TL Mafia LXI

On April 22 2013 13:29 WaveofShadow wrote:
Fuck it, I'm just gonna say what everyone else is thinking, CC's shitstorm be damned.

BM, why in all that is holy would you post that as a joke. You obviously knew exactly what effect a post like that would have, what gives?

On April 23 2013 08:39 Ace wrote:
could it be that yamato and Oats are both Scum but Oats has a great role so they want him to live for one day?

On April 23 2013 08:46 WaveofShadow wrote:
Why yall gotta ignore my post.

On April 23 2013 09:12 yamato77 wrote:

Do you want me to talk about someone other than VE?

I could talk about BC

On April 23 2013 09:11 Bill Murray wrote:
I kind of disagree, WOS ^

I feel like his case is subjective, where it's largely meta based, and that's the reason I agree with it. I don't feel like he has much objectivity with it... in fact, he keeps saying he's going to be trying to catch the entire team, but I have only seen him tunneling, in general... sorry to overgeneralize

i'll try to be more specific... he's beating a dead horse

On April 23 2013 09:24 VisceraEyes wrote:

Fuck that you give me shit all the time about my playstyle and unrepentantly ignore me when I play like that you little shit.

On April 23 2013 09:17 yamato77 wrote:

Well, there are 3 replacements being called for. Not gonna try to divine alignment from people that aren't playing.

Ace is a tricky one. The case I posted earlier before his interaction with BC was kinda bad, but I don't understand how he developed a scum read on me whatsoever.

On April 23 2013 11:34 Bill Murray wrote:

one hour later has read the entire game and made a case on sharrant?
his case is really tunnely, and reaching, as well
FoS Clarity

On April 24 2013 07:02 Vivax wrote:
The explanation doesn't add up at all.

Starts reading -> Says I'm here after 2h-> case after 1 h -> BM calls him out saying the case is bad and made in just one hour -> Clarity answers "Yeah well I figured I'd say hi after seeing that I didn't post anything -> Vivax calls him out again for quick case -> Clarity: "Yeah well I actually read for 3 hours."

Why does he answer to BM, talking about clarity's case being bad and the short time (second post), with a justification for his entrance post (first post)?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Clarity could have replied, as town: "I actually read for 3 hours, so what's your problem with my case?"

But Clarity was scared that his case looked scummy cause of BM's reaction, so he instead posted a justification for his late entrance, which he knew looked bad, and felt guilty for. And he didn't want to correct BM in saying that he read for so long precisely cause he'd have had less justification to explain the bad case.

Now that he's being pressured for the short time in which the case was written, he gives another justification where he actually claims that he was reading for a longer time.

When BM pressured him, he wanted to make it look like he made something in haste by arguing that he wanted to post before the hammer.
Now that it's exactly the point against him, he says that he was actually reading for a longer time.

On April 23 2013 11:42 Clarity_nl wrote:


I never said really good scum or town, in fact I think he's bad scum.
Like I said I have no idea about you. I liked yamato's post on ace.

On April 23 2013 16:33 Clarity_nl wrote:
Cause you're both anti town in the dumbest ways possible, but not convinced either of ye are scum just yet. You have a higher chance than most, though. There has also been 0 resistance to both your lynches

On April 26 2013 10:30 VisceraEyes wrote:

BM is ever a mystery to me. I'll have to look into his filter to answer this sufficiently. Being wrong doesn't mean that he's scum...and Palmar wasn't "wrong" about tube, he said "I find inactivity exceptionally scummy in this setup" and proceeded to ignore an inactive. That IS scummy.

On April 26 2013 12:25 ObviousOne wrote:
BM not reading the thread as mafia is 100% true. I was just mafia with him in boardwalk. We talked on Skype for 4 hours so I can't show you logs.

On April 23 2013 23:49 Vivax wrote:


I find this quote interesting. Clarity apparently was afraid of not posting anything before the hammer fell, and here he is admitting that his case on Sharrant was something done in haste, and to "show his face", not cause he found the reasons good enough to post them so quickly.

On April 23 2013 13:18 WaveofShadow wrote:

I'll comment on it. I already forget who said it but it screams to me of reaching. I have a very strong townread on Sharrant right now and nothing you bring up in your case on him strikes me as scummy at all---how is providing 'easy outs' as you call them an anti-town thing to do? What is inherently scummy about the way he has presented himself? I will agree that his methodology isn't necessarily great but it certainly doesn't look scummy. For example in the first example you gave he provides Rayn with an out because they had already been arguing for fucking ages and shitting up the thread; it's entirely possible that he wants the argument to end as well and just wants to get a clear read, which certainly seems likely as he encourages Rayn to continue the discussion on another subject.

I don't see anything wrong with his asking questions of others; everybody in here does that and you're really reaching with his talking about how he has to go eat makes him look insecure. You say that he just asks shallow questions to look involved? He's been plenty involved and has had plenty opportunity as scum to just blend it or let something go and make it seem as though he has contributed.

Your case is bad and I urge you to look over something else if YOU want to make it seem like you're contributing.

