Mini Normal 1854: Game Over

[TwoFace]

If we didn't lynch hiraki, you were the alternative. Maybe gamma or Sonia is scum. If so that points to you probably being scum.

[Gamma Emerald]

It wouldn't hurt for you to try and do something, since you're conftown.

I did warn you all that railroading was all this town was willing to do. I don't see anyone here willing to look into reads outside Emp/myself and if you really think you're that good at the game, you A) haven't been reading the thread well and B) are going to get a nasty surprise if you waste two days doing this. Hell the primary issue I see is Emp and myself have produced more content in the last 1.5 game days than the rest of the alive players combined.

There's scum on this lynch/intent. It ran up too easy and is too safe a wagon for them to have avoided. Because no one here is willing to call them on this railroading shit, they've continued to do so. And look no further than good old Gamma coming back from his vacation to pull a lynch.

Oooooh boooooy scum have decided to spin my vaycay as scummy.

[Aristophanes]

Lynching Hikari and getting town should've shown that.

Don't lynch Hiraki! He's obvtown!

[Aj The Epic]

Oooooh boooooy scum have decided to spin my vaycay as scummy.

Ain't saying your vacation is scum, you coming back and slipping on a wagon with not too much interaction is though.

[Gamma Emerald]

Oooooh boooooy scum have decided to spin my vaycay as scummy.

Ain't saying your vacation is scum, you coming back and slipping on a wagon with not too much interaction is though.

I'm p sure I was interacting though.

[Aj The Epic]

I see one line posts by you for like... 30 ISO posts. And the only thing you think is Emp and I are both scum, the EASIEST LYNCHES YOU CAN PULL. Nothing you've done to prove it, just sitting there expecting it to happen and being able to say "I said they were scum" without doing shit to push it. I don't consider anything you've done 'interacting'.

[Lil Uzi Vert]

My thoughts on King below. I understand the scum motivation for his play may be nonexistent according to my mason parter but I haven't gotten a town vibe from it at all.

Spoiler:

King has just been scummy and off from the go and I think there's a good chance AJ or Gamma is his partner.

Take his opening posts in 1954 and 1956. He checks in, states he'll get to rereading, and then immediately asks AJ for a brief summary of the thread. This is off because AJ hadn't posted anything game related in a while at the time of this question and he was also the leading wagon. You haven't read the thread and you're asking the leading wagon for a summary when you have no idea of what your thoughts are on his alignment. Why would town do this? You just subbed in and you haven't read anything and you want a summary of the game from someone you don't know if you can trust yet. Just doesn't add up.

In 1956, he gives out a read list while stating he still has not read the thread. What was the point of this? Why would town give a reads list if they have not read the thread? What's even more telling is that he's obviously lying about not having read the thread based on his read on Josh. There is no way one can have that strong of a SR on Josh if they've claimed to have not read the thread. What are you hiding from scum from lying about not having read?

Then we have his 1960 and we see where the confusion has sort of stemmed from and why VCA can never be the basis of an entire case in his 1961. VCA lacks context and it does not always tell the whole story.

In 1960, he says he's only looked at the vote counts and that's how he got his SR on TF. That's fine. What's not fine is that he had no intention of going back and understanding how the Fitz wagon formed based on his latter comment in his 1965 and you could argue his first point in that same post was the beginning stages of him discreditng the work TF put in by calling his policy awful. What also doesn't make it fine is when he decides to argue semantics in 1975. Maybe policy isn't the best choice of words but it's clear that TF means a general belief and he showed examples of him following that belief in 1967. The issue should've been dropped right then and there.

In 1983, he claimed he finished reading Day 1 and that Gamma is the reason why Fitz was lynched. This is bull and anyone who was actually here Day 1 can tell you that's not how it went down but even if you weren't, a through reread what have told you that wagon was all TF. He also says this clears Gamma which isn't true and why does Gamma barely providing any reasons of his own and being on the wagon clears him but TF being the driving force of the wagon but hopping off because a belief he proves he actually has doesn't? This thinking doesn't sound like it's coming from town.

