He has absolutely no reason to question his zomg read if he's scum. He'd either be bussing or going for a newbie mislynch. Either way, hedging there looks bad and scumhuntz wouldn't do it.
Ninja'd me.
But his vote on me? No reason, no prior mention, kind of just a vote for the sake of it.
And I didn't really read the Zomg thing as questioning his read, but rather, just parroting what everyone else is saying.
This lynch isn't happening toDay anyway since lots of people have Silver as town. I might just be wrong, but argh.
I like Proph and I like Tom. Hey Tom please keep up the good work I don't wanna bark at you like a rabid dog until you're lynched again, ok?
I also mildly like D_V, but I gotta constantly remind myself that a D_V with bad reads on the gamestate doing questionable things is a scum!D_V, not a VI D_V.
And yey two neutral claims D1! Everything we needed in order to not be distracted on our scumhunting effort right?!
@Cythare: weren't you scum in Eeveelution also? I remember getting duped by you and Seppel in that game IIRC.
Voting you is reasonable. He believes proph and sees you as a dichotomy.
I think his thinking is shallow, but it tracks.
I think it's just as possible we need to lynch neither or both of you as one or the other. I'm an evolved thinker like that.
But townhuntz is just like "nah man, they can't both be pro town" and plopped his vote down. It seems fine.
And he is absolutely questioning his zomg read. Try again
Voting you is reasonable. He believes proph and sees you as a dichotomy.
I think his thinking is shallow, but it tracks.
I think it's just as possible we need to lynch neither or both of you as one or the other. I'm an evolved thinker like that.
But townhuntz is just like "nah man, they can't both be pro town" and plopped his vote down. It seems fine.
And he is absolutely questioning his zomg read. Try again
Where did he say this?
My vote is predominantly to push him to give a reason, so if he already said this, its purpose is diminished.
He didn't state it explicitly, but I can follow his progression.
Oh I totally believe proph.
Don't really know who the scum is.
Let's vote the less townie of the claimed neutrals.
Like, I get it. How do you not?
I see where you're coming from, I just didn't see him state that so would prefer to have him give a reason rather than draw conclusions. Like I said, with no explanation given, how can we know what he was thinking? We can draw assumptions, but he's given us no reason to. Even still, a vote because he doesn't know what's going on is a lazy one.
Hence me interpreting it as him voting what I think he saw as a trendy wagon because he didn't know what else to do.
no I get it.
I just don't think lazy and unhelpful equals scum
If that's the case we should just lynch me and dv every time
Very good point, I'll actually take that insight and use it in future games as well. I've definitely been lazy town.
I would still like his own explanation, so my vote remains until then to encourage him.
Okay, so I've now completely realized that I need to play this from my computer and not my phone, otherwise I'm going to fall behind.
Mind, Cyth, Scar: I'm pretty confident that GJ is town, albeit really antagonistic and frustrating, but town. He is pushing the No Lynch way to hard (though I think it's a dumb idea) to actually be coming from a scum pushing their own agenda. He seems to genuinely believe in it. I think time spent continually pushing him is wasted and actually pulls time away from him trying to unnerve other people into slipping up if they are scum.
Clover, DV, Hunt (and Soren too I suppose): What good is it for town to lynch neutrals that (probably) don't have a true night kill? They aren't necessary to achieve a town victory, and they won't mess with your abilities, so whats the harm in keeping them around for now? Honestly, I would expect them to fall victim to the mafia at some point, because a scum neutralization is much more harmful to them than a town neutralization is to us. And Ghosting does something with abilities, but more than likely not removing them (because he was so concerned with making sure Proph's ability didn't remove them, there's no way that that is somehow his method/wincon.
Gentleman Johnny: Why so much antagonistic behavior? I get that you are trying to draw out reactions, but there has to be a better way. This is a game, it's supposed to be fun, and it doesn't seem like the interactions you're creating have any fun to them. Scum or not, if you throw enough brute force at people, they will break, or see you swing, neither of which are helpful.
To the question that was asked a bit ago but didn't get a lot of answers: I am in general against claiming how to unlock your latent abilities for a couple of reasons. One, knowing the triggers gives a viable and usable guideline to the scum on how best to order their night kills. Two, I don't think they're really all that important, sure, some will unlock as the game goes on, and that's dandy, but it doesn't do us any good to get some power roles at the expense of a more likely town win.
