There could be people with further information associated with their roles, who would be able to tell the alignment of somebody from minimal information. Role Cop / Flavour Cop would be able to do this.

That post sealed it. Vote Red_Baron.

Ahh, so you don't even wait for the rest of my post, where I give my reply to you?

But your getting it anyway:
Now to Penut - Again answering seriously takes space - sorry about that:

Of course I believe that, since due to me having so much more written down, it should be way easier to get a picture of my opinion and spot slips if there is any.


So basically, no matter what I do, I am either town or scum.. damn what a good argument. And yes, of course there isn't much variation, how much do you want me to variate when muttly13 is mostly posting the same accusation against me over and over??


So you laughed at it.. and you state that the exact same can be applied to me. IT CANNOT And I would really like to see you try. I'll try to argue why in a format to make it more simple to read:

- How can the same argument be applied to me, when its a known fact that I've posted way more reactions and arguments than muttly13?

- Yes, I have made repetition in my posts, when answering the same accusation from muttly13 as before, I have however also added new stuff.

- Yes, in many of my posts I notice his contradictions and weak accusation as scummy - however I am not targeting one person. I am answering several people - giving reasons as well. I could of course call it scummy what I see some do, but for now I am keeping low with that one, until I see what muttly13 is. There might still be a chance that I am wrong in my interpretation of his alignment.

- Links to above, since I've mentioned other options for muttly13, he has only seen one for me and repeated it over and over: I must be scum.


Its a damn hard task your asking, since thats the basic point of the game. I'll give a try to explain your questions, but can't make a post saying with proof as to why I am not scum. that would be claiming and still it would be a matter of believing it or not.

First question: The vote your referring to is from RVS where one was joking about Zchinque being a good player and pointed out one who later turned out to be scum. I believe most of the older players on GOG mafia knows what it was. Anyway, to say it simply: I was following up on the joke, however there was of course hint of truth in it. If Zchinque was mafia then he would indeed be dangerous as I find him hard to read. For the other part why I didn't post much. Well I had project delivery on the 21, I went for a Christmas tree on the 23, then Christmas 24 and so on continued a long line of holidays. My first whole day without family stuff or parties was on the fourth of January.. So yea slightly before day1 ended, but the main reason for posting more: There is more to post about. When we're all just sitting around with the no argument going on ad mostly without being directly accused, then not much is to write. But since that occurred from the beginning of day2, well there you have the novels. And I made long posts before while Zchinque was still alive and those were even against some of what he was writing, check back to post 303 of mine.

Good foundation, though if you don't believe muttly13 nor me. Why do you then find me scummy? Because I write a lot? And what do you then think of muttly13? Oh well, doesn't matter really and if I get lynched I have provided everything one will need to swiftly kill of him and maybe those who have also clearly been indicated by him.

Also on last thing, if I am scum it would be an odd idea too gather this much attention on myself, but hey could be of course...

So you want both of us to post why we are town, yet you wait for me to do so and muttly13 to post without doing so. And you vote for me... And muttly13 doesn't react at all to being proven wrong with his own quote? No of course, I am just hearsing what he said...

So Penut, what in my post sealed it? Sealed what actually? That replying to questions is more scummy? Showing others wrong is more scummy? Actually giving reasons is more scummy?

Well.. That brings me to L1 with muttly13 being L2 if I am correct? Vitek talked about voting muttly13, dunno if I should wait until then? I can basically only try claiming, since those voting for me doesn't seem to consider reason. Sadly more than 3 have voted for me, meaning that not all are scum and for some reason or another seems convinced that my ONE post stating I hope for info from the lynch and later voting for stuart is such a scummy move.. Or maybe its that I made long posts thats so scummy? No wait, its that I quote the person I am making an argumentation against and make reasons based on that.. Wait, Zchinque did that also...Hmm so basically I am so scummy, because I reply with reason as opposed to just accusations... the same accusation, the same wrong accusation.... Damn mafia games have fallen low in this argument here. And if I am lynched and you don't lynch muttly13 as a response, then town and I included deserves to lose. Town for being ignorant and me for not being able to convince some of you to see reason.

