Also, I'm not playing dumb. Of course a mafia is probably in each inn. But the same reasoning applies as to why all innmates don't massclaim; on the off-chance we have a mafia-free inn, we kind of don't want to blatantly state who is in it.
Trouble in the West: Pirates vs Cowboys [Finished]
- Thread starter Prizyms
- Start date
- Status
HypeBurst
Just Fabulous
(I'm not referring to shady as in suspicious if you dont get what Im referencing)
And I dont see why we care so much for OMO's claim tbh, claims in closed setups mean barely anything. I'm personally not voting for him because my main FoS is Swate, (which I just realised I havent voted for oops).
vote Swate
Oak Milk
Kill Hungry Thirsty Dead
I'd hold your votes on Swate for a sec while I check something quickly, also I may claim later, I may not. For now, I got a post coming but it could take some time, I'm not the fastest person to be able to transfer my thoughts to a post.
I understand the outcome to this. What I'm about to say is in relation to how I find Fiesta's personality.
It's off-putting how you've managed to turn a simple idea into something complicated. Every so often you'll "suggest" something that isn't useful. I don't necessarily find you guilty of being Mafia. There's just something odd about how you word things. Your jittery excitement comes out in your nonsensical posts and there's a hint of cockiness. It makes me question whether you're third party or if you're a town sided third party.
The way Fiesta and Swate communicate with each other, I'm not suggesting that you two are in an anti-town group, but are you two in an Inn? I ask this because there seems to be a friendly dynamic.Swate said:
@Jivvi what does this mean?jivvi said:
Also, you seem to be taking a more practical and professional approach to this game. Not that you haven't before, it just seems a lot more noticeable.
Also, this is who I understand to be in Inns.
Damp Attic Inn – 2 other members
Swate
Jeer
Smallest Crappiest Inn– 3 other people.
77
Small Crappy Saloon– 3 other people
Jivvi
P.S. I found my badass cowboy persona right 'ere
Oak Milk
Kill Hungry Thirsty Dead
Alrighty so, probably time to stop messing around and bring some real evidence to the table. Firstly I don't see the point in claiming, at least not yet, its probably important that I do claim at some point, but right now its not the most important thing in the world. Right so, a few people have noticed I've mostly been toying around, rushing posts, not presenting real evidence. They are absolutely spot on, and prehaps the ones I trust most at the moment,
@JKangaroo and @endersteve5 if there are anyone who I would mostly likely believe to be town, its them two. Now I have spoken about who I trust most, but who do I trust least? It might seem a bit suspicious, considering this person is currently voting for me at this time, however I have something a bit more substantial than what this person has against me.
That person is @GmK and here is why:
POST #294 Page 12
Sploorky said: ↑
IM RIDING THE OAK TRAIN TILL THE END. CHOO CHOO.
Seriously the votes on fiesta are in poor taste. He stated a fact, didn't day 0 soft claim somebody else. Gmk and nottykitten, I wouldn't expect you two to jump around with your votes like this so much. So either you're intentionally playing like this, or something is up.
Says the person voting for someone for a statement he based on things other people had said in the thread before him
Notty and Swate were clearly RVS, with Swate being actually suspicious, and Fiesta is policy as a warning shot.
Of course I am intentionally playing like this, why would I unintentionally do these things?
END OF QUOTE
In this post GmK points out that there were 2 people who originally suggested that the pirates may not have been able to talk to each other. This shows that GmK believes it to be me simply using misinformation, and it not being an actual slip up. However for some reason he decides this is false, and instead chooses to vote for myself toward the end of the day.
POST #354 Page 15
Nottykitten said: ↑
As pirates probabily don't know who the others are yet, it doesn't matter if we do the same thing.
inb4 there is a role that must always mirror what another person does.
unvote (still majorly annoyed at you, Fiesta, for constant derpness that is dangerous to the town)
vote OMO_63
END OF QUOTE
I originally found this quite confusing, if GmK really believed in what he said in post #294, then he should have had no real reason to vote me and instead would have continued along with his main FOV (pretty certain thats the correct term) instead he joins the bandwagon on myself, which ends with a no lynch.
