Princess Bride Mafia - Game Over

[Someone]

Random vote:mlaker

[Someone]

Ummm, guys, Who's buttercup?

[Someone]

oh yeah

[Someone]

How does my non-knowledge of princess-bride factoids make me scummy? I've only seen bits of it but have read the script thing. So, the admittedly small bandwagon is very unfounded.

[Someone]

Alas, I role claimed before the crash, and I will do it again. If I had an important role I would refrain from going for the claim, but I am but a

Florinn townsperson

.

Also, what I said before the crash stands. Massive was quick to make something out of nothing, and provided the main "evidence" against me. The evidence was that I made a random vote and I forgot who buttercup was.

Now, this would not be scummy on it's own because this would be no more then an OMGUS vote. But, he went on to

not vote for me

. If I was a mafia, this would be exactly the type of thing I would be doing, heading a bandwagon, without the dangers of being detected as scum if I get lynched and turn out to be a townee.

So

Unvote:whoever

and

vote:massive

[Someone]

If anyone is still suspicious of me I shall reveal the real name of a townee role. florin townsperson was in the letter, if she sent the same one to all the townees. Further more, how would I know what townees are if I was not one? Sorry if all this has been mentioned, I don't have the time to read the whole thread. there is no reason to disbelieve my claim.

thc
--Someone

[Someone]

In order to successfully role claim without giving up the name of the role, I am a florin something. The third letter in the something word is an "a".

[Someone]

I think we've hit scum guys. Unless I misunderstood, Fishbulb claimed that the real townee role was "florin townee". Unless we got different titles, I am

not

a florin townee.

So,

vote:fishbulb

[Someone]

Okie

Unvote fishbulb

[Someone]

Vote:leo

We need a bandwaggon somwhere...we're still on the first day you know.

[Someone]

Unvote:leo

and

FOS:Mikehart

i just dont buy it. unvote: someone vote: Leo

Now, the logic behind this is questionable at best. If Leo

isn't

the clergyman then the real clergyman should come out and reveal him as a mafia member. So logic deducts that he must be telling the truth.

Now, this isn't really too scummy, but that's why it's a FOS not a vote. This is indeed the first day and we have nothing else in terms of leads to scum.

[Someone]

vote:mole

[Someone]

unvote:mole

That's correct.

Vote:leo

[Someone]

I say just lynch him.

[Someone]

Well....maybe he can stop his own lynch?

[Someone]

well, well, well.

2 kills, not good.


Anyways, on to the more pressing issues. It's turned out to being Leo vs. Dp. The problem is that both of them have plausible role-claims.

Leo claims that he can invoke "divine intervention" to stop a lynch, and did so.
DP says he is a sane cop for sure.

The logic behind yesterday's lynch attempt against Leo was that if he was innocent, we could lynch DP. But, since leo used divine intervention he stopped the lynch, therefore it cost us 2 innocents. Are we really prepared to do the same today. If Leo is innocent, and DP is guilty, we will have lost two more lives, plus Leo himself, plus two more just to lynch one mafioso(DP). Also, quick lynches in all those days mean that we will have nothing to go on after we kill him. Is it really worth it?

On the flip side, Leo looks

super

guilty in my eyes.

A) A cop fingered him
B) There is probably an SK in this game, right(judging by the two deaths)? Well doesn't his role sound like an SK. Who else in the princess bride could be a viable SK or a second killing group?
C) Leo used his power yesterday. It cost us two townees, and potentially more. Now, this might be a mistake, because I would have done the same. However, has Leo not played in many games? Was it obvious to any of you that have played as much as him that it wasn't a good idea?

Anyways, I think I am leaning towards the "Leo is not guilty" side. But, my scum detector isn't reacting to DP yet either. So, my vote is withheld for now.

[Someone]

wow, that post wasn't supposed to be that long

[Someone]

I'll list you the prime numbers applicable: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17
Are you sure you didn't make a mistake sugar. I made a mistake at first too and then realised it was

prime

numbers instead of square.


Also, yes, It did not occur to me that we would lose the life of a townee. Anyways, we would have lost two townees because we would have the knowledge today of knowing if DP was telling the truth or not. Now, we are forced to do the lynch all over again.

I also stand by my statement that it will cost us a bunch of townees to get DP if he's playing leptons. It has already cost us two, plus we'll have to lynch leo, if hes an innocent then we lose him, plus two more. And then two last ones to lynch DP

[Someone]

Just in case, mole what's vowels minus consonants in our entire title.

