[Endgame] Firefly Mafia

[Anarkistsdream]

Fircoal, unless you want to say you are the doctor and not him, you need to drop this. Otherwise, your lynch is imminent.

[strike wolf]

Top 3 Reasons Naggy Wants Me Dead
1. I'm one of the most experienced players. The experienced players are usually going to be the ones leading the discussion and coming up with most of the leads. If you're the only experienced play left you're going to have a nice advantage over the town. Considering I'm one of these players, and so is Naggy, he realizes that once he's gone with me it'll be easier for him to twist the town into doing what he wants to.
2. It's easy. With my push on Naxus it's easy to go. "HE WAS PUSHING ON THE DOCTOR HE MUST BE SCUM!!!!" Of course when you look at this argument it really doesn't make much sense. Sure it might be a pile of WIFOM but do you really think any scum would be risking all these votes just to do some WIFOM. Yes that's even more WIFOM. WIFOM aside I can't see what good reason one would have for doing that if they were scum, since you all think that I'm scum that that's why you please tell me these good reasons. (Wanting to lynch the doctor is not a valid case as the pressure was already going away from him. By the time I posted that lynch was 99% not going to happen without a counterclaim)
3.I'm Town. Yes any time that a scum can off a town it's a good thing. No loses for the scum and they get off pressure free.

Oh and I'm active. I forgot about that one! (Look at post number chart in my big post)

Your activity defense is blatant bs. You mention activity like it is the god given irrefutable evidence of towniness and in the POTC game when you were town you excused inactivity/lurking as not being necessarily a scum tactic. Either way you are trying pretty hard to push your "activity" as a solid defense when it is not there. As far as your reasons you listed for why nag wants you dead. This is more you painting nag as scum in my eyes than legitimately defending yourself from accusations.

I'm not saying that activity = townieness, but active players are good for the survival of the game. Thusly it's a nice thing for the scum if they can kill off the active players that aren't scum, leaving only active scum to direct the lynch.

Which would more or less give a basic somewhat satisfactory reason for why you would mention your activity in that post but has nothing to do with why you made it such a key part in your big analysis post.

[VioIet]

Illiad, why is your avatar just one big black blank square? Isn't that only something a godfather would do? Trying to arrouse suspiscion? Is it WIFOM to vote for someone based on the avi. Maybe I am just seeing things. I suppose I will abandon that argument, as it would only be something I could get away with in the joke vote stage.

Anyway, on to address some points that you made.

Here you not only showed that you either didn't get my post against you, or you are pretending not and twisting my words, and you contradict yourself. My post showed that while naxus's case was still growing, anyone who posted something negative on nax not even going to the lengths of voting yet, would get attacked by you and put on the defensive. You were very keen on defending nax and smothering his case while it was still growing, and don't go all WIFOM.

However your case rested on whether nax was mafia, and it seems quite unlikely. Unvote

I am not twisting anything. And I don't see any evidence. I barely even mention naxus to my knowledge, except to say that I didn't see the scummy tells on Naxus, that everyone else seemed to see. Yet I do see the scummy tells all over you that nobody else seems to see yet.

Nor do I call really attacking those who went against Naxus. So I would really need you to provide some proof in this case.

I went against you, of course. And then against Sheep for hammering. And then I may have said something about Fir and Comm. And I remember questioning a statement that Streaker had made. I still don't see anywhere in there how I tried to thwart the case on Naxus. At that point I think i was only trying to really build a case on you.

Vio when you are building cases, do build on them on truth, and not a outright lie. I let the first one slide in the first post against me, but that's ridiculous. Show me a post where I hopped on either soundmans', fircoal's or streakers's bandwagon or been wagon hopping. I don't know if this is a case of skimming, confusing me with someone else, cconfusing this game with commander's game but I cannot comprehend how you can try and claim that I've been hopping on 3 other wagons when I haven't been on one of them.

Alright fine then. Give me some time. I do not build cases on nontruths. I will search this thread to present evidence of your hopping. And, in fact wouldn't it be the opposite. Wouldn't a scummy have to try to find things that don't exist to build a case on someone who is not on his side, so he can hopefully get them lynched? Isn't that what you are doing with me, because nothing is there?

