H.E. Mafia, Game Over, Town Prevails. [archive plox]

[new guy1]

There are so many flaws with that statement I don't even know where to begin.

which one, mine, or ghostly's?

Ghostly's

I dont think so, he just seems to be explaining his reasoning, which to be honest seems like a pretty good idea of getting scum to show themselves (with the flipping out part). It seemed to work too, as didnt CLEVER seem to struggle until he was helped and claimed doctor? I feel it was relatively good reasoning, so I would like to see where you see flaws

fastposted

[strike wolf]

You say that "It just means I want them to THINK I am singling them out." Probably because YOU HAVE singled them out.

"It just means, in general, I havent had time to start building anything else against anyone else." You spend every 20 minutes coming up with paragraph(s) posts talking about them and yet you claim not to have the time to take and find a case on someone else. Perhaps you should take the time to actually try to find some cases instead of spending all the time confirming your bias.

"WEAK evidence to see if they would flip out under pressure". Confirmation bias. You single them out under weak cases and when they respond, you confirm to yourself that they are "flipping out" under pressure.

[ghostly447]

You say that "It just means I want them to THINK I am singling them out." Probably because YOU HAVE singled them out.

I have given 3 names if you didnt realize and 2 other possibilities. Just because sometimes they respond to cases like human beings and therefore I must respond back, does NOT mean that I would not just as quickly make another case given the effort to go back through and reread the whole thing.

"It just means, in general, I havent had time to start building anything else against anyone else." You spend every 20 minutes coming up with paragraph(s) posts talking about them and yet you claim not to have the time to take and find a case on someone else. Perhaps you should take the time to actually try to find some cases instead of spending all the time confirming your bias.

I apologize for not having the effort to go back through and reread the rest of the posts. So you know, the other 2 possibilities were actually you and safari. Again, it was more weak evidence (fully intended to go for more evidence, etc since I had 3 weak cases out, 1 I actually feel was strong (CLEVER) so I wanted to make sure my next 2, after plenty of input from you 2, could hopefully yield something substantial). I decided NOT to bring these cases to the floor, because I find it a weak defense to try to accuse new people while proving your innocence. SO, since your so worried that I am singling players out, there you are for the next cases I intended to bring up.

"WEAK evidence to see if they would flip out under pressure". Confirmation bias. You single them out under weak cases and when they respond, you confirm to yourself that they are "flipping out" under pressure.

I think my posts above explain this point.

[DoomYoshi]

You expect me to believe that?

Day starts: ghost presents case on me and says chap and clever are scum.
Ghost "abandons" case on me.

While building case on clever, ghost justifies it based on my actions (jumping on the BW and jumping off), thereby 'proving' that not only clever, but also me are scum.

While building case on chap, ghost reiterates that both clever and I are scum.

After that, ghost simultaneously
A) continues to point out that I am scum
B) claims to have dropped the case
C) denies dropping the case

And now, you expect us to believe this was just an elaborate ruse? A shot in the dark? You basically dominated a day, and gave me undue stress, because of a fucking prank?

You are correct in that we do need cases, even weak cases to keep the day moving. That is where your correctness ends. This is something different though. This is borderline obsession.

[DoomYoshi]

OMFG!

On day 1 you claimed strike was scum and on day 2 as well, yet you expect us to believe that you targetted strike last night?

[strike wolf]

You say that "It just means I want them to THINK I am singling them out." Probably because YOU HAVE singled them out.

I have given 3 names if you didnt realize and 2 other possibilities. Just because sometimes they respond to cases like human beings and therefore I must respond back, does NOT mean that I would not just as quickly make another case given the effort to go back through and reread the whole thing.

"It just means, in general, I havent had time to start building anything else against anyone else." You spend every 20 minutes coming up with paragraph(s) posts talking about them and yet you claim not to have the time to take and find a case on someone else. Perhaps you should take the time to actually try to find some cases instead of spending all the time confirming your bias.