Fast forward to his 2038, he says TF has been basically flip-flopping. This is another example of King having not read throughly and missing something called context. The lynch was inevitable because Day 1 exceeded way past the two week limit due to the amount of replacements and the extensions we were given. That takes a wear on players especially after so much had been discussed. In his 2051, he argues that lynching is something one doesn't do by themselves and plays the semantics game. If so, why give credit to Gamma for the lynch and then latter Nacho? And again, it's clear what TF means by lynching here. He is obviously saying he doesn't help lynch claimed PRs.

Here, in 2058, is another example of where the argument should've been dropped. King brings up again that TF is trying to get town credit for lynching Fitz. Why would scum who dropped off the way King has been arguing TF did constantly bring up he was the driving force of the Fitz wagon? Makes no sense.

In 2108, another attempt to discredit TF after he presented the argument he had for Fitz being scum in 2055 and another sign King hasn't read throughly. The reason the wagon stalled on Fitz was because we had competing wagons on Creeps and Hiraki and various people on those wagons were stubborn, including me!

--

tl:dr: King is scum because he has proven that he's unwilling to make the effort to read the thread throughly and understand context as well continue to argue semantics

[Dierfire]

VOTE COUNT 3.07

Empking (3): Joshz, xSoniaNevermindx, Gamma Emerald
Aj The Epic (2): Nachomamma8, Aristophanes
Gamma Emerald (1): Aj The Epic
Joshz (1): Empking

No Vote (2): Lil Uzi Vert, TwoFace

With 9 players living, 5 votes are required to lynch.

TIMER

(expired on 2016-12-31 18:30:00)

NOTES

None

[Joshz]

luv, its important you remember that you strongly townread vedith when he was in that slot. i didnt, but you did. so you should make sure you believe empking's scumminess outweights his predecessors' towniness. its kinda funny because nacho is in the opposite boat in sring vedith but tring empking.

id like to point out too that scum is in a very hard position IF twoface and myself are eliminated from the lynch pool; thats only 5 to lynch out of, 4 if you accept a mason clearing aristo. scum are pretty forced to discredit someone that isnt a mason if possible, and one just subbing into the game might see twoface not being on the fitz lynch and myself "active lurking" (sorry i legit dont understand you here) as opportunities. this is evidenced by the fact empking's read post remains the same pre and post read through.

[Lil Uzi Vert]

A slot starts fresh for me when someone subs in but to answer it definitely outweighs.

[Aristophanes]

A slot starts fresh for me when someone subs in but to answer it definitely outweighs.

It can start mostly fresh, but never totally.

[Empking]

Luv:
I'll answer Luv's 2181 point by point.

Interacting with the largest wagon and asking things from it is not "off". That's retarded.

Giving your reads as they're created is obviously pro-town. My read on Josh was dead-on so I appreciate why you might think that it surely couldn't have come without a thorough reading, but it did. Josh had loads of posts, but none really that Nacho considered worth responding to or quoting. That's scum flying under the radar. That's active lurking. I was dead-on.

Read the thread. Read the pages either side of Nacho's vote if you think that reading all of Day One is too much work. Two is not the reason that the Hiraki and Creep wagons were overcome and scum got lynched. That came from Nacho and Gamma. Two was making no effort to get Having lynched Day One when the final wagon got on him. These are simply facts that happened. Don't trust me, look at the pages in question.

That's not semantics. If he is claiming to have a policy in this game. And it certainly looks like a policy in this game. But it wasn't a policy in those other games. Regardless, I literally said that I am willing to concede the argument in that post. That's not remotely arguing over semantics.

