Mini 768- Root of All Evil (Game Over)

[Verbosity]

I am going to vote for Pablo Molinero. I believe that he is the weakest player, and so most prone to revealing his alignment under pressure, and should he be town-aligned, would be least damaging to the town dead. I would appreciate additional votes to cause pressure on Pablo Molinero. Until then, I will place my vote accordingly:

Vote: Pablo Molinero

. Thank you for your time.

Please direct all counter arguments now, failure to do so will be regarded as implicit agreement with my strategy, failure to follow my strategy while being in agreement with it will warrant suspicion.

[Verbosity]

Vote: Verbosity

Be more concise man, it's just a random vote.

Is your purpose to constrain discussion? Or are you just too lazy to wade through my posts? I am being lengthy for the purposes of clarity, I make all my thought processes perfectly open. To me, your vote for my behaviour is suspect, because there is no town motivation for such an action, except sloth, which is no contribution to the town at all.

I don't know what you're planning with this verbosity, but it's a terrible idea.

Please expand on this, why is pressuring a weak link a bad idea? Do you not want discussion? It is clearly the best plan of action to pressure a weak link into revealing their alignment, whether consciously or otherwise. Do you disagree? If so, what is your preferred method? If you do not have a reasonably cemented conception of your strategy, why do you resist those that do?

Vote: Jazzmyn

The inability to spell 'jasmine' obviously means that she's dropped out of school and become involved in criminal activities.

No, that was, quite obviously, my parents, who saddled me a mis-spelled name. Me, I'm the black sheep of the family for being the white sheep of the family.

Vote: ChiefSkye4

until he explains what he did to (and where he buried) ChiefSkye1, ChiefSkye2, and ChiefSkye3.

Regards,
Jazz

Why are you ignoring what I have posted? Do you then accept my implicit agreement clause and the accompanying suspicion with failure to comply with my plan? Why do you defend from a random vote?

hey guys

Why are you ignoring what I have posted? Do you then accept my implicit agreement clause and the accompanying suspicion with failure to comply with my plan?

Please direct all counter arguments now, failure to do so will be regarded as implicit agreement with my strategy, failure to follow my strategy while being in agreement with it will warrant suspicion.

I've never played a game with him before, so I have no evidence of that myself.

Vote: ChiefSkye4 until he explains what he did to (and where he buried) ChiefSkye1, ChiefSkye2, and ChiefSkye3

Well, ChiefSkye1 died of natural causes. ChiefSkye2 died of a rotton baked potato poison. ChiefSkye3 died in an unfortunate ski accident. (a little bit of a Simpsons joke. Cookies to anyone who gets it.)

Vote: sekinj

For TCold's flakiness.

Do you agree with the logic of my plan, despite the vote? Have you then played with sekinj before to the extent that you believe that he is weak enough to be most easily pressured? If no to either, why have you followed this particular course of action? Why have you only commented on my target, rather than my method? Is this because you are connected to Pablo Molinero?

Thank you for your time.

[Verbosity]

Unvote
Vote: Verbosity

What is the point of this?

Ok... I really had hoped you were making a joke with your first long post, I really had. It seems, however, you aren't. (If you are, now is the time to go 'hahahaha I got you all, LOL') For one, how do you know Pablo is a weak link? I'm going to assume you've played with him before? You never said. For two, how is it fair, on page 1, to put a vote on said player for no more reason than that? For three, if you hadn't noticed, there is thing called a random voting stage, and in it, we generally have some fun, throw out silly votes, and hope the scum will make blatant slips (hardly ever happens). Now, if you look at the post you've quote of mine (and, nearly all the others you've quoted) they are examples of random votes. Now, my random vote was essentially a joke about your name, and the length of your post. (at the time, I assumed it was some elaborate joke). Concise is the opposite of verbose, right?

So please, if you are indeed joking, tell us. If you aren't, well I'd really like to know your reasoning for your actions. If your intention was to have a record time for the RVS, I feel you may have just succeeded. Personally, I'm a little pissed off, as the RVS is a nice little fun way to start a game, and you've just gone and ruined it.

Actually, I picked him

because

he hadn't confirmed yet. I was more interested in seeing how people would react to my actions, your actions seem indicative of a townie. Despite this, you and a number of other players seem to think that the Random Voting Stage is as holy as the Sabbath. It's not. The faster we can get out of this stage and into the real game, the better the game will be. Your intent to maximise the random voting stage comes off as childish, rather than particularly scummy.

