Mafiascum.net

I welcome these questions about my intentions.

I am not hunting the Clairvoyant, I am questioning why, with two Corrupt results, they are not naming and shaming. It is possible it was ManWithNoName, though, but I don't see a clear crumb so shrug.

Sorry, did you think I was crumbing? I am a mystic. I will not be elaborating.

Vote on Glitch sent.

In post 598, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:wait is Italian claiming cop....or am I being dense as usual?

Me, as I read that post

In post 600, Pine wrote:I welcome these questions about my intentions.

I am not hunting the Clairvoyant, I am questioning why, with two Corrupt results, they are not naming and shaming. It is possible it was ManWithNoName, though, but I don't see a clear crumb so shrug.

Sorry, did you think I was crumbing? I am a mystic. I will not be elaborating.

Vote on Glitch sent.

Interesting. Very Interesting indeed.

So you are Mystic, but you ain't the Clairvoyant (or you wouldn't be calling for them to claim), not Witch/Healer (or you would have explicitly claim in order for the Clairvoyant to feel safe to claim), not Medium (or you would have told us if Galron was Corrupt or not), and not Wizard (or you would have had 2 results already and about to have a third, thus could probably pinpoint the Clairvoyant/Innkeeper on your own).

This begs for a check in you, mate. In my mind you were trying to hint (but not explicitly claim) that you a re a protector to out the Clairvoyant. Of course, if you claim so you can't kill them for as ling as you are alive, which is why you couldn't double down on it.

ALSO, you realized that the Town predetermining the Clairvoyant's target reduces the chance of them having to claim at all.

Finally, the premise of Cliarvoyant claiming after 2 guilties have been found was already discussed (and thoroughly I might add). We are assuming the first Corrupt result was on brighteningskies (and if it wasn't then the Clairvoyant should have outed already, which they didn't), which means it was in fact a confirmation of skies claimed role.

@Town: I request that you all switch your recommendation on the check to Pine, so we know for certain it is Pine who will be targeted by the Clairvoyant tonight, IF Pine is clear, we eliminate WLC.

Your logic is flawed in at least one respect.

Doesn't hurt for the Clairviyant to prove me wrong

To me it's either Pine or WLC (the last wolf that is) with a very VERY small chance of it being skies (requires such a lucky guess of a fake claim AND of predicting whom the Clairvoyant checked out of the Wolf team to begin with). That combined with the fact we got 2 Corrupt results in the opening 2 nights makes me think skies probably isn't a Wolf.

But anyway, we check you and -if guilty- the game is over. If not we eliminate WLC and the game is over. IF NOT, we probably eliminate skies just to be sure.

Fine with me in practice, but your reading of me is pretty out of whack.

Here's a funny thought: How BRILLIANT would it be if skies was actually Clairvoyant who took the risk to fakeclaim to stay safe from the NK??

Note: I am -of course- kidding, as it would mean he already got 2 legit guilties. I am suggesting though that if theis setup gets run again the Clairvoyant may consider such a bluff if their N0 check hits NOT CORRUPT. BWAHAHAHAHAHA

P-edit: How so?

@Pine: I view you as a very good player, especially when it comes down to a pure mechanical approach. My suspicion of you stems mainly from this fact.

im fine with pine being checked. let the scum boss us around.

In post 609, Almost50 wrote:@Pine: I view you as a very good player, especially when it comes down to a pure mechanical approach. My suspicion of you stems mainly from this fact.

And my annoyance with your suspicion stems from you only thinking of how you would approach a Mystic role.

In post 611, Pine wrote:

In post 609, Almost50 wrote:@Pine: I view you as a very good player, especially when it comes down to a pure mechanical approach. My suspicion of you stems mainly from this fact.

And my annoyance with your suspicion stems from you only thinking of how you would approach a Mystic role.

I am not though. I am using your own logic here!! You are call8ing for the Clairvoyant (the most important role of all) to claim, but you are claiming Mystic yourself and do not want to claim beyond that?

Unless it's a big-brained maneuver from CLAIRVOYANT-YOU to stay alive I don;t understand what you're doing. yet again, even Clairvoyant-you wouldn't need such an "over the top" maneuver at this time, fully knowing that even if killed your check would still be outed via the Innkeeper.

So let me be more blatant about it: I thought you "may" be crumbing Clairvoyant when you objected to us dictating the check, then I thought you may be a protective when you called out for the Clairvoyant to claim. Then when refused to claim that too, I went back to the table to check what other roles were Mystic and couldn't find one that justifies your play. Om contrary; I found a motive for Scum!You to act the way you do, since confirming a townie (in WLC, assuming you are the remaining Wolf) makes your job almost impossible, since you'd need to kill the Clairvoyant, the Innkeeper, AND WLC, and given we won't eliminate the Jester you are cornered you need to kill the Clairvoyant as a priority to stop the, from confirmimg more people (or returning a guilty on you).

Now IF I'm wrong we lose nothing. You would be confirmed yourself and the Wolf will still be facing the same dilemma explained above.

Yeah I’m not engaging with you any more. My reasoning is sound and tbqh I don’t give a shit if you approve.

Atp. i kinda want to check WLC and if we dont get a hit kill Pine tomorrow bc he pinging almost all of my scum bells atm.... He almost not really worth checking. The only problem is the PR claim

In post 614, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:Atp. i kinda want to check WLC and if we dont get a hit kill Pine tomorrow bc he pinging almost all of my scum bells atm.... He almost not really worth checking. The only problem is the PR claim

hes not worth checking because hes prolly scum?

fuzzy+pine solve anyone?

although 3 scum+jester seems quite a lot.

I bet he is Hobbes. Don’t worry Pine, I’m guessing nothing will happen to you.

I kinda feel like this is a 2 scum setup, but I can't say why beyond it's just a gut feeling

I think the thread state would be much different with 3 wolves. I'm having much trouble trying to pair a group of 3 wolves and I think there are very few agendas running, so I think there's only one wolf and they are just skating on whatever town suggests / does.

I guess Galron could've been a wolf, but I still think we missed on that.

If Galron was a wolf, he was Defector. A Medium or Clairvoyant check wouldn't mean anything.

It's why I want the Clairvoyant to out with it, because if it's not Skies + Glitch, then we've probably got our solution.

In post 616, Tayl0r Swift wrote:fuzzy+pine solve anyone?

although 3 scum+jester seems quite a lot.

Maybe everyone should say they gonna put Fuzzy on the next ballot, just to see what happens.

If it is okay with everyone I think we should FF through this day as Glitch has claimed wolf......no need to wait 2 days to execute a claim wolf

I think we check Pine tonight,, I know what I said earlier but I was just spouting frustration. Pine needs to be sorted IMHO

I don't necessarily agree that we should check Pine. He seems to just be scumhunting and sharing his opinions normally and I'm not getting many scum pings from him personally.

I also kinda agree that if it were not me as the first check that returned corrupt it might be a good idea for them to share them.

I still say we should check WLC or fuzzy.