EPTBloodyC0bblers's Mafia XVI - Page 23
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Iaaan
Canada578 Posts
| ||
|
dozko
United Kingdom160 Posts
WARNING: the mother of all spoilers! + Show Spoiler + 1) + Show Spoiler + You are called out by a certain member whose name now escapes me, and you ignore this but go off on a tangent. Given that you have made your claim to mayordom about a dozen of posts ago it seems weird you bring this up now. Here is the post I am talking about in the bold bit: + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:00 ShoCkeyy wrote: This is why I have voted for you. I like that you're already trying to help us newcomers and win the game. If you were to be a mafia, you wouldn't be doing this. Back to lynching XeliN Notice he hasn't posted since I called him out! Note that before this post you have not posted for a page and a half, and after this post you do not respond to Shcokeyy but do an unrelated and weirdly timed campaign post. This leads me to the next part of the point. The remaining bit. The "claim to mayordom" is a short way of saying "your desire to step forward as a candidate for election". Initially you posted your candidature on page six + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2010 17:19 XeliN wrote: Also I put myself forward to run for election. Considered not doing as I have a survival instinct and don't want to have too much attention drawn to myself at an early stage but in all honesty I think i would be a good choice for either of the roles. 2) + Show Spoiler + If you look at his posts you will notice a certain tendency. He basically commentates a lot: i.e. he likes to state things which are obvious. To me this seems like some attempt to subtly gain credibility by not saying anything too provocative but still going with the trend a lot, since by saying obvious things no one can disagree with him and hence when people read the posts they will be subconsciously be lead to believe he is credible and trustworthy. Even if he is not red this still is not good since we all can read for ourselves and he is not adding any analytical value so far. After the very first piece of analysis you start a bandwagon claiming QS is mafia, going with the trend. + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2010 17:01 XeliN wrote: A quick attack? Well with a player named QuickStriker in the game this looks like a kind of obvious clue. Also he was the first to respond to the first Sheriff Candidacy anouncement of Fulgrim, drawing attention to himself being "amused" by Fulgrim's "I'm not a mafia" comment. Comment post + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2010 17:01 XeliN wrote: This however, as far as I can tell is an exceptionally bad strategy, the point of electing a mayor or sherrif is someone who seems active, discerning and importantly decisive, and your suggestion of sit and wait reeks to me on manipulation at an early stage. Another comment + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2010 22:02 XeliN wrote: Sure i am aware of that xD, but im also concious that it is certainly going to be an ambition of the mafia in general to have their members run in the election race and so anyone who puts themselves forward is simply by that action more suspicious that one who doesn't. Another + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 03:12 XeliN wrote: heh Sagaz interesting you raised that as I was just outside having a ciggarette thinking over the things in this thread and how there have already been claims made, suspcions cast e.t.c and was thinking it might be extremely intelligent for the mafia as a whole to simply not post much, rely on us creating so much confusion amongst ourselves that they do not need to try to provoke it or develop it. Following the trend: Initially: + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 03:12 XeliN wrote:I don't agree that we ought to lynch the person who has posted least in any way though and am also inclined to think that the mafia have not adopted this strategy of just letting the town fuck it up for themselves. On January 21 2010 07:46 XeliN wrote: Im starting to warm to the idea someone mentioned earlier about lynching those that post least, not because i think it relates to them being mafia or would be productive in any way just out of sheer annoyance. Yet another: + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote:Furthermore anyone who wishes to question anything about My posts or has any suspicions at all I will respond with openly and what I will intend to be clear and rational. These are plenty examples. Note that the rest of the point is deductive analysis, which is based on such posts, yet you dismiss it completely in your reply. 3) + Show Spoiler + His last point, does not respond to an accusation from another poster but simply explains his campaign. ( I repeat myself here with point 1) What strikes me is that he is the only candidate who is speaking in definite terms i.e. On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote: My candidacy for Mayor. I strongly believe that some of the Mafia have already given themselves away at a very early stage in this and as such know preciciely what I plan on doing were i to be elected into either of the roles. This is subject to change and reconsideration but let me be frank, I would vote to lynch, kill or incarcerate Quickstriker and or crescentia. There are others that I have suspicions about but nothing as strong as my feeling that both of these posters (Most specifically Quickstriker) are being manipulative and acting in a fashion that i would expect the Mafia to act.