Mini 365- Thinking Mafia - Game Over!

[Colonel Kurtz]

vote Pink Princess

I hate pink.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Twomz is the only person who catches my eye at the moment.

The more sporatic my actions, the higher the chance of me randomly hitting mafia... really though, I know why you and RA unvoted Omg, you both did it for good reasons i suppose... but the timing of it just feels wrong, so I voted for you. *shrug*

if only for that post. I just don't like it when people try to justify randomly hopping around on votes. Seems scummy to me because the only reason to not care for whom you are voting is if you are on your own (i.e. SK) or if you want to lynch townies. So basically, my weak suspicion is towards Twomz at the moment.

unvote Pink Princess, vote Twomz

although I don't appreciate Princess posting only to say "oh woe is me". But those are my thoughts at the moment. [/quote]

[Colonel Kurtz]

So, Princess, what would you do if someone called you on lurking when you honestly just didn't have anything to say? Continue to not say anything or say something about your vague suspicions to make people stop telling you that you're lurking? Yeah, that's what I thought. Way to cast suspicion in my direction for absolutely no reason, though.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Twomz - that's a very interesting philosophy, I've never really heard anything like that.

unvote Twomz

Princess - you completely ignored my question, and I am very aware the lurking is a scumtell. However, on page three, I think it is perfectly reasonable to simply have nothing to say. If I were making that argument on day two or three, your response might have been warranted, but your little speech about how lurkers are scummy is tired, overused, and mostly unwarranted. Anyway, I'm done being a jerk, so I'd additionally like to say that I'm glad you're feeling better, and I'd like to apologize for making a disparaging comment about you being sick.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Lowell- There's a difference between sucking up and genuinely feeling bad for saying something that was mean/uncalled for. And posting just to unvote someone? Oh noes! Yeah, that's definitely a scumtell right there...not holding onto a vote if the person gave a good explanation for why you thought they were scummy. You're digging in a place that doesn't make sense at all. I'm tempted to OMGUS vote you, but you're just doing the same thing I did to Twomz.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Sorry about the lack of participation, but I'm getting oriented right now (this is my second day at college), so I'll definitely post something good tonight or tomorrow. I have to go to yet another freshman meeting now, though.

[Colonel Kurtz]

As tempting as it is to vote Arafax for saying "I just want a wagon", I'm going to have to go with the Mert wagon at the moment because it seems like he is trying entirely too hard to be in the spotlight. I mean, yeah, I agree with some of the other allegations that he is making a big deal out of the 4 out of 7 vote, but my main problem is that he's sort of trying to be in the discussions consistently without being too much of a leader.

vote Mert

[Colonel Kurtz]

I think that since Mert is 2 away from lynch and hasn't really provided any sort of defense for himself...a claim would be good at this point....

[Colonel Kurtz]

unvote Mert

Yes, yes, it was so terrible of me to have a reason outside of "I just want a wagon" for adding a vote onto someone. Have you honestly never heard that reasoning before? I tend to not like people who stay in discussions consistently when they don't have anything new to say, and when it's kept up the whole game (thusfar) I tend to vote for them. In my mind, having a reason to get on a wagon (especially when it's actually a valid reason...), is a lot less scummy than saying "vote person, I want a wagon!"
What the hell, people?

Your reasons for joining the mert wagon were weak, your reason (?) for joining the Arafax wagon is even weaker and it feels like you're giving yourself a free ticket to jump on the Kurtz wagon if that moves faster than the Arafax wagon.

Oh, and by the way, Princess, two votes does not a bandwagon make.

If fact, Arafax and CES are my biggest suspects right now simply because of the shameless bandwagoning (at least RA is trying to pull one out of his butt to vote for me, I'll give him that). I see no reason to not vote for Arafax at this point.

vote Arafax

[Colonel Kurtz]

Actually, that's the main reason I haven't been voting for CES, this being his usual, if a little scummy, playstyle.

[Colonel Kurtz]

I've never played with you before, actually, and I have played with CES...so that was why.