Why?

I re-read Red_Baron's play in G4 and still don't see him as scum here. I am not 100% convinced about muttly but I think Red is town.
I was thinking... I don't think he would get to L-1 if he just left his case alone or made it only small. Therefore he dragged himself into this and I see it as unnecessary if he was mafia. Yes, it's speculating but I quite believe it.
Sorry, can't write much right now but I am also wary a lot of Peanut and a bit less of Joe, nmillar, itai.sharim and pazzer (except Peanut and Joe in no particular order). If muttly flips scum consider these my prime suspects.

You make a good point. In fact, I'd say you single-handedly convinced me that the Baron could be town more than a single word he's posted, so that's pretty impressive.

The reason I voted was for two purposes: one, I was tired of seeing line by line picking apart of posts that, in essence repeated the same thing over and over again. It was just one too many. Baron keeps lamenting that we're too ignorant to see the light (his final complaining paragraph addressed to me is priceless) but maybe he needs to realize that his line by line selective quoting strategy isn't working and he needs to take a different approach.

Second, at the time I was getting frustrated when I saw another of Baron's line by line picking apart Muttly post with no response to my request. Obviously he's since posted responding to me, but it was mostly the same dodging responses he's done the whole day. But I'll do a proper response, don't worry. Lots of interesting things to say in response to his most recent post.

Third, he's adamantly against claiming saying it's a "bad habit" the GOG mafia has. Not sure why he has anything to hide if he's innocent. It seems like a dodge. Obviously you don't always want to claim, but in a situation where two players are butted up against each other, claiming a realistic claim while the other refuses would probably save you.

Plus I'm perfectly ok to see Baron get lynched. If he turns up mafia, like I think he will, then we start focusing on his supporters. If he's town, then obviously we focus on Muttly and those that supported him. So I wanted to bring things to L-1 put the pressure on and see how everyone else reacts. It's kinda ruthless, but I'm banking on it paying off.

I'll wait a few and then post my line by line response to Baron. It should be thrilling.

http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/forum_mafia_game_10/post550

Again, just because you dont like the answer doesnt mean it didnt happen. Many things seem to work this way for you...

Fight fire with fire I suppose. Don't expect this regularly.

And I do have a picture of your opinion, and there are a ton of slips. Hence the vote.

And here is a pristine example of exactly what I'm talking about: taking a post out of context and skewing the meaning to make the other look suspicious. I in no way said this made you mafia. I said it didn't make you town. The only clue I got from your length of posts is that you write lots.

You've made more posts, but there's little new content in each one. In terms of rational arguments, I'd put you and Muttly about even.

I'm going to go with nope. 90% of your responses to me until tonight have been "read my earlier posts". 90% of all of your posts have been exasperated rephrasing of the fact that Muttly is scum.

You're only targeting one person. Muttly is answering several people, just not you. I don't blame him, you just ignore everything he says. And this is the very first time you've even remotely suggested doubt. Where was this doubt earlier when you charged after a weak throwaway claim hysterically?

And you've only said one thing over and over as well: Muttly must be scum. All of your reasons boil down to one single argument: Muttly is scum because he thinks I'm scum. Sorry, I don't buy it.

I think one of the two of you is scum. I'm voting for the one that's made more contradictions and accusations without basis. Obviously the fact that you've drawn so much attention to yourself counts in you favour, but again it could just be a particular play that backfired.

Again, I figured you weren't planning to respond. I felt that I finally had enough courage and reasoning to tilt the balance towards you as a suspect. Your explosive response just kinda confirms it for me. Obviously I'd love to hear how Muttly would respond to my question.

None of the above is scummy. Which is exactly what I get from your posts. You reply with dodgy answers, you don't actually show that others are wrong, yet you assume you have. And your actual reasons all basically come down to the same answer: Muttly is scum because he thinks I'm scum. While I'm sure that's a very good reason to target him for you, it's a meaningless reason for others.

