Memebase Mafia Game Over!

by **strike wolf** on Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:11 pm

I'm willing to allow Tails a few days to catch up...Jen's been replaced...so the next most inactive are LSU and Drake. I've seen LSU post at least once in the South Park thread since his last post here but I can't remember how long ago that was...and I know Drake's around.

by **edocsil** on Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:19 am

zimmah wrote:
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:In Soviet Russia, inactivity means you're active.

In all seriousness, I'm here. Fell behind, catching up.

Freedom and Equality for the masses! Death to the capitalist pigs!

-Tails

in soviet russia, being innocent means you're against the government.

.lol

I etah s'RP. tnow tsop hcum yadot.

by **shieldgenerator7** on Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:29 am

alright, we got TAILS active and JENBRONESS replaced

I'm willing to look into LSU's case.

*in soviet russia, keeps walking backwards*

-SG7 (

)

by **Victor Sullivan** on Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:21 pm

In Soviet Russia, you stall in!

But seriously folks... I have no clue what to do. Tails just ruined a perfectly good inactive case

Look at Scottish jerks... I invent plaid get-up with skirt. I call it kilt! I play bagpipes! Then they copy - all them! Kitty disappoint. Kitty wear pants now.

-Sully

by **LSU Tiger Josh** on Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:58 pm

.backwards posting hate I .insanity this protesting am I

rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrG. ?mad you What

by **chapcrap** on Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:28 am

LSU Tiger Josh wrote:.backwards posting hate I .insanity this protesting am I

rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrG. ?mad you What

Challenge Accepted! You don't have to backwards post. There are much better options. Like telling a Soviet Russia joke or saying the opposite of what you mean.

In Soviet Russia, the government tells you what you mean.

by **shieldgenerator7** on Thu Nov 17, 2011 7:39 am

Alright, thanks for showing up TAILS and LSU, but I want some conversation from you. Don't think you can just pop in and get away with it. COntribute!

*sees a 'why not zoidberg' sign, keeps walking, as poster looks at you*

-SG7 (

)

by **Leehar** on Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:56 am

unvote shieldgenerator7

Wasn't the lynch target between him and sheepofdumb yesterday?

by **Victor Sullivan** on Thu Nov 17, 2011 5:36 pm

Leehar wrote:unvote shieldgenerator7

Wasn't the lynch target between him and sheepofdumb yesterday?

Lol, good point. I suppose it's as good a starting point as any: Unvote shieldgenerator7

In Soviet Russia, you regulate government!

I hate myself so much right now. It no easy be hipster with stupid rules

-Sully

by **safariguy5** on Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:22 pm

I disagree somewhat. Going back and looking at the shield case, it really wasn't the strongest case, and I think he did try his best to defend himself.

unvote VioIet the quiet ones this game have this odd habit of turning up anti-town.

In Soviet Russia, Vodka drinks you!

by **strike wolf** on Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:26 pm

safariguy5 wrote:I disagree somewhat. Going back and looking at the shield case, it really wasn't the strongest case, and I think he did try his best to defend himself.

unvote VioIet the quiet ones this game have this odd habit of turning up anti-town.

In Soviet Russia, Vodka drinks you!

Survivors don't usually contribute much to the discussion...

But on the other hand, that reminds me of the question I never asked...Vio, are you claiming that you do not have any abilities?

In soviet Russia, safaris go on you!

by **chapcrap** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:59 am

strike wolf wrote:
safariguy5 wrote:I disagree somewhat. Going back and looking at the shield case, it really wasn't the strongest case, and I think he did try his best to defend himself.

unvote VioIet the quiet ones this game have this odd habit of turning up anti-town.

In Soviet Russia, Vodka drinks you!

Survivors don't usually contribute much to the discussion...

But on the other hand, that reminds me of the question I never asked...Vio, are you claiming that you do not have any abilities?

In soviet Russia, safaris go on you!

Challenge Accepted!!

I agree with strike about that. I mean, if we had to, we could lynch Vio, but I really don't see a good scenario right now where we would want to lynch someone who we think is not part of the mafia. So, with shield being the next best case from yesterday, I will vote unvote shield (that's a regular vote, right mods?)

