Catch 22 Mafia - Page 100

On June 27 2013 15:09 Adam4167 wrote:
Gah. Nevermind. I have discovered a flaw in my logic.

Continue going about your business.

On June 27 2013 15:19 cDgCorazon wrote:
So Adam, are you going to tell us what you found?

On June 27 2013 15:21 Oatsmaster wrote:
Awww .

So cora, on a scale of 1-10, how bad is your tunnel on me?

On June 27 2013 15:29 cDgCorazon wrote:


What is 1 and what is 10?

On June 27 2013 13:03 Oatsmaster wrote:
So do i wanna lynch someone who has been posting regularly, and is active, over someone whos only redeeming factor is the hammer on DP. I dont think so at this point.

You have been smart enough to figure out my alignment in other games, why are you taking things that arent alignment indicative and saying that they are scummy?

On June 27 2013 13:30 Adam4167 wrote:
Sloosh, last time you spoke of the issue (me vs Oats), you were siding with Oats due to 'my lack of anything substantive'.

Did the conversation last night between me, oats and Hapa change your opinion on any of us?

On June 25 2013 17:40 Adam4167 wrote:
Sloosh, here is my solidified post as to why I think Oats is scum. First, look at Oats attitude towards the GK ragequit post.

He goes from:



I don't think its alignment indicative. Add in casting suspicion onto Hapa for a legitimate unvote and also apparently knowing that GK gave up 'as town'. To:



A SCUMCLAIM. In 10 minutes. His justification is:



I don't think a townie would ragequit in a way that makes himself look this townie, therefore its a scumclaim. Read that again if you have to. I do not buy this explanation one bit.


Look at his attitude towards me. He has been hammering me since I got in here, and utterly refuses to listen to anything I put forward about why I am not scum, nor does he listen to why other people think I might be town. I gave a legitimate response for why I was not playing up to my Duel mafia standards, for which he had no rebuttal. He then uses the same argument again as a reason I am scum when discussing with OO. This kind of blatant disregard for anything coming out of your targets mouth is scummy. You know they're making a point that you cant argue, but you keep harping on it anyway. The one time he shows some form of insecurity in his read towards me? The post he votes me in. That is scummy. If you're sure I'm scum, as he damn well appears to be, drop your vote, call me scum and start convincing everyone else of your viewpoint. Instead, its this:



"Last time I tunneled someone to death against what everyone was saying they flipped town. Is that happening again?"

This attitude does not gel with voting someone. He's apparently reconsidering yet voting to kill me in the same post. Inconsistent. Scummy.


I already went over this before but ill go over it again. I called him out for not having a vote for me. He felt insecure and the need to correct that perceived wrong so he slapped his vote down as soon as he could. One minute later, he's saying "Votes dont matter man", so why did he vote in the first place if they don't matter! He realized he made a mistake and tried to downplay it. If he felt votes didn't matter, he would have responded to my first post with "it doesn't matter now, ill vote you later in the day after the discussion is over", but that isn't what happened.

On June 28 2013 01:42 ObviousOne wrote:
D1 Oats <---> Cora

+ Show Spoiler +
Oats, I'm sure I've had trouble being able to tell in past circumstances, but when you're antagonizing Cora a little bit here, is it in a joking manner? I think that's been a theme with you this game as well, joking around? Was that a motive to taking some jabs at Cora's playstyle? (It's just a touch of hypocrisy [jokes! but not really, but really]

I don't see anything here to point towards reasons for blocking Cora unless Oats thought Cora was a vig and going to shoot him.

On June 28 2013 02:31 goodkarma wrote:
Before you go "I don't want this guy at LYLO," maybe you should visualize how the rest of the game might transpire first? Like who are you going to lynch and when? Hapa was discussing coming up with a plan (if I recall correctly anyway... filter-diving too much effort.). Maybe that's what scum feared most?

In any case it makes the game much easier if truly scumteam didn't bus day one. That means you lynch Adam, Oats, and me in whatever order you want and you win. I'm still inclined to run with this scenario for the time being though idk maybe it's wrong. Of those the guy who probably would be most likely to not concede in a lost scumgame would be Oats.

##Vote: Oats

On June 28 2013 08:19 slOosh wrote:
Reread the whole game.
+ pg 55 ~ 63

Only thing going for Oats is his ability to post "naturally".

##Unvote: goodkarma
##Vote: Oatsmaster

On June 28 2013 02:31 goodkarma wrote:
Before you go "I don't want this guy at LYLO," maybe you should visualize how the rest of the game might transpire first? Like who are you going to lynch and when? Hapa was discussing coming up with a plan (if I recall correctly anyway... filter-diving too much effort.). Maybe that's what scum feared most?

In any case it makes the game much easier if truly scumteam didn't bus day one. That means you lynch Adam, Oats, and me in whatever order you want and you win. I'm still inclined to run with this scenario for the time being though idk maybe it's wrong. Of those the guy who probably would be most likely to not concede in a lost scumgame would be Oats.

##Vote: Oats