[/QIOTE] Now why would he write this when it is clear that he has a very small chance of actually being correct, and he knows it? I think it is because he wants to further add some false credibility to himself (further putting emphasis on point 2). Compare this with the other candidates before him, who approach this in a more open-minded fashion. Again i stand by my conclusion. How can you be so sure that your theories are correct, that you consider them an important part of your campaign, when even you realize we do not have enough info for that level of certainness. 4) + Show Spoiler + He claims that he will be a top priority for the mafia and we should protect him because of the "openess" of his posts. Well this makes no sense at all, because a) So far he has not said anything significant (still keeping his master plan under wraps) and b) the mafia would be silly to kill him, since that actually gives us MORE information than letting him live. Your claim + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote:I urge people to vote me in, I think i am likely to be a target for a mafia given the nature of my posts and openess of my suspicions and so on that basis only i would enjoy the protection. I still stand by my point. Your claim i have quoted above makes no sense because of the two points a) and b). 5) + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote: I am also slightly drunk as i was playing HoN with a friend on skype and drinking abit so i probably ought to wait untill putting forward a post like this but what did waiting ever acheieve! This paragraph makes me very suspicious. Firstly why bring up that you have been drinking at all? The most likely reason is that he can use that as an additional tool, to make people not read too much into his post. Again it seems he is trying to say obvious and genuine things to win our trust. Secondly and more worryingly look at the grammar of the quoted paragraph. Note that before the paragraph about the drinking, he has only committed 2 spelling mistakes in 350 words; yet in a single 37 word paragraph commits 3 spelling mistakes. I believe these are intentional and he is artificially supporting his drunken claim. I think my points here are valid even though they are a bit far fetched, the variance of the errors in your writing is very large up to this point. Again this is what I felt at the time thinking about the game and put it in words. You completely ignore this paragraph in your retort. 6) + Show Spoiler + 6) He keeps repeating that people who disagree with him are welcome to an open debate. Well this again is obvious. Anything posted here is obviously open for debate, and the fact that he keeps telling us this, coupled with the fact that he hasn't been called out so far again furthers his aim to gain our trust. Note how he has been far busier in making these types of posts rather than actually trying to analyze for clues. Example + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote:Furthermore anyone who wishes to question anything about My posts or has any suspicions at all I will respond with openly and what I will intend to be clear and rational. Another + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 02:49 XeliN wrote:Neither of those two assertions has any merit and i challenge you to make a clear and logical argument as to why. Another + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 02:49 XeliN wrote:Likewise please provide clear explanation for everyone to see and assess as for why you have named me, otherwise i suspect they may draw similar conclusions that i have. Given the above my reasoning is plausible. Also you have indeed only been involved in arguments with other players and only have 1 post on analyzing the clues (which is the only real concrete info we have so far). So my other point still stands. 7)+ Show Spoiler + 7) In the last paragraph of his post he does what ? You guessed it, going for the "friend available" routine, which again serves to further the aforementioned goals. This is self explanatory. As you can see from the above I have indeed based the analysis on your posts, and since 99% of the thread so far is speculation since we have little concrete info, it is laughable for you to begin PM'ing me and lunging at me in the thread simply because I have called you out. Before I conclude this mammoth of a post, let me draw attention to your posting style again. You write about everything with 100% certainty and you still sprinkle your arguments with certain things, which at this point are pointless to say as anyone will claim this when queried. e.g. + Show Spoiler + On January 23 2010 07:10 XeliN wrote:Another reason i suspect him and is I have the knowledge that I am innocent, Finally, I still stand by my original conclusions. Your posting style is still making me suspicious and I believe this may be down to one of the following reasons: - You're mafia and being a new player got freaked out, that you might be found out, given someone is putting so much effort in analyzing your posts (which is my default posting style anyway). - You have a blue role and dont want my posts to risk you getting lynched, but you jump to conclusions very quickly and dont think things through (further evidenced by your unprovoked flame PMs to me). Again read the very first sentences of my initial post on you. It is a gut feeling and my thoughts, why do you feel so threatened? | ||