[Someone]

I knew that .

[Someone]

Well, I'm positive that the second word is prime. Actually, I'll go out on a limb and way it has 7 letters. Anyways, the simple counting error was all it took. I did the same thing as mole. Anyways, florin is easily miscounted and I also interpreted it as 5 letters. Sorry for the inconvinience but I think we are back on the confirmed side.

Anyways, the reason that I made such a commital post was that I was a confirmed inoccent and that I did not have a chance to be accused. Anyways, I have yet to see someone (lol) disprove my logic and would like to see someone do it if I am to be accused of using crap logic.

[Someone]

Vote:mikehart

I agree with jerIC. If we just leave the whole cop situation alone he will be forced to keep making up fake investigations and eventually be proved right or wrong. I suggest that we just let this whole thing go and settle our suspicions on somebody else.

[Someone]

Although I think mikehart is pretty guilty, I'll have to

Unvote:mikehart

to get mole to talk. Lurkers are as bad as scum and we need to weed them out every time we realize we have any.

Mathcam, I would like to hear your opinion on the mikehart thing, if possible.

Mlaker, that is pretty crappy logic you used there. You basically say- Everyone vote for DP, he says I'm mafia and I say I'm not, so let's lynch him!

On a side note, this game is pretty fun, even though I do not know much about the theme.

[Someone]

Oops

vote:mole

[Someone]

Awesome, come sunday, I might not be as clueless about the game anymore.

[Someone]

I'm just interested in knowing where he is right now, A silent townee helps the mafia.

[Someone]

Well

unvote:mole, FOS:mole Vote:mikehart

. I guess Cam's right...sorta.

I guess lurking might not deserve a vote...but as long as we have a almost-confirmed innocent we should try to exploit that, and having him silent is not doing that.

I think Mikehart is as good of a target as anyone, he is looking very guilty in my eyes.

[Someone]

Why aren't we pushing mlaker into that position?

We are not doing this because we have no reason to suspec him of being mafia. Many players are more suspicious then him and I see no reason to pile more votes on him simply because it would be easier to do.

[Someone]

I still think that mikehart is the most suspicious of anyone.

What mikehart did was
A) try to expose the kid when there is no reason to do so.
B) Saying that granpa is probably sane when there is siginificant reason not to.

Now, I was going to type up a huge post saying exactly why mlaker was so guilty, but I think I have got a plan here.

Tell DP to investigate me tonight

If

He gets guilty- insane
He gets innocent- not insane

That way, we will know if his readings are reliable or not. What do you guys think?

[Someone]

Well, it doesn't

have

to be me. It could be any one else if you have more evidence that they are innocent then me. I'm just saying that I am a good canadate because there are three people somewhat verifying my role-claim.

[Someone]

Actually two, and my role claim is townee, if you didn't remember.

[Someone]

Have you even be

reading

this game???? Does "townee checker" ring a bell??? Read page 4.

[Someone]

Unvote:mikehart Vote:dourgrim

Oh come on dour.....Why are you voting for me? I do you really think that I am lurking??? My opinions are known, I just created a fairly good plan, and I was voting for mikehart. And then you come, out of the blue and say....that I'm not active enough? What happened to Darkblade, jadesmar, massive, all these people, who arent even voting, who have posted less then me, and you

vote for me???

Congrats, you've just become my no.1 suspect.

[Someone]

The same holds true. The only reason that you were voting for me was that I have been supposedly quiet. Not only is that a lie, but there are a lot of people who have been posting

much

less then me.

So, following this train of thought your "fos that will soon turn in to a vote if you don't talk" is nothing more then crap logic, therefore, it is based on nothing.[/quote]

[Someone]

Someone, I did not vote for you! That was an FoS, not a vote.

I know it was a FOS but as I said, it makes no difference. When someone points an Fos at me I would like to have something to defend myself from. I continue to think that the FoS is unjustified and I continue my vote.

[Someone]

Vote for me all you want, Someone... the fact remains that you have been intentionally misleading the Town by repeatedly saying that I'm voting for you when I'm not.

And right now YOU are misleading the town by saying that i'm still claiming that you're voting for me. The only time Ive said that is my first post and have since retracted my statement.

And you know what the most fun thing about all of this is? I wanted to hear more from you because you had (and still have) failed to allay my suspicions, and the only thing you do is rant and rave about my FoS.