I have never said that Two going off the wagon was scummy - maybe before he said the policy - although I've acknowledged that it ought to be. What is scummy is that Two won't give a straight answer to questions about why he unvoted. "I don't lynch claimed PRs" is nonsense; it's impossible. It is halfway between "I won't be on the wagon of a claimed PR day one. Just won't" and "I'll try to keep claimed PRs from being lynched" Posturing or protecting, but when asked directly which one he just calls me a liar and repeats his (gibberish) mantra. That's not pro-town behaviour. Perhaps it was obvious to you that he meant posturing? But where was the pro-town motivation is refusing to make it obvious to me? My question was not difficult.

He was flip-flopping in his discussion with me. I was literally the only one reading his posts in connection to me. If scum did think Having's lynch was inevitable then why the Jailkeeper claim?

"Why would scum try to get credit for a scum lynch" is a retarded question, and you should be ashamed for making it.

How come competing wagons stopped Having from being lynched when Two voted him first, and went down so smoothly when it was Nacho? Did those competing wagons simply vanish? No. The competing wagons is obviously not a valid reason for saying why the wagon stalled with Two and went smoothly with Nacho.

Luv: in your second paragraph you are calling me a liar and saying I had read the thread. But then later posts are saying that I'm scum for not reading the thread. Did I somehow unread the thread in my intervening posts.

Everyone: Please just reread the creation of the final Having wagon. The fact that Having was lynched Day One was not down to Two. Just read the pages in question, it's not ambiguous. Two's most recent comment on Having before Nacho's interrogation is explicitly giving up on Having been lynched Day One. Nacho - and accidentally Gamma - are responsible for Having being lynched. I'm not saying trust
me over your memories. I'm saying reread the pages in question. It's not ambiguous.

If that requires my flip first then that's fine. But once it's proven that I am town, could people just read the relevant pages. Please.

[Joshz]

You have still not said ANY case about me besides active lurking.

[TwoFace]

I have never said that Two going off the wagon was scummy - maybe before he said the policy - although I've acknowledged that it ought to be. What is scummy is that Two won't give a straight answer to questions about why he unvoted. "I don't lynch claimed PRs" is nonsense; it's impossible. It is halfway between "I won't be on the wagon of a claimed PR day one. Just won't" and "I'll try to keep claimed PRs from being lynched" Posturing or protecting, but when asked directly which one he just calls me a liar and repeats his (gibberish) mantra. That's not pro-town behaviour. Perhaps it was obvious to you that he meant posturing? But where was the pro-town motivation is refusing to make it obvious to me? My question was not difficult.

I've given you a straight answer. Multiple times.

I don't lynch claimed PRs day 1. I don't know how I can be any more clear, also it is not nonsense and certainly not impossible since I didn't lynch a claimed PR day 1. Side note, It's a very smart policy that all players should have.

The fact that you keep harping on this and saying I'm scum because I correctly call you a liar is exactly why you're scum.

If you were town you would admit your mistake and move on. The fact that you have the nerve to claim I'm shady for my policy is why you need death.

And another thing. I didn't call you a liar for your question. I called you a liar because you accused me of flip flopping. i never flip flopped so that was a false accusation.


And I'm sorry but you aren't in any position to say what is and isn't protown behavior. You want me to believe you are town, yet you've lied. Lying isn't protown behavior.

[TwoFace]

That's not semantics. If he is claiming to have a policy in this game. And it certainly looks like a policy in this game. But it wasn't a policy in those other games. Regardless, I literally said that I am willing to concede the argument in that post. That's not remotely arguing over semantics.

You know what semantics is? Semantics is me doing the same thing in those other games as I did here but saying it's different because I didn't say the word policy.

"I also have this thing about lynching claimed PRs day one. "

"I am not a big fan of lynching claimed PRs on day 1"

"You don't lynch a claimed pr day 1 ever"

All 3 say essentially the same thing, just worded differently. All 3 my actions were the same. I didn't lynch a claimed pr. Since empking is big on semantics. I'll say it in a way that makes sense to hissimple mind.

