G3S Mafia | Day 4 starts | Deadline: 1st Feb [11:59pm CET]

[#HBC | Ryker]

*Your .

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Felipe, I see you viewing. Now's the time for independent thought.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Because it doesn't fit my meta?

Do you think I'm focusing purely on survival? Because I think I'm balancing it pretty well with trying to catch scum.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

And you really think we're lovers when we both claimed to have indy suspicions on each other?

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

If you suspect him as an indy, why can't we go ahead and lynch him?

Also, does it really matter where you throw indy suspicions if you don't act on them?

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Because it doesn't fit my meta?

Do you think I'm focusing purely on survival? Because I think I'm balancing it pretty well with trying to catch scum.

I don't think you're trying to catch scum. I think you're trying to lynch Omni.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

If you suspect him as an indy, why can't we go ahead and lynch him?

Because I don't have grounds for my suspicion besides gut, and I lack confidence in my indy hunting. Omni is definitely a higher priority even considering those factors. What is your stance on Omni, Ryker?

 

[BarDulL]

I AM HERE. Still not caught up yet.

I see the town incentive in Axel's gambit, and I honestly think we let Ryker get away with calling out Axel's gambit too soon. I personally think we should lynch Ryker >___> but I had Omni has Town so I'm kind of in a perpetual mind **** and I really can't decide without reading.

Apparently I've got 4 hours to read, so I'll have time to read before putting my vote anywhere (in the event that it's necessary.)

 

[th3kuzinator]

Axel should claim. Right this second. I saw him viewing and not doing so is extremely anti-town this close to deadline.

 

[th3kuzinator]

Alright.

*cracks fingers*

I'll try to do this as fast as possible as I have stuff I need to do today.

 

[BarDulL]

Kuz, what's the main case on Axel? Is there a post you can direct me to?

Also, the main case on Omni would be nice as well, but I figure I can probably just look for walls of text from Axel/Brosuke and I should find it.

 

[Omni]

for u bardull: http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=14081399&postcount=1492

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Because I don't have grounds for my suspicion besides gut, and I lack confidence in my indy hunting. Omni is definitely a higher priority even considering those factors. What is your stance on Omni, Ryker?

Then really, is claiming that as a reason you couldn't be Lovers really all that valid?

Thanks for playing.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

I'm not saying we can't be lovers, I'm saying that two lovers claiming indy suspicion on each other is straight out weird.

Also, don't avoid the question. Answer. Now.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I believe I've been an avid believer in the no stance category. I'd have to read the game to get one and I'll not be pinned to one. Want to make something of it?

Axel, however, is scum and needs to die. You probably are too.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Well that helps me dislike your slot. Not reading and not giving stances is convenient, but you can pick out the two slots opposing you to be scum?

Sure, not pinning yourself to a stance when you haven't read is reasonable. But not having read at all is not. You can cherry pick your pressure on whoever you want using that.

 

[Axel]

Hold on Kooz. I'm making a post. I'll claim if you and Bronar want me to after. Also wait on your post. I would like to make mine first.

 

[felipe_9595]

Wait wtf is happening here. Yeah ryker is was rereading page 97, let me finish reading, in the manwhile something post whats happening here.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Well that helps me dislike your slot. Not reading and not giving stances is convenient, but you can pick out the two slots opposing you to be scum?

Sure, not pinning yourself to a stance when you haven't read is reasonable. But not having read at all is not. You can cherry pick your pressure on whoever you want using that.

Yes, yes I can.

You wanna make something of it?

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Right now? No.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Oh, word? Because the fact that I'm doing it now isn't going to change, so why don't we make something of it, seeing as you are implying that you want to make something of it.

 

[th3kuzinator]

I'm leaving in 10 minutes and might not be back until very close to deadline though. If its not done in 10 minutes I'm posting it.

 

[Inferno3044]

What's Axel at right now?

 

[th3kuzinator]

L-2. As is Omni.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

L-2 with you, Bardull, and Xonar being all that's left.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

What do you want to make out of it, really? You can call it null because, well, not having read does not determine alignment. And both alignments would refrain from making stances while not having read.

What profit does it have to work it out 4 hours before the deadline with 4 votes on Axel and 4 on Omni?
I'd rather bring it up when I can pull up other things to accompany it and see if I can start anything on you.

I think Inferno is going to vote Axel, I am going to vote Omni. The last vote is up to Bardull, so I also think that he should be the one who asks Axel for a claim, should he want to hammer Axel.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Though whether I really wanna start something against you depends on the night phase.