[Colonel Kurtz]

I was going to say the same thing, actually. I think that confirming Twomz's role is probably the best thing, because the more confirmed townies we have, the easier it is to find anti-town people.

unvote Arafax, vote Twomz

[Colonel Kurtz]

I think that since the mod said it was a strange occurance, so I'd say that's a safe assumption.

Vote Lowell

[Colonel Kurtz]

That is the stupidest role claim I have ever seen in my life. I am very sad that the day is not over yet.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Yeah, you haven't heard from me because this discussion is stupid. He's probably just nervous about lynching Lowell because they are scum together. Throw your pardner under the bus and stop bitching about it.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Ok, explain something to me. I've gotten the impression that Twomz claimed SK. So basically what he has been purporting is that there is a scum killing group and him as an SK, right? Why are we not killing him, since he is the SK? Or did I get that wrong?

[Colonel Kurtz]

So you are an SK and you targeted Arafax last night?

[Colonel Kurtz]

I say we lynch Lowell. He's the most likely to be scum (even though I think it's kinda unlikely that Twomz would be SK, I think he's mafia, because an unlynchable mafia member is a LOT more likely than an unlychable SK, but that's just my thought on the matter) other than Twomz. We can figure out what to do with Twomz later, like RA said.

[Colonel Kurtz]

I don't think mafia can target each other....

[Colonel Kurtz]

If you don't lynch Lowell now, you're basically conceding the game to the scum, because they obviously are outsmarting everyone except for me.

[Colonel Kurtz]

If I don't kill Lowell tonight, then you'll know i'm mafia and can lynch me tomorrow . But there was a SK kill last night, and I did it (you can check the morning scene if you don't believe me).

Stfu, scum. There wasn't an sk kill last night. There was a mafia hit and a vig hit on the same person. You as an unlynchable SK is unbelievable because it is bad modding. The mafia has no reason to hit an SK at night because they're not going for town, it would counterbalance the pro/anti town relationship. So by you saying that you're an unlynchable SK, you are telling me that you are scum. In my mind, we obviously have a vig who is smart enough to not come forward (although I have my suspicions as to who it is).


Pretty much, Twomz, you have to hammer if you want anyone to have the remote possibility in his/her mind that you aren't scum. If he's kami, then good riddance.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Ooh, he threw his parter under the bus, he can't be scum now...

[Colonel Kurtz]

1. The vig is smart enough not to claim right now but not smart enough to kill the bad guy in the night and instead kills a random townie and leaves the self-claimed bad guy alive? Right.

These two aren't mutually exclusive.... Just because the vig killed the wrong guy last night doesn't mean that he would have to be dumb enough to claim today. Saying that the vig killing the wrong guy makes him stupid, so therefore he would claim is illogical.

2. Twomz isnt unlynchable. He had lynch immunity supposedly an unspecified number of times, my guess is once.

...and? What is the meaning of this point? You proved, put forth, and refuted NOTHING.

3. An unlynchable scum on a team with other scum is more balanced than an SK all by himself with lynch immunity? Right.

That is correct.

[quote"Pink Princess"]Thats all. Sorry for the double post, but the Kurtz post kept bugging me. His logic is not agreeing with mine. And sorry for the lack of apostrophes in my post, my keyboard is malfunctioning. [/quote]All that means is that I am right, and you are wrong. Your logical skills are on the far side of atrocious, as far as I can tell, so the fact that you don't agree with me only makes me feel better about myself.

[Colonel Kurtz]

You didn't miss anything.

(-2) (PP, post 386)
(-3) (Twomz, post 430)
(-2) (Elias, post 444)
(-1) (Twomz, post 446)

Additionally, I find it funny that PP said that the town "agreed" what the vig would do, because...that's just a funny thing to say.
Who's up for the hammer?

[Colonel Kurtz]

I'll do the honors, fine

unvote Lowell

[Colonel Kurtz]

RA: fine

vote Lowell

Twomz, time for you to hammer.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Does lyncher mean scum?

[Colonel Kurtz]

Can I just claim? This is dumb.

