Arkham Mafia [ENDGAME]

[MacDougall]

Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

Having been victim of this before it begs the question ... why didn't you defend Matt from these accusations earlier instead of questioning him further?

[Matt]

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Mac

Mac who?

Mac wrongly believes I'm Riddler but I would like to thank him for putting into words what I failed to say myself regarding all the cray cray earlier, but he nails pretty much everything.

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Golden

Golden who?

Golden, you silly goose, let's vote Nero instead and see which mafia team he's on.

[MacDougall]

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Mac

Mac who?

Mac wrongly believes I'm Riddler but I would like to thank him for putting into words what I failed to say myself regarding all the cray cray earlier, but he nails pretty much everything.

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Golden

Golden who?

Golden, you silly goose, let's vote Nero instead and see which mafia team he's on.

I don't "believe" you are Riddler, I was spit balling.

[Matt]

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Btw

Btw who?

Btw Day 1 Arkham voters, day 2 was the same message, derp, so that was lame

[TheFloyd73]

Arkham Asylum, Where Independents escaped from, this could also be seen as their territory.

Wayne Manor Batman's/Civ faction house this would be the safest location to visit imo.

Wayne Enterprises Batman's/Civ business center, this could be seen as safe, but also a target for the mafia/Inmates

Fish Mooney's This is a gangsters/mafia area I think?

The Docks This would be more mafia aligned, since from what I remember from Batman alot of illegal activities occur here.

Gotham City Police Department One of the safest places except for the fact after night 1 we will have dirty cops. Which heightens the danger of this area. But, still more pro civ then many other locations.

City Hall Neutral area

Park Row (Crime Alley) Defiantly pro-mafia and inmates. Doesn't seem like a safe place to visit.

Blackgate Penitentiary This would be the regular prison, so I'd think we would be able to get more information about the mafia from this location.

Gotham City General Hospital The hospital would be neutral right now, but could be a target for inmates.

So I think Wayne Manor, the police headquarters, Blackgate, or maybe Arkham would be the best locations to visit. If we thing going to certain locations will give us clues on inmates/mafia I think it would be better to go to a location that would help us uncover the mafia. Or somewhere that would be seen as safer like Wayne Manor, at least until we now more about the map.

If find this to be an interesting overlook of the choices on Day 0. I suspect this could be an over-analysis, but I don't trust my senses at this stage.

Glorfindel, you appear to have overlooked Sig's speculation around your Day One vote, since you didn't refer to it at all. Do you have anything to say about It?

Matt's knock knock jokes are perplexing (and frankly, pretty awful). I sense something strange. Not that he's necessarily scum, but he may have been affected by someone with a special ability (due to the jokes, I'd say The Riddler).

I'll try to post again later, I haven't got time now.

[Scotty]

Hey, Scotty. Thanks for your response to my post. Firstly, may I respectfully request that you refrain from posting in that pale yellow font. I'm using an available theme for this site and that colour font is near impossible to read - thanks for your consideration. Secondly, I'm a tart? Thank you kindly for that assessment of my character - I didn't think you knew me that well

Seriously though, yes. I was a third party once (in a Teen Wolf Mafia game) and I enjoyed it immensely. I was a vigilante and I made it my business to hunt Mafia and picked off one that no one suspected Night 1 (sadly it was one of those deals where the role is targeted as an NK, it kills the role that targeted it...). For the same reason that I like being Town (a degree of independence that I don't think Mafia have) I think being independent might be better especially if you have some kind of ability but unfortunately that is not my fate in this game.

As for your last remark, I find it belittling and insulting and frankly beneath someone of your stature on this site. You are of course entitled to your opinion and I completely respect your right to not believe anything I say but I find that response unnecessarily personal and unworthy of this site if it truly purports to be a place where these games are meant to be fun and respectful.

First and foremost, know that I'm not attempting to make a row with you or personally attack you. I apologize if it was coming across as such. I realize that sometimes I forget my humor may be a tad crass and may not be viewed as humor at all.

So here's the deal, on a general level: Your presence in the game is actually very welcomed, with the various spats and negativity being thrown around. You are intrinsically a nice person, and I feel like we need more people like you around! Being nice is not necessarily suspicious, but what pinged me was how- I thought- you were using it as a crutch. It appeared to me that it was laid on thicker than I thought it needed to be.