 

[felipe_9595]

Unvote

Can someone explain me whats happening here.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Nah, I just want this to be on paper between you and I.

@Felipe - Kuz is about to explain what's happening. Take the post Axel's making with a grain of salt.

 

[Inferno3044]

What do you want to make out of it, really? You can call it null because, well, not having read does not determine alignment. And both alignments would refrain from making stances while not having read.

What profit does it have to work it out 4 hours before the deadline with 4 votes on Axel and 4 on Omni?
I'd rather bring it up when I can pull up other things to accompany it and see if I can start anything on you.

I think Inferno is going to vote Axel, I am going to vote Omni. The last vote is up to Bardull, so I also think that he should be the one who asks Axel for a claim, should he want to hammer Axel.

The bold is blech. I'm still a vote that can go either way depending on the claim. I don't see why he shouldn't respond to me asking him to claim.

Giving Axel 20 minutes to claim. If he doesn't my vote will go on him.

 

[th3kuzinator]

Felipe. We're lynching one of Omni or Axel. Omni claimed nilla. Axel is currently making a big post and may claim. There is a case on both players already.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

The bold is blech. I'm still a vote that can go either way depending on the claim. I don't see why he shouldn't respond to me asking him to claim.

Giving Axel 20 minutes to claim. If he doesn't my vote will go on him.

Isn't it cute?

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

The bold is blech. I'm still a vote that can go either way depending on the claim. I don't see why he shouldn't respond to me asking him to claim.

Giving Axel 20 minutes to claim. If he doesn't my vote will go on him.

Why is it blech? Isn't it the truth?

Regardless, if you're going to vote Axel, it is still in Bardull's hands.


It's not weird that I'm thinking you were going to vote Axel when the most relevant thing you said on the subject was that your gut thinks Axel is scum.

 

[Axel]

Everyone if you have not read my previous posts please at least fully read through this post. Please do not skim. Look into everything I'm saying.


Inferno explain to me what you like about Omni. I've asked you many times to look at the cases Xonar have presented against them, but you just like past them. Explain to me what you like about Ryker. Reread the past few pages of me and him talking. Notice that when I refute a point, he ignores it and simply makes more accusations. He is playing you like a fiddle. Either that or you yourself are scum. Ryker has done nothing but made accusations, he hasn't backed them up with anything at all. That's his scum style. It's a good way to push a lynch because it give the appearance that someone has more points against them then they actually have.

Inferno you are not getting away with placing your vote on me without fully responding to everything in this post. I want you to show which points of Ryker's I have not properly addressed and lay them out in a bullet proof fashion. You need to show exactly why you think I'm scum and explain the intent behind each point you make.

btw said you were 12 right? Wondering for meta reasons.

--

Ryu you are doing the same thing as Ryker. I address your points and then you just make up new ones. I'm very much inclined to believe that you don't truly believe I am scum, but are trying to push me with any reason you can dig up. We will be using the points you have made. You cannot spontaneously make up new points after I have shown you why they are wrong. All you can do is show why my refute is wrong if you find it to be so. If you cannot, then I have properly defended myself. That is how this game works Ryu. You don't pick a target as scum, and then just make up reasons for them being scum. You look at reasons first and see if they add up to scum. If they don't then they are not. Stop doing the former and play this game right. After all this time I still have to lecture you in every game we play. You do this every single game. It's insane.
[collapse=your case]

Whiling going to a bar tonight by myself after an exam I thought about this game some more an where my head was at.

I haven't made any real pushed or done anything in this game outside of using my gambit to find WL and get some reads off his flip as well as interactions. About those I interpreted them, Brosuke still I find to be unlikely to be aligned with WL, Inferno I'm absolutely sure isn't I doubt Laundry would try a lynch on his scummates on D1 when they're were better alternatives than those two.

Now onto Omni, yeah I didn't like what he did with not being open, but that kinda normal from past games I've played with him when I looked back at Fire and Ice/Shaq mafia. So why WL budded him, my first guess was that Laundry was trying to stay on how scummates good side to not die and help with numbers in lylo. The other is that he knew Omni was looking town and wanted to get cred by being all buddy buddy with him.

The unltimate problem is that this interaction is WIFOM, however looking back onto the beginning of the ay when Omni didn't know he was aligned with scum. That looks like a town slip.

I doubt he wouldn't have talked to his partner about it if he was scum. He would have discussed the connections and best kill for the night so at some point WL's flip would have come up into the discussion. He wouldn't have been confused like he was before even with the color thing he had problems with.

~

Now Axel, he dies.

