Falzis

And the way you've been posting this day is more reminiscent of the KevinH I know. Why weren't you this critical even on Day 2 or 3 (I'd understand on D1 of course)?

You know, I'm actually near giving up. I'm really at a lost anymore how to prove my innocence. You or SJ have already said that anything I say could be a big WIFOM and conceded it will look that way. The only thing I will add from your analysis KevinH is CD was more or less a sure townie. Scum wants to retain people who everyone is not sure of. CD has been proclaimed townie because of an inherited role from an inactive while you have been twice in the chopping block. This means that scum wanted to create more ambiguous situations for town to doubt and not make a convincing and united vote. Plus, since you were the one who built the case against me, and they know you would, when my alignment is shown as townie, they can make a case for your head the next day (if you really are a townie). I'm betting there is a scum if not two amongst the three people who have already voted for me. VOTE COUNT Falzis (3): Kaziocore, Sir Jesus, Theophilos No Lynch (1): Falzis Not Voting (4): Nerau, Martino, KevinH, Aquinas With 8 Alive, 5 is needed to lynch. Narsis is V/LA from 5 days from the 27th.

Say it long enough and it's gonna stick... or not. Even if you lynch me and turn the world upside down it won't change the fact that I'm not scum. You might be of another camp if not scum.

Oh but you did slip. Nowhere in this thread was the idea of 4 scum floating around until your post. The consensus has been there are only 3. You could also be scum pretending to be town since even if you voted for KevinH and tie the votes at 5-5, EM was still going to die first because he was the first to get to 5 (accdg to mole's rules). So just because you voted for EM doesn't acquit you of being possibly guilty.

I don't know how to prove my innocence because the "hard evidence" (voting patterns) are stacked against me but if you really are townie KevinH, I implore you to go and look back at everything and see the bigger picture especially the "soft evidence" (logic and implicits). My defense at lynching sojourner still stands. We have proven that scum are smarter and won't go around lynching and flailing their arms and putting big stickers on their foreheads that say IM SCUM IM LYNCHING TOWNIES. If not for EM's slip and quite incoherent discussion for the doc to roleclaim, he would have gone under the radar. Yes he was vocal but not quite as I was. Yes he was in the battlefield so to speak but I was the one on the front lines. I was and am the scapegoat. I was and am the odd thumb sticking out prominently. This is in contrary to the proven conclusions for this game that scum wanted to hide more than lynch. Actions that try to blend should be taken with more suspicion that actions that try to put the spotlight on themselves.

Umm... first of all, I wasn't talking to you. I was talking about SJ re implying I'm lying. The only thing I talked about you was your Freudian slip. So your whole post = invalid.

Oh please! Don't even imply I'm lying and was lying to everyone. I don't have any qualms as to getting lynched because you will be proven wrong. Secondly, you thought me to be townie on D1 and D2. So who's the liar now? You didn't think I was scum "long enough". Thirdly, I am not advocating a NO LYNCH by everyone. I am the only one not lynching. Do not misrepresent me. I am not lynching because again I want to prove my innocence by not pointing to anyone myself primarily and let the others build a case for other people. Me not lynching doesn't mean I don't advocate others to pull off a lynch. Lastly, before I die, I am putting out a new theory. There are four scum. Look at Theophilos' Freudian slip: Ho ho ho. Get cocky scum of the earth. You may kill me easily but I and the town will have the last laugh (I hope, Martino and Aquinas - win this one for us)!

Plus think about it, if I was really scum, and EM was sure to be lynched, why would I post such cocky posts knowing EM was going to be lynched and I was going to be proven wrong?