[Fircoal]

Fircoal, unless you want to say you are the doctor and not him, you need to drop this. Otherwise, your lynch is imminent.

I didn't bring that up to say that Naxus was scum. I think I messed up in writing it so it came off that way. I was trying to explain why I kept on voting him. Which is not as much because I wanted him lynched as much as I wanted him to be scum. I put in too much emotional investment.

Top 3 Reasons Naggy Wants Me Dead
1. I'm one of the most experienced players. The experienced players are usually going to be the ones leading the discussion and coming up with most of the leads. If you're the only experienced play left you're going to have a nice advantage over the town. Considering I'm one of these players, and so is Naggy, he realizes that once he's gone with me it'll be easier for him to twist the town into doing what he wants to.
2. It's easy. With my push on Naxus it's easy to go. "HE WAS PUSHING ON THE DOCTOR HE MUST BE SCUM!!!!" Of course when you look at this argument it really doesn't make much sense. Sure it might be a pile of WIFOM but do you really think any scum would be risking all these votes just to do some WIFOM. Yes that's even more WIFOM. WIFOM aside I can't see what good reason one would have for doing that if they were scum, since you all think that I'm scum that that's why you please tell me these good reasons. (Wanting to lynch the doctor is not a valid case as the pressure was already going away from him. By the time I posted that lynch was 99% not going to happen without a counterclaim)
3.I'm Town. Yes any time that a scum can off a town it's a good thing. No loses for the scum and they get off pressure free.

Oh and I'm active. I forgot about that one! (Look at post number chart in my big post)

Your activity defense is blatant bs. You mention activity like it is the god given irrefutable evidence of towniness and in the POTC game when you were town you excused inactivity/lurking as not being necessarily a scum tactic. Either way you are trying pretty hard to push your "activity" as a solid defense when it is not there. As far as your reasons you listed for why nag wants you dead. This is more you painting nag as scum in my eyes than legitimately defending yourself from accusations.

I'm not saying that activity = townieness, but active players are good for the survival of the game. Thusly it's a nice thing for the scum if they can kill off the active players that aren't scum, leaving only active scum to direct the lynch.

Which would more or less give a basic somewhat satisfactory reason for why you would mention your activity in that post but has nothing to do with why you made it such a key part in your big analysis post.

.

It wasn't a key part, it was just another note. Part of the reason I did bring it up though because for a Day 1 lynch in which we have the least of info to go on, lynching the most active player isn't necessarily the best solution. Mainly for the future well being of the thread.

[Iliad]

Illiad, why is your avatar just one big black blank square? Isn't that only something a godfather would do? Trying to arrouse suspiscion? Is it WIFOM to vote for someone based on the avi. Maybe I am just seeing things. I suppose I will abandon that argument, as it would only be something I could get away with in the joke vote stage.

Anyway, on to address some points that you made.

... I'm beginning to think you're just screwing with me. Either that or you need to find absolutely anything on me, and since the things that you tried to find me I showed to be absolutely and objectively false you are now attacking me because of the avi?
For your information it has to do with the time that DM was banned and there was a lot of controversy. Still if one of your arguments is my avi, I can't wait for the rest.

Here you not only showed that you either didn't get my post against you, or you are pretending not and twisting my words, and you contradict yourself. My post showed that while naxus's case was still growing, anyone who posted something negative on nax not even going to the lengths of voting yet, would get attacked by you and put on the defensive. You were very keen on defending nax and smothering his case while it was still growing, and don't go all WIFOM.

However your case rested on whether nax was mafia, and it seems quite unlikely. Unvote

I am not twisting anything. And I don't see any evidence. I barely even mention naxus to my knowledge, except to say that I didn't see the scummy tells on Naxus, that everyone else seemed to see. Yet I do see the scummy tells all over you that nobody else seems to see yet.

Nor do I call really attacking those who went against Naxus. So I would really need you to provide some proof in this case.