Tom: Good to see you again, you probably don't remember me, but we played a forum game about 6 years back called Kank's premium blend.
Okay, so I've now completely realized that I need to play this from my computer and not my phone, otherwise I'm going to fall behind.
Mind, Cyth, Scar: I'm pretty confident that GJ is town, albeit really antagonistic and frustrating, but town. He is pushing the No Lynch way to hard (though I think it's a dumb idea) to actually be coming from a scum pushing their own agenda. He seems to genuinely believe in it. I think time spent continually pushing him is wasted and actually pulls time away from him trying to unnerve other people into slipping up if they are scum.
Clover, DV, Hunt (and Soren too I suppose): What good is it for town to lynch neutrals that (probably) don't have a true night kill? They aren't necessary to achieve a town victory, and they won't mess with your abilities, so whats the harm in keeping them around for now? Honestly, I would expect them to fall victim to the mafia at some point, because a scum neutralization is much more harmful to them than a town neutralization is to us. And Ghosting does something with abilities, but more than likely not removing them (because he was so concerned with making sure Proph's ability didn't remove them, there's no way that that is somehow his method/wincon.
Gentleman Johnny: Why so much antagonistic behavior? I get that you are trying to draw out reactions, but there has to be a better way. This is a game, it's supposed to be fun, and it doesn't seem like the interactions you're creating have any fun to them. Scum or not, if you throw enough brute force at people, they will break, or see you swing, neither of which are helpful.
To the question that was asked a bit ago but didn't get a lot of answers: I am in general against claiming how to unlock your latent abilities for a couple of reasons. One, knowing the triggers gives a viable and usable guideline to the scum on how best to order their night kills. Two, I don't think they're really all that important, sure, some will unlock as the game goes on, and that's dandy, but it doesn't do us any good to get some power roles at the expense of a more likely town win.
Tom: Good to see you again, you probably don't remember me, but we played a forum game about 6 years back called Kank's premium blend.
No no. It's that I believe that there could be ONE neutral. I don't believe that there would be TWO. I believe Proph, but didn't like the pussyfooting around the topic by Ghosting. I think Ghosting is lying scum.
Actually that goes for Ghosting too. There's your answer.
No no. It's that I believe that there could be ONE neutral. I don't believe that there would be TWO. I believe Proph, but didn't like the pussyfooting around the topic by Ghosting. I think Ghosting is lying scum.
Actually that goes for Ghosting too. There's your answer.
@Tom,
I love when we are town together.
Oh, and also
Vote Ghosting Again. Harder this time.
Yes, because scum would love to claim neutral day one, bring a bunch of attention to themselves, and then help town unlock their latent abilities? For what reason? Your sole reason is because you don't believe that I'm neutral?
I'm not that bad.
What if Proph had claimed second? How would your opinion differ?
Why do you think a role that gets rid of abilities is more likely to be a pro-town neutral role than someone who wants town to have their abilities?
However, I am satisfied with you now giving me a reason, so I thank you for that. Per my promise, Unvote.
This lynch isn't happening toDay anyway since lots of people have Silver as town. I might just be wrong, but argh.
I like Proph and I like Tom. Hey Tom please keep up the good work I don't wanna bark at you like a rabid dog until you're lynched again, ok?
I also mildly like D_V, but I gotta constantly remind myself that a D_V with bad reads on the gamestate doing questionable things is a scum!D_V, not a VI D_V.
And yey two neutral claims D1! Everything we needed in order to not be distracted on our scumhunting effort right?!
@Cythare: weren't you scum in Eeveelution also? I remember getting duped by you and Seppel in that game IIRC.
Additionally, where is my scum motive?
I'm not pushing wagons, I've made only a few attempts at scumhunting -- mostly I'm trying to work on things that are relevant to my role. Does that not further indicate I'm not lying? Since the start my behaviour has been neutral.
If you think that I've just decided to gambit and claim neutral, you're suggesting I'm unnecessarily putting myself in a position I have no reason to (especially this early). It just doesn't make much sense to me. Why not just play my usual scum game and try to solve the game, appear as town as possible, and take advantage of wagons I could see moving forward?
I'm not even trying to get Proph lynched, lol.
I just feel like, while you're welcome to believe this, if the thought process is just "I think there's only one neutral", you're gaming the mod.
Me and Bur go way back, and he was the first person I ever modded alongside. As far as gaming the mod goes, if I am gonna do it anywhere it would be here...
But I hear the true annoyance in your words. I will think on it a little and get back to you. I can see your point that you aren't THAT bad. It also nets you nothing as scum... it's not like a counterclaim of a power role.
The only motivation I could see behind it from scum would be to get Proph lynched being scared of being vanillalized... vanillafied... I'm just gonna call it "nerfed" ... so much easier. But like you said, you aren't doing that.
@Proph:
re: Jack, his #166 is a good point I hadn't considered, and both of his posts immediately after that mirrored my thoughts on zomg's post pretty closely. The fact that it came before me or Cyth mentioned we also had similar problems with the post is the big thing, since the most anyone had really said about that post specifically was when Kosa said it was bad logic.
I believe Ghosting's neutral claim, his behavior pretty closely matches SK!Ghosting in GoldenEye. Total focus on not getting lynched and all that.
Withholding my thoughts on GJ/Mindreaver until I can look at their conversation a little more closely.
@Atogaholic: Is Huntzilla a double voter? He's voting Ghosting twice.
Ghosting is spending way too much time trying to convince us he is not scum.
Look at his posts.
Instead I should ignore anything being said when my only purpose is to fulfill my win condition? I don't need to scumhunt, and I don't win with any teams, so self-preservation is absolutely a priority.
Actually, you're totally being manipulative with that wording -- it's sooo hyperbolic.
You say:
"Ghosting is spending way too much time trying to convince us he is not scum."
Am I really? Let's take a look at all this time I'm spending:
Where did he say this?
My vote is predominantly to push him to give a reason, so if he already said this, its purpose is diminished.
Not saying how “not scum” I am.
Ninja'd me.
But his vote on me? No reason, no prior mention, kind of just a vote for the sake of it.
And I didn't really read the Zomg thing as questioning his read, but rather, just parroting what everyone else is saying.
Still not.
I'll unvote him if you can explain how the post I referenced isn't super scummy. This one:
Maybe I'd get less votes if I just start posting GIFs and nothing else. 
Still not.
I see where you're coming from, I just didn't see him state that so would prefer to have him give a reason rather than draw conclusions. Like I said, with no explanation given, how can we know what he was thinking? We can draw assumptions, but he's given us no reason to. Even still, a vote because he doesn't know what's going on is a lazy one.
Hence me interpreting it as him voting what I think he saw as a trendy wagon because he didn't know what else to do.
Again, not saying how not scum I am.
Because it's:
1) Lazy
2) Parroting town
3) Not attempting to solve the game, just going with what's popular
4) Without reason
Still not saying it.
Like, with all the options present, he's like, "Well may as well vote one of the two neutrals, that certainly has the best chance of getting scum!”
I just don't see how you assume his position and get that, but don't understand how I'm seeing his vote as lazy and unhelpful.
Very good point, I'll actually take that insight and use it in future games as well. I've definitely been lazy town.
I would still like his own explanation, so my vote remains until then to encourage him. 
Maybe we aren’t reading the same thread?
Yes, because scum would love to claim neutral day one, bring a bunch of attention to themselves, and then help town unlock their latent abilities? For what reason? Your sole reason is because you don't believe that I'm neutral?
I'm not that bad.
What if Proph had claimed second? How would your opinion differ?
Why do you think a role that gets rid of abilities is more likely to be a pro-town neutral role than someone who wants town to have their abilities?
However, I am satisfied with you now giving me a reason, so I thank you for that. Per my promise,
Unvote.
A mere one-third references my alignment, in a way that Hunt agrees with. I then ask if that’s his sole reason.
Ghosting, you suck at scumhunting when you're not town. You don't have that fire.
That's a bad vote too.
You are likely neutral, possibly scum, never town.
You don't get to omgus people when wanting you dead is natural.
Not that dv is lock town. I barely have an opinion.
That's just not a reason you get to use this game. And frankly, he's right
I'm not OMGUS voting him, he said something that's far from true. Why am I supposed to let him do that, when the intent is to smear me and cause others to vote for me? Based on a statement that isn't even true.
He said: look at Ghosting's posts, so I did...and what did we find, none of what he said.
It's not that far from true. You have definitely said some stuff for the purpose of us not thinking you're scum
And it's worked. I don't think you have teammates. So good on you.
It's not that far from true. You have definitely said some stuff for the purpose of us not thinking you're scum
And it's worked. I don't think you have teammates. So good on you.
I thought it would be easier to read you after having a huge scum qt together, and it has helped absolutely zero, lol.
It's just flailing kill it to put it out of it's misery.
>Completely ignores the legitimate refute of your accusation.
I quoted a huge amount of my posts to prove what you said wasn't true...and that's it. To assume that if I was scum I would even think there's a reason to flail is just ridiculous lol. There is barely a wagon on me, Hunt is reconsidering because he sees logic in what I said, and you don't even have any points worth bothering with. As a neutral with a pro-town role, I have even less reason to flail, but what scum in their right mind would even flail under this little amount of pressure.
Your attempts at smearing me are so low effort. I'll make sure to not bother responding to them, because people can just make things up and those things shouldn't ever be refuted. If they are, it's flailing.
But yes, D_V, I'm "flailing".
Do you disagree with everything in Hunt's post #319?
It's just flailing kill it to put it out of it's misery.
>Completely ignores the legitimate refute of your accusation.
I quoted a huge amount of my posts to prove what you said wasn't true...and that's it. To assume that if I was scum I would even think there's a reason to flail is just ridiculous lol. There is barely a wagon on me, Hunt is reconsidering because he sees logic in what I said, and you don't even have any points worth bothering with. As a neutral with a pro-town role, I have even less reason to flail, but what scum in their right mind would even flail under this little amount of pressure.
Your attempts at smearing me are so low effort. I'll make sure to not bother responding to them, because people can just make things up and those things shouldn't ever be refuted. If they are, it's flailing.
But yes, D_V, I'm "flailing".
Do you disagree with everything in Hunt's post #319?
Anyway, time for bed, I'll see you guys tomorrow.
You are way too focused on "Winning the argument to prove you are town".
And yet again...nothing in there about me proving I'm town, I'm saying how I'm not flailing at all and wouldn't even have a reason to with the jokingly small amount of pressure on me, and what little pressure there was has dissipated to an even lesssr degree with Hunt's #319.
And then I asked a question, which you ignored.
When all of your responses are short sarcastic quips, and you show no desire to listen, rationalize, or even appropriately respond to refutes and questions asked of you, it just reflects a lot more poorly on you and doesn't show an eagerness to or genuine desire to work out the game, but rather, simply a desire to make what you want happen.
I find Hunt'a response much more town -- regardless of what his end opinion is -- because he shows willingness to see a response, take a look at it, and think. In your case, the same can't be said at all. It's just misreps, smearing, and skirting around refutes.
I'll reword this: suppose I am a pro-town neutral like I claim, where does your vote move?
I'm asking you for a serious answer, and if you can't give me that, I see no reason to further discussion with you.
And if you think "I'd still lynch you" is an appropriate response when asked what you'd do if I was somehow
confirmed pro-town neutral, we have an issue.
I'll reword this: suppose I am a pro-town neutral like I claim, where does your vote move?
I'm asking you for a serious answer, and if you can't give me that, I see no reason to further discussion with you.
And if you think "I'd still lynch you" is an appropriate response when asked what you'd do if I was somehow
confirmed pro-town neutral, we have an issue.
1) Proph claims neutral. Claims his role removes abilities and "vanillafy" people. Wincon - Errybody is vanilla.
2) Ghosting claims the opposite of proph. This would mean he grants/amplifies abilities. His wincon is something along the lines of "no vanillas". That's what I get from "opposite".
3) Hunt senses dichotomy, believes proph, votes ghosting.
4) D_V agrees with Hunt, votes Ghosting, for tone as well as because he agrees with Hunt.
First, I also happen to believe proph. Also, I happen to believe ghosting as well. If his role is the opposite, it means he's essentially Anti-Vanillafying people. That doesn't seem like a scum ability. I don't see why both roles can't exist as claimed. It also doesn't seem like a hard thing to prove. Finally doesn't seem like the kind of thing that would hang around for long, if it wasn't true.
So why are we willing to give proph the benefit of the doubt here, and not ghosting? Because of playstyle? I'm not understanding what the argument is. Are we afraid that ghosting is lying to... what exactly? I don't understand what his motive could be. So lets give him a small pool of targets, and see what happens. Maybe he eats a scum-side roleblock (or a NK), but that's pretty good for us too.
@Ghosting: If you actually want to show that you are pro-town, stop spending so much time defending yourself. I know you think it isn't a lot of your posts, but I do agree with D_V that it feels that way. I was going to say that I don't think that you're a priority lynch, because I believe that you could be neutral with Proph, but the more that I mulled it and Huntzilla's statement over in my head, the more unsure I become. In a vacuum, I do believe that two neutrals are viable, but it's kinda weird to me that you are almost opposed but not actually at all. Still want to see some actual legwork from you before I decide that isn't just turtling.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Ninja'd me.
But his vote on me? No reason, no prior mention, kind of just a vote for the sake of it.
And I didn't really read the Zomg thing as questioning his read, but rather, just parroting what everyone else is saying.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
This lynch isn't happening toDay anyway since lots of people have Silver as town. I might just be wrong, but argh.
I like Proph and I like Tom. Hey Tom please keep up the good work I don't wanna bark at you like a rabid dog until you're lynched again, ok?
I also mildly like D_V, but I gotta constantly remind myself that a D_V with bad reads on the gamestate doing questionable things is a scum!D_V, not a VI D_V.
And yey two neutral claims D1! Everything we needed in order to not be distracted on our scumhunting effort right?!
@Cythare: weren't you scum in Eeveelution also? I remember getting duped by you and Seppel in that game IIRC.
I think his thinking is shallow, but it tracks.
I think it's just as possible we need to lynch neither or both of you as one or the other. I'm an evolved thinker like that.
But townhuntz is just like "nah man, they can't both be pro town" and plopped his vote down. It seems fine.
And he is absolutely questioning his zomg read. Try again
Where did he say this?
My vote is predominantly to push him to give a reason, so if he already said this, its purpose is diminished.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Oh I totally believe proph.
Don't really know who the scum is.
Let's vote the less townie of the claimed neutrals.
Like, I get it. How do you not?
Vote Gentleman Johnny
Yes, so was. I just gave my 2 most recent ones, not all of them.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
I see where you're coming from, I just didn't see him state that so would prefer to have him give a reason rather than draw conclusions. Like I said, with no explanation given, how can we know what he was thinking? We can draw assumptions, but he's given us no reason to. Even still, a vote because he doesn't know what's going on is a lazy one.
Hence me interpreting it as him voting what I think he saw as a trendy wagon because he didn't know what else to do.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Because it's:
1) Lazy
2) Parroting town
3) Not attempting to solve the game, just going with what's popular
4) Without reason
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
I just don't think lazy and unhelpful equals scum
If that's the case we should just lynch me and dv every time
Very good point, I'll actually take that insight and use it in future games as well. I've definitely been lazy town.
I would still like his own explanation, so my vote remains until then to encourage him.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Gentleman Johnny (3) - Mindreaver, Scarbo, Cythare
Ghosting (3) - Lil4leafclover, D_V, Huntzilla
Mindreaver (1) - Gentleman Johnny
zomgarcwind (1) - Jackrito
Prophylaxis (1) - SorenBlade
Jackrito (1) - tomsloger
Cythare (1) - Prophylaxis
Huntzilla (1) - Ghosting
Not Voting (5) - shadowlancerx, Silvercrys3467, zomgarcwind, Vaimes, Kosakosa
With 17 alive, it's 9 to lynch.
Deadline is Friday, October 7th, at 11:59 PM EST.
The most definitive thing you've said, is that Silver is scum and then you backed away. What do you believe in?
Mind, Cyth, Scar: I'm pretty confident that GJ is town, albeit really antagonistic and frustrating, but town. He is pushing the No Lynch way to hard (though I think it's a dumb idea) to actually be coming from a scum pushing their own agenda. He seems to genuinely believe in it. I think time spent continually pushing him is wasted and actually pulls time away from him trying to unnerve other people into slipping up if they are scum.
Clover, DV, Hunt (and Soren too I suppose): What good is it for town to lynch neutrals that (probably) don't have a true night kill? They aren't necessary to achieve a town victory, and they won't mess with your abilities, so whats the harm in keeping them around for now? Honestly, I would expect them to fall victim to the mafia at some point, because a scum neutralization is much more harmful to them than a town neutralization is to us. And Ghosting does something with abilities, but more than likely not removing them (because he was so concerned with making sure Proph's ability didn't remove them, there's no way that that is somehow his method/wincon.
Gentleman Johnny: Why so much antagonistic behavior? I get that you are trying to draw out reactions, but there has to be a better way. This is a game, it's supposed to be fun, and it doesn't seem like the interactions you're creating have any fun to them. Scum or not, if you throw enough brute force at people, they will break, or see you swing, neither of which are helpful.
To the question that was asked a bit ago but didn't get a lot of answers: I am in general against claiming how to unlock your latent abilities for a couple of reasons. One, knowing the triggers gives a viable and usable guideline to the scum on how best to order their night kills. Two, I don't think they're really all that important, sure, some will unlock as the game goes on, and that's dandy, but it doesn't do us any good to get some power roles at the expense of a more likely town win.
Tom: Good to see you again, you probably don't remember me, but we played a forum game about 6 years back called Kank's premium blend.
No no. It's that I believe that there could be ONE neutral. I don't believe that there would be TWO. I believe Proph, but didn't like the pussyfooting around the topic by Ghosting. I think Ghosting is lying scum.
Actually that goes for Ghosting too. There's your answer.
@Tom,
I love when we are town together.
Oh, and also
Vote Ghosting Again. Harder this time.
Yes, because scum would love to claim neutral day one, bring a bunch of attention to themselves, and then help town unlock their latent abilities? For what reason? Your sole reason is because you don't believe that I'm neutral?
I'm not that bad.
What if Proph had claimed second? How would your opinion differ?
Why do you think a role that gets rid of abilities is more likely to be a pro-town neutral role than someone who wants town to have their abilities?
However, I am satisfied with you now giving me a reason, so I thank you for that. Per my promise,
Unvote.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
In what way do I not understand the game state?
I'm not pushing wagons, I've made only a few attempts at scumhunting -- mostly I'm trying to work on things that are relevant to my role. Does that not further indicate I'm not lying? Since the start my behaviour has been neutral.
If you think that I've just decided to gambit and claim neutral, you're suggesting I'm unnecessarily putting myself in a position I have no reason to (especially this early). It just doesn't make much sense to me. Why not just play my usual scum game and try to solve the game, appear as town as possible, and take advantage of wagons I could see moving forward?
I'm not even trying to get Proph lynched, lol.
I just feel like, while you're welcome to believe this, if the thought process is just "I think there's only one neutral", you're gaming the mod.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
But I hear the true annoyance in your words. I will think on it a little and get back to you. I can see your point that you aren't THAT bad. It also nets you nothing as scum... it's not like a counterclaim of a power role.
The only motivation I could see behind it from scum would be to get Proph lynched being scared of being vanillalized... vanillafied... I'm just gonna call it "nerfed" ... so much easier. But like you said, you aren't doing that.
hmmmm...
Ghosting is spending way too much time trying to convince us he is not scum.
Look at his posts.
Ghosting (4) - Lil4leafclover, D_V, Huntzilla, Huntzilla
Gentleman Johnny (3) - Scarbo, Cythare, zomgarcwind
Mindreaver (1) - Gentleman Johnny
zomgarcwind (1) - Jackrito
Prophylaxis (1) - SorenBlade
Jackrito (1) - tomsloger
Cythare (1) - Prophylaxis
Kosakosa (1) - Mindreaver
Not Voting (5) - shadowlancerx, Silvercrys3467, Vaimes, Kosakosa, Ghosting
With 17 alive, it's 9 to lynch.
Deadline is Friday, October 7th, at 11:59 PM EST.
re: Jack, his #166 is a good point I hadn't considered, and both of his posts immediately after that mirrored my thoughts on zomg's post pretty closely. The fact that it came before me or Cyth mentioned we also had similar problems with the post is the big thing, since the most anyone had really said about that post specifically was when Kosa said it was bad logic.
I believe Ghosting's neutral claim, his behavior pretty closely matches SK!Ghosting in GoldenEye. Total focus on not getting lynched and all that.
Withholding my thoughts on GJ/Mindreaver until I can look at their conversation a little more closely.
@Atogaholic: Is Huntzilla a double voter? He's voting Ghosting twice.
Instead I should ignore anything being said when my only purpose is to fulfill my win condition? I don't need to scumhunt, and I don't win with any teams, so self-preservation is absolutely a priority.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
You say:
"Ghosting is spending way too much time trying to convince us he is not scum."
Am I really? Let's take a look at all this time I'm spending:
Not saying how “not scum” I am.
Still not.
Still not.
Again, not saying how not scum I am.
Still not saying it.
Maybe we aren’t reading the same thread?
A mere one-third references my alignment, in a way that Hunt agrees with. I then ask if that’s his sole reason.
You get the point, right?
