[M] Classic Mafia - Page 116

On March 24 2018 08:49 n00bKing wrote:

lulz?

*You* thought they were likely both the same alignment (and said so). *I* thought they were likely both the same alignment (and said so). Vivax thought they were likely both the same alignment (and said so). And that's just off the top of my head. Could have been more people who said things that were similar. But *nobody* was looking at it from the outside and saying they thought it was TvS, that I recall.

On March 24 2018 09:11 raynpelikoneet wrote:
"Same alignment" is also bullshit, always, based on two people arguing.

On March 24 2018 09:21 n00bKing wrote:

Well, looks like both of the people you're addressing disagree with you.

On March 24 2018 09:22 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Regarding this i actually have one thing to say.

darthfoley, since i have completely forgotten what i think your alignment is do you remember who was the guy who said one or both of us have to be mafia? Basically he called the argument between us "forced" but couldn't tell if we are both mafia (which is always the case if an argument is forced). But then he added the "if not both at least one" which is completely bs since if a townie and mafia are arguing and you cannot tell which one of those is mafia then it is equally likely the argument is TvS than that it is TvT.

On March 24 2018 04:06 raynpelikoneet wrote:
No you dont. I said tomorrow.

On March 24 2018 09:28 Tictock wrote:


This is the funniest thing I have read in this game all day. Almost sad, but still really funny.

I realize I am doing that thing where I am just posting my thoughts and reactions to whatever strikes my fancy and probably not doing anything actually productive.

I’m almost caught up though and will be home soon. So whatever that means.

On March 24 2018 08:05 n00bKing wrote:

More fake or less fake than Slam's, in your opinion?
More fake or less fake than rayn's, in your opinion?

On March 24 2018 09:44 Tictock wrote:


Yay a non WoT to quote.

Similar question to you as I posed to Moosy.

You guys were scum together last game, what is your read of him this game.

And if you try to give me some shit kus I didn’t repaond to something you asked me you will have to ask it again. I only skim some of your posts.

On March 24 2018 09:44 Tictock wrote:


Yay a non WoT to quote.

Similar question to you as I posed to Moosy.

You guys were scum together last game, what is your read of him this game.

And if you try to give me some shit kus I didn’t repaond to something you asked me you will have to ask it again. I only skim some of your posts.

On March 24 2018 07:55 n00bKing wrote:

It has relevance to this game in that rayn displayed a willingness to continue an argument in which he knows he is in the wrong. My fake-out non-vote of him was a big topic of discussion in that game, I *know* he remembers it. I *know* that HE knows that I did not vote for him in that game, and that the only two players I voted for in that game were BOTH scum. Yet he continued to extend the argument about it, time and time again. For what? To make the game thread longer and harder to read? To make his filter longer and harder to read? To try and take my focus off of the game at hand? What other reason would he have for willfully extending an argument where he knows what I've said is fact?

On March 24 2018 08:03 n00bKing wrote:

And if your inclination is to "assume that both were targeted because their reads were on track" then wouldn't you have to expect the mafia to have thought of this, when selecting their targets? In chess terms, this would represent thinking just ONE move ahead, yet you've not even done that?

Holyflare's top scum read had been mocsta, and Vivax's targets were Kelsier and Exo (whom multiple players had said were likely of the same alignment, regardless of which alignment that turned out to be). If the mafia wants people to think that HF and Vivax were targeted because their reads were on track, then it could be in an effort to achieve a mislynch on any of mocsta/Exo/Kelsier. Problem being that (if mocsta is truly a town Vigilante) they didn't foresee that he would cement his earlier Vigilante claim, and shoot Exo. Making an Exo mislynch impossible, a mocsta mislynch unlikely, and (if people still think Exo and Kelsier were likely the same alignment) a mislynch on Kelsier unlikely as well.

If you want to operate under the assumption that HF and Vivax were killed because their reads were on track, are you suggesting that mocsta should be the lynch? Are you suggesting that Kelsier should be the lynch? Are you suggesting anyone should be the lynch?

On March 24 2018 08:15 n00bKing wrote:

There wouldn't be any risk of fruitlessly responding to a dead HF, if you just didn't post until you'd read. And being saved from fruitlessly responding to a dead HF didn't save you from fruitlessly making posts about the flips while having no context.

eg "Exo seems like the weirdest kill to me, unless he was vigged?" If you just read before you posted, you would have seen that mocsta had said he was vig-killing Exo.

So, why would a TOWN player feel any need to post reactions to the flips, if he hadn't read the rest of the thread yet, and had no context to work with? I see absolutely no reason for a town player to do this. However, it is comparatively easier for me to pick out the scum motivation for trying to sound like you've not read the thread when you actually have.