Mini 749 - Antarctic Mafia [Game Over]

[orangepenguin]

One of us had to die. With me, it tends to be the other guy.

DraketheFake - 1 (FishytheFish)
JereIC - 1 (Netlava)
FishytheFish - 4 (Light-kun, tubby216, Jazzmyn, Looker)
Light-kun - 1 (DraketheFake)

Not Voting - 2 (JereIC, HowardRoark)

9 alive, 5 to lynch

FishytheFish is L-1

.

-Mod

(Vote Count accurate as of Post 600)

[DraketheFake]

Welp.

I'd still be pretty happy with an L-k lynch.

But Looker could use another look (har) after that last post.

Looks like claiming time, Fish.

[DraketheFake]

Alright nevermind this noise.

I shouldn't be vigged tonight regardless of whether or not Fishy flips scum because I am the

doctor

. My species is

Emperor penguin

. The flavor is that I am the top of the penguin food chain, and can therefore protect all the other penguins.

I protected JereIC last night. I had a very solid pro-town read on him yesterday and was pretty shocked when people started throwing him around today as a top 3 suspect (until he made the post that I agree was suspect). If he flips scum then I will be upset with myself but I'll move on.

You know who I think are scum? The people who lurked through the majority of yesterday: pacman, ZEEnon, and one of Mizz.Mafia/na85, AKA Jazzmyn, Netlava, Howard or Looker. I think the play of Jere, Fish, and myself today makes far more sense for townies than it does for scum or (especially) for scum buddies.

You know why I think Light-kun is the serial killer? Because he didn't claim his species right away, because he tried to get the town all in a tizzy over the second kill before admitting it was his, because the flavor doesn't add up, and because the way he baited na85 yesterday makes a lot of sense from the perspective of a player who wants everybody dead.

If we really can't put a Light-kun lynch together today, then I think we should turn to one of these lurkers and tell L-k not to shoot. If there's only one death (presumably me at this point) then that will lend credence to L-k's claim (but would not rule out a second scum group, only [most likely] SK). If everybody insists on pushing through with the Fishy lynch then that is also fine with me.

That is all.

[Light-kun]

DtF, what the fuck? I already said I'm not shooting anyone. Damn, you're stupid.

[Fishythefish]

I'm not ready to claim yet (while I have no intention of doing a freeko- if someone is actually ready to hammer me, I will claim).

Here's why:
- tubby's vote on me is totally unexplained.
- Looker's vote on me is totally unexplained.
- L-k's vote on me is old, and he refuses to respond to my comments.
- Jazz's vote similarly.
To the players on my wagon, and prospective hammerers; why? Also, are you happy with your fellow wagoners?

Until I have had a chance to defend myself against something, I'm not going to claim. Claims, unless totally necessary, harm the town, and I think this lynch should be avoidable without one.

I think my play does not deserve being at L-1. I think the scum are running with Drake's vote analysis, which is inconclusive at best, to unfairly narrow the pool down to 3 players. I further feel they are using this, along with a few other weak points against me, to get me lynched.

I no longer want L-k lynched, following his statement that he will not shoot. On the other hand, if it is him or me there are no prizes for guessing what I will choose.

unvote

- while I am still uncomfortable with Drake for the reasons I gave then, I find the wagon on me now much more suspect than yesterday's.
When I get time, I intend to decide who of my three attackers other than L-k I find most suspect, and build a case on them.

[DraketheFake]

DtF, what the fuck? I already said I'm not shooting anyone. Damn, you're stupid.

Well, to be fair you'd only just said it after a day of playing coy and acting like you were going to do what you wanted.

I think Fish is a mislynch. Even if he's not, he raises a good point about the wagon on him, and we shouldn't take a lynch so lightly at this stage in the game.

Here's another look at Looker's most recent post:

@LK - You would sound so much more convincing if you were a babbling idiot, but you aren't. You are a highly-intelligent vigilante mastermind, which leads people to distrust you no matter what you put so obvious before their faces.

Hmm...

I say the fish fries

unvote vote: Fishythef**kinfish

and you shoot drakethefrigginfake

So here we have ego-stroking mixed in with near-unintelligible babble, a vote without any kind of reasoning at all, and acquiescence to a plan without forethought that has the dangerous potential to end the game by morning. Wasn't I voting Looker at some point already today? I'm gonna do a look-back at all the people who I listed in that last post and see what is the what.

