Let's start.
I am not positive if this vote is significant, or random. In this case, I shall vote in order to obtain a good volume of pressure.
You're really not helping with this quandary.LobsterCatapult wrote:YamiChan wrote:I didn't start anything.>_< People need to stop. I know what you're trying to do. I want to play this game in peace.
mafia is anything but peaceful
Do I sense the wonders of opportunity in your text? Why yes, yes I do.xvart wrote:Are you an alt? Are you trying to start a fire to derail the day?
But the words of opportunity also come from this one's ideas as well.DeathNote wrote:Vote HohumSpeed lynch?
True, but the xvart was trying to make a cause up.DeathNote wrote:mine is so opportunistic it hurts. You should vote me instead of him. I am simply bwing without a cause.
Yami isn't that scummy, at that stage.CSL wrote:Vote: YamiChan
Less murking about the rules and the players in the game. More content, please.
FoS: Rikana
Explain your post 91.
LMAO.LobsterCatapult wrote:Rikana wrote:Juls could also go down that pit too.
unvote
vote:rikana
If this was the case, why did you randomly vote then?Yami wrote:You don't catch the Mafia by voting randomly.
At this point you have 2 votes on you. One is misted, in my standards, and one is going to happen.Yami wrote:You won't rest until I'm out of the game, and that is just sad.
THIS IS NOT AN APPLICABLE DEFENSE. NO ONE KNOWS THAT YOU'RE A TOWNIE. NO ONE HAS EVEN THE SLIGHTEST IDEA BECAUSE EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE AND SAID THUS FAR CAN BE SEEN AS SCUMMY.YamiChan wrote:Obviously, you didn't read the last few pages at all, if that is what you are saying, Toon.-.- If you guys are Town, the only thing you are going to do is kill any ally. You guys are the ones playing badly. You should never let personal feelings or things like who is new and who isn't influence a game.
In your opinion, but the facts are right there in front of you.YamiChan wrote:I was never honestly accused of being Mafia.
Oh god. Not you too.DeityKabuto wrote:Rikana wrote:Hello, ladies and gentlemen.
Let's start.
Vote: Yami-Chan
I am not positive if this vote is significant, or random. In this case, I shall vote in order to obtain a good volume of pressure.
Sorry, but something about this vote bugs me, somewhat.
Vote Rikana
I didn't know you could like votes more than before. Oh well.Lobster wrote:@rikana, i like my vote even more on you now that you switched your vote to ychan. you seem like the paragon of opportunism there.
It's not even that groundbreaking.MagnaofIllusion wrote:CSL wrote:Post 395 comes from town. I will bet my life on it.
And 396 is :goodposting:
So suddenly Yami, who you were pushing as flailing, obv-scum earlier suddenly is a lock solid Town read?
CSL you can swim in the scum-pool.
Finding DK scum is not possible unless he's found guilty, slipped or something else that's tangible and leads to scum. His entire meta leads to a null basis because of his incoherent and outright horrible logic.Empking wrote:Rikana wrote:Emp. DK.
You not getting it right.
Why?
Battleship? I'm a Battleship? I'm the army, navy, and air force combined. This accusation of what I am is pitiful.Lobster wrote:you are scum. im about to sink your battleship.
I didn't remove all purpose. It did not only create pressure for Yami Chan when it shouldn't have, like you said, but started discussion.Lobster wrote:your vote on ychan, your first post is stupid. you call your pressure vote a pressure vote, say its ambiguous and that you dont know what it means but stating its a pressure vote, thus removing all purpose from it.
All I can distinguish here is that you want me to make a case on DN.Lobster wrote:your 77 comes across as stuffy and fake, and a most probable distance from xvart, putting your vote on your scumbuddy, a safer vote, than putting one on DN, the TRUE opportunistic vote on your "wagon", thus actually may having to defend/create a case agaisnt DN rather than "opportunism" something scum can point out just as easily as scum.
Okay? You're not noting what I'm saying, but saying nothing scummy about them.Lobster wrote:your mild threat on juls is noted in your 91.
You know, the point of looking at points in Isolation also requires that you look at the things that happen between.Lobster wrote:your 114 is a probable whiteknight of ychan(sk). you say this.
Rikana wrote:
Just an obv. newbie. There's no reason that Yami needs pressure, because there's a good chance she'll flail.
Cut the crap.So what if everyone is after you? Should you start caring about them now, even though you know they're wrong? Prove them wrong. Beat the odds. Stop complaining about every single little detail, and start scumhunting now. If not, then I will be wrong and feel stupid for being wrong. If you want that, then I may cause mental infliction on myself for your sake.
your next post isVOTINGychan for something that she is already doing something that you said shed do asTOWN. FLAIL.