All 3 say essentially the same thing, just worded differently. All 3 my actions were the same. I didn't vote a claimed pr.

The end result is the same. I'm never going to vote a claimed pr day 1.

[TwoFace]

Btw in my original post I never used the word policy so not even sure how that got introduced

[TwoFace]

It is halfway between "I won't be on the wagon of a claimed PR day one. Just won't" and "I'll try to keep claimed PRs from being lynched" Posturing or protecting

Anyone with a 2nd grade reading level should have been able to figure out that my policy is that I won't be on the wagon. I've basically said as much multiple times.

Cause you can't figure out that when I say I won't lynch somebody, that actually means I won't vote somebody is kind of tragic. People on this site for years have been interchanging these words so I seriously doubt it's a new concept to you.

Now for the other part. If I believe the claim and we have ample time I'll definitely try to swing votes elsewhere.

Nacho made a very good point that made me not believe fitz's claim. If you're a legit town pr and at l-1, you don't risk going to bed without claiming. Not on this site where lol hammers happen all the time.

Although I did quote my policy about pr day 1. Your predecessors vote was bad. Definitely could have been for town cred. He sort of off and on pushed fitz but never had a real reason too. The one time he tried to give a reason, the reason wasn't even true. But that's off topic.

I did explain why it's a bad idea to lynch claimed PRs so I did sort of try to prevent it. If math wouldn't have been stupid and hammered via CC this game would be completely different. Town would probably be in better shape.

[xSoniaNevermindx]

uhhhhhh
VOTE: Twoface VOTE:
Okay that's a lie
Scoty claimed tracker and you were still on her wagon without a 2nd thought.

[xSoniaNevermindx]

VOTE: twoface
So you gonna explain this " I don't vote claimed pr's"
deal ?

[Joshz]

Link

[xSoniaNevermindx]

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=68822

[Lil Uzi Vert]

Luv:
I'll answer Luv's 2181 point by point.

Interacting with the largest wagon and asking things from it is not "off". That's retarded.

Giving your reads as they're created is obviously pro-town. My read on Josh was dead-on so I appreciate why you might think that it surely couldn't have come without a thorough reading, but it did. Josh had loads of posts, but none really that Nacho considered worth responding to or quoting. That's scum flying under the radar. That's active lurking. I was dead-on.

Read the thread. Read the pages either side of Nacho's vote if you think that reading all of Day One is too much work. Two is not the reason that the Hiraki and Creep wagons were overcome and scum got lynched. That came from Nacho and Gamma. Two was making no effort to get Having lynched Day One when the final wagon got on him. These are simply facts that happened. Don't trust me, look at the pages in question.

That's not semantics. If he is claiming to have a policy in this game. And it certainly looks like a policy in this game. But it wasn't a policy in those other games. Regardless, I literally said that I am willing to concede the argument in that post. That's not remotely arguing over semantics.

I have never said that Two going off the wagon was scummy - maybe before he said the policy - although I've acknowledged that it ought to be. What is scummy is that Two won't give a straight answer to questions about why he unvoted. "I don't lynch claimed PRs" is nonsense; it's impossible. It is halfway between "I won't be on the wagon of a claimed PR day one. Just won't" and "I'll try to keep claimed PRs from being lynched" Posturing or protecting, but when asked directly which one he just calls me a liar and repeats his (gibberish) mantra. That's not pro-town behaviour. Perhaps it was obvious to you that he meant posturing? But where was the pro-town motivation is refusing to make it obvious to me? My question was not difficult.

He was flip-flopping in his discussion with me. I was literally the only one reading his posts in connection to me. If scum did think Having's lynch was inevitable then why the Jailkeeper claim?

"Why would scum try to get credit for a scum lynch" is a retarded question, and you should be ashamed for making it.