I apologize for not having the effort to go back through and reread the rest of the posts. So you know, the other 2 possibilities were actually you and safari. Again, it was more weak evidence (fully intended to go for more evidence, etc since I had 3 weak cases out, 1 I actually feel was strong (CLEVER) so I wanted to make sure my next 2, after plenty of input from you 2, could hopefully yield something substantial). I decided NOT to bring these cases to the floor, because I find it a weak defense to try to accuse new people while proving your innocence. SO, since your so worried that I am singling players out, there you are for the next cases I intended to bring up.

"WEAK evidence to see if they would flip out under pressure". Confirmation bias. You single them out under weak cases and when they respond, you confirm to yourself that they are "flipping out" under pressure.

I think my posts above explain this point.

"I think my posts above explain this point"

Your actions have explained it. You've continued to go after your weak cases and it's become apparent you won't let it go. Either you "confirmed" your case against them or you'll continue to try until you find that "scum slip" you are looking for. I no longer care what you claim. It's become clear that you'll only be a detriment to town going forward regardless of your alignment.

[ghostly447]

OMFG!

On day 1 you claimed strike was scum and on day 2 as well, yet you expect us to believe that you targetted strike last night?

Yes, yes I do. I wanted to know if someone would visit strike because, afterall, there would be no reason for there to be so many mafia in a game, and I ultimately decided that chapcrap and strike were NOT connected. They would not be so close together in discussion against me (That would be stupid so early on). So I picked one (basically by drawing names out of a hat) and decided to watch strikewolf. I like strikewolfs play style, and was pretty much willing to bet on it that it would bring a profitable result.

[DoomYoshi]

OMFG!

On day 1 you claimed strike was scum and on day 2 as well, yet you expect us to believe that you targetted strike last night?

Yes, yes I do. I wanted to know if someone would visit strike because, afterall, there would be no reason for there to be so many mafia in a game, and I ultimately decided that chapcrap and strike were NOT connected. They would not be so close together in discussion against me (That would be stupid so early on). So I picked one (basically by drawing names out of a hat) and decided to watch strikewolf. I like strikewolfs play style, and was pretty much willing to bet on it that it would bring a profitable result.

Ok, I do believe that actually lol.

[ghostly447]

You say that "It just means I want them to THINK I am singling them out." Probably because YOU HAVE singled them out.

I have given 3 names if you didnt realize and 2 other possibilities. Just because sometimes they respond to cases like human beings and therefore I must respond back, does NOT mean that I would not just as quickly make another case given the effort to go back through and reread the whole thing.

"It just means, in general, I havent had time to start building anything else against anyone else." You spend every 20 minutes coming up with paragraph(s) posts talking about them and yet you claim not to have the time to take and find a case on someone else. Perhaps you should take the time to actually try to find some cases instead of spending all the time confirming your bias.

I apologize for not having the effort to go back through and reread the rest of the posts. So you know, the other 2 possibilities were actually you and safari. Again, it was more weak evidence (fully intended to go for more evidence, etc since I had 3 weak cases out, 1 I actually feel was strong (CLEVER) so I wanted to make sure my next 2, after plenty of input from you 2, could hopefully yield something substantial). I decided NOT to bring these cases to the floor, because I find it a weak defense to try to accuse new people while proving your innocence. SO, since your so worried that I am singling players out, there you are for the next cases I intended to bring up.

"WEAK evidence to see if they would flip out under pressure". Confirmation bias. You single them out under weak cases and when they respond, you confirm to yourself that they are "flipping out" under pressure.

I think my posts above explain this point.

"I think my posts above explain this point"

Your actions have explained it. You've continued to go after your weak cases and it's become apparent you won't let it go. Either you "confirmed" your case against them or you'll continue to try until you find that "scum slip" you are looking for. I no longer care what you claim. It's become clear that you'll only be a detriment to town going forward regardless of your alignment.