I went against you, of course. And then against Sheep for hammering. And then I may have said something about Fir and Comm. And I remember questioning a statement that Streaker had made. I still don't see anywhere in there how I tried to thwart the case on Naxus. At that point I think i was only trying to really build a case on you.

Firstly, considering in your first post you completely failed to adress the point my points you either skimmed it and didn't understand it, or you did understand it and tried to twist my words.

Secondly, the reason you're seeing scumtells is because you've assigned to me some false memories. According to you I either haven't posted and have been vote hopping on all the wagons, where that has been shown to be completely untrue by the record but you tried to argue it anyway.
This if from a different movie but "You musn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling"
If you're not going ot be constrained by the actual truth, why not just claim I speedhammered three docs and counter claimed two cops?

Thirdly, unlike you I did provide proof. I showed how you went agaisnt me, against sheep, against streaker, subtly tried to ask nax to direct the attention onto sheep all. And I showed how you did this when anyone agreed that naxus was acting scummy that you would attack them. I provided quotes and showed a very sustained pattern in your attacks and the fact that you're asking for proof shows to me that you probably skimmed it.

Vio when you are building cases, do build on them on truth, and not a outright lie. I let the first one slide in the first post against me, but that's ridiculous. Show me a post where I hopped on either soundmans', fircoal's or streakers's bandwagon or been wagon hopping. I don't know if this is a case of skimming, confusing me with someone else, cconfusing this game with commander's game but I cannot comprehend how you can try and claim that I've been hopping on 3 other wagons when I haven't been on one of them.

Alright fine then. Give me some time. I do not build cases on nontruths. I will search this thread to present evidence of your hopping. And, in fact wouldn't it be the opposite. Wouldn't a scummy have to try to find things that don't exist to build a case on someone who is not on his side, so he can hopefully get them lynched? Isn't that what you are doing with me, because nothing is there?

In future, it's probably best to try and find proof of your case instead of making it up in your head.

The obligatory wifom part in bold, where you try and gues how a scum would play. Interesting how the scummy there however has objectively done exactly what you have done by building a case on my avi and things that didn't actually exist.'

Vio building case on untruths is not good discussion and only sets us back and is quite scummy behaviour as it is trying to deceive the town and get someone lynched regardless of their actions.

[edocsil]

Keep up the good work guys.

[strike wolf]

Fircoal, unless you want to say you are the doctor and not him, you need to drop this. Otherwise, your lynch is imminent.

I didn't bring that up to say that Naxus was scum. I think I messed up in writing it so it came off that way. I was trying to explain why I kept on voting him. Which is not as much because I wanted him lynched as much as I wanted him to be scum. I put in too much emotional investment.

Oh and I'm active. I forgot about that one! (Look at post number chart in my big post)

Your activity defense is blatant bs. You mention activity like it is the god given irrefutable evidence of towniness and in the POTC game when you were town you excused inactivity/lurking as not being necessarily a scum tactic. Either way you are trying pretty hard to push your "activity" as a solid defense when it is not there. As far as your reasons you listed for why nag wants you dead. This is more you painting nag as scum in my eyes than legitimately defending yourself from accusations.

I'm not saying that activity = townieness, but active players are good for the survival of the game. Thusly it's a nice thing for the scum if they can kill off the active players that aren't scum, leaving only active scum to direct the lynch.

Which would more or less give a basic somewhat satisfactory reason for why you would mention your activity in that post but has nothing to do with why you made it such a key part in your big analysis post.

.

It wasn't a key part, it was just another note. Part of the reason I did bring it up though because for a Day 1 lynch in which we have the least of info to go on, lynching the most active player isn't necessarily the best solution. Mainly for the future well being of the thread.

I think key part was a bit of a miswording on my part. Prominent is probably a better word...so basically you are admitting to saying you are active as a defense...

Again I think this is fairly wifomy saying scum would go after the active. Lots of scum go after the newer players and inactive players who they can twist words and know won't defend themselves well. In my experience this is more one of nag's scumtell than what you are claiming in the games I have seen. I also think you have contradicted yourself about nag going after an easy target and wanting to get rid of you as an experienced active player. Experienced active players from what I know don't add up to being easy lynches.