As for your response about indie: it sounds like you're painting your indie experience as closer to that of the town: more independent, fun, your own man. I think you could very well be independent, though I am still getting a weird vibe from you. I'm going to keep an open mind and not vote for you yet because gut reads are only comfortable to me if I can back it up with a little evidence.

Anyway- I'm all for keeping it fun and frothy but just as long as you know that most of the name calling I do from time to time is meant to not be taken seriously. If it upsets you after knowing such, I'll just refrain from going all Willy Wonka on you

[Glorfindel]

Glorfindel, you appear to have overlooked Sig's speculation around your Day One vote, since you didn't refer to it at all. Do you have anything to say about it?

Hi, Floyd I'm sorry, I have no recollection of Sig's speculation about my Day 1 vote and frankly had I not answered his question about it, I don't doubt for a second that I'd have heard about it. In any case the rationale for my vote on Day 1 was quite clear. I stated very clearly that at the time I voted that I would be unable to return before the EoD due to work commitments and I had to place my vote using my best judgement at the time I made it. At that time despite the relatively small number of votes cast, Zebra was clearly in contention for lynching. I considered her a significant asset to our cause at that time (and still do) and placed my vote accordingly on (from memory) either on the only other (or one of a couple) competing wagons. I hope that satisfactorily explains my motivation Floyd.

[Golden]

No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Players with insane roles don't know they are insane. I am sure he is using insanity by it's traditional definition here. If someone with investigative powers targets Joker it's going to fuck up their ability and they won't know it.

I've never heard of your definition of insane from some other site being used here, and I'm not limiting epi to it (and certainly not presuming it as likely).

[Golden]

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Mac

Mac who?

Mac wrongly believes I'm Riddler but I would like to thank him for putting into words what I failed to say myself regarding all the cray cray earlier, but he nails pretty much everything.

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Golden

Golden who?

Golden, you silly goose, let's vote Nero instead and see which mafia team he's on.

I'd be fairly willing to take a stab on this and vote Nero.

[Golden]

Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

Having been victim of this before it begs the question ... why didn't you defend Matt from these accusations earlier instead of questioning him further?

Because I think Matt's behaviour is erratic and deserves questioning. And because I think the point is not how likely or not any theory is, but the way Matt reacts to it.

Now a question for you - given you were the one who victimised me in Star Wars, why wait to question me on it until after I raise it for myself? It seems very disingenuous to ask me that question in the abstract as though you weren't involved in what I spoke about.

[Glorfindel]

Hey, Scotty. Thanks for your response to my post. Firstly, may I respectfully request that you refrain from posting in that pale yellow font. I'm using an available theme for this site and that colour font is near impossible to read - thanks for your consideration. Secondly, I'm a tart? Thank you kindly for that assessment of my character - I didn't think you knew me that well

Seriously though, yes. I was a third party once (in a Teen Wolf Mafia game) and I enjoyed it immensely. I was a vigilante and I made it my business to hunt Mafia and picked off one that no one suspected Night 1 (sadly it was one of those deals where the role is targeted as an NK, it kills the role that targeted it...). For the same reason that I like being Town (a degree of independence that I don't think Mafia have) I think being independent might be better especially if you have some kind of ability but unfortunately that is not my fate in this game.

As for your last remark, I find it belittling and insulting and frankly beneath someone of your stature on this site. You are of course entitled to your opinion and I completely respect your right to not believe anything I say but I find that response unnecessarily personal and unworthy of this site if it truly purports to be a place where these games are meant to be fun and respectful.

First and foremost, know that I'm not attempting to make a row with you or personally attack you. I apologize if it was coming across as such. I realize that sometimes I forget my humor may be a tad crass and may not be viewed as humor at all.

So here's the deal, on a general level: Your presence in the game is actually very welcomed, with the various spats and negativity being thrown around. You are intrinsically a nice person, and I feel like we need more people like you around! Being nice is not necessarily suspicious, but what pinged me was how- I thought- you were using it as a crutch. It appeared to me that it was laid on thicker than I thought it needed to be.

As for your response about indie: it sounds like you're painting your indie experience as closer to that of the town: more independent, fun, your own man. I think you could very well be independent, though I am still getting a weird vibe from you. I'm going to keep an open mind and not vote for you yet because gut reads are only comfortable to me if I can back it up with a little evidence.