Wait wait wait. So when you make cases, you just say "my case brought nothing, just forget about them"? How, if the mafia make a good case, do you expect to even catch a mafia if you operate by this method? Just because they defended themselves (ONLY talking about doom and chapcrap here) doesnt mean they arent mafia. The cases didnt even force a claim against them. Just because whenever I bring up another thought about one and both immediately jump back on me, doesnt mean I myself am not looking for more scum tells. I AM looking for more scum tells. But when there are 2 people that I am trying to make separate weak cases against, yet still defend myself when they both defend themselves, you need to realize that I would look scummier trying to bring on a 3rd and 4th case. You wonder why I pursued them? I wonder why you think I could possibly try to point out another scummier player while I have enough on my plate.

Fastposted by DoomYoshi: Lol, at least we agree on something!

[safariguy5]

You say that "It just means I want them to THINK I am singling them out." Probably because YOU HAVE singled them out.

I have given 3 names if you didnt realize and 2 other possibilities. Just because sometimes they respond to cases like human beings and therefore I must respond back, does NOT mean that I would not just as quickly make another case given the effort to go back through and reread the whole thing.

"It just means, in general, I havent had time to start building anything else against anyone else." You spend every 20 minutes coming up with paragraph(s) posts talking about them and yet you claim not to have the time to take and find a case on someone else. Perhaps you should take the time to actually try to find some cases instead of spending all the time confirming your bias.

I apologize for not having the effort to go back through and reread the rest of the posts. So you know, the other 2 possibilities were actually you and safari. Again, it was more weak evidence (fully intended to go for more evidence, etc since I had 3 weak cases out, 1 I actually feel was strong (CLEVER) so I wanted to make sure my next 2, after plenty of input from you 2, could hopefully yield something substantial). I decided NOT to bring these cases to the floor, because I find it a weak defense to try to accuse new people while proving your innocence. SO, since your so worried that I am singling players out, there you are for the next cases I intended to bring up.

"WEAK evidence to see if they would flip out under pressure". Confirmation bias. You single them out under weak cases and when they respond, you confirm to yourself that they are "flipping out" under pressure.

I think my posts above explain this point.

OMFG!

On day 1 you claimed strike was scum and on day 2 as well, yet you expect us to believe that you targetted strike last night?

Yes, yes I do. I wanted to know if someone would visit strike because, afterall, there would be no reason for there to be so many mafia in a game, and I ultimately decided that chapcrap and strike were NOT connected. They would not be so close together in discussion against me (That would be stupid so early on). So I picked one (basically by drawing names out of a hat) and decided to watch strikewolf. I like strikewolfs play style, and was pretty much willing to bet on it that it would bring a profitable result.

These two taken together basically means that ghostly is tunneling on 3 people, plus adds strike and me to that. Dandy. Now who else has been advising caution about pushing with a doctor lynch? Oh yes, me and strike (among other people). I'm sorry ghostly, the risk/reward analysis on lynching a claimed doc does not add up. We're only on Day 2, we are not at LYLO, and there's probably at least a few town roles out there who can protect the doc so it's not like the doc is in any danger of dying. So you can't even make the argument that we might as well test the doc claim by lynching him because mafia is going to kill him anyways. Is having a doctor claim a detriment to town? Absolutely. But it isn't an insurmountable odd for us. So yes, there is a chance that clever is mafia. But should he flip town, it will do more damage to us than not lynching him now and seeing if he can back up his claim.

You're also basically saying that strike is scum therefore you're going to watch him because he's going to do something scummy. Circular logic and more confirmation bias.

I'm pretty sure my vote is already on you, but if it isn't unvote vote ghostly
Fastposted by ghostly

[safariguy5]

You say that "It just means I want them to THINK I am singling them out." Probably because YOU HAVE singled them out.

I have given 3 names if you didnt realize and 2 other possibilities. Just because sometimes they respond to cases like human beings and therefore I must respond back, does NOT mean that I would not just as quickly make another case given the effort to go back through and reread the whole thing.

"It just means, in general, I havent had time to start building anything else against anyone else." You spend every 20 minutes coming up with paragraph(s) posts talking about them and yet you claim not to have the time to take and find a case on someone else. Perhaps you should take the time to actually try to find some cases instead of spending all the time confirming your bias.

