How has he interacted with Zwet in Day One? This may help
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
This summary makes me look smarter than I actually am. Could you also write my biography please?Green Crayons wrote:Fine, we'll do a...Phily wrote:Doubt he admited hes scum. Your words are strongly suggestive when Seraphim could be a poor townie right now.
Recap:
action X = commenting upon night activity
Seraphim said that he's suspicious of ZEE because ZEE performed action X.
Seraphim said that action X is scummy.
Albert said that Seraphim also performed action X.
Seraphim said OH YEAH YOU'RE RIGHT, but just that ZEE is "more likely to be scum" (actual quote), as if him and ZEE are mutually exclusive from being scumbags.
1. He admits that his own action is scummy. He does not attempt to explain why he committed this action, he just let's this self-admittal hang in the air as if we're supposed to forget about it.
2. In doing this, if he were town, he would realize that town inevitably are going to commit suspicious actions. It just so happens that this action X is a scum/doctor tell.Then, realizing that he is (allegedly) town and made this mistake, he does not apply that potential to ZEE and reasserts ZEE's scumminess because of committing action X.
3. Also, he promotes the fact that it's an either/or situation between him and ZEE, which makes no sense unless if he already knows he isn't in the same camp as ZEE. The tell doesn't work once per game or something silly like that.
I just reviewed play that can be easily attributed to a crash course in Scum Thinking 101. Looks like a scum lynch to me.
Talk about an incredibly loaded question, and one that I would be happy to answer if this was a thread in Mafia Discussion. Let's just say I would put enough thought into it so that I wouldn't attempt to kill potential doc targets.
This somehow makes it seem like you know that GLaDOS was last night's target.
"Start to contradict"? Oh buy you are about this close to a smack bottom. For one I can't contradict another player, that's almost physically impossible. And two if you are going to start aguing I "turned on my buddy" you damn sure better show some buddy interactions first. I don't mind people sayin thy think a Gor/Kor partnership is possible (although I would like a little clearance as to why at some point you lazy bastards XD) but if you're going to start proclaiming YOU are responcible for me doing anything you need to back that up right now or shut up. There isn't a single person on this site that can make me do anything.Philly wrote:But didnt Kor only start to contradict Gorrad when I mentioned how I thought the two were buddies earlier? I think it was just a poorly timed turn on a buddy since they were getting along fine till things fell on Gorrad (to the best of my recollection)
So you don't trust Seraphim but you trust him enough to be happy with your vote alongside his own?Gorrad wrote:Three on Zee, three on Seraphim. I don't trust either of them. I trust Korlash and ABR, but not really GC, and I totally trust myself. Happy with my vote.
I don't trust him OR ZEE. They're voting for each other, so no matter which of the two I'm voting for, I'll have someone I don't trust voting with me.Green Crayons wrote:So you don't trust Seraphim but you trust him enough to be happy with your vote alongside his own?Gorrad wrote:Three on Zee, three on Seraphim. I don't trust either of them. I trust Korlash and ABR, but not really GC, and I totally trust myself. Happy with my vote.
You're pretty much an active lurker... I mean the whole "I'm not below the activity level" kinda suggests you're watching it and making sure you stay above it just for the purposes of being able to argue you are above it. GC has pretty much already said anything I would have felt to say though...xtoxm wrote:A threat like that isn't going to work GC. And I am engaged and i'm not below the activity level either.
Some sort of bulletproof crossed my mind, perhaps a jailer did the awesome deed.Mastin wrote:1: We have a night-kill immune player, who was shot, and the mafia wasted their shot because of that.
2: We have a roleblocker, who roleblocked the scum who sent in the kill.
Did the thought cross anyone else's mind?
You're right to think that stating these opinions on whos got what role (concerning town players) is indeed a bad idea, but if you have any idea of who is mafia at the moment I'd like to hear your opinion. Obviously it wont be ripped apart since you just joined so nows your chance =/Mastin wrote:They're just a spectator's wild speculation, and it might help scum in a nameclaim and hurt town in any future name claim as well, so I'd like to hear other opinions on the matter as well.