Mafiascum.net

In post 999, Messiah Complex wrote:garruk

Why try to lynch this?

In post 999, Messiah Complex wrote:@ Nautilus: why are you resorting to Stup already after you said you wanted to give them some room?

My reach out was rejected.

In post 1014, Tammy wrote:Holy wall wars 2013!

Tammy please stop playing like this.

In post 1078, Tierce wrote:Also you made me realize that this game is far too long for me to not have read it thoroughly lately but now I'm having too much fun spiting Nacho~

Better not spite me too much or you'll be dead before you know it!

In post 1113, AGar wrote:15/45, I'm going to stab the next person who speaks directly to a head of a hydra.

mollie is macmollie.

In post 1133, Syryana wrote:he's very serious, almost formal.

??????

In post 1133, Syryana wrote:Hell, he's so profoundly literal this game that he latches onto my mollie troll, takes it seriously, and proceeds to agree with the dislike of lurking

Remember how Ceph thought ffery wasn't posting enough in Hard Boiled? Yeah.

In post 1153, macmollie wrote:

In post 812, Nautilius wrote: quadz vote = mac

DENIED

amrun vote = mac?

DENIED

#470 = mac

DENIED

#568 = mac

DENIED

I miss him
I wanna chat with him. Can you bring him out to play too?

DENIED

0/4 correct you cut me deep nacho

COME PLAY WITH ME

In post 1157, Shadoweh wrote:I think I know what it is about your posts that bugs me in general, spacing everything out to make the posts look bigger was something I did as scum, it doesn't make the post easier to read you know. <_< This is really confusing though, what are you talking about and what does it have to do with syr being scum? I don't mean him confusing your scumbuddy for being town, I mean the random line about 'someone was kind to me once' followed by you already giving up on lynching scum (even though your thor wagon is proceeding semi-decently?) I mean would you be convinced by your own posts to vote syr?

why aren't you getting married?
why are you so thoroughly ignoring me?

In post 1197, macmollie wrote:maybe bring death to these (but also: to be discussed):

i wanna kill sd/stup
can you help me accomplish this?

In post 1299, StupendousMan wrote:Agar

Why?

In post 1354, Alfred Borden wrote:Really? If anything, I found the replace out townish, especially the "Tierce is town though, I just wanted to be a bit more careful with things" bit -- mostly the fact that he felt the need to explain what he was doing there in his early interaction with Tierce and the result he got from it as he was leaving. I think as scum he'd have just left it at "my reads are the same as before" as that doesn't really give away much information considering the early game nature of the reads.

AGar looks town.

In post 862, BBmolla wrote:It says my result will always be innocent.

But I have a guilty on RadiantCowbells.

@mod: If a framer framed someone, and a naive cop investigated that player, what would happen?

Why didn't you this question when you first received the investigation?
Why didn't you confirm that the result was correct immediately?

In post 889, Nani wrote:hi, will catch up shortly

What happened to this?

In post 912, BBmolla wrote:I had a guilty so I tried to think of possibilities. Which, assuming it was wasn't a mod error as I did, would be:

Why did you assume it wasn't a mod error?



I think I want to go here for a moment because I don't buy the way he's been reacting to the mod error because he doesn't actually seem at all frustrated about it and not questioning a guilty result as a naive cop is weird as hell.

Timing of "oh. this is a mod error." is also pretty shitty because it comes a minute after another post he made; seems strange that he would make a post, check QT, makes another post. It also seems weird that N didn't PM him and instead posted in the QT even though posting in the QT confirms his error to RC.

what the FUCK is with random quotes showing up in my walls?

luna wrote:not questioning a guilty result as a naive cop is weird as hell.

fucking finally. it's about fucking time someone else realises this.

I'm weirded out by everything right now to be honest.

In post 984, PeregrineV wrote:

In post 983, Rail Tracer wrote:busy atm, but just to interject here.

@PV

do you not believe that he is a daytalk enabler?

I don't know. My questions is, why not just say so?

um... he did? that's what he said when he claimed, even if he didn't use the words "daytalk enabler".

In post 984, PeregrineV wrote:

In post 983, Rail Tracer wrote:your vote is really weak.

It may be. Show me three or more of Peace's strongest town-posts this game. Then I'll reconsider my read.

um, even if i could be bothered doing this, i probably wouldn't because you're unlikely to be able to push a lynch through on peacebringer anyway.

my point was that the reasoning for your vote is really weak.

In post 986, mnemonicdevice wrote:VOTE: Peregrine

Anything town about him?

nope

the only reason PV is going after me because using language here, I am "tunnelled" on him. There has been nothing in play or behavior that makes me see things differently.

In post 1007, PeaceBringer wrote:the only reason PV is going after me because using language here, I am "tunnelled" on him. There has been nothing in play or behavior that makes me see things differently.

You have no scumreads (ooba posted something scummy, and Sleepy claimed Miller are your reads.)
You call three people town and the rest are null (139).
You vote Katsuki for meta (143,160) one page after calling him town (139).
In 306, you completely deny 143.
After he replaces out, you maintain the slot is scum for the same reasons (483).