Unvote

[HowardRoark]

Welcome, tubby216 . . . thanks for replacing. We all have our own play style, but a little more explanation can go a long way.

----------

vote Looker

I voted you for your lack of content earlier. You started to satisfactorily participate. Now you look like a raving lunatic.

----------

Before anyone hammers Fishythefish, I would like each voter to give a quick summary of the reasons for their vote on him.

@Fishythefish: You claim when you feel it is proper. I am not an advocate of the "L-1 means claim" philosophy. There are plenty of situations where it might be best not to and hope for the best. On the same note, if you avoid the noose today, there is probably a good chance that Light-kun will kill you no matter what we decide he should do.

I find the wagon on me now much more suspect than yesterday's.

I agree. More on this later.

----------

As for DraketheFake's claim . . . it looks plausible. So, it's either honest or a well thought out fake. I'll need to take a closer look at his play to make a better determination.

You know who I think are scum? The people who lurked through the majority of yesterday: pacman, ZEEnon, and one of Mizz.Mafia/na85, AKA Jazzmyn, Netlava, Howard or Looker.

I agree (with the obvious exception of myself ).

I'm gonna do a look-back at all the people who I listed in that last post and see what is the what.

So where would you like to start?

----------

When looking at the Fishythefish voters and DraketheFake lurker list, we see two in common: Jazzmyn and Looker. Chances of one or both being scum? Probably pretty decent.

----------

DtF, what the fuck? I already said I'm not shooting anyone. Damn, you're stupid.

You've also done a lot of "I'm going to do what I wanna do, no matter what y'all think" preaching. I still believe that you should not kill tonight.

----------

Now that I'm back and caught up on the events during my V/LA, I will go back and do some re-reading on DraketheFake, Looker [na85], Jazzmyn [pacman281292], and Netlava [hohum][ZEEnon].

[Light-kun]

DtF, what the fuck? I already said I'm not shooting anyone. Damn, you're stupid.

Well, to be fair you'd only just said it after a day of playing coy and acting like you were going to do what you wanted.

I think Fish is a mislynch. Even if he's not, he raises a good point about the wagon on him, and we shouldn't take a lynch so lightly at this stage in the game.

And his vote (just removed) on you looks like distancing. If Fishy is scum, you're scum.

Howard: The town doesn't want me to shoot, so I'm not...that was my last sentiment.

So: Cook fish today. The whale's hungry... mmm....

[Jazzmyn]

I have not much experience of flavour, but the inconsistency of a killer whale with a gun seems on an altogether different scale than the inconsistency of two species which don't make sense together.

This strikes me as a distinction without a difference. The flavour doesn't make sense regarding co-existing townies as both penguins and krill, so why do you suddenly expect it to make sense regarding a killer whale not having opposable thumbs?

I also don't think L-k's recent conduct (ie. repeated refusal to acknowledge that he will obey the town) is that of a vig, but rather of a SK who is unable to no kill. The people who are urging leaving L-k alive based on being able to lynch him if he disobeys us haven't thought about the numbers. Unless we are exceptionally lucky (ie. lynch scum AND shoot scum), we won't be able to kill L-k tomorrow without handing the game to the scum.

He said quite some time ago that he would not shoot if half the town indicated that preference, and we have done so, have we not?

I would much rather lynch scum than a town aligned vigilante, and I find LK's claim quite believable, and I find his play more consistent with that of a vigilante than a serial killer, so I would prefer not to lynch him unless there is some more compelling evidence that he is a SK above that which you have provided to date. I do not buy your "flavour" argument at all, as your argument is inconsistent with the

known

flavour, of which we can be 100% certain. Therefore, I am more suspicious of you, as it appears that you are scum who wants to lynch a town aligned vigilante.

Jazz, your other reasons for voting me I have responded to (551), and you have not commented.

I have pointed out my reasons for voting for you previously. They have not changed. Your post 551 was inadequate, as it was a selective response to my prior post; it addressed only parts of my post and left out other parts; and much of it (just like your prior post to which I was replying in a prior post) was in the nature of strawman arguments, addressing things that I did not raise in the first place. Your 551 only further solidified my take on you as scum, and did nothing to alleviate it.

