To be honest, when I said it implies it I was being kind. I pretty much agree with Orry there. For all intents and purposes, the wording you used pretty much stated that you were quoting without any hint that you might not be.

I know, but it shows that your at least considering other options. But thanks for posting - Just wrote to Robbeasy to ask for a filler, since I noticed the new posts after I sent my reply to orry.

But yea, Robbeasy: Look back and you'll notice that I used the word paraphrasing on my second post after the post where I posted the paraphrasing, of course the forum doesn't show any proper timespan, other than that I posted the first 4 days ago and the second 3 days ago - If I remember correctly it was actually a matter of hours, since it just changed to a new day, so not really that much time. However I didn't use it in my first post after it, which was a quick responds to your fear about rule-breaking, a reaction that got me a bit surprised to be honest (I guess you can see that from the response). So to conclude: this whole discussion about paraphrasing is not a slip I made just now. Its basically me not saying in clear words: The thing I posted in my former post is a paraphrase, instead of just referring to it as a paraphrase (or my post).

And when you Orry are continuing your role fishing: There might just be a reason as to why I have stated already that I haven't made a claim other than saying the ability was one shot and allowed people to make the assumption that I was a vig. Perhaps due to the reasons I am very interested as why you are bringing this point up so many times? But I feel I have to write what I just did in order not to cause any further misunderstandings, as they seem to be pilling up.

Every time I brought up your role it was in direct response to something you said. You said you never said what your ability was. When you claimed that it was as I said, a one-shot. Which heavily implies* that you were a vigilante, and the rest was a back-and-forth from there.

(My first mention of a one-shot vig was a theory as to what you meant when you said you knew that the mafia didn't perform the night kill)

*Definition of "imply"- Verb- Strongly suggest the truth or existence of (something not expressly stated)**

**In other words stop hiding behind the fact that you implied and not stated things, they both carry the same weight.

As for reasons why you would make up the role pm, to create wine is usually a good enough reason for mafia to do something. "Why would I do that if i were mafia?" is never a good argument and indicative of WIFOM.

A don't worry, it was Orry I was talking about/to with that one, don't see where you rolefished.

Well that is a rather obvious thing to say: I was the one who wrote I was 100% certain of something, you were the one who brought up my role, which I responded to by confirming the ability as one shot, you have then been the one bringing it up ever since (with me responding to it, partly revealing way more than originally intended, hence why I call your actions rolefishing).


First of, I am not sure I understand why your stating things from the dictionary.. Lets recap right: I claim that I am 100% certain that the mafia didn't make night kill. You make an assumption:

And you state yourself why I claimed it if I am town.

Now my response:

It was as Orryyrro said a one shot one, hence why I am revealing it. Also I deemed that before speculations got derailed by other considerations it was of best interest to know for town.

Meaning: The ability was as Orryyrro said a one shot one. I don't confirm your idea about vig, I just allow you to make the assumption in order not reveal any more info than what I wanted to share (That is one of the points of a mafia game as well): No night kill, for the very reason you write yourself. Actually its Robbeasy who points out that one should doubt everything in a mafia game.

No, not if it puts me in the spot light as the target for a lynch, for no reason. That statement would be true if I could do it on what someone else have posted and create further WIFOM while staying out of the lime light myself (going on the hypothesis that I would be a scum). So yea, I agree that the statement doesn't mean much, but in this case there is no other reason for doing what I did other than to do exactly what I said I did, inform about the no mafia night kill. And honestly, in most cases those who have been in a situation where their motives haven't made much sense as to why they would do it, with nothing giving them a reason to do the action, other than to share info with town, I would say that I've only seen them turn out to be townies just as they claimed, even though in some cases: Like Rodzaju, the reasons went beyond that, meaning I don't see a reason why a town would do it. Thats not the case here: You have a reason why a town would do it, but none why a scum would.

And since I am getting fairly tired of explaining the same thing over and over for you, and since your arguments disappear the same second you realize they don't hold, I am going to reverse my previous idea of giving NFY a chance to post before deciding if you will replace her as my nr. 1 on the list of scums. Well, can't really keep hoping for that with the way your posts is going. So vote Orryyrro You just don't seem to consider any motives or actions and is apparently trying your damn hardest to find flaws that could lead others to lynch me, although at least that.

Shit, I've been feeling like a hunted animal lately. The post I wanted to write will have to wait until tomorrow. Please do me a favour and don't lynch Red_Baron in the meantime, okay?

Hehe, hope they won't - As I haven't even claimd yet. But well, if they do decide to lynch me there will be a good deal of great lynch targets.. Meaning all those who vote for very very weak reasons.

Not an assumption, an inference. An assumption is a conclusion without any reason. An inference is a conclusion based on an implication. Implications carry a lot of weight and implying a lie is pretty much the same thing as actually lying.

The reason I define imply is that you seemed to be hiding behind the term and acting like it meant you weren't lying.

Also, to your most recent post reminds me, something which has been discovered since the game began: Beginner's Guide to Claiming apparently claiming when close to lynch isn't the norm and is actually bad play. This was posted in the administration thread so, in case anyone missed it, here it is.

Posting from my phone on the train- bloody hell that exploded..! Will post tomorrow, probably, and respond to the scum-points I've accumulated.

Hello people,
voting round for GOG Mafia Awards 2011 has started.
Please take your time and vote for your favourites.
You can find it here.

Sorry for interruption and for posting here, I forgot I am not logged as GOGfather. :-(

Edit by way of post: and (bien sûr) comment on this latest development.