Vote: D_V.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Upon looking at my posts, does it really seem that way, D_V? Or are you just trying to paint a picture of me to push a wagon?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
That's a bad vote too.
You are likely neutral, possibly scum, never town.
You don't get to omgus people when wanting you dead is natural.
Not that dv is lock town. I barely have an opinion.
That's just not a reason you get to use this game. And frankly, he's right
I'm not OMGUS voting him, he said something that's far from true. Why am I supposed to let him do that, when the intent is to smear me and cause others to vote for me? Based on a statement that isn't even true.
He said: look at Ghosting's posts, so I did...and what did we find, none of what he said.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
And it's worked. I don't think you have teammates. So good on you.
I thought it would be easier to read you after having a huge scum qt together, and it has helped absolutely zero, lol.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
For all the talk about how hard I am to read I've yet to win a scum game anywhere but MU, where I'm amazing apparently.
>Completely ignores the legitimate refute of your accusation.
I quoted a huge amount of my posts to prove what you said wasn't true...and that's it. To assume that if I was scum I would even think there's a reason to flail is just ridiculous lol. There is barely a wagon on me, Hunt is reconsidering because he sees logic in what I said, and you don't even have any points worth bothering with. As a neutral with a pro-town role, I have even less reason to flail, but what scum in their right mind would even flail under this little amount of pressure.
Your attempts at smearing me are so low effort. I'll make sure to not bother responding to them, because people can just make things up and those things shouldn't ever be refuted. If they are, it's flailing.
But yes, D_V, I'm "flailing".
Do you disagree with everything in Hunt's post #319?
Anyway, time for bed, I'll see you guys tomorrow.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
I miss the votecount button on MU already.
And now I'm off to bed.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
A double voter is always town? I don't think is double voting Mafia is likely, but can you really confirm him town just based on that?
You are way too focused on "Winning the argument to prove you are town".
But you keep dreaming!
You realize that I'm not trying to prove I'm town, right? Lol.
Also, I'm focused on calling out your bs when it's blatantly false.
Let's imagine a world where I'm neutral like I claim: where does your vote move?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
And then I asked a question, which you ignored.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
It stays on you and we lynch you.
I find Hunt'a response much more town -- regardless of what his end opinion is -- because he shows willingness to see a response, take a look at it, and think. In your case, the same can't be said at all. It's just misreps, smearing, and skirting around refutes.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
I'll reword this: suppose I am a pro-town neutral like I claim, where does your vote move?
I'm asking you for a serious answer, and if you can't give me that, I see no reason to further discussion with you.
And if you think "I'd still lynch you" is an appropriate response when asked what you'd do if I was somehow
confirmed pro-town neutral, we have an issue.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
It stays on you.
What is confusing about this?
Also I agree with hunt. To answer your question.
1) Proph claims neutral. Claims his role removes abilities and "vanillafy" people. Wincon - Errybody is vanilla.
2) Ghosting claims the opposite of proph. This would mean he grants/amplifies abilities. His wincon is something along the lines of "no vanillas". That's what I get from "opposite".
3) Hunt senses dichotomy, believes proph, votes ghosting.
4) D_V agrees with Hunt, votes Ghosting, for tone as well as because he agrees with Hunt.
First, I also happen to believe proph. Also, I happen to believe ghosting as well. If his role is the opposite, it means he's essentially Anti-Vanillafying people. That doesn't seem like a scum ability. I don't see why both roles can't exist as claimed. It also doesn't seem like a hard thing to prove. Finally doesn't seem like the kind of thing that would hang around for long, if it wasn't true.
So why are we willing to give proph the benefit of the doubt here, and not ghosting? Because of playstyle? I'm not understanding what the argument is. Are we afraid that ghosting is lying to... what exactly? I don't understand what his motive could be. So lets give him a small pool of targets, and see what happens. Maybe he eats a scum-side roleblock (or a NK), but that's pretty good for us too.
Vote Gentleman Johnny
@Ghosting: If you actually want to show that you are pro-town, stop spending so much time defending yourself. I know you think it isn't a lot of your posts, but I do agree with D_V that it feels that way. I was going to say that I don't think that you're a priority lynch, because I believe that you could be neutral with Proph, but the more that I mulled it and Huntzilla's statement over in my head, the more unsure I become. In a vacuum, I do believe that two neutrals are viable, but it's kinda weird to me that you are almost opposed but not actually at all. Still want to see some actual legwork from you before I decide that isn't just turtling.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)