Mini 1137: Long Overdue Mafia [Game Over!]

[neil1113]

/con to the firm. I have read and understood my role.

[neil1113]

VOTE: Rhinox

The mod's are always scum. Always.

[neil1113]

Wow... I can't believe I was wrong about Rhinox... I really thought he was scum guys. There goes my reads.

[neil1113]

I was going to say Xalxe, it takes 7 to lynch. Ha. Rhinox left that out on purpose... I think he was actually:

Rhinox

: Undercover mafia scum in a townies body.

[neil1113]

VOTE: Xalxe

It was already answered you clown. I was simply making a joke.

[neil1113]

@Andrew: WHY are you posting to little and have such a lazy meta? Are you willing to pick your game up for this game and be pro-town, or do you really not care? If the latter, I won't have any problem with a policy lynch later on in the day.

[neil1113]

[img]well folks i am a one-shot day cop, and i just investigated voidedmafia and got a 'guilty' result back. this is a normal so my sanity is guaranteed (as my pm told me as well). no quicklynch please, as there is still plenty of time to talk and figure out who his scumbuddies are.

Woah, are you serious? Just for the record, joking at this point of the day is VERY detrimental to the town, so please, are you being serious?

[neil1113]

Rather quick with that reveal, aren't you? Maybe YOU'RE worried about your scumbuddy instead?

But then, that raises the question: Why go after me, then, since I haven't really tried to go after you?

...wait...YOU DON'T SAY WHAT YOUR PM TELLS YOU, YOU IDIOT.

First, I don't get your defense. At all.

Second, I'm not sure about the current mods way of writing, but usually the rule is you're not allowed to

QUOTE

the role PM, but it has nothing against paraphrasing it.

[neil1113]

Yes, but why would he need protection if he's a ONE time day cop? He's pretty much useless to the Mafia now...

Also, you're going to be lynched. It seems like the best way to go about this situation. If you're town, he'll likely be lynched tomorrow. If you're scum, town goes up a point. Simple as that.

[neil1113]

Fitz,

While yes, we may not be able to gain any type of connection between Voided and his buddies now that the issue is on the table, it doesn't limit us from pressuring other scum in general on other issues, like we've been trying to do as town. I don't like your desire to go ahead and just eliminated Voided when we still have so much of the day left to get information apart from him... :/

[neil1113]

The thing is Fitz, is I don't see us being stupid enough to let Voided off the hook. However I agree with your theory, it'd be absolutely nuts and so much WIFOM we'd get drunk, if we sat around during the day trying to figure out who Voided's partners were, since Voided has said relatively nothing, and there hasn't been much time to establish any real tells. I would like to use the day - 17 more days - for everyone to continue pressuring whoever they found scummy to begin with, and move on from there. Near the week before deadline, we could easily just wagon back on Voided and end the day. In fact, if someone puts Voided at L-1, we can then just hammer when the days ending, to make sure there's absolutely no way a no lynch will happen.

[neil1113]

Woah... I don't like the lying from Pappums, and I don't like people "clearing him" because he made a gutsy move. I've made a lot of gutsy moves and played scum that way before, and people cleared me for almost the identical purpose. So Pappums is in no way clearing in my book. However, I don't like Fitz either, for scummy play and reasons I've already posted. Also:

Why on earth am I coming off scummy to you Andrews? And whoever else called me scummy, please either post your case, if you have one, or do some ACTUAL scum hunting. That'd be great.

[neil1113]

Woah... I don't like the lying from Pappums, and I don't like people "clearing him" because he made a gutsy move. I've made a lot of gutsy moves and played scum that way before, and people cleared me for almost the identical purpose. So Pappums is in no way clearing in my book. However, I don't like Fitz either, for scummy play and reasons I've already posted. Also:

Why on earth am I coming off scummy to you Andrews? And whoever else called me scummy, please either post your case, if you have one, or do some ACTUAL scum hunting. That'd be great.

neil, I get your point, but explain to me why pappums benefits from this gambit AND coming out with it now as scum. Please.

I don't believe I understand what you're asking?

[neil1113]

Xalxe, your argument seems to be "it's TOO scummy to actually be a scum move." That's a fallacy, and it's one you (if you're town) need to be VERY careful to avoid. It's not town oriented, and you can't possibly clear him because "he did such a stupid, anti-town move that he can't possibly actually be scum (anti-town)." As scum in my previous games, there's been certain instances where I SPECIFICALLY did something (like completely push for a day 1 lynch on one of my partners who wasn't active at all that game) that if you thought about it, there's no way I being scum would actually do it. But I did, and I did it to bring out that exact reaction. The town bought onto it, and I rode my way to a victory. Don't be so close minded to do it this time with him, Xalxe.

Andrew, if I read your statement correctly, which is slightly difficult to do... I believe you're saying because I said "if he(you) ACTUALLY IS lazy, and anti-town, then I'd have no problem lynching him" when we currently had no other path to go on, that I am scum because I said that? If so, I have three questions for you.

1. Why?
2. What is the benefit of keeping an Anti-Town, Lazy person in a game?
3. Have you done anything this game yet, to prove the opposite of the following accusations brought up against you?

Voided, it's not a rule, and so I can't enforce it, or force you to do anything... but, I don't mind cursing. I don't actually mind most words, as they don't bother me. But if at all possible, and if nothing else, just out of respect for myself, could you avoid using the G.D. word? If not, I understand and I won't complain about it again. I was just hoping you would.

