Monty Python Quest for the holy grail, GAME OVER!!!

God · Post Post #475 (ISO) » Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:00 am

Well my OMGUS vote is no longer needed so:

unvote Orbiting

I'm fairly convinced Night stalker is not one of the heads, since he seems to defend himself as not being in Cahoots with me. Now I WAS a head, and i know that we didn't know eachother, only that the others existed, and that they knew just as little as us.

Saigon · Post Post #476 (ISO) » Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:40 am

Now I WAS a head, and i know that we didn't know eachother

Should you really be saying this? I mean your first role in this game should be considered dead, isn't this like letting a dead guy post what he knows?

Saigon · Post Post #477 (ISO) » Wed Oct 29, 2003 11:00 am

How odd...you don't want to put the 4th vote on Night Stalker, but you'll put the 5th? Basically, you'll continue the bandwagon only if it's inevitable? If Night Stalker's evil, I'm going to be looking pretty hard in your direction. Oh, and in DS's. Good thing I have two eyes.

Cam

Actually, what I meant was that I may not like the reasoning behind the Night Stalker bandwagon, but if everyone thinks we should have him roleclaim, I'll help by getting him up to enough votes to warrant a roleclaim.

Just because I don't like it, doesn't mean I should sabotage the town's plans. If no one agrees to vote for anyone else than their prime suspect, I'm sure no one would get more than 3 votes.

I'm sure, that you (Mathcam) would vote for me or DS if a bandwagon started against us even if you claim Night Stalker is your prime suspect.

I'll hold my vote back, untill I see what people think about Night Stalker's last post, I'm still a mafia newbie.

Loose Cannon · Post Post #478 (ISO) » Wed Oct 29, 2003 2:00 pm

My impression of Night Stalker's post: He completely BS'ed his way through it. Nothing that I can explicitly point to, but I got the impression that he's grasping at straws and trying to include every little bit of evidence exonerating him so that people will unvote.

+ NS has posted 3x in the last 3 days, but posted only once in the preceding 4 weeks (he posted more in other games). As for the "I don't post unless I have something worthwhile to say" arguement, I reply with another one of NS' posts (repeated in its entirity) "Maybe they have to find a shrubbery?".[/i]

Saigon · Post Post #479 (ISO) » Wed Oct 29, 2003 2:18 pm

OK then, I'll

vote: Night Stalker

By now, I suppose we can demand a roleclaim from him.

Night Stalker · Post Post #480 (ISO) » Wed Oct 29, 2003 5:02 pm

Loose Cannon wrote:My impression of Night Stalker's post: He completely BS'ed his way through it. Nothing that I can explicitly point to, but I got the impression that he's grasping at straws and trying to include every little bit of evidence exonerating him so that people will unvote.

Well, yeah, duh. Of course! Anyone would do the same - unless the accusations were correct. How does that make it BS? (Unlike the "evidence" against me, which is BS.)

Loose Cannon wrote:+ NS has posted 3x in the last 3 days, but posted only once in the preceding 4 weeks (he posted more in other games).

BS! What other games would that be?

Loose Cannon wrote: As for the "I don't post unless I have something worthwhile to say" arguement, I reply with another one of NS' posts (repeated in its entirity) "Maybe they have to find a shrubbery?".[/i]

That was a direct response to the previous post. Are you even paying attention? Or are you just scum trying to cover up that you have no reason to be voting for me?

Saigon · Post Post #481 (ISO) » Wed Oct 29, 2003 5:08 pm

A roleclaim would be nice...

mathcam · Post Post #482 (ISO) » Thu Oct 30, 2003 3:41 am

I'm sure, that you (Mathcam) would vote for me or DS if a bandwagon started against us even if you claim Night Stalker is your prime suspect.

Yup, probably.

But that doesn't hold for everybody...only those of you who are on my "more suspicious than not" list.

Cam

Loose Cannon · Post Post #483 (ISO) » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:03 pm

Night Stalker wrote:
Loose Cannon wrote:+ NS has posted 3x in the last 3 days, but posted only once in the preceding 4 weeks (he posted more in other games).
BS! What other games would that be?

Lets see...
From September 30th to October 26th:
1 post in this game
5 posts in London Mafia

Well, I guess you're right, you didn't post any more in your other games.

Night Stalker wrote:
Loose Cannon wrote: As for the "I don't post unless I have something worthwhile to say" arguement, I reply with another one of NS' posts (repeated in its entirity) "Maybe they have to find a shrubbery?".[/i]
That was a direct response to the previous post. Are you even paying attention? Or are you just scum trying to cover up that you have no reason to be voting for me?

My point was that your post was not worthwhile. Because you claim that you only post when you "have something worthwhile to say" I find this extremely suspicious.

Further evidence of posting without substance:

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ight=#7530 - Where you post a picture of a giant bunny.

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ight=#7531 - Where you provide a link to a picture of a giant bunny (and ask the mod to delete your previous post)

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ight=#7305 - Where you tell people that you have a new avatar of a giant bunny (as well as saying that you have nothing of substance to add).

As far as I can see, you almost never post, cover yourself by saying "I don't post unless I have something worthwhile to say" and then contradict yourself by posting 2 pictures of giant bunnies, and a post where you inform us that you have a new avatar.

vote stands

(and sits, but it's still on Night Stalker)

Fishbulb · Post Post #484 (ISO) » Fri Oct 31, 2003 3:34 am

I still don't buy the argument against Night Stalker, but I got nothing else.