At any rate, there is nothing that needs to be "fair" about my votes. This is not a game of "fair", this is mafia. Once again, despite the general idiocy of this comment, I feel that it is largely of town motivation.

Oh, and also, I'm curious Verbosity. Your registration date is rather recent. Have you played mafia on another site? Same goes for Gateway and kpaca, what's your experience?

I am an alt. An alt of whom, I will not say.

Re: Spolium, see above.

I am going to vote for Pablo Molinero. I believe that he is the weakest player, and so most prone to revealing his alignment under pressure, and should he be town-aligned, would be least damaging to the town dead. I would appreciate additional votes to cause pressure on Pablo Molinero. Until then, I will place my vote accordingly: Vote: Pablo Molinero. Thank you for your time.

So, you want to lynch someone without any evidence for him being scum just because he's not worth the most to the town? Give the guy a chance.

That is not what I said. Jumping to conclusions like that is indicative of scapegoating, and thus is largely scum motivated behaviour. I said that I wanted to apply pressure to him, to get him to crack.

Please direct all counter arguments now, failure to do so will be regarded as implicit agreement with my strategy, failure to follow my strategy while being in agreement with it will warrant suspicion.

So, basically, you're saying anyone who doesn't agree with your strategy and vote PM is suspicious? Please see my 'counter-argument' up there.

Once again, no, that is not what I said. I said that if you agree with my plan, implicitly or otherwise, as I said I would assume prior, and if you then fail to follow the plan, it is suspicious. I did not in fact demand that everyone agree, did not say that people who disagreed would be scum. Stop misinterpreting my posts and strawmanning me. This is horrendously scummy behaviour.

To me, your vote for my behaviour is suspect, because there is no town motivation for such an action, except sloth, which is no contribution to the town at all.

Unfortunately, people will be lazy, be they townie or scum. You need to make sure people at least read your arguments, if you make them too long people will just skim and miss the facts.

I am attempting to make clear all my thought processes and hide nothing. That is hard to do while being concise as you apparently think is good. You shall likely learn from play with MafiaSSK how infuriating conciseness is.

Why are you ignoring what I have posted? Do you then accept my implicit agreement clause and the accompanying suspicion with failure to comply with my plan?

Quite probably because at that time it was still the random voting stage. See above, chances are they've skipped your post. This doesn't make them scum.
Also - are you admitting to a little sloth there, copy-pasting the same argument to three people? :P

If they skip my post, they are deliberately minimising information for the town, there is only scum motivation for that. The copy paste was because the questions were wholly valid, and I only copy pasted once, as I remember.

Is this significant, Verbosity, or a mere oversight?

I'd also like to hear this.

Above.

Unvote
Vote: Verbosity

1. You're pointlessly querying people in the RVS. Ignoring your post doesn't make them scum.
2. You're perfectly willing to kill someone who is, in all probability, pro-town - or force someone to reveal their role by pressuring them who you have no evidence for being scum.
3. Be concise, dammit.

These questions are not pointless, and as I have said, ignoring them is completely detrimental to the town, and by extension, scummy behaviour.

I am willing to put

pressure

upon that person.

You

jumped to the conclusion that I was willing to kill him. Your eagerness to ride my wagon is indicative of scum as is your strawman.

Why should I? Is it scummy to make all my thought processes known? What I have done is end the Random Voting Stage almost immediately, that is a good thing.

Welcome MafiaSSK - Could I get your opinion on Verbose's play so far?

This is contradictory. Why is it not scummy to ignore my posts, yet you follow this up with a request for a response?

vote: mafiassk

the clue is in the name.

See previous questions about why you ignore my posts.

Welcome MafiaSSK - Could I get your opinion on Verbose's play so far?

I believe it's acceptable for the RVS.

I would appreciate expansion on this point.

Unvote; Vote: molestargazer

[Verbosity]

That is not what I said. Jumping to conclusions like that is indicative of scapegoating, and thus is largely scum motivated behaviour. I said that I wanted to apply pressure to him, to get him to crack.

