Snake's WWE Invasion 'Royal Mafia Rumble'

[Ron Simmons]

Chris, my defence isn't that Mike is lying, it's that I'm telling the truth. I don't think he's scum, but maybe he is a serial killer, I don't know. I suspect the 'bomb' claim might be a bluff to help push through my lynch as he thinks he's right. Or maybe he's telling the truth. I really don't know what to make of it. I'm pretty sure he'd not scum though, whatever he is he's played a pro-town game thus far.

[Lawz]

I'm not really down with a brownie vote at the moment, he's V/LA and he has contributed towards the game more then Corey who's been less vocal. When Mike was V/LA votes quickly reigned down on him in sucession and people were quick to point out he was V/LA now brownie is the same and I think we should extend him the same courtesy tbf. Coreys been less active overall and has had a chance to integrate himself more, therefore if its out of those two I'd be more willing to vote Corey.

 

While I'm not saying this to discount your point, you're wrong in the reaction to voting on Mike. The point was made that it was suspicious that 3 people decided to vote for Mike once he was V/LA. There was at no point any discussion around it being unfair to vote someone who is V/LA.

 

I noticed someone said about voting for him when he's not around to defend himself, same point goes for brownie either way really. Maybe its suspicious Dan & Mike both voted brownie in short sucession then?

[Dan Williams]

So suspicious we discussed it beforehand in the thread and had a solid reason to do so regardless of v/la's how about you pitch in with something for once lawz as i don't remember a single post from yourself in the thread so far. Who do you suspect, why etc?

[Lawz]

So suspicious we discussed it beforehand in the thread and had a solid reason to do so regardless of v/la's how about you pitch in with something for once lawz as i don't remember a single post from yourself in the thread so far. Who do you suspect, why etc?

 

I think its pretty clear that I suspect Ron. If you had read the thread properly you'd see I have a vote on Ron already and suspect him because of his early play in coming out and saying about third party roles. But your probably way to busy throwing your toys out the pram to actually read the thread are you not? The only thing I remember about you Dan to be perfectly honest is the statement you made where you said "I hope Scum win" so before you start throwing shit at my doorstep, clean your own.

[Carbomb]

I'm not really down with a brownie vote at the moment, he's V/LA and he has contributed towards the game more then Corey who's been less vocal. When Mike was V/LA votes quickly reigned down on him in sucession and people were quick to point out he was V/LA now brownie is the same and I think we should extend him the same courtesy tbf. Coreys been less active overall and has had a chance to integrate himself more, therefore if its out of those two I'd be more willing to vote Corey.

 

While I'm not saying this to discount your point, you're wrong in the reaction to voting on Mike. The point was made that it was suspicious that 3 people decided to vote for Mike once he was V/LA. There was at no point any discussion around it being unfair to vote someone who is V/LA.

 

I noticed someone said about voting for him when he's not around to defend himself, same point goes for brownie either way really. Maybe its suspicious Dan & Mike both voted brownie in short sucession then?

 

I pretty much agree with this. All of a sudden it's not suspicious for Mike and Dan to quickly vote for brownie now that he's V/LA? I'm not up for voting either brownie or Corey, because the evidence provided for brownie's lynch has been flimsy at best (that he opposed lynching Corey in favour getting him replaced), and whilst Corey's absences have been frustrating, there are plenty others right now who look much more urgent to me.

 

Dan, I'm still not sold on you. You made a good defence of yourself before, to the point where I removed my vote on you in favour of lynching Nexus, but this recent development's got me wondering why you're working so smoothly in tandem with Mike.

 

Mike, I still don't 100% believe your "Bomb" claim - you seem so tunnelled in on Ron, I'm still 50/50 as to what to think. I'm looking over the last few pages, but probably won't have a response for a few hours, but I haven't taken my eye off you for a second.

 

Ron, your defence of yourself as a PGO was a bit shaky - getting the terminology wrong doesn't help, and this whole thing with Mike COULD've been an elaborate Nexus ruse to get heat off you by eliciting sympathy from others from Mike's tunnelling.

 

These are all general thoughts, though - the main reason why I'm stating them is simply because, whilst I haven't been the most prolific poster I could've been (health issues are still causing problems unfortunately), I'm not happy with Mike and Dan leading the discussion like this, particularly with Mike's method of bullying and lording it over everyone else, declaring his speculations and opinions like they're fact - only now has he admitted to the possibility of Ron being WWE, whereas before he allowed no such thing.