Chin up, it's all in good fun. I consider reason (which you do not present, or at least not well enough for me) and it's not because your posting style or length. It's because of your content, or lack thereof. Sure, you endlessly parrot that Muttly is scum, but you haven't given much a reason to believe that. You obfuscate things with your long and confusing posts, you ignore answers to your questions if they don't suit your argument and then accuse the person of ignoring your questions, and then we have this little rant where you try to blame your own communication problems on the community instead of evaluating why it is that I and many others think you're scum.

More coming in ten or after the next post.

Long enough. Incoming part 2.

I don't care about the length, long or short. It's the reasoning and thought process behind it. A clever mafia could write massive pages of reasons, and a townie could present a theory in three or less sentences. Vitek gives a very good convincing argument for you as town. Sometimes it's better to be straightforward then to write essays that obstruct the meaning. My old teacher called it the KISS principle (keep it simple, stupid). He said that students trying to BS their final exam essays tended to write a lot more, often about unrelated topics, to try to make it seem like they knew the material. This isn't an accusation against you (I have plenty of others, I don't need this one) but it's something to keep in mind that length of post can be irrelevant.

You definitely do, but it just gets wearying to see a post with six quotes, each one responding to a single paragraph, each one basically stating that Muttly must be scum, why can't you fools see it!

In more recent posts, you just start responding to Muttly when he wasn't even addressing you. The reason he isn't stating any new reasons is because he doesn't have any. He's presented his case, and has nothing more to add. That's not an indication that he doesn't have a case, it just means he doesn't feel the need to keep restating his case like you seem to.

Again, length is irrelevant. I don't mean a different approach in terms of posting style, I mean a different approach in reasoning. Obviously your poor me why don't they get it approach isn't convincing, why not try re-evaluating and coming up with a better or more convincing strategy.

"More coming" is hardly a direct statement at me. I assumed you were just posting more about Muttly, which I'm pretty disinterested in at this point unless you find something new to add. Also he did respond. Like Muttly says, again ignoring answers. (If you say that the fact that he didn't quote or address me made you miss it, then I guess I can hardly be blamed for not understanding your "more coming", can I?)

It can also indicate that you don't have a role you're willing to share. Also our doctor is pretty dead at this point.

Uh, yeah, your scummy behaviour. Just because you don't think it exists it doesn't make it not scummy. It's like you either have blinders on. And I sure hope you think Muttly is scum, otherwise you've tanked your game for nothing. I don't support Muttly as of now; I just think that your behaviour is more scumlike than him, so I'm rolling with it. There's a big difference between supporting him and condemning you, and they're not mutually exclusive.

Again, blinders. It's not the quote by quote response, it's the way you take the quotes out of context to suit your own argument, and use four or five quotes to drill the same argument in each post. It's just a constant verbal barrage of "Clearly he is scum" and "see my earlier post", which goes "clearly he is scum".

There's nothing easy about it, and it's unnecessary for most of your shallow arguments. That's why I don't like it. You don't need an out of context tangent for Muttly to tell us that you think he's scum. If your quotes were more selective and relevant and not just line for line responses, it might have a better impact or make your alleged reason make more sense. Right now there is nothing to make me suspect Muttly over you, so I voted accordingly. Now your jumping all over me the very same way Muttly jumped all over you for voting Stuart. Do you see what I mean when I say your posts are hypocritical?


This was utterly exhausting to write. Feel free to line for line respond to it, but I'm pretty sure I'm never going to write like this again. I'll read it, and I'll respond to questions that I feel need answering, but no more ridiculously long posts for me. I'll write up a summary for those that don't speak WOT in the morning, right now it's bed.

Also, no spelling mistakes, hopefully. I hope you appreciate it. :P

Take PenutBrittle's arguments, add Red_Baron's overreaction to muttly's case and you get my feeling about Red_Baron.

Baron, I think you should claim because I'm gonna vote.

Ok, I just finished wading through the 3 pages of WoT....and honestly my head spun. The argument between Muttly and Baron really sorta melded together because it felt like it went around in circles. I honestly would not be surprised if both of them ended up being scum in the end. Muttly exaggerating his argument, and Baron overreacting in his own defense.

