Snake's WWE Invasion 'Royal Mafia Rumble'

[Chris B]

This, primarily, combined with your tunnelling on Ron in the last day phase. I don't think you've defended yourself that well, and I also think the timing of Swift coming up with another major suspect the moment a wagon started forming on you is suspect - it brought us closer to a no-lynch, with Corey's lynch ending up being the main way to avoid it.

 

Ron, I think you need to cool your jets before you talk yourself into a lynch.

 

You're playing a super-defensive game, which comes across as having something to hide or protect. I appreciate you want to defend every bun thrown, but I think you need to start picking your battles. Just accept with you an Dan it's over. He's going to vote for you, he thinks your scum, and that's that.

 

I'm now more inclined to to think you're scum based on the full-on foot-on-the-gas defensive game of yours, you're now getting to the point that you're twisting words and not reading things properly, purely to discredit Dan's point of view. I don't think anybody thought you were being accused to tunnelling when Dan mentioned it a couple of posts back, and we all knew he was referring to himself, but you dived on it straight away without even reading it properly. Stop ting it personally dude.

(Ron's post quoted in this post has been removed, I have too many quotes in the post already)

 

I have been going through FamilyGuy's posts to try because he is appearing more and more to be the most likely scum. I found this, and it stands out because of his behaviour since making it.

 

Here he is telling Ron that he should just accept that Dan thinks he is scum, and stop arguing his case. Particularly this line "I appreciate you want to defend every bun thrown, but I think you need to start picking your battles. Just accept with you an Dan it's over. He's going to vote for you, he thinks your scum, and that's that." flies in the face of FamilyGuy's own actions during day two where he just could not let any comment that Ron made about him go by without accusations of tunnelling, without actually making a case for himself. Take this post for example, Ron voted for FamilyGuy, and when asked he gave reasons. The only points FamilyGuy responded to where those of balance and tunnelling. Since then he has continued to speak as though the points were done and dusted then and there, and that there was no further reason to suspect he was scum. (I bolded the parts not addressed by FG).

 

Any reason why, apart from the fact that you don't find it logical that I voted for you on Day 1?

Yeah, I thought you focussed on me heavily on day one. Tunneling almost. You also made that "direction of the game" comment. The way you played that first day is very different than the way I've seen you play before. That's left me thinking that you might be scum.

 

Of course, there's obviously time for you to change my opinion and I very well might. As I've said I think at least one out of yourself, Burchill's Buddy and TMS is scum. I think there's a plan to try and make me look scummy based on the fact I lost my rag on the first day. And admitedly, it's a solid foundation for scum to work from.

 

The reason I voted for you over BB and TMS is that I feel more familiar with your play style than theirs, and I know you're a really strong player (but don't know much about them) so I think for you to have been so focussed on me, when you ordinarily seem so rounded and balanced, I think something might be up.

 

I wouldn't say naming 3 players I suspect, and then questioning you because Nexus and SMS had gone AWOL isnt balanced, you kept bringing things to the table to respond to, then accuse me of tunnelling? I fail to see your logic.

 

 

Add to that his defiant protests when TripleA dared to suggest that a scenario he was part of was slightly suspect (Not at any point saying that he was scum, but that 3 people voting for someone who was V/LA was suspect and should be looked at), admitting that it was a valid point but highly flawed, then giving an incorrect summary of the point (stating that the accusation was that all 3 of them looked scummy, not that 1 of the 3 would likely be scum trying to hop on the wagon).

 

He has also flip-flopped a lot in the game, moving between angered accusations of tunnelling to trying to reason with Ron (which lead to the now infamous "I know I'm town, I know you're town" line (paraphrasing)), his play has been erratic as has his behaviour.

 

The fact that this line, spotted by Ron is fairly incriminating is only worsened by the fact that FamilyGuy has made several posts since then but has failed to acknowledge or defend this line. Given that there is now a wagon rolling on him, should he maybe try to stop it?

 

Family Guy, I notice you're online

 

I'm viewing the topic on my phone whilst at work you stalker, when I'm ready to type out a full case to why I'm not scum, and you clearly are, believe me you'll be the first to know.

 

No, apparently not as he's still preoccupied with Ron. He'll provide a full case exonerating himself and incriminating Ron, but only when he's good and ready. With us 2 days from the end of the phase. And why remove half of Ron's sentence?

