Martyr Mafia - Game Over

[Bloodmoney]

Vote: DGB

Obvious supernatural entity.

[Bloodmoney]

zach makes a very fair point. Not only do we need to lynch God or get Nietzsche to kill him, we also need to prevent him from achieving his wincon. I also don't think the day game will have much relevance if God and Nietzsche leave the game, since it will be clear to all that the majority, i.e. the agnostics won't have anything left to achieve, and the cults' motives will be completely clear too.

[Bloodmoney]

unvote. vote: zakeri.

I support this.

unvote, vote: zakeri

Even though I don't see how the initial comment by Jebus was necessary, I don't see how he could've interpreted mm's line as a Nietzsche-slip, and even if he did, I don't see why he would openly fish for something like that.

[Bloodmoney]

-1

I didn't say I interpreted it like that. I thought Jebus was interpreting that, and made an attack on him for what I felt was openly fishing for something like that. Do note he still hasn't said anything on why he felt that line stood out at all.

No, I know that's what you meant. Read that post again. I'm saying I don't see how Jebus would've misinterpreted that post that much, when it's completely obvious it wasn't a Nietzsche-slip. Nevertheless, this is not much of a point, since I don't see accrediting stupidity to someone a scumtell. Jebus and populartajo's opportunistic votes are noted, in that order.

unvote, vote: Jebus

BTW, -1? Took a leaf out of vollkan's book, huh?

[Bloodmoney]

Note that Jebus and PT both explicitly agreed with Blood's reasoning when voting Zakeri, so Blood attacking their votes is just hypocritical. It's like he's trying to scramble out of a botched distancing attempt.

Ehh. Except distancing doesn't make much sense here, as opposed to conventional scumteams. Cult can't afford to bus god, and god can't risk killing one of the cults because then the other two will come that much closer to winning themselves, and god doesn't win with the cults. The only viable scenario would be cult leader distancing a cult member (or vice versa, but that's more unlikely), but I don't know what that would accomplish.

No, look at my initial reasoning again.

How

exactly does that implicate Zakeri again? It seems to be a major point, but actually it isn't indicative of alignment at all, and in voting on my reasoning, pop and especially Jebus have showed their opportunism.

EA, reiterate the case on Zakeri please.

[Bloodmoney]

How do you change your thing from Mafia Scum to something else?

You can't yourself. Titles are more of a community thing here; you earn it. See these threads for more.

Also, I still support more pressure on Jebus. Zak's reversion to random voting is strange especially when jumping on a leading wagon, but Jebus' vote was founded on obviously broken logic that wasn't even his. If that's not opportunism, I don't know what is. Get your priorities straight people.

[Bloodmoney]

You claimed an anti-town role, what did you expect?

[Bloodmoney]

EBWODP:

unvote. vote: zwetschenwasser

My vote goes back to zakeri after this.

Ugh. If you state this, what point was there in voting zwet anyway?

[Bloodmoney]

Fair enough, okay.

unvote vote: zwet

btw, I see I haven't changed votes.

[Bloodmoney]

zach, don't be so fucking lazy. Read up and post something of actual value if you wish to keep your ass intact.

It was possible for me to make a case against someone, but it was also a perfectly decent choice to get other to react to my vote change once the one case I had made had fallen though.

Okay, I admit it. I wasn't thinking about how other people will react at all.

It's not like changing back will get people off of it.

What? Jebus is still bad, but I think this inconsistency is worse.

Unvote: Jebus

.

Vote: Zakeri

.

This is bullshit and you know it. Zakeri admitted to having tried to give a logical explanation for his in reality unplanned actions; when you actually

admit

to having lied, there's no fucking

inconsistency

. And don't tell me that as town you have never acted more confident than you actually were.

Why do we lose? Can't we just kill the last one?

Zwet is scum, but on second thought let's not lynch him yet, at least. If he's cult, he knows who God is, and he's bound to slip up sometime.

unvote

Indeed this setup is not a normal cult;

tbh(and no jebus, this is no more of a god then the other conspiracy) If I were god, I would feel rather town until all the A's gathered and played like townies.

Again, please. This maketh no sense, not to mention the inherent WIFOM-factor in "if I were scum/God/insertantitownrolehere" sentences.

There are valuable bits of information in these attacks on me, however, and I do think I can make an educated guess on the affiliation of some people.

PLZ TELL MEZ. I HAZ 2 NO HU TEH OTHER CULT PEEPS R SO I CAN HAZ LYNCHZ0R THEM

translation: I am a very funny man because, look, I can edit things people didn't say into their quotes. For the sake of me being funny and staying that way, please ignore the fact that I am not helping the town in any way whatsoever.

Jahudo makes a good point about zwet and mm deflecting off Zakeri.

unvote, vote: Zakeri

Meanwhile mykonian is looking to me like a blundering townie, and ting is the only definite pro-town voice here, along with Jahudo possibly.

