[Official] NBC Mafia Town Win MVP=trinicardinal

by **shieldgenerator7** on Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:01 pm

jonty125 wrote:Trini, do you understand what it means to be FASTPOSTED? Because from your defense it doesn't seem like it.

Fixed in red for better understandability.

I don't see a case either way between chap and trini. It seems trini and chap have both been inactive and I think trini defended well (if in fact everything he said was true), and chap just ignores his defense. I do believe his case against trini was OMGUS, but I'll have to look into it further, plus find a case.

About last night's kill, I find it very hard to believe there's only one killing role in this game. In the previous game (team CC) there were more than one killing role, the mafia + Com9's role, and JOAT vig shot, meta-gaming leads me to believe there can't be just mafia here. So I suspect either a vig that didn't shoot N1 or some role got roleblocked.

-SG7 (

)

by **chapcrap** on Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:04 pm

@trini

When you say that you a few minutes to log in, you were just posting to look active. There were only 3 pages in 2 and a half days and you weren't caught up? Weird. A lot of it was side talk about you being male or female. There wasn't a lot to catch up on at that point. And I never said that I needed time to catch up on anything. I said that I had been following all along and didn't post because I didn't have anything to say. I am in multiple mafia games and don't really keep track of when I post. I post when I feel like I have something to say or offer. I was actually surprised that I hadn't posted in 5 days.

It's not just about you not wanting to go to L-2. You just completely didn't want to vote for betiko at all. You could have voted earlier, but didn't want to 'throw around your vote'. But then you had no problem throwing your vote on me. Inconsistent.

I confirmed that since I hadn't posted in 5 days, I would have voted for me too, but I was fastposted by you (you know what that means, right?). A reasonable person would have unvoted at some point. The reason to vote an inactive is to get activity going or to pressure them. Neither of those reasons applied to me because I posted immediately and there was no pressure being applied to me. The sudden change of heart I'm talking about applies here. You state you agree with putting pressure on and then never do it until you are the first person to vote for me.

You did skim. You skimmed the fact that I said I was fastposted. I said it twice back then and I just said it again and you still don't acknowledge it. You are trying to say I skimmed? I was FASTPOSTED!! You're only defense is to ingnore facts. That's not a great defense.

P.S. I just got FASTPOSTED by shield

by **jonty125** on Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:06 pm

shieldgenerator7 wrote:
jonty125 wrote:Trini, do you understand what it means to be FASTPOSTED? Because from your defense it doesn't seem like it.

Fixed in red for better understandability.

I don't see a case either way between chap and trini. It seems trini and chap have both been inactive and I think trini defended well (if in fact everything he said was true), and chap just ignores his defense. I do believe his case against trini was OMGUS, but I'll have to look into it further, plus find a case.

About last night's kill, I find it very hard to believe there's only one killing role in this game. In the previous game (team CC) there were more than one killing role, the mafia + Com9's role, and JOAT vig shot, meta-gaming leads me to believe there can't be just mafia here. So I suspect either a vig that didn't shoot N1 or some role got roleblocked.

-SG7 ( )

Futrama had an SK as well.

16 player game - more than likely to have more than 1 killer or this game would last about 5 or 6 days (based on 4 or 5 mafia with lynch and 1 kill per night)

by **betiko** on Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:55 pm

hey there's I guy I barely see around here: jimfinn
anybody can make himself an opinion about him? looking at the players left and without going back into archives I am unable to remember anything from him. I think he had no avatar and maybe that's why my memory isn't relating him to anything, but i'd be interested to see him participate a little more..

regarding trini's case done by chapcrap: I got to say there is a little something, but I don't know.. you two seem to put a bit too much your pride into this and are in the OMGYS logic since day 1..

also, for the guys who haven't seen the movie; why don't you watch it online in streaming? it lasts only about an hour long..

by **Rodion** on Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:18 pm

Betiko, as long as it is legal, could you please provide me with a streaming link that works outside of the US?

I'll be waiting a couple more days before I give my opinion on the current topics.

And BG, the picture you photoshopped was really funny! I laughed hard when I saw the "I hope this blue is ok" bit! :lol:

by **betiko** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:02 am

Rodion wrote:Betiko, as long as it is legal, could you please provide me with a streaming link that works outside of the US?

I'll be waiting a couple more days before I give my opinion on the current topics.