If he is inexperienced as you say, getting him to crack will only elicit so-called 'scummy' behaviour from him, which will lead to a lynch, and in all probability, the death of a townie.
Pressure us fine. Cracking people without evidence to back it up isn't.

This is a common misconception. Getting people to crack merely leads them to post in what I like to call a "natural" way, without any guards or screens. In the case of scum, this reveals what they are, in the case of town, it does the same. You just need to know what to see.

I did not in fact demand that everyone agree, did not say that people who disagreed would be scum.

Is that what I said? No.
I said that people who agree AND don't do anything are scum.
I did not say that you demanded people to agree, nor did I say that people who disagreed would be scum. I gave you a counter-argument which showed that I disagreed.

Fair enough. I must have misinterpreted you.

If they skip my post, they are deliberately minimising information for the town, there is only scum motivation for that.

I agree. But you have to cater your posts for your audience. I still believe pro-town players will skip simply because it takes too long.

I'm going to continue as is necessary to fully disclose my thoughts.

This is contradictory. Why is it not scummy to ignore my posts, yet you follow this up with a request for a response?

It is a nulltell to ignore your posts. I wanted to know MafiaSSK's opinion as it's a good starting point for a replacement, and that topic is certainly the one right now. It also served to provide us with another point of view, which is never a bad thing.

It is not a null tell. Besides, he is a replacement on the first page, it is not as if he needs help.

These questions are not pointless, and as I have said, ignoring them is completely detrimental to the town, and by extension, scummy behaviour.

Interesting. Do I understand you correctly in interpreting this to mean "anti-town behaviour is tantamount to scummy behaviour"?

Anti-town behaviour and scummy behaviour are separate animals. Scummy is something that is suspicious, anti-town is flagrantly indicative that the player is scum. It's more like degrees of bad, really.

Verbosity's I made without any statement because I really wanted to see Verbosity's reply. As it stands I really believe Verbosity has self esteem problems and wants us to off them, (Voted on first day)

So for now I will be changing my vote.

UNVOTE

But I am suspicious of of the Verb, but only little now, and would like to look more into it on Day 2.

In the interest of good education, common practice is to lynch those who claim jesters or those who you believe to be jesters, they are more often scum than jester. Back to relevance, I am not a jester. If I were a jester, I would have asked for replacement. Jesters are not a role for a decent game, which I believe Battousai knows well. Think I'm scum if you want, but don't insult me like that.

The principle behind cracking someone is no different to that of pressuring someone.

The principle may be the same, but the difference lies in how far you take it, IMO.

Agree.

(1) I ignored what you posted initially because I thought it was a joke, since it seemed to me to be utterly ridiculous on its face, thus I did not consider that it had been written seriously.

(2) I do not agree with your initial premise, nor with your decree that anyone who does not do as you ask implicitly agrees with your plan, nor with your assertion that anyone who does not do as you ask is, therefore, inherently suspicious. Frankly, I think your attempt to bandwagon a player who had not even picked up his role PM nor checked into the thread, is ridiculous. You say that it was to apply pressure - but that could not possibly be effective when the player was not even present. Moreover, you provided no basis for your assertion that Pablo is a weak player who would crack under pressure and reveal his alignment, and no basis for your assertion that if he is town-aligned, he would be "least damaging to the town dead". Your casual dismissal of a player who was not even here to defend himself, frankly, stinks.

(3) What you imagine to be a "defence" is nothing of the sort. It's called a joke - you should perhaps look into the meaning of the word some time.

Regards,
Jazz

(1) ...

(2) It is not ridiculous to expect a response. The only recourse I have if someone ignores my posts is that they agree with them, or are scum. If somone agrees with my plan, but fails to follow it, that is suspicious, wouldn't you agree? Beyond this, I believe I have already explained that I picked the player who had not confirmed because I wanted the responses from the rest of you, and how eager you are to defend a random person.

(3) Interestingly enough, defending from a vote like that is often indicative that the person has something to hide. The guilty run if they see a cop, etc.

@Verbosity: I can see your logic, and I understand the RVS isn't something we want to stay in for too long, but seriously, page 1 man? It's a bit of fun. If you wanted to piss off nearly everyone and set yourself up as a lynching target, you've done wonderfully. Also, attacking people for not looking at an overly wordy post in the RVS is not really something that I see as worthwhile, or beneficial.