Anyway- I'm all for keeping it fun and frothy but just as long as you know that most of the name calling I do from time to time is meant to not be taken seriously. If it upsets you after knowing such, I'll just refrain from going all Willy Wonka on you

Thank you, Scotty. To be completely honest with you, I felt somewhat humiliated by my posts here this afternoon. I think I was being perhaps a little too honest (if that makes sense) saying some of the things I did and in retrospect, I can't expect anyone to take anything much of what I said as incontrovertible truth - although it is. Your previous post had me seriously wondering what the hell I'm doing in this game... Please don't misunderstand me - I'm not so niave as to not understand that probably every other player in this game is out to win it at any cost but you should know that there are some lines I will never cross.

And yes, from my experience, I think I often find it difficult to persuade my fellow players to a particular course of action. I think I'm reasonably articulate but there is obviously some skill at which I'm lacking. I think as an independent, you have the opportunity to influence the outcome of the game independently and that for the reasons I mentioned above, appeals to me. I can't explain your weird vibe, I'm sorry. I think I'd have enjoyed an independent role in this game although to be frank, for the good of this game, it's probably better that I didn't...

And no, I didn't get your sense of humour my friend but now that I do, knock yourself out...

[Golden]

I think Matt is pretty much regular Matt here. What you described is Matt's usual play isn't it? I would argue that GoC Matt was the most clear headed logical version of Matt I have seen and he was my scum teammate.

No. Matt might tunnel, but I basically always feel like I can see his side and like I can wade in in his defence. I don't get that feeling at all this game, because 1) I feel like he has played dumb at times and 2) I feel like he is being deliberately erratic.

[MacDougall]

Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

Having been victim of this before it begs the question ... why didn't you defend Matt from these accusations earlier instead of questioning him further?

Because I think Matt's behaviour is erratic and deserves questioning. And because I think the point is not how likely or not any theory is, but the way Matt reacts to it.

Now a question for you - given you were the one who victimised me in Star Wars, why wait to question me on it until after I raise it for myself? It seems very disingenuous to ask me that question in the abstract as though you weren't involved in what I spoke about.

Nah surely you jest? I have spent the entire time engaging with Enrique. I can't make every single post and observation at the speed of light. It occurred to me to question you when you brought it up, and I think that DOES make sense and your "suspicion" is lolular.

[MacDougall]

Also Epignosis can you please ban the word disingenuous in this game? It's out of control.

[Glorfindel]

Also Epignosis can you please ban the word disingenuous in this game? It's out of control.

Seconded.

[Golden]

Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

Having been victim of this before it begs the question ... why didn't you defend Matt from these accusations earlier instead of questioning him further?

Because I think Matt's behaviour is erratic and deserves questioning. And because I think the point is not how likely or not any theory is, but the way Matt reacts to it.

Now a question for you - given you were the one who victimised me in Star Wars, why wait to question me on it until after I raise it for myself? It seems very disingenuous to ask me that question in the abstract as though you weren't involved in what I spoke about.

Nah surely you jest? I have spent the entire time engaging with Enrique. I can't make every single post and observation at the speed of light. It occurred to me to question you when you brought it up, and I think that DOES make sense and your "suspicion" is lolular.

I'd been engaging on the Enrique/Matt stuff all day too. That's not my definition of the speed of light.

What "suspicion" is a made up word?

[Bullzeye]

No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Players with insane roles don't know they are insane. I am sure he is using insanity by it's traditional definition here. If someone with investigative powers targets Joker it's going to fuck up their ability and they won't know it.

In this community the traditional definition of insanity is not what you're trying to say it is. I've been exclusively playing around here for nearly six years now and have never ever seen anyone refer to reducing target accuracy as insanity. I doubt most people who play on this site would even consider that as an option and I doubt Epi, or especially LC, would word the role in such a way if that's what it was meant as. Around here, being insanified, or 'made insane' means to have your posting affected in some obvious way. It's like being cursed. That's how 90% of people on The Syndicate would interpret that role and is almost definitely what it means.

[MacDougall]

Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

Having been victim of this before it begs the question ... why didn't you defend Matt from these accusations earlier instead of questioning him further?

Because I think Matt's behaviour is erratic and deserves questioning. And because I think the point is not how likely or not any theory is, but the way Matt reacts to it.

Now a question for you - given you were the one who victimised me in Star Wars, why wait to question me on it until after I raise it for myself? It seems very disingenuous to ask me that question in the abstract as though you weren't involved in what I spoke about.

Nah surely you jest? I have spent the entire time engaging with Enrique. I can't make every single post and observation at the speed of light. It occurred to me to question you when you brought it up, and I think that DOES make sense and your "suspicion" is lolular.

