Mafiascum.net

Lol I didnt even think about that.

anyways... all the wifom talk is me playing out all the available scenarios in my head

I am entirely disregarding a situation that would place anyone as scum in a certain loss scenario as that is not acceptable as a form of wifom

This certain loss scenario includes ALL vts except mac (who GM claims to have JK'd ) due to VT as scum being autoloss not killing a pr... 2 mislynches being likely if a pr didnt die and they are both real

That was in RE: macs talk about wifom and VE's talk about nightkill not being sent in

And why is scum not killing a PR an "auto-loss" if we're both real?

I agree that it's uphill, but autoloss? Explain it to me.

Ok... Not entirely autoloss... But considering nobody will even. consider a lynch on ffer (if im not mistaken) and multiple no-kills would almost solidify the notion that both prs are real--- virtual autoloss.

In post 2249, VisceraEyes wrote:

##Vote: Ineffective

He's playing from a position of having more information about the gamestate than I do.

I... I don't really think that's necessarily so. Objectively scummy, sure, but I don't see any "extraneous info" tells.

In post 2268, Ineffective wrote:I dont think its unfair to assume that we will miss a 1/6 lynch if we lynch in blues considering i believed one pr was fake all along

This is incredibly stupid. Why, exactly, do you think a PR is fake? We have no real evidence to the contrary.

In post 2270, VisceraEyes wrote:"Guys let's lynch into the protective claims after a night of no kills! SURELY ONE OF THEM MUST BE LYING"

This is also stupid. One of us could be lying. A no-kill last night is not outside the realm of possibility.

In post 2271, Ineffective wrote:Blue= EM lingo for VT --- sorry for the confusion bro

This could all have been avoided if the mod wasn't Tracey. DAMN THOSE BLUE PR PMs.

In post 2276, VisceraEyes wrote:Not GM, who has been playing dark and mysteriously in the background ever since serious scrutiny has been on her (fmp), the person who you were SCREAMING was the faker all day yesterday...you think it's ME.

Uh... what? It's been a busy time and I don't think I'm really being mysterious. I've fully claimed, I've been forthright with my suspicions, I'm not sure what makes any of that mysterious unless you're looking to try to get Ine off you and back on me.

In post 2281, Ineffective wrote:I dont think its likely that we have 2 PR's

Why?

and

the no-kill

and macs subsequent towntelling confirmed my opinion bias

What makes you so sure it was a no-kill?
Never mind, you answered.

In post 2285, Ineffective wrote:

In post 2283, fferyllt wrote:Why do you think it's unlikely we have 2 power roles?

If a VT claim is mafia with 2 roles that can prevent a night kill and a mislynch still on the table ---they are almost forced to kill a PR claim or face certain loss. Mac was def not targeted for a kill because he is an easy mislynch target and my final words regarding a fos were that mac was probably the team-mate --- GM's thoughts rang similar, and nearly everyone thought they were a possible team. If i was scum i would almostceartainly kill a pr claim because i am a heavily mechanical player, and if i were to kill a VT for wifom it would not be you because you sheeped every vote i put down.

VE would have similar reasons not to kill mac or you --- GM is the only likely candidate to kill you and that would still be serious wifom considering that VEwas a free kill.

all this adds to me not seeing a possible scenario where a VT is scum aside mac--- and i think GM wifoming an NK in that situation would be more likely than mac performing a kill... However i am still somewhat open to mac being scum--- he is the only VTi would consider----

This is fair reasoning. I certainly agree that Mac was very likely not targetted. I also agree that most players would aim at either the JK or the Doc in this scenario, given the knowledge that at least one of us have been unprotected.
If I were Scum, then I would that VE very likely went unprotected (barring near-zero chance of unclaimed PR) and would have killed him. I would think he would have felt similarly about me. After all, there's no reason to no-kill or aim VT if you have a near-certainty of killing a PR.
The only reason Scum!VE might not have tried to kill me is if he thought I would Doc-Jailkeep him rather than trying to RB-Jailkeep someone else.
So I would personally think it is more likely Scum is in the VT claims.

In post 2288, fferyllt wrote:

In post 2287, Ineffective wrote:Why would he protect gm????? I would think a doc claim would be more believable if they claimed to save a townread

yabbut think about it from the scum POV. saying you protected the power role just seems like the obvious thing to do. protecting a VT might get questioned. Scum don't want questions surrounding their fake claim.