 

bristep, I'd like to hear more from you - you seem pretty level-headed, and I think we'd benefit a great deal from having your perspective on things right now. Doesn't mean I trust you, but your contributions have generally had a lot of value to them.

[Retro Red]

I'm not really down with a brownie vote at the moment, he's V/LA and he has contributed towards the game more then Corey who's been less vocal. When Mike was V/LA votes quickly reigned down on him in sucession and people were quick to point out he was V/LA now brownie is the same and I think we should extend him the same courtesy tbf. Coreys been less active overall and has had a chance to integrate himself more, therefore if its out of those two I'd be more willing to vote Corey.

 

While I'm not saying this to discount your point, you're wrong in the reaction to voting on Mike. The point was made that it was suspicious that 3 people decided to vote for Mike once he was V/LA. There was at no point any discussion around it being unfair to vote someone who is V/LA.

 

I noticed someone said about voting for him when he's not around to defend himself, same point goes for brownie either way really. Maybe its suspicious Dan & Mike both voted brownie in short sucession then?

 

I pretty much agree with this. All of a sudden it's not suspicious for Mike and Dan to quickly vote for brownie now that he's V/LA? I'm not up for voting either brownie or Corey, because the evidence provided for brownie's lynch has been flimsy at best (that he opposed lynching Corey in favour getting him replaced), and whilst Corey's absences have been frustrating, there are plenty others right now who look much more urgent to me.

 

Dan, I'm still not sold on you. You made a good defence of yourself before, to the point where I removed my vote on you in favour of lynching Nexus, but this recent development's got me wondering why you're working so smoothly in tandem with Mike.

 

Mike, I still don't 100% believe your "Bomb" claim - you seem so tunnelled in on Ron, I'm still 50/50 as to what to think. I'm looking over the last few pages, but probably won't have a response for a few hours, but I haven't taken my eye off you for a second.

 

Ron, your defence of yourself as a PGO was a bit shaky - getting the terminology wrong doesn't help, and this whole thing with Mike COULD've been an elaborate Nexus ruse to get heat off you by eliciting sympathy from others from Mike's tunnelling.

 

These are all general thoughts, though - the main reason why I'm stating them is simply because, whilst I haven't been the most prolific poster I could've been (health issues are still causing problems unfortunately), I'm not happy with Mike and Dan leading the discussion like this, particularly with Mike's method of bullying and lording it over everyone else, declaring his speculations and opinions like they're fact - only now has he admitted to the possibility of Ron being WWE, whereas before he allowed no such thing.

 

bristep, I'd like to hear more from you - you seem pretty level-headed, and I think we'd benefit a great deal from having your perspective on things right now. Doesn't mean I trust you, but your contributions have generally had a lot of value to them.

 

Up before 8am on a Saturday morning? We must be mental.

 

I don't know that Dan's having much influence in leading the game, he tends to become very vocal for a time then fall away for hours again (sometimes days). I think he is town, again I go back to my reasons following last night's lynch and the subsequent flip of Nexus. With that said, I think his play in the game has been fairly shoddy and he has done himself no favours. The rolecop reveal is the only thing that has saved him from being lynched this phase as I think he was still well within people's firing lines.

 

With regards to the Mike/Ron situation, I've said before that at this point I think Mike is town and based on that I am willing to go along with his SK theory. I haven't been in games before, so I haven't seen him swing and miss a barn door yet. However, this only benefits us if he is right, and I think that he has failed to win over the rest of the town with his arguments.

 

With that said, Mike has thrown out a claim of being bomb which again is a bold claim and one that really shakes up the game.

 

A few things to consider

 

If Mike is a bomb, then we need to use that carefully. He is willing to be lynched and have one of our suspects be the hammer. Might be a tricky thing to pull off, but I've never seen it happen so I don't know.

 

It could be that Mike has come up with the only role more useful to town (in terms of being unkillable by the scum) than a PGO, since a PGO can by lynched with nobody dying whereas a bomb can't. Mike even said as much to me earlier this phase when I asked him to clarify some of the rules regarding PGOs.

