Well let's get down to it now, shall we?
Accusation number 1:
You make good on your word until breaking it makes your slot look better.
You said you planned not to give out IC advice this game, but you did. The biggest issue I have with the IC advice you gave, is it was very clearly used to defend yourself. If you just changed your mind, and given some general IC tips, I would be fine with it, but there was a very clear way for a scum J to benefit from your actions. Admittedly, no matter what role you're playing, you could benefit from self-preservation, but what makes this MUCH MORE suspicious, is you didn't even follow the suspicious advice that you gave.
So let's begin with the pink. This is a lie and an untrue statement. I never once said that I was not going to give IC advice, I've been literally giving IC advice all game because it is my job. My job is to do the following: give advice to new players, help integrate new players into the community, play to my win-condition, and have fun. You say that I use the IC advice to defend myself, yet you do not even quote where I do as such. You say that I don't follow my own advice I've given, yet you don't bring up quotes or posts to how this statement is even true. Therefore, I have nothing more to say on the Pink.
My thought process about the whole situation? You disliked the fact that I gave you advice and disagreed with your case on Generic early on. Which segways into the next part of this quote:
Zalak said:
@
RosalinaSGS
I want ya to pay close attention here. actually,
@everyone
Not only did you not say anything whenever Rosa jumped in to dispute my accusations against you for you, but you actually liked every single one of Rosa's posts defending you. That contradicts the already sketchy advice that you gave. The way I see it, either you don't actually believe in the advice yourself, or you decided to break the advice to help save your own skin. You were happy to let Rosa defend you, letting you stay silent, but when I asked for your input on Generic, stating that I would try to lynch him if no one said anything to change my mind, you decided to stay silent once again, despite apparently having something to add to the conversation.
The quote you are brining up is my response to you asking me to defend Generic and respond to your case against Generic because I disagreed with it. I laid out my reasons for disliking your case, but you choose to ignore that constantly.
I did like, not every, but a lot of posts by Rosa because I agreed with Rosa. You've like a lot of people's posts this game as well where you agreed with them on your train of thought, yet when an opposing party does it, it's scummy? That is not coherent logic.
You keep saying "sketchy advice" yet you do not quote it nor do you bring it up so I'm still sitting here scratching me head not being able to respond to this point. However, if your point is me "liking" Rosa's posts = me not dissecting your case against Generic, then that's incorrect again. I was saying that it was not my job to defend Generic nor was it my job to respond to your case. I did not stay silent in the Generic argument, but actually stated quite blatantly that I thought your case was stretchy, I disliked it, and it painted you in a negative light. I still stand by that fact. Nothing about your case was the reason people lynched Generic and you could even ask the wagoners that as well.
And one more time from both me and Rosa, NEITHER of us have defended each other. We simply have agreed with each other's logic. Just like myself and Orbo have. And just like myself and RR have. You are the only person in this game having a problem with my logic. You are trying to say that me and Rosa are just blatantly defending each other with no rhyme or reason to it and it's not true at all in the slightest. You are exasperating the situation to fit your agenda that "J and Rosa are buddy-buddy!" but you have yet to say how two people defending each other or even just agreeing with each other = scummy.
Defending or Buddying a slot is not scummy. You've failed to show how Rosa or me agreeing with each other = scummy and your first accussation is bologna. It doesn't provide where this "sketchy advice" is, brings up the point AGAIN about Generic that I have responded to in the past and the Rosa situation.
I will say this, if you have a problem with Rosa defending me and not looking at Orbo/RR for the same thing shows that you are tunneling in on things that fit your agenda rather than looking at all the pieces of the game.
(This accusation was not just 1 lol, it had 3 parts in it so I'm scared to really look into the others)
Zalak said:
Accusation 2:
"Zalak
ing sucks."
I hope that's not how you were planning on defending yourself from my first accusation. I can imagine you typing it while you read this. "Zalak, you don't know the first thing about forum mafia. Let me tell you something about this game,as you are now, you can't possibly beat me.
You need at least 5000 more dark talisman energy crystals to even get close. Why would I, the strongest player in this list, need to give out false advice, and hide behind Rosa, when my only opposition is some noob with an ego?"
TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION THAT I IMAGINE YOU ASKING, not even the best players are safe from having to actually play this game. Being good doesn't give you a free win. You still have to pull sneaky moves. Just some SEMI-EXPERIENCED advice for you J, if you were planning to defend yourself by saying "nah, I wouldn't do that as scum", that's no good. A good defense would be something like "nah, I wouldn't do that as scum. here's why I did that as town".
It's debatable whether or not you have been using the mafia term of "OMGUS" on me (anyone who thinks this is interesting should go and re-read from near the end of D2 and through basically all of D2, so they can form their own opinions on this), but for a while now, you have literally been telling me I suck instead of actually defending yourself. Isn't that kind of like a variant on OMGUS? Where are your real defenses?
There's no accusation here. The first paragraph if you posing a hypothetical where you blurb on about me responding in a where I just swat you away (which was tempting after reading these paragraphs), but the second paragraph is where you begin to put your foot into your mouth more.
Zalak said:
not even the best players are safe from having to actually play this game. Being good doesn't give you a free win. You still have to pull sneaky moves.
I've isolated this portion considering this is the only thing that I can directly respond to that isn't you ranting and trying to "teach me" how to play mafia. You are saying that I am not playing the game? How have I not been playing the game? Can you honestly tell me and the other players that I have not been searching for scum? Can you say that I have been sitting in the back not getting my hands dirty? Can you honestly say that I am being sneaky this game?