As far as vio, she seems to be off in her own little world concerning iliad. Most of what she has written fits out of context but are inaccurate to the game but this latest attempt has been rather weak.

[Commander9]

I think key part was a bit of a miswording on my part. Prominent is probably a better word...so basically you are admitting to saying you are active as a defense...

Again I think this is fairly wifomy saying scum would go after the active. Lots of scum go after the newer players and inactive players who they can twist words and know won't defend themselves well. In my experience this is more one of nag's scumtell than what you are claiming in the games I have seen. I also think you have contradicted yourself about nag going after an easy target and wanting to get rid of you as an experienced active player. Experienced active players from what I know don't add up to being easy lynches.

As far as vio, she seems to be off in her own little world concerning iliad. Most of what she has written fits out of context but are inaccurate to the game but this latest attempt has been rather weak.

Pretty much summed up my thoughts. What Fir is doing right now by the looks of it is building up a defence around the fact that he has been active and has pursued lynches, but I've also seen the best scum as being active and not inactive (as someone has pointed out ). I consider Fir to be a very good player and what he's doing right now is getting my scumdar up to high. Initially, even after Naxus' alignment came out, I wasn't too suspicious, but his recent defence is just starting to make me worried.

I guess some pressure won't hurt. Unvote. Vote Fir.

[safariguy5]

This little Iliad/Vio tiff is interesting and we can definitely revisit it later, but I'm having a hard time buying this nag/fircoal stuff. We know chu likes to take little experiments and see who bites. By his behavior, I could possibly see it as a gamble to draw out scum, and as I have indicated, we had at least 1 bandwagonner to nag's original suspicion of chu. I don't fault nag for being suspicious of chu, but the clearest choice right now would be to go for the people who were caught by the apparent shift in bandwagon pressure.

[Anarkistsdream]

This little Iliad/Vio tiff is interesting and we can definitely revisit it later, but I'm having a hard time buying this nag/fircoal stuff. We know chu likes to take little experiments and see who bites. By his behavior, I could possibly see it as a gamble to draw out scum, and as I have indicated, we had at least 1 bandwagonner to nag's original suspicion of chu. I don't fault nag for being suspicious of chu, but the clearest choice right now would be to go for the people who were caught by the apparent shift in bandwagon pressure.

Which you would qualify as???

[Commander9]

This little Iliad/Vio tiff is interesting and we can definitely revisit it later, but I'm having a hard time buying this nag/fircoal stuff. We know chu likes to take little experiments and see who bites. By his behavior, I could possibly see it as a gamble to draw out scum, and as I have indicated, we had at least 1 bandwagonner to nag's original suspicion of chu. I don't fault nag for being suspicious of chu, but the clearest choice right now would be to go for the people who were caught by the apparent shift in bandwagon pressure.

I agree that Illy/Vio stuff is not something too important right now, but I'm not sure I agree that you so easily disregard Chu's behaviour. Initially, I had no problems with it, but his recent defence is extremely weak and he's sticking with it and trying to emphasize his activity and how he's contributing to the town with it - which seems extremely scummy to me.

[VioIet]

My gosh, I really really want to respond to Illy's post right now.
But I have a doctor's appointment and then I have to go babysit my
little cousin Matthew tonight, but when I have some time, I am going to address Illy's posts.

[Anarkistsdream]

My gosh, I really really want to respond to Illy's post right now.
But I have a doctor's appointment and then I have to go babysit my
little cousin Matthew tonight, but when I have some time, I am going to address Illy's posts.

You have a Drs Appt at 9PM????

[safariguy5]

This little Iliad/Vio tiff is interesting and we can definitely revisit it later, but I'm having a hard time buying this nag/fircoal stuff. We know chu likes to take little experiments and see who bites. By his behavior, I could possibly see it as a gamble to draw out scum, and as I have indicated, we had at least 1 bandwagonner to nag's original suspicion of chu. I don't fault nag for being suspicious of chu, but the clearest choice right now would be to go for the people who were caught by the apparent shift in bandwagon pressure.