Plus protecting the PRs is a slightly common meta for this 2of4 IIRC and as mentioned earlier in this post.

In post 2289, VisceraEyes wrote:The WIFOM in this thread all of a sudden is overwhelming.

QFT.

In post 2293, Ineffective wrote:absolutely everything related to a pr not dying makes me think one of them is scum

You're one player.

In post 2303, Ineffective wrote:Ok... Not entirely autoloss... But considering nobody will even. consider a lynch on ffer (if im not mistaken) and multiple no-kills would almost solidify the notion that both prs are real--- virtual autoloss.

Is being a Negative Nancy helpful to you?

Okokoksokdokokfsodkfodskodkfokfoskofepofkpoejpfojpfoejpfojpeojpeojpoejpfjwpoejpoejpojpofjepofjpweojfpoejpeojpoejfpojefpojwpeojpwefojpweojfpojpeowjfoejfpoejfpwoejfpwoejfpejfpeo

This is one hell of a game --- hats off to everyone

wat

considering the different points of view and all the information available i think the best lynch would be mac and the ideal pr actions would be doc on jk jk on VT

If mac flips town this is going to be a hard game

VOTE: mac

Despite my personal beliefs this is unquestionably the best objective POV. Lynch

The only alternative i would consider i have already stated

NL - doc on nobody - JK on whoever he wants to be on

Well I'm going to protect who I think is gonna die no matter what you say. *shrug*

Factor that in.

*she

The only reason for not protecting JK would be if we did a nl to see if JK died

If we lynch a VT it would be a mechanically comittal action to ensure PRS are kept alive if they are real and we gain another ml if. another kill is averted

If you suspect that the other pr is mafia then i would suggest the nl option to remove any doubts that you may have saved a VT --- someone dying would be benificial to flip-analysis

I would rather kill someone we can agree on rather than let scum kill someone. Scum know who people find suspicious and thus know how town sentiment is going to shift based on the kills. Like for instance you're saying that scum will auto-kill a PR if we NL today when last night proved that's demonstrably not the case...that you can direct our kills based on this (faulty) premise and that we somehow "gain information" from it.

It's all bullshit. All of it.

EBWOP: kills = actions

I disagree 100% if you claim no information can be gained... But im not pushing that theory anyways

Lynching mac is probably the best option for everyone here in an objective way

But you are that's my point. That's what you've been saying this whole time save your last two posts when you begrudgingly admit that "oh well objectively you're right anyway and we should lynch Mac."

hahaha

((((Tracey))))

Nope... I mentioned it once as my first option... Then i voted you... Then i admitted that mac was the best lynch if we had to lynch--- yes begrudgingly--- i still maintained that the other option was NL with no misconceptions that anyone would agree--- im not pushing it... atm im pushing a mac lynch

YES THE HOST IS AWESOME......

In post 2319, Ineffective wrote:Nope... I mentioned it once as my first option... Then i voted you... Then i admitted that mac was the best lynch if we had to lynch--- yes begrudgingly--- i still maintained that the other option was NL with no misconceptions that anyone would agree--- im not pushing it... atm im pushing a mac lynch

I'm speaking from a general standpoint - you pushing it = defending it as the best idea, saying it gives us illusory information, being "begrudging" re: Mac lynch, etc. It's your preference, and if you state otherwise you're lying. That's what I mean by "pushing". That's what you would have the thread believe if you had your way.

Begrudgingly conceding your PoV does not constitute "pushing a Mac lynch".

Imo pushing something is trying to get it to happen--- yes i am confident that my first plan is the best mechanical play, but i am under no illusion that i can make it happen and thus and not pushing it as the course of action, merely restating that i do not think it is wrong because of my pride resulting in an inability to admit otherwise even if i was wrong

Okay answer me this Inef.

Why, if you believe that scum would be forced to kill a PR if we NL, didn't they do that yesterday? Obviously nothing has changed - no kill last night, no lynch, everything is exactly as it was at the beginning of last night. Why would they be forced to kill a PR TONIGHT when they weren't forced to LAST NIGHT?

Your whole idea is based on the premise that scum WILL HAVE to kill a PR tonight - it's the only way your scenario even gives us any information - yet they didn't last night under identical circumstances. Why is tonight any different?