Detention Mafia - Page 24

On May 28 2014 05:20 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
Hi amiko!
Palmar makes this post here, claiming that bunnies was mafia.

When gobble asked him if it was a troll he said this:

He denies that this is a joke.

And he hasn't done anything to promote his case against bunnies. No questions, no nothing. Only voting jwz.

Until I say that I don't like palmar.
And then, soon after, he says that he likes bunnies now.
Seems like he's avoiding my suspicion.


also, my last post didn't have a z in it.....
I think I might desert this rule thingy.

On May 29 2014 01:44 Palmar wrote:
Now that slam has explained to you why your case on me is incomplete at best but more likely invalid, do you want to stop calling me mafia?

This is a newbie game so I'm going to be real nice and explain why your thought process doesn't work.

My initial vote on Ninja was based on simply what I perceived to be a slightly different mood/tone from the first game. The "ugh" seemed to be genuine frustration followed just like 3 posts later by a "XD".

The last point of my initial case was what she asked "can we now hunt some scum" which I found in her filter and didn't know the context it was written in. I was assuming that she was asking people to scumhunt, instead of just doing so herself. However when I read the game I realized she was trying to shut down a really dumb tangent people were on.

If you can't tell by now, this case is obviously very flimsy and more of a prod than an actual case. If you read my interaction with gobble after that, it confirms my intention of opening a talking point.

When I came back to the thread, the Jabber thing had gone down, and Ninja made some post (I may have quoted it in myfilter, can't remember) that made me think she's probably town. So I retracted my scumread on her and focused on other things.

Does this explanation of events work for you?

On May 28 2014 16:43 Palmar wrote:

Which part of it do you not get?

"If you leave it vague like this, it makes it seem like you're just trying to throw dirt on him without actually having to take a stand."

This is basically saying

"If you don't elaborate, you're acting like mafia".

When in reality if MZ is town, he shouldn't care whether or not i acts like mafia, but if he is mafia. If MZ is town and thinks i is town his logical explanation should be

"If you don't elaborate, you won't convince anyone".

Because if MZ thinks i is town, he wouldn't care about i doing something potentially scummy for the sake of it being scummy, and rather because it is not helpful. However if MZ thinks i is mafia, why is he explaining the steps i can take to remove any suspicion MZ might have to him. It's like me saying "hey, you just made a case that is wrong, that is very mafia like. please make another case that is right so I don't have to call you mafia." It's just an absurd way of playing the game.

The only reasonable conclusion is that MZ must think i is town, and thus it makes no sense for MZ to point out something i does looks like something mafia does.

The reason I created in my head is that MZ knows i is town, and doesn't feel the need to call him mafia right now, but does leave the open-ended suspicion for use later.

On May 28 2014 14:32 gobbledydook wrote:
so sloosh, what is *your* read on MZ? I have given my read already, basically I think he's not confident in his reads so he's hedging his bets.

On May 29 2014 02:41 Alakaslam wrote:
Watch someone who doesn't get math ask who i is

"Oh, dearest, you mean- 'who am I', not 'who is i', that' improper spelling and grammar."