Mafiascum.net

In post 1821, MathBlade wrote:If I have to get it after your flip I am okay flipping you now since your claim contradicts your crumbs.

I’d rather work together to form a plan to confirm invests and who is truth telling and not.

I’d like to maybe have all invests gather on you and you visit someone

Pooky says who you visited and I report how many visited you,

Win win

Pooky is not a tracker. He determines the type of action performed. Pooky visiting me is a waste.

Pooky on Toog makes the most sense since Toog claimed Invest.

Then swap you for Toog?

Pooky visit Toog?
You visit Toog?

I visit Toog?

Toog does thing?

Toog could visit me then for all I care.

In post 1825, MathBlade wrote:Then swap you for Toog?

Pooky visit Toog?
You visit Toog?

I visit Toog?

Toog does thing?

Pooky and me visiting the same target is a waste and part of why I don't clear Pooky.

In post 1826, Titus wrote:Toog could visit me then for all I care.

Tbh I am really hoping you pan out.

Are you sure you can’t say who you visited?

Because you’re the sketchiest of the claims to me by a country mile.

In post 1827, Titus wrote:

In post 1825, MathBlade wrote:Then swap you for Toog?

Pooky visit Toog?
You visit Toog?

I visit Toog?

Toog does thing?

Pooky and me visiting the same target is a waste and part of why I don't clear Pooky.

It’s not though.

I will see two invest actions if you’re telling the truth,

In post 1828, MathBlade wrote:

In post 1826, Titus wrote:Toog could visit me then for all I care.

Tbh I am really hoping you pan out.

Are you sure you can’t say who you visited?

Because you’re the sketchiest of the claims to me by a country mile.

I'm the sketchiest to you because I strongly disagree with your reads. Mechanically, I'm the least sketchy. Pooky and I would both have to be lying for me to not be an investigator.

In post 1829, MathBlade wrote:

In post 1827, Titus wrote:

In post 1825, MathBlade wrote:Then swap you for Toog?

Pooky visit Toog?
You visit Toog?

I visit Toog?

Toog does thing?

Pooky and me visiting the same target is a waste and part of why I don't clear Pooky.

It’s not though.

I will see two invest actions if you’re telling the truth,

Or you could just see reason and not waste any actions at all.

In post 1830, Titus wrote:

In post 1828, MathBlade wrote:

In post 1826, Titus wrote:Toog could visit me then for all I care.

Tbh I am really hoping you pan out.

Are you sure you can’t say who you visited?

Because you’re the sketchiest of the claims to me by a country mile.

I'm the sketchiest to you because I strongly disagree with your reads. Mechanically, I'm the least sketchy. Pooky and I would both have to be lying for me to not be an investigator.

Oh no.

I think you’re investigator scum.

There is a specific crumb that 100% mandates you to have an inno.

So that’s the reason you’re most sus.

In post 1831, Titus wrote:

In post 1829, MathBlade wrote:

In post 1827, Titus wrote:

In post 1825, MathBlade wrote:Then swap you for Toog?

Pooky visit Toog?
You visit Toog?

I visit Toog?

Toog does thing?

Pooky and me visiting the same target is a waste and part of why I don't clear Pooky.

It’s not though.

I will see two invest actions if you’re telling the truth,

Or you could just see reason and not waste any actions at all.

My entire job is to confirm you/Pooky/Toog

I don't have a hard innocent or guilty, so it's much better to sit on the information. You're looking for crumbs for guilty or innocent when my crumb isn't interesting at all. In fact, it's rather often obvious and plain.

That should be confirmation hint after I flip.

In post 1832, MathBlade wrote:There is a specific crumb that 100% mandates you to have an inno.

Really? Where is this crumb then? I'd like to show you that you have no idea how to read it.

In post 897, Titus wrote:Kinda feeling Frogster StD based on preliminary VCs. Weak because both counterwagons are voting Frogster.

VOTE: StD

In post 901, Titus wrote:

In post 900, Frogsterking wrote:I was wondering if it was a bad look for Chungus and Dragons to be refusing to vote each other in the way that they are.

This is the reason I am voting StD and not you. It's also partially why I have my theory as weak. The other reason is flipless.

In post 1017, Titus wrote:Bribes are strong. Ego weak.

VOTE: Greeting

Weak player, alive, doesn’t have inno? *confused Mathy face*

In post 1836, MathBlade wrote:

In post 897, Titus wrote:Kinda feeling Frogster StD based on preliminary VCs. Weak because both counterwagons are voting Frogster.

