I'm here, carefully weighing opinions against each other. Still entertaining the idea of the role duality I brought up in my last post, if only because it would make things so adorably complicated (and I wouldn't put it past our dear leader to set it up like that). This game has some pretty peculiar dynamics, and it would fit right in.

I also find myself agreeing with Vitek as far as "getting lost over and over again" is concerned but - CSPVG's claim admittedly stunned me a little. Frankly... not buying it. I think it's a big distraction and thus fairly suspicious.

vote CSPVG

That seems pretty thin as a reason. Are we not allowed to speak in hypotheticals anymore? Unless of course you're fairly convinced about him due to his other posts and you're using this particular one as an excuse.

But the interesting thing is that you were convinced Joe was blocked by mafia before I claimed roleblocker. So you knew I blocked Joe, and you were convinced I was scum before I claimed blocker? How could you know that? Was it an action you had? Oh, wait, your night action was blocked.
Or were you so certain that CSPVG and me were both scum from before my claim and you omitted that in your posts. Hm...


Yes. So you think I'm scum, and you also knew(?) that I'm a roleblocker while you couldn't have a night action. Curious

There seems to be something missing here. I'm going to assume it's you forgetting to type and not your reasoning falling apart. Also, CSPVG wasn't blocked, though he was targeted by me. You do see the difference, right?


Ah, so if CSPVG flips town motivator, that means I can't be scum, since you have no idea what the second block was, unless it happened as I said. If CSPVG flips mafia motivator, you can either think he motivated me, and as a townie I said what happened, that he motivated me and as scum I cursed someone else, or that he motivated someone else who has no idea about it and I'm lying, while the one who was motivated could counterclaim at any point. Ok, nothing to speculate at this point.


Care to point me at the post? Will go looking to see which one you mean, but since you do have a recollection of said post and I don't, it should be easier for you to do so. I will go looking too though.

You mean what I asked you 3 times and you said it just isn't done? I'm shocked! Because obviously the case of 3 town blockers will also be impossible, until the jailer also flips town. And what would that give us? 2 dead townies from Vitek pushing lynches, and one or two night kills as well.

Nope. I know what I'll flip. As I said in previous games though, the only sensible claim is town. And I do prefer not to call myself a townie, since that is LAMIST.

Let me try to clean up the following a bit.

It's the straw that broke the camel's back mixed with a bit of going with my gut. I support a lynch of either but now JMich is slightly ahead.

Not that I wouldn't embrace the title of nonsensical post master, that just isn't the case here and now. I'm, much like Vitek stated at the point where, "Every time I think it cleared itself, I meet some obstacle obfuscating it again. But maybe I am just overthinking it."

At one point I believed CSPVG and JMich were in cahoots. The theories put forth at the time seemed plausible.

Then I thought Vitek and JMich's banter was something which started to appear manufactured/crafted.

Then gkaiser shows up like a genie summoned from rubbing a magic lamp and I really don't like that at all.

NOT AT ALL!

When I clear my mind I go back to my question some time ago asking if the lynch of JMich or CSPVG would clear the air. JMich was the one to answer NO.

How odd...

Vote: JMich

This is not true and I said it many times already.
I was convinced he was blocked by mafia only after you confirmed he was blocked by you.

What?

What?

:middlefinger:
Nothing's missing.

No.
What are you babbling about?
He motivated you and you just choose not to use second block. How were you able to make that specultion from what I posted before?
In other words, stop making things up.

I don't really expect answer now. It's been 20 days old. It's post 312 and it was about your case against CSPVG.
I only mentioned it beacuse i came across it when I was typing that post and when you accused me of ignoring you, it offered itself, to point out the hypocrisy. :-)

Nobody asked you to claim town or call yourself townie.
I only pointed out that town would probably naturaly think about themselves as town while it looked like you had to force yourself into it to write "when" instead of "if".


Huh, sure I guess.

So this was the question "if it's possible for Joe to have been blocked by town":
"You mean one additional town jailkeeper, right? We already have one confirmed town jailkeeper (quad), a jailkeeper that blocked you, and me. So two town jailkeeper and a mafia roleblocker, one town jailkeeper, one mafia jailkeeper and one town roleblocker, or one town jailkeeper, one mafia jailkeeper and one mafia roleblocker?"
And 2 days later you felt like you need to point out that I said you to look at my previous posts to clear it up?
Oookay... I guess.