I'd been engaging on the Enrique/Matt stuff all day too. That's not my definition of the speed of light.

What "suspicion" is a made up word?

You are being that word that I have decided is banned.

Suggesting I am suspect for not questioning you for something that didn't occur to me until you mentioned it is a ridiculous assertion. Like I am supposed to just recall every ounce of information from every game with total recall.

The fact that you mentioned it so late into the piece made me feel like you were aware of it but held off saying so. The only reason I can see for doing that is because you wanted to see Matt lynched without doing your utmost to ensure the reasons were solid. The only reason you would want to do that is to ensure that you (and your friends aren't lynched).

[MacDougall]

No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Players with insane roles don't know they are insane. I am sure he is using insanity by it's traditional definition here. If someone with investigative powers targets Joker it's going to fuck up their ability and they won't know it.

In this community the traditional definition of insanity is not what you're trying to say it is. I've been exclusively playing around here for nearly six years now and have never ever seen anyone refer to reducing target accuracy as insanity. I doubt most people who play on this site would even consider that as an option and I doubt Epi, or especially LC, would word the role in such a way if that's what it was meant as. Around here, being insanified, or 'made insane' means to have your posting affected in some obvious way. It's like being cursed. That's how 90% of people on The Syndicate would interpret that role and is almost definitely what it means.

I have never seen it used in that way in a role description. It always is referred to as cursed, of which one is insanified (not made insane), but you are probably right.

Regardless, if Epignosis intended for it to be obvious that he meant "insanfied" then Epignosis should say so.

I just don't feel like it's possible for someone to have a posting curse and that role to make any sense. Perhaps in the secrets he goes on to elaborate on what it is to be insane in this context, hence why he won't explain what it is. I would say this is just as likely. It could mean anything.

[MacDougall]

No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Players with insane roles don't know they are insane. I am sure he is using insanity by it's traditional definition here. If someone with investigative powers targets Joker it's going to fuck up their ability and they won't know it.

In this community the traditional definition of insanity is not what you're trying to say it is.

What's with the wording here? Not what I'm TRYING to say it is? Why did you say it like that? Why not just "is not what you are saying it is". Are you trying to undermine my credibility while disagreeing for no apparent reason other than to do so?

[MacDougall]

Let it be known that I am now strongly considering voting for Bullzeye.

[Bullzeye]

I have never seen it used in that way in a role description. It always is referred to as cursed, of which one is insanified (not made insane), but you are probably right.

Regardless, if Epignosis intended for it to be obvious that he meant "insanfied" then Epignosis should say so.

I just don't feel like it's possible for someone to have a posting curse and that role to make any sense. Perhaps in the secrets he goes on to elaborate on what it is to be insane in this context, hence why he won't explain what it is. I would say this is just as likely. It could mean anything.

Some people (English teachers, grammar nerds, etc.) might prefer to say made insane over insanified, since one is actually a word and the other isn't. I dunno. I think Epi would've assumed everyone would know what made insane means within the context of our community once a posting curse showed up with no other explicit source. It was an easy conclusion to come to for basically everyone but you.

No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Players with insane roles don't know they are insane. I am sure he is using insanity by it's traditional definition here. If someone with investigative powers targets Joker it's going to fuck up their ability and they won't know it.

In this community the traditional definition of insanity is not what you're trying to say it is.

What's with the wording here? Not what I'm TRYING to say it is? Why did you say it like that? Why not just "is not what you are saying it is". Are you trying to undermine my credibility while disagreeing for no apparent reason other than to do so?

I put literally no deliberate thought into the wording. I suppose I said trying to say because you came storming in here pushing this narrative that insane is always defined as one thing and we should've all known that despite the fact we've never defined it as such here. I could've abbreviated it to "you are saying" but I didn't because it isn't that big of a deal.

[Glorfindel]

I've had cause to come on and check this game thread a number of times today and I honestly can't recall an occasion where I have and Magnus (Nerolunar) hasn't been on as well and yet (once again) you post so infrequently my friend. I know this is all pretty heavy going and as you're new you are maybe feeling a little overwhelmed (as am I) but isn't there something you'd like to contribute or some observation you'd care to make

[Bullzeye]

Also Mac you're one of about 10 people playing this game right now who could've come in trying to redefine everyone's idea of what insane means and have me not find that suspicious af. So maybe part of that slipped into my response to you.