[neil1113]

Quite frankly, I'm ticked off (or pissed, if you don't mind that) that andrew has so far made nearly no sense whatsoever in his posts. The only two that made any amount sense recently are the post asking me to claim, and the post that says that neighborizers aren't always town-aligned.

If he'd try to make sense with this case against you, then I wouldn't be so up about it.

I understand. You don't have to change your way of talking, or not get mad around me! Haha, like I said... I don't mind really any words, except those two. Thank you for your respect though, seriously.

[neil1113]

What scummy reasons do you refer to. You mention opposition to my "just get the lynch over with" sentiment which I had explained my rationale for somewhat in detail. Iirc I also asked you some questions regarding your suspicions which you have not answered. If you maintain suspicions on me I would appreciate you explaing how you disagreed with my suggestion. Not that it matters now since it was all based on a lie but as you still harbor those suspicions an explanation would be nice.

All of my suspicions have already been laid out, other than your aggressive tendencies but that could easily be justified as a play style, so I'd find it hardly worth discussing. I didn't mention I had a TON of reasons to find you oddly scummy, just reasons.

BTW...if anyone didn't notice...pappums lied and had us all diverting our attention to normal scumhunting.

I agree, this is kind of aggravating. However I don't agree with the L.A.L style of Mafia, so I can't justify lynching him just because he lied, despite how anti-town that is. I kind of understand his view, as far as trying his luck at reaction fishing. However there are better ways then this, and he could've single handedly caused a stupid lynch on perhaps a town PR, and then we'd be **** out of luck at the start of Day 2, especially if scum hit ANOTHER town PR during the night. So I WOULD be up for lynching him for the single purpose that he almost caused a lynch on someone that may or may not be scum, all because he was "reaction fishing." In fact:

UNVOTE: Xalxe

VOTE: Pappums

No, my argument is that there is no scum motivation. Rather the opposite of what you're arguing.

How on EARTH could you make such a solid comment with so much clarity, unless of course you know who the scum and who the town are? In which case, that'd make you Mafia. Could this be a scum slip? Anyways may I ask you, apart from the obvious "reaction fishing" fallacy, how on earth do you see this at all to be town motivated?

[neil1113]

Why oh why Fitz, are you so Anti-Town? I don't believe you're scum to be honest, but I don't believe you to be helping the town much either.

What scummy reasons do you refer to.

You mention opposition to my "just get the lynch over with" sentiment which I had explained my rationale for somewhat in detail. Iirc I also asked you some questions regarding your suspicions which you have not answered.

If you maintain suspicions on me I would appreciate you explaing how you disagreed with my suggestion.

Not that it matters now since it was all based on a lie but as you still harbor those suspicions an explanation would be nice.

Why do you feel the need to repeat yourself Fitz? It "looks like" you're simply restating what you obviously have not searched hard for, in several ways, to make it seem like you have more of a case against me then you do. THAT my friend, is scummy. Reread everything I've said, I don't need to lay it out for you again. I haven't posted THAT much. But, now I have a bigger case. THIS case, I'll lay out for you and even trail the main points so that THIS time, you don't miss it. Okay little boy?

All of my suspicions have already been laid out, other than your aggressive tendencies but that could easily be justified as a play style, so I'd find it hardly worth discussing. I didn't mention I had a TON of reasons to find you oddly scummy, just reasons.

All your suspicions have been laid out? Looking over your ISO I see one post where you indicate any suspicion with a shred of reason towards me. Singular. One post/reason. (etc etc)

So it’s scummy play which I have asked you to elaborate on and reasons (plural) which you have already “posted.” Which other than the one I quote above I can not find. I find that scummy.

Again, basically restating your first three paragraphs. You're basically saying "I don't see it so your scummy... I don't really see it at all, so you must be scummy.... you must be scummy, because I don't see it." Rephrase it all you want, you still don't have a case.

Then you say:

BTW...if anyone didn't notice...pappums lied and had us all diverting our attention to normal scumhunting.

I agree, this is kind of aggravating. However I don't agree with the L.A.L style of Mafia, so I can't justify lynching him just because he lied, despite how anti-town that is. I kind of understand his view, as far as trying his luck at reaction fishing. However there are better ways then this, and he could've single handedly caused a stupid lynch on perhaps a town PR, and then we'd be **** out of luck at the start of Day 2, especially if scum hit ANOTHER town PR during the night. So I WOULD be up for lynching him for the single purpose that he almost caused a lynch on someone that may or may not be scum, all because he was "reaction fishing."

So you don’t agree with LAL in mafia…but you state in your ISO 11 that you don’t like his lying. Then in the quote directly above, you don’t want to lynch him for lying…but you DO want to lynch him on the basis of what COULD have happened because of his lying. Wha? That makes no sense to me. So not the act itself but the potential outcome of the act. Sounds like you want to steer clear of perceived policy lynching but you still like being on the liar’s wagon.

... what? Why did you confuse what I said? I said it in a way that nobody else seemed to get confused, so why did you? If it helps, I'll say it AGAIN this time in a way that even you can understand it:

I don't like that he lied. But I don't lynch all liars, because it's a lynch wasted usually. Townies lie because they are human. Humans lie. *gasp* yes Fritz I know... it's a hard concept to grasp. But follow me here.

