Open 288 - Mayo Clinic (Game Over!)

[parknourie]

My side = Town.
The end of the story.

[andrew94]

KAGE DO you realise (if your vig) that vigs are COMPULSIVE BRO.

[MrBump]

Parknourie, so Chocolate Cake is Scum because you're Town? Oh, Chocolate Cake is ConfScum!

[evilpacman18]

I'm not scum so Rain is ConfScum.

Whaaaat...?

Unless I missed something (this is possible) the entire post this quote comes from is ridiculous unnecessary OMGUS.

[evilpacman18]

I also dislike the way Kage is so keen on NL'ing because we might hit Town, but as he's a Vig, and he seems to think Mafia is nothing but lucky guessing, he has a low chance of hitting Mafia. WHAT THE FU-

Again, I could possibly be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I've seen an extremely similar post to this somewhere in the thread. Who are you parroting? Is it Chocolate Cake?

[evilpacman18]

Oh I found it! It's Rain's post RIGHT ABOVE THAT POST!

Marill... what are you doing?

[evilpacman18]

Also, you say I'm "probably scum" yet your vote is on Kage and you have barely commented on him. Do elaborate.

Quadruple post. Rain has two legitimate posts so far in the game. Kage is the main topic of both of them.

[Chocolate Cake]

My side = Town.
The end of the story.

Not a convincing way to prove your innocence.

Rain is right. MrBump is probably scum, but I'm not following the train of thought on Kage. Rain, could you help me out there?

Also, you say I'm "probably scum" yet your vote is on Kage and you have barely commented on him. Do elaborate.

^This is completely not true, and comes off as grasping at straws.

P. Edit:

DAMN YOU, NINJA PACMAN!!!!

[evilpacman18]

I have half a mind to change my vote to MrBump (I slipped and called him marill because that's what he was on the site I first met him on). Nobody else has made me quadruple post.

[Kagetora]

Sigh this is gonna be a long post. Curse you sleeping time

I hate when people don't understand the difference between not knowing who to lynch and wanting to no lynch. There's NO NEED OR RUSH to place your vote. No lynching D1 is ridiculously idiotic. You don't need to have your vote on it just because you don't have anyone to vote for.

I've always played, and still believe, that while you still have the opportunity to, lynching when you have no real reason to do so tends to be more harmful to the town than helpful. That's why I promote no lynch on the first day.

Putting things in "quotes" like that acts like you are quoting what was said by people, DESPITE THE FACT NO ONE SAID YOU WERE PROVED. You're making your situation worse than it is.

If I wanted to truly quote something, as I am doing, I would put it in the quotes that the forum provides for us. "Writing something like this" is more or less akin to using your fingers in the air, not a word for word quote. You're misreading my post.

I... I... I... So we caught him, eh? Everyone was so focused on the "Lynch me" that no one really noticed the "Valid point" part. Because we caught him.
ALSO, notice how he's so intent on No Lynching because odds say we'll hit Town if we lynch. Yet he's willing to be lynched? HMMMMMMM...

Dropping off the context that came afterward isn't helping your argument. I withdrew my vote because when it was pointed out that the initial vote against me was in jest, and that was a valid point. If you had read what I had said afterwards, I don't want to be lynched. This was merely a semi-defeatism.

"If I were Mafia" is basically a way of saying "I'm Mafia so I acted like Town and when people called me out on it I would go WELL Y'SEE IF I WERE MAFIA I WOULDN'T DO THAT so therefore I can't lose!"

Well I promise you I'm not scum, and that's a word I don't see very often online. It was a hypothetical situation that you are again, misreading.

>Final gambit on D1 on Page 3 at L-2
I think he said at one point something along the lines of "Well generally you claim at L-1" BUT YOU WEREN'T AT L-1.
More "lynch me" AtE going on there.

Several things here. With the full game still around, L2 is pretty close and would likely get me voted off by sheer bandwagon. My claim actually saved me by removing several votes against me. Roleclaiming was what I considered the safest possible route to take. Also, if you're familiar with Aristotle's theory of persuasion, appeal to emotion is a powerful part of persuasion and I'm not entirely sure why such an appeal is so bad, when really the logic that has been presented is inherently flawed.

