Let's look at the player list to start with.
Hmmm...
Looks good. But Gandalf and Chess need to go. Good day one lynches for now.
Doesn't this feel a bit like a prequel to you?Magna wrote:So you invoke mythology from the Norse Mythos when clearly the scum element is Non-Greek Gods? Scumtastic.
"CryMeARiver wrote:False.diddin wrote:He pretty much claimed he has more powers. Him rolenameclaiming would give you a guess at what those powers could be, hence, rolefishing.chesskid3 wrote:Also no asking MoI to nameclaim is not rolefishing
if he's faking I want his ass locked to a claim
So it's a way to weaken the scum team a bit... And encuraging sacrificial lamb tactics. Ok... I admit, that this may be a possibility. Still I wouldn't expect Magna scum to claim hi true role/power in that case.chesskid3 wrote:To be fair, scum with L-1 restriction is rather stupid, because if they make it to 3 person lylo it's an autolose once they crossvote with someone, so it's seen as unfair.
You want an answer why your so caled "Plum-tell" is invalid.MagnaofIllusion wrote:Why my vote is a good vote has everything to do with the Plum-tell which you completely avoided in this initial response.
Magna wrote:Also you've begun a series of nitpicky attacks (going after Ranger for being 'mysterious', attacking CMAR on what is cleary a typo) as opposed to honestly scum-hunting.
Scum member would be you. Easily impressed townie would be any one who's blindly following you due to your supposed confiremd town status.Manga wrote:You need to clarify what you are saying here. Who is the scum member being sacrificed and who are the easily impressed Townies?
Zero. None. Nada. It's just plain funny.Magna wrote:1. What scum-hunting purpose is there in pointing out a funny but otherwise innocuous typos in his post?
How do you know which supposed "scumslip" he adresses, he doesn't say so specifically.Magna wrote:2. He’s pointed out that his statement makes clear sense and I overall agree. He’s calling “Wrong Pantheon” slip not a slip (it isn’t so he’s correct), says anyone pressing you on that issue is ‘reaching’, and that your interaction with Ranger is a Town on Town (this is the one aspect I don’t like as labelling an argument Town v Town so early is pulling a Zang). It is hardly all over the place.
In the original greek mythology, where without a doubt Andrius (who was in that game) got his inspiration from, there were no safe claims, but that was regarded as a major shortcoming of that setup, so I srtongly believe we have safe claims this time.Axelrod wrote:I would not be surprised, and would expect, the Mod to give the scum at least some safe claims. What's more up in the air is whether he'd give themallsafe claims. Seems like most of the time I see this, the Mod has given the scum 2-3 "safe-claims" and the others end up having to fend for themselves.
If anyone knows the ways these particular mods have handled this issus in the past that might answer the question right there.
I was attacking Ranger for voting me based on not stated but seemingly forcefully strteched reasons. It was somehow based on our discussion for which sane reasons scum would possibly right away claim hated townie.Axelrod wrote:I didn't read what you were saying right (probably because it doesn't make a lot of sense).Shadow Dancer wrote:Did I say "would be the scum member" or did I say "is the scum member". If it is in deed the first (O_o it is!), what are you basing your conclusion on.
If I now understand correctly, you were originally attacking Ranger of the North, who said that MoI could still be scum with his claim. And you were basically saying "No he couldn't, because it would be stupid for scum to "sacrifice" one of their members that way (by making a claim like MoI made), for the marginal gain of - getting some people to think he was Town?
Is that right?
So how about this one: Your whle argument is based on the preassumption that I was in deed buddying scum - in case I am not the whole things falls apart to "I don't agree with Shadow -> Shadow is scum." And that should make you reconsider the whole thing twice.Magna wrote:I was wondering if you would go this way. Neither of those arguments holds any water.
How does my argu7ment break down there? It leads to the valid deduction that I am not an easily impressed townie right now.Magna wrote:Your argument breaks down then as you were the only player to suggest I was confirmed in the least. And you clearly aren’t following me.
Exactly! That one single paragraph was fluffyfluffy toilet humour posting!Magna wrote:Ok, so it was pure fluff. Understood.
I don't see much sense in discussing with you, what Cry meant.Magna wrote:1. The accusations against you at that stage when CMAR posted were two-fold – firstly that you ‘slipped’ and didn’t realise Greek Gods were Town because you were scum and second that you buddied up. CMAR addresses the buddying angle as Null so he can only be referring to the Pantheon slip.
It's just tha, you know, you might have ralized that defending myself with actual reason led to some morons piling votes on me.Gemini wrote:That said, it bothers me that SD is insisting his life depend on his claim and nothing else. We need to find scum and clamming up isn't going to help us do it and it also lends credence to the idea that you are scum leaning on a fake claim to throw the claim out as your only defense.
Obviously isn't it? One of the reasons is that it can partly confirm my claim later on, but only if people don't see it coming and outguess me. Claiming it now would make me useless, I#d rather die on the spot. End of this discussion.Axelrod wrote:SD: can you please say why you refuse to claim superpower?
[disclaimer: Ugly allcaps coming. If your name's not Chesskid you can safely skip it.]chesskid3 wrote:Unvote
fffucking bullshit
I swear
there will be words postgame
about this setup if he really is a JK
In another context, yes. But alright. Discussion ends, vote stays for now. We can keep this up if you want.RangeroftheNorth wrote:No. All scum know now is that he knew that one role name was in the game. And I already stated that I wasn't going to attempt to force him to reveal any information he didn't want to reveal. Anyway, didn't I already say I was done arguing with you?
You asked a question O_o Wouldn't have put that past you. Here's a deal: You unvote, I answer somw questions of yours.gandalf5166 wrote:He did. And @SD: You still haven't answered my question.
Nope.gandalf5166 wrote:Already answered that a long time ago.Shadow Dancer wrote:O, I found it...Oh... not. That wasShadow Dancer wrote:What makes you think I am against a Diddin lynch btw?mine. Oops.
Did you just claim you did not even read any of my posts. Pathetic.gandalf5166 wrote:That said, no I don't. Is there any particular reason?Shadow Dancer wrote:are you high? please be sober while playing mafia. you know the reason why i trashtalk the shit outa you.
You wanna talk to me about dumb? You know what you whole "VI policy lynch" over scum hunting policy is? Yeah mright. Scummy as hellquadz08 wrote:Well, crud. Now there's TWO good wagons on VI's.
UNVOTE:
We'll go with
VOTE: Shadow Dancer
since he's not only being dumb and useless, but he's scummier than BS.
You made a far stronger stance by impliing that my desire ro get a Baby lynch over a Diddin lynch was strong enough to influence my decissions.gandalf5166 wrote:Well, I don't know. I'm simply saying that that wasn't the point of my post.Shadow Dancer wrote:And you call that an answer? That's dodgy as hell.
I think I already said this, but I can again: Leave being smart to those who are. BUt about the "shift away" YOU BETTER DO!gandalf5166 wrote:And that it's clear that you're making up random bullshit to get me to shift away. And guess what, it's not going to work.gandalf5166 wrote:Well, I don't know. I'm simply saying that that wasn't the point of my post.Shadow Dancer wrote:And you call that an answer? That's dodgy as hell.