So we've established already the fact that he lied in order to get a reaction. Now that this part is out of the picture, my difficulty with it is the fact that his lie could have gotten a townie lynched. Lying in and of itself isn't always anti-town as someone pointed out. Reaction fishing, isn't usually anti-town. HOWEVER... when you let it get to a point of a possible mislynch BECAUSE of your lie, then it becomes Anti-Town. Following?

So I don't want to lynch Pappums because he lied, but because of the implications the lie was very close to having. Get it? I hope so, because I am NOT repeating myself again. The fact that you've completely twisted this in your explanation of "what I said", helps my read of you as scummy. Why would scum purposely put a very simple concept, and twist it to make it difficult to understand? If I had said what you said I said, even I'd be confused by that concept.

This is not the first time you have done a 180 in the same post. This question question that you have avoided answering up to this point came out of a similar 180.

Your question was, how would scum be pressured? What do you want me to say? By votes, and by asking them questions? I don't understand why you'd ask me such a question? So I didn't answer. If you don't know how to pressure scum, you shouldn't be playing Mafia. Simple as that. If I had took it as you were ACTUALLY wondering, then I'd have given you an answer. Instead you came off as an pompous jerk trying to make some fallacy of a point, in which nobody would give more then 30 seconds worth of a thought of in the first place. So, I didn't answer. Get it? If not, I'll go slower...

If you were so certain Voided was going to be the lynch…why did you keep your vote off him and instead maintaining it on a RV for Xalxe?

Is this a serious question? If you don't understand this, I really have doubts about you being above the age of 13. I kept my vote off of him, like I've explained, because I was certain if pappum's claim was real, that Voided would be lynched without much of a doubt. We had a LONG time before the day came to an end, why would I want to rush a lynch? When the time came, he'd be lynched. I was certain of it. Why rush things? You rushing the day, is anti-town. Would you like to know how it is as well? In fact, instead of asking questions, I'll just start referring you to the Wiki. That way I don't have to explain it to you much more, because gameplay discussions should be limited.

I also find it odd that in the very first post after pappum’s claim…that you call him out on potentially joking. Why in the world would anyone of imagined that pappum’s claim was a joke.

Gameplay question again? Okay. Well you see, one needs to be careful. I was curious because of the current situation, and I had doubts as to why he would do the things he did if he was in fact what he claimed to be. So, I was hinting to him, that if it was a joke he is going to need to be careful with it. Mostly because I didn't want a townie lynched because of reaction fishing. Which, oh my gosh guess what? IT IS WHAT HE DID. Does it strike you as scum that I played that smart and didn't rush into it?

Are town fakeclaims on day 1 that common? [the answer btw is NO] It’s like you knew he was joking.

What about my post made it seem like I KNEW he was joking? What part of it hinted that I was SURE he was joking? And to answer your obvious first question, EVERY game is different, EVERY player is different. You can't pull out a statistic to try and explain someone elses gameplay. I don't count anything out of the game because "it doesn't happen often." If you do that, you fall into this very limited bubble, and can get easily deceived by scum.

You are avoiding my questions and not being consistent with you gameplay. I’m torn between pappum and you now. I think if pappum were to flip scum it would somewhat absolve you and Voided (though not entirely). However…if pappum were to flip town, my vote would be going straight to you (if it doesn’t before then).

If Pappum flips town or scum, please oh PLEASE do not change your read on me. I welcome your pressuring, and if you even LIVE throughout today, I can personally promise I will tear you apart piece by piece until all of your questions are finally answered in your thick skull, and we can both actively move on to scum hunting apart from each other. I'm trying, and I'd suggest you try too.

More to come for you. Give me a minute to follow the rest of your posts.

[neil1113]

What do you call what you did pappum? Fibbing? No...you lied. If you weren't lying please enlighten us on what is is.

Why are you speaking on terms of "us?" Nobody is following you Fitz. Refer to YOURSELF, not the rest of the town. If you haven't noticed, you're not exactly benefiting "us." Oh, and for the record, STOP believing the fallacy that all lies are scummy.

And how am I rolefishing?

I don't even need to quote the rest of your post.

"Are you a power role?"

Is asking

"Are you a power role?"

No matter what reasoning you have behind it. THAT is role fishing by definition. THAT is what you asked him. Now, I know you're not too good with logic, so let's try math shall we? If 1 role fishing = 1 role fishing, and X (you) have done 1 rolefishing, how many role fishings have you done?

Correct answer: 1. You have role fished with him. I hope this answers your question.

Jahudo...no offense but...no shit. You're saying regardless of whether Void is town or scum....there stands a good chance that there are 2 scum out of the 5 on his wagon. Why does this theory leave out pappums? he should be a consideration as well? So that makes 2 out of 6. That's not far off what the probable ratio of scum to town is for the entire game.

What did you hope to accomplish with this attempt at math that you pulled out?

And if we assume

there was one scum off the wagon (and I would argue possibly two off the wagon if Void IS scum)....then you have to look at 1-2 of Voided, Jahudo, andrew, Neil, Jerbs (assuming he is still in the game), mikemike (is he still playing) and Idiotking.

Let me explain this with three simple words... We're not assuming.

So basically you're saying in your theory...there is probably scum on and off Void's wagon.

This theory is better then most of what you've been posting!