The gambit is bad from a town perspective. Tried to push their own personal pick and claim that they would have pushed to a lynch if they could. Off lying about being the cop, figure this. Town wouldn't do this.

He would have known an investigative would have most likely CC' him if he pushed it that far and Ryker wasn't inactive enough.

From his bad gambit he moved to ignore, and continues to do so, and only answer questions and comments when he chooses to with a pick and choose kind of style.

I think that is worse from an intent standpoint.

More or less where my head is at with these two.

I'm not totally cool with Omni atm, but I dislike Axel way more.

[/collapse]
[collapse=My Defense]

Town wouldn't do what? Push my lynch choice? Yes I would and yes I did. Doesn't matter if you disagree with me. I told you in the very post that I claimed it was a gambit not to look into that fact. I predicted you and Inferno would be the ones to mention it. I showed you earlier how you were wrong, and you accepted it. So tell me what has changed.

Why the heck do people keep assuming Ryker is town. He isn't town my friend. People may dislike my ability to read into this, but it's not my fault you guys are so slow. The end of this day is irking me because scum is flailing so hard, and while I've shown my points with logic and reason, people are still being so slow. As I said I believe this is the climax and scum have no choice but to fight for keeping Omni alive at this point. The fact that you're making this 180 all the sudden says something. Now then the "knowing and investigative would have most likely CC'd him" was addressed in #1374. Instead of ignoring my previous responses in order to fit your case, you need to address them and show how they were wrong. Furthermore, to say that I knew an investigative Role would likely CC is wrong. I explained why I didn't this was likely at all. You know there's something here that I just realized. How would I know an investigative would have investigated GORDITO? Ryker even claimed that his investigation was random, so there is no way I would know there would be a likely CC.
You keep saying this but have yet to show what I have ignored. Show me everything I have ignored and selectively answered. You even dropped this case after I disproved it (#1283). This leads me to believe that you're bringing it up again simply to add substance to your case.

[/collapse]Your points:

1. "The gambit is bad from a town perspective. Tried to push their own personal pick and claim that they would have pushed to a lynch if they could. "

2. "He would know an investigative role would CC"

3. "He's ignored some comments. Selectively choosing"


These are the points you're working with here.

My Defense:

1. It's not scummy for me to push someone I find scummy. Agree to disagree here. (Though I found something against this which I'll point out below).

2. It would not be possible for me to know that the an investigative role investigated Gordito.

3. You have no backing to this. You have not shown a single thing I have ignored.


[collapse=Your Response]

It' the fact you tried to lie your way into your personal lynch. Even knowing you could out the cop.

No, the only thing you proved me wrong about if I recall is voting Gorf. Nothing else has change.

Why the heck do people keep assuming Ryker is town. He isn't town my friend. People may dislike my ability to read into this, but it's not my fault you guys are so slow. The end of this day is irking me because scum is flailing so hard, and while I've shown my points with logic and reason, people are still being so slow. As I said I believe this is the climax and scum have no choice but to fight for keeping Omni alive at this point. The fact that you're making this 180 all the sudden says something. Now then the "knowing and investigative would have most likely CC'd him" was addressed in #1374. Instead of ignoring my previous responses in order to fit your case, you need to address them and show how they were wrong. Furthermore, to say that I knew an investigative Role would likely CC is wrong. I explained why I didn't this was likely at all. You know there's something here that I just realized. How would I know an investigative would have investigated GORDITO? Ryker even claimed that his investigation was random, so there is no way I would know there would be a likely CC.
You keep saying this but have yet to show what I have ignored. Show me everything I have ignored and selectively answered. You even dropped this case after I disproved it (#1283). This leads me to believe that you're bringing it up again simply to add substance to your case.

L2cop plz.

You cop people likely to make it into lylo and top scum picks. Inactive Gorf was likely to do so. And if you lecture me about what a real cop should do, I'm going to ignore you an say, I know this more than you off experience.

Oh I won't eat out of Ryker's hand either, if he tries to blow me off tomarrow, I'll push his lynch.

Still, please die. Die really really hard.[/QUOTE][/collapse]

Your response:

1. "No, the only thing you proved me wrong about if I recall is voting Gorf. Nothing else has change."

2. "You cop people likely to make it into lylo and top scum picks. Inactive Gorf was likely to do so. And if you lecture me about what a real cop should do, I'm going to ignore you an say, I know this more than you off experience."

3. *Ignores*



My Defense:

1. Here's something I noticed when looking back. It's in direct contradiction to your point you're making here, which shows that you're really just trying to use anything to push me.