This is because you haven't gave any reason to justify your FOS. If I would just FOS you for no reason stated whatsoever, would you just take it like nothing happened?

That'd be almost funny if it weren't such an obvious ploy to avoid attention. The reasons to be suspicious of you are well documented throughout the thread, and the only thing preventing people from voting for you and lynching you because of those reasons is the fact that no one really trusts DP's "Grandpa" claim or his sanity. I really don't care how often you post... I care what you have to say in those posts. So far all I see is smoke and mirrors.

WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT I AM GUILTY???
HOW DOES GRANDPA"S SAINITY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ME???

[Someone]

Well....I admit that I interpreted the FOS wrongly. When I see an FOS, for me, it's almost as bad as a vote. And, as such as the post was worded, it was even worse (it may turn into a vote). When I make an FOS or a vote I usually outline why I do so and expect others to do the same. I realise that this may not be true all the time.

Nevertheless, I still think my vote is justified, or at least

as

justified as dourgrim's vote. If you guys bandwaggon me, keep in mind, if i'm guilty so is sugar and mole.

[Someone]

To people who are not voting for anyone presently, please present your position. We seem to be at a stalemate now, and both sides have stated their opinion.

I don't know why you guys aren't voting for anyone but right now nothing is going to happen in this town without your output.

[Someone]

Okie, long post time is it

and I'd be willing to wager that not a single person in this game can cite an concrete example of anything I might have done to clearly indicate scumminess without saying something to the tune of "well, his voting and posting seems kinda weird"... unless, of course, you count me FoSing and subsequently voting for people that others seem to consider above reproach

Well, here goes.

Y'know, this is interesting: suddenly everyone goes quiet, even though we have a sizeable bandwagon on mlaker. We also have Someone and his "master plan" which apparently absolves him from the need to talk, even though (in my mind) he's one of the more suspicious players in this game. Perhaps now would be the time for you to speak up, me buckos. Let's see if I can encourage that:

FoS-that-WILL-turn-into-a-vote-unless-you-start-talking: mlaker & Someone

As you all know, this, in my mind is the offending post. Now, an FOS-that-will-turn-into-a-vote-unless-you-start-talking sounds more serious then a real FOS, doesn't it. Furthermore, I

was

talking, and made it clear that I would not be joining the mlaker wagon because I found it to be unfounded.

I wanted to hear more from you because you had (and still have) failed to allay my suspicions, and the only thing you do is rant and rave about my FoS. That'd be almost funny if it weren't such an obvious ploy to avoid attention. The reasons to be suspicious of you are well documented throughout the thread, and the only thing preventing people from voting for you and lynching you because of those reasons is the fact that no one really trusts DP's "Grandpa" claim or his sanity. I really don't care how often you post... I care what you have to say in those posts. So far all I see is smoke and mirrors.

Ok, so even if it was a ploy to avoid discussion....what have I done? The reason that I suspect you, is that

you

have been avoiding the subject of my lynch. How am I "avoiding the subject" when you don't even make an arguement. If you could kindly produce some reasons that you find me guilty, maybe I could um..stop"avoiding" the subject? Maybe you see reasons why I seem suspicious but I sure don't. I sure can't make arguements against myself.....

Y'know, this is interesting: suddenly everyone goes quiet, even though we have a sizeable bandwagon on mlaker. We also have Someone and his "master plan" which apparently absolves him from the need to talk, even though (in my mind) he's one of the more suspicious players in this game. Perhaps now would be the time for you to speak up, me buckos. Let's see if I can encourage that:

FoS-that-WILL-turn-into-a-vote-unless-you-start-talking: mlaker & Someone

The bolded part of the quote was intended to point out that Someone was acting like he was cleared because of the "plan" he put forth regarding DP and was not meant to say that Someone was lurking or not posting enough. (I freely admit that I worded it poorly, and for that I apologize, but I stand behind the intention of the statement nonetheless.)

I really don't get this paragraph. rite's explination was as follows:

Let me restate what Dourgrim said here. He believes you to be suspicious because of issues where you've contradicted yourself and appeared to act shifty. For these specific issues (not all of which I see), ask Dourgrim. As to what Granpa's "sainity" has to do with you, he's referring to the fact that almost all discussion has revolved around him and people he's accused, leaving people not connected with that issue, namely, you, free from discussion. He believes that you are keeping the people distracted by bringing that issue up over and over again.