And BG, the picture you photoshopped was really funny! I laughed hard when I saw the "I hope this blue is ok" bit!

loool, don't be hypocrit, how could some free streaming links be more legal than others? ;-)

I mean we don't risk anything compared to downloading, it's the guys hosting those type of sites who could get into real trouble.. anyway unfortunately the link i have is in french, can't find it in english.. :cry:

maybe you can find a good brazilian site for this? my google keeps on giving french results even if i put .com or .co.uk...

by **trinicardinal** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:45 am

@chap - I did not skim and I was caught up with the talk I just did not see anything that looked like I could add any meaningful comments in a short space of time.

regarding the fasposting point - you CLAIM you were fastposted but anyone can say fastposted I'm not just going to take your word for that.

chapcrap wrote:@trini

I confirmed that since I hadn't posted in 5 days, I would have voted for me too, but I was fastposted by you (you know what that means, right?). A reasonable person would have unvoted at some point.

You will notice that I unvoted you after you were active for a while IF you were paying attention that is - Or were you skimming?

trinicardinal wrote:
Also chapcrap has been posting a lot more recently so my reservations about him submarining have diminished, therefore Unvote

Now please stop wasting my time and yours over this nonsense.

betiko wrote:hey there's I guy I barely see around here: jimfinn
anybody can make himself an opinion about him? looking at the players left and without going back into archives I am unable to remember anything from him. I think he had no avatar and maybe that's why my memory isn't relating him to anything, but i'd be interested to see him participate a little more..

@ betiko - jimfinn isn't the only one. I have not seen much of MeDeFe either His last post was on the 15th I believe. jimfinn's last post was on the 15th also. I intend to take a really close look at MeDeFe soon actually. But we have some interview to conduct this morning so it will have to be after those

by **Epitaph1** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:38 am

Daz also hasn't posted in a while. He's been relatively quiet in this game considering his activity in our clan. MoB can testify to his activity in our forums (and BG could too if he were here... *sniff). I don't want to call it submarining since we've had N1 since he last posted, but I'm surprised we haven't heard from him yet.

by **betiko** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:54 am

yup, jimfinn, medefe, dazza please report for duty!!!!!!!
8 days for the first 2 mentionned? that's some heavy submarining..
didn(t realize there were 4 of you guys from the same clan here.

by **strike wolf** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:03 am

shieldgenerator7 wrote:
jonty125 wrote:Trini, do you understand what it means to be FASTPOSTED? Because from your defense it doesn't seem like it.

Fixed in red for better understandability.

I don't see a case either way between chap and trini. It seems trini and chap have both been inactive and I think trini defended well (if in fact everything he said was true), and chap just ignores his defense. I do believe his case against trini was OMGUS, but I'll have to look into it further, plus find a case.

About last night's kill, I find it very hard to believe there's only one killing role in this game. In the previous game (team CC) there were more than one killing role, the mafia + Com9's role, and JOAT vig shot, meta-gaming leads me to believe there can't be just mafia here. So I suspect either a vig that didn't shoot N1 or some role got roleblocked.

-SG7 ( )

Still reading through what I missed however I wanted to make sure I commented on this. It is VERY dangerous to try to base balance speculation of a game based on what another mod does. Their balance is going to be much different. Especially as I trust safaru as amod more than I trusr Saxlad.

by **dazza2008** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:29 am

Epitaph1 wrote:Daz also hasn't posted in a while. He's been relatively quiet in this game considering his activity in our clan. MoB can testify to his activity in our forums (and BG could too if he were here... *sniff). I don't want to call it submarining since we've had N1 since he last posted, but I'm surprised we haven't heard from him yet.

Has it really been that long since I posted?

This day has only just started. I don't know what to think of the cases today so far. I have been reading but I will have a re-read and think and post my thoughts later.

by **trinicardinal** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:24 am

OK so here's what I got on MeDeFe

MeDeFe wrote:
dazza2008 wrote:I agree with everyone else. It would be completely random. I have not seen anything scummy from him yet.

Have you seen anything at all from him?

simple response - nothing much

MeDeFe wrote:
betiko wrote:
strike wolf wrote:Of course if I had ever lernt how to read than I would have known that wasn't post 100...

lol, you tried hard for it, and you made it!!

unvote, vote strike wolf!!

about the question, no cause i like very scientific methods, like posting the number 100 post. voting for the guy below me is too random. anyway, if we all vote for the guy below us i m not sure we would go very far!!