Blatant lie #1

The problem is, ANY scum who is accused can claim vigilante since we have no way of validating vigilantes in the near future.

Blatant lie #2 (Also a misrep of the intentions of this wagon)

SK's and mafia goons have exactly the same powers that vigilantes have. We cannot not lynch someone based solely on their vigilante claim.

Blatant lie #3

but he has tried to defend himself to the very end.

Could you explain how any of these are lies? The first one is a very good point to make, and the second one is as well. The third one isn't entirely true, I did display defeatism, but that's not necessarily a lie.

Kagetora's views seem so alien to me. Promoting No Lynch, claimed vigilante but advocating not killing someone because that target may be town. His general play so far seems to be "play safe". I do not like.

Fair enough. If that's really why people want to lynch me, there's nothing I can really do to defend myself against that.

I also dislike the way Kage is so keen on NL'ing because we might hit Town, but as he's a Vig, and he seems to think Mafia is nothing but lucky guessing, he has a low chance of hitting Mafia. WHAT THE FU-

See above points. I don't think it's entirely random but when I was initially targeted I don't understand the "logic" (also see above about use of quotation marks) behind and so it seems random to me.

KAGE DO you realise (if your vig) that vigs are COMPULSIVE BRO.

Yes. Yes I do. I asked the mod to ensure that the compulsive was meant to be there. (Paraphrasing is allowed)

My side = Town.
The end of the story.

Parknourie, so Chocolate Cake is Scum because you're Town? Oh, Chocolate Cake is ConfScum!

To me this seems awfully scummy. You refuse to accept my claim to town when my survival depends on it, but you simply accept Park's when it's unlikely they'll receive enough votes to warrant a claim this early? I'm considering changing my vote at this point almost solely due to that.

[evilpacman18]

Oh jeez. You can't make a post that long without including the names of the people you quote. I don't even wanna read this post now.

[Kagetora]

Sigh this is gonna be a long post. Curse you sleeping time

I hate when people don't understand the difference between not knowing who to lynch and wanting to no lynch. There's NO NEED OR RUSH to place your vote. No lynching D1 is ridiculously idiotic. You don't need to have your vote on it just because you don't have anyone to vote for.

I've always played, and still believe, that while you still have the opportunity to, lynching when you have no real reason to do so tends to be more harmful to the town than helpful. That's why I promote no lynch on the first day.

Putting things in "quotes" like that acts like you are quoting what was said by people, DESPITE THE FACT NO ONE SAID YOU WERE PROVED. You're making your situation worse than it is.

If I wanted to truly quote something, as I am doing, I would put it in the quotes that the forum provides for us. "Writing something like this" is more or less akin to using your fingers in the air, not a word for word quote. You're misreading my post.

I... I... I... So we caught him, eh? Everyone was so focused on the "Lynch me" that no one really noticed the "Valid point" part. Because we caught him.
ALSO, notice how he's so intent on No Lynching because odds say we'll hit Town if we lynch. Yet he's willing to be lynched? HMMMMMMM...

Dropping off the context that came afterward isn't helping your argument. I withdrew my vote because when it was pointed out that the initial vote against me was in jest, and that was a valid point. If you had read what I had said afterwards, I don't want to be lynched. This was merely a semi-defeatism.

"If I were Mafia" is basically a way of saying "I'm Mafia so I acted like Town and when people called me out on it I would go WELL Y'SEE IF I WERE MAFIA I WOULDN'T DO THAT so therefore I can't lose!"

Well I promise you I'm not scum, and that's a word I don't see very often online. It was a hypothetical situation that you are again, misreading.

>Final gambit on D1 on Page 3 at L-2
I think he said at one point something along the lines of "Well generally you claim at L-1" BUT YOU WEREN'T AT L-1.
More "lynch me" AtE going on there.

Several things here. With the full game still around, L2 is pretty close and would likely get me voted off by sheer bandwagon. My claim actually saved me by removing several votes against me. Roleclaiming was what I considered the safest possible route to take. Also, if you're familiar with Aristotle's theory of persuasion, appeal to emotion is a powerful part of persuasion and I'm not entirely sure why such an appeal is so bad, when really the logic that has been presented is inherently flawed.