In Soviet Russia, man is dog's best friend.

by **usAir** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:18 am

Could someone please recap the case on shield?

Also, for all of you that are unvoting with the soviet russia jokes, the joke negates the backwards rule, so you should actually be voting.

.etovnu nac uoy neht ,sdrawkcab gnipyt era uoy sselnU

Because in Soviet Russia, the government votes for you.

Everything went better than expected.

by **zimmah** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:45 am

usAir wrote:Could someone please recap the case on shield?

Also, for all of you that are unvoting with the soviet russia jokes, the joke negates the backwards rule, so you should actually be voting.

.etovnu nac uoy neht ,sdrawkcab gnipyt era uoy sselnU

Because in Soviet Russia, the government votes for you.

Everything went better than expected.

it's getting quite complicated.

in soviet russia joke makes you.

by **VioIet** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:31 am

strike wolf wrote:
safariguy5 wrote:I disagree somewhat. Going back and looking at the shield case, it really wasn't the strongest case, and I think he did try his best to defend himself.

unvote VioIet the quiet ones this game have this odd habit of turning up anti-town.

In Soviet Russia, Vodka drinks you!

Survivors don't usually contribute much to the discussion...

But on the other hand, that reminds me of the question I never asked...Vio, are you claiming that you do not have any abilities?

In soviet Russia, safaris go on you!

.emag siht fo erutuf raen eht ni yrassecen eb yam mialc ssam a tub ;eno detrats ydaerla sah enoemos fi llacer t'nac I

.tniop siht ta su pleh yltaerg lliw noitanimile fo ssecorp .stnemngila/selor demialc rieht htiw sreyalp eht lla gnitsil ,tsop a trats dluoc enoemos spahrep

.tfel mucs eerht tsael ta eb tsum ereht taht tciderp I dna, niamer neetneves .emag reyalp ytriht a fo tuo, dnuof neeb evah aifam owt ylno.

:sick:

ssip nwo ym gniknird tuoba RP lufwa-dog ytsan ylemertxe na evah I . seitiliba on evah I .rovivrus tytrap-driht saw I taht denialpxe ydaerla I, yako.

by **strike wolf** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:46 am

There in which lies my problem. The third parties who were before you have had fairly significant (if unpredictable) abilities. let's look...

Dazza-reporter (flavor tracker) could tell if someone left their house.

Victor-psychopath-randomly kills, investigates, protects or role blocks.

Rodion-finds out a person's role at the expense of taking away their vote and role blocking them the following night.

I feel I may have forgotten one...but anyways my point here is this. The roles shown by the third party so far do not have predictable effects but in two out of three cases their roles have a significant impact on the game and all three have the ability to investigate. In a lot of ways prior to your claim of no abilities the third party have been given from what I've seen the third party (even the otherwise less impactful roles i general) have been given some of the more significant abilities. now you claim to have no ability and this seems suspect to me.

by **strike wolf** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:01 am

strike wolf wrote:There in which lies my problem. The third parties who were before you have had fairly significant (if unpredictable) abilities. let's look...

Dazza-reporter (flavor tracker) could tell if someone left their house.

Victor-psychopath-randomly kills, investigates, protects or role blocks.

Rodion-finds out a person's role at the expense of taking away their vote and role blocking them the following night.

I feel I may have forgotten one...but anyways my point here is this. The roles shown by the third party so far do not have predictable effects but in two out of three cases their roles have a significant impact on the game and all three have the ability to investigate. In a lot of ways prior to your claim of no abilities the third party have been given from what I've seen the third party (even the otherwise less impactful roles i general) have been given some of the more significant abilities. now you claim to have no ability and this seems suspect to me.

ebwop: In Soviet Russia porn watches you

by / on Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:09 am

mmm pee me gusta
in soviet russia you drink pee and urinate vodka.

I don't know, perhaps a mass claim would solve something, the scum roles so far seem appropriately violent...
not that you need to listen to me anymore, I might be out at any time. While the rest of the world's desperate gamble for a living, here in Soviet Russia we gamble for a dying... *click* *click* oooh the rush! ME GUSTA :shock:

Wait, do two jokes reverse themselves?