I get the feeling too many people here are playing to an expected win condition. If you're not recruited, boys and girls, play like a townie for fuckssake. Seriously. Grow a pair.

[Bloodmoney]

I've read up. My post contained just as much value as yours did Bloodmoney. I didn't need to write a 200 page dissertation to state I agreed with Jahudo's reasoning.

ahahahahahaha

if your definition of contribution is "being vanilla town sucks. I agree with that guy", then I advise you to go to another site after this game, because HELLO we play this game through analysis and you're not doing a brilliant job right now. The very least you can do is work your heart out for us bringing evidence to the table while you're here.

No, I don't know it...if you lie, it is inconsistent with the truth...no?

I have only acted more confident than I actually was once as town, and that was my very first game.

Well how often do you think others do it? For fuckssake this game has to start somewhere be spontaneous.

BTW X is also cult. SilverPhoenix also might be.

[Bloodmoney]

Your personal attack on zachattack has been noted. Instead actually attacking his argument, you attacked his lack of info. If you disagree with his argument, then it should be pretty simple to pick it apart, as there is barely anything there to prove it. What does attacking his lack of info prove about his alignment? WIFOM arguments at most, absolutely nothing at least.

ahahahaha

nice defense of your cult buddy there, SP. I attacked zach for his lack of info exactly because he didn't have any argument to attack. Or do you mean the post I quoted in my last post? Because all his argument there consists of is "hey look I contributed just as much as you did" which is, plain and clear, FALSE.

[Bloodmoney]

Note the subtle embedding of my reads of players between the swearing and getting angry. Tell me zach, what kind of statement about players' probable alignment does "Being agnostic is boring. Jahudo makes a good point" inlude?

[Bloodmoney]

SP, where did I get personal? You don't want me getting personal.

Also, what was your argument against me again? All I see is you saying that I'm not attacking zach's arguments. Want to know why? BECAUSE HE HASN'T MADE ANY. If you think otherwise, quote for atheismssake.

and not "grow up", "grow a pair". You know, balls. Insert generic pun/insult here.

[Bloodmoney]

I'm talking about his actual vote on Zakeri (which actually isn't the first person to vote Zakeri by simply agreeing with Jahudo).

His vote needs justification, preferably. And protip: saying "others did it too, why zach" only further proves your connection.

[Bloodmoney]

Ok, thank you. You could do that next time without me having to cuss at you.

SP is still cult though.

[Bloodmoney]

Seriously, SP, if swearing and implying you are scum is a personal attack, you should go take a cold shower and think about this calmly. For fuckssake, it was you who told me to "grow up", what's that if not full-on ad hominem?

I'm talking about his actual vote on Zakeri (which actually isn't the first person to vote Zakeri by simply agreeing with Jahudo).

His vote needs justification, preferably. And protip: saying "others did it too, why zach"

only further

proves your connection.

It's not a fucking "protip", it's an actual accusation. It is a good start, considering it is the first piece of actual evidence you have brought forth in any argument you have made, and I gave it to you on a silver platter. But it is the

only

evidence you brought forward, instead of what you suggest with the bolded part in the quote.

Holy protip batman yes it was an accusation. I'm sneaky like that, phrasing it differently. Look, if you want evidence, sure. All you had to do was ask...

2) Why would it be a bad idea to ask who someone's suspects are if they say they have suspects? Please explain this to me.

And this confirms that it really has nothing to do with the Zakeri case. Jebus simply wanted to know Zakeri's suspects (even if they were tied to the case against him).

Deflecting off Zakeri. Zakeri is a possible God; hell, she's the top nominee for that.

And I don't doubt that you can play mafia. But what the fuck's that got to do with anything? You are the one avoiding having to face me, just like you accused me of avoiding zach: you deliberately attack my "personal insults" and not my actual points. Now you may just not realize that I have actual points, but I don't assume there's any problem with your reading comprehension.

[Bloodmoney]

Just got home. Need to get some sleep in. Will take a look in the morning.

[Bloodmoney]

First off, lay off the newbie when all he committed was an opportunistic vote. That much leniency doesn't cost the town a thing.

Double A and Indigo, please make a brief analysis of the last ten pages. With sugar on top and a vote to boot. Unlike ting I endorse specific points on every player.

DGB is indeed looking to be scum. props to pops. I'd like her to stop pushing a rival cult and tell us who her god is plz thx.

I think that Double A is acting the way he is because of his play style. Granted, if it is, it's extremely unorthodox, but it's a play style nonetheless.

What in Double A's play implies "playstyle" here? And why use the word "playstyle" so much? Looking at his posts on-site, what gives you the feeling that he isn't, in fact, a complete newbie but rather someone who has a developed playstyle?

If I may say so, you're making a big show of jumping to Double A's aid.

Blood calling SP cult in post 177 seems omgus-y. You originally called him cult for his alleged connection to zach. You wtihdrew your attack on zach. Why are you still calling him cult if you don't think zach is anymore?