Blatant lie #1

The problem is, ANY scum who is accused can claim vigilante since we have no way of validating vigilantes in the near future.

Blatant lie #2 (Also a misrep of the intentions of this wagon)

SK's and mafia goons have exactly the same powers that vigilantes have. We cannot not lynch someone based solely on their vigilante claim.

Blatant lie #3

but he has tried to defend himself to the very end.

Could you explain how any of these are lies? The first one is a very good point to make, and the second one is as well. The third one isn't entirely true, I did display defeatism, but that's not necessarily a lie.

Kagetora's views seem so alien to me. Promoting No Lynch, claimed vigilante but advocating not killing someone because that target may be town. His general play so far seems to be "play safe". I do not like.

Fair enough. If that's really why people want to lynch me, there's nothing I can really do to defend myself against that.

I also dislike the way Kage is so keen on NL'ing because we might hit Town, but as he's a Vig, and he seems to think Mafia is nothing but lucky guessing, he has a low chance of hitting Mafia. WHAT THE FU-

See above points. I don't think it's entirely random but when I was initially targeted I don't understand the "logic" (also see above about use of quotation marks) behind and so it seems random to me.

KAGE DO you realise (if your vig) that vigs are COMPULSIVE BRO.

Yes. Yes I do. I asked the mod to ensure that the compulsive was meant to be there. (Paraphrasing is allowed)

My side = Town.
The end of the story.

Parknourie, so Chocolate Cake is Scum because you're Town? Oh, Chocolate Cake is ConfScum!

To me this seems awfully scummy. You refuse to accept my claim to town when my survival depends on it, but you simply accept Park's when it's unlikely they'll receive enough votes to warrant a claim this early? I'm considering changing my vote at this point almost solely due to that.

Edited version of my previous post, including names this time. Sorry about that.

[evilpacman18]

Sigh this is gonna be a long post. Curse you sleeping time

I hate when people don't understand the difference between not knowing who to lynch and wanting to no lynch. There's NO NEED OR RUSH to place your vote. No lynching D1 is ridiculously idiotic. You don't need to have your vote on it just because you don't have anyone to vote for.

I've always played, and still believe, that while you still have the opportunity to, lynching when you have no real reason to do so tends to be more harmful to the town than helpful. That's why I promote no lynch on the first day.

Lynching when you have no real reason is always dumb. That's obvious. But why is it impossible to have no reason on the first day? By now there's enough reason to lynch several people and it's the first day. You talk until there's reason. If we just no lynched prematurely under the mentality that the first day can't productive, how many days would go by before we felt we had reason? It doesn't magically appear on the second day. Create conversation. Argue. Agree and disagree with what people are saying, then you'll have reason. Even on the first day. But you just seem eager to waste as much of the town's time as possible.

Putting things in "quotes" like that acts like you are quoting what was said by people, DESPITE THE FACT NO ONE SAID YOU WERE PROVED. You're making your situation worse than it is.

If I wanted to truly quote something, as I am doing, I would put it in the quotes that the forum provides for us. "Writing something like this" is more or less akin to using your fingers in the air, not a word for word quote. You're misreading my post.

I... I... I... So we caught him, eh? Everyone was so focused on the "Lynch me" that no one really noticed the "Valid point" part. Because we caught him.
ALSO, notice how he's so intent on No Lynching because odds say we'll hit Town if we lynch. Yet he's willing to be lynched? HMMMMMMM...

Dropping off the context that came afterward isn't helping your argument. I withdrew my vote because when it was pointed out that the initial vote against me was in jest, and that was a valid point. If you had read what I had said afterwards, I don't want to be lynched. This was merely a semi-defeatism.

"If I were Mafia" is basically a way of saying "I'm Mafia so I acted like Town and when people called me out on it I would go WELL Y'SEE IF I WERE MAFIA I WOULDN'T DO THAT so therefore I can't lose!"

Well I promise you I'm not scum, and that's a word I don't see very often online. It was a hypothetical situation that you are again, misreading.