I would argue there is no guarantee there were any scum on Void's wagon given they had a claimed result on him

(from possibly a townie) which was going to offer the opportunity for scum to lay back and let town do the lynch (whther it was on scum or town) without them having to join in (see neil). See how that

LIE

was a bad thing? So yeah, good stuff. Let's go with that. Not!

Lol you're quick wits and charming intellect is just too much for me. I enjoy how you quickly try to throw me under the bus as scum... the only problem here is that, well... I'm not. Might I just point out about the bolded text, what are you arguing exactly? There

IS ABSOLUTELY NO GUARANTEE

that scum is either on or off the wagon. You're not arguing anything, it's fact. Posting things like this appear to be scum hunting but in reality, is fluff. THAT is scummy.

As for back to square one...I said for the most part.

Your explanation for this, is not the reasoning you first stated. You've now changed your reasoning. Which by the way, since it wasn't what you originally stated, could be considered a .. how did you do it...

LIE

... and by your standards, we should now proceed to lynch you. Liar.

How am I jumpy? We get an investigation resulting in a guilty on voided from our ~day cop. The fact he asked for no quicklynch means nothing to me as I did not share his opinion on the matter.

IMO a confirmed scum so early on D1 was better off eliminated asap.

I’ve given my reason in further detail and if people don’t agree with them they are entitled to their opinions.

You just answered your own question. Do you really not see how that's jumpy??? If not.. why was the VERY next sentence your wrote:

As for immediately jumping on pappum

You went on to explain why, but none the less you basically just CONFIRMED that you recognized it as quickly jumping, and yet you still questioned us as though you had no idea what we were talking about? I don't get it... are you TRYING to appear scummy? Oh wait, do you have a Jester role???

As for me rolefishing...wth are you talking about? I didn't ask pappum or Void to claim.

Both posts are directed to Pappum

I would like to know if your day cop claim was legit or not

And how am I rolefishing? I would like to know if your day cop claim was legit or not

... I don't believe I need to say anything more, except... LIAR. :/

And there was no mislynch in the bag when pappums claim was still considered legitimate.

If you have issues regarding the potential mislynch of Void you need to look at the cause of it…not the people who believed pappum.

I'm really hoping I'm misreading this statement. Please tell me you're not actually saying, that there was no real chance of a mislynch?

[neil1113]

Lol alright Fitz.

"OK little boy?" Was referring to your seemingly lack of understanding and knowledge of the game, by the way you phrased things and the way you tried to come off as accusing.

"pompous jerk?" I said is what your post made you out to seem like in my opinion. I could've said "arrogant jerk" or "ignorant jerk" or "blind-sided jerk" and all would be acceptable. I don't mean it to be a shot on you as a person, but what your post seems to make you out to be. I'm saying it so that you could be careful in which you speak.

"thick skull?" Again, referring to a more one sided, tunneling outlook. Instead of being open and realizing, there's almost nobody here that's actually following you, you instead attempt to get questions out there by referring to the term "we" and "us." As far as I've been concerned, there are people agreeing with my reads and if they are town, they are on my side. Now I apologize if anything I said was taken as a personal attack on you as a person outside of this game. I didn't mean for anything to come off that way, though I can easily see how my words could've been taken that way. However I assure you, nothing I said was on a personal, or even angry for that matter, basis. I'm enjoying this game, and I hope you are too.

All in all, I didn't lay out a case against you. That wasn't my point. My point was in disproving your statements, and proving that you are a hypocrite when it comes to your own "policy." You lied, and I've explained it in my previous posts against you. I laid my cards out on the table that I had against you, in order that I may move on from you. Like I said, I don't believe you to be scum, just slightly anti-town. However, if you could take half the effort you put into me, and put it into scum hunting, I do believe you can be a great asset to the town when you choose to be. So my goal in the posts I made, were to make you come out and "choose to be."

Lastly, about this whole "fencesitting idea." You did not agree with Andrew did you? Please don't let it be so. Andrew's case is that because I basically called him out on a policy lynch, if nothing else, I'm scummy. He has no fencesitting case against me, because I am very careful where I put my vote. I acknowledged where I'd be putting my vote when the day came to, but I didn't want the day to end quickly so I kept the vote to myself during that moment. I WASN'T okay with a quick lynch. That's not fence sitting, that's technique. And now? How do you see right now as fence sitting? I'm still waiting for Pappums to come back before I move on. My vote is on him. My vote has spoken. You can't be fence sitting, when you're voting for someone. Voting is more powerful then the actual words themselves when it comes down to it. Fence sitting? Really? Oh dear, please don't ever settle for such a reaching, useless, and rather harmless case such as that against me. A little about me... I don't fence sit. Town or Mafia. Ever.

[neil1113]

Our conversations are not getting us anywhere.

Lastly, about this whole "fencesitting idea." You did not agree with Andrew did you? Please don't let it be so.

I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with andrew.

It's kind of like the fencesitting andrew is suspecting you for.

What is this then? Is this not in some form, agreement? Enough said.

these last several posts by neil feel like distancing to me.

How on earth did you come to this conclusion? Distancing? If I wanted to DISTANCE myself from somebody, I wouldn't be DRAWING ATTENTION to both of us by arguing with them, now would I? That sounds kind of.. well, contradictory. Think about what you said before you talk, please?

and now that i think on it more, his vote on me doesnt really make much sense. he is voting me because of the possibility that vm could have been mislynched while my gambit was still in play,

but that possibility would have been there whether i was town or scum.