I never withdrew my attack on zach. His initial laziness is still bugging me, because a vote like that might, in better places, be interpreted as opportunistic. And if a connection is implicated from one side why are you implying that I should only suspect one half of the implied pair?

I don't understand how post 181 by bloodmoney should give any information who is what allignment. He tries to find reasons for an attack, but comes mostly with null-tells. I don't like it.

unvote vote bloodmoney

I see that the too scummy fallacy is used on zwet. I know it is wrong to think that way, but I must say that I feel the same way.

Do elaborate on these nulltells, because I smell bullshit. Do you perhaps have a problem with the fact that I'm pressuring people, or just specific people? If the latter, I'd like a list of who you don't want me pressuring.

[Bloodmoney]

For a completely simple statement that is true, you try to make it prove that SP is linked to that person. A towny could make that statement quite normally, so nothing weird here.

Sure. A townie may make that statement; but it is far more likely for connected players to try and point out similar tells on others as a deflection. A townie, in my admittedly not very humble opinion, would first analyse whether the initial action is scummy by itself. And the way zach did it (the "my alleged role sucks. also, what that guy said" post, remember?) was definitely sounding alarms to me not least because he was the one who posted immediately prior to me.

and because of your perception that Zakeri is god, SP must be scum? Brilliant. Again a quite normal statement, that any player, scum or town can make, and you manage to twist it into a scumtell.

That was what raised the initial minor suspicion. The bigger part of my read on him is due to him jumping all over me for a little pressure on zach. Remember, when I asked zach to give a little more material to work with and SP started yelling at me for "getting personal"?

If I may say so, that is an even bigger show of jumping to Double A's aid. In fact, it almost makes you seem desperate to take some heat of yourself, after reading mykonian's statement.

Ugh. Read the -ing thread pretty please. I am not a newbie; I never claimed to be a newbie; if I ever play a newbie card please shoot me on the spot. Therefore I don't see how this would apply to me. And yes; it is jumping to Double A's aid on a particular point; the particular point which was stupid imo. Do a background check on people sometimes, especially when they claim it's their first game. Considering Double A's posts prior to this game I don't find it unlikely at all that he has no firm grasp of the theory.

This gave me the impression you were no longer suspicious of Zach. Which made me wonder why you were still suspicious of SP since your suspicion of him was born of what you thought was a connection between him and Zach. Since it turns out you're still suspicious of zach after all though, I no longer have an issue with this.

Look, you strike me as a bright guy, so I will try not to flip out in frustration. Here's the thing.

zach did something suspicious that implicates him and only him (namely the aforementioned post). zach has not redeemed himself completely, nor will he ever. What he has done, however, is replied satisfactorily to my request, and that deserves removal of pressure for the time being since I made sure I had other leads to follow up on. So zach, by himself, has little to implicate him.

On the other hand, SP's reactions imply a connection between zach and SP. And when a connection is implied, even if only on one side, the other side deserves suspicion as well if only by association.

If I wasn't clear enough, zach isn't suspicious for what he did, he's suspicious for what SP did.

[Bloodmoney]

Life is thick and the Man needs rest. Will post tomorrow when I have some energy.

[Bloodmoney]

If I wasn't clear enough, zach isn't suspicious for what he did, he's suspicious for what SP did.

So you are suspicious of zach now, yes? More than you were when you first brought up your accusations?

No, not more. In a different way, by association. And when suspicious of someone by association the WIFOM inherent in the thought process weakens the suspicion's validity.

pacman needs to make an effort and do something. This is worse than zach's initial post I called him out for; at least he voted for fuckssake.

@blood.
You went after zach first before you went after SP. Yes?

If I wasn't clear enough, zach isn't suspicious for what he did, he's suspicious for what SP did.

Why that then?

Huh. You could've just read what I said. zach made his stance clear with his own words a couple posts after I called him out for piggybacking; that cleared him of most of the suspicion from that point. But meanwhile, the dastardly SP jumped on me for attacking zach and thus zach was suspicious again. So now I'm not suspicious of him for the original point, I'm suspiciou of him for a new one. Goshdarn, I thought you were a bright guy.

I don't like that pacman is pretending to be clueless.

While this is otherwise a good point I don't like how zwet comments on almost nothing and keeps claiming anti-town roles. I'd get rid of the VI but the agnostics' best chance at catching God with a majority is today.

I'm holding off on prying pacman until Zakeri makes a good defense. DGB, you were hating me all this time. Pacman isn't that good a reason to start buddying up.

FoS: DGB and Pacman

And this is a terrible, terrible substitute for scumhunting. I don't see how DGB buddied up to you. She only acknowledged the point you made as valid.

What this exchange looked like is DGBcult recognizing zwetcult and, failing to lynch him, joining him on a mutually beneficial wagon.

I think zwets a recruit, not a leader. I'm not worrying about him.

:goodposting:

I think we can say that someone that has claimed cult till now, can't be god. God would never wifom us that way, as it would make people look at him. He doesn't want to be in the center of the attention.