"But back to you, if you were trying this, then why the lack of a vote? That sent a red flag to a lot of people when you didn't push a vote and even said you were willing to send him to his death yet made no effort afterwards to convince people you were legit with that. That fact is you made no effort outside of trying to push scum reads as to why you were a real cop." #1281

At first you tried pushing me for NOT pushing hard on Gordito.
Now you're trying to push me FOR pushing Gordito.

You're claiming that I am scum in either case. You are pushing me on whatever points you can make.

2. Again, I don't know the set up. Nor would it be possible for me to know that the supposed cop investigated the same person I was pushing who I happened to have a very strong scum read on. The ONLY reason that Ryker CCed is because he had an "inno on Gordito". You're saying that I should know that an investigative role would CC, but you're wrong that they would CC. You're just flat out wrong. The only reason he CC'd was because HE HAD A RESULT ON GORDITO. THERE WOULD BE NO WAY FOR ME TO KNOW THIS.

To address what you're saying here more specifically, what do you mean we cop people would make it to lylo with Gorf? I'm not real cop and I didn't plan on keeping my gambit to lylo? I retracted so what does lylo have to do with anything?

3. My point is proven. I have not ignored anything. It is you who is selectively choosing what to address.


In summary: Your third point is knocked out. Your second point is disproved. Your first point does not show scum incentive. You're saying that I'm scum for any action I take.

----

Now Ryker

Your case:
[collapse=You case]

Axel is scum from his behavior shortly before and all of it after I replaced into the game.

His claim is scummy as **** and he was pushing it through to the hilt.
The way he has, and continues to ignore everyone until confronted in a way he can't avoid.
The way he tries to force the one motive down everyone's throat without any reason for me to believe him.
That DISGUSTING strawman to my recent post.
The way he's trying to hammer home a lynch. That unvote offer with Acrostic was almost certainly so he could turn around and hammer.

My defense:

-If I wanted to push it through to the hilt, I would have. The fact that I retracted after a shift in reads shows that was not my intention. As I said before, during my initial push on Gord I very much did believe him to be scum. I would have lynched him. Of course I would have loved for him to actually respond and I'm certain no one would have just blindly lynched him without getting his response. For my gambit to be legit I had to make it believable.

Explain to me the scum intentions behind claiming a false guilty on someone you know is town. It would give them a ml but they would certainly be dead the next day, if not the night.

-As I said with Ryu, show me what I have ignored. You, Omni, and ryu have all said this, but none of you have shown me a single thing that I have ignored.


-"The way he tries to force the one motive down everyone's throat without any reason for me to believe him." Soupa (or anyone else) explain this to me. Why I ask is because I know very well it makes no sense and I would like to prove so with an outside perspective. I'll do my best to answer though:

Spoiler

wut?

-I responded to your post, but you didn't respond. I seriously don't know what you mean. And wasn't that post the same regard as your first point? You're bringing up the same thing in a different way.

-I explained why I wanted the hammer. You can say that I would have turned around and hammered, but that's simply not true. I would have waited until Acro's questions were answered, and probably waited until about the last hour. This point is a he said/she said with no basis.

You didn't bother to respond to this at all. As I said above to inferno, you just keep making accusations. You're not actually trying to elaborate or disprove anything. You just keep accusing and accusing.



Ok that should cover it. I (Zen) have class in an hour and then from 3-5 (MCT). And I have to get some lab work done in between that time so I probably wont be here for the deadline. I'll try and stay here for Koozes post.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Deadline is in less than 4 hours.

Voted |

Voter(s)​

|

Votes to lynch​

Omni |

Axel, Archer's Bane, Soupamario​

|

3 / 6​

Axel |

Ryker, Omni, th3kuzinator, Red Ryu​

|

4 / 6​

---​

Not voting: Inferno, Bardull, Brosuke, felipe;

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Tl;dr

claim plz.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Because you turn everything into a he said/she said scenario despite the fact that I elaborate on why I've reached said reads. There's no where else to take it. It's your proposed motive vs. mine plus the reasoning that leads me to conclude it.

I actually missed the point about scum intent.

The thing is, there's very little. There's even less town intent and a lot more to put at risk. As scum, you can out investigatives, get your mislynch, and then play this very card that "Scum wouldn't do it."

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Inferno, I will also request you to look at the bullet point list Ryker made on Axel which I replied to.

My first answer.
His answer to that.
My answer.

 

[Axel]

Xonar why are you unvoted?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim, Axel claim, Axel Claim, Axel Claim,