I agree that Illy/Vio stuff is not something too important right now, but I'm not sure I agree that you so easily disregard Chu's behaviour. Initially, I had no problems with it, but his recent defence is extremely weak and he's sticking with it and trying to emphasize his activity and how he's contributing to the town with it - which seems extremely scummy to me.

Although it is a valid point about nag nearly hammering naxus save for a somewhat fortunate invalid vote. I think that while the part in fircoal's argument about activity to be absolutely worthless, I feel like it's more a shouting match between nag and fircoal more than it is solid evidence. Vote pattern wise, I think nag might have tried to stealth hammer and missed the opportunity. I'll take up this nark case later then as I think the wagon hopping was a weak evidence base to begin with by nag initially that was strengthened later by fircoal's actions. So I will unvote for now while I wait for some explanation for that almost hammer.

[mandalorian2298]

My gosh, I really really want to respond to Illy's post right now.
But I have a doctor's appointment and then I have to go babysit my
little cousin Matthew tonight, but when I have some time, I am going to address Illy's posts.

You have a Drs Appt at 9PM????

I know that English is not my mother's tongue, but that sounds like kinky business to me.

[Fircoal]

I didn't bring that up to say that Naxus was scum. I think I messed up in writing it so it came off that way. I was trying to explain why I kept on voting him. Which is not as much because I wanted him lynched as much as I wanted him to be scum. I put in too much emotional investment.

Your activity defense is blatant bs. You mention activity like it is the god given irrefutable evidence of towniness and in the POTC game when you were town you excused inactivity/lurking as not being necessarily a scum tactic. Either way you are trying pretty hard to push your "activity" as a solid defense when it is not there. As far as your reasons you listed for why nag wants you dead. This is more you painting nag as scum in my eyes than legitimately defending yourself from accusations.

I'm not saying that activity = townieness, but active players are good for the survival of the game. Thusly it's a nice thing for the scum if they can kill off the active players that aren't scum, leaving only active scum to direct the lynch.

Which would more or less give a basic somewhat satisfactory reason for why you would mention your activity in that post but has nothing to do with why you made it such a key part in your big analysis post.

.

It wasn't a key part, it was just another note. Part of the reason I did bring it up though because for a Day 1 lynch in which we have the least of info to go on, lynching the most active player isn't necessarily the best solution. Mainly for the future well being of the thread.

I think key part was a bit of a miswording on my part. Prominent is probably a better word...so basically you are admitting to saying you are active as a defense...

Again I think this is fairly wifomy saying scum would go after the active. Lots of scum go after the newer players and inactive players who they can twist words and know won't defend themselves well. In my experience this is more one of nag's scumtell than what you are claiming in the games I have seen. I also think you have contradicted yourself about nag going after an easy target and wanting to get rid of you as an experienced active player. Experienced active players from what I know don't add up to being easy lynches.

As far as vio, she seems to be off in her own little world concerning iliad. Most of what she has written fits out of context but are inaccurate to the game but this latest attempt has been rather weak.

Yes experienced active players aren't easy lynches, but that's why it's such a good idea for scum to lynch me now, because even I will admit I'm playing like shit. While I don't think what I did was that scummy, obviously the town does, and it's not like it's very hard right now to finger me as scum. Thusly it's a prime time to get rid of me. And I don't think it's WIFOMy in the scene of in the case of a good player playing badly and a bad player playing badly who would you wanna try to lynch. The better player of course. I have basically been WIFOMing up this whole thing, but meh, that's kinda just how I see this at the moment. I still think it'd be suicide for a scum to do what I did. And stupid no matter what side you're on unless you aren't on a side, but I don't always have my mind in the most rational of places.

[VioIet]

But I have a doctor's appointment

You have a Drs Appt at 9PM????

Yep, I have PT on Tuesdays nights. Accident a few years ago.

I know that English is not my mother's tongue, but that sounds like kinky business to me.