Can you say "WIFOM?" Someone playing aggressively, saying that God will play not like him?

FoS: mykonian

. Again.

Wifom? yes. Likely? no.

mykonian stop digging your grave and trying to derail the town.

I'm God! Lynch me now!

Anyone up for lynching our VI?

After the ting-mykonian exchange I expect God to be changing activity levels.

The Jebus wagon is lame, and qwints is obvscum for his first post in 6 days being nothing but a piggyback vote.

[Bloodmoney]

Obvscum of what variety? We only want to lynch one out of the seven scum.

I'm not sure which kind, that's my problem.

Why is the Jebus wagon lame?

You are attacking him for a natural reaction to a scum claim.

Meanwhile I notice that Zakeri apologized for his lack of input, unvoted, and promptly failed to give any contribution whatsoever.

[Bloodmoney]

DGB is striking me as being too DGB. While I find myself agreeing with her I have a strange feeling concerning her (stranger than usual at least). I'm slightly scared at the idea that DGB might be God.

So I have to ask the people on the Zakeri wagon: did you have legitimate reasons to vote Zakeri aside from just joining the wagon?

I dunno. Would you consider a healthy suspicion of Zakeri being God a legitimate reason? Seriously. The cases have already been made. If you find plotholes, feel free to point them out, but if you're interested in looking at the cases again go dig them up yourself instead of delegating.

I never withdrew my attack on zach.

His initial laziness is still bugging me, because a vote like that might, in better places, be interpreted as opportunistic. And if a connection is implicated from one side why are you implying that I should only suspect one half of the implied pair?

In response, I only have to say that you did.

QUOTE ME.

Wait, wait, I'm cult leader, right? Then it makes sense to deflect off God, right? (/endsarcasm)

Um yes. Sarcasm or not what you say is correct.

You must protect him, or everything is lost.

Your point with the sarcasm tags?

While throwing around suspicion in normal games makes sense to see reactions, there wasn't only one scum in those games that we are trying to find out of twenty. Why the excessive finger-pointing, BloodMoney?

Vote: BloodMoney

(purely as pressure and to unvote Jebus for the time-being)

Why wouldn't you want to see reactions in this particular game? Don't you want the cult leaders accidentally slipping info on who your God is? Of course, the question is rhetorical, considering you are a cult leader.

Also, you realize this vote makes no sense whatsoever, don't you? Even if you had basis for it (which "excessive fingerpointing" isn't), simply by stating the "pressure vote" nature of it you rob it of any purpose it would otherwise have had; because now I know that you wouldn't have the guts to go through with lynching me.

And I'm seeing, plain as the sun, distancing from Jebus.

unvote, vote: Jebus

No opportunism here.

:goodposting:

SilverPhoenix, please note I was defending Ortolan

Oh? Why was that? To the best of my knowledge ortolan has a voice of his own. Need your recruit/leader alive?

I believe I've said this before, but I would like this to be entirely clear: DO NOT PLAY TO AN EXPECTED WIN CONDITION. I see too many people doing just that. In the here and now, every agnostic's duty should be to find God and preferably today, while we're in majority. So move your lazy asses and stop lurking and being scummy already.

[Bloodmoney]

Making a mental note to post here after I'm done with my main account's game(s).

[Bloodmoney]

Why wouldn't you want to see reactions in this particular game? Don't you want the cult leaders accidentally slipping info on who your God is? Of course, the question is rhetorical, considering you are a cult leader.

You aren't reaction-mining, you are being belligerent. Two very different things. The point is you aren't doing any convincing of your findings, but simply moving on to get angry at others. Which makes me question why you did it in the first place.

Big game, multiple targets. I have to get my bearings too, why do you expect me to finger scum based on a small pool of reactions?

Oh? Why was that? To the best of my knowledge ortolan has a voice of his own. Need your recruit/leader alive?

An honest mixup turned into a cult leader-recruit relationship? One aptitude of belligerent people is finding conflict where there is none. Another is finding connections where there isn't any, as in the case of me and zach.

That wasn't even directed at you. Why answer?

QUOTE ME.

Ok, thank you. You could do that next time without me having to cuss at you.

Tell me, how is that the same as dropping the case? I dropped the line of questioning, because he gave me what I asked for. It doesn't absolve him of the lack of initial contribution, but there is nothing further I can ask of him at that point.

Also, you realize this vote makes no sense whatsoever, don't you? Even if you had basis for it (which "excessive fingerpointing" isn't), simply by stating the "pressure vote" nature of it you rob it of any purpose it would otherwise have had; because now I know that you wouldn't have the guts to go through with lynching me.

I'm not making a case against you, I am simply defending myself. You made an accusation way back when and I'm doing my best to convince you otherwise of your faulty logic. I never said you were God/Cult/Scum/whatever and I never said I wanted to lynch you. It has nothing to do with guts because I don't think you are God, but a horribly misguided agnostic. And I don't want to lynch agnostics, but to educate them.

