Your first rebuttal is not really an answer, it's just a He's the scum, not me sort of statement.
The 1st accusation is that I didn’t know who Mafia was on Day 1. How is this scummy?
2. Next point is again similar, mere statement that something is the case. I have to say, it doesn't look like you were happy you hit the SK.
The 2nd accusation is saying I’m scummy because the wording of my posts did not give off enough “happiness.” This does not change the fact Mafia did not know Chamber wasn’t town and thus reasoned my FOS of everyone on that wagon. I have already answered this question. Go back and read it. You’ll see it was IH who used it against me originally and now it’s being pitched by Primate. Go figure.
3. The Remus to Kilmenator thing is interesting. I personally would note that when you made your case against Remus you never voted him. I would also note however that there wasn't really enough time to see whether you were actually dropping the Remus case to attack Kilm. So that's inconclusive in my mind.
Try and remember we were Lynch or Lose that day. And I guess you’re not drawing any conclusions from Primate engineering the facts on that accusation?
4. Next point I agree with Akbar.
Bout time.
5. And the next, though I would add that it looks an awful lot like a planned disatncing attempt.
Again, we were Lynch or Lose.
6. Next one strikes me as a misinterpretation on Primate's part.
That’s a nice way of acknowledging his 3rd fabrication during the post.
7. The Ih thing next... not sure about this
If you had to make a group decision, why would you want to eliminate a known town voice and create a higher ratio of scum?
8. urgh.... I really really don't like that next statement. How would taking into account the possibility that Apeiron is scum blow the game for us? I would say the opposite is much more likely to be true.
If we vote Apeiron, we lose. What’s confusing about that?
9. Next statement... I would say that IH's lynch pretty much was guaranteed after everyone decided I was clear. I don't think it needed to be scumless, either: it's possible the scum wanted to get one last piece of distancing done. Also, the idea that Primate waited because he wanted to try and stop the lynch is ridiculous: by the point the entirety of the other players had already statde a willingness to lynch IH.
If we were committed to the lynch, why did we give Primate time to defend him? Obviously we weren’t completely decided.
10. The bit you address to me misses the point somewhat. That was really the weakest point of my argument, an amusing coincidence probably. The fact that both scum have acted in a manner towards you that is consistent with the way they acted towards their other scumpartner is at the very least worrying.
I can’t vouch for your speculation. I can only answer the facts.
11. I looked through your posts again and found another thing that worried me. in your 31st post and your 36th post, you indidcate that you have been trying to work out what roles people have. That is not a pro-town thing to do.
If this was a Day 1 fishing attempt at power roles, I would agree with you. However this was an attempt to locate the surviving Mason to avoid a mislynch. This is no different than trying to analyze who your teammates are in general, to gain confidence in who to believe throughout the thread.
12. Oh, and that statement at the bottom of your last post doesn't fill me with confidence. It might be clear from your viewpoint who the scum is, but it definitely isn't from mine.
Apparently not. What’s really frustrating is your desire to swim upstream at endgame just because Primate is such a good player. I still haven’t understood why it’s my responsibility to illustrate a no-brainer case condemning Primate and absolving me at the same time. If you’re going to say voting Mafia is just a distancing tactic, where does that leave room for me doing my job?
Look at the facts, Primate’s so called case against me had 3 points in it that I didn’t even have to defend because he altered the facts to make it fit his presentation! Look at the language he uses in his questioning:
Primate wrote:@Akbar, if you were the last mafia, what would be your rationale for killing Ectomancer?
My reply:Primate wrote:He's unquestioning about Ecto's claim, but that's fairly reasonable either way, considering that he was itching for the cop to claim earlier.
Akbar wrote:oooo, I was ITCHING for the cop to claim. I can hear the dramatic music in the background now. Unless you have a reasonable case against the roleclaiming that saved us from a Lynch or Lose situation, don’t try to make it sound suspicious. It was a good strategy that yielded 2 lynched scums.
Notice how he skipped right past the part about explaining why it was a bad idea and instead decided to reiterate the definition of “itching” to maintain the image of suspicion. He also tells me to stop trying to find melodrama in his words. Yet, he’s the one using phrases like:Primate wrote:You make it sound like you were responsible for it. And stop trying to find melodrama in my words. All the day you had been pointing out the benefits of the cop claiming. If that isn't 'itching', I don't know what is.
Primate wrote:he was itching for the cop to claim earlier
Primate wrote:you have been guns blazing against me,
So you tell me who’s using Melodrama.Primate wrote:Akbar was attacking Chamber like a dog,
We were Lynch or Lose the day Remus was lynched, yesterday AND today. For you to think Primate is not the last scum, you have to convince yourself that a full mafia team would bus 2 scumbuddies back to back and not even try to win both days.
Look at the vote counts. There were 4 lynches. Draygen Mage/Primate voted both times it wasn’t a scum team member. He skips the two that were. Is that coincidence too?