Falzis

I'm not trying to make you look like a fool, I'm trying to make you look like someone who isn't sure of what he is saying, which could be a scum tell. Anyway, I don't agree with your semantic gymnastics as I think you are trying to deftly maneuver out of a tight spot. I'm still keeping an eye on you.

Ugh hello. Your point is ridiculous because the point I was making by voting for you is precisely what you said, that I believe there is a scum amongst those that didn't vote for Sojourner (or more exactly those that voted for me) and it happens to be that I suspect you to be the scum (if also Theophilos, but that's another story). Plus, there are only three people in the other camp. You (KevinH), Theo and Martino. So tell me, who do you (KevinH) think is the scum in that other side? Of course you'd have to choose between Theo and Martino... unless you're the scum.

EBWOP: Evidence of Logical Implosion

This is the second time you have confused me Sir Aquinas (I posted a while back early on D3 about one of your posts that confuse me). First you said you're not convinced of my scuminess when compared to KevinH yet in the same breath and post you say that I you think me and EM are scum. So which is which really? And if you think EM is scum for doing everything I've done, shouldn't I be the first one you vote for instead of him? And your defense of KevinH not defending himself is simplistic as well. You say maybe he has nothing to defend for, that we should presume everyone innocent until proven guilty. I say otherwise. Everyone is presumed scum except for themselves and should prove their townie alignment as the days progress. Plus, even if a townie is innocent, quality defenses could still be given. All I ask is an analysis from KevinH why he couldn't be scum based from his actions, non-actions, and voting patterns. I think it's a fair demand since I did the same when I came back from V/LA. I posted three reasons, one of which perfectly absolves me even if I voted to lynch a townie (the cost-benefit analysis it's on page 24-26 I think). KevinH didn't answer his internal contradiction stating he agreed my defense of my innocence was solid, and he really couldn't argue against it but in the same breath say I'm still scum. It's one or the either. Much like your own contradiction. It's either you believe there's not much evidence I am scum enough for you to vote for me OR you believe I am scum by association with EM. You can't believe both. FOS: Aquinas

Oohh I just noticed from EM's quote of voting patterns on D2 that Kaziocore was the only one who didn't vote for KevinH amongst those who voted for sojourner. If KevinH turns out to be scum, we can look towards the direction of Kaziocore.

Two answers. Trivializing our comment, and simplistic finger pointing. You could defend yourself the same way I've defended myself when I came back. Plus, I could actually say the same thing to you and Theophilos. But in my defense, and not of EM's, all of my actions are independent of his. Although I have noticed his conspicuous and suspicious timing of reinforcing what I do or say. Rest assured if you do turn out to be townie, EM is the next on my chopping block.

You could be really a townie but really, I haven't heard a systematic or comprehensive defense from you. When a suspicion is thrown your way you either shrug it off or give a short post. Plus if I remember correctly your meta games, you post quite succinctly possible scenarios that could arise from different actions. I haven't seen that anywhere during this whole game.

So where is Kevin in your sights right now? What do you think of him? Are you more likely to vote for him again or not?

Well, I don't think Nerau was near the threshold of a pressure cooker to role claim since it was just you and Narsis who put pressure on him. And I didn't say what Narsis said was necessarily scummy, I just said is he implying something?

But how do you know he caved under pressure? Did he really leave because of pressure or some other real life or lost interest in the game reasons? And your post is just full of WIFOM. It's like you're implicitly telling everyone that you (Nerau-Narsis) have a powerrole. You put this out here yourself so I'm not role fishing. I wonder if this is intentional or a slip up? VOTE COUNT Falzis (3): KevinH, Theophilos, CanucksDynasty Sir Jesus (1): Electric Mango Electric Mango (1): Martino KevinH (1): Falzis Not Voting (4): Narsis, Kaziocore, Aquinas, Sir Jesus

Why do you doubt anyone would have switched (and just to clarify, what case, my "weak" case?) BTW, since you are here, and you can step in mole if this is out of line (since you just said no asking on the weak doc role), could you tell me why you believed in my case against soj and voted with me? And would you have voted for KevinH or me if the soj case wasn't made?