I suggest we all vote for the guy who's name is below the same person, I also suggest that this person we choose to lynch is scum.

Good idea.

unvote
vote betiko

Seems a little bit eager to vote but its day one and it seems that eagerness to jump on/start a wagon is not a big deal according to chap

MeDeFe wrote:
Leitz wrote:To answer betikos question of trust: nobody, if anything by asking that question I'm suspecting you are up to no good.

Should we lynch him then?

not sure if this was meant to be a joke but it seems a bit hasty to be asking the about lynching someone here

MeDeFe wrote:
strike wolf wrote:Well honestly I'm not really buying into any of the current cases...I don't really think there's anything to Rodion's questioning of leitz, I don't really find the betiko case that strong and the rodion is basically non-existant. If anything I buy the betiko case more than the others but I still find it fairly weak even for day 1.

Of course it's weak, but so are most cases on day 1. Rodion's asking for a reasoning is... about as non-scummy as things get, though.

Betiko's questions, "would you be ok with lynching the person below you" and "who do you trust" are odd, though. If everyone answered honestly they could be used to figure out scumbuddies or mason/lover partners. But expecting honest answers is foolish in the first place, so what's he after?

Getting a little confused with who asked what here - possibly skimming

MeDeFe wrote:
dazza2008 wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
strike wolf wrote:Well honestly I'm not really buying into any of the current cases...I don't really think there's anything to Rodion's questioning of leitz, I don't really find the betiko case that strong and the rodion is basically non-existant. If anything I buy the betiko case more than the others but I still find it fairly weak even for day 1.

Of course it's weak, but so are most cases on day 1. Rodion's asking for a reasoning is... about as non-scummy as things get, though.

Betiko's questions, "would you be ok with lynching the person below you" and "who do you trust" are odd, though. If everyone answered honestly they could be used to figure out scumbuddies or mason/lover partners. But expecting honest answers is foolish in the first place, so what's he after?

Was the first question not asked by Rodion?

Anyway I did not find either question particularly scummy. To me it just seemed like 2 guys trying to get some kind of conversation going which can only be a good thing.

You're right, Rodion asked the first one. I must've gotten that mixed up somehow.

ok...

Then we have betiko asking one weird question, and Rodion asking a weird question and later a non-scummy question. I'm still leaning towards putting pressure on betiko, though.

Explains his reasoning for staying on the betiko wagon

MeDeFe wrote:
betiko wrote:So just so we are clear, for each game, the mod can invent a new type of role or he has to stick to a determined list? we could be confronted to a role no one knows about, even the most experienced mafia players right?

The mod could make up every role for every player from scratch, but it's easier to use roles that have been played and tested and are known to be balanced.

MeDeFe wrote:Day 1 passing by with as little as this happening would be bad for town, though. We need information to go on if we want to be able to find the scum.

MeDeFe wrote:
betiko wrote:I hope i m not going to get another backfire for taking another initiative but i might have an idea.. why don t we take the list of players (but ourselves) and grade from 0 to 3 the level of suspicion we have for each? our entries would all be submited to safari and we couldn t see the results before everyone turns in his list. safari would then post all the lists at the same time (mentioning whose is which), so there is no bandwagoning. it might be a bit against the spirit of the game though...
it might help us in the process of voting?

I'm not sure you could make yourself look more suspicious if you were trying. Are you trying?

And yes, that's pretty much completely contrary to the spirit of the game. In RL you have to spot small hints and get really lucky quickly, on a forum it becomes a game of information where you look for inconsistencies, try to find out who's lying, try to spot people who vote together, see who started which bandwagon, who gave which wagon momentum, and so on and so forth. Forget about making lists. Even if we could get one completely honest list from every player they wouldn't be much help (and we wouldn't get honest lists). At this point I'd rate every player as moderately suspicious on the list you proposed.

oh, btw, unvote, since it looks like the betiko wagon isn't going anywhere. I'll have to look into the newest wagon a bit more before I commit either way.