[Colonel Kurtz]

I'm the vig, as if I hadn't already made that abundantly clear.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Arafax then Twomz

[Colonel Kurtz]

No...CES is lying.

vote CES

[Colonel Kurtz]

I've been breadcrumbing vig for a while now. In case I needed to spell that out.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Well I'd just like to say that CES had contributed shit. I breadcrumbed not to set up a roleclaim, but so when I ended up claiming and the scum said "No, I'm the vig" (which I knew would happen), I could point to my obvious breadcrumbing. It serves the scum no purpose to breadcrumb a role, especially if that role might get knocked off. Therefore, I think my breadcrumbing is a pretty obvious point to me being the actual vig. Why is it that everyone calls me aggressive and attributes that to me being scum. That makes no sense. You can go back and check my previous games; this is how I play. I haven't been scum since my second game ever (as Untrod Tripod), and I have yet to be scum since rejoining the board. Again, check my record and you'll see that this is how I play town. If you're going to metagame like that, you may as well know what you're talking about, which you all clearly don't.

All CES has ever done this game is say "let's lynch him" "I want a bandwagon" and "vote him". Explain to me how that is somehow less scummy than my somewhat aggressive nature.

I vigged Arafax because I thought he was scummy. The day before I did it, I was saying that I thought he was scummy. Then he died. I said Twomz was scummy yesterday, then he died. Is it really that hard to put the pieces together?

Oh, and Mert: two SKs is stupid. It wouldn't happen. And maybe Twomz was trying to take credit for the vig kill because he wanted people to think he was the vig? At that point there was no evidence of there being a vig and I hadn't come out and said I was yet (it being day two), so he was probably just trying to claim it before I did. It actually makes perfect sense that he'd claim vig.
Oh, and just because you're "used to" CES's playstyle doesn't mean that he *isn't* scummy. Like I've said, he hasn't contributed shit, and he's been incredibly overaggressive. Why is that not scummy to you? That is truly what makes no sense to me.

Oh, and I want Mert to reveal his results.

[Colonel Kurtz]

So, Kurtz - given that Twomz had claimed SK and didn't at any point claim vig, I have to ask again why you think he'd have done that if it wasn't actually him that killed Arafax.

He did. The sk made stab killings and the scum and I both apparently use guns. Flavor-wise, that makes far more sense than either the mafia or vig using a knife. Arafax was both stabbed and shot, so Twomz had to have targetted Arafax; your question is irrelevant.

[Colonel Kurtz]

You can not buy it all you want, but you'll be lynching the only person in the game who isn't a complete fucking retard. Clearly everyone targeted the same person that night.

I don't think she's (PP) lying. Yeah, it's a little weird that we all targeted the same person, but so what?

I don't understand why the fact that all three of us targeting the same person makes me scum, but whatever. The existance of the vig is obvious, since we had three kills last night, and I don't see how PP blocking me makes me scum.

I'm going to take it as a given that PP blocked me when she said she did. What does that mean if I'm scum? Either one of my scum partners did the killing or all three of us targeted the same person.

I think the fact that you're taking CES's word over mine, when his posts average less than three sentences each and he's done

nothing

proves that you're all stupid anyway, so it's pretty clear to me that the only way that you'll figure out that I'm the vig is by lynching me. Then you'll be basically in a lynch or lose situation, and the town's track record for good thinking is bad. You're losing the game by lynching me, but whatever. You decide.

[Colonel Kurtz]

You know what, I'm just going to make this easy. I think you're going to lynch me because you are all poor mafia players. In fact, I think that lynching me would be the best thing now since it's apparantly confusing to you that counterclaiming against a vigilante who has been breadcrumbing and all but claiming his kills since day one is obviously an idiotic last ditch mafia claim. He has nowhere to go, so he's going against the only person who isn't completely confirmed (at least in your eyes). Since you all are so determined to lose, lynch me so CES will be a confirmed scum and you have a 50-50 chance of roleblocking the correct scum (assuming elias is actually scum, PP's assertion that there's only one more scum could be right). I think Mert's results from last night would be very helpful in determining who to roleblock, so he should probably disclose that before I get lynched so PP can roleblock and keep the town alive.