Ok I'm getting quite annoyed with all this I've been avoiding the topic stuff. Why don't we just get it over with: what did I say that made me a suspect. If it was a "gut feeling" how can I be avoiding the subject? So everyone, accuse me with all you have because i'm ready .

I stand behind the statement that Someone has not only not cleared himself to my satisfaction but has failed to do much of anything to prove his innocence beyond a role-claim that, quite frankly, would be incredibly easy to fake considering the number of people who have made identical claims in the thread already. I will grant you that it is extremely difficult to prove one's innocence in a game of Mafia. This does not mean, however, that my "gut feeling", as rite put it, is any less valid. And FoS's (which is all I originally threw out there) are often based on nothing more that "gut feelings".

Okay, this is where i get mad . How can you mistrust my role claim? I have

exactly

the same role as sugar, and mole. Now, I am not

invincible

because of it but see, if i'm guilty, so are sugar and mole, or else I somehow guessed the second word in the townee title when I had no idea whatsoever of the role. Furthermore, you FOSed me just because of a gut feeling, knowing all this, and turned it into a vote because I said that you made a vote, and that I was trying to drag suspicion off myself from some invisible plague of suspicion. I repeat, if anyone wants to make a post pointing out how I was suspicious, go ahead. Frankly, I had no idea I was suspisious before dourgrim brung it up. Actually, I was quite suprised to be the highest on somebody's susupicion meter.


Now, as for dourgrim's suspiciousness, summarised from the above posts is: the FOS which was at first undifined, followed by an explination that didn't make much sense. Followed by an argument against me which was not backed up by evidence (from before the event) and then
I guess that's all I have to say.

[Someone]

I think mathcam is quite right. If we figure out DP saneness then we might be able to determine if Mlaker is guilty or not. Right now, we can center our target on somebody else.......Darkblade.

A summary of all darkblade's posts this game

bandwagon@Someone.com

Vote:Someone

Im' more concerned about the vote for the vacationer myself.

Unvote: Someone

Vote:jadesmar

I see Fishbulb's point. Getting peopel to claim they aren't townie? How very helpful to the mafia to know who the protown roles are.

And

A simple coutning error? Hmmm, I dunno if can buy that. Also, sorry about my lack of posts. I'll review the thread and have someone more intellegent to say later.

Oh and I think ROAD is goign to be a SK

His last post was on page nine......if that's not lurking, I don't know what is.

Vote:darkblade

[Someone]

Really? Where is that? If that's true...

unvote:darkblade

[Someone]

Vote:leo

I guess there's no defense possible for me, either you believe me or you don't.

[Someone]

Vote:dourgrim

I don't really think that his post about me was too scummy (but then again, i'm probably a little bit biased :wink). But, the Dourgrim was guilty in my eyes before this point. I really didn't see how I was giving off scummy vibes before. Dourgrim was making something out of nothing.

And some food for thought, why the attempt on my life, on the part of the mafia? I was in danger of being lynched anyways, why didn't they take the life of someone else and leave me to die at the hands of the town?

[Someone]

yea, and the wink was supposed to be

[Someone]

Unvote: dourgrim

Nothing much to add, of course i want the people on the list that haven't claimed yet to come foward. Also, a check by one of our cops on vizzini may be a good idea. [/b]

[Someone]

FOS: Werebear, mikehart Vote: Dourgrim

Didn't we agree that we had to make these people role-claim? If they are pro-town they have nothing to gain by prolonging the wait.

[Someone]

I don't think lynching me would be a good option. Lynching another uncleared (massive) would be a better choice. If we are to believe the reasoning against me, it would mean that I do not have investigative immunity. Now, if there was a second ROUS from the start, he might. So, logic would say that we should kill another unconfirmed and investigate me, right?


I am one of the semi-confirmed townees so, you can be pretty sure that I wasn't the second ROUS from the start. So, to sum it up, if I am scum, I'm pretty much dead anyways. So

Vote: Massive

[Someone]

OK, memory lapse here, didn't we have another cop still alive?

[Someone]

And our investigative grandpa would be a cop right?

[Someone]

I think I did the ROUS in by not making a kill on night 6night and then making on the next. I kinda changed my mind after seeing that the mafia were indeed all dead and that there were no other kills. I guess the best bet would have been to continue not to kill...but somehow my judjment was all screwed up.