Are you suggesting that people want to lynch me for ending the RVS? I'm not writing a book here, it's not that much to read, if I can write it and respond to all of your complaints about it, you can read it.

vote: verbosity

You have already shown your aptitude at pointing out every small thing in a given players post and dubbing it "horrendously scummy" so i can only imagine what you would have done with who you call "the weakest player".
Most probably witch hunt.

That was in fact one (1) thing that I did that to. If you've noticed, I actually said that Azhrei is town. Explain how my actions could be motivated by the scum, and why those motivations are greater than those for a townie.

For those that are curious:

Scum

molestargazer
ChiefSkye4
Jazzmyn
ThAdmiral
MafiaSSK
Gateway
Spolium
Azhrei

Town

??? - Please post more
sekinj
Archon
kpaca

[Verbosity]

Ironically, I find myself strapped for time to make a longer post, I promise you all a response tomorrow, but for now I should clarify, Azhrei that what I posted above was a

spectrum

. Scum at the top, town at the bottom, the others were people who have not posted or not posted enough.

[Verbosity]

Alright to address a few points
Spolium - Why do I think he's gun-ho, because I feel he's living up to the term verbosity, we'll know more on day two. See post 36... Again, reading the above posts Verb is either scum, or a gung-ho person that likes to move in a direction and for the second is perhaps flustered by us talking and discussion the idea instead of doing it. (should see me play call of duty and explain the concept of rushing B in the beginning of every map and ignoring the one they start by, it looks just about the same)

Trust me I think Verbosity is blowing wind, and stirring up more trouble then they are worth, but still I am going on the vote that they are townie.

With that said though, and the fact Verbosity has us focused on someone we shouldn't, we might as well make Verbosity the day one lynch.

Vote: Verbosity

Why is it a good idea to lynch someone you believe to be town?

wow. a busy day...

verb - now that ssk has replaced in, have you moved your vote because it was no longer on what you considered the weakest player? do you now consider the molester the weakest player? or have you moved your vote because of your suspicion of molester? I'm just trying to figure out if the 'weakest player' bit had any validity to it, or if you ONLY picked that player becuase he/she had not yet confirmed. therefore was useful in your presentation of your 'plan', which in reality was just a mechanic to spark discussion.

SSK is not a weak player, but the reason I moved my vote was more to lynch molestargazer, because I believe that he is scum. You're probably the smartest player in this game. Do you have anything more helpful to add?

Bad logic

Incompetence is not a good excuse for scapegoating.

vote: verbosity

You have already shown your aptitude at pointing out every small thing in a given players post and dubbing it "horrendously scummy" so i can only imagine what you would have done with who you call "the weakest player".
Most probably witch hunt.

That was in fact one (1) thing that I did that to. If you've noticed, I actually said that Azhrei is town. Explain how my actions could be motivated by the scum, and why those motivations are greater than those for a townie.

Regarding azhrei he could be your scum partner. (this is theoritcal and does not necessarily reflect how I feel)

Regarding how your actions could be motivated by the scum: if a scum were to focus on a player they believed to be the weakest, by putting pressure on them and scrutinizing their words, they could most likely get a wagon going and possibly a lynch.

I'm just going to ignore what you just said. Out of respect for your skill.

The last part of my request was the most important part. In order for your accusation to be valid in any way, shape or form, you must prove why I would have more motivation to act as I have as scum than is town.

Anti-town behaviour and scummy behaviour are separate animals. Scummy is something that is suspicious, anti-town is flagrantly indicative that the player is scum. It's more like degrees of bad, really.

Strange. I would define scummy/anti-town the other way around, but I think I see what you mean.

Good.

Another question (open to others as well) - I have seen it noted on occasion that scum will commonly declare the RVS over, usually in an aggressive manner and implying/declaring that it is for the good of the town. I have not come across this myself, but what's your take on that? What do you think of it in light of this game?

Any competent player wants to end the random voting stage as soon as humanly possible. It's not indicative of alignment. I don't think that the circumstances in this case are any different. Though some players desire to continue the RVS is strange. Frankly, it's also stupid.

Spolium - Why do I think he's gun-ho, because I feel he's living up to the term verbosity, we'll know more on day two. See post 36

Given that "verbosity" means an excess of word use (typically more than necessary to clarify a point), I find it odd that you attribute this to towniness, when it is a null tell at best.