It's not that VM could have been mislynched but you caught it just in time, it's that the only reason VM wasn't mislynched is because some people (like myself maybe?) didn't buy into your false claim in the first place, or rather, wanted to wait it out to see how things played out. If you almost got VM lynched and your role is town, you're not playing to your win condition so you deserve to be lynched for being anti-town. If you almost got VM lynched and your role is scum, then you're playing to your win condition but you should still be lynched because well.. you're scum. Either way, you don't seem to win in this situation, so how is my vote against you NOT pro-town? Explain that, or stop trying to use your little WIFOM suspicions to change the subject.

Neil does seem to be trying to keep himself out of the spotlight while still targetting fitz,

I ask you the same question as I did the others, how on earth is me completely throwing myself out here to question Fitz mean I am trying to keep myself out of the spotlight? Those are almost completely contradictory statements.

and I agree that the name calling does seem more like a personal attack than something that is beneficial to fitz for learning how to better his argument style.

How is this more scum motivation then town motivation? How can you establish which motivation it is, just because a name has been thrown out there? And I've already explained WHY I have stated the names I chose.

If the name calling in itself wasn't scummy, the "Lol alright fitz" doesn't sit too well with me. It's belittling and rude and leads me to think that

neil is saying that stuff to try and make fitz out as the bad guy,

which would have worked had he not been called out on it.

And upon being called out for the names, he continued to act as though fitz had almost no right to be offended. That is scummy to me. [/quote]

The only problem the following bold statement, is I have specified SEVERAL times that I do not believe Fitz is scum. That my friend that is a girl, is quite contrary to the picture you believe I'm painting. Your "suspicions" seem like very little thought out, and almost instinctive instead of logical. You seem to have caught on to what OTHERS have said, and jumped on the wagon rather quickly. What about me do you find scummy in your own words? Other than what I've already explained? If you CAN'T state a half way decent case here (which, by the way, I don't believe you can), you can sure be prepared to be lynched for "lurking" and "fluff accusations" and then prepare to die scum. For next game, if you ever play scum again after this game, remember... you can't just ride the town wagons and repeat accusations and try to half-read my posts and make your own accusations, then make it seem like you're scum hunting. Because it's not scum hunting, it's repeating and showing you're not actually paying attention to my posts. Which is either an insult to me, or you're scum that doesn't really care about the town.

[neil1113]

I also don't like the fact that neil and fitz are trolling the hell out of each other.

I'm done "trolling."

[neil1113]

Messed up the first quote:

EBWOP:

Our conversations are not getting us anywhere

FITZ

.

Lastly, about this whole "fencesitting idea." You did not agree with Andrew did you? Please don't let it be so.

I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with andrew.

It's kind of like the fencesitting andrew is suspecting you for.

What is this then? Is this not in some form, agreement? Enough said.

[neil1113]

V/LA Mod this weekend

noted, thanks

[neil1113]

Back from V/LA

noted, welcome back!

[neil1113]

all right folks, here's the dealy-o. to believe that i am scum, you would have to believe that scum would be willing to pull a suicidal move like that

and

at the same time repeatedly tell people not to mislynch

and

tell everyone your pm said you were sane (giving you no option to claim that your sanity was not assured after the supposed vm townflip).

Don't get drunk on your WIFOM here. See, here's my problem Pappums. As Scum, you could easily have planned this, to use that very excuse. Then, when it comes to play, you say the excuse, show how "completely outrageous" it would be for scum to do such a thing, and basically get a confirmed townie ride the rest of the game. One thing your plan didn't realize, is that I'm here. I've been scum more then I've been town, and I know EXACTLY how that mind set is, because I've done some similar things with EXACTLY the same motivation. Yes, you can say what you said and claim it to be outrageous but the fact of the matter is, you've done it, for the most part it was anti-town, and your a hypocrite. Allow me to explain why.

to believe havingfitz is scum, you would need to believe scum would want to policy lynch someone who he claims is a vi, thereby

bringing about a shorter day without any real scumhunting (which is good for scum)

and

endorse quicklynching vm

after a suspicious early day one claim without scumhunting (once again, good for scum)

and

endorse lynching someone

for using a gambit under the pretense of lynch all liars without scumhunting (are we seeing a trend, here?).

Not only are you blatantly twisting this case to overly make Fitz look like scum, but you're completely trying to pull the wool over our eyes. This is anti-town. Your three main points, is that Fitz is "trying to end the day early with a possible quick lynch." The hypocritical part, is did you, or did you not almost get VM lynched with your "Pro-Town Gambit?" The correct answer is, yes. You were but a few posts away. The reason he's not lynched? You got LUCKY nobody else voted while you were away. So in reality, while Fitz may or may not have been wanting the day to end early, the fact is, he's only one person. You on the other hand, deceived us about your ability (not that you don't have the ability, but that you used it at that time), and VM was within inches of getting lynched because of it. That's a BIG difference. Now let me break the above post down for one second.

to believe havingfitz is scum, you would need to believe scum would want to policy lynch someone who he claims is a vi, thereby bringing about a shorter day without any real scumhunting

Except for one small fact you seemed to conveniently overlooked. He was clearly in context, referring to if the day came down to a quick lynch, he'd like to propose someone that is a VI in order that though we may not know much, at least we'd get a future potential disaster out before that goes down. And who knows? He may flip scum.

endorse quicklynching vm after a suspicious early day one claim without scumhunting (once again, good for scum)

You DO realize you just accused him for believing you basically? It's not suspicious he believed you, it's suspicious that you'd be so deceitful friend. And what do you mean a suspicious early day one claim? Not many thought it was suspicious except maybe myself, and a FEW select others.

endorse lynching someone for using a gambit under the pretense of lynch all liars without scumhunting (are we seeing a trend, here?).