In Soviet Russia Snowmen dress YOU

by **TA1LGUNN3R** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 6:11 am

pcm wrote:Say the opposite of what you mean. Only Unvotes will be counted as Votes (Votes will count as unvotes). Writing your entire post backwards will negate this rule, as will making an "In Soviet Russia" joke. I'm such a bastard.

You guys know that you only have to post backwards or tell a "In Soviet Russia" joke if you intend to do a normal vote, right? You can just post normally for any other talk. Or "unvote" for a normal vote.

Anyway, why are we dropping the case on shield? I just powered through like 25 pages and his case seemed valid. The gist of it was that he was trying to blend in with the self-imposed pr and skimming and/or altered recollection. Plus, he was all too happy to jump on the sheep bandwagon once strike put forward his case.

Saf wrote:I disagree somewhat. Going back and looking at the shield case, it really wasn't the strongest case, and I think he did try his best to defend himself.

unvote VioIet the quiet ones this game have this odd habit of turning up anti-town.

In Soviet Russia, Vodka drinks you!

But the case you've advanced against Vi is much more convincing...

There can be no freedom for all until the State is demolished.

-Tails

by **LSU Tiger Josh** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 6:49 am

I hate mass claims because then we're just playing the mod and not the game.
What you mad.
In Soviet Russia it is colder inside the house than it is outside

by **shieldgenerator7** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:45 pm

LSU Tiger Josh wrote:I hate mass claims because then we're just playing the mod and not the game.
What you mad.
In Soviet Russia it is colder inside the house than it is outside

LOL This actually happened to me one time on a camping trip.

So the case on me is that a made a self-imposed PR, and I was "all too happy on to jump on the sheep bandwagon"?

Well, about the PR, I saw that most people had PRs with their roles, and some didn't. Although my role PM never explicity stated I had a PR, it infered it so I innterpreted as best i could to come up with my PR. I don't see anything scummy about using my PR. The only way this is scummy is that it looks like I'm "trying to blend in". And that doesn't necessarily mean I'm scum.

About jumping on the sheep wagon, (if i remember correctly) there was not much going on at the time (me being too lazy to scum hunt me self

), and so when a valid case came up I had no choice but to join it. And he ended up being SK. Cool. Way to go Strike!

Alright I feel someone of this may be inaccurate. I'll reread the thread and post later to see how much I forgot.

*sees a time-portal, keeps walking (

I wanted to see what's in it...) *

-SG7 (

)

by **shieldgenerator7** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:09 pm

Ok, I just looked back over the relevant pages in the thread and I found basically what i had suspected there to be (and I doubt confirmation bias is a part of it)

Strike made a case on me, I defended, and then activity slowed down, safariguy started his "lynch the inactives" routine, and then strike made a convincing case on sheep, and me and jonty jumped on the bandwagon immediately. Activity picked up as sheep was pressured and slowly brought to the chopping block, yet some how evading it, saved by the bell (in this case the deadline). So it's like I said, there wasn't much to go on around the time, so when strike made the case on sheep, I welcomed the activity.

And one thing I noticed was that part of the sheep on suspicion was that he was using different memes and was not showing his true colors. Thinking about that, I can see how the suspicion would then fall on me, seeing how I had claimed to have a self-imposed PR. Well, I have something to say about that. I am consistent in my PR (although I do combine it with other memes occasionally), and my PR makes sense when you look at my meme and what my role PM says about my meme.

Also, looking back, I noticed LSU started a post with "U mad?" and then never again uses it (I didn't check the whole thread but I only found him using it once). Not to deflect attention from the case at hand, as this is the only thing I found against LSU so far. I just found that interesting.

And this is not the first time I've had to defend myself for the very same reasons. :roll:

you people just keep saying the same things over and over. (although the sheep BW argument was new).