Basically says that betiko is being suspicious but still unvotes because the wagon isn't moving - looking for a new one so obviously has no problems with bandwagonning and I find it strange that if you have just stated that someone is acting suspiciously that you will then leave them alone. chap has thoughts (albeit wrong) about me but at least he's trying to build a case - MeDeFe is suspicious but drops the case to look for another bandwagon? That does not make sense to me.

MeDeFe wrote:It's tricky to post something relevant when you log on, see 2 unread pages and have time to read only one, then you log off, come back some time later, and there are 3 unread pages. Finally I've had the time to read them all.

I was a bit uncertain of SW's case against BGtB initially, but after seeing how it has developed it looks strong enough to me for a vote BGtheBrain. BGtB has consistently failed to defend himself and properly refute the points brought against him.

Jumps on the BG wagon and stays there. Nothing more from him since. That's a long time to be away. I have to analyse jimfinn's posts next but I'm am suspicious of MeDeFe because of the submarining and especially the last few posts. Unless the jimfinn case shows more suspicious points or some good night information comes out I will be voting for him

by **trinicardinal** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:46 am

ok going to start trying to put together the jimfinn situation now. and then I'll place my vote based on situation so far.

by **trinicardinal** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:50 am

betiko wrote:
also, for the guys who haven't seen the movie; why don't you watch it online in streaming? it lasts only about an hour long..

btw FYI I couldn't get it streaming but I did get it in parts on youtube so i used that.

by **MeDeFe** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:59 pm

trinicardinal wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
betiko wrote:I hope i m not going to get another backfire for taking another initiative but i might have an idea.. why don t we take the list of players (but ourselves) and grade from 0 to 3 the level of suspicion we have for each? our entries would all be submited to safari and we couldn t see the results before everyone turns in his list. safari would then post all the lists at the same time (mentioning whose is which), so there is no bandwagoning. it might be a bit against the spirit of the game though...
it might help us in the process of voting?

I'm not sure you could make yourself look more suspicious if you were trying. Are you trying?

And yes, that's pretty much completely contrary to the spirit of the game. In RL you have to spot small hints and get really lucky quickly, on a forum it becomes a game of information where you look for inconsistencies, try to find out who's lying, try to spot people who vote together, see who started which bandwagon, who gave which wagon momentum, and so on and so forth. Forget about making lists. Even if we could get one completely honest list from every player they wouldn't be much help (and we wouldn't get honest lists). At this point I'd rate every player as moderately suspicious on the list you proposed.

oh, btw, unvote, since it looks like the betiko wagon isn't going anywhere. I'll have to look into the newest wagon a bit more before I commit either way.

Basically says that betiko is being suspicious but still unvotes because the wagon isn't moving - looking for a new one so obviously has no problems with bandwagonning and I find it strange that if you have just stated that someone is acting suspiciously that you will then leave them alone. chap has thoughts (albeit wrong) about me but at least he's trying to build a case - MeDeFe is suspicious but drops the case to look for another bandwagon? That does not make sense to me.

As far as I recall, betiko's behaviour had been generally put down to noobishness at that point. All I was doing was letting him know that he was still dropping scumtells like cheap candy at carnival.

Bandwagoning is what you do on day 1, you put pressure on people, see how they react, try to spot signs of scumminess, get a claim or two, maybe lynch someone. Yes, on day 1 I have little problem with bandwagoning, it's a necessary evil in order to get something to start from on day 2.

by **trinicardinal** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:05 pm

jimfinn wrote: unvote, Vote: Rodion

The random question of whether we should lynch the person below us seems a bit scummy to me. After all, it seems readily apparent that mafia would want a random lynch and town would not, but the obviousness of that also means that mafia would also want to act like they did not want the lynch. This can lead only to WIFOM and eating up valuable time, and feels deliberately nonhelpful of him to do. He's trying to keep us from getting out of the RVS/RQS

So Day 1 and everyone is getting trouble to get even a semblance of a good reason to commit. jim has decided to start on Rodion due to his question seeming a bit scummy to him.

jimfinn wrote:Clarity post: RVS/RQS = Random Voting Stage/Random Questioning Stage. On other sites I see it all the time; perhaps it's less common here (only my third game on this site).

jimfinn wrote:
trinicardinal wrote:Also I find it interesting that strike talks about being suspicious of some of those voting for betiko and then proceeds to try to build a case against me when I have deliberately refrained from voting for betiko at this point due specifically to the point that there is no real case against anybody yet. Hell this thing is nothing but paranoia

Then again, I think that your comments about not wanting to put betiko to L-2 indicate your suspicion of betiko, and I would certainly have considered you part of the attack on betiko, even though you technically didn't vote for him.

adding in his 2 cents but apparently not feeling strongly enough to switch votes to me. Also does not seem interested enough to follow up like chap did.

jimfinn wrote:I think that Rodion's guide is helpful, and I don't consider it a disruption. New players might not necessarily check the mafia discussion forum.