You keep saying he's not scum hunting. Have you read his posts? I'd strongly disagree. Anyone who reads his posts, will also strongly disagree. Though yes, he has his annoying moments, and his long posts can get tiring to read, you couldn't even BEGIN to argue the fact that he is indeed scum hunting.

the whole point of my gambit was to see the reactions people would have to there being a confirmed scum cornered, and then after the gambit was lifted people could scumhunt by looking for suspicious reactions. havingfitz has made every attempt to make this day shorter than it should be, which is antitown and scummy. the fact is that havingfitz has done no real scumhunting at all, and has been avoiding doing so all day.

obvscum is obvious.

moar votes plz.

Again, you've completely misrepresented him, deceitfully made a case against him that for the most part is false, and now are calling for a lynch of your own? Hypocrite! You're right about one thing though...

Obvious scum is indeed obvious, which is why my vote is on you. Your falty, weak, and deceitful case against Fitz now confirms my suspicions on you.

[neil1113]

Wow... it didn't even give me the option to pre-edit before I posted to see Fitz's post. I feel stupid now. :/

[neil1113]

Might I just say, this idea of a Pappums lynch right now is unnerving considering the people on his case.

One is a very incompetent player altogether.
One is the most suspicious player according to the town (by ratio of votes)
One almost got lynched because of Pappums gambit, and his case has a very suspicious OMGUS feel to it...

Altogether I must say, while I disagree with Pappums case against Fitz, I have yet to read a decent case against him to sway my vote. Would anyone like to try? I'm willing to reconsider my position on him should you attempt at making a case that isn't "what he said!" or some type of verbal agreement, but rather actually laying out the points. The only person I saw close to doing this was Pappums, and I already commented on his case.

Also for the people NOT voting Pappums, do you believe he is scummy? Why or why not?

[neil1113]

But Jerbs... I was looking forward to talking with you. Way to crush my hopes and dreams.

Also guys, we only have 1 week left. We need to at least be laying our cards on the table as far as who are going to be the capable lynches that most of the town agrees on for Day 1....

My vote is Pappums, Fitz, Jerbs in the order of first to last as far as who I feel most comfortable lynching. Jerbs is really just because he's replacing, and I hate replacements. (Not the people, the act. Lol)

[neil1113]

Lol if you say so Mike and Fitz. Just remember, Fitz is in danger of being lynched, it's only right that he pulls something out against somebody who has called him out as a viable lynch candidate.

[neil1113]

In theory, yes it can be found scummy. However, I'm not scum, and therefore there was no scum motivation in my vote. I simply hate replacements in general. In all games. Sorry if it's scummy to you. I just find it funny Fitz would point it out so quickly, like a dying man's last curse.

[neil1113]

VI? Really Pine? Oh dear, you obviously haven't read the thread.

And Pappums, I basically said there was no case, and I wanted someone to make a case that at least SOMEWHAT stands. Glad it could make you laugh though, however if you spent that energy actually making a case, then we can talk.

[neil1113]

Fitz playing the "look who's Neil second lynch candidate is" card is not fair to myself. You and Pappums are both the only real viable lynches of the day, so you two were included because of that. I said I'd rather see Pappums go then you, because I'm more confident in that lynch then yours. I was not saying you out of EVERYONE is my second guess to being scum.

[neil1113]

So who do you consider scum at this moment, fitz? Besides pappums and me, I mean.

Either you're joking, not paying attention, or just trying to annoy him... either way, I laughed at this post.

If you're serious, his top three suspects as made clearly known are you, Cecily (the only girl if I'm not mistaken in this game), and Pappums.

[neil1113]

Does anyone really disagree with the future possibility of a policy lynch on Andrew? I just don't seem him coming out pro-town... and I've given him chances.

(I'm not saying lynch Andrew right now, just throwing the possibility out there)

[neil1113]

top scumreads: havingfitz, neil, voidedmafia.

Lol wow. So basically the three people who have pushed the most for your lynch? Okay, cool. You're kind of like Fitz in a way.

[neil1113]

lol dipshit i have already said why i had found them scummy BEFORE they voted me.

one thing that i did not explain completely is that your vote for me and blasting of havingfitz is basically the old 'hos scumbuddy vote townie' fallacy.

So ignoring your obvious failure of a defense to my accusation...

OMGUS anyone? It's not a FOS (what on earth is a HOS? Hall Of Shame?) and vote townie, considering well, I've already acknowledged I'd lynch him if thats where the town is going. I'm just not comfortable with it. It's called "choosing the scummier person and voting for them" and this my friend, is how you play Mafia. Which judging by your horrible defense, you don't know much about.

[neil1113]

Oh haha I forgot, there's also one VERY wrong thing about the "Lynch Scumbuddy and vote Townie" fallacy you accuse me of...