I say I'm a freakin' newb in this game. All of my predictions and analysis were wrong and I wasn't much help to the town. But at least I tried. I don't know why you are so gung-ho all of a sudden and it's a very big shift of character from you in the past three days. But given all this I would now count you as townie since EM has consistently voted for you on D2 and D3. I've always said I am being made a scapegoat. I still think I am. I've said I was manipulated. I was. Everything I did, I did it on my own accord and I did it first. EM just jumped on everything I did. The only thing that separates us and which is very important is his suggestion for the doc to role claim. I shot it down like almost everyone else did. EM backtracked and I bought his defense that he wasn't necessarily saying for the doc to role claim. But the point is, the reason EM was lynched was because of that scum tell. I never advocated role fishing, nor attempted to. I would think that clearly separates me from EM. Plus, if you want to look to lynch someone based on EM's affiliations, I suggest you do the opposite. Or the subtle associations. Because I still dare say that obvious and blatant and open association is not a scum move. We have proven my assumption re soj lynch case was wrong and that scum indeed wants to hide more than they want to lynch. So even if EM voted for soj, and another scum could have killed soj on D1, they didn't. So it would be foolhardy to assume that the scum in this game would be so open to their association with each other. If anything, EM's distancing posts from Sir Jesus or Nerau-Narsis should be more scrutinized. Next, that would mean that at least either Sir Jesus or Narsis is scum, and on D3, I couldn't imagine them to be scum. But of course, EM's death would more or less tell me that indeed at least one of them is scum. I still believe though that one scum is hiding in the EM camp even if it violates the assumption that scum won't vote for fellow scum. I also believe that Martino and Aquinas are full-proof townies. I'm just scratching my head though why Canucks was NKed and not one of Martino or Aquinas. I'm looking now on CD's posts to try to get a clue why he was the one killed. As for my No Lynch vote, there are 6 of us townies left. 5 townies can still outvote the 2 in most voting situations. The scum would need 3 townies to vote for a fellow townie to be able to pull off a townie lynch. I don't think it would be easy to do that except for my head, and that's why I'm not lynching because I want to prove my innocence.

Well you'll be dead wrong! If anything, I was a victim of EM's manipulations. He hitched on everything that I did, supported everything that I said, and cozied up to me with his posts where he says he thinks I'm townie. And now I'm scum by poisonous association. My defense on D3 against lynching sojourner still applies here. But more over, I've always put my head farther out than EM who conveniently played my second fiddle, trying to play townie but was actually not. Like Martino and others have said, it would be too obvious for scum to have played it that way. If you want to look at subtle alliances, look at Sir Jesus' direction. SJ and EM were the first ones to state outright that they thought I was a townie, they were the people who supported me every step of the way. Now you can interpret it as that we are a three-some scum and I suppose many will lynch me with greater belief because of that but once I die you'll see I wasn't in league with them. Lastly, I think Nerau-Narsis is the 3rd scum if one of the scum didn't hide by voting for EM (which could be Theophilos or still even KevinH once they saw the snowballing consensus against EM) because according to mole's lynch story on D2, only two scum were in the story and I think if there are 3 scum, the reason why only 2 were included because one of them was inactive (Nerau). I won't be voting to support my cause to prove my innocence. Even if you vote for me, we can still afford a mislynch today. Vote: No Lynch

I really doubt EM would turn up scum. But hey even if he is, and people lynch me the next day because they think I'm scum, it's all good since town can afford to mislynch the next day if scum is lynched today. If EM is scum: Day 4 - 6 townies, 2 scum (vote for either me, SJ or Narsis) Day 5 - 5 townies, 1/2 scum (if correct lynch / if not from above pool of suspects) Day 6 - 4 townies, 0/1 scum (if correct lynch / if not from above pool of suspects) Day 7 - town wins! If EM is not scum: Day 4 - 5 townies, 3 scum (must be correct lynch or lose on next day - 50% chance since six voted for EM, 3/6 are scum) Day 5 - 3/4 townies, 2/3 scum (if 3-3, town loses, if 4-2, must be correct lynch or lose on next day) Day 6 - 2/3 townies, 1/2 scum (if 2-2, town loses, if 3-1, must be correct lynch or lose on next day) I wonder where mole is. I'm itching to know EM's alignment.

