The host should be destroyed for this.
![suspicious :suspish:](./images/smilies/suspicious.gif)
Return to “Mountain Mafia [END]”
This bob won't be getting my vote Day 1.colonialbob wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:26 pmIn fact, it's cold as hell.
I hear the peak is breathtaking.Marmot wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 9:13 pmWho'd have thunk. There's an asteroid out there that is literally a mountain.Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:52 pm According to wikipedia Olympus Mons isn't even the tallest
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheasilvia
I don't believe you will accept any reason to vote for someone on Day 1. If that is the measure with which you judge Day 1 votes, then you just got my Day 1 vote.Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:00 amYou named two town reads, or at least two players not to vote for on Day 1. That's a good enough reason for Day 1 because I will accept any reason on Day 1.
Throwing your vote around isn't the same thing as accepting "any reason on Day 1."
This again, about what a "civilian Epignosis" cares to do. You really should write a book about me, since you're such an expert.
What is Quin's reasoning?
Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:22 amWe need an eye rolling emoji that I can post here.colonialbob wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:41 am And now, the game is really afoothill!
*crickets*
How's the fence treating you?
*vote sloons*
My reaction also was to vote nutella. My perspective after giving it some thought, however, is to question if nutella would be so careless and flippant if she were mafia, knowing that being careless and flippant would likely draw votes. I need to hear more.Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:48 pm![]()
*votes Nutella*
"Buddying" two civilians on Day 1 is not going to stop my lynch if that is what the majority wishes (not that I agree I have "buddied" anybody).Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:53 pm
Uh, you pick two Civs and buddy them so they trust you and don't lynch you. Long game benefit: survival, and more likely to lynch Civs along the way. You intimidate Sloonei out of coming after you. Benefit: One less Civ coming after you; survival; more likely to lynch a Civ along the way.
Can anyone who has ever been bad with me point to a time when I set up a long term plan Day 1?Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:53 am You are implying that "setting up a long game" is something I, as mafia, would do on Day 1. That is mistaken. The fact is I don't bother with long term planning Day 1 when I am bad. It's antithetical to success in most cases, because to be good at being bad, one must be flexible and able to dance. And I am a fine dancer.![]()
Wait a minute.Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:53 pm
Uh, you pick two Civs and buddy them so they trust you and don't lynch you. Long game benefit: survival, and more likely to lynch Civs along the way. You intimidate Sloonei out of coming after you. Benefit: One less Civ coming after you; survival; more likely to lynch a Civ along the way.
If you can't back up your accusations with, you know, facts, you should reconsider your accusations (if they are indeed genuine). I wasn't asking anybody to do any research. You can't do any such research unless you have access to old BTSC. I asked if anybody could point to a time I made some elaborate endgame-in-mind scheme on Day 1. Memory is all anybody needs for that.
I retracted my good opinion of Mesk after she posted something that didn't align with my initial perspective. I'm still thinking her over.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:39 pm
Combined with suspicious nonlynchcandidate declarations, I think this is worthy of a vote.
I said I wouldn't vote for colonialbob today because he got my Elton John reference. I appreciated that.Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:48 pmwhy did you say you won't be voting for cbob or mesk today?Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:46 pmIf you can't back up your accusations with, you know, facts, you should reconsider your accusations (if they are indeed genuine). I wasn't asking anybody to do any research. You can't do any such research unless you have access to old BTSC. I asked if anybody could point to a time I made some elaborate endgame-in-mind scheme on Day 1. Memory is all anybody needs for that.
But I can go ahead and say the answer to that is no, because it isn't how I operate. You can keep claiming I'm operating in a way I never have before if it's convenient for you.
This is the version of Epignosis that is tired of Long Con making shit up about him.Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:02 pmI'm not loving this version of Epignosis. He seems to be working harder at discrediting the accusations against him than actually figuring out the players making the accusations. This doesn't look like the crafty town Epignosis who will get under people's skin for the sake of reading them without any fear or regard for his own appearance. Instead he looks like he's trying to fight his way out of a corner.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:57 pm @Sloonei
@colonialbob
What do you think of Epi's vote for LC?
nutella, but I expressed doubt on that front. My problem with nutella is that I think I have been wrong on her every single time. Hell, last time I defended her Henry Fonda style, and she still turned out being bad.Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:08 pmI'll grant you that this is not the first time I've seen this show. But Long Con is not the only player who's said things about you.Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:04 pmThis is the version of Epignosis that is tired of Long Con making shit up about him.Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:02 pmI'm not loving this version of Epignosis. He seems to be working harder at discrediting the accusations against him than actually figuring out the players making the accusations. This doesn't look like the crafty town Epignosis who will get under people's skin for the sake of reading them without any fear or regard for his own appearance. Instead he looks like he's trying to fight his way out of a corner.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:57 pm @Sloonei
@colonialbob
What do you think of Epi's vote for LC?