On April 24 2013 23:11 Sharrant wrote:
Okay, let's get this started with the most important part:

Clarity should be lynched tomorrow, a few people have made cases on why, and they're quite right. He apparently spent 4 hours reading the thread and came up with not even half a case on me, and refused to comment on the lynch that was happening right in front of his eyes all the while flip flopping on the amount of time and effort he supposedly put in.

He's obvious enough at this point that everyone should be on board with his lynch, I don't think there's more that needs to be said about him.

Responses to cases and stuff:


@Clarity
There's nothing in your case to respond to. You obviously just skimmed my filter and tried to pick out what you could skew to look mafia oriented, and you failed miserably at that.

@Rayne

+ Show Spoiler +
1. It's laughable that yous till think that asking for games is a scum tell, but run with it if it makes you happy. He did point me to his games, just not linked them. Not as helpful as I would have hoped he would have been, but he didn't mention any games off site which was the concern.

2. I never stated I was pleased with your answer. I asked you to restate so everyone would see that your answers still did not match up with what you had said earlier in the thread. Pushing that singular point any more would just make the thread more of a mess than it was starting to be, and the whole point would get lost and thus once I had you restate it again clearly there was no more value to be gained from going after you on that point at that time. So instead, I wanted to move you onto topics that would be helpful regardless of whether I was wrong or right about your alignment.

3. The choice of who to talk about is as telling as the choice of who not to talk about, I'll learn more about your alignment from you picking who you want to discuss then I will from giving you the topics I want you to discuss. It tells you too much about how I already lean on those topics, and having you drive the discussion lets me get a better feel for you.

4. I'm really surprised you don't get this part. Lots of newer scum buddy people, especially people that defend them. Here he shows that he's suspicious of the fact that you defended him, regardless of whether the fact he stated was misremembered (apparently someone else in that game had said it) he showed that his thought process went "Hey! This guy has taken up a shield for me" -> "Wait, why did he do that?" When as a new scum scared to be in his first big game would have been more hesitant to put any tarnish on his knight's armour.

5. You're mixing up your time periods so bad that this question is just a jumble of words. Your staunch defense of him got me to check out your filter. His subsequent "Hey, why are you defending me?" moment made him more than likely town.

@WaveofShadows


I think Oats was a good lynch because of how useless he was being, it's a shame he turned out to be town, but at least he was a non-self aware miller. That said, I think there were better lynches for that day, Clarity and Rayne being two I think would have been better lynches.

Yamato is almost definitely town, everything about his posts on the second half of day one scream town yamato in a way I don't think he knows how to replicate as scum. Last time I played with him when he was scum I caught him (but was not able to get him lynched before I was killed) because of how glaring the difference is between him being the townie, headstrong Yamato and him trying to emulate the townie headstrong Yamato.

I hope that satisfies your curiousity.

If there was one or two things in particular that lead you to have such a strong town read on me, what would they be?

I'm going to be around for a while doing some filter diving in, so I'm available for questions. It is very likely that I will be unavailable for Thursday, and possibly some or all of Friday (excepting phone posting which I hate hate hate doing). There will be 0 posts from me between midnight tonight, and Thursday night.

On April 28 2013 06:37 Sharrant wrote:


What are you even saying?

On April 28 2013 06:40 Sharrant wrote:


And here's where you tell me that's a joke, right? Right?

On April 22 2013 01:16 raynpelikoneet wrote:

Because the OP clearly states there can be multiple number of same roles, so discussing if there are one or more self-aware millers in stupid in the first place.

Anyone who claims miller on D1 should be lynched.

##Vote: Bill Murray

On April 22 2013 01:23 raynpelikoneet wrote:


What concerns me about you on this is the following:
You state that there is no reason to discuss this atm, yet you are giving BM an out in the first place by discussing the matter and saying this kinda stuff:

Why are you so eager to give BM the "right" answers if you want him to expalin himself?

On April 22 2013 01:25 raynpelikoneet wrote:

I think that ship sailed already.

On April 28 2013 07:05 Sharrant wrote:
Yamato, do you have any desire whatsoever to lynch Ace?

On April 28 2013 07:22 TheRavensName wrote:


So why shoot me? Remember the modkilled scum tried to look active and kill me, and if you looked you would know I can't be scum.

My question: Why has no one really addressed WoS yet? he just claimed self aware miller but didn't counter claim before, and looked through the thread again Everyone has said WoS is scummy and yet no one except a very few amount of us have even tried to make a case against him.

My town meta has me always roleclaiming when I feel I am in actual danger of death, and I NEVER lie.

On April 28 2013 12:26 Ace wrote:
Wos-->alive.notshoot

On April 28 2013 07:22 TheRavensName wrote:


So why shoot me? Remember the modkilled scum tried to look active and kill me, and if you looked you would know I can't be scum.

My question: Why has no one really addressed WoS yet? he just claimed self aware miller but didn't counter claim before, and looked through the thread again Everyone has said WoS is scummy and yet no one except a very few amount of us have even tried to make a case against him.