No reasoning why Nerux or CSL are mafia, they're just going against her for the wrong reasons.YamiChan wrote:I may be new, but I am not in over my head. I'm just being targeted by people for the wrong reasons. Ironically, this happened in my very first game on the other forum. A certain individual hated that I was new and decided to target me. No matter what evidence he saw to my innocence or what powerful roles defended me, he rallied the Town against me. He ended up making himself look more like Mafia as a result, and his death provided a key clue in taking down the real Mafia. I turned out to be one of the most valuable roles in the game and uncovered this key, ensuring a Town victory. But that individual's anger only increased at having been shown up by a newbie, and it caused things on that site to go rapidly downhill. Don't be blinded by assumptions and what seems to be. I'm not playing terribly at all. Nerux and CSL are. They are rallying against me for all the wrong reasons, and their attitude in doing so makes them look more suspicious.
YamiChan wrote:Proof that you and Nerux are suspicious? Every single post the two of you make backs me up.
No, it's more like saying that while 182 is good, I still need to look at him. Y'know, when I saidLobster wrote:Rikana wrote:
#182 is quite good with theory. It also makes my thoughts of xvart scum go away.
However, my mood and opinion do change. I hope you realize this.
LLD is null guys. You can't tell if she opened a box as town or scum.
#301 is neruz opportunity part 2.
LOL NO GET LYNCHED. you are basically saying that you think xvart is now No longer scum, but then you say...well of course i can change my mind.
Rikana wrote:Rikana wrote:I'll look into Xvart, but I'm still good with my Primate vote.
How the hell did you get that? I just said that DKscum is impossible to find without a guilty, because his logic is bad as town or scum. I never called him scum. I just said I'm not lynching him.Lobster wrote:Rikana wrote:
Finding DK scum is not possible unless he's found guilty, slipped or something else that's tangible and leads to scum. His entire meta leads to a null basis because of his incoherent and outright horrible logic.
I thought you knew this.
sooo dk....is....not worth lynching/is town/
what happened here?
Obv. DK was the only lynch plausible D2. That and it was a quite vote. You used relationships to find DK scum, while everyone else was easily able to just get rid of him. Justifying a vote that no one would care about is scummy in itself for over explanation.Lobster wrote:Rikana wrote:Add Lobster to my list.
Forgot about him.
Unvote, Vote: DK
soo...im assuming im added to your scum list. well then....why are you voting for someone IM voting for?! especially someone you said wasn't worth a lynch earlier that day.
your vote on dk was opportunistic and weak, along with your vote on primate, weak.
This is rather usual for him, and is starting to get on my nerves because of it.danakillsu wrote:Has anyone noticed the complete lack of defense on DeathNote's part. More votes need to go there until we at least get this scum to publicly crack rather than active lurk.
Scum can do it, but town is more likely to do it.LobsterCatapult wrote:1) oh yeah, it started discussion, sure. you know, scum can start discussion to. i do not see how the way you phrased your vote was pro town at all. it gave you a lot of outs, so no one could pin your vote on anything except (gasp) starting discussion.
But that's opinion. Just because someone says something, doesn't mean that it is. You're justifying someone else's word to be your word, which isn't very good.Lobster wrote:2) what im saying is that this juncture, and WHY you said your vote was voting for the person who was the most opportunistic, you should have voted DN, because in fact his vote WAS the most opportunistic. your reasons for voting, and your votes do NOT correlate. this is is interpretted as distancing from xvart because putting your vote down on him is safer than DN because DN might actually call you out on it. even DN says his vote was the more opportunstic.
Pit equates to group. Again, what is so scummy about this "threat"? I highly doubt that Juls was threatened by this, nor even cared about it.Lobster wrote:3) saying somone can fall in a pit was interpretted as a vague threat by me. you didnt explain it.
Nice misrep. You honestly just looked at that paragraph skimmed it and looked for the single thing that looked scummy out-of-context. I'm getting annoyed from your annoying accusations.Lobster wrote:4)except you DIDNT say that was the reason you voted.Rikana wrote:That's what she's doing in those posts...CSL wrote:She's appealing to emotion and flailing around like a scum chicken with it's head cut off. Need I say more?
I'm honestly going to ignore your new cases if more this assuming bullshit comes up.Lobster wrote:No, it prolly made you think: "well...i guess i can put my vote on this really scummy townie, hey at the worst they are 3rd party right? i can just say i was fooled just like everyone else"
That assuming bullshit is coming back, but I'll answer to the parts that actually have a valid point. Yes, I didn't say that I was going to go look over him. I probably should've. If that's your case against me, go ahead and lynch me for that. I can't say anything against it without lying.Lobster wrote:that isnt what you said. you said that you can change your mind, not that you have to go back and look over him. your point on your vote with xvart is that you are still giving yourself OUTS. you are like, "well, i like my vote on primate, and yeah xvart was scummy, but his 182 isnt scummy... but i can totally change my mind". you are saying your scumbuddy could be scummy, while saying, oh while voting a townie.