If you could draw our attention to another player who's been off the radar so far, who would it be?
I explained the problem. See above.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:18 pm Nutella is supatown as town and not when she's bad. She killed it as a Phenon civvy I had this whole fake suspicion on her for her not being aggressive enough when we were scum together in ME that was of course a legit line of questioning I never got around to pushing cause I didn't want her dead.
What's the problem, Epi?
That's why I said I would need to hear more from her. nutella is very good at faking anything.Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:32 pm Nutella hasn't always been super consistent as a townie in my experience with her. She'll speak her mind without regard for whether or not it all fits neatly together, and I've got no issue with that. I don't think I would vote for her based solely on her posts so far.
Distracting from me is a good thing.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:37 pmI'm just filling the silence. I don't have a strong opinion on Kyle. Like I half think you're distracting from Epi but I don't wanna get tunnel visioned. You do whatever.
No.
LC's speculation is that I am "buddying" two civilians and intimidating one civilian so that I won't ever get lynched.
I don't know what "og motivation" means, but there is nothing weird about saying I'm not voting for this person or that person. Would it be better if I said nothing at all? I can surely keep it to myself that I'm not voting for someone. No one would know. I'm not going to defend my decision to refrain from voting someone Day 1. There are four mafia members. I cannot lynch them all Day 1. And if I'm right not to vote for the people I won't vote for, it narrows my pool down to people I should be voting.Kylemii wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:03 pm Maybe strawman is the wrong word, but I think focusing on the "long game planning aspect" of the argument allows you to ignore the part of the argument where it's actually just really weird to make a positive declaration towards anyone one day 0, or 1 without any kind og motivation behind it.
Correct.Kylemii wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:19 pmSo you don't think they're good necessarily... you just said you didn't think you'd vote for them.Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:12 pmI didn't say I trusted them.
I already talked about colonialbob and Mesk.
In that post you did imply you trusted Mesk at least a little bit more because she hadn't apparently read the roles, do you have anything to add to that?
Nope, sorry, but I'm sure LC appreciates you helping him out with the explanation.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:43 pmI'm going to explain a thing you're pretending to not understand one time out of the goodness of my heart. I won't continue to do so because it is tiring.Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:54 pmNo.
LC explicitly called cb, Mesk, and Sloonei civilians. There was no consideration given that I could be "buddying" a teammate, as JoH suggested (however the hell one does that).
He also has taken anything I have said or done and says I am "setting up a long game" even though I have never before in my four years of playing Mafia done that Day 1. Instead of considering angles in which my words and actions indicate a civilian, he presses on with his unfounded, circular nonsense.
There is no strawman fallacy or hyperbole, and even if there is, so what?
LC posts that you are bad and you are buddying Bob and Mesk. The implication is that since scum doesn't buddy teammates, if LC is correct in his suspicions, Bob and Mesk would by definition be town.
LC is not claiming to have figured out Mesk or Bob's alignments outside of this, which is obvious.
I am not claiming that scum buddying a teammate is a thing, which is also obvious.
No more straw men. Townies don't gain anything from willfully pretending not to understand accusations.
Ah. An assumption. Three of them, actually. Glad to hear you admit it.
Can we not? This is the third time I've had to ask that people leave political jabs out of Mafia.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:31 pm Tbf to Epi, he pretends not to understand stuff when he discusses politics, too.
So if I assume three people you've interacted with are good to conclude that you are mafia, how'd that be?
I chose three players who are civilians? You can't even get your case right.Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:55 pmEpi... why are you not getting it?Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:47 pmSo if I assume three people you've interacted with are good to conclude that you are mafia, how'd that be?
You are the one exhibiting the behaviour I find suspicious.
The assumption in play is that you, as a baddie, chose three players who are Civvies.
The assumption is not that they are Civvies and therefore you are bad.
You are too smart to not understand that. You are being deceptive to try to change peoples' minds about what exactly I'm accusing you of. I don't understand why you do this.