That's actually not true in general terms. Scum players are more inclined to post less, to attempt to avoid revealing information about themselves. In my case, I imagine I would act like this regardless of my alignment.

Would Mafia push that hard though, Verb has pretty much guaranteed a day two lynching if they lead a bandwagon in such a strong way and it is wrong.

That said, I don't think Verbosity is saying more than is necessary. He's said a lot to a lot of people, which is different.

:)

This is a common misconception. Getting people to crack merely leads them to post in what I like to call a "natural" way, without any guards or screens. In the case of scum, this reveals what they are, in the case of town, it does the same. You just need to know what to see.

I still stand by the viewpoint that new players will not post naturally, their playstyle will become worse under pressure. That's certainly how it was for me - perhaps I'm generalising a bit, but it isn't going to change my opinion.

You are generalising, but whether or not you're right is a matter of opinion, more than anything, and I would not want to get into a discussion on theory when we have better things to be doing.

I'm going to continue as is necessary to fully disclose my thoughts.

I'm going to drop this argument now.
I know I will take time to fully read your posts. Let's move on.

:)

In the interest of good education, common practice is to lynch those who claim jesters or those who you believe to be jesters, they are more often scum than jester. Back to relevance, I am not a jester. If I were a jester, I would have asked for replacement. Jesters are not a role for a decent game, which I believe Battousai knows well. Think I'm scum if you want, but don't insult me like that.

Where did he say you might be a jester?

He said that I might want to be lynched. There's only one role that does that.

do you now consider the molester the weakest player? or have you moved your vote because of your suspicion of molester?

1) MOLE. My avatar. Read.
2) I would hope that his vote was because he believed I was scum when I disagreed with his initial post and voting, and not because I'm a useless player. :P

Sho' Nuff.

"You're over analyzing on this one"

No such thing, good sir.

I'm 50/50 agree/disagree with this bit.
Yes, it's possible to overanalyse a person's post to draw connotations from it that they simply did not / would not have meant.
However, it isn't possible to look at someone too much if you think they're scum.

It is always possible to be tunnel-visioned.

I have seen it noted on occasion that scum will commonly declare the RVS over, usually in an aggressive manner and implying/declaring that it is for the good of the town. I have not come across this myself, but what's your take on that? What do you think of it in light of this game?

I don't think saying that RVS is over is a scumtell. It's merely an indication that said player wants to get on with the game, be it for pro-town or pro-scum purposes. It will heavily depend on the context in which it is said.

Given that "verbosity" means an excess of word use (typically more than necessary to clarify a point)

Hence his posts, which are long. I believe that's what he was trying to get at.

Gasp!

Verbosity - Do you still believe I am the best bet for a lynch D1? If so, why?

I think you're scum. (Yes.)

Thank you for your time.

[Verbosity]

Gateway, so you know, it's very unlikely that we will ever "know" anything in the way you seem to think we will. The chances of a cop claiming with reliable information is practically null. This is not Something Awful, on mafiascum, we play a better game of mafia. You had better get used to using reasoning, not relying on reveals or claims to do your work for you. I find your logic (if it can even be called that) to be severely lacklustre. Despite that, I think you are more stupid than you are scum, so I will not vote for you, as I think we would be better served with a molestargazer lynch. Regardless of your alignment, you need to clean up your play. Think out what you say, don't just run off at the mouth. Just because you don't have a convenient answer to chase doesn't mean your opinions should change with the wind. If you change your opinions too much, they become worthless, as they are rapidly becoming to me.

Sekinj: Why are you not voting? Surely there's enough information to scrounge a vote from, and the random voting stage is well over with.

Those voting Gateway: Why do you think that his play is indicative of scum, rather than stupid?

[Verbosity]

It wasn't an attack, I was just stating my opinion. I can't even comprehend the desire to lengthen the random voting stage.

That only works if you think that the player would crack, and frankly I think Gateway is not collected enough to be a valid choice for that strategy.

I also get the feeling that those of you that suspect Gateway will not switch to molestargazer at any soon point, is that accurate?

[Verbosity]

I'm sick with something vaguely similar to strep throat, so I apologise for my brevity, I am not up to a long post at the moment.