|
QuickStriker
United States3694 Posts
Also, I took a brief skim look on dozko's post above. The long analysis is interesting to look at so I do encourage all other members to take a look at as well. I will finish reading it later on when I'm back. | ||
|
d3_crescentia
United States4053 Posts
On January 23 2010 08:24 Iaaan wrote: And last think I can think of right now, If either the mayor/sheriff are DTs, they could tell us, because they can't be killed by the Mafia right? we have to lynch them. for any other role they could just lie (if they were the Mafia), but its not hard to prove your a DT to the public if you have protection. True, but I think the Mafia can turn this around to their advantage even if they were to lie and claim DT publicly. If a Mafia officers claims DT publicly, then they'd have to rolecheck someone. Mafia could coordinate to have one person take the hit; they would check and be forced to sacrifice a member after public announcement. All well and good for the town, except that the DT cannot rolecheck twice in a row, and would still let the Mafia kill 6 people for the time being. Then on the third night, the Mafia/fake DT would have a chance of being discovered if two DTs do the same check to be sure. However, doing so could reveal the real DT if they collaborate together and then the Mafia will target the real DT. We could then lynch the Mafia/fake DT if the evidence is conclusive enough, though it's possible that they could also make a lucky guess in checking people, and continue on another day. Secondly, if the Mafia officer claims DT and says he's doing cluechecks instead, the same thing would happen with the rolecheck above - there's no way to confirm the word that the officer actually IS a DT without outside collaboration, which would threaten to expose any other DTs we have. If we have the case that the officer actually IS DT, then for all of the reasoning above it would be dangerous to trust him 100%. In other words, it would be extremely advantageous for us to have a DT in office, but it would be extremely suspicious for them to roleclaim that publicly. Privately will be a different story, but even then I would be suspicious. Lastly, keep in mind that the Mafia are actively trying to figure out whatever OUR roles are, and they have a better chance in guessing Townie over a blue role. If in the first case they decided to not let another Mafia take the fall, they have a good chance of hitting a Townie by guessing, and again we would have to wait until Night 3/Day 4 for a double DT confirmation to be sure. It would be advantageous, yes, to have a DT in office, and I would think an active DTs would have had the thought cross their mind, even if they didn't decide to do it. I just don't think they would roleclaim so soon. This is all off the top of my head and someone could (and should try to) find holes in my logic. Day 2 clues should give us a better idea of who to lynch. I think the remaining DTs should rolecheck the election candidates - whomever they can or mistrust. | ||
|
johnnyspazz
Taiwan1470 Posts
can someone explain to me what clue checking is? | ||
|
d3_crescentia
United States4053 Posts
Supposing the electorate is DT, though, and roleclaims, the situation would not change much even if the DT was under no suspicion. 6 people will die in 2 nights, but there's no guarantee for that we can lynch any Mafia in that time. It's just that roleclaiming DT for a mafia candidate, under my line of thought, will likely end up with a DT death amongst those 6. Looking back upon it, Mafia-electorate roleclaiming DT is much like a stronger GF. Yeargh. | ||
|
gaizka
United States991 Posts
| ||
|
d3_crescentia
United States4053 Posts
On January 23 2010 09:22 johnnyspazz wrote: wow interesting points by everyone so far. can someone explain to me what clue checking is? The DT asks if a certain line or phrase from the Day post contains a clue, and/or if it points to a particular person. This is done in private by PMs to the game host. Examples: 1) DT asks, "does the phrase "he saw that it was a broken flower vase" contain a clue?" 2) DT asks, "does the phrase 'with a quick attack' point to QuickStriker?" and the host BC will reply in PM to them. What they do with the knowledge is up to them of course... | ||
|
Fulgrim
United States560 Posts
| ||
|
d3_crescentia
United States4053 Posts
hope this conversation goes on until MSL starts! | ||
|
Iaaan
Canada578 Posts