Why does defending yourself include voting me? Why do you have to explicitly state the "pressure vote" characteristic of your vote? If you think I'm an agnostic, do you really think the best way to "educate" and reform me is to OMGUS me? Nicely done buddying up, btw.

Also, actually stating that you think I don't have the guts to lynch you is a very big mistake on your part, because not only are you belligerent, but you are cocky and think you're invincible. You don't win as town by standing out like that. There is someone like you in every game I play and

almost

every time they make a bad decision with consequences against the town. I'm simply tired of seeing such self-destructive behavior.

Huh? And I'm getting personal? I work my ass off scraping together working material for this town, and I'm being destructive. Huh. I guess I'll just make like the lurkers here and hope to be recruited for an easy win.

DGB, for reference, do you mean bussing as lynching a scumpartner to appear innocent, or simply distancing?

eh; something happened and my post didn't happen or something.
I'm agreeing with MK on the grounds of playing for future WinCons, I want bloodymonkey or someone to point people that seem to be playing like this, because apparently I'm blind.

All of the lurkers are either scum or playing towards an expected wincon of recruited cult: Erratus Apathos, Indigo Heron, Double A, ortolan, qwints. Quite probably more. And yes, it's MONEY, not monkey.

ortolan, post 337, note how zwet's defense is snuck in there with the implication that he would be a mislynch. If you have a scummy read of him, why do you think he'd be a mislynch, do tell?

"But furthermore the cult leaders have no particular reason to dissociate themselves from God-"

Try thinking of AItP. But with the assassin having a very sucky role. And the guards being cultists in 3 different groups. and add a bunch of vanillas waiting to be recruited who for the moment want god lynched instead.

What purpose does this post serve? The analogy is overly complicated and completely useless, especially since you don't explain the referenced strategy in AItP, without which your point has no purpose.

ortolan, why am I god? Other than my obvious godliness, of course.

[Bloodmoney]

DGB, for reference, do you mean bussing as lynching a scumpartner to appear innocent, or simply distancing?

Both. It may mean voting a buddy when it's clear the buddy won't be lynched, or it may mean actually pushing for a buddy's lynch.

You do agree, then, that the latter type of bussing--going through with the lynch--will not likely happen with god as the lynchee? This is an important point by which God can be found later on; consider Lover Mafia.

All of the lurkers are

either

(scum)

or

(playing towards an expected wincon of recruited cult): Erratus Apathos, Indigo Heron, Double A, ortolan, qwints. Quite probably more.

Is this a slip? You seem to think I am playing for future recruitment (i.e. playing pro-scum) while knowing that I am not presently scum.

Please note the formatting in the initial quote. You either don't read what you quote, or you are opting for blatant misrepping instead of actual helpful contribution. Feel free to tell me if it's the latter.

Bolded important stuff above. I'm trying to find the purpose of the wording of these posts. I just wrote a bunch of stuff, but it was stupid and I need to think more. Something just....bugs me about it. Part of it deals with the comment I made earlier about putting the blame on so many people. Part of it deals with it being repeated so much, like that your opinion is god-like and should be followed (i.e. instead of being lurking sheep with no opinion, they should be lurking sheep with your opinion). Essentially, this is the kind of thing you only say once, yet you say it three times.

I would only have to say it once if people who weren't scum stopped lurking and started helping find god. And I never said my opinion is god-like. Hell no, feel free to bring something of your own to the table, but I don't see this from a lot of people. I don't want lurking sheep with my opinion, I want active people with opinions that help pinpoint the one person three/six people aren't willing to lynch.

Simply stating that half the players are lurking scum doesn't matter to finding the real scum, aside from any reactions they the lurkers find alarming enough to comment on (which so far hasn't been the case).

Is there someone in particular who's lurking that you want to defend?

unvote, vote: qwints

Are you saying that mykonian is scummy, anti-town, or both? If both, it's not something he's likely to stop.

I'm saying that his logic is painfully obviously broken and he should realize it. The derailing the town comment is about how he draws people to comment on his broken logic. So, anti-town and not specifically scummy.

I don't think Blood is helping much.

I don't think zwet is helping at all.

[Bloodmoney]

Jebus, are you freaking kidding me? You know who's on my scumlist, and you keep pretending you don't.

Well, you could, you know, try to be actually helpful and reiterate.

pacman, you could try posting something helpful too.

Well, you're right, I did misread it, it must have been in an attempt to give a coherent/charitable interpretation of what you said. So you're calling me a lurker? Do you have any proof of this? Why are lurkers more likely to be scum than those participating in the game, it's no different to any other game where lurking is almost always a null-tell? So I disagree with two aspects of your argument- firstly I don't think I've posted little enough to warrant being classed a lurker, secondly I don't see why not posting as much as others is scummy anyhow- it's probably a mistake of mine to join so many large games which eat time like no other (which might have the effect of limiting my posting ability), but I don't see it raising the probability of me being scum. I will have to read over to see if those people you nominated as lurkers actually are as well, because I just don't see it in my case.

lurking is much more anti-town (agnostic) in this game, because we very likely won't have majority by tomorrow. I want to do what I can Day 1, before the power of lynching is wrested from my hands. Cult/god need only to stall and/or mislynch today, and Nietzsche has a high possibility of misfiring too; that's why I suspect all lurkers of being scum or expecting to become one.