That is of course unless you want to pull your heads out of your asses and lynch CES and let me vig Elias tonight.

[Colonel Kurtz]

I'dug, but it's not my fault that my arguments are over your head.

Frankly I'm surprised that you don't think CES's playstyle is scummy, and you should be suspicious of him simply based on the way he's been playing, in my opinion. Dropping little one-liners and never providing any sort of substance is, to me, a hell of a lot more indicative of scum than simply being aggressive (and whatever else it is that I'm doing that makes you think I'm scum). Y'dig?

Oh, and he did, he targeted Arafax, as did I, but I got roleblocked. What is so hard about this? Just lynch one of us; at this point, I don't care who, since it'll lead to a town win.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Kurtz, I think you're unnecssarily rude and have been the whole game, and it's making it hard for me to see you objectively. Rudeness always makes me a bit lynch happy.

Can't you defend yourself and particiapte in useful discussions without relying on insults? It's not a very convincing method.

Had you been reading, you would notice that I have defended myself plenty. I've been useful, I just told you how to win the game, for God's sake.

This paragraph is an abridgement of the paragraph below it:
Your distaste for my playstyle doesn't affect the fact that I'm right. You claiming that you want to lynch me because I'm "rude" is an ad hominem argument because you said that my style affects your objectivity. And that's just terrible.




If you aren't afraid of being offended, read the full version.

Your statement right there requires comment. You say that my rudeness (opinion) ruins your objectivity. It isn't as though I have been doing nothing but insulting people. I have posted PLENTY of good content, and I don't see why anything I say should ruin your objectivity. Your distaste for my logic or method of delivery (or side commentary on your ability) doesn't affect the fact that I'm being right or logical. The fact that you can't look beyond how I say something tells me that you are doing an insufficient job of reading. In all logical arguments, it is the logic, not the method of delivery that matters. You're making an ad hominem argument against me by saying that I'm lynchable because I'm rude, even though I've posted plenty of good stuff. Your objectivity is not my problem; all that I am required (and motivated) to do is post logically and correctly, and that's what I have been doing. If you can't keep ad hominem arguments out your game, I suggest that you avoid playing with people who actually know what they're doing.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Don't be suspicious of CES for his playstyle, be suspicious because he's been actively lurking and being needlessly vote hopping and never providing any reasons for votes. That and his counter-claim reeks of scumminess.

I'm not overdefensive, I'm just sick of saying the same things over and over again.

[Colonel Kurtz]

ad hominem ad hominem ad hominem!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If my 'rudeness' doesn't affect anything and you aren't going to make a move against me or anything, why did you even bother posting all of that?

[Colonel Kurtz]

As impressed as I am that CES actually posted something longer than two sentences, I must disagree with you on several points.

Mert[510] wrote:
What do you think about Kurtz's bredcrumbing of the role? Since you're not going to admit to being scum (obviously), do you think he's more likely scum or more likely another SK?

I've seen scum decide what to claim early on plenty of times. Anyone can breadcrumb a role. And I'm assuming he's mafia.

Were I scum, breadcrumbing a power role, especially one that the SK (which we all knew existed) would not want sticking around, and one that a good claim would require proof of, would be an incredibly stupid idea. As scum, you would look for a safe claim that wouldn't require proof. A protective role or a passive role is much safer than vig. Allow me to distill your argument to a syllogism.

CK has breadcrumbed vigilante
I have seen scum decide on what to claim early
therefore, CK is scum

...

My argument, distilled to a syllogism is

I breadcrumbed vigilante
all of the vigilante kills have coincided with people I have said should be lynched
therefore, it makes sense that I would be vigilante

While your basic argument does not hold up logically, mine does. I am not saying that you are wrong simply on account of the logic, I am saying that you have an extremely poorly-thought out argument. I guess what I'm really saying here is that in pure mafia terms, when there is a vigilante claim in the late game, it is usually the real vig and the scum is the one counterclaiming. Had I claimed yesterday, you or Twomz would have offed me. If you had claimed vig yesterday, I would have kept quiet and either Twomz or I would have offed you last night. It makes no sense for either the real vig or a scum to claim vigilante in any occasion except when there is a confirmed doctor or it is a lynch or lose scenario. I think that the fact that I have been breadcrumbing for a while now should lead any reasonable person to the conclusion that I am far more likely to be the real vig, simply because of the costs vs. the benefits.