How come competing wagons stopped Having from being lynched when Two voted him first, and went down so smoothly when it was Nacho? Did those competing wagons simply vanish? No. The competing wagons is obviously not a valid reason for saying why the wagon stalled with Two and went smoothly with Nacho.

Luv: in your second paragraph you are calling me a liar and saying I had read the thread. But then later posts are saying that I'm scum for not reading the thread. Did I somehow unread the thread in my intervening posts.

Everyone: Please just reread the creation of the final Having wagon. The fact that Having was lynched Day One was not down to Two. Just read the pages in question, it's not ambiguous. Two's most recent comment on Having before Nacho's interrogation is explicitly giving up on Having been lynched Day One. Nacho - and accidentally Gamma - are responsible for Having being lynched. I'm not saying trust
me over your memories. I'm saying reread the pages in question. It's not ambiguous.

If that requires my flip first then that's fine. But once it's proven that I am town, could people just read the relevant pages. Please.

It's off when you just subbed in and gave no indication in your opening post of having played with him prior like you did with Nacho. If me and Nacho weren't masons and you had asked him that same question, I wouldn't have given it a second thought because you at least showed that you knew him prior to this game and for all I know that's enough of a reason you may have to trust his summary of the game for the time being.

Giving reads isn't exactly pro-town and it definitely isn't when 3 of those reads you got were from Nacho. You didn't say you skimmed or you read just ISOs, you had claimed to have not read the game. There is no way you could have that read on Josh with that claim which is why I called you a liar. Your case on Josh still doesn't make him scum. Active lurking is NAI. Also, why does it sound like you're trying to get town credit for giving reads yet you criticized TF for claiming he was trying to get town credit for saying the wagon on Fitz was all him?

I don't trust you because I think you're scum and I was actually there. The reason people came around to Fitz were mostly for the reasons TF laid out.

TF's 2189 addresses this point fairly well.

All the answers he's given to that question are pretty much the same thing, you just keep arguing semantics.

This is dumb. Scum want to live just as much as town do. Of course some sort of fake claim was going to be thrown out.

Competing wagons stopped Fitz from being lynched quickly because people essentially wanted to policy lynch Creeps and also wanted to lynch Hiraki because his play didn't read like it was coming from town and was screaming scum. It looked like Nacho was the one that got Fitz lynched because he subbed in very late into a day which had taken such a toll on the town. We gave in and we lucked out.

I am calling you scum because you have shown you're not willing to reread the game throughly. If you were willing, we would probably not be having this discussion right now.

[Lil Uzi Vert]

uhhhhhh
VOTE: Twoface VOTE:
Okay that's a lie
Scoty claimed tracker and you were still on her wagon without a 2nd thought.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=68822

Don't have the time to reread right now but if true, wow.

[TwoFace]

uhhhhhh
VOTE: Twoface VOTE:
Okay that's a lie
Scoty claimed tracker and you were still on her wagon without a 2nd thought.

VOTE: twoface
So you gonna explain this " I don't vote claimed pr's"
deal ?

Sure I'll explain it.

See I was killed night 1 overcaimed masons for correctly identifying 2/3 of the scum team.
Sotty claimed tracker day 2

I was dead when the tracker claim happened.

What else you got?

[TwoFace]

TwoFace was killed in the night! He was

Spoiler:

Welcome to Mini Normal 1843! You are a

Vanilla Townie

!

Abilities

You have your voice and your vote. Use them well to discover the truth.

Win Condition:
You win when all threats are eliminated to the town and at least one town member is still alive.

Here is the game thread. Please confirm via PM with your role name and alignment

Day two deadline is Friday November 18, 1 PM PST. (expired on 2016-11-18 13:00:00)

I see the unvote but whatever.

I'm a tracker, I tracked Jaack he didn't go anywhere. It was a toss up between him and twoface. I realized twoface more of a me read and a couple of people told me that I was tunneling so I ended up going with Jaack as he was my next best read.