I apologize for not having the effort to go back through and reread the rest of the posts. So you know, the other 2 possibilities were actually you and safari. Again, it was more weak evidence (fully intended to go for more evidence, etc since I had 3 weak cases out, 1 I actually feel was strong (CLEVER) so I wanted to make sure my next 2, after plenty of input from you 2, could hopefully yield something substantial). I decided NOT to bring these cases to the floor, because I find it a weak defense to try to accuse new people while proving your innocence. SO, since your so worried that I am singling players out, there you are for the next cases I intended to bring up.

"WEAK evidence to see if they would flip out under pressure". Confirmation bias. You single them out under weak cases and when they respond, you confirm to yourself that they are "flipping out" under pressure.

I think my posts above explain this point.

"I think my posts above explain this point"

Your actions have explained it. You've continued to go after your weak cases and it's become apparent you won't let it go. Either you "confirmed" your case against them or you'll continue to try until you find that "scum slip" you are looking for. I no longer care what you claim. It's become clear that you'll only be a detriment to town going forward regardless of your alignment.

Wait wait wait. So when you make cases, you just say "my case brought nothing, just forget about them"? How, if the mafia make a good case, do you expect to even catch a mafia if you operate by this method? Just because they defended themselves (ONLY talking about doom and chapcrap here) doesnt mean they arent mafia. The cases didnt even force a claim against them. Just because whenever I bring up another thought about one and both immediately jump back on me, doesnt mean I myself am not looking for more scum tells. I AM looking for more scum tells. But when there are 2 people that I am trying to make separate weak cases against, yet still defend myself when they both defend themselves, you need to realize that I would look scummier trying to bring on a 3rd and 4th case. You wonder why I pursued them? I wonder why you think I could possibly try to point out another scummier player while I have enough on my plate.

Fastposted by DoomYoshi: Lol, at least we agree on something!

Good cases can be made by anyone, the strength of the case will dictate acceptance.

The reason why they're jumping on you is because you've continually brought the cases up. It makes you look like a lyncher or something honestly. If a person makes a good defense for a case brought against them, usually it means that we move onto another case. It doesn't mean that we forget about the case, but there's no point beating a dead (for the time being) horse.

Also, you've said they're weak cases about 3 times. If they're weak cases, why pursue them?

[ghostly447]

You say that "It just means I want them to THINK I am singling them out." Probably because YOU HAVE singled them out.

I have given 3 names if you didnt realize and 2 other possibilities. Just because sometimes they respond to cases like human beings and therefore I must respond back, does NOT mean that I would not just as quickly make another case given the effort to go back through and reread the whole thing.

"It just means, in general, I havent had time to start building anything else against anyone else." You spend every 20 minutes coming up with paragraph(s) posts talking about them and yet you claim not to have the time to take and find a case on someone else. Perhaps you should take the time to actually try to find some cases instead of spending all the time confirming your bias.

I apologize for not having the effort to go back through and reread the rest of the posts. So you know, the other 2 possibilities were actually you and safari. Again, it was more weak evidence (fully intended to go for more evidence, etc since I had 3 weak cases out, 1 I actually feel was strong (CLEVER) so I wanted to make sure my next 2, after plenty of input from you 2, could hopefully yield something substantial). I decided NOT to bring these cases to the floor, because I find it a weak defense to try to accuse new people while proving your innocence. SO, since your so worried that I am singling players out, there you are for the next cases I intended to bring up.

"WEAK evidence to see if they would flip out under pressure". Confirmation bias. You single them out under weak cases and when they respond, you confirm to yourself that they are "flipping out" under pressure.

I think my posts above explain this point.

OMFG!

On day 1 you claimed strike was scum and on day 2 as well, yet you expect us to believe that you targetted strike last night?

