[M][N] Default Suspicions Mafia - Page 14

On February 20 2014 10:18 marvellosity wrote:
The point of that being that Palmar will talk about things like you've been constantly attacking him for talking about things. And it doesn't mean very much. That's just how he talks about stuff.

On February 20 2014 10:20 marvellosity wrote:
Let's go with this:

##unvote
##Vote: Toadesstern

His +1 on prplhz's vote is super-weak. Why is Toad agreeing with prplhz that rayn is looking for a way not to take stands? Toad is passingly familiar enough with rayn to know that's not how rayn operates.

Naughty toad.

On February 20 2014 09:43 Toadesstern wrote:




I didn't feel the need to vote myself and revote you for a more dramatic expression of my desire to get you lynched.

On February 20 2014 10:30 Toadesstern wrote:


I voted him because I like voting rayn after the last game we had together, just look at the post I quoted while voting him. I think that was the first game we had together so no I don't really know how he plays considering that I ragequited because of him on d2. At least I don't recall any other game.

Do you honestly think I'm going after him in all seriousness right now instead of just taking sidestabs at him for last game?
After posts like these:
?

I had the same idea as prplhz had and said I can't think of a reason why a town would want to proppose this and I'd still like to see his reasoning for all this.

On February 20 2014 10:32 marvellosity wrote:

you can't say

1) "I'm not going after him seriously"
and
2) "but I need to hear from him about this"

1) is backing out of it and yet you're pushing it with 2)

my vote stands while I go to bed

On February 20 2014 10:26 raynpelikoneet wrote:
So here we go (marv i would have expected a bit more from you, i am sad):

There are three possibilities about my motives and here they are:

1) I am town and this is my thought process; I misunderstood the setup as i have already explained and thought the votes from previous days are added to the current days votes. That's why i made my plan in the first place. Now this would have been the most pro-town plan because i would have later on brought up the fact that we should treat this as a majority lynch and at the end of the day people who are not in the majority wagon put their votes on themselves. In that way we would have eliminated any cons for the town in setup we possibly can, which is pretty much everything other than the randomness which we can't eliminate.

However, that was not the case. Now, i still stand behind my "if you "unvote", vote yourself" plan because of this. If we do not push this policy it leads to possibly stupid and irrelevant questions like "you don't think this dude is scum anymore, why is your vote still on him?". We don't want that because we benefit from clarity and it's beneficial we know exactly WHEN and WHY people drop their scumreads and where they head next. If they don't have next target they should inform that by voting for themselves. This prevents mafia from misrepresenting people because you can always back up your thoughts with your actions in thread (most importantly voting). Having no possibility to unvote is pro-mafia, if you't agree with that you need to explain me why. It's never irrelevant where your vote is at.

On February 20 2014 10:26 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Why did you not try to see what i was/am trying to do and how that would make me whatever alignment. What you did is you took some posts from me and painted them scummy without no thinking behind it. I want to know why.

On February 20 2014 10:26 raynpelikoneet wrote:
If what i was doing was (1), then i am town.
If what i was doing is (2), you can't tell my alignment.
If what i was doing is (3), then you are saying i am some random noob which this post already proves i am not because i would have came up with a decent explanation on the fly.

So again, why am i mafia? Especially prplhz and Toad?

On February 20 2014 10:36 VIVAX420 wrote:
toad you are backtracking so hard. it's not serious, yet you gave shitty but serious reasons for it.

On February 20 2014 10:32 marvellosity wrote:

you can't say

1) "I'm not going after him seriously"
and
2) "but I need to hear from him about this"

1) is backing out of it and yet you're pushing it with 2)

my vote stands while I go to bed

On February 20 2014 10:44 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Palmar the problem is not that if you make it clear or not. It's if other people think you are being clear or not which is not always so easily said. You know how this shit works, scum misrepresent everything people do because that's how you lynch townies. Why not reduce the possible amount of misrepresentations by an easy policy that does no harm in any case?

On February 20 2014 10:44 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Palmar the problem is not that if you make it clear or not. It's if other people think you are being clear or not which is not always so easily said. You know how this shit works, scum misrepresent everything people do because that's how you lynch townies. Why not reduce the possible amount of misrepresentations by an easy policy that does no harm in any case?