TL Mafia LVII - Page 2

On September 07 2012 07:30 slOosh wrote:
I'm guessing someone vigged Ottoxlol, mafia stacked KP one of BC or BM and then suicide bombed into the other hoping to catch some blue prots. Time to do a lot of re-reading.

On September 07 2012 07:34 Hapahauli wrote:
Shame a shot got wasted on Ottox. Oh well.

##Vote Miltonkram

@ Grush

Shouldn't you... uh... NOT be happy vigi shot a green role?

On September 07 2012 07:39 Forumite wrote:
If Ottox would have been alive right now then I expect he´d allready have a few votes. Him dying saved us a day of discussion.

On September 07 2012 07:55 austinmcc wrote:
If you're still around

On September 07 2012 09:12 Toadesstern wrote:

Wouldn't mind lynching him either.

first one: I agree, Ottox dead is good but I don't like the 2nd part. Why me? I'm your strongest townread? Or am I your most influential townread? The latter one would mean mafia agenda.
second one: what did that post refer to? I'm not understanding what you're trying to say here and out of context saying "This is hard Town is REALLY active and good this game." sounds pretty contradictory. Like you're obviously happy that town is active and good this game (right?). If that's the case what's hard? Out of context it really sounds like you don't like town being active and good, neither does it sound like you're part of "town". So what's the meaning of that post?

Anyways, see you tomorrow.

On September 08 2012 05:57 DoYouHas wrote:
Ok, I think Hapa is right about Brood.


1. - This bit is fine. Not wanting to lynch just to verify a roleclaim makes sense.

2. - This is where it crosses the line into scum territory. In the space of one sentence Mattchew has gone from a roleclaim to a fakeclaim. It could be construed that what he is saying here is that the belief that someone has fakeclaimed and lynching them to confirm it is not a good enough reason. However, that isn't what he actually said. He said, "Fakeclaims aren't a good basis for lynch". That makes the contradiction Hapa pointed out both plain and valid. I also don't like how Brood left himself a way out with "so I cant vote for him unless his posting sounds scummy".

---

This explanation about Ottox is wrong.

It makes no sense to defend your top scumread. Who gives a crap if someone is backing you up for the wrong reason? You make note of that and use it against them later. You don't try and convince them to not pressure the person you think is scummiest. This looks like BS to me. Also, I'm surprised you cite his lack of scumhunting as the only valid reason because earlier you posted this, directed at Toad:

So for Toad it was scummy but for Ottox it was completely innocuous? It seems far more likely that you were caught hedging than having this explanation be true.

##Vote: BroodKingEXE

On September 07 2012 21:29 Hapahauli wrote:


BKE "Fail-Bussed" Mattchew

Read the bolded segment below (occurs right before Palmar confirms the Mattchew fakeclaim).


BKE states that fake-claiming isn't enough to lynch Mattchew. Hell the entire post is wishy-washy for reasons I pointed out in the case earlier. It's a very scummy post overall, but the "fake-claiming" bit is the most important, because BKE turns around two pages later after the mod confirmation and does this:



Mattchew hadn't posted anything in the interim to, as BKE put it, "sound scummy." BKE went from not wanting to lynch Mattchew for a fake-claim, and then when everyone jumped on Mattchew, treated the fake-claim like a huge scum-slip.

That's all you need to know really. It's indefensible.

On September 08 2012 06:23 DoYouHas wrote:


What?

On September 08 2012 06:52 Toadesstern wrote:
grush is mafia. BKE's probably; if BKE's not mafia it's probably foru?

But I had almost no time today as friends came over so I'll have to reread things tomorrow. Haven't even read what happened the last 4 hours so far except for an incredible fast read.