Heh, sorry for that. Clusterfuck of Finals. Couldn't be helped. Thankfully, I have the last one on Tuesday, so I'll be free as a bird (if I'll pass it)RedCoyote wrote:I ought to vote the Colonel for hanging me out to dry in an ongoing game we were both in. Now I am stuck with some crazy lady in said game, but I won't mention any names.
Not much to examine here so far. I say, let's have a close look on all of them, and see if something will fit later with that Sotty kill. I even have my first idea posted below. That's the only thing we can do on page 4. Actually giving them a free pass for it is a terrible idea and it was scummy for you to even suggest it. I don't see in any way, why Sotty's death makes people mentioned by her unable to be the Sottykiller.RedCoyote wrote:I take it you disagree with my conclusion then. Which of the three should we give attention to, or should we examine all three? Do you think you'll be able to discern which of them are more townie/scummy? How?
Uh... You DO realize, I was actually the first one to vote RC, right? I never jumped his wagon, because at the time of vote there was NO WAGON at all.Shotty to the Body wrote:vote Col. Cathart
He seems very opportunistic jumping onto the RC wagon the way he did.
The link is - MIC was one of the three players who shouldn't be voted due to Sotty's death according to RC in post 52. I called it for potential attempt to shift attention from you, Charter and MIC. Then comes the wagon, and then comes MIC with a defense based on 'hahahaha, this case is weak, lol!' and nothing more (unless we're still counting that weird Hoopla thing).Then he comes out and accuses him and Moai of being a scum team. RC didn't have any influence in Maoi's posting, so if anything he should move to Moai if he thinks he's defending otherwise it's a useless linkage between two unknown alignment players, killing the linkee first makes little sense.
1) Self contradicting where?Not to mention this (emphasis in bold):
Self-contradiction much? Isn't that first bolded part why he voted RC as well?Col.Cathart wrote:Not much to examine here so far.I say, let's have a close look on all of them, and see if something will fit later with that Sotty kill.I even have my first idea posted below. That's the only thing we can do on page 4.Actually giving them a free pass for it is a terrible idea and it was scummy for you to even suggest it.I don't see in any way, why Sotty's death makes people mentioned by her unable to be the Sottykiller.
Again, no. The base is similar ('There's really not much to go on here'), but then we go in opposite ways. He says 'let's vote outside of those three' and I say 'Why outside? How do you know this actually a WIFOMy gambit? I say we shouldn't even blink while seeing their actions, there might be some interesting link later in that matter.'A close look at myself, Maoi and, charter at this point results in essentially nothing after which he wants to wait till later. This is almost exactly what RC said.Col.Cathart wrote:Unvote
vote: RedCoyote
I think you're trying to shift attention away from 3 players at once. Possibly, you're a scum and one of those three is your buddy.
I totally second this post, and I would like RC to respond to it.Locke wrote:Exactly. So why vote outside of them? That's what I don't get. You can say what you like about misinterpretation but I think you're going to have a pretty hard time if you're arguing that your initial reaction to the kill was anything other than to suggest that we don't target those players because Sotty mentioned them. You didn't say 'let's treat everyone equally and ignore the kill', you said 'let's avoid these players so we don't argue about the kill' and then random voted Dry-fit. As far as I can see, that's doing the exact opposite of what you state above; you're being more receptive to their supposed involvement by deliberately not voting them.
*Sigh...* I'll use whatever words I'll like to describe scummy actions (for the record: in my mafia dictionary 'interesting' means scummy or very townie. When I'm playing mafia I'm not interested in anything else), thank you. Point retraction is noted.Shotty to the Body wrote:Why is it interesting? I'll admit I made a mistake, I didn't check who voted when before making the post, but if you want to call me scum for it just do it, don't beat around the bush. Alluding to things being 'interesting' or whatever else just muddles the pond when people are rereading your posts. I'm probably guilty of this as well, but it's a personal goal to cut down on the 'mysterious ways' style of playing.
= coincidence (or not... Dun Dun Dun!) I found to be funny.What's a 'LOL point?'
*twitches* That does it...MIC wrote:AND YOU, ARE DEFINITELY A JESTER OR SOMETHING.
Well, that's only the final reason for the vote. RC's latest posts were quite good. I still have doubts about him, and so about you. The best way to check my theory about you/RC pair is to actually have a lynch on either of you, and you are more scummy than RC at the moment.Moai Interceptor Cannons wrote:You know, I've seen people get bashed for jester speculation before, and I consciously said something like that on the assumption that people in this game would have more sense than to act upon it. Guess I was wrong.