Today GmK has turned my confusion, from suspicion, to certainty of his guilt, after I stated that I didn't know whether the pirates knew each other or not and had left it as bait to see who would respond and who wouldn't. He replies with the following:
POST #472 Page 19
Am on way to work and just managed to catch up.
Quite glad in a way for only one kill, makes the game less volatile and gives us a bit more time to hunt scum. But whoever took my nottykitten away from me shall be avenged with the full force of beer!
@JKangaroo - I'll say it again, like last game: Don't only go by role descriptions on other mafia pages. If Prizyms specifically stated that this will be a "crazy" game it is very likely that most roles are quite different than usually. In the case of the arsonist we don't really know any specifics (do we even know it's an arosnist? For all we know it could be a rich oil sheik that has the goal to give gasoline to as many people as possible? Yes I know that's probably not it, but we can't again, like last game, assume too many things too easily)
But, eh, @Old_Man_Oak_63 - what!? Suddenly you say all you did last day was a test for scum? But you didn't even really do anything that would lure out scum? How does one attract scum by pretending to be scummy? You still seem very very shifty to me :/
END OF QUOTE
The last paragraph that is in regards to me, strikes me as very suspicious, as I said before, in Day 0, GmK gave the opinion that he didn't believe previous evidence, although he still voted for me. Now in this post his opinion sways greatly from that of Day 0, suggesting that my actions were not substantial, if thats the case, then I cannot have appeared to have been very scummy either and yet I 'seem very very shifty'.
I would have brought this up right then and there, but I still I wasn't sure enough to vote on it, I needed something else, something that would clearly suggest that GmK had a hidden agenda. I left a short weak argument, and decided to see what he would do with it.
Hence this happened:
POST #565 Page 23
Old_Man_Oak_63 said: ↑
It might have seemed a bit wierd, in fact it probably was, but I had a rough idea of what I was doing and what I wanted to achieve. Hard for me to describe, since it really only makes sense to me >.>
I think you're full of BS (in the nicest way possible)
vote Old_Man_Oak_63
END OF QUOTE
This is what left me with no doubt in my mind, a hidden agenda lay within GmK that cannot be ignored, with evidence I have gathered from previous posts it is clear to me that GmK believes me to be innocent and yet he continues to press votes against me, with evidence that he even made counter arguments to! There is no doubt in my mind that GmK is a pirate and a drunk one at that. As such I choose to lynch.
vote GmK
@JKangaroo and @endersteve5 if there are anyone who I would mostly likely believe to be town, its them two. Now I have spoken about who I trust most, but who do I trust least? It might seem a bit suspicious, considering this person is currently voting for me at this time, however I have something a bit more substantial than what this person has against me.
That person is @GmK and here is why:
POST #294 Page 12
Sploorky said: ↑
IM RIDING THE OAK TRAIN TILL THE END. CHOO CHOO.
Seriously the votes on fiesta are in poor taste. He stated a fact, didn't day 0 soft claim somebody else. Gmk and nottykitten, I wouldn't expect you two to jump around with your votes like this so much. So either you're intentionally playing like this, or something is up.
Says the person voting for someone for a statement he based on things other people had said in the thread before him
Notty and Swate were clearly RVS, with Swate being actually suspicious, and Fiesta is policy as a warning shot.
Of course I am intentionally playing like this, why would I unintentionally do these things?
END OF QUOTE
In this post GmK points out that there were 2 people who originally suggested that the pirates may not have been able to talk to each other. This shows that GmK believes it to be me simply using misinformation, and it not being an actual slip up. However for some reason he decides this is false, and instead chooses to vote for myself toward the end of the day.