In addition, you claimed with no votes and no pressure (833).
You also claim "negative utility", the exact same reason you voted Sleepy/Diabolik (41).
So, you claim to be town, and think Sleepy is scum for claiming the same thing in your PM?

None of this is town, and you are not town.

In post 986, mnemonicdevice wrote:VOTE: Peregrine

Anything town about him?

You just outted yourself as scum.

You should have waited to survival vote me until you had more votes on you. Then it would look legit.

I confirm the mod error.

I am also positive that BB is scum. My gut has felt it since I first replaced into the QT.

@RC: Do you also confirm that you are a paranoid cop, who knew his sanity from the start? And also that BB is a naive cop? Furthermore, do the two of you have daytalk, currently? And is there anyone else in your QT?

@Pere: Did you ever tell us whom you targeted last night? If not, could you please do so?

Oh btw, RC said I was scum yesterday because she though the role dopog claimed was bastard and thus a lie. He then went on to explain that the reason dopog specified sane cop in his fake claim was because I was naive and his buddy.

After that theory was proven 100% wrong, I don't know why RC still thinks I'm scum.

In post 1000, Luna Lovegood wrote: Why didn't you this question when you first received the investigation?
Why didn't you confirm that the result was correct immediately?

Because I assumed it was a framer. It just made most sense to me. Only when people started going "No, sanity always triumphs over framer shit!" did I go "Okay, one way to resolve this.
Because I assumed it was. That would have been a fucking ENORMOUS mod error and I assumed that it was a wierd but correct result, not a mod error.

In post 1000, Luna Lovegood wrote:Why did you assume it wasn't a mod error?

Vote: BBMolla

I think I want to go here for a moment because I don't buy the way he's been reacting to the mod error because he doesn't actually seem at all frustrated about it and not questioning a guilty result as a naive cop is weird as hell.

Having it be a mod error means things makes more sense and there's less guesswork I have to do. I did question what the result meant, hence asking in my neighborhood and in thread. I trust my mods enough to not make mistakes like that.

In post 1001, Luna Lovegood wrote:Timing of "oh. this is a mod error." is also pretty shitty because it comes a minute after another post he made; seems strange that he would make a post, check QT, makes another post. It also seems weird that N didn't PM him and instead posted in the QT even though posting in the QT confirms his error to RC.

Made a post, inbox had one message, read it, "MOD ERROR!", "oh, awkward, it was error", look in QT, "it was an error."

Recieved both dood.

Nach, if you think I'm scum fine, but I'm not going to fake a mod error. I'm better than that dude.

In post 1011, Mitillos wrote:@RC: Do you also confirm that you are a paranoid cop, who knew his sanity from the start? And also that BB is a naive cop? Furthermore, do the two of you have daytalk, currently? And is there anyone else in your QT?

@Pere: Did you ever tell us whom you targeted last night? If not, could you please do so?

I targeted Rail Tracer last night.

In post 1014, BBmolla wrote:Nach, if you think I'm scum fine, but I'm not going to fake a mod error. I'm better than that dude.

I didn't expect you to. The concern was how you reacted to the mod error.

the stars tell me that this vote is a good one
they also probably have paranoid niggles on peregrinev but they do know that giving him an extra day probably is best, considering roleblocker if scum will be completely trapped on peregrine
mem is not a star child and is not town by the feeling of my early bones either, so she's doubly a good vote for now.

pv wrote:So, you claim to be town, and think Sleepy is scum for claiming the same thing in your PM?

this is borderline retarded logic.

i didn't begin suspecting that town could be full of negative utility roles until after the two flips + networker claim + sleepy hinting at it.

you're misrepresenting this.

the rest of the things you said in #1008 aren't really any better, but peacebringer can defend himself on them. this was just so poor i had to mention it.

pv wrote:I targeted Rail Tracer last night.

what was your read on me n1?

mitillos wrote:Furthermore, do the two of you have daytalk, currently?

this is a dumb question, given how obvious the answer is (hint: read the fucking thread). not to mention the answer to this is absolutely meaningless in determining anything other than peacebringer is, or knows there is, a daytalk enabler.

@RailTracer: If RC says they don't have daytalk, Peacebringer is lying and needs rope. This should be obvious, so I'm not sure why you oppose asking the question.

because it's nonsense (i mean, seriously, how fucking dumb do you think peacebringer needs to be to lie about that? either he's really a daytalk enabler or he knows of a role/mechanic that enables it), and it's already been confirmed. you clearly aren't reading if you can't see this.

pop quiz: how would BB know the results of this paranoid cop from N1?

pop quiz: why do you think bb complained that RC hasn't been posting in the qt?
pop quiz: why do you think bb and RC haven't said peacebringer is confirmed scum for lying?

read the damn thread. your persistence in asking questions like this just makes it look like you're trying to seem like you're doing something when you aren't.

Tell you what. You keep making your assumptions about the other players and I'll keep asking my questions. I've read the thread. I want RC to confirm or deny certain things. You butting in just makes you look that you're trying to either stop RC from potentially slipping up, or alternatively protect people from the consequences of their lies.