You're forgetting that the case will be different if EM is scum since it would be illogical for scum to vote for fellow scum. Lol that was the point, if EM is scum, no scum could have voted for EM especially if they could have just tied the vote or tilted it towards Kevin. Right? That's why, I will be shocked to find out if EM is scum. Since that would mean SJ and Narsis are scum.

HAHAHA I'm even more correct than I thought. With Theo's vote on EM, if EM turns out scum, it would mean that amongst SJ, Nerau-Narsis, and I, two are scum. I don't think anyone here would say even one of them is scum assuming you think I am the other scum.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Where did you come from? GOSH I was surprised I didn't think you would be online and vote at this crucial juncture before anyone who has voted for EM could unvote. You've now sealed the deal and EM's head is off (6 is majority = auto lynch). La la la we'll finally see who's scum.

This early, I'm predicting a townie alignment from EM. There is no way in hell he can be scum since that would mean that the rest of those voting currently for Kevin except for me are scum. And I can't imagine Sir Jesus and Nerau-Narsis to be both scum. And if you agree SJ and N-N to be townies, that would mean EM, Theophilos and I are scum. It's absurd to think that I and Theo are in the same boat. Why would Theophilos be the third scum? Because if EM and I were scum, there's no one left to be the third one since we can all agree that we don't think a scum will vote for fellow scum (assuming EM is) at this point.

EBWOP Kevin's numerical vote should read as (4).

VOTE COUNT Falzis (3): KevinH, Theophilos, CanucksDynasty KevinH (3): Falzis, Sir Jesus, Narsis, Electric Mango Electric Mango (3): Martino, Aquinas, Kaziocore as it stands. bolded are those who voted for sojourner minus original Narsis, non-stylized for those who voted for me minus sojourner, and italicized for replaced players. for easy reference of camps.

Very out of character! Not that I'm discounting the possibility of you giving a substantive post but I would assume you would maybe in the next mafia game, but not in this game. If you're always confused, I wonder why the clarity now? I'm thinking you're being fed. And that makes me very very amenable to voting for you instead. Secondly, I don't think EM said for the doc to roleclaim. He said "hey guys, let's discuss the possibility of the doc roleclaiming". They are two very different situations. And you can accuse me of defending EM and we look like buddies but I think it's a gross misrepresentation to say he was from the start advocating the doc to roleclaim. And if you say, oh hey, he could have misguided a poor new soul, let's backtrack and look at the environment. A lot of us posted immediately the dangers and pitfalls and say, oh no that's not a good idea and even a good discussion to pursue. Plus, the only newbie left is Kaziocore.

I was wrong. I thought we were talking about the same thing. So let me rephrase the question. Who do you think is the scum from those that didn't vote for sojourner?

He did vote on page 14, the last page before D1 ended but I only saw the top part of it (mole's summary). It seems SJ unvoted in the middle of the page.

Wait lemme check if I remember correctly. I think he voted for KevinH on D1.

But we're talking of people who voted. They were inactives. You said so yourself. There could be a scum in the other camp. I didn't assume you were talking about the inactive camp.

And I would also love to hear finally why would you vote for me if you believe that my defense was a solid and inarguable case? I asked you that before and I've yet to hear the answer. Please don't say "You're still the best candidate" because if you believe my defense, which argues my innocence, you shouldn't vote for me at all.

I say: One, the assumption that scum wanted to lynch a townie was wrong and that scum chose to hide and not vote was the correct conclusion on scum D1 actions. Two, dare I say, the analysis about my and even EM's innocence still stands precisely because of number One. We can't be scum since if scum voted for sojourner, he should have died because there was a manifested intent to lynch and there was a violation of the conclusion from number One that scum chose to hide. Three, to that extent, I am extending the umbrella of innocence to Sir Jesus since he voted and didn't choose to stay under the radar.

Knock knock KevinH. Pressure time. Who do you think is scum amongst the three of you that voted for me?