POST #354 Page 15
Nottykitten said: ↑
As pirates probabily don't know who the others are yet, it doesn't matter if we do the same thing.
inb4 there is a role that must always mirror what another person does.
unvote (still majorly annoyed at you, Fiesta, for constant derpness that is dangerous to the town)
vote OMO_63
END OF QUOTE
I originally found this quite confusing, if GmK really believed in what he said in post #294, then he should have had no real reason to vote me and instead would have continued along with his main FOV (pretty certain thats the correct term) instead he joins the bandwagon on myself, which ends with a no lynch.
Today GmK has turned my confusion, from suspicion, to certainty of his guilt, after I stated that I didn't know whether the pirates knew each other or not and had left it as bait to see who would respond and who wouldn't. He replies with the following:
POST #472 Page 19
Am on way to work and just managed to catch up.
Quite glad in a way for only one kill, makes the game less volatile and gives us a bit more time to hunt scum. But whoever took my nottykitten away from me shall be avenged with the full force of beer!
@JKangaroo - I'll say it again, like last game: Don't only go by role descriptions on other mafia pages. If Prizyms specifically stated that this will be a "crazy" game it is very likely that most roles are quite different than usually. In the case of the arsonist we don't really know any specifics (do we even know it's an arosnist? For all we know it could be a rich oil sheik that has the goal to give gasoline to as many people as possible? Yes I know that's probably not it, but we can't again, like last game, assume too many things too easily)
But, eh, @Old_Man_Oak_63 - what!? Suddenly you say all you did last day was a test for scum? But you didn't even really do anything that would lure out scum? How does one attract scum by pretending to be scummy? You still seem very very shifty to me :/
END OF QUOTE
The last paragraph that is in regards to me, strikes me as very suspicious, as I said before, in Day 0, GmK gave the opinion that he didn't believe previous evidence, although he still voted for me. Now in this post his opinion sways greatly from that of Day 0, suggesting that my actions were not substantial, if thats the case, then I cannot have appeared to have been very scummy either and yet I 'seem very very shifty'.
I would have brought this up right then and there, but I still I wasn't sure enough to vote on it, I needed something else, something that would clearly suggest that GmK had a hidden agenda. I left a short weak argument, and decided to see what he would do with it.
Hence this happened:
POST #565 Page 23
Old_Man_Oak_63 said: ↑
It might have seemed a bit wierd, in fact it probably was, but I had a rough idea of what I was doing and what I wanted to achieve. Hard for me to describe, since it really only makes sense to me >.>
I think you're full of BS (in the nicest way possible)
vote Old_Man_Oak_63
END OF QUOTE
This is what left me with no doubt in my mind, a hidden agenda lay within GmK that cannot be ignored, with evidence I have gathered from previous posts it is clear to me that GmK believes me to be innocent and yet he continues to press votes against me, with evidence that he even made counter arguments to! There is no doubt in my mind that GmK is a pirate and a drunk one at that. As such I choose to lynch.
vote GmK
Enderfive
sarcasm incarnate
Well, Oak, you got my attention. I'm interested in seeing your second and third posts.
Meanwhile, anyone that decides to vote Oak until he hasn't posted his 2nd and 3rd posts and hasn't cancelled them is instant scum as far as I'm concerned.
Meanwhile, anyone that decides to vote Oak until he hasn't posted his 2nd and 3rd posts and hasn't cancelled them is instant scum as far as I'm concerned.
Oak Milk
Kill Hungry Thirsty Dead
Actually, instead of pushing the topic onward and confusing matters more, I'm going to give people a chance, to read my first post and give feedback on it. I'd rather anything be settled now, instead of after I've finished everything I have had to say because matters could be a lot more confusing by then. I'll stay up till 4 in the morning if I have to!
Fiestaguy
The man with 8 fingers.
Me and swate being friendly is... Idunno. I guess i can't be unfruendly torwards that llamasaur x3 This doesn't mean i don't acknowledge the suspicion against swate. It's that i'm more focused on OMO
And perhaps because me and swate are both SCP readers ;-;
And perhaps because me and swate are both SCP readers ;-;
- Status