Mafiascum.net

it's suspicious that nahdia targetted a dead player because that is easily faked

In post 748, farside22 wrote:

In post 747, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Seems like such an unusual claim if Nahdia is scum. So i find it believable.

I don't think so, but I know my opinion this game will mean shit all.
Just as an aside, easy to claim because player is dead, any other claim and player was targeted by another PR leads to a lot of your dead to scum to nahdia.
But you can lead.

i mean even though nahdia died any other visit would still show up to a voyeur right? a cop would still get an innocent result right?

i dont see why me targeting a dead player is any more easy to fake than any living player. hoctac was still a valid target last night.

In post 741, Nahdia wrote:didn't realize it was l-1. i wouldn't hammer without a claim. sorry bob :\

voyeur. hoctac was killed by a killing action (lol)

I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE LYNCHING THIS

In post 752, Nahdia wrote:i dont see why me targeting a dead player is any more easy to fake than any living player. hoctac was still a valid target last night.

cuz he flipped, so it is easier to make up something compared to if you targeted a living player

In post 753, popopopopopopo wrote:

In post 741, Nahdia wrote:didn't realize it was l-1. i wouldn't hammer without a claim. sorry bob :\

voyeur. hoctac was killed by a killing action (lol)

I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE LYNCHING THIS

i don't

In post 747, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Seems like such an unusual claim if Nahdia is scum. So i find it believable.

what??? its a pr claim thats unconfirmable because it was on a dead person, and theres zero chance of anyone cc'ing


IF YOU TRACKED/WATCHED/ANYTHING ELSE NAHDIA TO HOCTAC LAST NIGHT DO NOT CLAIM

UNVOTE: Nahdia
That isn't easier to make up?

In post 754, midwaybear wrote:

In post 752, Nahdia wrote:i dont see why me targeting a dead player is any more easy to fake than any living player. hoctac was still a valid target last night.

cuz he flipped, so it is easier to make up something compared to if you targeted a living player

In post 755, midwaybear wrote:

In post 753, popopopopopopo wrote:

In post 741, Nahdia wrote:didn't realize it was l-1. i wouldn't hammer without a claim. sorry bob :\

voyeur. hoctac was killed by a killing action (lol)

I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE LYNCHING THIS

i don't

?????? THESE TWO ARE ALMOST CERTAINLY PARTNERS

In post 754, midwaybear wrote:

In post 752, Nahdia wrote:i dont see why me targeting a dead player is any more easy to fake than any living player. hoctac was still a valid target last night.

cuz he flipped, so it is easier to make up something compared to if you targeted a living player

Do you think Nahdia is making up everything or do you think she targeted Hoctac but is lying about her role?

In post 745, Nahdia wrote:

In post 742, votato wrote:

In post 741, Nahdia wrote:didn't realize it was l-1. i wouldn't hammer without a claim. sorry bob :\

voyeur. hoctac was killed by a killing action (lol)

any modifiers on the role? why voyeur hoctac? other than the dad bod...

no modifiers. i tried targeting someone i didnt think i was a likely kill but might be targeted by a scum pr.

Ok that begs the question: what useful info could that possibly give you? This doesn't seem likely.

it is easy to make up because hoctac was killed
like I can claim tracker and say "hoctac went nowhere" and nobody could cc

popo chill with the all caps

In post 760, Albert B. Rampage wrote:

In post 745, Nahdia wrote:

In post 742, votato wrote:

In post 741, Nahdia wrote:didn't realize it was l-1. i wouldn't hammer without a claim. sorry bob :\

voyeur. hoctac was killed by a killing action (lol)

any modifiers on the role? why voyeur hoctac? other than the dad bod...

no modifiers. i tried targeting someone i didnt think i was a likely kill but might be targeted by a scum pr.

Ok that begs the question: what useful info could that possibly give you? This doesn't seem likely.

i dont understand the premise of this question. it sounds like you're just flat out calling my role useless?

which, i mean, kinda. but not entirely.

In post 751, votato wrote:

In post 748, farside22 wrote:

In post 747, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Seems like such an unusual claim if Nahdia is scum. So i find it believable.

I don't think so, but I know my opinion this game will mean shit all.
Just as an aside, easy to claim because player is dead, any other claim and player was targeted by another PR leads to a lot of your dead to scum to nahdia.
But you can lead.

i mean even though nahdia died any other visit would still show up to a voyeur right? a cop would still get an innocent result right?

You mean Hotoc dying? Yeah I was thinking about that.
I mean I saw a game where scum was a voyuer/watcher ability in a game so it's not like I'm sold on nahdia as town. She moved her vote pretty fast over to bob while accusing midway/popopop as scum and thought the bob wagon was "ok lynch"

midwaybear wrote:it's suspicious that nahdia targetted a dead player because that is easily faked

That was what I was saying in a nutshell.

In post 762, midwaybear wrote:popo chill with the all caps

if you view the claim as suspicious why are you not comfortable with a lynch?

In post 761, midwaybear wrote:it is easy to make up because hoctac was killed
like I can claim tracker and say "hoctac went nowhere" and nobody could cc

A voyeur recieves every action type which visited the target.
So saying "killing action on hoctac" is no different than saying "no action on norwee"

In post 765, popopopopopopo wrote:

In post 762, midwaybear wrote:popo chill with the all caps

if you view the claim as suspicious why are you not comfortable with a lynch?

because they could be truthtelling

In post 761, midwaybear wrote:it is easy to make up because hoctac was killed
like I can claim tracker and say "hoctac went nowhere" and nobody could cc

If she wanted to draw a PR out with a fakeclaim, she could do better than that. It might be true.

THIS IS FUCKING BS THEY CLAIMED A SHITTY PR AND TARGETED THE NIGHT KILL

LYNCH IT WITH FIRE

Farside is setting off multiple alarm bells for me.

In post 771, popopopopopopo wrote:THIS IS FUCKING BS THEY CLAIMED A SHITTY PR AND TARGETED THE NIGHT KILL

LYNCH IT WITH FIRE

Wouldn't scum!Nahdia claim something better if they wanted to be townread?

In post 772, NDMath wrote:Farside is setting off multiple alarm bells for me.

Your awfully quick to believe a claim without a question or doubt.
So I would say we are even with our suspicion of each other.