Kitkat16

I am Ninetales, a Pay-backer (Vengeful).

I still don't see why people aren't taking what I said about Kevin seriously. OK, so I got a couple of the details wrong due to skim reading a few posts, but the bulk of what I said is still legit.

I'm afraid not. All I was going to do was to share my thoughts about Kevin, but decided there wasn't much point in waiting for AbT to post because I believed him anyway. P.S. I have very limited internet atm, sorry for my absence all.

AbT did claim vigilante. I am the JOAT, and my cop investigation revealed AbT to be scum, but the only possible way that AbT is not guilty if we have a framer in play. Oh. I scrolled through several pages and couldn't find his roleclaim and stopped in the end because I'd looked for a while and couldn't be bothered. Maybe I'm getting muddled. I thought we had multiple people claim JOAT? Or was that MK?

OK. Having thought about it, I believe AbT. Yes, we had a cop find him guilty. But we also know that if there *IS* a framer in play, AbT would probably have been framed that night. Your point about mafia vigilante roles is irrelevant. AbT didn't claim vigilante, he claimed JOAT. As far as I know there's no such thing as a mafia JOAT. In my experience, when someone is reasoning poorly in this game in relation to pushing a potential lynch, it often means that they're scum. I've had it happen to me in the past: a couple of jokers were overlooking the evidence and saying that it seemed dead certain that I was scum, and I was gutted that my defence was being overlooked, but it was just that the individuals involved were scum and were desperate to kill me off, but gave themselves away in the process. It looks to me like you're deliberately overlooking the evidence to try and push a lynch on a townie. And if AbT *HAD* been framed, mafia would be pushing hard to kill him today. I think we should be looking carefully at anyone who seems too certain that AbT is scum. I'm willing to remove this, but for now, unless further information is coming forward like another positive cop result on AbT: Vote: KevinH

Once we get a reply from AbT, I have more to add depending on what he says.

I agree with Yehom. I want to hear from AbT whether he killed Canik or not. I do note the following: Canik *WAS* on AbT's list of potential scum, although he didn't seem to stand out in particular as suspicious to AbT. For the record though, do mafia potentially have roles which can kill an extra townie?

Ah. Well it might be less convincing than I thought, but we've gotta pick one or the other, and it's something. MK's story *has* been pretty inconsistent. And there are some advantages to MK over AbT in that (a) the investigative PRs can check AbT (the framer could frame him again, but it would clearly rule out the possibility of Lach lying or being a paranoid cop or something, not that I think that's very likely -- can JOATs even be paranoid??) and ( we know that AbT attaches an extra townie vote.

Don't question Lach's innocence! There's absolutely no way he's scum! It's scummy to even think about it! Don't think about it! [/sarcasm] Good catch there, Jazzy! Very interested to hear Atliis explain this. .... This is indeed a very good point.

Oh, whoops.

This is all so bloody complicated. It all exploded at the last minute last night when I was asleep, and now I don't have a huge amount of time to think about it. Let me try and get my head around it. What it seems to boil down to is that Lach investigated AbT and he turned up guilty. However, we know that if there *IS* a framer in play, AbT would've been a prime target that night. We also know now from SBG's post that AbT's seemingly erratic play in the first day or two was an honest mistake. So I'm not sure why SBG's post carries particular weight, as some have suggested. It all comes down to AbT was found guilty. On the flip side, we have MK, who has behaved fairly erratically. Yet this isn't out of the ordinary for MK. [As far as lynching Lach is concerned, yes there's a possibility that he's scum trying to bait out the cop, but lynching him today would be an utterly stupid idea given the strong possibility that he is telling the truth. It's far too soon to lynch him even if we eventually decide that is the correct course of action.] In short there are weaknesses to voting for either AbT or MK, because there's a slight possibility that either might genuinely flip town. However, we've gotta lynch *someone*. I think I'm going with MK, despite defending him earlier. What decided me was when Lach claimed to be JOAT. If Lach is telling the truth (which I think he probably is) it means either MK is lying or we have two townie JOATs, which seems unlikely. (Is it even possible according to the rules to have two of the same PR??) This also gives any investigative PRs (e.g. Atliis, perhaps?) the opportunity to check AbT during the night (assuming that Atliis survives the night, of course, but we might have protective PRs still in play, who knows.) Vote: MK

Funny, your name is missing from this mislynch too. Actually, your name is missing from any wagons actually. I mean, if I was a scum player trying to avoid being on any town wagon, you'd be nailing that on the head. Unvote: Atliis Vote: KitKat Re: all of this, yeah on reflection MK does seem suspicious, especially putting his vote on someone he says he knew was innocent. The truth is that although I read all those posts I was reading them fairly superficially and not thinking deeply about them. As you may have noticed, over the past while I haven't really been active on these forums much, and the reason for that is a declining interest in CN as well as the fact that my nemesis Death from above in the Pink Senate War is well out of my range at the moment. I've been playing other games and also finding other hobbies in real life e.g. taking up running. (Incidentally, I've also lost interest in PnW because its war mechanics suck.) My involvement in this mafia game has suffered as a result, including the thought put into reading the accusations towards MK. To show that I'm telling the truth, I'll say that I am usually hyperactive on these forums and would have been far more active in this game if I were my usual boisterous self. My defence of MK was motivated by the post I've quoted at the top of this post, because I felt bad for him and he was clearly a wee bit upset, and I wanted him to know that someone would stick up for him. To show that I'm telling the truth, what I will say is that if I were scum, which I am not, I would have reacted the exact same way, so what I'm saying doesn't give me any townie points here. What I will say is that I never claimed to be 100% certain he wasn't scum, which would certainly be a scum move. I just expressed my annoyance at people going after MK again and said I believed him. Now, having reread the posts in question with more thought, I'm like "yeah, actually, I can see why they accused him." Having said that, I'm still not saying I think he's scum. I'm unsure. On the one hand, he has done some dodgy stuff. On the other, his annoyance and hurt in that post earlier where he got pissed off seemed genuine to me, *AND* you've got to factor in that his posts aren't inconsistent with his style of play from other games. If all this makes me seem scummier, well, whatever. Appearing to compromise on my view that MK is town when someone says that defending him makes me seem scummy probably doesn't give me any townie points. Shrug. I can't help that. If I were genuinely scum and I were lying about not having read those posts thoroughly and I were playing it smart, I'd have stuck with my original stance that MK was town to make it look like defending MK was never about giving myself townie points.