Pink Princess wrote:
CES, may I ask why you didn't vig Twomz the first night and instead chose no one?

We had just confirmed his lynch immunity-type ability. Scum rarely have that type of ability. I saw no reason to kill him. And I wouldn't have killed him Night 2 if he hadn't confessed. Night 1 I had some suspicions, but not one strong enough to justify just killing them without giving them a chance to, at least, claim.

In my mind, I think it was fairly clear that Twomz didn't have the town's interests in mind. I only didn't vig him that night because I felt that Arafax had a stronger mafia vibe than Twomz did, and I was hoping that whoever Twomz killed (if he, as I suspected, was SK or scum) would provide us with more info. You claim to have not killed him because you saw no reason to. This, to me, is a cop-out answer. Your entire response there says "I didn't kill him because I didn't kill him" to me.

Pink Princess wrote:
Your argument also rests on Kurtz being my scum partner. I find that combination highly implausible.

I don't see how it does actually. My argument is simply that your actions are inconsistent with the actions of a roleblocker. Of course, Kurtz is scum, so I do think you're scum with Kurtz, but that's besides the point.

You have made no argument to that point. Your argument was "Your actions aren't that of a roleblocker because you're scum". If I recall, when there are power roles in a scum group, you can only use one per night. She couldn't possibly be scum with me because then
a. there would have been no roleblocks or
b. there would be no mafia kills.

And since she claims to have blocked on a night when there was a mafia kill, she couldn't be a mafia roleblocker. To me, there are no holes in her claim, but there are several holes in your claim. How about you focus on explaining yourself rather than questioning people who have a fairly solid claim, hmm?

Pink Princess wrote:
I might be an RB, but that's not a guaranteed block (since there is such thing as scum roleblockers who also block people and unblockable SK's - as last night so nicely proves), so I thought lynching the claimed bad guy was an idea worth considering - especially if he wasn't going to get NKed.

It generally speaking is guaranteed. Being roleblocked yourself or an SK being unroleblockable is truly an exception. And you know what happened the first time we tried to lynch him. That should play a part in your thinking.

...I'm not even sure what you're trying to prove here. Since Twomz had a lynch deflection that means that he can't be unblockable? Or that since RBs are generally solid, that means that there's no way that it could be a chance ability? Why should his lynch deflection play *any* part in our thinking? You're really reaching with that one. Again, I think that since PP managed to block someone the night Arafax was killed, YOU should take that into consideration. There were three killing parties in action at the time, and only two got a kill through. That means one of three things
1. He was hit by two gunshots (vig and mafia) and the mod only felt the need to mention one (which is unlikely because he made the distinction that Arafax was nailed by two killing parties in the first place)
2. The mafia has a cop and they used that ability instead of the kill (which would require the mafia to have a cop...and since we already have a claimed cop, that means that either Mert is scumcop {unlikely} or we have a cop on both sides, which is improbably in a game this size)
3. PP managed to roleblock either the vig or the mafia.

According to Occam's Razor, option number 3 is the case on that one. Since we can assume that PP is in fact a RB, we should simply focus on that rather than creating confounded theories about scumblockers or PP being mafia with me. You can assume that I'm mafia all you want (even though that isn't the case), but PP is definitely town.

Colonel Kurtz[511] wrote:
I vigged Arafax because I thought he was scummy. The day before I did it,I was saying that I thought he was scummy. Then he died. I said Twomz was scummy yesterday, then he died. Is it really that hard to put the pieces together?

You thought Twomz was scummy? Twomz CONFESSED to being scum. You can't seriously to expect to make anything out of that, do you? This is a craplogic argument.