Also, do you realise that you trying to convince me of my wrong assumption of setup does you no good in my eyes at all when I consider you did exactly the same thing in last game when you as scum tried to convince me (among other things) that Krypsyn's vig claim doesn't make him town and tried to dicredit him while it did?

Of course. It's brilliant scum ploy. I am doing much good to myself by doubting my own case and spending hours by thinking through other possibilities.

So?


Also, this is not to support any case, but I really came to hate arguing with you. For some reason I feel like your every post is mocking me, talking me down and there is some passive aggressive feeling to them which make me feel uneasy. Also I feel like you are misrepping my every post (even if you are town) like you were intentionally misunderstanding them only to annoy me.
Not sure why and not sure why I am sharing it at all. O_o (possibly beacuse I have troubles to keep my mouth shut in mafia)
So sorry, my post is maybe too harsh because of it too.

Allow me to quote you
Please provide a post before post 465 where I have claimed.
I'll even accept a post before post 473 as well.
Do this, and I will drop everything and vote for me as well.

The feeling is mutual, and not intentional. It does appear mostly because we are the two people arguing over and over in most of the games. I think I will have to always assume you are on my team from now on and concentrate on other people, if only they would post...
No hard feelings either way.

In regards to missing post 312, it was during the time my hdd crashed, so I had seen the post, I made a note that I should be answering it, then by the time I got a working computer again I had completely forgotten about it. I think I should use an analog notepad instead of a digital one for mafia notes :/

Anyway, give me a post where I'm claiming before you become convinced of Joe being blocked by mafia, and I'll vote myself. Do not give me that, and I'll vote for you. Then I'll wait for others to be convinced about one of our cases, or make a more convincing one.

Where are you coming from here?
Is this just still about the fact that in your opinion I confirmed Joe right after he claimed which I many time repeated is not true?
Otherwise I don't know what this is supposed to mean?

You say
and I post your first time saying that Joe was blocked by mafia
I then ask you to tell me when I claimed, since it was quite after post 465.

Yet you still claim you didn't clear Joe until after I claim, which post 465 proves that was a lie.

So yes, you did explain why you think Joe was blocked by mafia (there can't be 3 town blockers in a game, jailkeeper can't be mafia etc), but there wasn't a shred of doubt about Joe being blocked by mafia even before I claimed. Yet you only became "convinced" after I claimed.

So, again, had I claimed anything before you posted that Joe has had to be blocked by mafia?

This is merely a post to avoid a prod, for which I apologise.

I am in the process of redecorating my room, and don't have an a lot of time to post at the moment. I'll try and give all of you some of my thoughts tomorrow.

I hope Vitek doesn't mind if I step in here but the highlighted in Vitek's indicate the shred of doubt that you claim isn't present.
I don't think that you're ever going to convince VITEK HIMSELF that he is lying (in this instance. -he has been known to lie in the past. Mostly to me.) and I doubt that you'll convince anyone else in this way either.
You should try some sort of fearmongering tactic like perhaps your role has an added power that you hadn't mentioned before but it has the ongoing ability to stop double-kills and when you die then the killers will run rampant. That would be more interesting.

I'm getting completely lost in the ViMich argument and have mostly stopped reading it because it's making my head hurt. But Joe makes a good point at least, Vitek wasn't 100% before JMich claimed.

@Joe and @SPF
I refer you to the quotes I posted in post 496. That does seem to me like Vitek is convinced Joe was blocked by scum before I claimed.

And yes, I know you are tired of this argument, as both Vitek and me are as well. Thus why I do ask him to show me where I claimed, and convince me (or try to, I am a bit bullheaded) that he wasn't convinced before my claim.

So what does that mean as far as you're concerned? Are Vitek and Joe in cahoots?

Trying hard to lurk less, though I always appreciate someone polishing my lamp...

I'm sticking to my vote for CSPVG for now, intriguing as the banter between JMich and Vitek is. It's starting to get so convoluted and in-depth, I would at this point not even be surprised any more if it was staged to split votes evenly and cause a no-lynch due to lack of majority.