Newbie Mafia XL - Page 2

On April 09 2013 03:23 Rainbows wrote:
If you can lay down your reasons why you think it's a fakeclaim, I will gladly roflstomp them into the ground.

This is incessant.

On April 09 2013 03:29 Obzy wrote:
@Warent - assume rainbows is town. scum will specifically not kill him, because he's a lynch candidate.
assume rainbows is scum. he lives because we have no other vigilante.

either way, all it means is we don't have a vig that isn't rainbows.

On April 09 2013 03:42 Obzy wrote:
all it means was a poor word choice - i mean to say, it basically proves that we don't have a vig that isn't rainbows, and other than that, it shouldn't be a surprise at all that he survived.

you just posted again and it sort of blows my mind:

Because people have expressed interest in lynching him!? If you meant to imply that I wanted to lynch him - incorrect, sorry for the misunderstanding. If you meant to imply "Wow, who ever would have thought of lynching him?" - are you even reading lol >.> I take it that you, then, have zero objection to thinking Rainbows is town and have zero intention of lynching him yourself, or you never would've asked that question. However, before deciding to look at the voters on Jampi, whom I believe are at least reasonably townie and I would rather vote Ravens, you had indicated Rainbows, me, and Fish as potential scum, directly after the mislynch.

So now you both do not understand why Rainbows would still be alive, AND the idea of him being lynched today had apparently not crossed your mind. In end-game I'll apologize for this tone if you are town, but honestly, I don't see a way that you could have logically changed your mind on Rainbows, secretly, to a point that it makes you ask why he would be lynched. Please convince me otherwise.

On April 09 2013 05:23 Obzy wrote:
The problem is that Moloch, Kirby, nobodywonder, Jarjar, and Fish aren't posting (or at least - not enough). Ravens and Warent are posting and I'm getting scum vibes, but they could just be _relatively_ scummy compared to Rain and Smancer. To further identify if they are actually scum, I would like to be able to continue gathering thoughts on the other five.

On April 09 2013 22:02 JarJarDrinks wrote:
So jkirbys defense was pretty weak just like I expected.

And looking @ Ravens last few posts, I think he may also be scum and trying to distance himself from kirbs. Here's his response to my case against kirby:He's trying to make it seem like he isn't defending kirby by saying I'm making him doubt his read while @ the same time saying that I don't really have a good argument against him because of my main point. And he's trying to apply that same argument to rainbows even though it's not really similiar @ all. And kirbys defense of jampi while earlier naming him a suspect is the strongest point in my case against him, it's certainly not the only one.


Warent looks pretty bad to me too. On day 1 he tries to twist rainbows words and (mafia 101) makes a big deal out nothing:Man is he harping on that one post that rainbows made. And what better way to try to solidify that case? Kill Saraf and have him flip green.

On April 10 2013 00:52 JarJarDrinks wrote:
Rainbow was right in that Saraf was basically saying that "we should lynch you whether you are scum or not". And it did seem like Saraf thought Rainbows was town even if he said the words "Even if you are" as opposed to "Probably are". That's just nitpicking words and harping on semantics.

On April 10 2013 03:38 nobodywonder wrote:
Hi, nobodywonder here, I'll be here for about 30-45 minutes before I head to class. I'll be available from in about 3hrs then and get ready for the ultimate lynch then. So now I'll be rereading and taking questions.

First thing, Warent, how did you read jrkirby as town? What kind of townie is he then?

It's not really the relevance of the questions. He had reasonable suspicion because there existed questions that had not been answered. It's enough excuse for him to make a case against rainbows. And just making a case against someone isn't a sure sign of scum. He made a reasonable case with poor persuasion. That's not a lynchable thing.

At first I thought he was stupid, so I read that as scum, but after he claimed I realized that either he was going to die or he was just the stupidest vigi there was. Now he's just a terrible vigi.

On April 10 2013 06:56 Moloch wrote:
Warent, I've been thinking along the same lines of you, but I still feel there's a better chance he's telling the truth than not.

Your Mafia perspective is spot on. There was basically no downside to claiming at the point he was at.

Your town perspective should include a
#3 - The mafia assumed the medic would protect Rainbows, so they didn't want to waste their hit on him, and they knew they could roleblock him so he couldn't do anything anyway.

Because of this newly added possibility, your claim that there is no good reason for Mafia to keep Rainbows alive is false, which weakens your argument by a lot.

As such, he KNOWS there is a doctor. Saying that there can't be three blues is absolute suicide if he fakeclaimed. He would KNOW there's another blue.

On April 11 2013 00:48 Obzy wrote:
Another wonderfully active night. Outstanding. I guess Warent is posting.
+ Show Spoiler +

Warent, entirely hypothetically, what if in my -imaginary- -luck shot- -guess- scumteam prediction you were replaced with Rainbows?

And the number of blue roles, yes, is unknown to all players, but I feel it's a safe assumption that it's either 2 or 3, and we could all have safely assumed that at the beginning of the game.

I mean, so did Smancer, Fish, and myself. Assuming your assumption is correct; Smancer obviously is my pick for the scum on jampi's wagon.

You know if anyone else is blue, they can claim because 3 blues in a game is super rare. cop/doc/vig is stupid op.

if you're a doc/jk you can claim and then lynch me? never even thougt of thaat.

If Rainbows was town, he would know that he was a proper vigilante, and there are two confirmed blues. Saying that there can't be three is flat-out-incorrect, obviously, and he wouldn't say it unless he believed it.

If Rainbows was scum, he would know by now there IS no proper vigilante, and there is no roleblocker - as there were no roleblocks claimed, or roleblockings claimed. So there is no roleblocker. As such, he KNOWS there is a doctor. Saying that there can't be three blues is absolute suicide if he fakeclaimed. He would KNOW there's another blue. So I feel like it's a fact that Rainbows is blue, and he only made that statement because he was so certain there were only two blues, as it was his past experience.