report that was a single sentence long. You've taken time from me, the staff, and sullied the reputation of myself and Human. If you have nothing concrete to add to this discussion, I would request that you keep the rest to yourself and let the moderators handle it from here.

  10. ISO #10

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    I will be marking this under Audit and someone will take a further look as this appeal seems pretty legitimate and it's obvious time has been put into it.

    However,
    Quote Originally Posted by gftgy View Post
    If possible, I would like to request SuperJack to handle my appeal, as I trust their understanding of meta-gameplay elements, which is key to my appeal.
    you do not have the choice as to who takes a look at this appeal.

    On another note, sometimes things happen and it's important to keep in mind that someone reporting you does not mean you're a bad person/player.
    Quote Originally Posted by AnassRhamur View Post
    Please don't post in the punished players section if you're not involved. Consider this a warning from Thugnificent. You got one Thug ticket. Collect 3 more of those and i'll have to issue a Thug Infraction. Collect 3 Thug Infractions and you get 1 Thug Misdemeanor Charge.

    Spoiler : :
    Citizen, Agent, Citizen, Vigilante, Citizen, Godfather, Citizen, Citizen, Voter, Elder, Mafioso, BackUpSleuth, Escort, Mafioso, Detective, Citizen, Citizen, Tailor, Citizen, Citizen, Citizen, Citizen, Citizen, Citizen, TheJoker, Citizen, LadyGaga, Mafioso, Winston Wolfe, Detective, Citizen, Citizen, Masquerader

  11. ISO #11

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    I was apparently mistaken that being on the watch-list has no practical effect. I'm used to flying under the radar and receiving very little attention before or after a match, or from one match to the next. (Like I said, this is my first report in 800 games played. That's probably a record.) However being on the watch-list for game-throwing seems to be bringing a lot of attention I'm otherwise unaccustomed to, as I found myself accused of griefing/trolling, gamethrowing, and skyping all in a single night, none of which are activities I partake in, and being harassed after games (which is something I have never had occur). For whatever reason, players tormented me for the actions of another player, apparently not even bothering to check who I was after the match. This negatively impacts my ability to play the game, as it's difficult to not let someone's in-game taunts regarding the previous game affect my judgment, and being bullied is rarely exactly "fun."

    Arguably, it's a meta-game that I just need to become familiar with, but it's one I am uncomfortable with at present. As such, I will be taking a break from Mafia until this ruling is overturned or the time period is up. I appreciate the work you all put in in trying to keep the community clean (I personally think you should be much more strict) and I respect the transparency of your process. I await the result of my appeal with bated breath, and am ready to address anything that I may not have covered in the wall of multicolored text above.
    Last edited by gftgy; April 18th, 2017 at 01:42 AM.

  12. ISO #12

  13. ISO #13

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    Thank you for your patience. Arrow has been busy but will get to all the appeals as quickly as he can.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mesk514 View Post
    1-I really and truly believe @Unknown1234 is town. He stuck by me when I needed him
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyrlander View Post
    Wow, this game was really easy. I just had to talk dumb shit to survive some days more. :P
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike View Post
    If sheriff cleared you honestly I would take him out of my town core and put him as scum.

  14. ISO #14

  15. ISO #15

  16. ISO #16

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    SC ID VERIFICATION
    gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449 is Correct.
    Human: 1-S2-1-7818686 is Correct.
    EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807 is Correct.

    Respective Hotkey:

    gftgy: Ctrl+4
    Human: 3
    EpicTimes: 8

    Player Offenses:

    gftgy: Griefing
    Human: Griefing
    EpicTimes: Griefing

    Key Points:
    Players in question:

    gftgy, DOCTOR, 10
    Human, BUS DRIVER, 13
    EpicTimes, CRIER, 4

    Game:


    Setup: gftgy gets the host. Despite some calls to remake, game starts with all 13 players.
    Names: None.
    Roles: None.
    D1: Early calls to lynch the Diablo, from multiple players, not all of whom are in this report.
    N1: 10(DOCTOR) abstains. 4(CRIER) calls for a lynch on 8, the diablo avatar(There is no JUDGE in the game.) 13(BUS DRIVER swaps himself with 3.
    D2: 4 is dead from a MAFIA hit. 7 quits the game. 11 reports 8(BEGUILER) is NS. Votes pile up, but not enough for a trial.
    N2: 10 heals 6. 13 swaps himself with 1. 4 is dead.
    D3: 7(INVESTGATOR) is dead. 11(SHERIFF) is dead. 5 has a heart attack. More calls to kill the Diablo, claiming it's not a random. Eventually 10 gets lynched.
    N3: 13 swaps himself with 5. 10 and 4 are dead.
    D4: 5(VIGILANTE) and 2(DOCTOR) are dead. 7 players remain, but five of them are not town aligned. 13(BUS DRIVER) is hung. He claims they should've lynched 8 while they had the chance at the end.
    N4: Night.
    D5: 1(LOOKOUT) is hung.
    N5: Night.
    D6: 9(SURVIVOR) is dead. One mafia is AFK, preventing a lynch.
    N6: Night.
    D7: The three mafia hang the MASS MURDERER and win a flawless victory.

    Was the game result altered?

    No. They didn't lynch 8.

    Additional Notes:

    While 8 was, in fact, a BEGUILER and thus would have been a positive lynch for town, the only justification I see in game is that the Diablo avatar is annoying. Be that as it may, it's not a good reason to lynch, and as such, I don't see a reason to overturn the charges of griefing. I do, however, find that reactionary gamethrowing might have been pushing it a little, and will expunge that.

    Thank you for the report!

  17. ISO #17

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    Hi Arrow, thanks for finally getting around to reviewing the game. Did you read my wall of text above or are you just viewing the replay itself? I think I provide plenty of reason for wanting to lynch 8. On Day 2, I even explicitly state in the replay that I didn't think 8 was the demon, yet I was interested in putting 8 to trial anyway. This statement proves that I was actually targeting the player, not the avatar, and simply used the meta-gameplay elements revolving the avatar to accomplish my objective. Since my actions were intended to lynch an evil I had correctly identified, how was I Griefing?

    I am looking to either convince you that my behavior was legitimate, or for you to inform me how my reasoning is insufficient proving that I actually committed a crime so that I may change my ways and sin no more. As it stands currently, I still believe firmly that my reasoning has not been understood (despite the veritable mountain of evidence behind it) and that I was correct in my actions, so I don't think I have learned anything from this report.

  18. ISO #18

    Re: gftgy: 1-S2-1-564449, Human: 1-S2-1-7818686, EpicTimes: 1-S2-1-1008807

    Also, I did not abstain from healing anyone on the first night, as your summary says. I healed bruh. Though that action in particular is inconsequential to the matter at hand, I think you may be rushing through this review without giving it the attention to detail that it requires.

    I've already waited two weeks. At this point since the punishment is expired, I can wait longer. I recognize that this is something you do in your free time and that you may have been pressed for some of late, but I would appreciate it we could give this our proper thought when you actually have the time to commit it.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •