Mafiascum.net

Xtoxm wrote:Definately am.

O.K. then explain your thought process on day 3. How sure were you of being lynched after the 3rd vote on you? Did you think we would lynch you regardless of your role? How powerful did you think your claim would be? Why did you almost give up when you had this claim in store, if it was truthful? What were you thinking with your first vote on Gorrad? Who do you want to see in endgame with you?

Albert B. Rampage wrote:Did you think we would lynch you regardless of your role? How powerful did you think your claim would be? Why did you almost give up when you had this claim in store, if it was truthful?

Yeah, this is what makes me still edgy about Xtoxm too. Still. His role, if correct, is...

Wow.

Something just occured to me. I've got it! Now it makes sense.

A Mafia enabler! Does the opposite of what Korlash does, with the same rolename. Instead of enabling positive effects, he enables negative. That explains the role name, the nervousness regarding claiming, and the scummy behavior! . ZEE can wait. Gods, I can't believe I fell into the trap of linking role and allignment. That's usually the second thing I warn people against in a game (the first being against Jester discussion).

How sure were you of being lynched after the 3rd vote on you?

Certain

Did you think we would lynch you regardless of your role?

Yes. And claiming would only tell scum who potentially has info, either that or force them to claim. Well Phil is dead but the other one...

How powerful did you think your claim would be?

Not very. I expected it to sound made up. I didn't think there'd be another.

Why did you almost give up when you had this claim in store, if it was truthful?

I didn't think the claim would do anything for me.

What were you thinking with your first vote on Gorrad?

I just found him scummy. Can't remember exact thoughts. I also don't like him..He knows why.

Who do you want to see in endgame with you?

Is this meant to be loaded? I really don't see a point in answering this. It's not in my control.

Xtoxm wrote:

What were you thinking with your first vote on Gorrad?

I just found him scummy. Can't remember exact thoughts. I also don't like him..He knows why.

Dude, are you STILL sore about me replacing you in DN Mafia after repeated rule violations? Get over it.

You are always a dick to me. You policy lynch me, and isnist that i'm an idiot.

First :

Korlash wrote:This is actually the biggest reason I like him as scum today and also a small reason Gorrad is cleared a bit in my eyes. Where is the evidence that if one of me of Gorrad flips town, the other is obv scum? Where is the evidence that if one is scum, the other is obv town? This looks like he's setting up one mislynch today with the other to follow the next day. However, I'm still willing to allow him the chance to backtrack and try to manufacture evidence, or of course point out where I missed it. Whichever...

There are a few things I would rather not talk about. The evidence behind the Gorrad/Korlash dichotomy is one of them, though it's plain to see with one's eyes open while looking at D2. I will say that Phily, our cop and confirmed innocent, thought that either Gorrad or Korlash was scummy. My reasoning does not stem from this fact, but this just shows that a confirmed innocent was also of the mind that at least one of these two were scumbags. So, technically, the town doesn't just have to trust me - the town can trust Phily and I.

Korlash wrote:I'll put this as short as I can. I like flavor and I like claims. seeing as how I called Chandolier as mafia on day 1 and seeing as how I was right about Sera I think I have good reason to do what I do to claims. I didn't hammer him at first so he could full claim, after whoever unvoted me voting him was kinda pointless. I didn't vote him in the end because Mastin had made it look like he was claiming Tracker and half confirming Sera's story. Now if you can explain to me how putting a guy who's claim I am currently questioning at L-1 would make it more likely to get answers from him before a lynch you can continue arguing my not vote as somthing. If someone had put sera at L-1 again I probably would have voted him. but as long as I was continueing my question, I felt keeping him at L-2 would give me the most time to continue my questioning.

And this makes no sense. You were fine with hammering him, but not fine with putting him L-1 because it was pointless? If you find someone scummy, . It isn't a pointless exercise. And if you're wanting more time to continually question someone, then I can understand keeping them at L-2. But saying you wanted more time by keeping him at L-2 while at the same time proclaiming you would hammer him if someone else put their vote back on is totally contradictory. Your reasoning is nonsensical.

Korlash wrote:You just helped prove my post. Thank you. Even you can only find one post linking me and sera as partners, so let's think for a moment. Why do you think I would ask why people were linking me to him... Oh right, because no one ever gave any reasoning or posts as to it! Philly just up and said it out of the blue! yeah asking him why is so scummy on my part. /sarcasm

Phily just threw out the notion that maybe you Gorrad might be connected to Seraphim to Albert, and wanted to know what Albert made of it. The fact that you jumped into the conversation attempting to denounce a line of argument that had yet to be made looks like blatant pre-mature distancing.

Korlash wrote:In retrospect obviously Sera, but at the time I only meant misdirect from anyone currently under pressure. sera and Zee are probably the only two that were, so I suppose I meant misdirect from one of them.

Phily wanted to focus on you or Gorrad. Phily was our cop, so you most definitely can't be saying he was trying to misdirect contemporary pressure for any anti-town reason. The only other person who I saw suggesting the Gorrad/Korlash dichotomy was myself - and I had made it abundantly clear that lynching Seraphim was a priority. So maybe you can explain more what ill-begotten pressure "misdirection" you were attempting to dissuade.

Korlash wrote:... How so? And how does it make me scum? Just throwing out useless stuff now huh?

No, your statement looks like you're scum trying to look town. Hence, manufactured. I don't find that opinion to be useless.

Korlash wrote:My knowledge of past theme games makes me scum now?

No. You should have no idea if scum are given safe claims or not. Your words and actions come across as if you know for a fact there are safe claims involved. Nobody would know for a fact except scum and OGML.



Now, :

Gorrad wrote:1. Frankly, I don't see how the logic there is the same at all. For one thing, Seraphim has an obvious strong bias. Secondly, I, unlike Seraphim, posted reasons why ZEE was more likely. You can't say we have the same logic when Seraphim doesn't post logic. And yes, I still feel the same way about ZEE. In fact, Xtoxm's claim's satisfied me enough for now, Unvote, Vote: ZEEnon.

Here's the logic: "Seraphim is pretty scummy! However, ZEE is scummy! Therefore, let's vote ZEE and not Seraphim." It acknowledges that Seraphim is scummy but you want to bypass him for a "more scummy" candidate. I use quotation marks because I find that opinion to be incredibly suspect. But, you both used it. That's how. Bias doesn't come into play in determining the fact that the two of you used the exact same logic.

What were your posted reasons as to why ZEE was more likely? I didn't catch anything substantial on my read through yesterday.
Do you really think two scumbags made the exact same mistake?

Gorrad wrote:2. I found ZEE's original transgression worse than Seraphim's. I found him scummier. However, the kills paradox, aka the reason I was voting Seraphim, slipped my mind in 463, hence why I thought I was voting ZEEnon. When I realized that I wasn't, I looked through my post history and remembered why my vote was where it was.

So you don't think the timing of this "slip of the mind" wasn't terribly convenient/bad timing (from whatever perspective you want to look at it)?

Gorrad wrote:3. 384 is a response to 383

Alright, that's what I thought. But I can't understand why you're making it in response to 383. I think we're interpreting Phily's statement different, so please explain to me what it meant to you.

I see the difference in your issue with the claim itself and the mechanics of the claim in 4. I think 5 hinges upon you just so happening to forget the incredibly legitimate reasons to vote Seraphim when his wagon was starting to tremble and waver.



And finally, :

Korlash wrote:what about [Xtox's] play, the play he pretty much does as both scum and town from my experience with him, makes you think him town? How can you make the statement "He is town" over what you see as just a town playstyle from him?

I think his play resembles his town play more so than his scum play. Xtox can be an incredibly infuriating player to game with because he's more about voicing his gut and emotions than his logic and deduction, but I think he's a little less of a pain in the ass when he's scum because he cares more about getting lynched. My gut just says town. I've seen him call out scum and then get rush lynched because the scum manipulate the town into thinking Xtox's play isn't helpful to the town - I wouldn't be surprised if that's what is happening here. I also think his claim is legit because I caught him searching for *something* when Seraphim claimed. I assumed it was because Xtox had a passive ability (which I indicated at some point in D2) and so was seeing if Seraphim had one as well. Apparently (and I'm assuming here), Xtox was actually looking to see if Seraphim had a latent ability. That means Xtox didn't just pull this claim out of his butt.

Albert wrote:Erg0 is a sheep of the worse kind. Easily falling into enemy plans, easily manipulated by the scum. He's no less than a coward and an incapable.

You're dumb. Hey, look, now we're both name calling.

... Processing ...

Korlash wrote:*gasp* I have found Chado! My non-official sub goal has been achieved! Hold me... ^_^

Well, you found me. Congratulations. Was it worth it?

~

I am wondering if a mass-claim is proper here. In all likelihood, the scum has quite a good idea of the set-up already by this point, and claiming now deprives scum of the opportunity of an additional night of thinking of fake-claims. We seem to have a number of people who think it might be detrimental to claim their roles, but as others have pointed out, it is not really detrimental if it (i) successfully prevents a town player from being lynched, or (ii) results in a scum being lynched.

~

Green Crayons, considering that you say:

I'm thinking Xtox, ZEE and Albert are solid town. DOS and Mastin are leaning town.

I think we should be lynching either Korlash or Gorrad today. Nobody else.

What are your thoughts on Jebus / LynchHimNotMe?

~

Gorrad wrote:Instead of enabling positive effects, he enables negative.

Can you go into more detail for this speculation? I am not understanding how such a role would work in theory or in practice.

GC wrote:There are a few things I would rather not talk about. The evidence behind the Gorrad/Korlash dichotomy is one of them, though it's plain to see with one's eyes open while looking at D2. I will say that Phily, our cop and confirmed innocent, thought that either Gorrad or Korlash was scummy. My reasoning does not stem from this fact, but this just shows that a confirmed innocent was also of the mind that at least one of these two were scumbags. So, technically, the town doesn't just have to trust me - the town can trust Phily and I.

So this explains why you killed him. Makes sense now.

Refusing to explain seting up future lynches is always bad and only confirms what Bullshit it is. saying people should trust the ideas of one guy (who also never explained himself BTW) just because he was town is also stupid. Town is wrong all the time. Being town doesn't make you a god who knows all. Explain your reasonings scum.

GC wrote:And this makes no sense. You were fine with hammering him, but not fine with putting him L-1 because it was pointless? If you find someone scummy, you vote them. It isn't a pointless exercise. And if you're wanting more time to continually question someone, then I can understand keeping them at L-2. But saying you wanted more time by keeping him at L-2 while at the same time proclaiming you would hammer him if someone else put their vote back on is totally contradictory. Your reasoning is nonsensical.

When I hammer a guy over a claim, I control when it happens and how much information I get. if I had put him at L-1 it's entirely possible he would have been hammered before Mastin did that post of his. If Mastin had actually been some sort of role that confirmed him it would prove my point of waiting, I actually think the fact his post caused me to doubt my self is proof enough. When it comes to lynching people for role speculation there is a lot of... risk... My saving my vote until the actual hammer is one way I try to minimise the risk.

GC wrote:Phily just threw out the notion that maybe you or Gorrad might be connected to Seraphim to Albert, and wanted to know what Albert made of it. The fact that you jumped into the conversation attempting to denounce a line of argument that had yet to be made looks like blatant pre-mature distancing.

And how is what I said denouncing anything? All I did was ask a question, if anything I gave Phily the oprounity to strengthen it by providing reasons. Saying i was attempting to denounce a line of argument INVOLVING ME is reaching of the highest level. I have ever right to demand reasons of any line of thought with me included in it.

GC wrote:Phily wanted to focus on you or Gorrad. Phily was our cop, so you most definitely can't be saying he was trying to misdirect contemporary pressure for any anti-town reason. The only other person who I saw suggesting the Gorrad/Korlash dichotomy was myself - and I had made it abundantly clear that lynching Seraphim was a priority. So maybe you can explain more what ill-begotten pressure "misdirection" you were attempting to dissuade.

You keep bringing Philly up at every turn. When I first suggested this is why you kiled him it was a joke. I'm begining to believe it now. Would you still have tried pulling this if Phily wasn't a cop?

And as far as you saying "sera was a priority" yeah... I'd say the same thing about a scum buddy that was going down. Continuing to suggest certain people are scum without providing a hint of evidence or reason definitly looks like possible misdirection, whether it was or wasn't on yours or phily's part I don't really care. The fact still remains, you were bringing up the possibility that I was scum without providing any reason why while Sera (proven scum) was being wagoned. Until you flip town, I'm still suggesting that was proabbly misdirection. In Phily's case, maybe he's just impressionable. Maybe just dumb.

GC wrote:No, your statement looks like you're scum trying to look town. Hence, manufactured. I don't find that opinion to be useless.

How? Explain to me what makes what I said more likely to be said by scum then town?

GC wrote:No. You should have no idea if scum are given safe claims or not. Your words and actions come across as if you know for a fact there are safe claims involved. Nobody would know for a fact except scum and OGML.

... That's because I ALWAYS believe that to be the case. Where have my words in any way suggested I "know for a fact"?

GC wrote:I also think his claim is legit because I caught him searching for *something* when Seraphim claimed. I assumed it was because Xtox had a passive ability (which I indicated at some point in D2) and so was seeing if Seraphim had one as well. Apparently (and I'm assuming here), Xtox was actually looking to see if Seraphim had a latent ability. That means Xtox didn't just pull this claim out of his butt.

Caught him "searching"? What the hell does that mean? How can you catch him "searching" in the middle of the day? Are you talking about an in game activity, or like search the web? I mean... I just don't understand what you are saying here...

And I hardly see how "searching" corroborates with "Filming to increase ratings"... It hardly confirms him no matter how you clearify it...

Glad wrote:Well, you found me. Congratulations. Was it worth it?

*sniff* yes... ;_;

Glad wrote:I am wondering if a mass-claim is proper here. In all likelihood, the scum has quite a good idea of the set-up already by this point, and claiming now deprives scum of the opportunity of an additional night of thinking of fake-claims. We seem to have a number of people who think it might be detrimental to claim their roles, but as others have pointed out, it is not really detrimental if it (i) successfully prevents a town player from being lynched, or (ii) results in a scum being lynched.

The problem here is still the idea of safeclaims. As it has been shown there area few people who do not believe safeclaims exist, hell GC has already attacked me for even suggesting it. Let's just pretend for a second the scum got safeclaims like Orihime or Mr. hat and Clogs for example. Anyone who doesn't believe safeclaims exist would never lynch those characters over mine. As it stands we should only massclaim if and when we as a whole can't find anyone who is scummy enough to wagon. Once we hit a dead end so to speak, a massclaim seems acceptable. Right now, it's just not worth it.

Glad wrote:Can you go into more detail for this speculation? I am not understanding how such a role would work in theory or in practice.

huh how did I miss that... This is a pretty good question actually. For one I highly doubt a negative effecting role would be called "spirit enabler"... For two, the only really negative effects are either killing or roleblocking and both of those are completely different roles. Perhaps Gorrad can explain what he is thinking here...

DOS wrote:What are your thoughts on Jebus / LynchHimNotMe?

I don't have any feelings towards him, because he has been more of a lurker than you. Amazing, but true.

Last time I felt that there was a scum between X and Y which left only Z to be a scum, I got screwed over because the town just didn't go after Z. Or something to that affect - I'm only recalling from memory and I'm pretty well into my alcohol abuse at this early hour of the morning (oh, weddings). With that in mind, I actually would be really happy with a Jebus lynch simply because he's acting like a super lurker scumbag. I'm not dead-set on it because we ahead and can afford a mislynch - so I'm willing to go for either Korlash or Gorrad today.

Korlash wrote:Refusing to explain seting up future lynches is always bad and only confirms what Bullshit it is. saying people should trust the ideas of one guy (who also never explained himself BTW) just because he was town is also stupid. Town is wrong all the time. Being town doesn't make you a god who knows all. Explain your reasonings scum.

This is so scummy that it hurts so much. And it's scummy because the reason for my dichotomy is so incredibly town. If you truly don't see the cause behind it, it's because you're either a really dense/blind town or you're a scumbag feigning ignorance.

And the town wrong all the time - what the hell is with that statement? How in the world do you think town wins if they're wrong all the time? And, yes. We should pay attention to the indicators because we know that his suspicions were not motivated by scum origins. Now, if we disagree with his inclinations is one thing. But I don't. And I trust the cop's inclinations because he's was town and they matched my own. So I'm asking the town to trust the cop (as they should) and me (who was one of the players who strongly pushed for scumbag Seraphim's lynch). Not too much of a stretch here.


I'm not actually fit to respond to the rest at the moment. But I can't help myself in responding to the above.

I wrote:Last time I felt that there was a scum between X and Y which left only Z to be a scum, I got screwed over because the town just didn't go after Z. Or something to that affect - I'm only recalling from memory and I'm pretty well into my alcohol abuse at this early hour of the morning (oh, weddings). With that in mind, I actually would be really happy with a Jebus lynch simply because he's acting like a super lurker scumbag. I'm not dead-set on it because we are ahead and can afford a mislynch - so I'm willing to go for either Korlash or Gorrad today.

As an addendum, I'm not 100% certain of myself, so I don't discount the possibility that one of the players I have labeled as town/leaning town are actually scum. Which is why I haven't been a major Jebus-pusher at the moment - one of my current town players might actually be a scum partner to Gorrad or Korlash. (I am much more confident in my Gorrad/Korlash dichotomy than my whole town list, for the record. Like.. 95%. lol, statistics. I pulled that out've my butt. But I'm super confident in one of those two being scum - much more so than the other five or so players I listed as town actually being town.)

Clarification.

GC wrote:And the town isn't wrong all the time - what the hell is with that statement? How in the world do you think town wins if they're wrong all the time? And, yes. We should pay attention to the indicators of the confirmed, dead cop because we know that his suspicions were not motivated by scum origins. Now, if we disagree with his inclinations is one thing. But I don't. And I trust the cop's inclinations because he's was town and they matched my own. So I'm asking the town to trust the cop (as they should) and me (who was one of the players who strongly pushed for scumbag Seraphim's lynch). Not too much of a stretch here.

Not "all the time" in the sense of every single time, but "all the time" in the sense it is a common thing. Grammer is lame, screw English. Let's all start speaking japanese or soemthing. At least then only sentence structure is screwed over.

And Phily didn't provide any reasonings either. I'd love to pay attention to what he said if he said anything. saying "I think so and so is scum" doesn't mean shit, no matter what you flip. If he had provided reasons, built a case, or hell even gave a few good attacks here and there then you would have something to stand on. As it stands you are pushing that just because he was town, his unbacked up suspicions are somehow above needing to be justified anymore.

The town should trust the cop in matters in which him being the cop gives him more info then the rest of us, not in every single thing every single time. being the cop does not make him a better scum hunter during the day, only gives him more information at night. an anyone who thinks he investigated me or Gorrad night one should explain why, otherwise him being the cop has nothing to do with his supicions on me and Gorrad.

And the degree to which you are taking your Bus on Sera only confirms it as said bus. Wasn't Albert also pushing for sera's lynch? yet you couter him, call him an idiot. say he is wrong, so... Thusly by your logic you are an idiot and are wrong as well.

GC wrote:This is so scummy that it hurts so much. And it's scummy because the reason for my dichotomy is so incredibly town. If you truly don't see the cause behind it, it's because you're either a really dense/blind town or you're a scumbag feigning ignorance.

... It's a nice way of calling my post scummy without saying how. You just can't find reasons for anything can you?

GC wrote:I'm not actually fit to respond to the rest at the moment. But I can't help myself in responding to the above.

seeing the crap you responed with you probably should have waited.

... Processing ...

On the whole Post 634 is reading very poorly to me.

Green Crayons wrote:I don't have any feelings towards [Jebus], because he has been more of a lurker than you. Amazing, but true.

Excuse me? If you are accusing me of lurking then be up-front about it, and then explain why you think that.

Green Crayons wrote:I actually would be really happy with a Jebus lynch simply because he's acting like a super lurker scumbag. I'm not dead-set on it because we

are

ahead and can afford a mislynch - so I'm willing to go for either Korlash or Gorrad today.

I am just not following the logic here. If we can “afford a mislynch” then this should be an argument in favor of Green Crayons being more willing to consider lynching Jebus, rather than keeping his options narrowed down to Korlash or Gorrad as he ends up doing.

Green Crayons wrote: This is so scummy that it hurts so much. And it's scummy because the reason for my dichotomy is so incredibly town. If you truly don't see the cause behind it, it's because you're either a really dense/blind town or you're a scumbag feigning ignorance.

I will plainly say that I do not see a reason for the dichotomy.

I agree with Korlash’s post in many respects. Townspeople get things wrong all the time – period. This is a turn of phrase, and obviously does not literally mean “town’s are wrong 100% of the time,” as that is a clearly preposterous position to defend.

As a game continues, one can only hope that the town becomes more and more accurate and more able to agree on their suspicions. This does not change the fact that most actual townspeople are at some point suspicious of almost other player in the game, and that necessarily a majority of such suspicions are wrong. It is an extremely rare occurrence for a townsperson to be correct with every suspicion they give, let alone every non-random vote they give.

Green Crayons wrote:So I'm asking the town to trust the cop (as they should) and me (who was one of the players who strongly pushed for scumbag Seraphim's lynch). Not too much of a stretch here.

There are a good number of things wrong with this.

-> PhilyEc may not have had correct information. [See: Cop sanities, mafia redirector, investigation immunity, etc.]

-> There is no reason to foist PhilyEc’s judgment over my own judgment. To use your words, I know that suspicions are not motivated by scum origins. Why ignore my thought process and rely on a thought process that I can no longer even ask about?