As to the rest of Kurtz's post, I don't care that you're agggressive, you're scum.

As to the whole Twomz and the death of Arafax issue, I don't have a clue what the argument is about. As I see it, Twomz and the mafia killed Arafax.

Posts 519 and 520 is just Kurtz playing the disgrunted asshole town player routine.

The Pink Princess - Kurtz debate that follows is essentially PP giving Kurtz a helpful hint and Kurtz making something out of it and attacking her for no good reason.

Yeah, but you're ignoring the whole argument. I said I thought Arafax was scum, and then he got NKed, and I said Twomz was scummy, and he got NKed by the same method (bullets). It's a correlation worth noting. Does that, in and of itself, prove that I'm vigilante? No. No combination of arguments, outside of the mod posting my role pm, will even be PROOF that I'm the vigilante. The point here is to make a convincing argument. My argument for why I'm vigilante is a lot more logical and factual than your's is. Allow me to put them together.

Why you are vigilante:
1. You killed Twomz because you wanted to give him a chance to claim.
2. You counterclaimed me during a 6-person mass claim.
3. I am scum.
4. There are three killing parties.
5. Anyone can breadcrumb, you've seen it done.

Why I am vigilante:
1. I have been breadcrumbing since day 1, a maneuver that is fairly risky for the actual vigilante, but it wasn't a strong enough breadcrumbing for the mafia or SK to waste their kill on me, apparantly.
2. The people I have said I thought were scummy have died that night to gunshot wounds, which is the vigilante method.
3. My arguments are logical and I have actual logical reasons behind the kills, which I have presented.

Like I said, no set of arguments can prove that I'm vigilante, or that you're vigilante, but I have to say that my argument actual has a basis in logic and the vigilante role leads back to me from day one, whereas you have only swooped in to counterclaim and have provided improbable reasons that don't make any sense. Seriously, when one of your reasons for me being scum is that "CK is scum", you need to rethink your argument. You'll notice that nothing I have said can be boiled down to "CES is scum because he is". I leave that brand of thinking for counter-claiming scumballs.


I've been disgruntled for the entire game, did you not notice? PP said that my "rudeness" was affecting her objectivity, and that irks me, so I said something about it. I think that bringing method of delivery into an argument is not a good way to debate. That is all I said. Like she said, she didn't vote me, she didn't say I was scummy. We were having a side argument. You seem to be the only one who's making something out of it.

[Colonel Kurtz]

I'm only going to respond to two things that you've said, simply because if you're going to argue in this way continually, I don't feel like wasting my effort.

Firstly, I did make an argument to that point. Check the CES-quote in post #509. That was my argument. And I'm not saying she's a mafia roleblocker(we don't have proof that anyone was roleblocked), but I don't see why she couldn't be. You make the kill, she roleblocks.

Is this the quote to which you're referring?

In addition, I have trouble reconciling your argument to lynch Twomz Day 2 rather than lynching Lowell and letting the vigilante take care of Twomz with you being a roleblocker.

I'd hardly call that an argument.

Anyway, I said that the way a mafia group with power roles usually works is that you only get to use one of them per night.... So basically you didn't read what I said.

As for this

This is just plain BS. I did not provide an argument for you being scum, I merely answered Mert's questions. I never implied a logical connection between the 2 answers I gave.

Vote: Colonel Kurtz, he's scum.

I don't see how it does actually. My argument is simply that your actions are inconsistent with the actions of a roleblocker. Of course, Kurtz is scum, so I do think you're scum with Kurtz, but that's besides the point.

As to the rest of Kurtz's post, I don't care that you're agggressive, you're scum.

While I'll give you that none of those technically constitute any kind of reasonable argument, you've definitely stated a bunch of times that I'm scum.

Oh, and one more thing you said that I have to respond to

Colonel Kurtz wrote:
1. He was hit by two gunshots (vig and mafia) and the mod only felt the need to mention one (which is unlikely because he made the distinction that Arafax was nailed by two killing parties in the first place)

You're making a bad comparison. Shot and Stabbed does not specify how many shots were fired. You wouldn't seriously expect it to say Shot, Shot and Stabbed.