Yes, yes I do. I wanted to know if someone would visit strike because, afterall, there would be no reason for there to be so many mafia in a game, and I ultimately decided that chapcrap and strike were NOT connected. They would not be so close together in discussion against me (That would be stupid so early on). So I picked one (basically by drawing names out of a hat) and decided to watch strikewolf. I like strikewolfs play style, and was pretty much willing to bet on it that it would bring a profitable result.

These two taken together basically means that ghostly is tunneling on 3 people, plus adds strike and me to that. Dandy. Now who else has been advising caution about pushing with a doctor lynch? Oh yes, me and strike (among other people). I'm sorry ghostly, the risk/reward analysis on lynching a claimed doc does not add up. We're only on Day 2, we are not at LYLO, and there's probably at least a few town roles out there who can protect the doc so it's not like the doc is in any danger of dying. So you can't even make the argument that we might as well test the doc claim by lynching him because mafia is going to kill him anyways. Is having a doctor claim a detriment to town? Absolutely. But it isn't an insurmountable odd for us. So yes, there is a chance that clever is mafia. But should he flip town, it will do more damage to us than not lynching him now and seeing if he can back up his claim.

You're also basically saying that strike is scum therefore you're going to watch him because he's going to do something scummy. Circular logic and more confirmation bias.

I'm pretty sure my vote is already on you, but if it isn't unvote vote ghostly
Fastposted by ghostly

I like your playstyle safariguy. But one thing. I love how you give CLEVER an out. By technically saying if he is mafia, he of course wont die, but if he is the doctor, then there is obviously a way out of it. You through it out there immediately with no real reason to do so. Just cover your tracks as to why he wont die tonight.

Fastposted by safari. Again, if you didnt notice, I HAVE said they are weak cases. But DoomYoshi is the one who brought it back up, analyzing every weak point of it to somewhat "safely pack" himself in my mind. So I have to keep saying it, because it is in fact, believe it or not, my defense that I needed to keep it going.

Since I am at L-1, I am going to assume someone will hammer me while I sleep. I just want to take a completely wild guess here so I can wait to see at the end.

Mafia:
CLEVER
ChapCrap
DoomYoshi
Safariguy

I dont care if I am right or wrong at this point. This game has been a hell of a second day. Go town, and good work whoever the full mafia may be.

[safariguy5]

You say that "It just means I want them to THINK I am singling them out." Probably because YOU HAVE singled them out.

I have given 3 names if you didnt realize and 2 other possibilities. Just because sometimes they respond to cases like human beings and therefore I must respond back, does NOT mean that I would not just as quickly make another case given the effort to go back through and reread the whole thing.

"It just means, in general, I havent had time to start building anything else against anyone else." You spend every 20 minutes coming up with paragraph(s) posts talking about them and yet you claim not to have the time to take and find a case on someone else. Perhaps you should take the time to actually try to find some cases instead of spending all the time confirming your bias.

I apologize for not having the effort to go back through and reread the rest of the posts. So you know, the other 2 possibilities were actually you and safari. Again, it was more weak evidence (fully intended to go for more evidence, etc since I had 3 weak cases out, 1 I actually feel was strong (CLEVER) so I wanted to make sure my next 2, after plenty of input from you 2, could hopefully yield something substantial). I decided NOT to bring these cases to the floor, because I find it a weak defense to try to accuse new people while proving your innocence. SO, since your so worried that I am singling players out, there you are for the next cases I intended to bring up.

"WEAK evidence to see if they would flip out under pressure". Confirmation bias. You single them out under weak cases and when they respond, you confirm to yourself that they are "flipping out" under pressure.

I think my posts above explain this point.

OMFG!

On day 1 you claimed strike was scum and on day 2 as well, yet you expect us to believe that you targetted strike last night?

Yes, yes I do. I wanted to know if someone would visit strike because, afterall, there would be no reason for there to be so many mafia in a game, and I ultimately decided that chapcrap and strike were NOT connected. They would not be so close together in discussion against me (That would be stupid so early on). So I picked one (basically by drawing names out of a hat) and decided to watch strikewolf. I like strikewolfs play style, and was pretty much willing to bet on it that it would bring a profitable result.