 

Family Guy, I notice you're online - fancy elaborating on your quoted comments?

 

Does the second half of the post make it seem less stalkerish and more an effort to move the game along?

 

Anyway, the more I have read through his play the more I think that he is scum and also scum trying to play misdirection and distraction to try and avoid wagons forming. For that reason and for every other reason

 

VOTE Family Guy PMSL

[The Icon]

Well, there's a hole or two in that argument.

 

1. 'The fact that this line, spotted by Ron is fairly incriminating is only worsened by the fact that FamilyGuy has made several posts since then but has failed to acknowledge or defend this line. Given that there is now a wagon rolling on him, should he maybe try to stop it?'

 

I did with a long and drawn out post defending my actions, this appears to have been completely ignored by bristep in an attempt to make his argument more valid. I'll reiterate that defence for those of you who missed it first time round. At the time, frustrated with Ron Simmons monotonous tunnelling, in attempt to move the game forward at a time when I believed we were embroiled in a town vs town argument, I through it out there to make him move on to someone else. It was bore out of nothing more than my opinion at the time that Ron was town, and my knowledge that I am town.

 

This came before the PGO schtick at the start of the last day phase, which I still struggle to believe.

 

2. The only points FamilyGuy responded to where those of balance and tunnelling. Since then he has continued to speak as though the points were done and dusted then and there, and that there was no further reason to suspect he was scum. (I bolded the parts not addressed by FG):

 

i) You also made that "direction of the game" comment. The way you played that first day is very different than the way I've seen you play before

 

ii) As I've said I think at least one out of yourself, Burchill's Buddy and TMS is scum. I think there's a plan to try and make me look scummy based on the fact I lost my rag on the first day.

 

Again, I did address the first point plenty of times when it was brought up originally. It was when I was torn between 3 suspects who I all thought were scum, and merely stated I would vote for whichever one of them was most likely to be lynched. In the end I voted for Nexus, who turned out to be in a scum power role, someone the scum are hardly going to throw under the bus. I find it strange this is a point you would pick up on as being part of a strong argument Chris, as you were jumped on earlier for saying something similar.

 

I didn't address the second point due to it being one of abject stupidity and arrogance. Scum would hardly pick out any player not called SMS and go 'I bet we can make them lose their rag on Day 1'.

 

It's not the fact that I'm being accused of scummy play that gets me, it's that I'm being accused of really bad scummy play. I'm being accused of throwing a Scum Power Role under the bus, focusing on the same when there'd be much more viable targets the scum could try to mislynch against, and picking out a player seemingly at random on Day 1 and trying to make them crack?

 

Oh come on.

[Snake Plissken]

Vote count incoming later on this evening.

[Snake Plissken]

3. (Kane) Swiftstrike

4. (Dolph Ziggler) Brownie

5. (Randy Orton) Family Guy PMSL (L-6) Ron Simmons

6. (CM Punk) Dan Williams

7. (Cody Rhodes) Ron Simmons (L-6) Family Guy PMSL

9. (HHH) Chris Stone (L-1) MOD PENALTY

13. (Kofi Kingston) Carbomb

14. (Sheamus) Mike Castle

16. (Edge) Burchill's Buddy

17. (Rey Mysterio) Wolfvinson

18. (MVP) Lawz

19. (Jack Swagger) Chris B (L-6) Swiftstrike

 

Chris Stone has recieved a Mod Penalty until the end of this day phase. Wolfvinson has recieved his final Prod. With 12 Alive it takes 7 to throw someone over the top rope. Ad Break will occur on Wednesday 5th January 2011 at 10am.

[Mike Castle]

Urgh, this is getting annoying.

 

mod, do we have a specific time that Chris Stone will get mod-killed if he doesn't post?

[The Icon]

See, all these inactive posters are putting the town at a massive disadvantage IMHO. They're statistically more likely to be town, and at this rate the scum are going to win by default due to inactivity.

 

Chris_Stone by my reckoning is in the double-voter's slot, and is a player likely to be town if that's the case I believe? It's unlikely the scum would be given the double-voter is it not? Maybe one of the more experienced mafia players can clarify that for me?

 

If that is the case, I'd say leave him be, as it's likely to be another town player we lose due to non-activity.