Uh, yeah, actually, I would. With the mod being specific enough to say that he was attacked with a knife and was shot, I'd expect the morning scene to say he was shot by different people if he was. Call me crazy, but I don't think our mod is a slacker, and he'd want us to have that info.

I love how you ended the post with something completely and totally irrelavant to what we were talking about, though. It really hearkens back to William Jennings Bryant. And I WILL crucify you on this cross of gold, because you're a lying scumbag.

[Colonel Kurtz]

What if Elias is actually town and there were only two mafia? It's a definite possibility. Or maybe he's trying to throw his partner under the bus and hoping to kill you or Mert tonight so, if you lynch CES, I might won't kill him tonight (poor planning, but eh). He tried to distance himself from CES, anyway, so that seems likely.
I think the no lynch is a terrible idea. It's doable, but there is probably room for error, somehow. Better that we just lynch the scum and get on with winning the game. I say we lynch CES, and if we don't win then, I'll vig Elias. That's really easy and impossible to screw up.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Now would be an excellent time for Mert to reveal his results.

[Colonel Kurtz]

i thought that wagon had little reasoning to begin with. anyways, i think i'll go vote: ces
not only does his wagon hopping and contentless posts make him very scummy, it hurts the town a lot. all he does is jump on wagons without explanations, so we'll have nothing to judge him on in the endgame. i think a ces lynch today is a lot better for the town than an arafax one.

i realize that its your playstyle, but its still anti town. if we cant get a read on you we have no idea whether youre town or not. anyways, its not like im hankering for a ces lynch. i just wasnt hankering for an arafax lynch either. at the very leat im putting pressure on ces to contribute.

I dont really buy the CES claim. But my opinion is mainly based on his playstyle which always seems to convince me he's scummy. But whatever.
That last post from Kurtz seemed a little over defensive, and bitchy. My main suspicion lies on CES right now.

Nope...not explicit at all...

I get him trying to distance himself early on, though. I may be applying a far more sophisticated layer to his thought process, but since I think there's a good chance he's mafia, this makes sense to me.

[Colonel Kurtz]

My misgiving is that maybe Elias isn't scum. I'd rather not lynch a townie simply because you feel like it.

I notice that CES appears in three of your possibilities, I appear in two, Elias appears in two, and you appear in one. Why not lynch the *most* likely candidate?

[Colonel Kurtz]

Yeah, I would. However, I think that lynching someone else today is not the correct play. Too much possibility for error.

But yeah, I would be willing to do that.

[Colonel Kurtz]

If Pink Princess is a mafia roleblocker, why did she show up as innocent to you? Only the GF has that ability, and he isn't ever a roleblocker.
I say that it's pretty much confirmed that PP is town, if you're not lying about that investigation.

I have another idea, though: what if Mert is a mafia cop? I'm not saying it's likely at all, but it's a possibility, if we're going to assume that there are mafia power roles. On the other hand, why are you assuming that if Elias is innocent, PP isn't? There could be only one remaining mafia member left. Since you got innocent for PP and she's not the GF...I don't see why not. Unless she set up an impressive roleclaim and there was no mafia kill the night Arafax got whacked so she could have that claim. We need to lynch Elias, CES, or me.

Do not lynch:
Mert - cop
PP - roleblocker
bloojay - mason

Possible lynches:
CK - vig or scum
CES - scum or vig
Elias - iffy, but claimed lucky townie.

On the other hand, I'm damn positive that CES is scum, so I really don't want to change my vote at all.

[Colonel Kurtz]

I guess basically what I don't get.

If we lynch me or CES, there is a 50/50 chance of hitting mafia.

If we lynch PP or Elias, there is a 50/50 chance of hitting mafia if one of them is scum, but then there's the possibility that neither of them are scum and you wasted a lynch.

I think you just need to lynch CES and I can kill Elias tonight ftw (if he's mafia).