[Bloodmoney]

lolumwot?

anti-town=agnostic? huh?

Haha, no. town=agnostic. I meant to say that town can be substituted with agnostic.

[Bloodmoney]

I don't get mask's last post, especially the last sentence.

You mentioned a "context tell" committed by X, but ignored the plea to elaborate. Please be kind and answer, lest I think you're pulling shit out your ass.

[Bloodmoney]

Got prod; no time to read and post, sorry

Will catch up tonight

[Bloodmoney]

I've read up and honestly, nothing new has happened. qwints is still non-posting scum, I'm, say, fifty percent on him being god to boot. He's much more lurkish than Pacman is, and add to that the slight difference in meta--qwints is usually more useful than this. Which is why I don't understand the focus on the latter instead of the former.

DGB is probcult if qwints is god.

Double A is still posting nothing relevant, and I get the feeling he's purposely playing the unknowing newbie. If he's honestly lost in confusion, I urge him to get himself replaced ASAP because this is not the kind of game you should learn mafia with.

I don't understand what Jebus is asking, and I'm not letting Pacman off the hook. Not by a long shot.

Well, what makes him god of all things? I agree with ortolan; feel free to read up on his posts in other games, he's generally useless.

[Bloodmoney]

DAMMIT

that was me.

[Bloodmoney]

In other words, DoubleA and zwet are intent on taking one for the team and having the agnostics lose their majority (unless the culting goes particularly badly N1, today is the only game day agnostics actually have control over the lynch.)

[Bloodmoney]

That's new. How so?

[Bloodmoney]

Oh. Ha. Haha. Haaa.

[Bloodmoney]

Suddenly I want to lynch Jebus.

unvote, vote: Jebus

Did God tell you to?

[Bloodmoney]

zwet, stop playing DGB. One (plus alts) is more than enough of her.

Also, seeing SP's yet another overreaction, I'm tempted to vote Jebus, although his reaction is mild compared to when I attacked zach.

[Bloodmoney]

I find both of the said reactions rather mild, in terms of tone and action.

Initially, sure. But then I replied and the shit hit the fan. Blech.

To add, not every scum action in every mafia game is a distancing act. That was the point of my vote on DGB.

Did you just call yourself scum?

Oh snap DGB got there first.

Anyway, zwet: you aren't being particularly funny or particularly helpful.

[Bloodmoney]

That's generally what happens when you laugh at someone's insight.

I'm sorry; I'm happy when I find scum.

[quote7"SP"]Oh so I'm distancing now? FROM WHO. [/quote]

I wasn't really serious, it's pretty obviously a typo.

BTW xofelf, thanks for replacing, now that you had some things clarified for you it'd be nice to have a set of opinions from you. Like nowish.

[Bloodmoney]

zwet is obvcult and trying to be a distraction. Ignore him, he's no use to us.

xofelf gives opinions detailing only me and how scummy I've been, which other players would gladly call OMGUS. Luckily for her I believe that OMGUS is a fairytale. Nevertheless I'd like her to give something on everyone, if her time permits naturally, and I don't intend to be snippy, pretty please with sugar on top.

As for your points--I didn't ever get angry, I was trying to get some reactions. I accused people of being opportunistic because that's what they were, jumping to "obvious" conclusions and piggy-backing on others' sloppy points if they made or agreed with any points at all. I make up my mind about roles based on their actions, and

of course

I'm not gonna let them argue me out of it--they shouldn't be out to convince me this way or that, they should be out to find God. I change my mind based on their actions, not based on how good they argued against my accusation.

BTW qwints is the best lynch here.

[Bloodmoney]

You could try to pretend you are town, qwints.

[Bloodmoney]

mm... well, there is no time, going on nolynch would just give cult leaders extra time to recruit, so I will

unvote, vote: qwints.

I'm starting to believe qwints is culted...

Then why the FUCK are you voting him you berk?

[Bloodmoney]

Oh that's right, forgot. Rival cults.

[Bloodmoney]

Who's your leader?

[Bloodmoney]

X, don't be fucking stupid. The only one we

want

to lynch is God. If qwints tells me who his leader is, I'm lynching pacman instead.

[Bloodmoney]

Also, the fact God didn't night-kill Jebus last night (i.e. because he already knows he's not Nietzsche despite qwints tipping him off) means he's pretty much guaranteed to be a cult leader.