[Sorsha]

Matt- If Nero gets lynched today and doesn't flip mafia what happens to your Enrique suspicion?

[MacDougall]

I have never seen it used in that way in a role description. It always is referred to as cursed, of which one is insanified (not made insane), but you are probably right.

Regardless, if Epignosis intended for it to be obvious that he meant "insanfied" then Epignosis should say so.

I just don't feel like it's possible for someone to have a posting curse and that role to make any sense. Perhaps in the secrets he goes on to elaborate on what it is to be insane in this context, hence why he won't explain what it is. I would say this is just as likely. It could mean anything.

Some people (English teachers, grammar nerds, etc.) might prefer to say made insane over insanified, since one is actually a word and the other isn't. I dunno. I think Epi would've assumed everyone would know what made insane means within the context of our community once a posting curse showed up with no other explicit source. It was an easy conclusion to come to for basically everyone but you.

No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Players with insane roles don't know they are insane. I am sure he is using insanity by it's traditional definition here. If someone with investigative powers targets Joker it's going to fuck up their ability and they won't know it.

In this community the traditional definition of insanity is not what you're trying to say it is.

What's with the wording here? Not what I'm TRYING to say it is? Why did you say it like that? Why not just "is not what you are saying it is". Are you trying to undermine my credibility while disagreeing for no apparent reason other than to do so?

I put literally no deliberate thought into the wording. I suppose I said trying to say because you came storming in here pushing this narrative that insane is always defined as one thing and we should've all known that despite the fact we've never defined it as such here. I could've abbreviated it to "you are saying" but I didn't because it isn't that big of a deal.

Yes but Bullzeye you are completely overlooking the fact that for what you're saying to be the case Epignosis would have had to have designed a role that amounts to "target me and you get to tell the thread I am the Joker".

[MacDougall]

Day 1 - Bullzeye votes Wilgy on the back of other people's reasons.
Day 2 - Bullzeye spends the lion's share of it hounding Matt on the back of other people's reasons.

A distinctive lack of original thought from young Bullzeye.

[MacDougall]

Also Mac you're one of about 10 people playing this game right now who could've come in trying to redefine everyone's idea of what insane means and have me not find that suspicious af. So maybe part of that slipped into my response to you.

You are making me feel like me introducing the idea that insane might mean something different is attacking the very fabric of the syndicate. Since I know that's not what you're really intending I assume I am picking up on your intention to discredit me... Interesting because I made this post that you didn't explicitly respond to.

Disregarding secrets, the only role with a curse I can see is The Joker. Unless I'm missing something?

This is actually a very suspect post is it not? Bullzeye fanning the flames of Enrique's false case which further misinformation that borders on a lie since he uses the word "curse" when it doesn't actually mention that in the role at all.

[MacDougall]

I am voting for Bullzeye tbh. I know it happened fast but I've got a hunch.

[Bullzeye]

Day 1 - Bullzeye votes Wilgy on the back of other people's reasons.
Day 2 - Bullzeye spends the lion's share of it hounding Matt on the back of other people's reasons.

A distinctive lack of original thought from young Bullzeye.

Can the reasons I'm "hounding" Matt not be my own that I share with other people? I haven't actually made up my mind about Matt/Nero/Enrique yet and was asking questions to try and help myself figure it out, since as I've already said that seems like a good way to go. I'm annoyed you think I'm just following what other people say and you've really reduced the context of my Wilgy vote too.

Also I'm not ignoring the fact that the obvious interpretation of Joker's role means people who target him know who he is. That should be super obvious. The fact is there are rules against outing players AND we don't know if people who become insane don't have some incentive not to out the Joker.

Linki:

Also Mac you're one of about 10 people playing this game right now who could've come in trying to redefine everyone's idea of what insane means and have me not find that suspicious af. So maybe part of that slipped into my response to you.

You are making me feel like me introducing the idea that insane might mean something different is attacking the very fabric of the syndicate. Since I know that's not what you're really intending I assume I am picking up on your intention to discredit me...

Not doing either of those things. I'm saying that if someone like Dom or LoRab were to show up saying X term means something its literally never meant in this community I'd find it suspicious but for someone who hasn't been around as long and has strong associations to other sites it's not surprising. I'm not trying to discredit you. I explained why I think you're wrong and if you don't like that then I don't know what you want me to say. The fact is your interpretation is unlikely to be correct.