These two taken together basically means that ghostly is tunneling on 3 people, plus adds strike and me to that. Dandy. Now who else has been advising caution about pushing with a doctor lynch? Oh yes, me and strike (among other people). I'm sorry ghostly, the risk/reward analysis on lynching a claimed doc does not add up. We're only on Day 2, we are not at LYLO, and there's probably at least a few town roles out there who can protect the doc so it's not like the doc is in any danger of dying. So you can't even make the argument that we might as well test the doc claim by lynching him because mafia is going to kill him anyways. Is having a doctor claim a detriment to town? Absolutely. But it isn't an insurmountable odd for us. So yes, there is a chance that clever is mafia. But should he flip town, it will do more damage to us than not lynching him now and seeing if he can back up his claim.

You're also basically saying that strike is scum therefore you're going to watch him because he's going to do something scummy. Circular logic and more confirmation bias.

I'm pretty sure my vote is already on you, but if it isn't unvote vote ghostly
Fastposted by ghostly

I like your playstyle safariguy. But one thing. I love how you give CLEVER an out. By technically saying if he is mafia, he of course wont die, but if he is the doctor, then there is obviously a way out of it. You through it out there immediately with no real reason to do so. Just cover your tracks as to why he wont die tonight.

Fastposted by safari. Again, if you didnt notice, I HAVE said they are weak cases. But DoomYoshi is the one who brought it back up, analyzing every weak point of it to somewhat "safely pack" himself in my mind. So I have to keep saying it, because it is in fact, believe it or not, my defense that I needed to keep it going.

Since I am at L-1, I am going to assume someone will hammer me while I sleep. I just want to take a completely wild guess here so I can wait to see at the end.

Mafia:
CLEVER
ChapCrap
DoomYoshi
Safariguy

I dont care if I am right or wrong at this point. This game has been a hell of a second day. Go town, and good work whoever the full mafia may be.

Yeah ok, so you're saying that we have no other protective roles/busdrivers or something with 15 people left?

Or are you saying that those roles aren't going to try to protect the doc?

I'm pretty sure clever is going to survive this night regardless of what alignment he is. There are enough people alive. Remember, the best evidence for a mafia case is a faked night action. That's the nail in the coffin you want.

[DoomYoshi]

Once again a lie. My most recent tirade is a response to the following post. Allegedly you listing why I am scummy is dropping the case. I don't buy it at this point though.

Claimed Captain Flume, Town Watcher. From Catch-22 (I believe was the name of it). Same as our dead confirmed Town Tracker. I know nothing about 'Catch-22' except for the small bit our mod included in my role pm. Besides that, all I can hope for is that the town sees no reason to lynch me so I can try to watch some more and hopefully catch scum. If not, good luck town.

The highlighted section here is causing me major concern. First off, the character from Catch 22 (Orr) was the busdriver, not the tracker. Now, admittedly this is mistake that I made myself. I was then corrected by Strike or safari or someone. Now, Ghostly has continued to make this mistake, so I conclude that he actually thinks/thought that the tracker was the character from Catch 22. Looking at this, I am seriously concerned, as he seems to be using it as circumstantial evidence in support of his claim. This, coupled with other things he has said to similar ends is now causing me to seriously consider the possibility that this claim is a fake that Ghostly came up with based on these facts. I mean, I get this feeling that if Ghostly hadn't mixed up the character's roles that he would have claimed Gob or something from Arrested Development. I am not going to move my vote at the moment, because I don't want to rush things by putting him and L-1 where anybody could end the day before I am good and ready, but I now consider him my number 1 choice for the day.

Is that a lynch?
Cause I'd hate to see a no lynch after all this work
So unvote vote ghostly
Not trying to hammer its just late Monday and the deadline is upon us

The deadline is next Monday, a week from now.

Bleh, I need some sleep. Gotta also drill it into my brain that I am saying the wrong crap. I have gotten used to saying our tracker was Catch-22 and have just not gotten it through my head quite yet. Cant teach an old dog new tricks, or in this case since I have gotten so used to 1 thing, its hard to change my pattern of thought.