Just my opinion though.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Yeah if you're not mafia then presumably we'll win the game if we lynch CES.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Fine, let's lynch Elias and ignore the obvious scum.

unvote CES, vote Elias

[Colonel Kurtz]

Actually, I rethought that.
PP is a more likely to be a scumblocker or masquerading as a roleblocker than Elias is to be scum. Anyway, a roleblocker is too dangerous to keep around.

unvote Elias, vote Pink Princess

[Colonel Kurtz]

Please, share why I am suddenly so likely to be scum. For that opportunistic turnaround for no good reason, I'm pretty willing to bet you're the scum in the vig group.

It's pretty obvious that you all don't feel like lynching the obvious scum, so I simply moved on to the next most likely. I'm more scared of a possible scumblocker than I am of a mafia goon. About you thinking I'm scum: well you haven't been right yet, why would you bother starting now?

If there is a scum roleblocker, lynching me will probably lose the game.

If there's a scumblocker and it isn't you, I would be very surprised. Also, they wouldn't be able to make a kill in the first place if they were blocking me. Duh?
Your claim isn't solid, there's always a possibility that the scum held off on a kill that night so that you could claim to be a roleblocker (even though that doesn't make any sense, but it certainly fits your logic pattern thusfar) and your defense hasn't been as sufficient as mine has. You could always be the GF, anyway. This is what happens when we don't lynch the obvious scum and try to make complicated plans for "definite wins". Things get complicated and there's a chance for screwing up. If you're honestly interested in winning the game, then change your vote to CES, because he's definite scum. Otherwise, it has really seemed like you've been defending him today, which tells me that you're either scum or stupid.

My statement only means that you are less likely to be scum than CES, and more likely to be scum than Elias.

You know what, I've decided I'm not going along with this. I'm not going with the retarded let's-complicate-matters-and-kill-the-vig plan. I'm voting for the person I'm 99% certain is scum.

unvote PinkPrincess, vote CES

[Colonel Kurtz]

Reference me, please, I honestly haven't seen that before.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Alright. I'd just never seen it before, so I was sticking to what I already knew.

What recent developments? I think he's scum, and that PP and Elias stand a chance of maybe being scum.

[Colonel Kurtz]

God, the amount of craplogic and scummy behaviour you guys are letting Colonel Kurtz getting away with. I'm going to have to make a summary of all the things that give him away. (I'll try to do it tomorrow, but it'll be Saturday at the latest.)

You mean like shameless bandwagoning, lurking in plain sight and not contributing at all until making a shamelessly scummy counterclaim against a breadcrumbed vig (and even then only offering brief, unintelligible responses to decent questions)?
Oh wait, that was you.

Just because you said something doesn't mean it's true.

[Colonel Kurtz]

And if it's so obvious that I'm scummy, why is it necessary for you to make a list of reasons why I'm scum? Speaking of which, why didn't you do this earlier? You being like "Oh, I see. I *guess* I'll have to make a list of reasons why the person who I counterclaimed is scummy" is kind of stupid, inasmuch as it makes it seem like you think counterclaiming and making a few incoherent posts would be enough of an argument to get me lynched.
This thought process seems scumtastical to me. Kind of like your play today. Yeah. I can't wait for your post, personally, if it's anything like your others.

[Colonel Kurtz]

You know what, I've decided I'm not going along with this. I'm not going with the retarded let's-complicate-matters-and-kill-the-vig plan. I'm voting for the person I'm 99% certain is scum.

unvote PinkPrincess, vote CES

[Colonel Kurtz]

Bloojay, to lynch PP, you would have to sway Mert, CES, and Elias, which I don't think is going to happen. Just vote for either CES or me and get on with it. This "oh, but there are other options" crap is stupid. You have to either think that I am lying, or that CES is lying. Form an opinion and act upon it, please.

And while you're at it, why "isn't CES the proper lynch today at all". It's always been my experience that the proper lynch is to lynch scum, so if you don't think he's scum, then vote for me and stop being silly.

[Colonel Kurtz]

I believe that no lynch had received a majority at the time of the crash

[Colonel Kurtz]

Bah