@ Nebuch, again, if I stop, that's giving up to a BS case on me to begin with. I'd rather keep fighting them than let them lynch a town and make mafia/3rd party that much closer to a win.
jonty125 wrote:jak111 wrote:If I could go back and pick who to kill would I change it? No. I wouldn't.
So you would still knowingly shoot a town empowerer, which I'm gonna guess has had some detrimental effect to some town roles and you would still shoot him again?
Now this is twisting words. I believe it's my last post that I answered this with the assumption I did not know what he'd flip. Otherwise that is just stupid to say without that context and you're knowingly twisting it.jak111 wrote:I killed Zivel, get over it. This is Mafia, I did what I thought would be a good move to kill a scummy player early on. I did not know his role neither did anyone else. Killing him was as good as any other kill I could of done last night.
You used a night action that unnecessarily damaged town, and you keep insisting it was the right move. If a vig had vigged N1, that wouldn't be OK, but with you it seems not only is it OK to vig N1, it's as if your action was the perfect action last night and you are not listening to the other players, which is scummy.
I have admitted to it being a mistake. I think Strike Wolf should be reading this so he can see what true word twisting looks like.jak111 wrote:Literally, if town wants my help, show it.
Comments like these, if you are town-aligned of course town wants your help, town don't owe you anything.
Nor do I owe town anything past what I've already given. I will help town when I can, but I will not listen to potential scum order me around who expect a pat on the back by the town. I will protect who I believe is town.
That last sentence brings me to another thing. In my eyes anyone in this game can be mafia. I don't have a mason partner or teammates. I don't have an investigation role nor do I have anything else that can tell me who is mafia/town. There's groups of you I imagine that have the luxury knowing what 1-4 others are. Or can use a power that can tell you the alignment of others (which I'm surprised a cop did not check me in the night if they truly believed I was scum. Odd, is it not? For being so certain yesterday and today?).
No, I'm ganged up on and told I'm OMGUS'ing if I find something in a post scummy if that person happens to be voting me. So what everyone is saying, right now there are 6-7 people I cannot FOS, Vote or build a case on at all because they're under the protection of it being OMGUS if I do?
The corruption of OMGUS in this game has gone to a new limit. Claiming it on me every time I vote someone when I actually BUILD a case to go with it. Meanwhile not many voting me have built a case so much as cast blame and statements that have no defense against because they aren't arguments or cases. They're just their opinions.
I mean look at Edoc's change of vote (even though it's not bolded we all see it). There's no case with it, no argument, just a change of vote because I had the balls to build a case on Strike. Whether it's a good case or not, I can't say. But it's a case that I feel is good enough for at least trying to make one when everyone else claims they want one made before lynching me (this was back at the start of the day they claimed this and now that we're approaching deadline none of them have even attempted to start a new case what so ever. I have, twice so far).
I know people are going to completely skip over this post like most have been doing and shrug it off. So let me point out a few main points about this.
[list=]
[*]The term OMGUS is being corrupted and over used to the point building a case and voting someone is considered OMGUS.
[*]Those that claimed to want a new case before lynching me have failed to even attempt one.
[*]The case built on me is still petite. Most of the voting circles around statements instead of arguments.[/list]