And yet, something's bothering me over this, I just can't tell you what.

This looks like Muttly asking for you to comment on his idea.

I did indeed read your 11 page essay and I read your explanation and it seems to make even less sense than the original because it does not state how you can reach the assumptions that you did.

I believe that Muttly is indeed referring to new info from both the night kill and the lynch, both of which had happened when he posted his contradiction idea. So how can you possibly get to him saying it was a contradiction for you to expect a night kill, and that he knew something about it, when it has already happened?

Requesting a vote count please.

Okay FUCK it.. I have attached the beginning of my original intended post for this. But honestly I don't even fucking care anymore. Trying to actually help town seems to be a complete waste. Either those towns voting for me are not those I am argumenting against, I hope that to be the case. And as such I can slightly understand the ignorance. Most lately shown by Penut.

If I had to sum up my scum suspects it would be:
muttly13 - due to his wording of accusations and general actions
penut - for his utter horseshit of a post, stating mixture of truth and lies. Mostly how he deems my case based on so much bullshit I can't wrap my head around it.. for a somewhat replay to that.. see the linked attachment (its short).
Itai - Mostly due to muttly13 never mentioning him, this might be wrong of me - so I ain't to sure on this one.

Last point before doing what I properly would have done anyway in hope of just simply killing the fuck out of those and prove my point, of course if anyone is willing. You might also just kill me and lose later... I don't care.

-but it was a quick response to staurt: its clear irony the last part about the explanation, with the rest of the post clearly being directed at others.. Its not a question for me, its an accusation. And please explain how hoping for info to be gained from the pointless deadline is a contradiction with my actions on D2??? I can't and I have no clue how he can even call it that.

Yes, the 11 pages might be more confusing due to missing quotes. But post numbers are there and can be referenced. Otherwise its mostly stuff I already posted summed up and a few new ideas that hit me while writing it.


As for you Itai: I am not sure in my idea any longer that if muttly13 is scum then you are. Since I've seen post of both kinds from you and mostly its due to muttly13 not talking about you that made me suspect you.

But hell, I consider myself dead in this game anyway and I am at a point where I am so angry that its properly good at I don't write anymore. I don't play mafia games to be angry and thats what I am at (hence my attached link instead of posting it and not finishing it).

I am the hotel security guard - one shot vigilant (and yes, I was considering what a brilliant joke it would be to kill you again Vitek :P But could find no sound reason for it).


Now to the other part, which might easily get me killed, since I am on L1 and all is left to one person who can quick lynch me even before other voters see this. But heck, as said my goal in this game has switched so I am coming forth with it anyway.

Besides the above I am also the survivor. I can win with either the mafia or the town. But quite frankly I am currently so pissed at the mafia that I rather kill/out myself than win with them. If I can course just one of them to be killed it would please me immensely, because never in a mafia game I've seen so bullshit reasons... Anyway, go ahead and kill me, see my claim is true and then consider what happened, after yet another of you have been killed.. Kill muttly13 and you'll have caught a scum, then feel free to kill me - but know this: I am on the side of town in this matter, I would fucking hate to let them win. By the way penut, there you have your reason for me lengthy posts as well. I got too emotional, so yea, for the future (if your town, otherwise well played): Please try a different route than you post is long, makes it confusing, I'll vote for the guy with short posts, because if your town then you cannot possibly have understood what I written nor can you have seen when I posted clear contradictions next to one another. if you had you wouldn't make a post like that. But if your scum, then I like your style ;)

Last thing, my story actually hints at hating thiefs, but since I have both as win conditions it seems like it doesn't affect my character as much as it affects me.

Final last thing :P: If anyone is considering to kill me just to get rid of long posts.. well I pretty much promise you they won't be as lengthy again for the rest of the game. Used too much energy already on certain targets to be bothered later.

If I die, thanks for the game and I like how you can spot the experienced from the rabble in the votes. Thanks guys for actually believing.