So if the rules of today are the same rules of the original game, then Julien/Lawrence have now two votes. One of mine and one of Budja.
But we'll see if this is the case when we see the first VC.
You are defending him with meta (which is something I don't like), while admitting that he could be scum. And I don't see how it could be bad that you get lynched if Empking is scum. It's also interesting to note that you say 'self-interest', while speaking about that you could be town or mafia. That's not what I would call 'self-interest' as you should do it for the best of the town or mafia.Ortolan wrote:Obviously he has a no less than normal probability of being scum this game, but I am just asking you be wary because he does have a scummy meta and if he is lynched this entails me being lynched also, which is bad for my action be it town or mafia (so as I said this comes from self-interest)
And it may bore you talking about this, it's not a good reason to stop talking about it. So you can expect me to bring it back some times.Ortolan wrote:So I'd like to know, if Empking would continue to play like this when you two are seperated, would you or would you not go for his lynch and why?
Santos actually supported it with a vote. It's not about suggesting the plan, it's how both of Santos and URoE responded to it. Both supported it, but only Santos voted for a no-lynch.BSG wrote:As for URoE, the only thing that bothers me about what was pointed out by RR is that he seems to like the idea of a no-lynch. But at the same time, he will only go for it when multiple players agree with it.
The reason why this bothers me, is that if you like your idea and you think that it's the best for the town, you should try to convince the others that this is the right way to go. And this gives me the idea that he's trying to look for an exit if the idea of a no-lynch was denied and if he would get attacked.
You gave some comments about this. However, Tajo responded to this as Santos was making some kind of remak regarding SG. I thought that it had to do something with SG and Tajo being a couple, instead of Tajo distancing from Santos. That's why I pointed it out.Tajo wrote:Hey dude you need to start respecting people.Santos wrote:never mind. totally failed sexual innuendo.
You think you are like very clever hiding behind your screen, huh, huh?
I think not...
Don't ignore your other head!BSG wrote:@Santos
Perhaps we should discuss who we suspect, so tell your suspicions for once.
It seems that you don't want Slicey to be lynched only to be longer in the game, so who would you like to lynch instead?IronTurkey wrote:Oh and before anyone asks: I'm not going to vote Slicey because: A) he can change the vote at any time anyway and B) though playing to win means finding scum, I'd very much like to be in this game longer than one day.
BSG wrote:@Santos
Perhaps we should discuss who we suspect, so tell your suspicions for once.
MLock posted this the 4th. So why was he replaced?MacavityLock wrote:Posting in all games: Hopefully short V/LA due to being down with a nasty fever. Trying to play Mafia when I can't fully concentrate is a bad thing. I'm sure poptaj will do us proud while I'm gone.
Could you answer this IronTurkey?BSG wrote:It seems that you don't want Slicey to be lynched only to be longer in the game, so who would you like to lynch instead?
KMD wrote:Well Braeden does seem pretty scummy. I'll admit that. But that's my second head, so I'm against the lynch.
And look who's bringing it up again. Don't blame me that I get the feeling now that this is just to give us an impression that you've read this game, while not doing so.Ortolan wrote:It's getting boring talking about it (my meta defence of Empking) now, really.
As someone who has played with Empking before, I'm aware of his meta (long time ago Emp.) But that shouldn't be a reason to not lynch him. Or even worse, defend him. As for the neutral part of this quote, it didn't look like that in the other ongoing game (not allowed to quote from that one).Ortolan wrote:About Empking: yes, he looks scummy. I have previously played with him in a game where we were scumbuddies, and he also looked scummy in that. I'm in I believe two ongoing games with him (this and another, there might be one more I can't think of also)and think he looks scummy in both of them. I do also recall someone specifically saying he has a scummy meta. So currently I'm probably neutral on him.
Read what I've said again. Because I didn't say this at all.Ortolan wrote:This is not saying "Empking looks town", how the fuck would I have known whether he was town or not on page fucking two?
You wanted to stop this talk as it 'bored' you. Yet, you're the one who brings it up after a re-read. Not only that, it's what you mostly discuss. You talk about Slicey, a post from Narsis and you mention that you see Empking as Town, and that you have a neutral read on IT. The first two is due to something you don't see as a scumtell, while I do (and apparently Narsis and Slicey as well) and the other two you don't state a reason for. And no, the reason why you see Empking is town isn't a reason as he voted Santos. I'm included in that one.Ortolan wrote:WaitBSG (436) wrote:And look who's bringing it up again. Don't blame me that I get the feeling now that this is just to give us an impression that you've read this game, while not doing so.What?Where does this even come from? Highly ironically me bringing this up resulted directly from re-reading the entire game. You spent a lot of time attacking me for a null-tell rather than doing any good scum-hunting today, don't think it will go unnoticed. If not today then later.