Disregarding secrets, the only role with a curse I can see is The Joker. Unless I'm missing something?

This is actually a very suspect post is it not? Bullzeye fanning the flames of Enrique's false case which further misinformation that borders on a lie since he uses the word "curse" when it doesn't actually mention that in the role at all.

I didn't ignore this post either I just didn't think it warranted its own individual reply because it connects to your misunderstanding of what insanity means. There is no role that says outright it can curse a person but there is a role that says it makes people insane, which is basically the same thing. I asked in case someone else had noticed something I hadn't, and to see what other people thought about it.

[Bullzeye]

I am voting for Bullzeye tbh. I know it happened fast but I've got a hunch.

Please. You're voting for me because I said you were wrong and you don't like that. Get over yourself.

[MacDougall]

I am voting for Bullzeye tbh. I know it happened fast but I've got a hunch.

Please. You're voting for me because I said you were wrong and you don't like that. Get over yourself.

Do you really think that? Because I think it's pretty obvious why I'm voting for you Bullzeye. I was suspect of you already. Keep the high school insults to a minimum please Bullzeye.

[Bullzeye]

Yes Mac I really think you don't like me saying you're wrong. Your initial 'suspicion' of me stemmed from you saying I was willfully misrepresenting insanity as what it actually is on this site.

[MacDougall]

I think you are suspicious for your Wilgy vote.

I think you are probably the one who killed him.

I think you are suspicious for laying into Matt under what I perceive be false pretenses.

I think your reactions are also suspicious.

And if you think I'd waste my vote on a no u, u dont no me no.

[MacDougall]

Yes Mac I really think you don't like me saying you're wrong. Your initial 'suspicion' of me stemmed from you saying I was willfully misrepresenting insanity as what it actually is on this site.

I don't care if you say I am wrong. I even said you are right about the fact that insane doesn't mean that here. I can't dispute that at all. But you still didn't explain why Epi created a role that amounts to anyone who targets him gets cursed to post a ton of shit in the thread, then we're supposed to believe that that role happened to get hit on night 1 (possible, but adds to the unlikeliness) instead of what is more likely to be a curse role that actually targets each night.

Why are you putting suspicion on quotation marks? Are you inferring that I am faking my suspicion?

My initial suspicion stemmed from you sidelining Matt while Enrique did all the heavy lifting. You were angling your way onto the easy lynchwagon. I could see it a mile away.

[Bullzeye]

I think you are suspicious for your Wilgy vote.

Even though I initially said I wouldn't, I'd decided I'd be voting for a low poster. Initially I wanted Floyd or Bubbles because they're always super low posters, and was considering Lovedelic because they never checked in. It was pointed out that Floyd and Bubbles are low posters regardless of alignment whereas Wilgy's absence was suspicious because it correlates with him being bad in past games. So I voted a low poster who potentially had a higher chance of being bad. So did several others.

I think you are probably the one who killed him.

What reason do you have to think this? Am I known for killing people I've voted for? Do you have any reason whatsoever to think I'm the kind of player who'd make a kill like that on night 1?

I think you are suspicious for laying into Matt under what I perceive be false pretenses.

And I've explained why they're not false pretenses. I've not laid into Matt I've asked him questions and he has chosen to respond in a frustrating and confusing manner (even when you ignore the joke format).

I think your reactions are also suspicious.

Everyone always says this to me in every game. No matter what I do or say I get told I'm overdefensive and overreacting. I'd not bother posting at all but that'd be just as suspicious.

And if you think I'd waste my vote on a no u, u dont no me no.

It can't be a NO U when I've explicitly said I don't suspect you. I just think you came into the thread thinking you knew something for a fact when actually you didn't and there's nothing wrong with that because you shouldn't have been expected to know you were wrong.

[MacDougall]

"Hmm what role should Joker be LC" young Epi asked.

"Well he should have power! He's a great character and should be really cool and tough!" young LC said.

"Yeah you are right! So we should make it so if he gets targeted something BAD happens to that person... but also JOKEY!" Epignosis enthusiastically intoned.

"Yeah for sure!" young LC agreed. "Like they get POST CURSED!"

"That is a great idea. That way if someone targets him, then they will immediately know that who they targeted is the Joker and whenever they start posting in curses in the thread, everybody else will also know that they targeted The Joker... making it easy for them to lynch The Joker!"