Also useful are the following:
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=FAQ
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Roles
http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?tit ... reviations

jimfinn wrote:EBWOP: I'm going to unvote as well, Rodion's being more useful now.

fairly simple posting so far although not much of it... almost as if he's trying to be seen but not say anything?

jimfinn wrote:
dazza2008 wrote:unvote I believe BG's claim. I have not seen the film but did a search to see what there was. It seems there has to be characters that are less common as there seems not to be too many. I found the one BG claimed and I can't see why he would not be VT.

If a moderator is trying to make a good, balanced game, either the scum will be provided with fakeclaims (characters guaranteed not to appear) or alignment will be independent of character in the original book/game/movie. So I wouldn't personally accept the fact that the character SEEMS POTENTIALLY VT as an exonerating bit of evidence. That said, I also don't have strong enough suspicion of BG to bring him to the edge of a lynch yet, but I just think that his claim neither enhances nor reduces his credibility.

So jim still isn't saying much. All of his posts are very short and he has hardly posted for the game. In addition he hasn't posted anything new since the 15th. He claims this is only his 3rd game here which would put him in a similar position to me but it also implies that he has played mafia otherwise which I haven't so i'm inclined to cut him a little less slack on the noob factor.

Given the posts by MeDeFe and jimfinn its a bit harder to decide between them but on the whole I am a bit more susbicious of MeDeFe so

FOS: jimfinn
Vote: MeDeFe

by **Leitz** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:23 pm

Alright, so night 1 took a townie out. Most of us were convincend BG was talking the truth, as turned out to be. Despite all the action, nothing big was revealed accept that the doc claim didn't ensure a doc kill. Good news for town!

As far as Day 2 has been going on, I've been keeping a close eye on all posts and FOS/votes. So far I'm retaining my vote until a bigger case (the trini/chap case seems a bit overkill to me) will come up. It is still early and there is no real deadline so I'll be waiting to see how everybody reacts on the FOS/votes.

by **trinicardinal** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:51 pm

MeDeFe wrote:
trinicardinal wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
betiko wrote:I hope i m not going to get another backfire for taking another initiative but i might have an idea.. why don t we take the list of players (but ourselves) and grade from 0 to 3 the level of suspicion we have for each? our entries would all be submited to safari and we couldn t see the results before everyone turns in his list. safari would then post all the lists at the same time (mentioning whose is which), so there is no bandwagoning. it might be a bit against the spirit of the game though...
it might help us in the process of voting?

I'm not sure you could make yourself look more suspicious if you were trying. Are you trying?

And yes, that's pretty much completely contrary to the spirit of the game. In RL you have to spot small hints and get really lucky quickly, on a forum it becomes a game of information where you look for inconsistencies, try to find out who's lying, try to spot people who vote together, see who started which bandwagon, who gave which wagon momentum, and so on and so forth. Forget about making lists. Even if we could get one completely honest list from every player they wouldn't be much help (and we wouldn't get honest lists). At this point I'd rate every player as moderately suspicious on the list you proposed.

oh, btw, unvote, since it looks like the betiko wagon isn't going anywhere. I'll have to look into the newest wagon a bit more before I commit either way.

Basically says that betiko is being suspicious but still unvotes because the wagon isn't moving - looking for a new one so obviously has no problems with bandwagonning and I find it strange that if you have just stated that someone is acting suspiciously that you will then leave them alone. chap has thoughts (albeit wrong) about me but at least he's trying to build a case - MeDeFe is suspicious but drops the case to look for another bandwagon? That does not make sense to me.

As far as I recall, betiko's behaviour had been generally put down to noobishness at that point. All I was doing was letting him know that he was still dropping scumtells like cheap candy at carnival.