No, your point didn't make any coherent sense.Lobster wrote:what...on earth changed your mind from saying you didnt want to lynch dkab...to wanting to lynch dkab? why was he the only plausible lynch d2? maybe its because im kinda hungover, but i dont understand what you are saying here. are you saying that me finding a relationship to vote dkab (him and rc) was the reason you voted for him?
Lobster wrote:and why woudlnt someone care about a vote? what?
I never took anyone off wagons. I took the wagons with no one confirmed on. I didn't do it every time because I was never going for perfection.CooLDoG wrote:Rikana wrote:CooLDoG: I did it subjectively in terms of what it looks like each person would be doing at each moment, rather than a full run through.
I made conclusions at the end. If you don't like it, perhaps you should do one on your on.
In addition, is your scum read on me still gut?
No, I mean the whole thing is crap. I'm talking about everything. Re-do it except clearly explain every single detail related to votes. And do not take people off wagons. Simply highlight them in green or something. It just seems lazily slammed together to shovel something out there.
As I've said before, I believe actually not extremely sure, DeathNote lurks as scum or town. He's really a useless piece of dead meat that can find something juicy once and awhile.CooLDoG wrote:Look at deathnote scums activity level. Look at other posts... case closed.
Yes.CooLDoG wrote:I have a question. Its a yes or no question. You should only answer it with one word.
Are you defending Deathnote?
If yes, why?
There is too much opportunity in the air for this to be a good lynch, or a scumlynch.Gammagooey wrote:What exactly do you think is wrong/off with the game/off with deathnotes play in that you don't think he can be scum?
Fuck off.MoI wrote:Rikana’s 1199 ‘VC Analysis’ is so craptasticly butchered words don’t even ….
No, I was just tired. I don't care what vote I'm at. I will find scum, at no cost. Therefore, let me respond to your wall.MoI wrote:So after that large wall this is the only response. I guess you’ve given up. Nice.
I'm not sure if I could understand that as obvious alt per se as you know who I am, or as I'm obvious to be an alt. It was kind of my point to be obvious. Using a newbie card is a weak tactic.MoI wrote:Rikana (who is an obv alt, IMO) votes YamiChan in ‘RVS’.
And? He voted me because I didn't call myself an alt. in the first post. Technically, I could try and be intelligent and do the same thing without being an alt. It was blatant opportunism and if you can stare me down and say it wasn't, you must be allied with him as well.MoI wrote:In response to xvart’s question about alt status and whether he is trying to ‘derail the day” he responds with the following
I like to bounce.MoI wrote:Hops on the Yami bandwagon in ISO 7.
That'd be really cool and all if I had any FoS' up to that point. In addition, if you can do the same thing as above and tell me everything that I have said wasn't scummy, you must be aligned with him(part 2)MoI" wrote:FoS buddy, vote easy lynch townie?
But like I said before, no. But wait! Xvart never said anything about Rikanascum so he must be scum lolzMoI wrote:Pretty strong appearance that xvart things Rikana is scum.
Comparing me to Reaper is so hurtful.MoI wrote:Pulling the same “cheeky scum” move that Reaper also did.
I do love such hits.MoI wrote:The rest of his Day 1 ISO is a weak vote for Inhim and one-liners.
Why should you need to ask for a counter-claim for another Vig to come out.MoI wrote:Starts Day 2 voting for Primate? The reason is that Primate said he didn’t counterclaim my ‘Vig’ Sekrit Partner claim. Which he found ‘odd’. Which makes no sense given I specifically asked for counterclaims.
Give me a fucking break. My assessments on DK are correct. I never white-knighted him. I only said that lynching him on the basis of bad logic was a really bad idea because he does it as scum or town. Read his games. He's a complete mess that I never want to play with again.MoI wrote:Spends some time White-Knighting DK in ISOs 21 and 22.
Yeah, because the last thing I remember with Xvart were his townie approaches, and his scummy start ups. I have to stand forward that acting scummy at first but then improving play isn't that bad.MoI wrote:I'll look into Xvart, but I'm still good with my Primate vote.
You know, this is one of the main disadvantages of being an alt, it's also one of the points I don't want to argue against because this is an easy null tell based on meta. Hope that gives you a clue or something. At any point, this isn't a point why I'm scum.MoI wrote:More cheeky scum play