sonicwolf: 2-s2-1-2313535, nefarious: 2-s2-1-697019, malvok: 2-s2-1-891047

[Xalphas]

Account Name: sonicwolf,Nefarious, malkov
Account ID: 2-s2-1-2313535, 2-s2-1-697019, 2-s2-1-891047
In-Game Name: Senator jar jar binks, jar jar anal beads, trafagot

Crimes Committed: cheating

Your Account Name: Xalphas
Summary: These 3 players were playing so commun most people noticed they were using a cheat comminucation(or called skype)
and it is also be seen in the replay i have. you also see how they know each others role already and defending each other
until the end of the game.

[Slaol]

Slaol's

ID's confirmed.
sonicwolf: 2-s2-1-2313535
nefarious: 2-s2-1-697019
malvok: 2-s2-1-891047

Priors
sonicwolf: Skyping/Gamethrowing- http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/23286-Nefarious-2-S2-1-697019-SonicWolf-2-S2-1-2313535?highlight=2-s2-1-697019
nefarious: Skyping/Gamethrowing- http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/23286-Nefarious-2-S2-1-697019-SonicWolf-2-S2-1-2313535?highlight=2-s2-1-697019 -Skyping- http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/20754-Maf(2-S2-1-697019)-Townie(2-S2-1-614377)?highlight=2-s2-1-697019
malvok: Skyping- http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/20754-Maf(2-S2-1-697019)-Townie(2-S2-1-614377)?highlight=2-s2-1-697019

Hotkeys.
sonicwolf: 3
nefarious: 1
malvok: 4

Partied?
Confirmed by being next to eachother on player list.

Roles.
sonicwolf: Silencer
nefarious: Executioner
malvok: Mass Murderer

Names.
sonicwolf: Senetor Jar Jar Binks
nefarious: Jar Jar Anal Beads
malvok: trafaggot

Review.
On night 1 Sentotor Jar Jar Binks silences Jar Jar Anal Beads. It is an offensive weapon, but shows interaction.
On day 1 trafaggot (Mass Murderer) says "I think 5 might be the MM" and votes Jar Jar Anal Beads' (Executioner) lynch target (5) before even Jar Jar Anal Beads does. Senetor Jar Jar Binks is also on the train.
Day 2 dialogue
- 8: Senetor Jar Jar Binks (Silencer) is Triad!
- Jar Jar Anal Beads (Executioner): 8 is Triad!
- trafaggot (Mass Murderer): Nah guys, 8 is suspicious
- Jar Jar Anal Beads: Get 8 up there
- trafaggot: lynch 8
Day 3 notes
- "6 the marshall has revealed himself"
- *Jar Jar Anal Beads votes 6*
- *trafaggot votes 6*
- *Senetor Jar Jar Binks votes 6*
Day 4 notes
- 2: "7 is the Triad"
- *Jar Jar Anal Beads votes 2*
- *trafaggot votes 2*
- *Senetor Jar Jar Binks votes 2*
Night 5 notes
- 13: "sorry I was afk"
- Senetor Jar Jar Binks: "12 (Executioner->Jester) is probably Mass Murderer, we lynch him tomorrow"
Day 6 notes
- *Jar Jar Anal Beads votes 3*
- *trafaggot votes 3*
- *Senetor Jar Jar Binks votes 3*
Day 7 notes
- *trafaggot votes Jar Jar Anal Beads (Jester)*
- *Senetor Jar Jar Binks votes Jar Jar Anal Beads*
- *13 (Triad with Senetor Jar Jar Binks) votes Jar Jar Anal Beads*

That should be enough. I believe there is a minor chance they are Skyping.

Result
Triad won with a leaver and an afk...

Crimes committed
1x Skyping for all of them
no gamethrowing since Mass Murderer lost, and Triads won

Recommended
Nefarious: Permaban
sonicwofl: Banlist
Malvok: Kickvote

[AppleyNO]

Marked Approved.

[Slaol]

Confirming punishments
sonicwolf: 2-s2-1-2313535 x2 banlist
nefarious: 2-s2-1-697019 permaban
malvok: 2-s2-1-891047 x2 kickvote

[Sonicwolf1]

In regards to recent accusations I have prepared this responce.