I hope you're town, because if you're scum, that's awfully low play. Other than that, I don't think Atliis has even spoken today. Also colonel Medved is very quiet. MK can confirm that we discussed months ago via PM how much it sucked that people constantly lynched him for out-of-game reasons. I'm not pulling this stuff out of my arse.

I like MK though. Shrug. OK. I've just seen a lot of people go after MK game after game at the slightest excuse.

fwiw, I believe you, MK. I'm sick of people who don't like you for out-of-game reasons constantly using this medium as an opportunity to have a go at you. It just turns into people pushing to lynch you every single game. My vote is remaining elsewhere (I haven't decided quite where yet, but it's certainly not on you.) As for the rest of you, will you just give it a rest...

Congrats to mafia for winning the game. Traitors of the town. How in the world were we supposed to know you were town? You didn't exactly do a good job defending yourself. *AND* you lied about your role which certainly didn't help either.

Penny for your thoughts, Canik?

Well that's the thing. He *isn't*. He has yet to provide a single possible explanation for why two separate people have both said they know with certainty that his roleclaim is false, despite multiple people (including myself) repeatedly asking him to do so. The only reason I'm not placing my vote on him at this point is that he's pretty much lynched for sure anyway and there's no point in finishing the day early. (Actually, on that point, how much longer have we got to go, guys? cbb reading through tons of posts again to find the last one from TW lol.)

It's simply not how I play. Last game I sat quiet (besides D1's inactive lynch attempt) until I had something worth sharing, and when I did we got the SK. Kevin will you deny that Rafay jailed you both nights? Something does feel off but I can't quite nail it down. I'll reread tomorrow. Likewise. I prefer not to say stuff unless I actually have something to add. Which is why I have gone quiet for now.

Well to both of your points, just because someone jails someone N1 and there is no kill would not necessarily make me think for sure I was the reason to prevent it. There's many roles that could possibly explain why there was no kill, so not smart to just assume if he was in fact a jailer that Kevin is scum or to put votes on him for that. If Kevin doesn't present anything D2 to bring suspicion to him to worthy a vote outside of the off chance your Jailer action was the reason to prevent it, it's not wise to just vote him with no reason given by his postings to then be questioned on why you're voting him and maybe forcing a RC. That being said, Rafay's reasoning for Samus was nothing, so not like he cared about voting someone without any real given suspicion. Also want to note, could he of voted Samus D1 because he was fearing being lynched at the end and Samus is a scum partner? He had to know his vague and rather zero reason to suspect Samus wasn't going to push a lynch on Samus, but if he called him out right before he's lynched would maybe distance Samus from scum ties. That same question could also go for Kevin. Could Kevin in fact be a scum partner, for which Kevin could claim "i can't confirm or deny," in case Rafay's RC didn't hold up, and also give town points to Kevin if Rafay came up scum, again helping to distance Kevin. Those are 2 possibilities in my opinion, and woudn't be surprised if one of the two were a scum partner. Not enough solely to go on IMO yet, but worth noting A 3rd possibility, though rather farfetched is Brewers is a scum partner and knowing Rafay was likely in hot seat D2, the scum decided to self sacrifice Rafay and have is scum partner Brewers counter his claim to make Brewers look town. More farfetched at this point IMO because hard to get scum team to self sacrifice when they've only killed 1 town so far this game, but if they thought Rafay was a for sure lynch or likely lynch they could. The question was not why Rafay didn't place a vote on Kevin. (I wouldn't have either. There's too strong a possibility that there are other explanations for why there was no kill on N1.) The question was why he didn't leave subtle hints anywhere that Kevin might conceivably be scum or that he had jailed him, so that if he were killed we could go over his posts later and get some useful information out of them. Simply to express a suspicion of Kevin would've been helpful to us.

Rafay, can you please get your inactive arse on here and give us a reason for your actions? I'd be interested in hearing your side of the story. Thx!

Yes you are. Vanilla townies would be completely unable to verify whether or not Rafay was jailor.

Hmm. I find this all very confusing. I essentially agree with Yehom. Even if you don't want to come out and vote to lynch Kevin on D1, or be overtly suspicious of him, why not at least drop subtle hints in your posts so that we can analyse them for later if you get killed? Instead you were inactive for the entire day, and then roleclaimed at the absolute last minute without giving us any information. Care to explain any of this, Rafay? On the other hand, I'm also quite confused as to how multiple people can confirm with 100% certainty that Rafay is not jailor? As far as I'm aware there is no PR role that will not just tell you a player's alignment but will also tell you their role...? I'm somewhat conflicted because I don't want to probe too deeply about how brewers and atliis are sure that Rafay is not jailor because it will give scum too much information, but on the other hand it would be helpful for town to know...

This wouldn't be a problem if certain...... people.... would pull finger and stop being deliberately inactive. Why don't we just have a system where mods choose to block people from playing based on their own perceptions of inactivity?

Meh. Vote: No Lynch.