Panzer: I'm having more fun as this alt than I have had with mafia for a long time, so I do not feel that I will be revealing my identity any time soon. That said, you are so unbelievably right about Gateway, that role is so ridiculously broken it's beyond anything that could be called reasonable.

People: Each night he gets a list of an innocent and a scum, and he can then kill one of them. That is so overpowered, it isn't even worth talking about.

Vote: Gateway

. Worst fakeclaim ever. I do not plan on getting off this wagon ever. This is L-1 by my count.

Archon is insane. Whether or not that is scummy I will decide later.

[Verbosity]

Hold on guys.

Gateway: What does "report to you all" mean? Would the moderator post it?

[Verbosity]

Regarding Jazzmyn's post: Jazzmyn, how do you feel about this now? Has you opinion changed at all? I, for one, find the gradual changes quite telling, I have serious doubts about Gateway.

Regarding Panzerjager's post: Your haste to "clear" me comes off as scum wanting to be able to build a case without the need for any strong evidence in this game. While I agree that meta is highly valuable, I am placing my individual desire to have fun over the value of you being able to meta me. Either accept it, or build a case against me without it and get me lynched.

From Panzer's posts in general I get the feeling that Panzerjager and Gateway are opposite alignments. Either Panzerjager is scum and wants to lynch a role that powerful, or Gateway is scum and Panzerjager isn't going to let up. Panzerjager and Gateway: I'd like to know your thoughts about the preceding sentence.

Regarding Azhrei's post: This comes off as far too conciliatory for town. This is a strong connection between Panzer and Azhrei against Gateway.

Regarding Panzerjager's and Azhrei's post, there is a very strong connection between these two against Gateway. Very very strong.

Regarding sekinj's post: This reminds me of a scum trying to distance himself from the inevitable wagon. The difference between scum doing this and town trying to stop a bad wagon, is that town would be pushing a separate wagon, as opposed to just getting the heck off this one. Sekinj is most probably scum. <omitted>

@Verb:

What are your thoughts on molestargazer and Gateway right now? What do you think of ThAdmiral's plan?

Mole is becoming less prominent in my mind. I think that Gateway, Panzer, or sekinj would be a good lynch. ThAdmiral's plan relies on Gateway actually killing, which I think he will dodge and say that he didn't find either scummy. I don't see a fundamental problem with it, though.

Gateway: If you make it to night, you will stick to the plan. At night, you will kill one of them. I don't care if you don't think either are scummy, kill the scummier one. This is not a request, it is instruction.

---

Connections I have noticed:
Panzerjager-Azhrei vs. Gateway
Sekinj-Gateway
Gateway-Verbosity
Spolium-Sekinj
Archon-Verbosity
ThAdmiral-Gateway
Verbosity-molestargazer

Useless people:
MafiaSSK
Archon

---

These are relevant, please respond to them truthfully. They are litmus tests to determine how much you're trying to hide.

Spolium: Do you think you are a nice guy?
Sekinj: Do you get angered easily?
MafiaSSK: What did you have for breakfast?
ThAdmiral: Hi.
Gateway: Do you think that you have many friends, or few friends?
Panzerjager: Do you think you're sensitive?
Azhrei: Do you consider yourself a kind person?
ChiefSkye4: Do you want to be taller?
Jazzmyn: Do you think you're insecure?
kpaca/replacement: Do you think you spend too much time on the internet?

---

Unvote; Vote: sekinj

[Verbosity]

Gateway: Why aren't you voting Panzerjager then? Further, you have been so incoherent that I am not going to put the blame on Panzer for misinterpreting your madness. From your answer I gather that you are highly invested into this game, which sadly only tells me that you are a power role or scum, rather useless at this juncture. In addition, I am getting that you are feeling victimised, which is newbie town. At the same time, you are unwilling to take responsibility for your bad stance, which is characteristic of scum.

sekinj: Do you have any other suggestions regarding who is scum? Or are you intent to be his bodyguard and nothing else? From your answer, specifically the brevity, you're trying to be conservative, and not reveal too much about yourself, scummy. However, you openly admit weakness, which would normally be town, but the guilty manner in which you do admit it is scummy. Further, your attempt to pass it off as a joke is indicative that you intend to pass of what I am saying as made-up, scummy.

Sekinj is a good lynch today.

[Verbosity]

Spolium: Do you think you are a nice guy?

