Rantai wasn't lynched... On top that, what makes you think that kill was suppose to point YOU out as Mafia? It just sounds...odd.Sync wrote:
Poor Rantai :< Confused why you were lynched myself. Maybe since you suspected me, mafia was setting up a way to point out me as mafia.
Pretty shallow, but who knows
are you dumb or stupidWojjan wrote:
well there's no lurker dead
that should account for something.
Fixed it for you. Sure, a vig kill might have given us more information but who knows, maybe the vig has a better idea? Who knows what it might be though?Wojjan wrote:
thing is I, Wojjan only, specifically said "vig kill one a these bitches"
I meant killed and Rantai was calling me suspicious D1.Lilac wrote:
Rantai wasn't lynched... On top that, what makes you think that kill was suppose to point YOU out as Mafia? It just sounds...odd.Sync wrote:
Poor Rantai :< Confused why you were lynched myself. Maybe since you suspected me, mafia was setting up a way to point out me as mafia.
Pretty shallow, but who knows
don't you startLilac wrote:
Fixed it for you. Sure, a vig kill might have given us more information but who knows, maybe the vig has a better idea? Who knows what it might be though?Wojjan wrote:
thing is I, Wojjan only, specifically said "vig kill one a these bitches"
using vig so early in the game and pushing for it so muchWojjan wrote:
So why did no inactive die? I actually think all vigs in play might be all town right now. Scum woulld waste no time using a second kill on an inactive if it wouldn't only reduce our numbers but also earn them confirmed cred.
maybe so he could say "mafia probably did that to make me look bad, hurr durr".Chris wrote:
I'm not sure if Sync is just paranoid or bad, but I don't see why he would send a kill in that would (in his opinion) make him look bad.
yes.dkun wrote:
but then again, i've only lurked and read so far, does that make me scum according to your logic?
He doesn't say he has a chance of missing. It's quite clear from this post that he doesn't know if he has a chance of missing. The way it's worded suggests that he was simply told what was in the role list, that if there are other vigs then his accuracy goes down.Dusty wrote:
If the description on the role list my giftee had is the same as my vig role, I don't even have guaranteed 100% accuracy...
Just because my day 1 posts were such almighty genius that they transcended the level of your pitiful mind.Lilac wrote:
By God.
Mashley said something that actually made sense and I can somewhat agree on.
He said if his vig role works like his giftee's, then he wouldn't even have 100% accuracy.Mashley wrote:
Read his post againHe doesn't say he has a chance of missing. It's quite clear from this post that he doesn't know if he has a chance of missing. The way it's worded suggests that he was simply told what was in the role list, that if there are other vigs then his accuracy goes down.Dusty wrote:
If the description on the role list my giftee had is the same as my vig role, I don't even have guaranteed 100% accuracy...
Read then post plz, right back at you.
If he chose vig for his giftee then he would have come to the conclusion that he isn't 100%, not that he might not be 100%.JInxyjem wrote:
He said if his vig role works like his giftee's, then he wouldn't even have 100% accuracy.
Sounds to me like he chose vig for his giftee and thus came to that conclusion that he may not be 100%.
If he was saying what you're trying to say, then his statement would have read:JInxyjem wrote:
No, his post showed that he thought he may not have shared the same type of vig as his giftee but if he did share the same type of vig, it meant that he did not have 100%.
Dusty wrote:
If the description on the role list my giftee had is the same as my vig role, I don't even haveguaranteed100% accuracy...
Haven't quite read the thread up till now. Wasn't tracking it.Wojjan wrote:
any thoughts?
It should be blatantly obvious that both dusty and dusty's receiving end of the santa both have vig. There for he knows he's not 100% accurate, so when he says that we know there's another vig in play. Why would we not use that?He says that he didn't have guaranteed 100% accuracy. This means that he might not have 100% accuracy, but on the other hand he might.
Why are you also not saying why my reasoning is bad? You ust sort of toss it out there so in the case I get a bandwagon on me you can just say you're right and course along.IMO it's bad because Dusty had quite a good point IMO, and you said it wasn't.
There's a decent amount of "cop-out" roles available in this game, based on the list I have. Somewhat suspicious of those who voted due to it being a "convenient cop-out" role. Expecially since Mafia recieve whatever role is given to them, they can claim what their role actually is generally and be safe. It's like what goes on with my giving mafia believable extra abilities in my games, except in this game everyone has specifically one ability.I agree, the mafia don't really have a reason to lie this time, so we have to rely almost exclusively on scumhunting via posts.
funny how pieguy makes the list and mashley doesn'tfoulcoon wrote:
heres who I think are most suspicious at this point:
Sync
Wojjan
pieguy
i'm game for a lynch on any of the 3
If we assume the role is given after the mafia was chosen, this would make sense (not that it could be true), but I'm not sure if that is the case with role distribution. Does anyone knows which comes first?Sync wrote:
because rolecop mafia is a popular mafia role and it's hard to imagine mafia being really unbalanced like that
also, the shit foulcoon pulled is even more convincing