Epignosis was thrilled with his new creation. All the hosts beamed when he told them of his majestic role creation. Not one single host realising the folly therein. That such a role would be cursed by it's own creation and possibly the stupidest role to have ever lived.

[Bullzeye]

Yes Mac I really think you don't like me saying you're wrong. Your initial 'suspicion' of me stemmed from you saying I was willfully misrepresenting insanity as what it actually is on this site.

I don't care if you say I am wrong. I even said you are right about the fact that insane doesn't mean that here. I can't dispute that at all. But you still didn't explain why Epi created a role that amounts to anyone who targets him gets cursed to post a ton of shit in the thread, then we're supposed to believe that that role happened to get hit on night 1 (possible, but adds to the unlikeliness) instead of what is more likely to be a curse role that actually targets each night.

Perhaps a curse role does exist but it's not listed in the role list and I'd rather try to understand information we do have than make up information we don't have. As for the role getting hit on night one, stranger things have happened. I don't know why Epi would create such a role but I also don't know why he wouldn't. There's nothing wrong with it assuming he has some kind of mechanic to protect the Joker from being outed so easily.

Why are you putting suspicion on quotation marks? Are you inferring that I am faking my suspicion?

I put it in quotation marks because I don't think it's valid since my understanding of it was that you suspected me based on a misunderstanding of the facts. I will retract that belief now that you've gone into more depth.

My initial suspicion stemmed from you sidelining Matt while Enrique did all the heavy lifting. You were angling your way onto the easy lynchwagon. I could see it a mile away.

I don't think Matt is an easy lynchwagon at all. I don't necessarily intend to vote for him. As I said, I was asking questions to figure things out for myself. I could be swayed into an Enrique vote if Matt was more convincing with his arguments.

[MacDougall]

I'm the guy who targeted The Joker last night and was cursed as a result. I'm saying I didn't target anybody and don't know who The Joker is because reasons.

[Nerolunar]

I've had cause to come on and check this game thread a number of times today and I honestly can't recall an occasion where I have and Magnus (Nerolunar) hasn't been on as well and yet (once again) you post so infrequently my friend. I know this is all pretty heavy going and as you're new you are maybe feeling a little overwhelmed (as am I) but isn't there something you'd like to contribute or some observation you'd care to make

I am overwhelmed. I keep a tab open in my broswer and refreshes it occasionally. I hate having to read more than a few pages in one go, so I take it as it comes, especially that it´s Sunday and I don´t have anything else to do.

I believe both Mac and Bullz are town. They both seem genuine to me.

[Bullzeye]

"Hmm what role should Joker be LC" young Epi asked.

"Well he should have power! He's a great character and should be really cool and tough!" young LC said.

"Yeah you are right! So we should make it so if he gets targeted something BAD happens to that person... but also JOKEY!" Epignosis enthusiastically intoned.

"Yeah for sure!" young LC agreed. "Like they get POST CURSED!"

"That is a great idea. That way if someone targets him, then they will immediately know that who they targeted is the Joker and whenever they start posting in curses in the thread, everybody else will also know that they targeted The Joker... making it easy for them to lynch The Joker!"

Epignosis was thrilled with his new creation. All the hosts beamed when he told them of his majestic role creation. Not one single host realising the folly therein. That such a role would be cursed by it's own creation and possibly the stupidest role to have ever lived.

You don't agree with how most people seem to be interpreting the curse. Fine. You don't have to, this isn't Soviet Russia. But using what you can see in the roles list, disregarding all secrets, what other explanation for Matt's curse is there?

If we bring secrets back into the conversation, the Joker has some. Perhaps in there somewhere is a balancing mechanic making it harder for people to know that Matt (for example) targeted the Joker. Maybe Matt now has an incentive to not go after the Joker, in the hypothetical world where he has a targeting role and hit the Joker last night.

[MacDougall]

"Hmm what role should Joker be LC" young Epi asked.

"Well he should have power! He's a great character and should be really cool and tough!" young LC said.

"Yeah you are right! So we should make it so if he gets targeted something BAD happens to that person... but also JOKEY!" Epignosis enthusiastically intoned.

"Yeah for sure!" young LC agreed. "Like they get POST CURSED!"

"That is a great idea. That way if someone targets him, then they will immediately know that who they targeted is the Joker and whenever they start posting in curses in the thread, everybody else will also know that they targeted The Joker... making it easy for them to lynch The Joker!"