[color=#0040FF]Why would it be in your brain at all though?[/color]

Regarding the players I mentioned that everyone feels have cause me to lose my sight to the other players around me, I just have reason to believe they may be scum. I posted those reasons dozens of times, and after you make a case, no matter how good or bad it is, you are always wondering if you can actually trust them.

So if 0% of the reasons are valid, and some are pure fabrications, the case must still be continued? Unfortunately, in RL this is true. Michael Jackson will forever be known as a child molester, even though it was never proven. In mafia this shouldn't be the case.

I just personally feel SOME things I pointed out actually were scumslips, and therefore sometimes its hard to let go of the fact that they may NOT be scum.

Which ones?

I do still feel their scum, but I promise you I still go with unbiased behavior into any game, and thats how it is throughout as well.

Prove it. So far nothing you have said, other than this post, has provided any evidence that this is the case.

I have already pointed the ones out that started me off. Though I would have to go back and get the one for chapcrap, here are my reasons:

CLEVER: Scumslips are all I see from him. The only reason he hasnt been lynched yet is because he is a claimed town doctor.

ChapCrap: Like I said, I would have to go back and read my cases again to be able to see what I brought the case up against him for. But as of right now, I am not even sure I will live through today and tonight, so if I do, I will reread the entirety of D1 and D2 and see what it was, check consistency of posts (say I caught him for scumslipping, I would see if he continued to scumslip throughout). For now, I will leave this one.

DoomYoshi: Last game I was in with you, where you were town, you were the most active player there. I brought the case against you because there were periods of time when you didnt post at all, and others when you still werent as active as in the other game. I think you posted saying that January wasnt a good month for you or something of the sort, but as soon as I brought it up (or a couple days after) you began to get more and more active.

Those were the reasons for my beginning cases on you and CLEVER. I still feel CLEVER is making scumslips (He went skimming again last night when he thought the deadline was last night, and NOT March 5th).

[ghostly447]

Once again a lie. My most recent tirade is a response to the following post. Allegedly you listing why I am scummy is dropping the case. I don't buy it at this point though.

DoomYoshi, you are becoming very annoying. And I still respect you, but I have answered this at least a hundred thousand times. YOU PROVED ME WRONG. THAT IS WHY I QUIT PURSUING. ALL YOU ARE DOING NOW IS TRYING TO DEFEND YOURSELF TO THE POINT THAT TOWN THINKS THERES NO WAY YOUR ANYTHING OTHER THAN TOWN. I hope you can remember me saying it this time.

[strike wolf]

*goes to the sink. Rinses my hands and wipes them off*

I'll tune back in to see the result of the lynch and read back what i missed but until then I'm wiping my hands of whatever else happens this day.

[DoomYoshi]

I am on ghost's prediction list, yet allegedly there is no more case against me?

This might seem surreal since the game is only words but ghost, your actions speak louder than your words. You have provided no evidence that you are not honing on me and provided no reason other than lies as to why I am mafia and yet you claim that you are not honing in on me?

So, it wasn't a ruse use was it? That whole post was a lie so you could try to keep yourself alive. Your approach to defending yourself is the same as your witch hunting of me: throw everything and see what sticks.

Response to fast post: when did you quit pursuing? You just put me in your list of mafia! That to me is pursuing. If you can show me one portion of day 2 that you didn't pursue me, I would stop defending myself. I will not, and can not stop, until you yourself understand that the case was wrong. You think I am scummy for no reason. And that can not stand, in principle.

[ghostly447]

I am on ghost's prediction list, yet allegedly there is no more case against me?

This might seem surreal since the game is only words but ghost, your actions speak louder than your words. You have provided no evidence that you are not honing on me and provided no reason other than lies as to why I am mafia and yet you claim that you are not honing in on me?

So, it wasn't a ruse use was it? That whole post was a lie so you could try to keep yourself alive. Your approach to defending yourself is the same as your witch hunting of me: throw everything and see what sticks.