I currently am very unclear on why you are voting for me, other than a disagreement over the importance of the flavour argument which is shared by 3 other players (jere, drake, tubby). I think your vote looks bandwagonny, as it is not well backed up, and I am clearly a player whose lynch is a possibility relatively soon.

If that is the case, it appears even more strongly that you are not paying attention. I have previously set out my reasons for voting you, and as I said above, your responses since have done nothing to alleviate my suspicions. Admittedly, I am just as capable of anyone of being wrong, but this is how I feel at present and I'm not going to back off of someone who I think is scummy just because you say so.

This thread needs more Looker, the Greatest Woman to Ever Live...I pray she arrives swiftly...


Regards,
Jazzy-Wazzy

What the ? It is very poor form to change someone's post while pretending to quote it.

@LK - You would sound so much more convincing if you were a babbling idiot, but you aren't. You are a highly-intelligent vigilante mastermind, which leads people to distrust you no matter what you put so obvious before their faces.

Hmm...

I say the fish fries

unvote vote: Fishythef**kinfish

and you shoot drakethefrigginfake

What the ? Now, this is just getting downright weird. Looker, why would you (a) feel the need to bastardize the names of both Fishy and Drake to incorporate swearing; and (b) ask the claimed vig to NK someone when it has already been established that (i) it is better to direct him to hold off on killing during the night in order to better test his claim (which we still need to do despite the fact that I, for one, believe his claim) and to better protect the town; and (ii) he has already said that he will not kill tonight if half the town indicates that preference?

Looks like claiming time, Fish.

I shouldn't be vigged tonight regardless of whether or not Fishy flips scum because I am the

doctor

. My species is

Emperor penguin

. The flavor is that I am the top of the penguin food chain, and can therefore protect all the other penguins.

And this is weird too. Drake, why did you tell Fishy to claim and then immediately claim yourself when you did not even have any votes on your except for Fishy's?

Up to post 602 so far, and this is getting long, but there are some very strange things going on here, it seems. I need to think some more. More later.

Regards,
Jazz

[DraketheFake]

And this is weird too. Drake, why did you tell Fishy to claim and then immediately claim yourself when you did not even have any votes on your except for Fishy's?

Because I didn't want a situation where we had a quick hammer before we set in stone that L-k isn't shooting tonight. Also because we're not in a very good position here and people need to understand that before they carelessly throw their votes around. Also because I think people are more inclined to consider the opinions of a power role seriously.

But yeah I understand what that must look like.

If Fishy is scum, you're scum.

You're a fool/scummy player etc.

[Netlava]

1st off lynching lk is retarded and and any talk of it should be and will be considered anti town to me.

Nop, don't agree.

I re-skimmed fishy's post. I am planning on re-reading his post in depth and the case against him, but as it stands, I don't think he is scum. The only thing that bothers me is this:

You read like a scum desperately trying to get a townie lynched, or a hopelessly tunnelled townie.

...mostly for the townie part. But my conclusion on him is not scum.

Also, I am also planning to re-read Dtf :eyeroll:, but I'm also leaning not scum on him too.

All I know is that post 555 appears to be an incredible lie. I don't believe that LK is a killer whale with a gun to shoot people tucked under his blubber.

But I think there must be some opinion on which one he is since it makes a difference whether to lynch him or not.

No, I just didn’t consider the possibility that I misunderstood what you were saying. But there is still an inconsistency that you haven’t explained yet.

What inconsistency is that?

Ok, if you had to state a rule for when the present tense is scummy, what would that rule be?

I was specifically referring to this:

> DDD seems to be constantly reversing his position and twisting his own words in response to anyone accusing him of saying something odd.

Imo, I believe town would say something like, "DDD has reversed his position" instead. That is more akin to calling it like it is without the exaggeration. The way you worded it is less accurate because it suggests a continuing occurrence.