These are all rhetorical, by the way. The correct answer is I have been playing the game and been scum-hunting. I do not even need to cite sources here because the claim is ludicrous. To say that I am just skating by to a free win shows that this case is ill-developed and not any real evidence to back it up.
You do realize a big reason why people have me as town is because of my scum-hunting and the fact that I have been laying all my cards on the table which everyone seems to be nodding along and agreeing to?
I have nothing to say on the OMGUS (Oh-My-God-You-Suck). You've taken a whole road that I cannot even fathom. That term means that you start accusing someone for disagreeing with your pushes/your slot which you have done to me. However, I am not dredging that up. I have not been on you for you pushing my slot. I have been on you for your horrendous wacky pushes D1/D2 and the way you have been on my slot telling me to defend myself from imaginary accusations which is what this post is becoming to be.
It's a lot of air and no real foundation yet.
Zalak said:
Accusation 3:
I find it very strange that the supposed strongest player in this game would not see through SlickWylde. He did a great deal of bandwagoning, and he tried very hard to appeal to every player. He remained incredibly neutral for most of the game, and only pushed when he knew there were others who agreed with him. You also ignored both Rosalina's accusation, and my accusation against Slick, only taking note of Orbo's accusation (comprised almost entirely of points that had already been made) from near the end of yesterDay.
Slick also acted incredibly odd towards you, listing you as scum, but seeming very disinterested in actually lynching you, but I suppose if you were town, you wouldn't know why Slick did the things that he did. I expected you to question him though... He didn't even give a reason for disliking your slot until I pushed him for it much later... hmm
I am going to say this very clearly. You are expecting me to nail every single scum? I'm sorry, but that's an unrealistic goal to have someone live up to for one and with regards to Slick, no one really had him as a scum-read. Everyone voted him at the end of the day-phase because he scum-slipped REALLY hard. You are saying that he was SUPER obvi-scum, yet he lived till D3. So by your logic, I'll throw it back at you, why wasn't he lynched earlier in the game if he wasn't so apparent?
Orbo was the first person to explain the Slick suspicion in a way that made sense and wasn't convoluted. Yes, that is true and I am sticking to that. I agreed with Orbo's reasoning > Yours and you've yet to show how your evidence against Slick was so damning and apparently exactly Orbo's reasoning so again...
I had questioned Slick in the past. I've literally questioned every slot and tried to connect myself to everyone to garner the best results. So yet again, another falsity in this post. I also stated that I wasn't interested in Slick at the time. I was focused on your slot and Sparky and Koops. I also can't explained Slick's odd behavior towards my slot. If I had to take a guess, he was probably being really cautious around my slot because I am the IC and his neutral posting style wouldn't want him to make waves against the main posters. You can see that because he gave you a town-read without even much explanation besides "Gut".
It goes two ways, you can't just pick and choose what you want to see and then call it truth.
Zalak said:
Final Accusation:
You forgot your initial reason for accusing me of OMGUS'ING you, which makes me think your first reason wasn't legitimate at all. Illegitimate accusations are just about the scummiest thing in the universe.
I giggled pretty hard at the cyan. You are litterally throwing illegitimate accusations at my slot, not citing evidence, and not posting truth. So by your own logic, you should be the scummiest slot in this game, correct?
I jest (a bit), but I have never forgotten about calling you out for OMGUS and will continue to repeat myself. However, there's the fact that you say this:
Zalak said:
Your first reason was for accusing me of OMGUS'ing you was that my push was back and forth, and I said you still warranted investigation after my NK analysis supposedly cleared you (which I explained only made you seem less likely to be a WW at the time). After I pointed this out, you changed the story. In my big push against you, I explicitly stated that
but you claimed that I was lying about the order at which things occurred, and quoted your first accusation against me, and my second accusation against you, leaving out my initial post against you from one day earlier than the other two. I explicitly mentioned that my first accusation was two in-game days ago, and you either didn't look for it, or saw it and left it out intentionally.
Which is directly taking quotes out of context and not truly showing the correct order of events, but what makes me look the worst in your way of the story. I never changed the story and I never changed what I said. So, I'm just saying your gripe here is that you want me to say that I OMGUS'd you first>you OMGUS'd me.
Let's pose the hypothetical:
Sure, you're correct. I OMGUS'd you first. How does that change literally anything? What does the order mean that is so damning against my slot? You have failed to prove or state how you being correct in that debate equates to me being scum. However, the thing you seem more hellbent on proving in this post is that you were "correct".
Zalak said:
and then THIS
(more directed at the other players now)
makes me feel like I was on to something.
anyways, those are my biggest points.
And I'll repeat myself again, this was me expressing disinterest in debating you again because the conversation was going nowehere, the conversation was cluttering the thread and allowing people to just duck and dodge the thread. It was an eyesore of an argument between our two slots that didn't do anything besides help show everyone that I am town.
So I guess in a way, thanks for dragging me into this constant debate with you. It has helped show to everyone else (sans yourself and minor Sparky) that I am town. Now I've had an actual "wall battle" with you, there is literally no way you cannot say I haven't "defended" myself.
However, this wasn't even a case against me. It was more "I dislike that J disagrees with me and I find that scummy!" which leaves it to be lack-luster. There's nothing more for me to talk about in this post because it just is a regurgitated post of things we have already discussed which seriously could have been condensed into bullet points.