Bandwagoning is what you do on day 1, you put pressure on people, see how they react, try to spot signs of scumminess, get a claim or two, maybe lynch someone. Yes, on day 1 I have little problem with bandwagoning, it's a necessary evil in order to get something to start from on day 2.

Sorry folks... while doing up my case with jimfinn it would seem that I missed MeDeFe's response to my case on him. Glad to see you back amount the posts. in time I expect I will fully understand the intricacies of Day 1 band wagons. Either way I still am not comfortable about you or jimfinn so far and there has been little concrete evidence to go on for anyone. I'm leaving my vote as it stands for now until we get some more information or you can convince me otherwise.

by **betiko** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 3:02 pm

well, I am going to vote for jimfinn because he has definitely not brought anything to the game so far and he hasn't posted here in over a week (CC is a game where you are supposed to watch your turns every 24h). All his comments are dull and he is definitely the one who is the least implicated. He might be a townie, but his submarining reflects either scuminess or disinterest/lack of time to bring his 2 cents once in a while. let's see if this makes him show up in here.. wonder if he's even been reading this since his last post..

vote jimfin

fastposted

by **jimfinn** on Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:13 pm

Hey all, sorry, I'm just catching up a little bit - I spilled a drink on my laptop during the Mafia night, and I'm still getting caught up on so far. I've just barely been logging in to take my turns from wherever, but today I was able to get an old laptop up to the point where I can use it til my good one is fixed.

by **jonty125** on Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:39 am

FOS jimfinn until he responds to the case and then I'll place my vote.

by **safariguy5** on Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:33 am

Vote Count

trini(1)- chap
MeDeFe(1)- trini
jimfinn(1)- betiko

With 16 alive, it takes 9 to lynch.

by **betiko** on Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:52 am

jimfinn wrote:Hey all, sorry, I'm just catching up a little bit - I spilled a drink on my laptop during the Mafia night, and I'm still getting caught up on so far. I've just barely been logging in to take my turns from wherever, but today I was able to get an old laptop up to the point where I can use it til my good one is fixed.

it only took you 10 minutes to answer once I decided to go against you and before that you didn't say a thing in 8 days?

so this prooves that you decide to never get involved and that you come and read here quite often..

by **strike wolf** on Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:56 am

Well reviewing the trini-chap case. As much as I am suspicious of anyone who's first defense against someone is to claim OMGus and then misuse wifom at the end, I'm not seeing enough to vote Trini from the case brought forward (whether chap wants to acknowledge it or not there is a big difference between casting one of the first few votes on the wagon and putting someone at L-2 to force the claim) and despite early suspicions against him Trini has since been fairly helpful in progressing discussion. It does however have more substance than the reasoning for voting chap at the moment. I still need to finish reviewing day 1 so I will not comment much on the chap case other than to say the case he pushed for against trini does seem to be an earnest attempt. As far as inactives, I am as of right now much more inclined to believe Medefe over Jimfinn as Medefe's posting has been fairly consistent from what I've seen elsewhere. However it appears they both responded fairly quickly to the inactive allegations.

by **betiko** on Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:04 am

strike wolf wrote:Well reviewing the trini-chap case. As much as I am suspicious of anyone who's first defense against someone is to claim OMGus and then misuse wifom at the end, I'm not seeing enough to vote Trini from the case brought forward (whether chap wants to acknowledge it or not there is a big difference between casting one of the first few votes on the wagon and putting someone at L-2 to force the claim) and despite early suspicions against him Trini has since been fairly helpful in progressing discussion. It does however have more substance than the reasoning for voting chap at the moment. I still need to finish reviewing day 1 so I will not comment much on the chap case other than to say the case he pushed for against trini does seem to be an earnest attempt. As far as inactives, I am as of right now much more inclined to believe Medefe over Jimfinn as Medefe's posting has been fairly consistent from what I've seen elsewhere. However it appears they both responded fairly quickly to the inactive allegations.

medefe is not too afraid to say what he thinks, there is some substance... I vote for jimfinn and in the next minutes he shows up just as an act of presence, but still not really saying anything.. he's definitely the least helpfull here. looks like he is only waiting for someone to be against the wall to bring his 2 cents and bandwagon against him..

[Official] NBC Mafia Town Win MVP=trinicardinal

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Re: [Official] The Nightmare Before Christmas Mafia Day 2

Who is online