No. It more likely means that qwints was trying to fool us and Jebus is God.

al_kohaulec "HAMMAH'ed" qwints but really the hammer had already happened. He didn't show any sign of suspecting qwints before that post and in fact said he didn't understand the wagon in post 680. His late fake-hammer could be an attempt to look town after the damage was already done. It is the best example of possible distancing I see here.

This is a good point.

Jahudo: Easily one of the stronger pushers for the qwints wagon. I don't like that he hopped off after qwints claimed recruit though.

Mykonian: Hop.
I also don't like how he unvoted when qwints claimed recruit.

I think they're rival cult and they didn't want a simple recruit dead. They were likely aiming for a leader (which they eventually got).

Yay! Day two!



So we got the Christian, well at least there is one less cult to worry about.

cult leader/culted, although I don't know what idiot would cult Double A

My candidates for god are Jebus and al, al less likely because it was Jahudo (cult candidate) who made the point against him. Likely cult: mykonian, Jahudo, Double A.

[Bloodmoney]

I'm less inclined to believe that Jebus is god. I need to do a reread on qwints, but his last claim did sound like an act of desparation. We were talking about lynching Jebus the following day if he was still alive, and with the noose already around qwints' neck, he wouldn't want to throw in God's name and get him lynched as well.

Also, since qwints is dead, he lost. There's nothing he can do now, it's simply game over. There's little reason to try to fool us now, so it's reasonable he was telling the truth, which lends to the idea that jebus is a cult leader.

That's a good point on qwints having lost already.

Either way my statement that Jebus being God is more likely based on qwints' final words is BS. And DGBcult's pavlovian reaction implies Jebus is a CL rather than God. ortolan and X are either still untouched or pay more attention.

Ah, but this reaction is also telling. If Double A wants another cult dead, he's either misguided or cult. I'd lean toward the former, but even if it is the latter, we don't want him dead. FoS: ZSW.

Ah, but if he's a simple recruit we

do

want him dead. Even if it's particularly unlikely that any idiot following the game would cult Double A.

That makes a lot of sense. However, it could also be, "Vote: God." Not the most logical move, but distancing is natural, and when you only know one "partner"...

I agree with al here. A CL wouldn't keep pushing a wagon that has potential for a lynch if the lynchee was God.

Basically, I meant that Jebus is most likely agnostic because qwints has a high chance of lying about the whole Jebus thing.

So why, again, didn't God kill Jebus? You sir are bullshitting and want for some reason to be able to call Jebus agnostic.

[Bloodmoney]

However, also note the italics. Let's look at what qwints said yesterday (in isolated posts):
P14: "I am culted." LIE
P15: Clarification: "Yes I am a recruit."LIE
P16: Complete turnaround to saying he's CL, and framing Jebus for either being Nietzsche, CL, or God Truth, ???
Why should I take his word for truth? He only said one truth in those three posts. Give me a good reason.

For fuckssake use your sense man. To claim recruit is the only thing that has potential to stop a lynch--a recruit, while anti-town, takes only one player away from the pro-God groups, which is not worth lynching for. CLs on the other hand take a third of the pro-God groups down with them. Naturally if qwints wanted to survive he wouldn't claim CL.

In contrast: when he claimed Jebus as the failed recruit he had already lost everything, the lynch was sealed, and there was no reason he wouldn't try to give God a heads-up.

And stop being belligerent. It really just looks like you want me dead, now that you slipped in accusing me of something I didn't say.

Why should I stop being belligerent? We're a fucking lynch mob. And yes, you

did

say what I quoted you saying--the fact that you are considering multiple roles for Jebus is the very thing I'm attacking. He cannot be an agnostic because God would have fucking smitten him. He cannot be a recruit because God wouldn't have fucking known he is fucking cult and would have burnt him to a fucking crisp. He cannot be Nietzsche because God would have popped a cap in his ass.

Fucking fuck.

[Bloodmoney]

Hey look, some filler from pacmanscum

[Bloodmoney]

My list isn't a list, it's an order. Realistically, he is either agnostic or CL. Why can't you accept the possibility that qwints was a two-faced liar, since he already clearly was? And actually answer my question this time, and, you know, CONSIDER VALID ALTERNATE HYPOTHESES. (That's my whole "stop being belligerent" point, I don't care if you don't agree with me, but insinuating that I'm scum because I don't agree with you is both maddening and complete tripe)

No; realistically, he's either CL or God, in that order, with the first option far in the lead. If he was agnostic he'd be long dead on account of God's fury. I can accept that qwints was a two-faced liar. So? He still had some motivation to try and help God, and give him some information to consider regarding a night kill. I WILL CONSIDER VALID ALTERNATE HYPOTHESES IF YOU PRESENT SOME.

BTW I wasn't saying you're scum because you don't agree with me. I was saying you aren't thinking properly. Jebus-agnostic=dead in this scenario. Jebus-recruit=dead in this scenario. On the other hand God has no incentive to kill Jebus-God or Jebus-leader, the first being self-explanatory and the second because one CL down means if another dies Game Over.

