Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dariush]

It could be a coincidence. And there's the OMGUS angle, although such a blatant OMGUS seems unnecessary. However, I would still like to hear what Toaster has to say about this.

Wait, seriously? You agree that Simple's case is bullshit, yet still join onto it? Ohgodyou'resoscum.

Simple, your case is bullshit and I can't believe you don't realize that. Also, xkcd has a nifty comic illustrating your logic about RBs:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Simple]

Alright let's get this straight : I realize that it's only one of many possible explanations of why there was no kill. Why there was no kill altogether tonight: either the scum kill is not done by one person or i botched and he's vig. I go with the explanation that people that act strange for them are scum. I was going to claim only last night block but that wouldn't be anything else than sowing misinformation. N1 i chosen Max by random and the fact that he seemed bit silent in comparison to his usual behavior. Assuming that i hit the target if we got less kills on N2 was pretty naive now i think of that but honestly i think blocking one person consistently is better than shooting at random so i choose to continue. And well , i thought it's good time to claim and that this should clear some things up especially if nobody could bring any other reason for lack of kill. And it's not only lack of kill paired with block that made me vote him now : he seemed scatter his question without real focus on anybody for the long time. And when he changed this stance it was only for most attacked person at the moment. It seems like he strife to not get drawn into any major arguments, and that's unusual and what brought my attention. As for why i blocked him instead of my suspects : i don't believe in my scum-finding abilities.  I confess i was fucked up D3 by doing nothing, sorry for that.  Also just in case it's useful to anybody : I'm raven.

[Jim Groovester]

Your story is inconsistent. You claim you suspected Toaster and that was your reason for blocking him, but you've never ever stated this, and you back away from your stated suspicions with the terrible excuse that you do not trust your scumhunting.

Well, fuck, why did you block Toaster then? I thought you didn't trust your scumhunting.

Simple.

[Max White]

Interesting, as I was blocked n1, so either the scum have a block with them or Simple is telling the truth.
Simple: One block doesn't account for two missing kills. Are you claiming to be a jailer or simple roleblock?
Toaster: Can you confirm being blocked on n2 and/or n3?

[Jim Groovester]

Interesting, as I was blocked n1, so either the scum have a block with them or Simple is telling the truth.

Why is this an either/or scenario?

Why can't Simple be scum, have a block, and be telling the truth?

Curious you wouldn't mention that possibility.

[Max White]

Why can't Simple be scum, have a block, and be telling the truth?

so either the scum have a block

He could very well be scum and have made the block, so yes I have thought about that. I'm still interested in confirming all I can though.

[Toaster]

Simple:  Well, that explains what those messages I was getting was.  I didn't realize I was getting blocked because I took no action both those nights.

I'm rather curious as to why you think I can explain the kill count going down twice.  You'll have to ask your scumbuddies why there was no mafia kill last night.

Also, why didn't you post your full case to start off with?  It's fairly self-contradictory, btw.

N1 i chosen Max by random and the fact that he seemed bit silent in comparison to his usual behavior.

Was it random or not?

And well , i thought it's good time to claim and that this should clear some things up especially if nobody could bring any other reason for lack of kill. And it's not only lack of kill paired with block that made me vote him now : he seemed scatter his question without real focus on anybody for the long time.

...Which you didn't wait for anyone else to bring a reason.  Also, you first said I was silent, then you say I'm scattered.  Which is it?

And when he changed this stance it was only for most attacked person at the moment.

Got some evidence to back that nonsense up?

As for why i blocked him instead of my suspects : i don't believe in my scum-finding abilities.

So... since you don't trust your scumhunting, you blocked at random, despite saying earlier you didn't want to block at random.  Gotcha.

I go with the explanation that people that act strange for them are scum. I was going to claim only last night block but that wouldn't be anything else than sowing misinformation.

This is less contradictory and more scumslip.  Misinformation?  That tells me you know why there weren't any kills.  So why weren't there kills, scumbag?


Max:  I can confirm getting odd flavor on N2 and N3, something about being surrounded by darkness and leaves.

Do you have an opinion on this or are you just going to watch?

Also, I have no vote today.

[Mysteriousbluepuppet]

Want to warn you guys, midterms are approaching ( as in tommorow until friday) so i wont post until then. Very sorry about this , but i must prioritize. I will be back on friday.

Also, Extend, hopefully ill be able to get back here before then end of the day

[Jim Groovester]

Also, I have no vote today.

So you were blocked and targeted with some other action, or is there something else going on?

[Simple]

Your story is inconsistent. You claim you suspected Toaster and that was your reason for blocking him, but you've never ever stated this, and you back away from your stated suspicions with the terrible excuse that you do not trust your scumhunting.

Well, fuck, why did you block Toaster then? I thought you didn't trust your scumhunting.

Simple.

You see i call it random but maybe it's a bad choice of words. I was not suspecting toaster at the time , it was only gut feeling early.
What i mean is that i belive that i should pursue after my primary suspects in the day game and leave the night actions for the people who are "the third option". They did nothing as scummy to become main suspect but there's something that's not tangible enough to make a case but that makes me doubt their motives. And that's nearly random choice until it brings some result that could tip the scales.

Interesting, as I was blocked n1, so either the scum have a block with them or Simple is telling the truth.
Simple: One block doesn't account for two missing kills. Are you claiming to be a jailer or simple roleblock?

Uhh, what's the difference ? My action says that it will block whatever action they wish to perform.

Simple:  Well, that explains what those messages I was getting was.  I didn't realize I was getting blocked because I took no action both those nights.