[Netlava]

For clarification, here are the quoted persons in order:

1) tubby
2) fishy
3, 4, 5) jereIC

[Fishythefish]

515, Jazz's case

519, my response

530, Jazz's response to 519

551, my response to 530

Your attack on my 551 is simply absurd. Because I don’t quote everything in it, you claim I am responding selectively. Of your points in it:

The first is not relevant to the case on me.
The second I respond to.
The third I respond to.
The next 4 are all completely covered by my next point- viz that if there is no reason for scum to take my position, it’s not scummy. You were asking why I brought a few things up- this was the answer to all of them (and that was obvious).
The remaining two I respond to.

Jazz, your other reasons for voting me I have responded to (551), and you have not commented.

I have pointed out my reasons for voting for you previously. They have not changed. Your post 551 was inadequate, as it was a selective response to my prior post; it addressed only parts of my post and left out other parts; and much of it (just like your prior post to which I was replying in a prior post) was in the nature of strawman arguments, addressing things that I did not raise in the first place. Your 551 only further solidified my take on you as scum, and did nothing to alleviate it.

This part of 608 is, to put it simply, a lie. I don’t quote every word in your post. But I respond to every point in your post, and in your case. If you think there is a strawman argument in it, where is it? Everything I say is detracting from your reasons for finding me scummy, are there are no big reasons I have overlooked. That 519 brings up things you did not say is false. Everything in it is relevant to you finding me scummy.
I struggle to believe this paragraph of 608 was typed in good faith.

Since you don’t want to summarise, your case, as I see it:
1) Believing L-k too easily is scummy.
My reply in 551 definitely needs a response- why would scum do this?
2) Retracting suspicions on L-k is scummy- particularly since it was not justified at the time.
This is the one point I concede. I did withdraw my suspicions of L-k, which were at odds with the rest of the town. However, do you really not agree with my point in 551 (about my justification for it)? I think this is very clear.
3) My day one voting pattern is suspicious. Specifically, more suspicious than anyone else, including Jere and DtF.
I asked you if this was your position. You said “Yes”. I asked you why. Please respond.
4) My disbelief of L-k is scummy. Furthermore, I am trying to get him lynched.
I have

never

advocated L-k’s lynch if he agrees to no kill. Do you seriously imagine I am scum who thinks vigilante L-k won’t go along with the town, and so can get him lynched? Why have you not criticised any of the three players who take the same view as me, including those who want to lynch L-k regardless of his agreement, and voted him?
5) 551 is a selective response, involving strawman arguments.
This is a nonsense.

If I have missed anything, or misrepresented you, please clarify.

So yeah, I think your case on me needs some work. Before your last post, I thought it might just be poorly explained. Following this post, I think that you are scum. I find it incredible you find

nothing

in 551 worthy of a response. When I attacked your case, I don't believe you reviewed it. I don't believe you even considered the points in 551 again. You didn’t even bother to respond to the direct “Why?” in it. You are not interested in the truth, you are interested in my lynch.

Vote: Jazzmyn

----

I’m giving up on responding to L-k’s posts. I hope they speak for themselves. L-k’s attack on me has got beyond absurd. This is not he play of a pro-town player.

---

I would still like to hear from everyone on my wagon about how they feel about me being at L-1, given that (at least half of) the votes on me are so unexplained.

[JereIC]

Apologies for the inactivity. I want to make a larger comment, but that's probably going to have to wait for lunch or maybe sometime this evening.

[Looker]

This thread needs more Looker, the Greatest Woman to Ever Live...I pray she arrives swiftly...


Regards,
Jazzy-Wazzy

What the ? It is very poor form to change someone's post while pretending to quote it.

Sorry, mama neva taut me bot no form

@LK - You would sound so much more convincing if you were a babbling idiot, but you aren't. You are a highly-intelligent vigilante mastermind, which leads people to distrust you no matter what you put so obvious before their faces.

Hmm...

I say the fish fries

unvote vote: Fishythef**kinfish

and you shoot drakethefrigginfake

What the ? Now, this is just getting downright weird. Looker, why would you (a) feel the need to bastardize the names of both Fishy and Drake to incorporate swearing; and (b) ask the claimed vig to NK someone when it has already been established that (i) it is better to direct him to hold off on killing during the night in order to better test his claim (which we still need to do despite the fact that I, for one, believe his claim) and to better protect the town; and (ii) he has already said that he will not kill tonight if half the town indicates that preference?
Regards,
Jazz

(a) Sorry, I was/am-still-kinda drunk...
(b) (i)Forgot about the fact he has to confirm his power (but would the real vig hold off, too...? never mind...)