I am Sonicwolf. I do know both Nefarious and Malvok. I'm friends with many mafia players. I may have been partied up with them, we occationally do that to ensure we all get into a game. But I was not communicating with them during the game.

So, lets review the game shall we.

Night 1 - Sonicwolf silences Nefarious. This is suspicious because I targetted him? Would it not also be suspicious if I never targetted him? Talk about damned if you do and damned if you don't.
The reason I silenced him was simple. It was night 1. I had nothing to go on. So I decided it might be fun to target the person with the similar name. Probe his reaction.

Day 2 - Malvok (MM) accusses 5 of being a MM. It seems he was going for the jester defense right off the bat.
Nefarious' (exe) target is also 5, so its not surprising that he would support the vote.
3 more people then vote for 5, as a triad I see someone that isn't one of the triad is getting a lot of votes. Of course I'm on the train.
He then gets 1 more vote. A total of 7 votes on one guy. Does this mean that half the game is working together?

Day 3 - 'Tree Rapist' accuses Sonicwolf of being triad, loudly. Nefarious is now a jester! The previous day someone who claimed sheriff made same accusation. So he accuses the accusee, knowing fine well its a suspicious move. That's his job!
I assume Malvok is still trying to play the jester card, he follows Nefarious and accuses 'Tree Rapist'. Even if he's not, he is MM, he wants to kill invest roles, which 'Tree Rapist' is acting like.
First vote was not even one of the three of us. There was then a landslide of votes for 'Tree Rapist', and he immediately goes up on trial.
'Tree Rapist' then fails to provide a suitible defense and is killed.

Day 4 - The marshall reveals himself.
Nefarious (jester) votes for marshall. Not unusual. The Malvok follows suit. What can I say about this. Well, we have played together often, one of our favourite memories is after using the marshall's ability to kill two people, no one knew who to get next. So I put a vote on marshall as a joke. The rest of the game followed suit. Its never happened again, but its still a funny manuever which usually makes people laugh, as it is doomed to fail. Which is one of the advertised features of this game if I am not mistaken.
A full 17 seconds pass before I (Sonicwolf) put my vote down for the marshall. If we were communicating don't you think it would have been a lot more immediate? As to whip the game into a frenzy of votes of people who haven't stopped to think? I was admitibly hoping this would happen anyway after casting my vote, as the triad would stand to benifit. In the end it just caused a stalemate, which is a good thing for all parties involved in those votes, with exception to maybe the jester.

Day 5 - I can no longer silence 2, and he starts accusing me of being triad again. Nefarious is still accusing the revealed sheriff much like a jester would, Malvok is a MM and thus wants to kill of as many people as he can so joins in. I realise there can't be many town left and I vote him. Everyone but the arsonist votes for him. This is not surprising. 2 was the last member of the town.
In conclusion of this day. The last town accuses someone of being triad. No town left, of course he gets lynched.

Night 5 - I notice one of the people acting suspiciously, I suspect 12 of being the MM. I was wrong. I didn't want to waste an attack so I tell my teammate of my suspicion in case I am killed.
We the triad decide to send the informant to kill 3.

Day 6 - 3 is still alive. The informant then realises 3 must be a killing role. He calls MM. I remember a dead invest's last will, and announce that I think he is arsonist. But vote anyway as I believe arsonists are more dangerous than MM late in the game. The rest of the (town?) follow his accusation. It only takes 3 votes at this point. Sonicwolf, the other triad, Nefarious, a jester, and Malvok, the real MM are the quickest to vote. Its also near the end of the game, and everyone is getting desperate. This is a pretty standard reaction in that situation, wouldn't you agree?
EVERYONE votes guilty. Its not isolated.

Day 7 - I note that there is still and any random role left, and warn teammate of jester possibility. Not such a huge assumption, no one had claimed survivor, there could have been an exe, but no one had announced any success there either. And any random could not be MM, which meant MM and arso filled the evil and killing roles.
We the triad correctly assume that the MM would vote guilty, and a jester would probably vote guilty on 'Jar Jar Anal beads' (Nefarious), so we didn't need to risk voting guilty.
Nefarious is exicuted.