Yes, very kinky indeed

As far as vio, she seems to be off in her own little world concerning iliad. Most of what she has written fits out of context but are inaccurate to the game but this latest attempt has been rather weak.

Sorry if my latest few posts have seemed incoherent. Been dealing with a lot lately- new schedule, babysitting, CC drama this weekend, and a big upcoming exam. I suppose it has all taken its toll one by one. I see I did mix up this thread with another, so I guess i got a few of my arguments mixed up. Now that the baby is sleeping, I have finally put all the posts together and I'm going to analyze them when i can, to help prove my case.

[VioIet]

Count me in. Amazing show that was unfortunatly cut short.

Oh God... An Aussie...

And what do you have to say about Aussies?

This joke vote doesn't count, as it happened before the game started.

I feel honoured to have sparked a series of Whedon themed mafias. Was considering making a firefly one, but it'll be funner to play in it.

Angel and dollhouse still up for grabs, though

Again before game started.

Con and Firm.

unvote vote sheep because sheeps hate red

vote strikewolf for vote hopping

This is the supposed joke vote here. Its not even a joke vote!! Everyone knows that sheep hates red, because it is the vote color, and no one likes being voted. Vote hopping is a valid reason, however. This is not a joke.

It does look like Naxus tried to prove his town status and jumped at the opportunity.

Regardless strike wasn't in any danger, and neither did sheeps vote put him in any. It would've been nice if the joke votes continued, but I guess we're through on the other side now.

Already serious now, but seems to be reluctant to get to the serious side of the game. I think mafia enjoy the joke vote stage immensely because there is no real pressure on them, and they can say whatever they like. However once the game starts, they have to be careful what they say and lay low. That's why illiad was sad when the joke vote stage was over. It required him to come up with a completely different strategy.

It would've been nice if the joke votes continued

Wait... Wut?

I meant the joke vote stage continued, as it was fun.

Isn't it in our best interest to have the most talk time possible, not the most joke time possible?

It is, but that doesn't mean the joke stage wasn't fun, or that I can't point out that it was fun. I wasn't suggesting we stay in the joke vote stage, or it's preferable to normal mafia just talking about how it ended and that it's generally fun because of the overall silliness. You of all people, should agree.

Not exactly sure why you're sticking to this so much.

Perhaps because he noticed something strange about it, and wanted to inquire further. Or maybe, since he might be the SK, he thought it was a good opportunity to build up suspicion against someone so that they can get lynched.

[strike wolf]

This little Iliad/Vio tiff is interesting and we can definitely revisit it later, but I'm having a hard time buying this nag/fircoal stuff. We know chu likes to take little experiments and see who bites. By his behavior, I could possibly see it as a gamble to draw out scum, and as I have indicated, we had at least 1 bandwagonner to nag's original suspicion of chu. I don't fault nag for being suspicious of chu, but the clearest choice right now would be to go for the people who were caught by the apparent shift in bandwagon pressure.

I agree that Illy/Vio stuff is not something too important right now, but I'm not sure I agree that you so easily disregard Chu's behaviour. Initially, I had no problems with it, but his recent defence is extremely weak and he's sticking with it and trying to emphasize his activity and how he's contributing to the town with it - which seems extremely scummy to me.

Although it is a valid point about nag nearly hammering naxus save for a somewhat fortunate invalid vote. I think that while the part in fircoal's argument about activity to be absolutely worthless, I feel like it's more a shouting match between nag and fircoal more than it is solid evidence. Vote pattern wise, I think nag might have tried to stealth hammer and missed the opportunity. I'll take up this nark case later then as I think the wagon hopping was a weak evidence base to begin with by nag initially that was strengthened later by fircoal's actions. So I will unvote for now while I wait for some explanation for that almost hammer.

Nag wasn't the one who almost hammered. That was soundman.

[Anarkistsdream]

Yep,Soundman...

And Violet, that's actually a good case against Iliad.

[Commander9]

Yep,Soundman...

And Violet, that's actually a good case against Iliad.

How so? I personally don't see any case...