(ii)I was/am-still-kinda just throwing my opinion out there

[JereIC]

No, I just didn’t consider the possibility that I misunderstood what you were saying. But there is still an inconsistency that you haven’t explained yet.

What inconsistency is that?

You quoted the part of my kill-'em-all plan discussion where I said there was a big risk that there was only one scum in the group, so killing us all would screw town, and said a townie wouldn't consider "this". Later, you said that a pro-town wouldn't suggest himself as a lynch target. That explanation seems inconsistent with the part you quoted - how do you get from me criticizing the plan to me suggesting myself as a lynch target?

Ok, if you had to state a rule for when the present tense is scummy, what would that rule be?

I was specifically referring to this:
> DDD seems to be constantly reversing his position and twisting his own words in response to anyone accusing him of saying something odd.
Imo, I believe town would say something like, "DDD has reversed his position" instead. That is more akin to calling it like it is without the exaggeration. The way you worded it is less accurate because it suggests a continuing occurrence.

As far as I'm concerned, it was a continuing occurence. I highlighted several posts by DDD in which he seemed to twist his words or reverse his position, and I didn't notice him stop doing it until after I made that post. I know that past performance isn't a guarentee of future actions, but c'mon.

I want to address the first point last because it's my main case against Fishy.

All I know is that post 555 appears to be an incredible lie. I don't believe that LK is a killer whale with a gun to shoot people tucked under his blubber.

But I think there must be some opinion on which one he is since it makes a difference whether to lynch him or not.

First, the reason I think LK is lying is not just that it doesn't make sense flavor-wise. I think if he was actually claiming killer whale, he would have accounted for the flavor in his post (something like, "I'm a killer whale, not sure why the mod has me crawling onto land and punching a single hole in DDD.") He's also hinted before that he has a gun (post 484), so the killer whale claim now isn't credible.

Now, just because he lied doesn't mean he's scum. If he were scum, lying about his animal risks a counter-claim and eventual lynch, so he's only take that risk if his animal was really scummy-sounding and he's claim an animal that's cute and harmless, or at the very least doesn't eat penguins. So he's up to something with his claim, about which I have theories that I can throw out there if anyone wants, but overall it seems pro-town.

So, here's why I find Fishy (and, to an extent, DoctheFake) scummy. Their rationale for pushing LK to claim is that they thought he'd screw up, and then they could push for his lynch. That's preposterous. LK's lie was clumsy, but no one could have reasonably anticipated a massive disconnect between the flavor and his actual claim. Therefore, their post hoc justification strikes me as opportunistic, especially since they've

both

backed down when other people started criticizing it. In particular, Fishy's claim that he unvoted LK because LK promised not to kill tonight doesn't make sense. You think the guy's lying about his species in a scummy way, but he's telling the truth about what he's going to do tonight?

I intend to hammer, and I'd like a claim from Fishy.

[Fishythefish]

So, here's why I find Fishy (and, to an extent, DoctheFake) scummy. Their rationale for pushing LK to claim is that they thought he'd screw up, and then they could push for his lynch. That's preposterous. LK's lie was clumsy, but no one could have reasonably anticipated a massive disconnect between the flavor and his actual claim. Therefore, their post hoc justification strikes me as opportunistic, especially since they've

both

backed down when other people started criticizing it. In particular, Fishy's claim that he unvoted LK because LK promised not to kill tonight doesn't make sense. You think the guy's lying about his species in a scummy way, but he's telling the truth about what he's going to do tonight?

I intend to hammer, and I'd like a claim from Fishy.

Firstly, a factual error. My unvote was from DtF, not L-k. I was, for a time (to be precise, one post), leaning towards L-k's lynch (not least because he was planning to blow my head off tonight), but I have also said that even a confirmed SK is not the obvious kill. I have never, ever pushed for L-k's lynch.

At the very least, the promise not to kill means it is likely the game won't be over by morning, and that if someone dies tonight we know L-k is the SK.