Why opportunistic? I declared my doubts about MIC since the first time I made RC/MIC connection. We're very close to deadline, and one of my suspects is at L-2. What's so opportunistic in here?Hoopla wrote:Cathart's vote on Moai feels very weak and opportunistic, which seems unusual for him. I don't remember him as a particularly dangerous or wreckless player, and would imagine he'd normally use a stronger vote as town to put someone in the L-1 position. If we still had/have time, I'd switch my vote to Cathart if others were interested
I wasn't voting for him before, because I was on RC's ass. My gut tells me, there's something wrong with him anyway, but so far he explained everything, and it is up to me (and others) whether to believe him or not. MIC's flip will either wreck my theory completely, or give more fuel to it. Either way, it's a good deal, especially with MIC's play so far.Hoopla wrote:It seems weird that was the reason, or rather, an additional reason for the vote, rather than voting earlier. Why not just point to your previous arguments? It looked like it was a linked reason (as if he was waiting for just one more scumtell) to get onto the wagon, which undermines previous suspicions.
1) Post, when she votes me and tells everyone to vote me instead of MIC.RedCoyote wrote:What post are you referring to?the Colonel 151 wrote:vote: Hoopla
Hoopla's hammer counts for nothing?
Well, technically MIC confessed his scuminess, so she had all rights to assume 'if MIC is scum' scenario.Locke Lamora wrote:As for your 'if Moai is scum' post, I thought the original premise was contrived to begin with. It just read like you were eager to start pointing fingers at other players even though you shouldn't have known whether MIC was scum or not.
Har har har!Hoopla wrote:Time to drop the bombshell. I am a tracker, and followed Locke Lamora to Dry-fit last night. He's got some explaining to do about why he was there.
I tracked RedCoyote on the first night. No result (as in - he did nothing interesting during the night). This proves nothing, as he could just be a goon who didn't send any action, but that's why I was not mentioning him much after talking all about his connection with MIC a t the end of D1.d3x wrote:@C.C- Did you get any results last night?
I'll try to post my latest thoughts once per 24 hours. *scary music*d3x wrote:Assuming that Hoopla is not Scum, which is exactly what I'm assuming, Scum would've had to choose between 2 PRs to NK tonight {regardless of whether Hoopla was actual Vig or SK}. Now, we have our Tracker swinging in the wind by himself. You eliminated the choice, thus you decided his fate.I think you have hoopla to thank for that one.
Clarification: Technically, I outed myself, but I felt it was necessary to counter claim immediately.Never mind the fact that Hoopla outed him in the first place.
) gave in his/her own modding guide for Mini games was 'make sure you don't make a setup in which town can lose on D2' (paraphrase). So I think my doubts ARE justified, but as I said ?Bio Hazard wrote:I know it doesn't look good that Konowa's vote was on RC on D1, but I know he's town.
Or I get killed, and we have MyLo + charter with a report we're not sure we can trust, because we still don't know if he's joat or mafia. Even more fun. This is definitely bad idea.charter wrote:I don't think that's a good idea. If we no lynch, I get killed, then there's six left, and it's MYLO and there's no room for error anymore.
How can we be sure if mafia doesn't have any flavor as well? I mean, Vanilla Townie has a half sentence of flavor after all so it's not really a flavor-heavy game.d3x wrote:Regarding charter's no flavor claim, it definitely lends credit to him. From the way Hoopla responded in p229 I thought any false claims would've made up some flavor text and gotten busted for it.
Exactly. That's the main reason, I'm still for charter lynch. Except the 2 deaths on the following night, we have absolutely no proof what so ever, that charter really is JOAT, and every next day will be as confusing as this one. I would rather have a clear ground to stand on during the late game (not to mention I STILL predict scum flip from him), rather than anoying questions in my head like 'is he really telling the truth?' etc.Locke Lamora wrote:You then have to decide whether to use your vig or not: if you do, we could lose; if you don't, you'd have to cop and scum would either kill you or we'd be having this argument all over again tomorrow.
What kind of question is this? I don't see your current behavior as sheeping or parroting me, and I found your D1 play quite town. I have no reason to suspect you, at least for now. If anything, this question was the biggest eyebrow raiser for me. What are you trying to accomplish with that question?Locke Lamora wrote:CC: I'm interested. We seem to agree on a lot of points and you don't appear to find me even the slightest bit scummy (or if you have, you haven't shown it). Why is that?
Exactly, so why dwell on it?Locke Lamora wrote:I've been called scummy from several directions today and I seem to make it onto most people's scumlists somewhere. As far as I can tell, you've had a town read on me pretty much all game. It's quite reminiscent of last time I played with you,except you're confirmed town this time.I'm also wondering who might be scum trying to capitalise on suspicion on me and who's just genuinely suspicious town, so it got me thinking about you not seeming to suspect me at all.
At this point (probably one scum, one power role outed) every another probable power role is better for town. I think, if someone has anything to claim, the time is now.Bio Hazard wrote:^What's with the rolefish?