VOTE: StD

In post 901, Titus wrote:

In post 900, Frogsterking wrote:I was wondering if it was a bad look for Chungus and Dragons to be refusing to vote each other in the way that they are.

This is the reason I am voting StD and not you. It's also partially why I have my theory as weak. The other reason is flipless.

In post 1017, Titus wrote:Bribes are strong. Ego weak.

VOTE: Greeting

Weak player, alive, doesn’t have inno? *confused Mathy face*

Nope. Not an intended crumb. My crumb is repeated and only decipherable post flip.

Weak in that context meant strength of reads.

In post 1837, Titus wrote:

In post 1836, MathBlade wrote:

In post 897, Titus wrote:Kinda feeling Frogster StD based on preliminary VCs. Weak because both counterwagons are voting Frogster.

VOTE: StD

In post 901, Titus wrote:

In post 900, Frogsterking wrote:I was wondering if it was a bad look for Chungus and Dragons to be refusing to vote each other in the way that they are.

This is the reason I am voting StD and not you. It's also partially why I have my theory as weak. The other reason is flipless.

In post 1017, Titus wrote:Bribes are strong. Ego weak.

VOTE: Greeting

Weak player, alive, doesn’t have inno? *confused Mathy face*

Nope. Not an intended crumb. My crumb is repeated and only decipherable post flip.

I just don’t buy it. It’s much simpler you’re scum.

I have been over your posts several times.

I don’t buy Toog claiming invest as scum because soon as 3 of us flip town he’s dead.

That leaves you and Pooky.

All three of you are probably going to have some kind of self referential check (or should)

I just think there’s funky shit going on.

I also don’t think any of us four are good elims

And would rather go back to BGC.

I’d like to elim BGC and get commitments on who is investing who so I can voyeur and confirm which will leash the scum.

Right. Without my flip, my crumbs aren't obvious. That's the point of crumbs, particularly ones without hard innocents or guilties.

Pooky may well be a scum follower. You could be a panicked scum invest.

Why did you target Cape?

In post 1842, Titus wrote:Right. Without my flip, my crumbs aren't obvious. That's the point of crumbs, particularly ones without hard innocents or guilties.

Pooky may well be a scum follower. You could be a panicked scum invest.

Why did you target Cape?

*tried scrying replacement’s brain*

Damn not a voyeur power. (Translation I replaced in at top of day)

I know I am not scum correct.

But I can provide accountability and scum leashing.

If I lie I am in a 1v1.

If I truthtell we either have caught scum or very likely town.

In post 1841, MathBlade wrote:I’d like to elim BGC and get commitments on who is investing who so I can voyeur and confirm which will leash the scum.

I'll investigate BcG if you leave him and Frogsterking be today. Let's do Malcolm.

In post 1844, Titus wrote:

In post 1841, MathBlade wrote:I’d like to elim BGC and get commitments on who is investing who so I can voyeur and confirm which will leash the scum.

I'll investigate BcG if you leave him and Frogsterking be today. Let's do Malcolm.

That’s one commitment down.

Although I literally have no one I can elim if you suggest that so it’s down a vote because I literally cannot make a world without one of you three. I’ve been trying.

Like the odds of hitting town are astronomical.

In post 1845, MathBlade wrote:

In post 1844, Titus wrote:

In post 1841, MathBlade wrote:I’d like to elim BGC and get commitments on who is investing who so I can voyeur and confirm which will leash the scum.

I'll investigate BcG if you leave him and Frogsterking be today. Let's do Malcolm.

That’s one commitment down.

Although I literally have no one I can elim if you suggest that so it’s down a vote because I literally cannot make a world without one of you three. I’ve been trying.

Like the odds of hitting town are astronomical.

That's because you're tunneled.

There's plenty of actual, viable suspects if you can separate from your conclusions and reset.

Look at the VCs supposing that BcG Frogsterking and I are town

In post 1846, Titus wrote:

In post 1845, MathBlade wrote:

In post 1844, Titus wrote:

In post 1841, MathBlade wrote:I’d like to elim BGC and get commitments on who is investing who so I can voyeur and confirm which will leash the scum.

I'll investigate BcG if you leave him and Frogsterking be today. Let's do Malcolm.

That’s one commitment down.

Although I literally have no one I can elim if you suggest that so it’s down a vote because I literally cannot make a world without one of you three. I’ve been trying.

Like the odds of hitting town are astronomical.

That's because you're tunneled.

There's plenty of actual, viable suspects if you can separate from your conclusions and reset.

Look at the VCs supposing that BcG Frogsterking and I are town

That’s what I tried.

I can’t.

There’s no reason the Greeting wagon happens otherwise