TL Mafia XXVIII - Page 3

On July 25 2010 10:06 SouthRawrea wrote:
Thank you for your cooperation, see you guys next day. Anyone in particular I should place a bomb on? I've already got a candidate in mind at this time but just for the future...

On July 25 2010 10:37 youngminii wrote:
This is exactly how the mafia would react in this given situation: Kill of citi.zen then have everyone back out into a corner and defend themselves like chaoser is doing right now.

No, you will not be spared. Also, I like my hit list and I will keep it that way. Also, if citi.zen is telling the truth and SouthRawr is not, then Tricode is almost definitely also telling the truth, hence Tricode should not be on the list.

BC
SouthRawrea
Chaoser
Infundibuxdlgxcubum
Pandain (Claimed DT)
Amber[Light] (Pandain claimed to have checkd him)
Tree.hugger (moved tree.hugger to the bottom 'cause it's likely he's just bad town)

On July 25 2010 10:51 youngminii wrote:

If you listen carefully you can hear the soft reasonings behind my loudness.

And yeah that theory makes no sense, It's Night 3 now and you're claiming DT has already checked 3 times (me, you and amber). You just made the same mistake citi.zen did last game by slipping up your claim. You are now 100% red in my eyes.

On July 25 2010 18:09 d3_crescentia wrote:
What the fuck is this shit. We should have lynched either Tricode or BC today, because we have no idea if BC is confirmed town, and then all of this shit happened. In fact given the amount of misinformation that's flying around in this thread it can become unmanageable and frustrating to try and figure things out right away.

Claims that need to be resolved:
- BC/Tricode
- zeks/Southrawrea
- Pandain/Amber[Light]/youngminii

Since we have three claimants (Tricode/South/zeks) then we need to avoid overlapping kills if it so happens we have two bombers. Since zeks has claimed to have bombs on BC/South, South should put his remaining bomb on Tricode (chaoser?? what even makes you think he's a THREAT, for fucks sake). We then lynch both of them. I'd rather all of the above die and have our DTs check other targets rather than waste any more time trying to figure these things out.

Yes, I realize that this 1-for-3 trade is terrible. I don't really give a shit, though, because it's time to play hardball.

Something is especially not right here, considering citizen's claims that he was also DT checked. But then if our claimant checked Amber and young, when could they have checked citizen? I don't like this.

On July 25 2010 10:41 Amber[LighT] wrote:


You might want to go back to your DT lol

On July 25 2010 10:55 Amber[LighT] wrote:


I can't believe you're actually going to roll with this mysterious DT like you aren't getting away with anything.

On July 27 2010 13:43 zeks wrote:
lined up 3 hours got collectors edition!!!!!!!!!!

why do i suddenly not feel like playing anymore

jk

On July 27 2010 18:10 Bill Murray wrote:
Can everyone try to PM someone to replace?

On July 30 2010 05:14 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh wtf, where did my post go. Formatting fail.
Here's my post, I buried it in the quotes ><

Actually that's a better plan, lol.

OFC, once one vet claims we should have the other claim as well. This will help prevent mafia fakeclaiming vet (which they will, i expect). So if a mafia fakeclaims, both vets will step up and say "I'm vet" and we know we have one mafia caught.

Is that acceptable?

On July 30 2010 23:22 Divinek wrote:


yeah we should have let BC defend himself for the full 48 hours so he could have swayed your vote off plus others rofl

narrow minded fuck you he checked red, you're getting on my nerves