 

It boils down to which action will leave us where at the next day phase

 

- If MIKE is lying, and RON is telling the truth

 

If we lynch Ron then we have lost a town member, and also one that the scum could not kill. Mike will almost certainly be lynched tomorrow, unless he is night killed (which the bomb claim could be seen as trying to prevent). We will certainly lost 1 town member overnight.

 

If we lynch brownie or Corey and they turn up town, then we are also down a town member and lose 1 more town overnight. Mike again would be prime for a lynch tomorrow, or at the least he would be discredited and of little use to the town at that point.

 

If they turn up scum then, well either Mike played a really dumb game or he threw the two of them to the wolves.

 

- If MIKE is wrong (but not lying) and RON is telling the truth

 

If Mike is wrong, then the same as above still applies, except Mike's bomb claim might take out a town if they hammer, not believing it.

 

- If MIKE is right and RON is lying (i,e he is the SK)

 

If we lynch Ron, then the serial killer is gone and we lose 1 town overnight. Then we get down to rooting out the scum, and I think Mike's suspect list holds a lot of water afterwards.

 

If we lynch brownie or corey and they turn up town, then again Mike is prime for a lynch and again the hammer would get killed as well. That could leave us 4 town down in two days with no scum deaths at all.

 

If they turn up scum, then we are on the right track, all is well and we keep rooting out the scum next day.

 

It's really a question of what you feel most comfortable doing. I still think that FamilyGuy has acted extremely scummy however I am cautious that I also thought that about Dan in day two, and he is now town in my eyes (whereas I had voted for him to be lynched last day before changing to Nexus).

 

Let's not forget as well, on the topic of voting for V/LA, there is a slight difference in that Mike is a very vocal player, and three people independently (it seemed) voted for him within a couple of hours, once he was V/LA and would not be back before the end of the phase to answer the votes. brownie is nowhere near as active, and he will be able to have his say on Monday when he comes back (I would assume that we aren't looking to lynch this weekend). I think we need to keep a mental note of who is trying to use the Mike V/LA discussion because if brownie *is* lynched and turns up scum then that is definitely a FOS in their direction.

[Carbomb]

Just a very quick one, as I'm getting ready to go out:

 

I think you're certainly right about FGPMSL. His behaviour has struck me as particularly scummy, jumping on board wagons very quickly, and out of the blue. He's up on my list right now.

[Snake Plissken]

Votecount will be posted late afternoon/early evening as I am out all day today. If lynch is reached. Please stop posting.

[Retro Red]

I've got a christmas night out tonight so I'll be away from about half 4 this afternoon until tomorrow morning. And I may not be overly productive tomorrow morning. Or for the rest of the day for that matter. I'm not going to lie, I am going to get messed up. It's been a while, it's inevitable.

[wolfvinson]

Apologies for not being about (without going into the boring details, I've been ill, doctors, hospitals, tests...).

 

To pick up from the last day phase. My suspicions at the time were FGPMSL, Nexus (who as I stated got my vote as the one most likely to swing), Lion & Bristep.

 

Having spent 80 minutes reading through the current day phase, I'm now concerned about Mike. Very aggressive play, more so than usual (this may be my first proper game, but I have followed them all). It's quite possible he may be using a bogus roleclaim to divert attention as used by Swift in another game.

 

Speaking of which, Swift is now in & using yet another style. Very good player, one to keep an eye on, especially as he has replaced one of my suspects.

 

I'm tending to believe Ron at the moment. Some people do have certain words or phrases they overuse. Being vigilant is something a game like this requires.

 

I'm not keen on the vote Corey or Brownie trend. Neither have given me any real reason to suspect them. Yet.

[Mike Castle]

I'm not keen on the vote Corey or Brownie trend. Neither have given me any real reason to suspect them. Yet.

I strongly advise you read my case on Corey from last day phase, and brownie's responses to it. That is what solidifies them as being together.

 

And swift unnerves me, he's normally active and posting a lot. Yet he's very quiet this phase, and being as I already found Lion suspect (as previously pointed out) it does carry over to swift, and I think swift might be hoping to let that suspicion disappear before really coming out on the attack.

[swiftstrike]

Right quick update, I am to page 50, about thirty pages to go and, It is making me think about some of my earlier thought.