If he's misreading it, why don't you give us the way it was supposed to be read?

>Final gambit on D1 on Page 3 at L-2
I think he said at one point something along the lines of "Well generally you claim at L-1" BUT YOU WEREN'T AT L-1.
More "lynch me" AtE going on there.

Several things here. With the full game still around, L2 is pretty close and would likely get me voted off by sheer bandwagon. My claim actually saved me by removing several votes against me. Roleclaiming was what I considered the safest possible route to take. Also, if you're familiar with Aristotle's theory of persuasion, appeal to emotion is a powerful part of persuasion and I'm not entirely sure why such an appeal is so bad, when really the logic that has been presented is inherently flawed.

Persuasion has no place in town defense. It's for scum and people trying to lead a wagon to use, nobody else. I will admit, you did pick the right time to claim, however.

Blatant lie #1

The problem is, ANY scum who is accused can claim vigilante since we have no way of validating vigilantes in the near future.

Blatant lie #2 (Also a misrep of the intentions of this wagon)

SK's and mafia goons have exactly the same powers that vigilantes have. We cannot not lynch someone based solely on their vigilante claim.

Blatant lie #3

but he has tried to defend himself to the very end.

Could you explain how any of these are lies? The first one is a very good point to make, and the second one is as well. The third one isn't entirely true, I did display defeatism, but that's not necessarily a lie.

The first one is untrue because of the possibility of counter claims, which I see as a good idea in a game with this setup where town is almost guaranteed to have a doc into the endgame. The second one just isn't true at all. SKs, goons, and vigs might share killing in common, but the roles are about as different as they could possibly be. Also implying that we wanted to lynch you BECAUSE you claimed vig was the bigger blatant lie of that quote. And the third IS necessarily a blatant lie so I'm not even gonna touch it.

Kagetora's views seem so alien to me. Promoting No Lynch, claimed vigilante but advocating not killing someone because that target may be town. His general play so far seems to be "play safe". I do not like.

Fair enough. If that's really why people want to lynch me, there's nothing I can really do to defend myself against that.

Also misrepping his wagon, just like his scumbuddy vat.

I also dislike the way Kage is so keen on NL'ing because we might hit Town, but as he's a Vig, and he seems to think Mafia is nothing but lucky guessing, he has a low chance of hitting Mafia. WHAT THE FU-

See above points. I don't think it's entirely random but when I was initially targeted I don't understand the "logic" (also see above about use of quotation marks) behind and so it seems random to me.

KAGE DO you realise (if your vig) that vigs are COMPULSIVE BRO.

Yes. Yes I do. I asked the mod to ensure that the compulsive was meant to be there. (Paraphrasing is allowed)

My side = Town.
The end of the story.

Parknourie, so Chocolate Cake is Scum because you're Town? Oh, Chocolate Cake is ConfScum!

To me this seems awfully scummy. You refuse to accept my claim to town when my survival depends on it, but you simply accept Park's when it's unlikely they'll receive enough votes to warrant a claim this early? I'm considering changing my vote at this point almost solely due to that.

You're... stupid.

Can we please get votes back on this guy?

[Kagetora]

Hold on a second. This just jumped out at me.

Persuasion has no place in town defense. It's for scum and people trying to lead a wagon to use, nobody else. I will admit, you did pick the right time to claim, however.

Maybe you should consult with someone who's not a dumbass.

Is this a change of opinion or a contradiction?

Lynching when you have no real reason is always dumb. That's obvious. But why is it impossible to have no reason on the first day? By now there's enough reason to lynch several people and it's the first day. You talk until there's reason. If we just no lynched prematurely under the mentality that the first day can't productive, how many days would go by before we felt we had reason? It doesn't magically appear on the second day. Create conversation. Argue. Agree and disagree with what people are saying, then you'll have reason. Even on the first day. But you just seem eager to waste as much of the town's time as possible.

It's still all unfounded speculation. Have you even considered that maybe these people don't have an ulterior motive and simply arguing the hole in the logic? I will almost always support a lynch on the second day, when we have BOTH actions and words that we can speculate on, rather than just one of the two.