YOU ARE NOT TOWN. Or rather, you're Anti-Town. So Scum or not, you're playing to the scum win condition which to me, shows I have no desire to keep you in the game if you're going to keep going against the town like this. We can't win if you pull crap like this out. So town alignment or not, you're scum.

[neil1113]

And sorry for the triple post, I hit enter too soon. To clarify, so that nobody thinks I'm setting myself up to be justified if he comes up town, I DO BELIEVE he is scum aligned.

[neil1113]

I would normally NEVER under ANY CIRCUMSTANCE recommend a self-hammer, but nobody here seems to like you Rat. Which is funny, you seem to be living up to your display name on the forum. So I'll ask you, do us all a favor and self hammer, get out of this game please so we can move on?

If not, someone please hammer him and shut him up? I don't care if anything I'm saying here looks scummy, I'm fed up with him.

Also:

Mod - I second the enforce of rule #4.

[neil1113]

lol did you really just compare yourself to Batman?? Oh geesh.

[neil1113]

Pine, I'd rather you call me scum then NewbTown. I'm NOT new by any means to Mafia...

Also, did Tarson really just post the biggest WIFOM, Fluff post in the game? Epic. I'm not Scum because I simply am annoyed by a VI's play, as he's annoying several people and is making the game less fun. I'd rather lose as town then to suffer through someone like him and win a game that no one enjoyed. Maybe you're different? This doesn't paint me as scum though, just annoyed. It's not a tell either way. To say it is, would be to dive into WIFOM. Which is okay for you to do Tarson, since your last post was basically nothing but speculation.

[neil1113]

Bub, Tarson.. let's get some votes in here from you guys! Take a stand some place.

I don't know why everyone finds Cecily suspicious... I can't really see her as that. Perhaps it's my biased soft spot towards women, but I really don't see her play as directly tied with scum motivations. Pine I can see a slight case on, but not one that has me moving my vote from (now, Nachomamma).

Which reminds me, hi Nacho. Sucks you got replaced into this position, but welcome to the game none the less. Perhaps you could shed some fresh light on this game?

[neil1113]

Happy Birthday to you... Happy Birthday to you... Happy Birthday to Rhinoxorous... Happy Birthday to you.

[neil1113]

Nacho, for Voided's #4 question, I'd like to modify it. Even if you do think both are scummy, who ELSE are you cautious about?

[neil1113]

Lol whatever... :/

[neil1113]

Okay, now my brain officially hurts, but I feel good knowing I can finally enjoy this game. Again, I'm sorry for my delayed response.

I can see your actually trying, or appearing to be trying, So I give you credit for that. However, you have no case against me sir so I see no reason to warrant a response. The only answer I could give you is WIFOM because your case is WIFOM.

[neil1113]

Well welcome Bub. I hope this flurry of activity lasts. I have not looked at neil that much since my focus on pappum was joined by Cecily and IK. With my current uncertainty towards the pappum role, that would bump up the possibility that neil was scum IMO. But it's not a strong enough feeling towards neil to want to see him go today over Cecily...and perhaps Pine or IK.

So I'm thinking my top five atm are: Cecily, IK & Pine, neil OR pappum.
****************

@Cecily...thanks for chiming in and saying nothing.

Wow, this post right here makes me worry about my town assessment of you. How on earth does his post contribute anything at all towards your view of me? Here's what I think: You simply take a (fluffed WIFOM filled case) and make it seem like it's more then what it is, and then use it as justification to try to get rid of me because I'm causing you trouble. Why would a town motivated person do this?

In fact, this causes me so much worry I'm but a second away from changing my vote onto you.

[neil1113]

Nacho, from your answer to #4 it sounds like you're approaching it with a closed mind. Don't do that, as it shuts down your ideas for options outside of those two. Tunneling doesn't benefit us as town.

[neil1113]

P.T.,

What do you have as a case on Andrew? The only thing I see is a VI Policy Lynch, in which case if that's what your pushing over everyone else, that's extremely anti-town...

Voided,

Is there anyway to test your role claim?

[neil1113]

Voided,

Is there anyway to test your role claim?

If you're chosen, Rhinox will tell you via PM. Though I have claimed, I still feel like if I chose you, you should stay silent about it for now. I can't stop you, of course, but that's what I'd want.

Sorry to be lazy here, but what exactly does your role imply for

THIS GAME

?

Neutral - Andrew said little of any significance, it was all nothing-y nonsense or thats what I made of it anyway. By neutral I meant I couldn't see how anyone could get a positive read (scum or town) on him. Not enough to lynch anyway if you had a confident a read on someone else

What do you have as a case on Andrew? The only thing I see is a VI Policy Lynch, in which case if that's what your pushing over everyone else, that's extremely anti-town...

Mike quoted my case at the top of this page.

So basically, you have no case?

[neil1113]

*sigh* I wish I was around before the lynch happened. This is NOT a good start for us guys. So let's go ahead and get rid of one scum while we can:

VOTE: tarsonisocelot

Gut feeling makes you seem very suspicious to me. Something about your case wasn't right, and I felt it then but I didn't step out like I should have and ISO'd you. So I'm going to be doing that shortly.

[neil1113]

*sigh* I wish I was around before the lynch happened. This is NOT a good start for us guys. So let's go ahead and get rid of one scum while we can:

VOTE: tarsonisocelot

Gut feeling makes you seem very suspicious to me. Something about your case wasn't right, and I felt it then but I didn't step out like I should have and ISO'd you. So I'm going to be doing that shortly.