[Snake Plissken]

Mike, if I answer that it may influence the way the day phase is played.

[Mike Castle]

Actually scum can be given the double voter role just as likely as town can. It depends on what the mod wants out of it, and how it balances the game (And if we have both a PGO and a Bomb, I'd not be surprised to see it on the scum side so that they can get players tough to night kill lynched easier. It just means having to explain their reasons for it much more).

 

But, I don't have any real case on Chris Stone, as he's been non-existant pretty much since replacing in, and I'm pretty sure the slot he replaced into was next to dead prior to that too. Which means we're nearing endgame with a slot we can get no read on. The problem is, if it's scum, the scum obviously wont remove it, and if it's town, the scum will leave it there as it makes their job easier.

 

This is why I want to know if there's a set time the slot will get modkilled, because the only way to play it into our favour is to make sure that happens during a night phase so we don't risk cutting to night early and losing the game that way. Sure we lose town if he's town, but it's better we lose the slot that way, than in place of a lynch where, if it happens the start of the next day phase, we run the severe risk of us cutting right to night and potentially losing the game then and there.

 

(Another reason why mods should be replacing or mod killing, and being completely transparant about things, rather than keeping some of it hidden).

 

Also, those who haven't given their top 3 suspects, get posting, and explain why you've failed to do so up to now. By my count only me, Dan, brownie and Chris have done so.

[Jaffa]

Mike, Chris Stone obviously isn't contributing and is going to get modkilled or lynched unless he reappears.

 

Is it feasable to allow an already lynched player to replace in and take the spot? Obviously, we'd have to hope that they haven't been told the setup or roles, but could it be done?

[Snake Plissken]

Mike, OK then in answer, it won't happen during a day phase (The modkilling that is)

[Mike Castle]

Thanks Snake, that solves us worrying about arranging a lynch around a mod kill

 

Is it feasable to allow an already lynched player to replace in and take the spot? Obviously, we'd have to hope that they haven't been told the setup or roles, but could it be done?

Not really no.

 

If they were a power role, they're already unable to come in for reasons anyway (Such as a cop having info the new slot they're entering wouldn't have), if they were night killed, then there was obviously a reason for it, and if, for instance, they DID target Ron and died that way, they would confirm him when they shouldn't.

 

Then there's the fact that they could only really enter into a slot that was from the same side they already were, meaning Nexus could only replace in if Chris Stone was scum, and anyone else could only do so if he was town, meaning that slot is confirmed scum/town that way.

 

On top of that, there's the fact we have dead threads on here (I normally see them, but a few mods don't like them. I prefer it though) meaning there may be information given to the dead players that they shouldn't have, such as who is and isn't scum or whether certain role claims are true or not. I mean it's one thing for people in the game to believe or not my claim, but if someone came in and said "I know Mike's claim is correct" then it's unfair to scum.

[The Icon]

Mike, I don't want to post a Top 3 as of yet, because I don't have 3 players who I have a strong enough feeling they are scum, therefore I wouldn't want my flimsy opinion to contribute towards a mislynch. I'd prefer to name players I am as sure as I can be are guilty, than through players that I think may be innocent, purely because I think they are less likely to be innocent than another player.

[Jaffa]

Thanks Snake, that solves us worrying about arranging a lynch around a mod kill

 

Is it feasable to allow an already lynched player to replace in and take the spot? Obviously, we'd have to hope that they haven't been told the setup or roles, but could it be done?

Not really no.

 

If they were a power role, they're already unable to come in for reasons anyway (Such as a cop having info the new slot they're entering wouldn't have), if they were night killed, then there was obviously a reason for it, and if, for instance, they DID target Ron and died that way, they would confirm him when they shouldn't.

 

Then there's the fact that they could only really enter into a slot that was from the same side they already were, meaning Nexus could only replace in if Chris Stone was scum, and anyone else could only do so if he was town, meaning that slot is confirmed scum/town that way.

 

On top of that, there's the fact we have dead threads on here (I normally see them, but a few mods don't like them. I prefer it though) meaning there may be information given to the dead players that they shouldn't have, such as who is and isn't scum or whether certain role claims are true or not. I mean it's one thing for people in the game to believe or not my claim, but if someone came in and said "I know Mike's claim is correct" then it's unfair to scum.