So you could be easily mafia? And what caved under pressure? "imo, mafia would want to leave an inactive player alone since they couldn't hurt them by being inactive." Well now that you say it, it does seem a pro-townie point for SJ. The reason why I suspected SJ was because I thought he was scum trying to play on people's willingness/preference to lynch inactives (same reason I gave a while back). But Kevin's reasoning supporting SJ's proposition still doesn't fly for me.

My suspicion of SJ is based on his proposition to vote off Nerau (now Narsis).

I think Martino's point was that we only know our own alignment that's why putting statements for other people's alignment won't help if the doctor/psychiatrist only detects truth or lies from that player.

How does it benefit us to second guess power roles anyway?

EBWOP: I am townie.

I thought as much. As per your question, the two I would pick of the 3 I suspect right now would be EM and Sir Jesus. Kaziocore the least because the case against him is built more on negative evidence (what he isn't doing) more than on positive evidence (what he has done).

But I didn't do that. I said "Oh I was wrong, and he really wasn't scum!" per my concession to Martino's foresight. @Canucks I have 3 in mind I think they have equal chances of being scum. I'm sleepy right now and too lazy to sift through posts to make a comprehensive case but the short of it is Electric Mango, Sir Jesus and Kaziocore. EM for role fishing (which I've found persisted since Day 1). Sir Jesus for proposing to vote for Nerau. And Kaziocore for being a newbie (might be playing or told to play the newbie card).

I think he meant mole that of the 6, Narsis (the original, not Nerau-Narsis) died and is ruled out. Anyways, it really seems to me that there is a mafia propaganda to let me take the fall, and paint EM as scum by association (which I do not credit or discredit). It's so convenient for scum to step aside, let townies make a wrong lynch and wagon on it, then blame the proponents later. This strategy will chalk you up one more day lynch and you can just say the next day "Oh, I really thought Falzis was scum". After all that's said and done, I have to go back to Kevin after all, with a stronger belief of his scuminess. Vote: KevinH

Yes but you have to tell me why of all six, I should be that one scum. I haven't seen a reason to not suspect the others as much if not more than me.

Could I possibly know your thoughts about the possibility of me being townie? And why you voted for me despite those thoughts? Just for more info you know.

EBWOP to above post as proof of Kevin's agreement. Make what you will out of the seemingly inconsistent stance. If he thinks the case is good and can't really argue against it, why would he vote for me? The fact that I pushed for the lynch of a townie is one of the core premises supporting my innocence in my defense. So why use that as a reason to vote for me if you agreed with the defense? Plus, does that make me the better candidate? There are so many of us to be made a case for. There are other people who voted for sojourner. I was the first one. A glaring unscummy move (putting your neck out there!! ring ring) if I ever saw one.

Might I remind you of this post of mine which I believe to be quite excellent. Kevin agrees that it's a solid defense yet has still voted for me. The cost-benefit analysis alone would absolve me.

It doesn't really help much to post very short reasons. "Poor reasons" is so vague but nevertheless my reason for voting soj may not be bulletproof but it wasn't exactly poor either. As I said before, it was logical, but not all logical things in the world turn out to be correct. Also, you don't state what the link between the three of us is. Is it because we all voted for soj? It would really help to be more clear with what you say. I'm not liking short posts from you or Kevin. And since you bring up the matter of Kevin and Theo's immobile votes, isn't it more townie to change votes than just pin your vote on the same person everyday? Especially when, you don't help in hunting for scum. Just because you have one target (ie. me) doesn't mean you should stop hunting for other scum. It's usually people who change votes that are more likely to be townie since it shows a sign of uncertainty, a characteristic only townies possess not knowing who is scum and who is town. Oh well. You still have one day to mislynch anyway. At least if I die, next day you will be more or less sure who is scum. And it won't be me.