Damn, being mafia must be easy if all you have to do to win is something unusual.Kylemii wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:57 pmif you're mafia for the prescribed reasons then it also stands to reason that the 3 people you interacted with would be more likely to be civ.Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:47 pmSo if I assume three people you've interacted with are good to conclude that you are mafia, how'd that be?
Interacting the way you did with any of them would be unusual if you were both wolves would be unusual.
My head says Long Con and nutella, but I'm aware of my biases there.
Mesk, still, I suppose.
By saying I'm pretending not to understand, you are effectively calling me "stupid," because I don't understand.Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:34 pmI swear that my suspicion of you is genuine, not personal.Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:24 pmLong Con has done nothing but provoke me, and he knows it, which means I am less likely to do anything productive this Day phase because he knows I'll argue with him, and I know when I do argue with him, he's going to continue making things up (like I somehow magically chose who was going to quote Elton John) and whenever I challenge anything he has to say about me, he will give glib, unhelpful responses ("Indeed." "Keep dancing," etc.), which shows he isn't interested in figuring me out. He's interested in getting me out regardless of my alignment. It almost feels personal.
When you take my two "glib" posts, and ignore all my other ones, to make the point that I'm not interested in figuring you out, it's deceptive. This makes you look suspicious.
When you try to twist my clear points into "magically chose - Elton John" crap, it's deceptive. This makes you look suspicious.
Just stop pretending you don't understand, and it will be a start for you looking less suspicious. Why do you DO this???
So, according to you, I must have been sitting in BTSC, rubbing my hands together going, "Oh boy, I just posted an Elton John song lyric. Let's see if a civilian responds to it so I can buddy up to him! This is going to be great! Just watch me cruise to victory by telling this unwitting participant in my clever charade that I won't be voting for him Day 1, and then BOOM, we win and he'll never know what him him!Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:40 pmI never said you chose who would quote Elton John. You chose him because he responded to you. He gave you the buddying opportunity you were looking for, and you chose that Civ because of it.Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:37 pmBy saying I'm pretending not to understand, you are effectively calling me "stupid," because I don't understand.Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:34 pmI swear that my suspicion of you is genuine, not personal.Epignosis wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:24 pmLong Con has done nothing but provoke me, and he knows it, which means I am less likely to do anything productive this Day phase because he knows I'll argue with him, and I know when I do argue with him, he's going to continue making things up (like I somehow magically chose who was going to quote Elton John) and whenever I challenge anything he has to say about me, he will give glib, unhelpful responses ("Indeed." "Keep dancing," etc.), which shows he isn't interested in figuring me out. He's interested in getting me out regardless of my alignment. It almost feels personal.
When you take my two "glib" posts, and ignore all my other ones, to make the point that I'm not interested in figuring you out, it's deceptive. This makes you look suspicious.
When you try to twist my clear points into "magically chose - Elton John" crap, it's deceptive. This makes you look suspicious.
Just stop pretending you don't understand, and it will be a start for you looking less suspicious. Why do you DO this???
How the fuck did I choose who would quote Elton John? I'm not psychic.
I'm out for the night.
Or you just don't know what the word "likely" means.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:38 pmSure. A few good townies voting for Epi, who is probably bad.Kylemii wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:07 pmCan you expand on this link?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:00 pmI think she's more likely bad if Epi is bad and Epi is more likely to be bad if just one of them is.
Nutella hamdwaves this, votes for me and leave.
Assume Epi is bad. Nutella is likely trying to discredit the Epi train, hoping his dancing skills allow him to survive and making an excuse not to vote for him. So Nutella is likely bad. Or
Maybe wrong. If I suddenly have a kill I have to use right after Epi is lynched, I shoot Nutella.
Assume Epi is good. Nutella isn't defending her scumbuddy Epi because Epi isn't scum. The case on Nutella half evaporates. If I suddenly have a kill, I don't shoot Nutella.
Let's reverse this.
Assume Nutella is bad. Oh, she's probably covering for scumbuddy Epi but maybe she thinks Epi going to get lynched and is just letting him. I'm willing to use my hypothetical kill to shoot Epi at any rate.
Assume Nutella is good. She's probably just wrong. I still trust my reasoning over hers. I still shoot Epi.
So lynching Epi is more likely to catch scum and allows me to correct a mistake if I'm making one.
They're probably both bad. Probably doesn't matter. Epi should still go first.
It's cool man.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:03 am Epi, I would be super happy if you would sing for us again. Sorry about the politics thing earlier. That was rude of me.
For me, Jack is Long Con Jr.