If he's misreading it, why don't you give us the way it was supposed to be read?

I am doing the best that I can, and also on most forums, putting stuff in

this kind of quote[ /quote] versus "this kind of quote" is a very big difference which I'm sure you can attest to.

The first one is untrue because of the possibility of counter claims, which I see as a good idea in a game with this setup where town is almost guaranteed to have a doc into the endgame. The second one just isn't true at all. SKs, goons, and vigs might share killing in common, but the roles are about as different as they could possibly be.

Also implying that we wanted to lynch you BECAUSE you claimed vig was the bigger blatant lie of that quote.

And the third IS necessarily a blatant lie so I'm not even gonna touch it.

Has anyone counter-claimed my role? The second one is true. They have the same POWER but not the same objective. I'm pretty much positive this is what he means. I'm not entirely sure what you're saying in the italics part of the quote.

You're... stupid.

Can we please maintain some civility here? I don't believe I've directly insulted you at all this game, I'd ask that you please do the same for me.

[evilpacman18]

Hold on a second. This just jumped out at me.

Persuasion has no place in town defense. It's for scum and people trying to lead a wagon to use, nobody else. I will admit, you did pick the right time to claim, however.

Maybe you should consult with someone who's not a dumbass.

Is this a change of opinion or a contradiction?

Not sure what you're seeing. I called your friend a dumbass because you said you and him agreed that giving up was a good idea. I'll still stand by that opinion. I never said anything about your claim. If you want me to: It's obviously a lie but it was well-timed.

Lynching when you have no real reason is always dumb. That's obvious. But why is it impossible to have no reason on the first day? By now there's enough reason to lynch several people and it's the first day. You talk until there's reason. If we just no lynched prematurely under the mentality that the first day can't productive, how many days would go by before we felt we had reason? It doesn't magically appear on the second day. Create conversation. Argue. Agree and disagree with what people are saying, then you'll have reason. Even on the first day. But you just seem eager to waste as much of the town's time as possible.

It's still all unfounded speculation. Have you even considered that maybe these people don't have an ulterior motive and simply arguing the hole in the logic? I will almost always support a lynch on the second day, when we have BOTH actions and words that we can speculate on, rather than just one of the two.

Does someone wanna explain this to me? It doesn't make any sense. It's like he just decided to talk about something completely beside the point.

If he's misreading it, why don't you give us the way it was supposed to be read?

I am doing the best that I can, and also on most forums, putting stuff in

this kind of quote[ /quote] versus "this kind of quote" is a very big difference which I'm sure you can attest to.

The first one is untrue because of the possibility of counter claims, which I see as a good idea in a game with this setup where town is almost guaranteed to have a doc into the endgame. The second one just isn't true at all. SKs, goons, and vigs might share killing in common, but the roles are about as different as they could possibly be.

Also implying that we wanted to lynch you BECAUSE you claimed vig was the bigger blatant lie of that quote.

And the third IS necessarily a blatant lie so I'm not even gonna touch it.

Has anyone counter-claimed my role? The second one is true. They have the same POWER but not the same objective. I'm pretty much positive this is what he means. I'm not entirely sure what you're saying in the italics part of the quote.

If he's talking about powers as just powers and not powers AND objectives, then he needs to get his mind back in the game because that's trivial unimportant information.

You're... stupid.

Can we please maintain some civility here? I don't believe I've directly insulted you at all this game, I'd ask that you please do the same for me.

Say things that make sense. Then we'll talk.

[Chocolate Cake]

Note to Kage: I advise you get an avatar. It's nice to put a picture with a name.

Kage is proving to us the value of the newbie game (the argument on no-lynching, the defeatism). EPM has yet to prove why Kage is scum though.

[Kagetora]

Not sure what you're seeing. I called your friend a dumbass because you said you and him agreed that giving up was a good idea. I'll still stand by that opinion. I never said anything about your claim. If you want me to: It's obviously a lie but it was well-timed.

I'm seeing you calling my friend a dumbass because he and I agreed that roleclaiming was the right option to take. And I still haven't lied yet.

Does someone wanna explain this to me? It doesn't make any sense. It's like he just decided to talk about something completely beside the point.