And this line of discussion is definitely fruitful if it can lead you to realize that any hypothesis that presumes Jebus-agnostic is fundamentally flawed.

-----------

Jebus, if you aren't CL, why are you still alive? You're implying that qwints wanted you dead--why would he?

If you are avoiding a CL claim simply because you don't want to die, don't be afraid. a Cult Leader claim will make you lynch-immune as long as the third cult doesn't have majority--which won't realistically happen.

So grow a pair and tell the truth.

If we take Jebus and quints to be true, then two cults tried to recruit him the same night, and he's currently a recruit in either Jewish or Islamic faiths.

This still doesn't explain why Jebus-agnostic would still be alive. Him not being NK'd would in no way assure a Jebus-lynch because he's most likely CL based on not being killed--and with a CL dead there is no incentive for anyone but cult (not the faction that controls NKs) to kill Jebus-leader.

Hey look, some filler from pacmanscum

NOOO NOT OTHER INSANE ZSWET NOO

I know you only say this because your post was filler and you are afraid to admit it. Scum.

He is starting to act as you did in middle D1. that scares me.
Also, I ask for explanation (WAIT, I DIDN'T! Well, I'll do now).

Active lurking is an offense punishable by lynch mob. Is that a good enough reason?

BTW your focus on this point instead of far more relevant ones is confirmation that you are avoiding having to contribute.

[Bloodmoney]

@mykonian: either I'm very convincing or you're more short-sighted than I thought. Maybe sarcastic. Cult Leaders won't claim voluntarily--they still haven't lost.

Jebus, on the other hand, has yet to adequately explain himself, and if he is indeed Cult Leader, claiming the truth would be enough clarification in itself.

[Bloodmoney]

BTW I'm contemplating a zwetGod scenario. He's been doing a fairly good under the radar gig so far with one-liners that have sufficient insight without being too helpful. He mentioned qwints once as having no read on him, failed to mention him for his next 40 posts only to vote him for wishy-washiness (a few days prior to deadline as the third vote on the wagon) and makes some "LYNCHQWINTSSCUM" comments leading up to the lynch. Godly behaviour, if I may say so.

[Bloodmoney]

I think DGB is god.

Please refrain from bringing up my personal life into the game.

hahaha

<3

[Bloodmoney]

Now that you made me go and look, in no particular way.

[Bloodmoney]

simulposting, yay

I was talking to DGB 862

[Bloodmoney]

@mykonian: either I'm very convincing or you're more short-sighted than I thought. Maybe sarcastic. Cult Leaders won't claim voluntarily--they still haven't lost.

they can't lose by claiming, can they. and we still have our superweapon, and we don't want that accidentaly to hit a CL, don't we?

The fact that god and CL could look so much like each other annoys me. It could easily make us lose.

and it might have also other uses, don't you think?

Hmm I see where you're going. What actually is true is CLs don't want the

rival

leader to claim and get lynch immunity--but by claiming they will draw the other CL's claim as well because the remaining leader will have no motivation to remain undercover. So the fact is that CLs would be best off claiming if they could avoid the other CL claiming, which is unavoidable.

So Jebus is one CL, and you won't get him lynched, other CL. Please claim now.

And you make a fine point also, SP. So zwet is unlikely to be God.

[Bloodmoney]

I think DGB's deliberately playing cult.

vote: DGB

Bloodmoney (regarding 825), don't insert "fuck" or a derivative thereof in between every word.

Oh?

[Bloodmoney]

What are you implying?

[Bloodmoney]

What are you implying?

That to suggest that someone may be faking cult is utter nonsense. Wouldn't you agree?

No. Cult is not the priority for the town, and would not be a lynch target. God would do well to fake cult.

Jahudo: note how mykonian accuses zwet of being CL and DGB votes zwet immediately and without explanation.

[Bloodmoney]

First: be clear on what you say. One-liner fashion is ununderstandable and annoying, mostly if you aren't good at english.
Second: *facepalm* I'm V/LA. I don't know if I said it before.
Also, I didn't post to another things because I had no time.
Rereading at swift speed, with possible post soon.

I like how you resort to personal attacks in lieu of any game-related comments you might make. As an aside, I think my english is more than good, and the meaning of "filler" and "pacmanscum" is quite obvious.

[Bloodmoney]

unvote, vote: al_kohaulec

[Bloodmoney]

SP, if you're asking my why I voted for al, it's pretty self explanatory if you look at his two most recent posts and the respective time stamps. Coupled with his faux hammer and his general "I'm eager to help the town" attitude screams scum.

X's myk-case is intriguing although written from an extremely biased perspective. I'm not really behind the mykonian-thing. Either an al- or a pacman-lynch would be my guess.

[Bloodmoney]

On a tangential note: INDIGO HERON NEEDS TO POST

[Bloodmoney]

Gurgi: please prod Indigo for me.

[Bloodmoney]

I am really sorry for this, and I apologize for Gurgi and the players, but I have no time for mafia whatsoever at this point.

mod: please replace me.