And I'm the jester.In post 3491, MathBlade wrote:VOTE: Unvote
My mood is all y’all can die. I am the serial killer (joke)
VOTE: MalcolmTucker
And I'm the jester.In post 3491, MathBlade wrote:VOTE: Unvote
My mood is all y’all can die. I am the serial killer (joke)
God if I get eliminated this is going to look so scummy, especially since Kitty had been reluctant to put their vote on me initially so they could see which way the winds blew.In post 3495, KittyTacky wrote:Just because someone claimed a role doesn't mean they are a worthy kill.
I have cleared all this up. I've never played the role before, I wasn't sure how to approach it. D1 I had mild suspicions on Kitty and felt like they may be the more hidden mafia using the kill. D2 I decided to stay on them as I was becoming more confident. D3 I tried you to switch it up a bit. If I wanted to lie about clears I'd surely throw more names in there?In post 3476, MathBlade wrote:?? That may be someone else’s point but that’s not mine.In post 3405, MalcolmTucker wrote:The presumption on me being mafia here is essentially based on the idea that I've spent all game literally doing things that are the antithesis of being beneficial to the mafia because it makes me look more like a townie. I get that can be a helpful approach for a while but it only tends to work for so long. And when there are other roles in the game that can potentially reveal your identity anyway it would have been possible for all my work to be undone anyway if I'd been mafia playing that way. It doesn't make sense.
I know wagons alone do not tell a player's allegiance but fundamentally it is quite remarkable I'm currently under more suspicion than HEM who has now twice hammered townies and Kitty who continually and almost exclusively pushed players who turned out to be town.
Mine is that your PR play and day play makes you very likely scum.
I for the life of me, cannot figure out why you Jailkeep Kitty twice. It just seems like a fake claim but you don’t want to give clears.
Brb dinner
They don't play perfectly, but they also don't just casually reveal themselves and consistently doing nothing but voting for play that seems anti-town is not always a good idea. I have explained this so many times now...you voted and justified your vote on Italiano for identical reasons to your vote on Scorpious but it was wrong.In post 3498, KittyTacky wrote:You seem to assume that scum would play flawlessly and perfectly logically. Why?! That's a huge assumption to make.In post 3430, MalcolmTucker wrote:But this - again - ignores the point that'd been made that scum wouldn't want to sit on role claimed players without a solid case against said claim. Their logic was again the exact same here despite the fact I'd pointed out this was in my opinion more likely to come from lazy/uninformed town than scum.
making what up?In post 3490, MathBlade wrote:You mean how I said I wouldn’t do that as I have been putting in lots of OT at work?In post 3451, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Kitty I share the same read as you do in as much as they're willing to hide behind a fatalistic will that town will never do X. He has been proven wrong with Scorpious but he made the same excuse as Italiano. I can understand that read.
Math, I've been waiting for them to turn online and dominate the game because that's how i experienced them in the large normal, but they never really read the thread. Although, I sympathize because I haven't done that myself.
You’re literally just making up shit now.
I'm trying to work through my paranoia after getting pocketed multiple games in a row, I want more outside takes. But also I'm trying to understand why we're not getting paired by anyone at this point. We're only getting scum read individually, but no one's coming to either of us telling us to wake the fuck up and reevaluate. The implication with solves like Roden/Kitty or HEM/Kitty is that we're pocketed in some way, but no one's outright said that.In post 3511, humaneatingmonkey wrote:what do you think Roden
why dont you stop flirting with the idea of shading me and confront me directly
In post 3336, Roden wrote:In case I die, please don't forget this tomorrow, because Malcolm never responded.In post 3112, Roden wrote:In post 3088, MalcolmTucker wrote:There's not really any way we can go wrong here as town unless HEM were town and to gain some unique insight from rereading the whole thing. If HEM comes back town we go for Jackson next. If HEM is mafia then we're all good and we eliminate Jackson surely?Where does "if Jackson isn't" fit into that post?In post 3101, MalcolmTucker wrote:Nah that was a typo. Meant if Jackson isn't.In post 3099, ItalianoVD wrote:In post 3094, JacksonVirgo wrote:Is this a slip?In post 3088, MalcolmTucker wrote:If HEM is mafia then we're all good and we eliminate Jackson surely?
I'd still like for Malcolm to respond to this btw.In post 3390, Roden wrote: Also, if you think the voting patterns are alignment indicative, then why aren't you suspicious of Gamma? He was also on both mis-elim wagons.
this is really opportunistic
In that case then the Day 1 suspicions towards them were right and the resistance towards their wagons came purely from town. Those same townies have suspected you/me/Kitty for most of this game. And this also has to mean Malcom is town and really is a Simple Jailkeeper, but I don't see how that fits the set up.In post 3518, humaneatingmonkey wrote:yes but i'm more entertaining a gamestate where town is self-cannibalizing and scum is playing a low-key game. right now, scum's winning strategy is to secure two miselims. that's it. that's what they need to do. who do you think is inching towards that finish line?