(I'm on the last of four trains I took to get home for Christmas and I'm shattered; please don't read too much into these two posts..! O.o)

Well, you just posted my very reason for acting as I did.. look at the guide you just linked to. And no its not the same as lying. I am allowing you to assume something, and yes that is somewhat lying, but there is a huge difference between lying straight out and allow other possibilities than the actual one. Otherwise mafia games would be very boring. And your still doing your damnedest to discuss my role and fishing for it, no matter how you put it.. bringing up the same point I already answered is clearly just an attempt to do some fishing. And you'll notice that I've follow the guide you posted rather well (although I hadn't seen it before seeing your link). On a side note: I am guessing that you must already have noticed that english is not my first language, and subtle differences in meanings of words are not really what I think anyone should judge my actions of. I bet its been pretty much discussed in other connections already (like the whole: we, us, town so on debate), so could please ignore whatever meaning you read from my choice of word, and read the explanation instead - like my reasons for doing it - So when I state my reason for not reacting an outright claiming in order to make sure you didn't misunderstand my role.. wait why?? That would be a dumb move to reveal myself. So if I make the assumption that Robbeasy is a doctor because he is so nice to other players, would he have to claim to disapprove me, otherwise he would be lying if he confirmed that he was nice to others? Thats not how it works.

Nice one, and very interesting with the idea about claims and L1. Also shows exactly what I been saying all this time: I revealed something in order to give town information, which is one of the accepted reasons for revealing things about oneself. And thats what town should do: Reveal important info, because keeping it in only helps scum, although one shouldn't out themselves for no reason. I also like how the thing Rodzaju did is actually described in the guide as a bad move, funny stuff.

It's not that you claimed that you preformed the nightkill that I don't like, it's the whole PM business. quoting or paraphrasing PMs doesn't really help anyone as there is no way of verifying if they're true, which is why quoting them isn't allowed to prevent situations like this one.

Anyhow unvote Red_Baron

You held up well under pressure, so you may be telling the truth, I still don't like the PM quoting business though.

Yea, it had the exact opposite effect of was I was hoping.. meaning to reduce WIFOM and just get the fact about the no night kill straight out to be discussed. But well, how it ended up is also somewhat useful since it gives a good deal of posts which can be used to conclude/analyze on.

Unexpected development: I have an hour or two of free time. Let's do this.

1) So about Red_Baron then: as I said, I believe him. Reason #1: if what he's saying is true, claiming the nightkill is a distinctly town thing to do. Reason #2: after Rodzaju, I have renewed my slightly weakened conviction that scum are quite unlikely to take such an outrageous gamble, so the probability is strongly on his side. And then there's the third reason, which is not nearly as much exact science, but instead considers the psychology, as Poirot would say.

RB insists that the whole sorry PM business (and I do think it is regrettable) has not revealed anything new, and keeps repeating it over and over again. Which is, of course, missing the elephant in the room -- that the PM we have read in #891 very strongly implies he is town. "Although not the bad guys he'd do anything for money and was best off dead. Feeling moderately happy you set off." I believe that if that were planted there by RB, he would not be so oblivious about it. People who do clever things tend to be proud of these clever things. And RB does not do that at all. Call it a hunch, but it's a strong one.

2) Some people, it seems, do not bother to read or remember, possibly deliberately so. When discussing my protection of jefequeso, I offered four reasons for doing so (#849). How odd that Robbeasy (#853) and nmillar (#887) both pick up only on the last one and start treating it as gospel truth. And why, when talking about this protection of mine, doesn't almost anyone ever mention the fact that I'm also a roleblocker? Because if you want to talk statistics, this effectively doubles my chances to stop a nightkill, you know.

3) And now it's time to go for the offensive. I have noticed a few rather suspicious things, and want to get them out in the open.

The question has been raised: how is it possible I am still alive? When this day started, I was eager to see how long it was going to take before someone floated this argument. First came Robbeasy (#835), wondering why people are willing to believe I am town (notice it's the same Robbeasy who kept saying the reason for the Rodzaju lynch was to confirm his information). He developed it further in #843 and himself retracted it in #863, so in came TwilightBard in #866, finally saying what I wanted to hear: "I think the final straw for me in believing that Baz is town, is a fairly simple one. He's a CLAIMED DOCTOR since Day 1 and still moving around."

Want to know why this argument is more likely to be presented by scum? I'll let TwilightBard himself explain, from way, way back (#165): "It seems like a ploy to draw attention to other people, and is dangerous even if he is town, because the mafia can easily just ignore him to give the illusion that he should be lynched". This is absolutely classic scum play, as is, in fact, the whole hunt on jefequeso (which was, incidentally primarily led by TwilightBard and Robbeasy).

Two more arguments of TB's re: my role I'll deal with as briefly as I can: for #866 and Rodzaju's contradiction in saying I am/am not town, please reread Rodzaju's #768 in which he confirms what we all knew: that he had an agenda and was willing to lie/deliberately misinterpret to push it ("I did try to suggest a lynch of Angelo BEFORE outing myself. This is why I was suggesting he may be scum.") -- in this context, also note the last line of his lynch in #814 ("4 people pffft" Bazilisek says before giving Rodzaju one last kick before leaving) and the curious fact that the other two people he was supposedly backing up do not appear in the flavour at all.

And as for #895 ("[baz]'s Mafia, which is possible, as the doctor part seems to be in our heads"), I will again refer to the lynch flavour (#814) which describes me as "Alcadas top surgeon".

You may call it extended OMGUS, I call it reaction to a smear campaign. There are some more people I'd like to draw attention to, but I think this will do for now.

vote TwilightBard