Here are the possibilities, as I see them:Penguin wrote:
If westo was mafia, he would have already voted Husa if Husa was town. Which means that it would have to be Westo / Husa as mafia instead of Husa / John.
- Both Westo and Husa are scum. This means that the reason Westo is hesitant is because he doesn't want to kill a fellow Mafia member, despite what he says about feeling guilty of lynching a "fellow townie".
- Westo is scum and Husa is town. This is unlikely because he would have already won the game. One town Lynch and one nightkill = win for Mafia. On a side note, we can infer that everyone not voting for Husa as of this minute is town, because if not, the other Mafia member would have hammered him by now. Unless Husa is Mafia himself. If so, then I can't make a conclusion as affirmative as that.
- Westo is town. It doesn't matter whether Husa is scum of not because he can't know for sure. This would explain his hesitance.
However, if Husa isn't, then I can't say anything for certain. I also can't say if Husa is town or not, since he barely even talks. Anyone could be his partner.
Assuming Husa is town, I can't be scum, see above logic. If he is, I can't be his partner either. Keremal expressly stated in his last post that he would hammer Husa if it came down to it. I can't really give more evidence due to Kere not talking much, but he's relatively new, and was most likely being honest when saying that.Penguin wrote:
But at the same time, YOU could possibly be trying to throw shade over towards Westo since you know that your teammate is on the chopping block right now.
These are my reads coming into the game.
...
Westonini wrote:
johnmedina999 wrote:
https://old.ppy.sh/forum/p/6965548 (willingness to vote for abraker when he was being questioned)
In abraker's case, there were several things that he had said that made him seem suspicious. The main two points against him were:
1.) When under fire by Penguin, in order to dismiss everything said and play it off he simply replied with2.) Which then led to him claiming he didnt realize Penguin voted for him because he was "drunk".abraker wrote:
Ok got the reaction I wanted
Penguin is a safe town readabraker wrote:
Main reason is because Penguin did not vote me after all that and remained on Husa. Give mafia a reason to vote someone and they will take it, and that will be their excuse when the lynched does turn town.abraker wrote:
Oh wait he did. I'll reply again when I have the beer out of my system :\
Anyone would have found this suspicious. However, I was hesitant and never actually voted for him. Then the day ended with a No-Lynch.
Your logic checks out. However, you contradict yourself because you really didn't contribute to that one-on-one fight, and yet you let Penguin disctate your opinion.
Westonini]"[quote="johnmedina999 wrote:
https://old.ppy.sh/forum/p/6973062, https://old.ppy.sh/forum/p/6973063 (willingness to vote for anyone)
This is a simple one. I agreed with Penguin when he said:
Penguin wrote:
we gotta be proactive and vote someone or else we're just gonna be sitting here twiddling our thumbs and doing nothing while mafia runs the game.
We needed something to happen in order to get any sort of info we could. A good way to get things going would be to vote someone and put them under pressure. But I never actually voted anyone that time either. Things happened without me having to vote anyone.This was kind of a weak accusation from me, I didn't have much to base it on. I'll give you a pass on this one.
Westonini wrote:
johnmedina999 wrote:
https://old.ppy.sh/forum/p/6976475 (willingness to vote for Husa)
As for this time, while I did claim I would vote Husa I was also pretty hesitant on it as well. I announced that I would be voting Husa soon in order to force them to say something for their case since we haven't really heard anything in their defense. If I voted for Husa that would be it for them, we'd have 4/4 votes needed to lynch. If that's really what I wanted I could have just voted for them right then and there. But I was apprehensive because if we mess up and accidentally vote off a townie, we'd lose the game. 4vs2 -> Lynch Townie 3vs2 -> Night Phase 2vs2 -> fulfills mafia wn requirements.johnmedina999 wrote:
It also doesn't help that he hasn't contributed much to the witchhunt, he just kinda goes with the flow.
It's common among newbie scum to look for an excuse to vote for someone else as soon as possible, and as far as I can tell, this is his first game (due to https://old.ppy.sh/forum/p/6962555 and also I can't find much on Google)
While it's true that I said I'd go with the flow, I've only actually done that to an extent. I don't want others to control my votes and I aim to sway the conversation if there's something that needs to be brought up. Such as letting Husa have a chance to defend themselves for example. I normally try to take a neutral side between people instead of being biased towards one person. If anyone says something suspicious, I will question them on it. The times I announced to everyone I'd be voting abraker and Husa soon was only to give them an incentive to defend themselves.[/quote]
It's your neutrality that doesn't sit right with me. It seems to me that you're not taking anyone's side, you're trying not to offend anyone, and therefore you won't get accused of being Mafia, and you can pick people off at night.
[quote="Westonini]"If I was a mafia member, don't you think I would have voted someone at least once already in hopes of getting a townie lynched? The only vote I've ever made thus far was "No-Lynch".[/quote]
This is the part that troubles me as well, for above reasons. I don't know what to think about it yet.