I have not backed down from my flavour opinion on L-k as far as I am aware. However, I won't deny that my conviction has been weakened by the fact that other players think flavour a generally unreliable thing. L-k's agreement to no kill has also made me more inclined to think that I may have been wrong (though I am still fairly sure he is the SK).

On asking for species claims: L-k shot someone. The obvious read on this is "man with a gun". The obvious read on "man with a gun" is serial killer. I certainly thought there was a possibility that L-k would not want to claim a species for which "serial killer" made the most sense. In this case, he was very likely to claim a false species. Where is the ridiculous leap of logic you suggest? Once you start thinking about species, and thinking about the only claimed person, this is not a big step.
Also, it's pretty hard to see how this boast of this being my plan all along would be a scum move; outing L-k does not gain me town points, as L-k's lynch would be at least as good for the scum as the town.

I am not ready to claim. There are 4 votes on me I consider bad, and at least two which are unarguably so. I think a hammer now would be a horrible move. As town, you should be questioning the motives of my other attackers, even if you think me scummy.

[Fishythefish]

With me at L-1, and the threat of a hammer, I strongly urge someone to unvote me. This bandwagon is terrible. Of the players on it, two have not explained their votes

at all

. One is a very likely serial killer, who at any rate has no case on me except very old points which I have responded to. Jazzmyn? Well, on any other bandwagon Jazzmyn would hang for his lack of response to me if (when) I flipped town. On this one, he'd sail through unnoticed. Notably,

no two of my attackers share

any

common ground on why I am scummy

.

Perhaps I am biased by being on the receiving end, but I don't see how anyone can fail to see this bandwagon as ridiculously scummy.

[Fishythefish]

Oh, and one of the two players who haven't explained their votes at all voted for me while drunk. Just to put the icing on the cake.

[Fishythefish]

Notably,

no two of my attackers share

any

common ground on why I am scummy

.

Actually.... got a little carried away here. Jazz has, just about, mentioned that he finds me scummy because of vote analysis, though with little justification. L-k finds me scummy largely because of my reaction to said vote analysis. Jere has also said this vote analysis made sense, although not specifically when making a case on me. So this is not, in fact, true. Still, there is remarkably little consensus on the good reasons for voting me.

Jere: a while back you said that you found me scummy because my defences were weak. When I asked about this, you said, quite reasonably, that this were your immediate thoughts after asked, and that you would expand if voting for me. Well, the time has come for you to explain, if this is part of your rationale for being close to hammering.

Sorry for the multi-posting

[DraketheFake]

Therefore, their post hoc justification strikes me as opportunistic, especially since they've both backed down when other people started criticizing it.

Yeah, because saying "I think L-k should claim his animal so we can see if his animal matches the second kill method" would have been so effective. It's hardly fair to call it "post-hoc" justification when there would have been no other way for us to catch L-k in his lie.

You think the guy's lying about his species in a scummy way, but he's telling the truth about what he's going to do tonight?

I sure don't. But it's nice to hear it, and since the rest of the town seems to want to believe his claim and play Russian roulette between the three of us there's really not a lot I can do. I only just unvoted, I laid out the case against him over and over, and nobody was having any of it. I don't see you voting for L-k at the moment, for instance.

[tubby216]

sorry for my absence from this game i have been busy i will try to post something tomorrow

[HowardRoark]

@Looker: It's time to sober up and chime in on the current situation.

Yeah, because saying "I think L-k should claim his animal so we can see if his animal matches the second kill method" would have been so effective. It's hardly fair to call it "post-hoc" justification when there would have been no other way for us to catch L-k in his lie.

QFT.

the rest of the town seems to want to believe his claim and play Russian roulette between the three of us

While I don't entirely trust Light-kun, I feel that lynching him today would be a bad choice. If he doesn't kill tonight, then we have a more confirmed town aligned player. If he does kill tonight and we are placed in a bad spot, at least we have something more solid to justify his lynch.

[Light-kun]

And this is weird too. Drake, why did you tell Fishy to claim and then immediately claim yourself when you did not even have any votes on your except for Fishy's?

Because I didn't want a situation where we had a quick hammer before we set in stone that L-k isn't shooting tonight. Also because we're not in a very good position here and people need to understand that before they carelessly throw their votes around. Also because I think people are more inclined to consider the opinions of a power role seriously.