*shrug*

Saigon · Post Post #485 (ISO) » Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:49 am

Macros, we obviously need a deadline

Fishbulb · Post Post #486 (ISO) » Fri Oct 31, 2003 6:21 am

What we need is for Night Stalker to claim so we can either finish him off or move on.

I'll add my vote if there isn't a claim soon.

Night Stalker · Post Post #487 (ISO) » Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:36 am

I don't particularly want to role claim, since as many of you admit, it's a load of steaming BS, (Loose Cannon, have you even seen the movie? Go watch it, then you'll understand the bunny.), and it'll be the equivlent of drawing a big red bullseye on my back, but the rampaging mob has spoken.

I'm the Black Knight.

I'm not evil, I'm a pro-town vigilante.

Now, before the mafia starts shouting "He's a witch, burn him!", take note of two things:

1) Have I killed anyone yet?

2) I could very easily claim one of dozens of tiny but plausible roles, like, say, Brother Maynard, or Sir Not-Appearing-In-This-Film, but I'm being honest, because I'm pro-town.

(Doc protection tonight would be appreciated, before the French taunt me to death for having no arms and legs.)

Any questions?

I'll be away tonight and tomorrow, but I'll be back Sunday... /size]

mathcam · Post Post #488 (ISO) » Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:40 am

Well, I'll certainly concede that the Black Knight is in the game. He definitely seems like he'd be evil, but Night Stalker has a point that he hasn't killed anyone yet. Of course, if he were evil, this would also be a great ploy for him. Especially with doc protection. Hmm.

Cam

Saigon · Post Post #489 (ISO) » Fri Oct 31, 2003 3:38 pm

actually, I would think the black Knight was a back-up SK (maybe with the exception that if he targets King Arthur he dies) The reason he hasn't killed anyone yet is he wasn't a SK on night 1 and 2, and he might have been blocked night 3 (or perhaps even he can't kill anyone the first night afte the bunny dies).

My vote stands. I think it's highly unlikely that Macros would make the Black Knight a pro-town vigilante.

Macros · Post Post #490 (ISO) » Sat Nov 01, 2003 3:33 am

Deadline - WEdnesday 5th november. 10pm GMT

Vote count:
5 Nightstalker (Massive, Mahtcam, Orbiting, Loose Cannon, Saigon)
1 Wacky (DB)

Fishbulb · Post Post #491 (ISO) » Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:23 am

I believe him. And it will be obvious he is lying if we get a different type of kill.

Darkblade · Post Post #492 (ISO) » Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:23 pm

I thought I unvoted Wacky after I found out I was asking the town to hang a corpse

Unvote: Wacky

Also,

Please extend the deadline

We have fodder to talk about now. I'm for now believeing Night Stalker, because if he was a SK, there would to too many killing roles in the game it would seem.

God · Post Post #493 (ISO) » Sat Nov 01, 2003 2:12 pm

hmm, that claim makes sense i suppose...
and it would be an awesome tactic to use as an SK once i think about it, make it all the way to the endgame and then start murdering people..

Macros · Post Post #494 (ISO) » Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:07 am

i'll extnd the deadline if conversation picks up, it hasnt, so the deadline stands.

Thoth · Post Post #495 (ISO) » Sun Nov 02, 2003 11:17 pm

I believe NS. It just seems to me that the Black Knight is just too obvious a pick for a vigilante to not use him for that role. In the movie he kills exactly once, then gets dismembered and can only talk afterwards. As the role must be in the game either NS is it or the real Black Knight will vig-kill him tonight.

rite · Post Post #496 (ISO) » Mon Nov 03, 2003 1:06 am

Thoth wrote:As the role must be in the game either NS is it or the real Black Knight will vig-kill him tonight.

Careful what you say. We've had simpsons game w/o Homer here, anything is possible.

mathcam · Post Post #497 (ISO) » Mon Nov 03, 2003 4:12 am

I'm ver surprised by all this. The whole game we've been listing people who we thought would be evil, and the black knight was among them. And then someone comes out and says "Yes, I'm the Black Knight. But I'm good" and we're all like "Oh, how surprising. The black knight is good. Okay," rather than "Die, you fiendous murdering scum!" Yes, not acting as an SK until the end

would

be an awesome play, wouldn't it?

And maybe he gets a bonus for not killing. We all know he's a horrible fighter. Maybe he's in training or something. Maybe he can store up kills. And now that he knows we're on to him, he could unleash them all tonight. I definitely agree it's

possible

he's good, but anything's possible. Isn't leaving him alive a huge risk to take for very little possible gain? Plus, it's not like we have any better leads.

Evil in this game is those who opposed King Arthur's quest. The Black Knight opposed King Arthur's quest. You can draw your own conclusions, I guess.

My vote (as you may have guessed), stands.

Cam

Werebear · Post Post #498 (ISO) » Mon Nov 03, 2003 5:59 am

mathcam... the Ladies of Castle Anthrax hindered the quest, but I wouldn't call them evil. I'd have to spend lots and lots of time with them before I could do that. Lots. Of. Time. *ahem* Anyways, I think he should be unvoted, and someone else picked on. We haven't had a kill from the Black Knight, and if one comes up we can always kill him then - or maybe someone's investigated him, or will. Again, it's a case of "if they're not killing people, let's leave them alone".

mathcam · Post Post #499 (ISO) » Mon Nov 03, 2003 6:10 am

Okay, good counter-example. But they also weren't trying to kill any of the main characters. My concern is that we leave it too late. If we assume he's good and our numbers dwindle down too far, one kill might be all it takes.

It's true he could be investigated....though that's also true about whoever we pick on next, right? But fine....*goes and sulks in corner...*

Unvote: Night Stalker.

Cam