So maybe it wasn't a good idea  But if our mayor/sheriff is a DT, then its still good. I'm sure that a Mafia and a DT could have the same view on getting one of the electoral roles, the protection would be great, just the side it helps changes o: | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On January 23 2010 08:59 dozko wrote: Xelin, of course my long analysis on you (and primarily your campaign post) was opinionated and a bit vague. You seem to forget that it is day 1, and I stated in the beginning that this is my gut feeling, its really not black and white. For the sake of putting the topic to rest I will now post examples and clarifications for each of my seven points. WARNING: the mother of all spoilers! + Show Spoiler + 1) + Show Spoiler + You are called out by a certain member whose name now escapes me, and you ignore this but go off on a tangent. Given that you have made your claim to mayordom about a dozen of posts ago it seems weird you bring this up now. Here is the post I am talking about in the bold bit: + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:00 ShoCkeyy wrote: This is why I have voted for you. I like that you're already trying to help us newcomers and win the game. If you were to be a mafia, you wouldn't be doing this. Back to lynching XeliN Notice he hasn't posted since I called him out! Note that before this post you have not posted for a page and a half, and after this post you do not respond to Shcokeyy but do an unrelated and weirdly timed campaign post. This leads me to the next part of the point. The remaining bit. The "claim to mayordom" is a short way of saying "your desire to step forward as a candidate for election". Initially you posted your candidature on page six + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2010 17:19 XeliN wrote: Also I put myself forward to run for election. Considered not doing as I have a survival instinct and don't want to have too much attention drawn to myself at an early stage but in all honesty I think i would be a good choice for either of the roles. 2) + Show Spoiler + If you look at his posts you will notice a certain tendency. He basically commentates a lot: i.e. he likes to state things which are obvious. To me this seems like some attempt to subtly gain credibility by not saying anything too provocative but still going with the trend a lot, since by saying obvious things no one can disagree with him and hence when people read the posts they will be subconsciously be lead to believe he is credible and trustworthy. Even if he is not red this still is not good since we all can read for ourselves and he is not adding any analytical value so far. After the very first piece of analysis you start a bandwagon claiming QS is mafia, going with the trend. + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2010 17:01 XeliN wrote: A quick attack? Well with a player named QuickStriker in the game this looks like a kind of obvious clue. Also he was the first to respond to the first Sheriff Candidacy anouncement of Fulgrim, drawing attention to himself being "amused" by Fulgrim's "I'm not a mafia" comment. Comment post + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2010 17:01 XeliN wrote: This however, as far as I can tell is an exceptionally bad strategy, the point of electing a mayor or sherrif is someone who seems active, discerning and importantly decisive, and your suggestion of sit and wait reeks to me on manipulation at an early stage. Another comment + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2010 22:02 XeliN wrote: Sure i am aware of that xD, but im also concious that it is certainly going to be an ambition of the mafia in general to have their members run in the election race and so anyone who puts themselves forward is simply by that action more suspicious that one who doesn't. Another + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 03:12 XeliN wrote: heh Sagaz interesting you raised that as I was just outside having a ciggarette thinking over the things in this thread and how there have already been claims made, suspcions cast e.t.c and was thinking it might be extremely intelligent for the mafia as a whole to simply not post much, rely on us creating so much confusion amongst ourselves that they do not need to try to provoke it or develop it. Following the trend: Initially: + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 03:12 XeliN wrote:I don't agree that we ought to lynch the person who has posted least in any way though and am also inclined to think that the mafia have not adopted this strategy of just letting the town fuck it up for themselves. On January 21 2010 07:46 XeliN wrote: Im starting to warm to the idea someone mentioned earlier about lynching those that post least, not because i think it relates to them being mafia or would be productive in any way just out of sheer annoyance. Yet another: + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote:Furthermore anyone who wishes to question anything about My posts or has any suspicions at all I will respond with openly and what I will intend to be clear and rational. These are plenty examples. Note that the rest of the point is deductive analysis, which is based on such posts, yet you dismiss it completely in your reply. 3) + Show Spoiler + His last point, does not respond to an accusation from another poster but simply explains his campaign. ( I repeat myself here with point 1) What strikes me is that he is the only candidate who is speaking in definite terms i.e. On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote: My candidacy for Mayor. I strongly believe that some of the Mafia have already given themselves away at a very early stage in this and as such know preciciely what I plan on doing were i to be elected into either of the roles. This is subject to change and reconsideration but let me be frank, I would vote to lynch, kill or incarcerate Quickstriker and or crescentia. There are others that I have suspicions about but nothing as strong as my feeling that both of these posters (Most specifically Quickstriker) are being manipulative and acting in a fashion that i would expect the Mafia to act.