I'll save you some time and effort. I killed SE.

Of course you did.

So, feel like outing your fellow mafiates and turning this into a super easy win for Town?

I've got a feeling it's going to be a bit more complicated than that.

I'm assuming you're not claiming scum here - if you had a vig role, why SE?

Of course, this either assumes that mafia either didn't try to kill someone, or was blocked. I will say that I did not take any night actions last night.

I won't self vote, but I will cast the first stone against numbers, until he explains why he killed SE, and why we should not assume he's scum

Vote: numbers

Vote: Numbers

feel free to claim

I like how you pursue terrible logic Zinger. It is fitting.

Assume whatever you want, but I caution against assuming too much, like that mafia definitely have a standard nk on top of their nine abilities that may or may not include additional kills. I myself have two killing abilities. Combined with True's 3, that's five kills in a 12 player game and only covers two players. Assuming mafia definitely has an extra kill ability is foley at this point (note that I'm not saying proceeding as if they do for cautions sake is such, but the assumption that at least one kill per night has to be a mafia kill is).

As for my kill last night, it's a secondary clause in a protection ability but I confirmed with Rubik yesterday that any deaths that result from it are considered a kill by me in terms of other ability interaction (I asked because I have another ability that had the potential to interact with it, but I will not be going into that today). The ability is such that if an attempt is made on me the night I activate it, a random player of the targeter's alignment is killed instead. Last night seemed the best night to activate it since town shouldn't have been vigging, but that's a lesson for another day.

My logic is sound, KoD.

Also, I just used my ability on Numbers, so, yeah, welcome to the Town side JD.

Hey zinger, wanna give me the rules of your no lie policy again?

I'll try and break it down for you again, KoD, since you seem to refuse to grasp the point.

First and foremost, to understand my logic you have to accept my premise:

1. I don't buy that the use of a Random Lynch, on day 1, in the context of this game, is something that would strictly benefit the Mafia team.
2. I don't believe Rag's desire to pursue a Random Lynch is any indication of Rag's alignment (I believe Town Rag would do the same thing).

If you accept that premise then it becomes all too clear that those who are pushing for a Rag lynch most likely have a scum agenda, because they are using Rag as a scapegoat to convince town to lynch one of their own.

Now I know you do not accept that premise. Fine. But the real tipping point isn't so much that you believe contrary to me on the issue regarding Rag, it's that at the mere mention of a point of view that contradicts your own you become exceedingly defensive, and started throwing around wild accusations towards the people who were contradicting you.

At the end of the day the results are this: you began your crusade against Rag by suggesting that there could only be a scum motivation behind one who wants a Random Lynch, and, to me, your actions have shown to be the more likely motivated by scum intentions.

Sure.

I won't intentionally fabricate something that is false during the course of a Mafia game in which I am using my NLP (which, is like, 90% of mafia games I play in), except where my alignment (and by association, wincon, if revealing wincon also reveals alignment) is concerned.

I am not against omitting pieces of the truth. For example, I could say "I'm a Cop", if in reality I was just a 1-shot Cop. It's not a lie, it's simply neglecting to bring forth the full details of the ability (number of uses).

That's more or less the bulk of it.

In this game I have three one shot abilities. I have told you all what one of them is (and I have even used it on Numbers). The other two I haven't remotely brought up, but I haven't lied about them either.

A short post followed by a much longer post despite my having said nothing in depth?

If I were a betting man, I'd say you're intentionally antagonizing me with bad logic for the sake of keeping me focused on it.

While we're on the topic though:
1) You don't need to buy it. Make a pro/con list. A majority of the people (note: that's more than the side you are on) agree mafia benefit more from a random lynch.
2) Your belief is not needed. You're more than welcome to go back and actually pull up where someone (myself or others) stated that Rag's desire to pursue a random lynch was an indication of his alignment. As it stands, the reason Rag was viewed as scummy was due to his tactics, not his desire to random lynch. Since you challenge that, prove it is as you say and not otherwise.

Your premise alone is already flawed so the rest of your argument is null and void.

As for the topic of what Numbers brought up, I can see it as plausible. After all, didn't Silly say he had a choice of a vig role as well?

Your opinion =/= fact, KoD. Also, if a "majority" of the people agreed, as you say, Rag would've been lynched yesterDay.

You managed to amass four votes against Rag (including yours). That means that the majority of the people DIDN'T see fit to lynch Rag based on your premise.