Of course, I'll look it up. You used it as a defence. A defence should always be checked as it could easily be bogus. You actually did find him scummy in those games. But because he's scummy in all his games, he would be neutral. You're just giving him a free pass each game, which is unacceptable, but that is a difference in our opinion and shouldn't be discussed here.Ortolan wrote:Amazing. You actually go to the effort of looking this up, but then are oblivious to the fact that it very, very, very strongly supports everything I've said this game, and in absolutely no way contradicts it. Yes, the argument I made is that "Without the benefit of meta, Empking looks objectively scummy. He always looks like this though, so he is a neutral read." The fact he looked scummy as he always doesBSG (436) wrote:Anyway, your meta argument that you've meta defenced Empking before is bogus. See here, your quote from Alpha:Ortolan wrote:About Empking: yes, he looks scummy. I have previously played with him in a game where we were scumbuddies, and he also looked scummy in that. I'm in I believe two ongoing games with him (this and another, there might be one more I can't think of also)and think he looks scummy in both of them. I do also recall someone specifically saying he has a scummy meta. So currently I'm probably neutral on him.doesn'tmake him town, but it makes him not really more likely to be scum than the prior, setup probability." So please tell me any way in which what you quoted contradicts what I said this game, or were you hoping no-one was actually paying attention and further crap-logic is what you needed to take the wagon to a lynch?
You're wrong. You're not allowed to discuss any ongoing game outside said game. And we're not discussing it right now. But I think that the players should know how bad your defence actually is. As I'm not allowed to quote it, I'll let them look at it themselves. And you're not the one who is allowed to give comments about this.Ortolan wrote:Strictly speaking, you are allowed to neither quote nor reference it. You slip in that "it didn't look like that in the other ongoing game", knowing the point will stick because I can't quote it to potentially prove you wrong. Nice play, scum.BSG (436) wrote:As for the neutral part of this quote, it didn't look like that in the other ongoing game (not allowed to quote from that one).
Yes, it's very scummy to have a life besides mafia. Hello, Penguin to human, I talked about this on the same day you came with your defence. So your accusation in this quote makes no sense.Ortolan wrote:A whole bunch of people, not all of them opportunistic scum probably (;)), criticise me for this, probably rightly initially. Then when the issue should be over and done with I get several people later in the day suggesting a vote on me because of it (Slicey, others IIRC, possibly Narsis and yourself implicitly). Obviously I still need to defend myself, if I'm going to be lynched for such a crappy reason. Then BSG the hero comes in and accuses me of dwelling on something "everyone had moved on from", except they were going to vote and potentially lynch me for it.
Braeden becomes scummy-KMD doesn't defend.Ortolan wrote:Pretty sure theonlyargument you have against me relies on continually misquoting me then basically implying I'm not allowed to defendmyself. So let's not get too sanctimonious about our "wording".
When you said this, you only had one vote. Even with those attacking you regarding the Empking meta, you would have only been at a max of L-2. So I don't see why you were getting afraid.Ortolan wrote:Look. No. I was/am getting voted solely for doing that, it may bore me but if I'm going to get lynched for it I have no choice but to discuss it. Stop using insanely bad arguments please. Also I've done more than my fair share of scumhunting this game. Just the biggest scumtells being dropped are still the crap arguments being used against me.
I can't blame you as you don't look at it using a penguin brain, however you said that we should be wary of what a scumtell is in his case. So what normally would be scummy when a player does it, should be treated as neutral in Empking's case. And that is defending. And you knew that you were defending:Ortolan wrote:You're still using the same strawman I asked you to stop using in my previous post. I never, ever acknowledged I "defended" Empking- I said be wary of interpreting what would be scumtells for other people into his play. This is not defending him, and I characterised it as "cautioning" in my previous post. You can call my latter assessment of Empking a "defence" of him, but not this. This is getting into seriously mentally-deficient, teeth-grinding territory.
Ortolan wrote:He has a scummy (very scummy) meta, please read his recent games and see how likely he is to be lynched versus how many times he actually is scum (no offense, Empking). Yes, I am trying to save my own skin here