Yeah, I'd consider myself a nice guy. I'm taken though, sorry.

Frankness, no need to cover up with false humility, townish. References to personal life, with light hearted behaviour, townish. Assumptions about my intent, scummish.

[Verbosity]

Just checking in with a friendly threat:

Gateway: If you do not kill a scum, I will lynch you so hard. This includes failing to kill, and killing a townie. Unless scum turn up in a state of deceased, you will die on the morrow. I am not kidding. This is a threat.

[Verbosity]

I've seen the logic. Tonight I will take credit for the kill I make and report the other name. From that we will be able to know a lot.

You'll pardon my audacity for making sure.

In the meantime, sekinj is getting

really

scummy. I love you, babe, but you're scum. And we just can't have that in this house.

I may be slightly delirious from my meds.

[Verbosity]

I am choosing to allow Gateway to continue processing oxygen on the proviso that he continues to turn up corpses for us.

[Verbosity]

Even I think that this conversation is pointless. You guys are just butting heads at this point. The simple fact of the matter is that sekinj prefers herself to a Gateway lynch, the fact that she is not voting for herself in preference to a Gateway lynch shows that it is a bluff.

Gateway, you should be voting for sekinj, unless you want to die.

sekinj, you should be voting for yourself, unless you want Gateway to die.

Anyone that feels like getting on the good wagon, please do. Any conversation other than this is a waste of time. As it is, you're arguing what's been argued for the last five pages.

[Verbosity]

I really don't have anything to say. If you read this thread, it yells 'Gateway is scum or a SK!' Really, whichever one it is, we should just lynch him.

I'm also mildly tempted to vote Sekinj, but I'm a little put off by her attitude. Gateway is a much better lynch.

Also, Gateway, if you're wondering why I'm just not saying much to you, it's because you're an idiot, and there's no point asking questions when they won't be answered, or I'll be insulted because the answer is apparently 'common sense'. Ok? Now go back to randomly spouting shit.

This is precisely why we keep him alive till he stops turning up dead scum for us. There's no sense killing him if he might remove a scum for us.

how is it anti-town to try to give a TOWN power role a shot?

Well, when you're the only one in the entire game that is convinced that Gateway is not a liar, there has to be something up. Just to clarify, 1-10, how much to you believe Gateway's CLAIM? Just his claim. 10 being "spotless, without a doubt", 1 being "this is totally BS."

10, i'm afraid

Consternation. Why is she still breathing?

[Verbosity]

Frankly, this kill changes nothing. We follow the plan. I'm not sure how I feel about nolynching. Generally, I don't like it, because it usually works out to the scum's advantage.

Gateway: Why are you trying to alter the plan? If you stop turning up scum, we lynch you immediately. No discussion on this point.

Archon: Why aren't you following the plan? Why did you not voice these suspicions yesterday, they seem just as valid then as now? Where do you get your LSD?

ChiefSkye4, ThAdmiral, molestargazer, Jazzmyn: What are your suspicions, it seems like a while since I heard some from you.

Azhrei: Why did you take so long to get on the sekinj bandwagon?

Panzerjager: I have no questions for you, it's all about your scumbuddies' answer.

[Verbosity]

No. We don't lynch the other person first. We lynch you. Immediately.

[Verbosity]

Before I say anything, I would like to hear from ThAdmiral.

[Verbosity]

I am noticing that Gateway is still far too interested in appeasing certain specific members of the game. I am becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the nolynching. I am becoming confident at this point that Panzerjager, Jazzmyn, and Gateway are scum. I am prepared to start with Panzerjager.

Vote: Panzerjager

. I think we can afford to lynch Panzerjager at the risk that he is town, if we are in fact up by two mafiates, we can safely lose a townie. If we are down by three townies, we cannot safely nolynch again. We need to lynch Panzerjager. Anyone that intends to go against this plan should explain the reasoning for such action.

[Verbosity]

I suck at alts.

[Verbosity]

Suspicion of Archon is reaching a fever pitch for the above post. Appealing to a higher authority is scummy. MafiaSSK is my second choice, because he's a lurker, and I enjoy to policy lynch them as a matter of course. However, Azhrei's recent posts concerning the number of mafia remaining strike me as intending to muddy the waters with conversation other than our primary concern, that is the lynch. Further he is fearmongering telling us to play as if it's lylo. There's really no advantage to freaking out already and that quickly. On that vein,

Vote: Azhrei

.