What kind of things besides alignment and wincon constitute claiming your alignment? If I asked you "do you have the ability to kill a player tonight, either as a function of your role or your team", would you be able to say no even if you were mafia?

The caveat is that I can lie about what team I am on, not about things I do. As such, if I am afforded a team-based benefit (such as the Mafia night kill as you are describing), I would be able to deny having access to such a benefit because admitting to having that would give away my team. I would NOT however lie about things I do. So, in the aforementioned case of a Mafia night kill, I would deny being Mafia but I would not deny making the kill.

It's a very narrow line I have to walk when I am a member of the Mafia, to make sure I don't violate my NLP and simultaneously don't give away my team. Fortunately, I am so rarely on the Mafia team that I usually don't have to worry about it.

I did not kill Squinty last night, if that is what you are wondering about. Last night I protected myself from being killed, albeit rather uselessly since nobody tried to kill me last night.

I do want to say to those currently voting for Numbers, while I fully believe we may have just caught ourselves a red-handed scum, I did use my ability on him that would allow him to win with the Town. I think at this point, given the ability I used on him, it would be foolhardy to lynch him now.

just looking for loopholes in your policy

Can i take that to mean that any ability granted to you because you are a member of the mafia is fair game for you to lie about?

Votes:

15377: NeoSilk, Ragnarokio (2)
KoD: Zinger2099 (1)
No vote: Niklor, KoD, GobO_Scarlet, Silly, Garren_Windspear, Fruit (6)
Nope: 15377 (1)

So ooo I just received confirmation from the mod that apparantly numbers needs to assist in his own lynch to benefit from the ability I Granted him to be able to win with the town.

So... I turned him into a Jester? Apparently?

Depends. I mean if you are talking about a team-ability that doesn't belong to me (if Mafia Night kill), then I don't have to lie at all, because the ability isn't mine so I'd be telling the truth. If we are talking about an ability that I, and only I, can control, then I wouldn't lie ability but it, regardless of my Alignment.

I never stated my opinion is fact. I let the facts speak for themselves.

Such as the majority agreeing with the perspective that I hold. You don't need to trust a word I say. Go back and look at the posts people made. Or perhaps you prefer I do it for you?



At this point I've shown over half of the players in the game. Numbers and myself are included automatically for having been on the side against random lynching more vocally than others. In total, the number of players who have similar views to us is ~9 (I'm neglecting to go into my post and count names because I've already done a lot of footwork).

So what does all this mean? Simple. It means you're wrong Zinger. Honestly beyond that, nothing else needs to be said concerning this particular point.

Let's see if there is anything else of importance to address in your post. *Takes a moment to read.*

Ah yes, there is another flaw with your post. Whether or not it is intentional elu -- ah hell with it, you did it intentionally. It's so obvious given the way you've been approaching discussion points with Numbers and I. Anyway, the flaw with the rest of your post is that you are relating the "majority" I spoke of to a majority that wanted Rag dead. That was not the case technically. First, it should be noted that the only reason Rag did not get lynched was due to Numbers and myself switching our votes (my first went first) from Rag to TB. So in complete and utter honesty, Rag was actually sought for lynch by a majority. Part of the majority changed its mind is all. Second, the "majority" I spoke of in my previous posts (to this one) was in regards to a majority of people agreeing with the view that random lynch is bad. Third, because a third is needed given how obtuse you have been, viewing random lynch as being bad and wanting Rag lynched is not a package deal. That is, the two are not connected. They are separate. Different. Shall I find more words to get this across to you? Point is, you erroneously, and I do believe it was intentional, thought that a majority against random lynching would want Rag dead (which is technically true given the votes, but in absolute terms not everyone that I listed was voting Rag -- Scar would be an example of this).

All that being said,

Vote: Zinger

As I've mentioned a few times above, I believe you are being intentionally antagonistic with issues that don't have you at the center. You bring them up and not only press on them, but continue the same use of misrepresentation (through disagreement and use of your own invalid opinion) to keep it as a focus. That is what I find scummy about you.

Now for some fun stuff:




I see nowhere in there where I maintain that Rag is scum because he chose to pursue random lynch. So, yet again, Zinger's perspective is invalidated when it comes to addressing topics he has no knowledge of (probably due to how hard he is trying to misrepresent/misdirect).





Because, and let's be honest, Numbers is right. The best part is that it drips with irony since he holds such a view, yet labels Numbers and I as scum for disagreeing.