I'm rather curious as to why you think I can explain the kill count going down twice.  You'll have to ask your scumbuddies why there was no mafia kill last night.

Also, why didn't you post your full case to start off with?  It's fairly self-contradictory, btw.

So by chance you did something N1 and nothing when i blocked you ? Yeah. I know i should start with it but i just felt like i should claim outright and it was bit rushed.

N1 i chosen Max by random and the fact that he seemed bit silent in comparison to his usual behavior.

Was it random or not?

Well if i choose my target by something minor and based on meta like that it's no difference to random to me. I also explained it a bit in response to Jim.

...

...Which you didn't wait for anyone else to bring a reason.  Also, you first said I was silent, then you say I'm scattered.  Which is it?

You're spent most of the time asking few people questions that were either only asking for confirmation about what they said earlier or direct "are you scum?" questions that you have not followed by anything and just gone back to what seems to be random probing. I wouldn't call it active lurking but it was too passive in my opinion.

And when he changed this stance it was only for most attacked person at the moment.

Got some evidence to back that nonsense up?

Sure you have not focused on anybody D1 so that's hard to point exactly, but D2 D3  you just go after lurkers and switch to the one that can be lynched (BD). Hmm , why exactly did you go after lurkers back there ?

As for why i blocked him instead of my suspects : i don't believe in my scum-finding abilities.

So... since you don't trust your scumhunting, you blocked at random, despite saying earlier you didn't want to block at random.  Gotcha.

Same thing as above. In short : by random i mean choosing one of the "big unknown" people.

I go with the explanation that people that act strange for them are scum. I was going to claim only last night block but that wouldn't be anything else than sowing misinformation.

This is less contradictory and more scumslip.  Misinformation?  That tells me you know why there weren't any kills.  So why weren't there kills, scumbag?

Huh ? If i claimed only my last action it wouldn't be the truth why i suspect you. I don't get how that relates to me knowing why there was no kills. I don't know that, but i suspect my block ( and you by it) is involved.

Also, I have no vote today.

Hmm how's that possible? Isn't your vote on me and listed on the votecount ?

Uh, i hope it's readable.

[Jim Groovester]

Simple:  Well, that explains what those messages I was getting was.  I didn't realize I was getting blocked because I took no action both those nights.

Also, why you didn't claim the weird messages beforehand?

[Toaster]

Jim:

So you were blocked and targeted with some other action, or is there something else going on?

Blocked and targeted.  I didn't lose my vote N2.

Also, why you didn't claim the weird messages beforehand?

I considered it, but I didn't see the point.


Simple:  You should check me on D1 again.  D3, sure, I wasted a lot of time on people who weren't talking. (Darvi and BD)  Darvi because I wanted him to actually play, and BD because he was being a passive lurker, like you were being (until you got voted on it.)

So by chance you did something N1 and nothing when i blocked you ?

Rolefish much?

You conveniently ignored my scumslip question.

[Mephansteras]

The Counting Stones
Mysteriousbluepuppet: IronyOwl
Simple: Dariush, Jack AT, Jim Groovester, Toaster
Toaster: NUKE9.13, Simple


Vote phase ends ~5pm Pacific Wednesday

[Jack A T]

Interesting, as I was blocked n1, so either the scum have a block with them or Simple is telling the truth.
Simple: One block doesn't account for two missing kills. Are you claiming to be a jailer or simple roleblock?

Uhh, what's the difference ? My action says that it will block whatever action they wish to perform.

That's just a simple roleblock.  Jailers both roleblock and protect their target.

Your story is inconsistent. You claim you suspected Toaster and that was your reason for blocking him, but you've never ever stated this, and you back away from your stated suspicions with the terrible excuse that you do not trust your scumhunting.

Well, fuck, why did you block Toaster then? I thought you didn't trust your scumhunting.

Simple.

You see i call it random but maybe it's a bad choice of words. I was not suspecting toaster at the time , it was only gut feeling early.

Let me get this straight: you had a case against Toaster, which was your reason for blocking him, but you didn't suspect him?  While blocking him and having a case against him?  I find this hard to believe.

[NUKE9.13]

Right, right, right.

Guys.

Everyone is lurking. Myself included.

We need to get our act together. Make with the posting. Choose our lynch targets carefully.

Now here is what we know:

N1: 2 kills (1 town, 1 scum). Max blocked
N2: 1 kill (1 town). Toaster blocked
N3: 0 kills. Toaster blocked
N4: 1 revival

Let if we assume that Toaster is just some guy, and that the N1 extra kill was due to Powder Miner hitting a PWV or something, we still need to explain the lack of a kill N3. Does anyone know anything about that? Are there no investigative roles that have successful investigates?
I'm not rolefishing, before anyone starts screaming whilst frothing at the mouth. If you don't think that claiming will help us almost certainly lynch scum, you don't need to claim. But I get the feeling that we need to get our act together soon, or this game will go very badly. Its 3/10 scum, and everyone has some sort of role- and Meph is evidently not averse to adding lylo-breakers. It could already be mylo.

Here's what I think:
Simple's motives for blocking Toaster aside, there were still less kills N2 and N3 than N1.
I would argue that in a game this size, having more than one source of kills is to be expected, be it a SK or a vig. 0 kills, then, is quite extraordinary, and we can safely assume that the killer(s) have been sabotaged somehow.
The only person who we know was sabotaged last night is Toaster.

It isn't perfect, but, in the absence of anything better, I am sticking with my vote on Toaster.