Mafiascum.net

In post 1871, mbaki wrote:I don't even know what that means.

You left yourself an out to being on my wagon even though your L-1 won't bring any new info

In post 1874, OkaPoka wrote:

In post 1869, BrightEyedFish wrote:

In post 1867, OkaPoka wrote:im going to need more than emotions got the best of me lmao

everyone gets mad but not everyone fakeclaims vigilante as a pr d1 bc angry

pedit: if a 1 for 1 is on the table ill take a 1 for 1

I've been mad and fake claimed guilties on people on several occasions

links 4 entertainment pls

Overkill 2

In post 1875, BrightEyedFish wrote:

In post 1871, mbaki wrote:I don't even know what that means.

You left yourself an out to being on my wagon even though your L-1 won't bring any new info

I'm not on your wagon.

In post 1877, mbaki wrote:

In post 1875, BrightEyedFish wrote:

In post 1871, mbaki wrote:I don't even know what that means.

You left yourself an out to being on my wagon even though your L-1 won't bring any new info

I'm not on your wagon.

Ohhhh
Apologies. I was so caught up in this. I mixed Oka 2nd L-1 with you.

In post 1846, OkaPoka wrote:VOTE: bef

just claim so we can move on thx

no need to wait for intent

just do it

do it

do

it

In post 1847, OkaPoka wrote:thats l1 btw

The heck is this...

bef how'd that fake guilty work out for you

In post 1855, mbaki wrote:Zero chance that's a real claim. It was clear Fish would be the lynch today, no way he didn't use it last night.

Yeah, I would've used it as soon as possible, specially considering DDL is a VT claim.

In post 1880, OkaPoka wrote:bef how'd that fake guilty work out for you

I took out a scum in the night as I was PGO. So not too bad.

Man, what's up with these "let's save shots" play?

"im a 1-shot cop, ill save my shot for later, scum will never find me, hahaha"

ok so would u fakeclaim as a not pgo

UNVOTE:

It's suboptimal to lynch a claim that's likely dying tonight anyway

if town

so then

who r u thinking of there

1846, 1847, and 1849 were pretty disgusting.

VOTE: OkaPoka

In post 1888, OkaPoka wrote:so then

who r u thinking of there

I'm thinking you fooled me pretty well till today.

fair enough

VOTE: OkaPoka


FINALLY
SUPPORT FOR A WAGON I CAN DO

In post 1837, BrightEyedFish wrote:

In post 1836, Kmd4390 wrote:

Vote Bright

Reasons are in my ISO from Day 2.

Lazy vote. Show why please.

Did the flips change or just reinforce your read on me.

Also, if you truly believe me to be scum, which I doubt, who would my hypothetical scum partner(s) be?

I already showed why yesterday. Flips didn't change anything. I was townreading both players. I'm also not doing preflip associatives. This is the first time I can recall you taking a tone that implies I could be scum. What changed your read? My vote on you? Or am I misreading here?

Bright wrote: If I was scum my partner would be MIA for the rest of the day gaurenteed

Can't think of a single reason town says this.

_____________

I don't buy the claim. It's already been said, but no way a one shot investigative says something that could draw a NK N1, draws suspicion Day 2, and STILL holds on to the shot. Why risk not getting a chance to use it like that? It sounds like scum trying to buy another day.

In post 1893, Kmd4390 wrote:

In post 1837, BrightEyedFish wrote:

In post 1836, Kmd4390 wrote:

Vote Bright

Reasons are in my ISO from Day 2.

Lazy vote. Show why please.

Did the flips change or just reinforce your read on me.

Also, if you truly believe me to be scum, which I doubt, who would my hypothetical scum partner(s) be?

I already showed why yesterday. Flips didn't change anything. I was townreading both players. I'm also not doing preflip associatives. This is the first time I can recall you taking a tone that implies I could be scum. What changed your read? My vote on you? Or am I misreading here?

Bright wrote: If I was scum my partner would be MIA for the rest of the day gaurenteed

Can't think of a single reason town says this.

_____________

I don't buy the claim. It's already been said, but no way a one shot investigative says something that could draw a NK N1, draws suspicion Day 2, and STILL holds on to the shot. Why risk not getting a chance to use it like that? It sounds like scum trying to buy another day.

Maybe it's the tone but I never implied that you are scum. I think your vote on me was lazy and it was by telling us to ISO your D2 posts. I'd bet no one ISOd you after that post. I didn't and honestly I don't remeber your reads from D2.

actually its not fair enough

creature how did you think this would play out.

bef would have had to claim today, no?

like i was fair enough because normally i dont push pr claims

but then you included my l1 posts getting claims

thats the optimal play here. 100%. not fair enough. anything else is substandard

Oh right

I had a problem with the way you forced the claim

In post 1864, mbaki wrote:

In post 1857, BrightEyedFish wrote:

In post 1855, mbaki wrote:Zero chance that's a real claim. It was clear Fish would be the lynch today, no way he didn't use it last night.

I almost used it on you N1 but tried not to play based on emotions

That doesn't matter. Why didn't you use it N2, after you were almost lynched yesterday and multiple other people said they were lynching you if Vorkuta flipped town?

Yet to see an answer to this.

In post 1886, Creature wrote:UNVOTE:

It's suboptimal to lynch a claim that's likely dying tonight anyway

what