Night 7 - The two triads discuss how best to avoid being killed by the MM that night.

Results:
Triad win by the skin of their teeth.




I can understand why Xalphas would report this, he feels hard done to. He was unlucky, and overeager to reveal his identity. But there was no skyping involved. We were all just unlucky enough to end up non-towns. Infact skyping wouldn't have helped the triad win in the least. And all of the predictions I made were founded on conclusion I could and DID make myself. And we DID accuse each other during the game. And there definately wasn't any gamethrowing involved, if it were, the jester would have been the lone winner, for the last laugh achievement. These accusations just simply don't add up.

I mean from this game it also looks like Xalphas (2 : Massimo Travolta) and ChaosHound (8 : Tree Rapist) are communicating and have a vendatta against me. For example:

Night 1, Xalphas goes to check me, and ChaosHound watches everyone that visits me.
Day 2, Xalphas immediately accuses me, and ChaosHound immediately assumes Xalphas is not say a forger.
Day 3 ChaosHound writes false information, that is incrimating to me (Senetor Jar Jar Binks), and puts it in his last will. (He had been watching Xalphas' house, and seen two visiters. Me and 4. He then claims he saw me visiting 10, who had died that night) He spends a lot of time looking at his last will, so its no mistake. So either he is making a very large assumption, which could be considered game throwing, or he is communicating with Xalphas.
Then to top it off, he doesn't even provide any evidence on his trial, why not? Because he can't provide any which he could have ligitimately gathered and continue his crusade against me.
Night 3 Xalphas then goes to check on 4, the other person that visited him. Coincidence? It could be but this was not information included in ChaosHound's last will, that information was erased to incriminate me.

So what could have really happened here is that Xalphas and ChaosHound were communicating, and hense assumed the only way they could have lost is if the people involved in their downfall were also cheating. However like their accusations against us, this is also probably unlikely. Coincidences happen.

So I ask you to reconsider your punishing measures. None of us did anything outside of the behaviour of our characters. We did not have knowledge that we couldn't have gathered ourself. The evidence provided by Slaol, just looks bad, because quite frankly, it is out of contex. By all means put us on the watchlist, but you said it yourself, "I believe there is a minor chance they are Skyping.". That means there is a major chance we were not. And I certainly wouldn't have gone through all this trouble to write a report if I were guilty.

Thank you for your time.
Sonicwolf.

[ypmagic]

Hi, welcome to the reports section and the staff will be notified shortly of your appeal.

[Slaol]

Lol.
I don't think I'm allowed to re review, but odds are no one will change this result.

"Minor chance they are skyping" was sarcastic. It is blatantly clear from day 1 that you were skyping, and all of you have previous reports with the others in them. Playing in parties is fine until you start using it as an advantage to unfairly ruin games.

[Sonicwolf1]

Now hold on Slaol. I was respectful to you. And you just summerised my entire appeal with "Lol." I'm trying to be civil here and have a fair hearing, but you seem more concerned with mocking me. I admit I'm new to the forums, but I'd assume in a non-corrupt society an appeal should be received impartially. You have already had your say. What you're doing now could be considered an attempt to violate the neutrallity of the reviewer.

I will hear what my reviewer has to say, and accept his/her verdit. But until that happens, you should be treating me with the same respect you treat any of your forum's members.

[Slaol]

Now hold on Slaol. I was respectful to you. And you just summerised my entire appeal with "Lol." I'm trying to be civil here and have a fair hearing, but you seem more concerned with mocking me. I admit I'm new to the forums, but I'd assume in a non-corrupt society an appeal should be received impartially. You have already had your say. What you're doing now could be considered an attempt to violate the neutrallity of the reviewer.

I will hear what my reviewer has to say, and accept his/her verdit. But until that happens, you should be treating me with the same respect you treat any of your forum's members.

My apologies if it offended you. It gave me a chuckle when you called my gobbs of evidence bad and out of context. Someone will get to this eventually.

[Sonicwolf1]

Hmm I guess we both misunderstood each other then. I had no intention of calling your work shoddy, just... incomplete. But thank you for the apology.