Your argument, in effect, is:

Boiled Down Argument wrote:This person was town, so let’s follow whoever they were going after.

This is clearly a bad argument, and it is furthermore just about the easiest argument for scum to manipulate their play to subvert. It is pretty much most classic way to get a town to chase it's own tail.

-> Last I checked, PhilyEc thought “Seraphim is confirmed in [his] books” and was actually opposing the Seraphim lynch for almost the entirety of Day Two. I see little reason to think that his other thoughts were more valid.

Gladdos, what do you think about lynching GC?

... Processing ...

I want to have him lynched slightly less than I wanted to have him lynched yesterday, and that is largely due to his involvement in the Seraphim lynch. As of yesterday, if I were to quantify my want to have Green Crayons lynched, it would probably have been: "I want Green Crayons dead before the game can get down to five players."

Right now I am unsure who I want to lynch for today, since I am still thinking through the claims and processing Days One and Two.

Still, I have not liked the way he has attacked people throughout the game. This includes his attack on Giuseppe on Day One, his attack on Seraphim from Day One and Day Two (despite the fact that these attacks ended up being against scum), and now his attacks on Gorrad and Korlash on Day Three. There is something about the way he has been going after people that does not sit with me.

Yeah, well I think Erg0 is town and shouldn't be lynched.

I think Xtoxm or Glados should go today.

Erg0, I understand that you have put a lot of effort into your theories, but no one is going to trust you based on the flimsy, circumstantial evidence you have brought against Gorrad and Korlash.

Mastin, you should start choosing sides by now. Lines have been drawn. Its time for you to decide who your allies are. Since you lack the most technical aspects of the game and are far behind everyone else in terms of experience, I think you should latch onto a more experienced player and expand on their theories instead of playing an independent game, which you are not yet ready to do. Look at ZEEnon as a model; he is a prime example of faithfully attaching yourself to someone with a more clearly defined mafia skillset. Also, cut the setup discussion, its not helping the town.

Zee wrote:Gorrad or Korlash is scum. Or a combination of the two.
I strongly suggest we lynch Gorrad.

This is a pretty out of the park thing to say as your more recent posts have suggested you do not find fault in my claim. Even so much as to say my calim CONFIRMS someone else. How does my claim confirm Glad if I am scum?

ABR wrote:Erg0, I understand that you have put a lot of effort into your theories, but no one is going to trust you based on the flimsy, circumstantial evidence you have brought against Gorrad and Korlash.

I think Zee will... Although two people is hardly something to shake a stick at.

ABR wrote:Yeah, well I think Erg0 is town and shouldn't be lynched.

I think Xtoxm or Glados should go today.

I suppose I could be willing to lynch Xtoxm today. I don't necessarily disbelieve his claim outright but I do think there is enough fault with it to accept his lynch. However, in my recent Insane Asylum game I was in a similar position where another person claimed my role and I felt mistrust towards him. While that gives me some doubt in this game I feel our claims (mine and Xtoxm's) are not similar enough as they were in the Insane game.

I'd rather not lynch though until I get some understanding as to why you think Glad is scum and GC is town...

Erg0 has the arrogance of a player that thinks he is above everyone else for being right once. Scum wouldn't be so proud about bussing their scumpartner as to brag and brag and brag about it in such a pompous fashion.

... Processing ...

Albert B. Rampage wrote:Since you lack the most technical aspects of the game and are far behind everyone else in terms of experience, I think you should latch onto a more experienced player and expand on their theories instead of playing an independent game, which you are not yet ready to do. Look at ZEEnon as a model; he is a prime example of faithfully attaching yourself to someone with a more clearly defined mafia skillset.

This may be the most callous and most insulting thing I have ever seen in a game of mafia -- and it is directed at both Mastin and to ZEEnon. Regardless of what your alignment is, you should be ashamed for suggesting this as a serious strategy. What kind of role model are you? Any respect I had for you as a player -- and especially as "mentor" -- has just been lost.

~

ZEEnon, would you mind giving a compiled synopsis on why you suspect Korlash?

So you disagree that ZEEnon is latching himself onto GC?

... Processing ...

Yes. From what I can discern, ZEEnon has been researching the game independently, creating theories based off that research independently, and drawing conclusions as to alignments largely based off those theories. Green Crayons has been doing no such thing. Simply because two players come to similar conclusions -- which in this case involves a dichotomy between Korlash and Gorrad -- that does not mean that one is latching onto the other.