Response to fast post: when did you quit pursuing? You just put me in your list of mafia! That to me is pursuing. If you can show me one portion of day 2 that you didn't pursue me, I would stop defending myself. I will not, and can not stop, until you yourself understand that the case was wrong. You think I am scummy for no reason. And that can not stand, in principle.

I just put you on my list of what I am going out thinking of doomyoshi. I know my case no longer holds weight against you. Please get that. I am just throwing it, because I know I am going to get hammered, and want to see if my predictions were right. Its kind of like, may as well take a guess in my opinion.

[DoomYoshi]

Ok, fair enough.

[spiesr]

Response to fast post: when did you quit pursuing? You just put me in your list of mafia! That to me is pursuing. If you can show me one portion of day 2 that you didn't pursue me, I would stop defending myself. I will not, and can not stop, until you yourself understand that the case was wrong. You think I am scummy for no reason. And that can not stand, in principle.

While your opinion on this may vary, I believe that there is a sort of difference between convinced that someone is scum to the point where only hard evidence will change your and making your feelings on the matter publicly know versus actively pursuing a players lynch.

Yeah ok, so you're saying that we have no other protective roles/busdrivers or something with 15 people left?

Well, how much for defensive power could we really have at this point? If SomethingClever really is the exact vanilla Doctor he claims to be, then we likely won't have any other doctors. It seems Ghostly is either the watcher or we don't have one, so there won't be that threat to scare the scum away from killing obvious targets. That pretty much just leaves us with the possibility of a bus-driver or bodyguard to save someone. Maybe a Jail-keeper. So, SomethingClever living through the night isn't quite as sure thing as you make it out to be.

I'm pretty sure clever is going to survive this night regardless of what alignment he is. There are enough people alive. Remember, the best evidence for a mafia case is a faked night action. That's the nail in the coffin you want.

Anyhow, I can see Ghostly having a sort of point here. If we are somehow in a situation where you and SomethingClever are scumbuddies, then you dropping these posts that preemptively justify him having survived the night is a thing. But, regardless, the whole "he lived he must actually be scum?" thing is a steaming pile of WIFOM.

[spiesr]

Since I am at L-1, I am going to assume someone will hammer me while I sleep. I just want to take a completely wild guess here so I can wait to see at the end.

Now, I am not 100% sure about this, but my count puts you at L-3...

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Vote Count

MoB Deadly:
dazza2008:
Some7hingCLEVER: 2 (spiesr, jak)
spiesr:
pancakemix:
jonty125:
Victor Sullivan:
new guy1:
chapcrap: 1 (ghostly)
soundman:
ghostly447: 5 (Doom, dazza, saf, strike, chap)
safariguy5:
strike wolf:
Doom Yoshi:
jak111: 3 (jonty, MoB, clever)
NL:

With 15 alive it takes 8 to lynch. Deadline in 6 days. Great discussion, guys, keep it up.

-Tails

[Some7hingCLEVER]

umm I guess I never put my vote backVote jak111

[ghostly447]

Since I am at L-1, I am going to assume someone will hammer me while I sleep. I just want to take a completely wild guess here so I can wait to see at the end.

Now, I am not 100% sure about this, but my count puts you at L-3...

Seems you were right...I thought I WAS at L-1. Okay then, carry on. I suppose I will re-read this whole thing when I get time. Just because I may as well be considered dead, doesnt mean I wont try I guess...

[soundman]

umm I guess I never put my vote backVote jak111

Vote Count
jak111: 3 (jonty, MoB, clever)

You did put it back...

Well, I really want to lynch clever. The only thing holding me back is, like I said before, the doc claim.
While I think Ghostly hasn't really been a help to the town, I do believe he is town. Therefore I'm reluctant to lynch him. And even if he isn't any help during the day a watcher can be a helpful role.
I find it really odd that jak claimed with so little pressure. But that could just be a noob thing.
At this point I don't know who I should put my vote on. I don't want a no lynch but I'm not seeing a good lynch option...