So who should

WE

have lynched instead of Voided yesterday? (edited by Bub)

I would have rather seen my top suspect flip obviously. But I actually believed Voided's claim for as much as I could without proper evidence, so his flip did nothing to help me find scum.

Pre-Edit: What is your case on me Fitz? That I pushed you? And everyone should take note, this is the first time Fitz has suspects OTHER then those who have questioned and pushed him! I'm proud of you Fitz! Though I still your only case on me that isn't stretching or misrepresenting, would have to be because your sour that I pushed you last day phase. Which I admit, I shouldn't have done now that I'm convinced there's really no way you could be scum and play the way you've played.

[neil1113]

If I make mistakes when trying to put together a case please point them out. I am still quite new to this game so I might miss scum or towntells through inexperience - if you can explain logically why something I have said is wrong then correct me.

In this instance, what was not right about my case? And doesn't "gut feeling" seem a little strong for voting me - do you have anything concrete?

This is the point of ISOing you. And voting for you is slightly strong, but not as strong as you might think, considering nobody else has a vote on you and I know I'll be around a bit. At least I hope. I'm not too worried of a wagon on you right now, which is why my vote is there.

And

Okay. Who was your top suspect?

I can't tell if you're serious or not? My top suspect was the person I had my vote on... or in other words, Pappums Rat.

[neil1113]

I believe I've got a bit of explaining to do for yall after the game. I think you'll understand my playing style a lot better. Until then, I will admit something I'm not proud of. Day 1, I was so set on the Pappums lynch that I had really tunneled and not payed much attention to everyone else unless for some strange reason, I was brought up by them. I then went over the cases people presented against Voided and there were only two that stuck out to me. One I kind of dismissed, because I'm always cautious when it comes to the person hammering. That's Pine, obviously. The second was TO's case. It just didn't sit right with me, I think because the way I read it, it sounded more forced then anything else.

Bud, take a look at your case again. You don't have one. Try real scum hunting, and don't focus on me.

Also Fitz, I didn't say it was the first time you targeted me. I have a feeling you're looking at my posts and specifically trying to find places to start an argument with me. Even to the extent as stretching, like you did in a recent post. I don't understand why you're doing this, though I have some ideas, but I refuse to get into some logic debate with you right now. I believe you're town, and I know I am, so arguing with you won't do the town much good. If you still feel the need to lynch me, so that you can see you're wrong for yourself, feel free too. I believe once in awhile, everyone has to realize they're wrong at some point and if it takes my lynch to show you that, so be it. But the reason I'm defensive, is because you've now tunneled with your perception on me. You have no real suspicions, and I have looked over your ISO. Your cases aren't real. They are fabricated, stretched, perspectives that you've used my own words and changed them around or taken them out of context. I still have yet to see a single good point you've brought up that I have not acknowledged lately. This is why I'm led to believe, the only reason you don't like my play, is because it's been focused on you for a good part of the game. I'm not saying recently, I'm saying for a good part of the game. So please don't take this out of context again by saying I haven't targeted you recently, because I have said nothing about recently here.

[neil1113]

I've been here, but I the past few days, I haven't really had a lot of time to put into this game and the game I'm currently running. But with the little bit I have, I want you to know I have been following. TO's claim was out of the blue, and slightly random but I can see why she did it.

UNVOTE: TO

Pine was indeed suspicious, but it has since the beginning, and still is sounding like a townie that may have messed up and is now getting called out on it. Pine's defense did nothing to sway my opinion, but rather furthered it. I'm not sure exactly where to go from here, and I think I have a lot to be rereading on now. I apologize for my lack of activity.

[neil1113]

Rhinox, what result would a tracker receive if he targetted a PR who targetted player A, but that PR was roleblocked? No result, or...?

I'm not sure if you could ask such a role specific question... 1. That would be to assume that there was indeed a Tracker. If said tracker is real, that's one thing. But if it's false claim, what do you expect Rhinox to say? Oh I don't know, there's not a tracker in this game? Lol... just giving you a heads up.

[neil1113]

Well... in the words of a wise man:

"What? WHAT???? But... but... how? Why didn't I... But.... you never... AGHHH!"

Actually, it was a video game. Right before the character died. But anyways...

Wow. Good game scum, I kind of had two of 3 figured out, but Faraday was the one I missed. Like Fitz said earlier, I believed your claim because I figured without it, the scum would seem more powerful then the town, and the game would look in favor of the scum. Oh well. Oh yeah, and CURSE YOU JAVERT! For killing little ol' me. (Just kidding, I see why you did it.)

[neil1113]

Pine and Voided make me sad. It's just a game...

*sniff*

Can't we all just be friends?





Except for Tarson, who can go die.
But everyone else, friends! <3




Just kidding.

[neil1113]

I'd like to think I wouldn't have bought Faraday's claim, though now I'm thinking clearly, then I'm not sure if I would've been.

Cecily, I knew you were town and I was really hoping they'd get off your lynch wagon. I was pretty sure Mike was scum, though I didn't find him to be the traitor. Just scum.

[neil1113]

Neil: I felt he was town, honestly. Wasn't liking his play at the end, which made him more scummy/null, but he was still town at my lynch.

<3