 

Mike when you asked about why I believed Ron PGO claim, I said that I believed it because it was feasibly that TMS might have investigated him after finding him scummy all of day 2 as you suggested, but having read the end of day 1 now it is clear that he suspected Ron then looking at it barring possibility investigating TripleA, I now feel it is likely he investigated Ron and that's why

 

No, the 'defensive' argument isn't silly, ESPECIALLY when it's a vote like mine, because why try to defend yourself to a vote solely based on an opinion on the way you post?

 

If someone were to give a pretty much throwaway vote as mine to myself, I wouldn't really worry about, I'd if anything just concentrate on no-one else voting for me.

 

And I will say this to you Ron, your defence to such a throwaway vote, for me personally, is condemning

No offence, but that's absolutely ridiculous. No vote should be a throwaway - there's no point playing the game if you're town and you're putting no thought into who you're voting for. You vote for the person you think should be lynched, not "just because". (*1)

 

And you also shouldn't judge whether someone's scum based on the fact they don't play how you do. That's a hugely flawed strategy.(*2)

 

So much so that I'm beginning to suspect that it's a scum strategy. I'm not sure enough to place a vote yet, but I'm certainly suspicious.(*3)

 

1 - It's not throwaway in MY MIND, I believe hand on heart YOU are scum. However you're obviously going to say your Town, and if you are, then such a vote in YOUR MIND should be considered throwaway, the fact you're taking such a vote, a singular vote, that isn't actually pushing for everyone to jump on board to lynch you is very interesting indeed. I wouldn't have even bothered with this inane debacle.

 

2 - NEVER said that, I said I think you're scum from the way you have acted throughout, it just comes across scummier than most IMO, I don't care how people play. Example of that? TripleA and his gung-ho approach, I personally don't like it, I do believe however that his actions are for the benefit of Town, I don't believe yours are, simple.

 

3 - Alls fair to ya, to me, personally, your fixation with my vote, your eagerness to bandy scum back around onto me because of my vote, the inability to understand/desire to put words I've never said and basically what SMS came up with, as well as your demeanour really does believe I've made the right decision.

 

To everyone else, as previously mentioned somewhere above, I am also suss of Dan, if a change of vote is needed to gain the lynch I may help out in that regard.

Baring this saying he trusted TripleA this is the strongest statement he has made up until page 50. Also this quote now baffles me

 

Please stop talking about people's roles if you think they are pro-town! I've been trying to avoid commenting on this and frankly you've put me in a bad position. If I don't get night killed tonight I'll be stunned. That's not to say I have a power role, but even if I don't you're putting me in the firing line as the scum are going to think that now. I you suspect someone has a pro-town role, or even if you think someone else has pointed it out, ignore it! Obviously if you think they're scum those rules go out the window, but talking about pro-town power roles is not a good thing!

 

I don't mean to have a go, but I'm being forced to address this issue and I really don't like that.

Ron if you are a PGO then giving the Scum a reason to night kill you is a good thing, this post and the line that I have bolded are a bad thing as it is inviting to be saved so this post is at best a bad post for a PGO to make and at worst proof that you have made up the PGO claim.

 

Even with that all said Bristep is still my number one suspect as scum and shall still have my vote. I hope to be fully up to speed by tonight and then I can make a proper case against him.

[Retro Red]

Even with that all said Bristep is still my number one suspect as scum and shall still have my vote. I hope to be fully up to speed by tonight and then I can make a proper case against him.

 

I'll repsond to any allegations you want to make but I'll be doing so tomorrow at some point since I'm out tonight, so town please bear that in mind if swift tries to lead you into a lynch. I am not scum, and I await this 'case' eagerly because if it's based on fact and not hearsay and assumptions I'll be very surprised.

[Burchill's Buddy]

Just a quick one as I forgot to yesterday, I'm 99% v/la this weekend, meaning I'm only on my phone, I can post short stuff but can't really get into big discussions, but if I really need to I can drop in quickly. Back to normal Monday morning.

[Ron Simmons]

swift, I was trying to invite the scum into killing me by suggesting I had a power role, and repeatedly bringing that up. Maybe that line was I'll-judged, but I wanted it to seem like a plausible post by making it seem like a post of frustration at Triple A and Mike rather than a role claim that might raise eyebrows all round.