Any discussion on the first day will be unfounded speculation, you have no hard evidence that can be used to prove or disprove a hypothesis. If you lynch me, you merely prove my point. I am a vigilante, and if/when you lynch me and prove it so, then you will have proven that all of this is unfounded speculation.

If he's talking about powers as just powers and not powers AND objectives, then he needs to get his mind back in the game because that's trivial unimportant information.

No it's not. He's saying that since I claimed vigilante, you can't know for sure that I personally killed someone, when there are plenty of other people who can mess with my claim.

Say things that make sense. Then we'll talk.

We have been talking, and your aggressive nature makes much less sense than the defensive one you put me in.

@CC: Sure thing. As for the no lynching argument and defeatism, this comes from my experiences of playing this game everyday with my friends and the conclusions we have collectively come to.

[evilpacman18]

Kage is proving to us the value of the newbie game

QFT.
Frankly, I'm having a harder time seeing him as scum than I was before. He's just completely underprepared and way too inexperienced for this. Still, I'm seeing newbscum. Not newbtown.

[evilpacman18]

Not sure what you're seeing. I called your friend a dumbass because you said you and him agreed that giving up was a good idea. I'll still stand by that opinion. I never said anything about your claim. If you want me to: It's obviously a lie but it was well-timed.

I'm seeing you calling my friend a dumbass because he and I agreed that roleclaiming was the right option to take. And I still haven't lied yet.

Does someone wanna explain this to me? It doesn't make any sense. It's like he just decided to talk about something completely beside the point.

Any discussion on the first day will be unfounded speculation, you have no hard evidence that can be used to prove or disprove a hypothesis. If you lynch me, you merely prove my point. I am a vigilante, and if/when you lynch me and prove it so, then you will have proven that all of this is unfounded speculation.

If he's talking about powers as just powers and not powers AND objectives, then he needs to get his mind back in the game because that's trivial unimportant information.

No it's not. He's saying that since I claimed vigilante, you can't know for sure that I personally killed someone, when there are plenty of other people who can mess with my claim.

Say things that make sense. Then we'll talk.

We have been talking, and your aggressive nature makes much less sense than the defensive one you put me in.

@CC: Sure thing. As for the no lynching argument and defeatism, this comes from my experiences of playing this game everyday with my friends and the conclusions we have collectively come to.

[evilpacman18]

crap. That wasn't supposed to happen. Ignore that.

[evilpacman18]

Not sure what you're seeing. I called your friend a dumbass because you said you and him agreed that giving up was a good idea. I'll still stand by that opinion. I never said anything about your claim. If you want me to: It's obviously a lie but it was well-timed.

1. I'm seeing you calling my friend a dumbass because he and I agreed that roleclaiming was the right option to take. And I still haven't lied yet.

Does someone wanna explain this to me? It doesn't make any sense. It's like he just decided to talk about something completely beside the point.

2. Any discussion on the first day will be unfounded speculation, you have no hard evidence that can be used to prove or disprove a hypothesis. If you lynch me, you merely prove my point. I am a vigilante, and if/when you lynch me and prove it so, then you will have proven that all of this is unfounded speculation.

If he's talking about powers as just powers and not powers AND objectives, then he needs to get his mind back in the game because that's trivial unimportant information.

3. No it's not. He's saying that since I claimed vigilante, you can't know for sure that I personally killed someone, when there are plenty of other people who can mess with my claim.

Say things that make sense. Then we'll talk.

4. We have been talking, and your aggressive nature makes much less sense than the defensive one you put me in.

@CC: Sure thing. As for the no lynching argument and defeatism, this comes from my experiences of playing this game everyday with my friends and the conclusions we have collectively come to.

1. Go back and read the post you linked. I asked you why would you ACCEPT DEFEAT (obviously a reference to your saying "lolwutever just lynch me") if you were a vig. Then you said "lol I broke the rules and asked my friend and he told me to." Then I called him a dumbass. NOWHERE do you specify that you asked him about claiming so I'm SUPPOSED to assume that we were talking about the functional part of my post that you quoted, the accepting defeat part. I would be the stupid one to assume otherwise.

