Mini 617 - Scottish Mafia, Game Over

CoheedCambria09 · Post Post #475 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 7:17 am

With Lowell at L-1 i'd like to see a claim from him. He's had the most attention on him all day and is looking ripe for the lynching.

Empking · Post Post #476 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 7:50 am

Mirth wrote:
Lowell wrote:You're accusing dcorbe of destroying a wagon, despite there being many other people on it. If you cared about that wagon, YOU WOULD HAVE PURSUED IT. Instead you pursue someone else, avoid the wagon, and blame dcorbe for the whole thing.
Except he wasn't. He was picking a fight with dcorbe who accused him of derailing a wagon by not joining it.

I don't like Emp's vote right now. It shows hes obviously not paying attention to the game. (He both didn't realize that his vote was a) already on Lowell, and b) that Lowell is at L1.)

I was trying to do the old, try and get an admittance of guilt by pretending to hammer. It didn't work but I didn't see a reason not to do it.

Mirth · Post Post #477 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 7:54 am

Pretending to hammer on the same page as a votecount which lists you as already voting him and not too many posts down from me criticizing the quickness of Cyb's vote and asking Lowell for a claim? Yes, brilliant to pretend to hammer before someone claims.

Empking · Post Post #478 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:04 am

I don't see why it'd matter if I did it before a claim.

Lowell · Post Post #479 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:04 am

Well I didn't admit guilt and am therefore innocent. Can you unvote now?

Mirth · Post Post #480 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:04 am

Lowell wrote:Well I didn't admit guilt and am therefore innocent. Can you unvote now?

Or you could just claim like you've been asked to twice. Why are you avoiding it.

Lowell · Post Post #481 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:06 am

Because claiming is stupid and is only suggested so people can feel good about themselves for mislynches.

Empking · Post Post #482 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:06 am

Lowell wrote:Well I didn't admit guilt and am therefore innocent. Can you unvote now?

Was that a joke?

Lowell · Post Post #483 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:07 am

Empking wrote:
Lowell wrote:Well I didn't admit guilt and am therefore innocent. Can you unvote now?
Was that a joke?

No.

Watch those who are waiting for this to end....

Mirth · Post Post #484 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:11 am

Lowell wrote:
Empking wrote:
Lowell wrote:Well I didn't admit guilt and am therefore innocent. Can you unvote now?
Was that a joke?
No.

Watch those who are waiting for this to end....

Then it was crap logic, as you probably did realize it wasn't a hammer vote and scum don't always admit guilt after being hammered.

Claiming is stupid at L-1? Do you ever support claiming? Or are you only saying it's stupid because you think you can't come up with a claim that will save you?

Empking · Post Post #485 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:13 am

Please someone hammer.

Lowell · Post Post #486 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:15 am

It's stupid because it's just a lazy device for people to justify lynches. Run someone to L-1, get a claim, forget about them for awhile, repeat w/ someone else.

Was the second part of that supposed to be joke? If not, I have no idea what you're asking.

Lowell · Post Post #487 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:16 am

emp, what's your hurry? You're driving me crazy with this. There are a lot of people unexamined because they can sit back and watch you do their dirty work for them.

Empking · Post Post #488 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:19 am

My hurry is, you won't claim. I don't think your even trying to convince us of your innocence.

Mirth · Post Post #489 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:22 am

I have to agree with Lowell on this one. There is no hurry. Your status as the uncounterlclaimed cop is the only reason I'm not bothering to try and get you lynched. Because your actions have been the absolute scummiest in this game, honestly.

massive · Post Post #490 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:03 am

Lowell wrote:
massive- slightly scummy.
406 just looks weird. He sees a quick wagon building on someone and instead of joining, says he "wants to join." He's trying to push the Lowell wagon without taking the blame for it. Also, he's hiding. And when I accuse someone of hiding, you know it's serious.

If you are the type of player who will put someone at L-1 because "a quick wagon [is] building" then I'm afraid you and I are two different types of players.

Lowell · Post Post #491 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:04 am

I'm saying I don't try to have it both ways, and you do. You're trying to position yourself as "for" the wagon, but not having to take credit when it goes down in flames.

massive · Post Post #492 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:11 am

I am still "for" the wagon and still think you are a good lynch candidate. But I wasn't going to put you at L-1 simply for skittles and giggles. There was appropriate pressure, I made my position quite clear, and wanted to hear your response. I think you are struggling to present this as "suspicious behavior" just because it doesn't match 99% of reckless townie play, which this site has in abundance.

Do you think I "tried to have it both ways" during the first two days' lynches?

CoheedCambria09 · Post Post #493 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:42 am

Ok, so lowell not claiming at L-1 is kinda scummy in my opinion but there may be a reason behind it (doc, another power role).

And something thats bothering me is what emp did to try and force "guilt" out of lowell by fake hammering. It is scummy in my books because we were waiting for a claim from lowell. He seems very anxious to get lowell lynch. Suspicious.

Mirth · Post Post #494 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:47 am

Coheed, you seriously think there's a second doctor in this game?

CoheedCambria09 · Post Post #495 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:49 am

nevermind, forgot ceph was a doctor. Change that to (power role)

Mirth · Post Post #496 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:54 am

You never did answer my question either. Who are *your* suspects.

q21 · Post Post #497 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:19 pm

Lowell wrote:You're accusing dcorbe of destroying a wagon, despite there being many other people on it. If you cared about that wagon, YOU WOULD HAVE PURSUED IT. Instead you pursue someone else, avoid the wagon, and blame dcorbe for the whole thing.

My word you're backwards. I never particularly like the EA wagon and had said as much, I had no problem with it falling apart. That post was in response to dcorbe complaining that I was pulling down the wagon - something his own unvote and vote for me achieved much more assuredly than anything I did.

Cybele · Post Post #498 (ISO) » Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:12 pm

massive wrote:
Cybele
: In 452, you seem to intimate that the best play for a Mafia roleblocker would be to NOT block Empking to throw suspicion on him? Do you think that's a better play than continuously blocking him?

I think it could easily throw us off if we expect a constant blocking. Why waste a nk on the cop if we can trick town into lynching him for us? Also, the constant roleblocking is a waste of a power unless town has no more power roles...
Which brings me to what CC09 said: We already have a cop and doc, how many other power roles are we expecting?

massive · Post Post #499 (ISO) » Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:10 am

I will say that I agree with q21: dcorbe's "hop-off" was much scummier than q21's avoidance of EA's bandwagon (in a vacuum). Probably what prompted Empking to inspect him in the first place.

CC09

: After reading the last couple of pages with Lowell's adamant refusal to claim, who do you think is "waiting for Lowell to claim"?