*never mind, walks thru time-portal

, then comes back, keeps walking*

-SG7 (

)

by **chapcrap** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:13 pm

LSU Tiger Josh wrote:I hate mass claims because then we're just playing the mod and not the game.
What you mad.
In Soviet Russia it is colder inside the house than it is outside

Challenge Accepted!

This.

If we are all to mass claim, not only does it mean we have to decide if everyone is telling the truth, we have to play the mod. There have already been crazy roles in here, so I don't think that is a good solution.

Furthermore, I agree with the case on shield from yesterday. A self imposed PR seems a little crazy. I believe Vio about being a third party survivor from before. I don't think she needs to have any more abilities as a survivor. Just because some other third parties had bigger roles, doesn't mean she does. Survivor is a role that doesn't have abilities typically.

by **jonty125** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:13 pm

shieldgenerator7 wrote:Ok, I just looked back over the relevant pages in the thread and I found basically what i had suspected there to be (and I doubt confirmation bias is a part of it)

Strike made a case on me, I defended, and then activity slowed down, safariguy started his "lynch the inactives" routine, and then strike made a convincing case on sheep, and me and jonty jumped on the bandwagon immediately. Activity picked up as sheep was pressured and slowly brought to the chopping block, yet some how evading it, saved by the bell (in this case the deadline). So it's like I said, there wasn't much to go on around the time, so when strike made the case on sheep, I welcomed the activity.

And one thing I noticed was that part of the sheep on suspicion was that he was using different memes and was not showing his true colors. Thinking about that, I can see how the suspicion would then fall on me, seeing how I had claimed to have a self-imposed PR. Well, I have something to say about that. I am consistent in my PR (although I do combine it with other memes occasionally), and my PR makes sense when you look at my meme and what my role PM says about my meme.

Also, looking back, I noticed LSU started a post with "U mad?" and then never again uses it (I didn't check the whole thread but I only found him using it once). Not to deflect attention from the case at hand, as this is the only thing I found against LSU so far. I just found that interesting.

And this is not the first time I've had to defend myself for the very same reasons. you people just keep saying the same things over and over. (although the sheep BW argument was new).

*never mind, walks thru time-portal , then comes back, keeps walking*

-SG7 ( )

I'm dead

by **strike wolf** on Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:19 pm

shieldgenerator7 wrote:Ok, I just looked back over the relevant pages in the thread and I found basically what i had suspected there to be (and I doubt confirmation bias is a part of it)

Strike made a case on me, I defended, and then activity slowed down, safariguy started his "lynch the inactives" routine, and then strike made a convincing case on sheep, and me and jonty jumped on the bandwagon immediately. Activity picked up as sheep was pressured and slowly brought to the chopping block, yet some how evading it, saved by the bell (in this case the deadline). So it's like I said, there wasn't much to go on around the time, so when strike made the case on sheep, I welcomed the activity.

Jonty?

Also it was kind of ironic. I wasn't even really trying to form a full fledged case against you but after I voiced my concerns seemed like it did start to pick up. Playing this role is trickier than I thought without the vote it's hard to get people to know when I am distinguishing between who I think should be voted and who I am just questioning.

And one thing I noticed was that part of the sheep on suspicion was that he was using different memes and was not showing his true colors. Thinking about that, I can see how the suspicion would then fall on me, seeing how I had claimed to have a self-imposed PR. Well, I have something to say about that. I am consistent in my PR (although I do combine it with other memes occasionally), and my PR makes sense when you look at my meme and what my role PM says about my meme.

Also, looking back, I noticed LSU started a post with "U mad?" and then never again uses it (I didn't check the whole thread but I only found him using it once). Not to deflect attention from the case at hand, as this is the only thing I found against LSU so far. I just found that interesting.

And this is not the first time I've had to defend myself for the very same reasons. you people just keep saying the same things over and over. (although the sheep BW argument was new).

*never mind, walks thru time-portal , then comes back, keeps walking*

-SG7 ( )

LSU has used the U Mad? thing a few times and Kwanton used it several times when he was active. I don't think there's a case on that aspect.

Memebase Mafia Game Over!

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Re: Memebase Mafia [17/31] Day 4 - Looking for Singles?

Who is online