2.

THIS IS MAFIA

YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE MAIN POINT OF THIS GAME. EVERY SINGLE THING SAID IS GONNA BE ROOTED IN SPECULATION. IT'S THE

POINT

OF THE GAME!!!!!!!

3. Yeah. You're right, actually.

4. Ignoring this.

[Kagetora]

1. Go back and read the post you linked. I asked you why would you ACCEPT DEFEAT (obviously a reference to your saying "lolwutever just lynch me") if you were a vig. Then you said "lol I broke the rules and asked my friend and he told me to." Then I called him a dumbass. NOWHERE do you specify that you asked him about claiming so I'm SUPPOSED to assume that we were talking about the functional part of my post that you quoted, the accepting defeat part. I would be the stupid one to assume otherwise.

I did. While what you say is a valid reading of the post which I hadn't seriously considered, mine is as well. The way my post was meant to be read would be something along the lines of 'I don't give up. My friend and I agree that roleclaiming is the best option.' And how many times must I clarify this? I did not talk to anyone here on this site. I was consulting a friend of mine, outside the game. Nowhere do I see a rule that specifically bans this, and your pushing of the issue that isn't there is really getting on my nerves.

If I really wanted to give up and quit the game, I would have tried to get myself modkilled, which is silly to suggest that I truly want OUT of this game.

2.THIS IS MAFIA
*snip*
YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE MAIN POINT OF THIS GAME. EVERY SINGLE THING SAID IS GONNA BE ROOTED IN SPECULATION. IT'S THE

POINT

OF THE GAME!!!!!!!

You obviously don't understand what I'm saying. Yes, interpreting what other people say is good, but it simply cannot be the only thing you go off of. Yes it can be used as evidence, but without any actions, what good is it? Not much. And once again, if your incorrect speculation as to my scum nature results in my lynch, you will prove my point.

3. Yeah. You're right, actually.

Wow, we found something we agree on.

I bear no ill will towards you, but your argument simply doesn't make sense.

[MrBump]

I'm merely posting using logic that has been used in this thread, but in a more obvious fashion. I don't REALLY think Rain is ConfScum.

My side = Town.
The end of the story.

Not a convincing way to prove your innocence.

Rain is right. MrBump is probably scum, but I'm not following the train of thought on Kage. Rain, could you help me out there?

Also, you say I'm "probably scum" yet your vote is on Kage and you have barely commented on him. Do elaborate.

^This is completely not true, and comes off as grasping at straws.

P. Edit:

DAMN YOU, NINJA PACMAN!!!!

I'm grasping at straws in my, what, third post in the thread? Are you actually serious? Despite the fact I already posted a "wall" about how I think three, possibly a fourth (I know there's three but yeah) are scum? Are you out of your mind?

There is to be

NO personal communication outside of the forum postings

unless your role PM specifically allows it. Players who can communicate outside of the forum postings may communicate at night and during the confirmation stage.

How did you miss that, Kage.

What I'm picking up is everyone jumping on my ass for things other people have already done. Parroting has been done a million times in this thread. Agreeing with someone is NOT SCUMMY. If that was the case, why post at all? I thought Rain's point was good. So basically I'm not allowed to agree with people's views on players? BEARING IN MIND, I think said player is scum?

[MrBump]

I just noticed, I EVEN SAID I WAS USING THE LOGIC IN THE SAME POST. LRN2READ.

[evilpacman18]

You obviously don't understand what I'm saying. Yes, interpreting what other people say is good, but it simply cannot be the only thing you go off of. Yes it can be used as evidence, but without any actions, what good is it? Not much. And once again, if your incorrect speculation as to my scum nature results in my lynch, you will prove my point.

Oh I see. You're one of those noobs that thinks that the game can't be played without examining kills, claims, PR usage, etc. That's not true at all. For instance. Go read any game. It's SUPER RARE for scum to be caught because of who they killed. Also, how do you explain the countless lynches of scum before any of this information made itself available. The town is never well-informed and that doesn't get that much better until endgame in general. You're implying that all early lynches of scum are nothing more than dumb luck just because helpful solid information wasn't available. Blatant lie.