But yeah I understand what that must look like.

If Fishy is scum, you're scum.

You're a fool/scummy player etc.

Dear DTF: If we lynch scum, and mafia miss by your all powerful Doctorness (Sarcasm), I will shoot you tomorrow night. And I repeat for Howard who is obviously hard of hearing: TOMORROW NIGHT.

On asking for species claims: L-k shot someone. The obvious read on this is "man with a gun". The obvious read on "man with a gun" is serial killer. I certainly thought there was a possibility that L-k would not want to claim a species for which "serial killer" made the most sense. In this case, he was very likely to claim a false species. Where is the ridiculous leap of logic you suggest? Once you start thinking about species, and thinking about the only claimed person, this is not a big step.
Also, it's pretty hard to see how this boast of this being my plan all along would be a scum move; outing L-k does not gain me town points, as L-k's lynch would be at least as good for the scum as the town.

I am not ready to claim. There are 4 votes on me I consider bad, and at least two which are unarguably so. I think a hammer now would be a horrible move. As town, you should be questioning the motives of my other attackers, even if you think me scummy.

You know, the only arguable idea I have about flavor is that, even though I targeted Debonair doesn't mean I killed him. It is entirely possible that a serial killer and I targeted him, and when I "found him dead," I did nothing. Therefore, maybe a serial killer and I both targeted him. However, your narrow minded concept that I am serial killer for, essentially, flavor and/or "fucking up my species claim" (paraphrased) is absurd because:

I wouldn't screw up a claim if it were easy to do. If I were a mafia member, for example, I claim vig, town doesn't want me to shoot, I skate bye by paying attention to stuff like that. This aside...

In a mini NORMAL, flavor isn't allowed to have any grand impact on the game. In fact, if this game did have that included, allowing me to clear myself with teeth marks in Debonair's corpse or something, this game would then techinically be a mini theme, and Orange was in Peguin.

Finally: Flavor arguments are bullshit anyway.

Second Point: I find this to be deflection, which is scummy. I see no defense here nor do I see a requested claim.

DtF: I might shoot myself tonight just to test your Doc Claim. Anyone object? *Is very angry at the moment, and wants to shoot DtF instead, but won't...*

The way I see it, DtF is the mafia logical kill. If I attempt to shoot myself and the Doc protects me, I live, the Doc dies, I'm confirmed. If the mafia doesn't shoot the doc, and I die because DtF doesn't protect me, then we lose 2 townies, but get to lynch a mafia member very quickly. If we're both alive with this, we're both confirmed. This does, however, require town trusts me to shoot myself, as if I lied, I would be "confirmed" but actually scum. Yes, this is the single hole in my play but, you get the idea.

[DraketheFake]

I see no defense here nor do I see a requested claim.

Well then you apparently missed JereIC's post about 4 above yours.

DtF: I might shoot myself tonight just to test your Doc Claim. Anyone object? *Is very angry at the moment, and wants to shoot DtF instead, but won't...*

The way I see it, DtF is the mafia logical kill. If I attempt to shoot myself and the Doc protects me, I live, the Doc dies, I'm confirmed. If the mafia doesn't shoot the doc, and I die because DtF doesn't protect me, then we lose 2 townies,

but get to lynch a mafia member very quickly.

If we're both alive with this, we're both confirmed.

This does, however, require town trusts me to shoot myself, as if I lied, I would be "confirmed" but actually scum. Yes, this is the single hole in my play but, you get the idea.

The bolded section is terrible logic. If we're both alive tomorrow after I protect you and you shoot yourself, then neither of us is confirmed except to each other, barring a tracker or some such. As for the first part: what? If I die and you die because I didn't protect you, and we both turn up town, how does that help lead to a lynch?

I'm against you shooting yourself, because I don't think you should shoot tonight, as I've said over and over. You yourself pointed out the fatal flaw in the plan to "confirm" you, and though I can't think of a better use of my protection I'm not going to WIFOM the town in that way. Besides which, I want the information of whether or not you actually

can

choose not to shoot, and your desperation to be able to shoot strikes me as a pretty clear indication that you are, indeed, a SK.