This game feels like the members of the town do remarkably little as compared to the power roles.

[Verbosity]

Verbosity why did you vote gateway yesterday?

As I said, he was too interested in appeasing specific people, rather than actually playing in a pro-town manner. It's playing to seem town rather than being town. Usually indicative of scum.

I keep being drawn back to wanting to lynch molestargazer for never being altogether with it. I'm not even sure what to make of him not putting together that I'm an alt, especially after I openly admitted it previously. Really. Also, you should know that this playstyle is put on, it's not altogether natural. If I were playing as me, you'd be getting a lot less in the way of reasoning and a lot more in the way of me pushing a lynch. I'm trying this for fun. :)

Archon: Appealing to a higher authority means appealing to the mod, for emotional value. Not making yourself higher. Is English not your first language?

SSK: In what way have you contributed more to this game than Adel (who has not posted in this game)?

[Verbosity]

Oops, sorry, I lynched the

wrong

non town-aligned guy. Somehow, chuckles the angry vendetta keeper, I think that showing some inkling of suspicion in general is better than lurking in plain sight, which I am letting you get away with for the primary reason that i have been feeling terrible and only recently improved, and the more secondary reason that I think that other people are more scummy than you as you are. Would you like to me to go into why you are scum and engineer your lynch or would you prefer me to go after who I think is scum and stop defending my lynch of the non-aligned scum. Woopsee, there's the problem in your general theory. Point is, I voted correctly, I was wrong about the person who self-hammered, which I really never regret, as those seem to be the only people I ever mislynch. Except you of course, because you're better than that, right? This is a very long rant to say that I refuse to satisfy your replacement for actually scumhunting. Stop blowing smoke and start actually getting somewhere. Scumhunt, now, or else. That's the short version.

Get of your moral high horse for a second and actually look at what your actions have achieved.
Yes I know that gateway wasn't town aligned but he was far more useful to the town than you have been, and his death is the only thing that has saved the scum from a total loss.
I don't know what's worse your stubbornness or your arrogance.

Any mistakes I may have made, in the sekinj lynch, far exceed in benefit to the town your actions. That is, none, except the first enunciation of the plan which frankly would have been reached without you anyway.

Also, arrogance is probably more annoying, though stubborness is more damaging. I think what you're getting at is how I'm pretentious.

[Verbosity]

Any mistakes I may have made, in the sekinj lynch, far exceed in benefit to the town your actions. That is, none, except the first enunciation of the plan which frankly would have been reached without you anyway.

Also, arrogance is probably more annoying, though stubborness is more damaging. I think what you're getting at is how I'm pretentious.

You're all three to be honest.

You say that like you think you aren't. Get over yourself.

[Verbosity]

I apologise that I'm not keeping up with this game. I have been sick for more than a month now. I am going regularly to the hospital, and I'm starting to get scared at the diseases that are being talked of. I'll try to keep it up.

Panzerjager: I guess I'm confused exactly what I've done is scummy. Do you mean that I'm scummy because I'm not pushing as hard? I'm going to assume that's the problem. To be honest, it's because I'm losing steam. I'm not sure where to go at this point, most of my targets have been confirmed, everyone else is in the graveyard already. My gut is telling me to railroad you into the ground so hard, but you're confirmed, so I'm conflicted. On that issue, as a confirmed townie, are you suspicious of Azhrei for his representation? What I mean is that when a townie is told he isn't posting enough, he usually tries to pick it up, like I'm trying to here. When Azhrei is told he isn't posting enough, he says sorry, and then continues what he was doing. That is scummy in any player that is not a chronic lurker, though MafiaSSK is probably still a fantastic lynch, because he's impossible to read, to me at least. That said, MafiaSSK, where is your promised response? You promised it on the 18th, and we received a one-liner on the 19th. Totally separate from this, molestargazer, I'd like to know why you just FoS'd and voted more people than could be scum. To clarify, I want to know how you intend to maintain the use of your votes and FoS's when you're using them to pointless excess.

For now, I'm willing to follow molestargazer and clean the water before I start looking through it.

Unvote; Vote: Verbosity

.

[Verbosity]

Unvote; Vote: MafiaSSK

. Yeah...