Epignosis was thrilled with his new creation. All the hosts beamed when he told them of his majestic role creation. Not one single host realising the folly therein. That such a role would be cursed by it's own creation and possibly the stupidest role to have ever lived.

You don't agree with how most people seem to be interpreting the curse. Fine. You don't have to, this isn't Soviet Russia. But using what you can see in the roles list, disregarding all secrets, what other explanation for Matt's curse is there?

If we bring secrets back into the conversation, the Joker has some. Perhaps in there somewhere is a balancing mechanic making it harder for people to know that Matt (for example) targeted the Joker. Maybe Matt now has an incentive to not go after the Joker, in the hypothetical world where he has a targeting role and hit the Joker last night.

Yeah okay. I doubt it but it's possible.

Matt might not be cursed. Matt might have a curse as part of his role. Matt might just like knock knock jokes.

Go on, lynch Matt. I'm tired of defending him.

[Bullzeye]

I doubt Matt likes knock knock jokes to the extent that he'd cause all this aggro over it. Even he's not that ridiculous.

[MacDougall]

I note that The Joker role doesn't say that the insanity lasts for the next day phase. It just says will be made insane. Posting curses aren't usually lifetime things.

[MacDougall]

I wonder if Wilgy wasn't the target. The mods inferred the night phase was confusion max. I wonder if Two Face took Wilgy hostage and was the one who was targeted.

[Bullzeye]

I note that The Joker role doesn't say that the insanity lasts for the next day phase. It just says will be made insane. Posting curses aren't usually lifetime things.

This is a fair point, but the wording could be deliberately vague if LC and Epi didn't want it to be immediately obvious.

[MacDougall]

I note that The Joker role doesn't say that the insanity lasts for the next day phase. It just says will be made insane. Posting curses aren't usually lifetime things.

This is a fair point, but the wording could be deliberately vague if LC and Epi didn't want it to be immediately obvious.

Or in his secrets it says "yeah but like you can't say that you targeted me ner ner"

[Bullzeye]

I note that The Joker role doesn't say that the insanity lasts for the next day phase. It just says will be made insane. Posting curses aren't usually lifetime things.

This is a fair point, but the wording could be deliberately vague if LC and Epi didn't want it to be immediately obvious.

Or in his secrets it says "yeah but like you can't say that you targeted me ner ner"

I mean they wouldn't necessarily have to since the rules of the game cover that with the whole no role outing thing. Maybe they say "you also win with the Joker now so perhaps you don't want him dead" or "insane people die if the Joker dies". The question is though, and this is what I've been trying to work out for myself, if Matt did target the Joker last night and that is why he's posting in Jokes, is he genuinely not allowed to out the Joker and is that connected to his insistence that he doesn't think Nero is the Joker?

[LoRab]

FYI being made "insane" in Mafia role land, is having your targeting ability messed with...

http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Sanities

Not to mention having a role in the game that amounts to "if you are targeted the player who targets you advertises it to the thread via posting like a retard" and that role being anti-town is a joke.

It's been said already, but that's not the usage of the term in this mafia realm. In 8 years of playing on this and its mafia-cousin-sites, I have never heard the term used that way. So, while it is possible that they switched things up in order to screw with us, I don't think it's likely that they would make a role description mean something totally different from what the vast majority of players understand it to mean.

That said, you raise a good point with it not making sense for it to be so obvious. Same reason that I speculated that perhaps the joker's role secrets include the ability to insanify. Or, as you point out, the possibility that there is a failsafe for the person who targeted the joker naming their target.

Also, I respectfully request that you not use the word retard or retarded--it is offensive.

[MacDougall]

FYI being made "insane" in Mafia role land, is having your targeting ability messed with...

http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Sanities

Not to mention having a role in the game that amounts to "if you are targeted the player who targets you advertises it to the thread via posting like a retard" and that role being anti-town is a joke.

It's been said already, but that's not the usage of the term in this mafia realm. In 8 years of playing on this and its mafia-cousin-sites, I have never heard the term used that way. So, while it is possible that they switched things up in order to screw with us, I don't think it's likely that they would make a role description mean something totally different from what the vast majority of players understand it to mean.

That said, you raise a good point with it not making sense for it to be so obvious. Same reason that I speculated that perhaps the joker's role secrets include the ability to insanify. Or, as you point out, the possibility that there is a failsafe for the person who targeted the joker naming their target.

Also, I respectfully request that you not use the word retard or retarded--it is offensive.

Okay but it's cool to threaten to put someone through a wall, got it.