 

Fair enough. Looks like we're screwed with that slot then.

[swiftstrike]

Mike I'm not going to do a top 3 as that is the way of a stitch up lynch, no need for any questions or prove, just see who is giving off the worse "vibes" and then lynch on that basis.

 

Okay, at least for now, I'm taking out Mike and Ron. The way the two of them have acted in the game still has my alarm bells going off, but Mike's defence was strong. So, take those three out, and:

 

1 - Family Guy PMSL - Bristep's case on him, looking back, was pretty strong. Also, I still think it would be useful with regards to Mike and Ron. After all, if it turns out that Family Guy is scum, that'll be good for both of them, since they've pushed him seperately.

 

2 - Dan Williams - I still haven't forgotten his early play. He's been somewhat lurky-mc-lurksy since then.

 

3 - Swiftstrike - Yeah, there's an element of OMGUS here, but I've always been wary of going after people who go after me. His cases on Bristep, Lawz and myself have been bizarre, and I think he's trying too hard to get the MVP crown. He's pushing me on playing style, and that's really the pot calling the kettle inconsistent.

 

The thing is I don't just have you on playing style I also posted the following, so your change in play style is merely a small part of your scummyness as I mentioned before shown below

 

I'd say it's more likely that he's not been on the forum since his last post (just checked his profile). But this is what I essentially mean in regards to in-active players will fuck the town over if, indeed, they are town, and if both he and Corey are town, then we've as good as lost the game anyway if we let them both survive this day phase (and I trust Chris over Corey).

What has Chris done to earn your trust Mike?

 

 

Is it that he voted Nexus to L-1 after deadline was suppose to be up and hence would not have mattered if anyone else voted to lynch?

I think it's L-1 there, but I'm not sure. Just to be on the safe side, and in case we can still vote:

 

Unvote

 

Vote: Nexus

 

Or that he was doing so while sowing seeds that Dan should be the lynch while voting for Nexus?

I don't think Dan's defended himself well at all, to be honest. I'm feeling rather like we've been played here. It's like some people have been actively trying to force a no-lynch. I'm actually wondering if Nexus hurling himself at the noose was a scum plan that's ended up backfiring when the day hasn't ended when was expected.

 

Or that he seems just happy with any lynch regardless?

In the interests of getting a lynch.

 

I originally voted Dan at the start of the day, because I thought he needed pressure put on him. I changed it to Mike, because Mike's play today has been horrendous. As it came close to the deadline, I changed it back to Dan because he was closest to a lynch - however, then a few people changed their votes to Nexus after he started acting suicidally. Since Nexus has been on the radar throughout the game as a suspect, it's not a lynch I have any issues with.

For the record, I'd go for Bristep, Corey or Dan at this point. I don't want to jump between, but I will go for whichever is the more popular option.

Right, I'm travelling to Ireland tomorrow, so my access will be sporadic for the next 24 hours. Family Guy isn't my preferred choice, but Mike's put himself in a position where anyone looking to be the final vote is in a catch-22 - if they believe him, they won't lynch him, and if they don't believe him, they're potentially killing town. Dan and Ron both seem to be slipping through the cracks somehow, which is surprising me. The Bristep/Swift thing is interesting as well, but it feels almost unusually aggressive from Swift. Nonetheless, I don't want to be part of the reason for a no-lynch, and I think Family Guy is now in the lead.

 

That said, Family Guy's tunnelling on Ron HAS been excessive, and I've not understood it. Part of my issue with Ron and Mike has been that I'm not sure who to believe. Family Guy's flip would probably be a useful thing to find out, so let's see how that one goes.

 

Unvote

 

Vote: Family Guy PMSL

[Mike Castle]

Mike I'm not going to do a top 3 as that is the way of a stitch up lynch, no need for any questions or prove, just see who is giving off the worse "vibes" and then lynch on that basis.

Fair enough.

 

vote: swiftstrike

 

For the record, the top 3's also give a good bit of evidence as to who is just riding by on other people's lists, and who has their own opinions. The fact you're basically deriding people's issues on you as a "stitch up" despite people taking issue with your slot even before you entered it tells me that you would rather others believe it's a stitch up, and get rid of those voting you.

 

By the same token, I'm unhappy with Family Guy's response. This late in the game and you don't even have 3 top suspects? Seriously?