[strike wolf]

I have to agree with commander. Vio's case has been pretty clear tunnel vision. I don't really see any legitimate case there..
I'm sticking with my vote on fircoal but there are a couple people I want to look further into before I really post something long.

[Streaker]

Great discussion going on, and I think I'll even drop my suspicions of Fir right now. He seems to be hunting scum like no other, putting pressure everywhere he sees fit.

Now, between all the back and forth, small things may be overlooked. This post from Shaggy stood out to me:

Wow, I got some reading to do.

Unvote soundman, I made it as I thought it would be the next best case after Naxus.

Don't want to make to much of a post off just skimming, but some random thoughts of mine:
- I believe Naxus' claim of doctor is real, and he's reasoning of acting scummy valid.
- Off first skim I don't think Fir is very scummy. I can see his reasoning for continual pressure on confirmed doc, seems to be actively scum-hunting.
- Jerado looks pretty sucumarining atm. Hasn't posted much except for joining a wagon.

As much as I love big walls of text, I don't really have time atm to go over it properly and come up with much substance. Will try and get through it by tomorrow. Any chance of getting a votecount / deadline?

So, we have Shaggy saying Naxus had good reasons to act scummy. Not quite how I would call what Naxus was doing...
He also brings in a lead to an inactive. Hoping to draw away pressure that mostly Fir is giving? It's an easy solution to an active Day 1, if you are mafia.

Also, why would you ever wanna call a deadline when you aren't even caught up reading? Again, Shaggy's behaviour seems to point at wanting to end the day ASAP. And again, that's only what scum would do.

[naxus]

From my experience I wasn't acting scummy, just giving a bad defense. And also Shaggy dan has been kinda submarining only surfacing when absolutely needed to.

Vote shaggy

[ShaggyDan]

So, we have Shaggy saying Naxus had good reasons to act scummy. Not quite how I would call what Naxus was doing... He also brings in a lead to an inactive. Hoping to draw away pressure that mostly Fir is giving? It's an easy solution to an active Day 1, if you are mafia.

Also, why would you ever wanna call a deadline when you aren't even caught up reading? Again, Shaggy's behaviour seems to point at wanting to end the day ASAP. And again, that's only what scum would do.

I meant good reasoning in acting defensively (everyone targeting him), I've done it before as well (and it makes sense seeing as he is an un-CC'd Doc). I wasn't meaning to bring a lead into pressuring the inactive, more just a note incase others had missed it.

To clarify: I wasn't asking for a deadline to be put in place, I was just asking for a vote count/deadline in case I had missed one that we already had.

And what indication have I given to wanting to end the day ASAP. If you think I was trying to bring pressure to an inactive wouldn't that mean I want the day drawn out? Then you go and say I want the opposite? If I wanted to end the day I'd jump on a bandwagon and start pushing as fast as I can.

Yes experienced active players aren't easy lynches, but that's why it's such a good idea for scum to lynch me now, because even I will admit I'm playing like shit. While I don't think what I did was that scummy, obviously the town does, and it's not like it's very hard right now to finger me as scum. Thusly it's a prime time to get rid of me. And I don't think it's WIFOMy in the scene of in the case of a good player playing badly and a bad player playing badly who would you wanna try to lynch. The better player of course. I have basically been WIFOMing up this whole thing, but meh, that's kinda just how I see this at the moment. I still think it'd be suicide for a scum to do what I did. And stupid no matter what side you're on unless you aren't on a side, but I don't always have my mind in the most rational of places.

@Underlined section: If you think it would be suicide for scum to do what you did, then surely this sounds like you're advocating your own lynch being that we have no idea if you're scum or not? At the end of that quote you basically called yourself stupid or third party. I think that's enough to put a little D1 pressure on you, despite my initial feelings from skimming. Vote Fircoal. So how do you explain your own post? Are you stupid or thirdparty?

As for Violet and Illiad, I find it interesting how it is progressing, but I'd rather stay focused on one case at a time.

Also for the record, sorry for the lack of posts, I've been really busy. I'll try and be more active but I can't really promise anything . At the very least I'll be on here every 2 days or so.