[/QIOTE] Now why would he write this when it is clear that he has a very small chance of actually being correct, and he knows it? I think it is because he wants to further add some false credibility to himself (further putting emphasis on point 2). Compare this with the other candidates before him, who approach this in a more open-minded fashion. Again i stand by my conclusion. How can you be so sure that your theories are correct, that you consider them an important part of your campaign, when even you realize we do not have enough info for that level of certainness. 4) + Show Spoiler + He claims that he will be a top priority for the mafia and we should protect him because of the "openess" of his posts. Well this makes no sense at all, because a) So far he has not said anything significant (still keeping his master plan under wraps) and b) the mafia would be silly to kill him, since that actually gives us MORE information than letting him live. Your claim + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote:I urge people to vote me in, I think i am likely to be a target for a mafia given the nature of my posts and openess of my suspicions and so on that basis only i would enjoy the protection. I still stand by my point. Your claim i have quoted above makes no sense because of the two points a) and b). 5) + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote: I am also slightly drunk as i was playing HoN with a friend on skype and drinking abit so i probably ought to wait untill putting forward a post like this but what did waiting ever acheieve! This paragraph makes me very suspicious. Firstly why bring up that you have been drinking at all? The most likely reason is that he can use that as an additional tool, to make people not read too much into his post. Again it seems he is trying to say obvious and genuine things to win our trust. Secondly and more worryingly look at the grammar of the quoted paragraph. Note that before the paragraph about the drinking, he has only committed 2 spelling mistakes in 350 words; yet in a single 37 word paragraph commits 3 spelling mistakes. I believe these are intentional and he is artificially supporting his drunken claim. I think my points here are valid even though they are a bit far fetched, the variance of the errors in your writing is very large up to this point. Again this is what I felt at the time thinking about the game and put it in words. You completely ignore this paragraph in your retort. 6) + Show Spoiler + 6) He keeps repeating that people who disagree with him are welcome to an open debate. Well this again is obvious. Anything posted here is obviously open for debate, and the fact that he keeps telling us this, coupled with the fact that he hasn't been called out so far again furthers his aim to gain our trust. Note how he has been far busier in making these types of posts rather than actually trying to analyze for clues. Example + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:53 XeliN wrote:Furthermore anyone who wishes to question anything about My posts or has any suspicions at all I will respond with openly and what I will intend to be clear and rational. Another + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 02:49 XeliN wrote:Neither of those two assertions has any merit and i challenge you to make a clear and logical argument as to why. Another + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 02:49 XeliN wrote:Likewise please provide clear explanation for everyone to see and assess as for why you have named me, otherwise i suspect they may draw similar conclusions that i have. Given the above my reasoning is plausible. Also you have indeed only been involved in arguments with other players and only have 1 post on analyzing the clues (which is the only real concrete info we have so far). So my other point still stands. 7)+ Show Spoiler + 7) In the last paragraph of his post he does what ? You guessed it, going for the "friend available" routine, which again serves to further the aforementioned goals. This is self explanatory. As you can see from the above I have indeed based the analysis on your posts, and since 99% of the thread so far is speculation since we have little concrete info, it is laughable for you to begin PM'ing me and lunging at me in the thread simply because I have called you out. Before I conclude this mammoth of a post, let me draw attention to your posting style again. You write about everything with 100% certainty and you still sprinkle your arguments with certain things, which at this point are pointless to say as anyone will claim this when queried. e.g. + Show Spoiler + On January 23 2010 07:10 XeliN wrote:Another reason i suspect him and is I have the knowledge that I am innocent, Finally, I still stand by my original conclusions. Your posting style is still making me suspicious and I believe this may be down to one of the following reasons: - You're mafia and being a new player got freaked out, that you might be found out, given someone is putting so much effort in analyzing your posts (which is my default posting style anyway). - You have a blue role and dont want my posts to risk you getting lynched, but you jump to conclusions very quickly and dont think things through (further evidenced by your unprovoked flame PMs to me). Again read the very first sentences of my initial post on you. It is a gut feeling and my thoughts, why do you feel so threatened? You have read my mind. I don't like the way Xelin has to offer things, or the way he puts things. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On January 23 2010 09:10 d3_crescentia wrote: True, but I think the Mafia can turn this around to their advantage even if they were to lie and claim DT publicly. If a Mafia officers claims DT publicly, then they'd have to rolecheck someone. Mafia could coordinate to have one person take the hit; they would check and be forced to sacrifice a member after public announcement. All well and good for the town, except that the DT cannot rolecheck twice in a row, and would still let the Mafia kill 6 people for the time being. Then on the third night, the Mafia/fake DT would have a chance of being discovered if two DTs do the same check to be sure. However, doing so could reveal the real DT if they collaborate together and then the Mafia will target the real DT. We could then lynch the Mafia/fake DT if the evidence is conclusive enough, though it's possible that they could also make a lucky guess in checking people, and continue on another day. Secondly, if the Mafia officer claims DT and says he's doing cluechecks instead, the same thing would happen with the rolecheck above - there's no way to confirm the word that the officer actually IS a DT without outside collaboration, which would threaten to expose any other DTs we have. If we have the case that the officer actually IS DT, then for all of the reasoning above it would be dangerous to trust him 100%. In other words, it would be extremely advantageous for us to have a DT in office, but it would be extremely suspicious for them to roleclaim that publicly. Privately will be a different story, but even then I would be suspicious. Lastly, keep in mind that the Mafia are actively trying to figure out whatever OUR roles are, and they have a better chance in guessing Townie over a blue role. If in the first case they decided to not let another Mafia take the fall, they have a good chance of hitting a Townie by guessing, and again we would have to wait until Night 3/Day 4 for a double DT confirmation to be sure. It would be advantageous, yes, to have a DT in office, and I would think an active DTs would have had the thought cross their mind, even if they didn't decide to do it. I just don't think they would roleclaim so soon. This is all off the top of my head and someone could (and should try to) find holes in my logic. Day 2 clues should give us a better idea of who to lynch. I think the remaining DTs should rolecheck the election candidates - whomever they can or mistrust. The thing with this, is that Mafia won't roleclaim DT publicly. If some one roleclaims DT publicly then we can expect them to be lynched by the mafia. So that means if a mafia member role claims DT publicly and doesn't get lynched, that person must be a mafia. There's no way a DT will survive if he openly says he's a DT. | ||
|
Iaaan
Canada578 Posts
| ||
|
RoyW
Ireland270 Posts
On January 23 2010 10:04 ShoCkeyy wrote: You have read my mind. I don't like the way Xelin has to offer things, or the way he puts things. Come on people, am I the only one who thinks it's obvious that Xelin is not Mafia? I can't imagine anyone making a 'lynch me on condition of lynching person x next' gambit unless they're ultra-defensive and feeling persecuted. We have many many people in game, and many people are flying under radar through inactivity. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On January 23 2010 10:39 Iaaan wrote: But for the electoral roles shockeyy, they have protection from the mafia. That's if EVEN a mafia was elected as a electoral role. And I really doubt that. I feel like the people we have at the moment aren't mafia, or detective. | ||
|
Iaaan
Canada578 Posts
| ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On January 23 2010 11:36 Iaaan wrote: I'm happy that you feel like that, but I'm sure you can understand if we consider the all the possibilities and don't just trust blindly. I understand of course, that's why I said, "I feel." | ||
|
~OpZ~
United States3652 Posts
On January 22 2010 23:36 RoyW wrote: I'm not sure, but based on the thread so far, my feeling for Mafia is pointing towards ShoCkeyy. Pretty much every one of his posts so far have been one-liners that are poking or prodding accusations at others. No thats me.... Why do XeliN, quickstriker, Velkan Knight sound so similar....Like....Mildly retarded.... That's why I find them suspicious!!! Do not follow!! | ||
|
~OpZ~
United States3652 Posts
On January 23 2010 11:18 RoyW wrote: Come on people, am I the only one who thinks it's obvious that Xelin is not Mafia? I can't imagine anyone making a 'lynch me on condition of lynching person x next' gambit unless they're ultra-defensive and feeling persecuted. We have many many people in game, and many people are flying under radar through inactivity. Don't defend the mildly retarded.... Trust me, he's mafia....I'm down with shockeyyy | ||
| ||
