I don't think I even mentioned Daganev. And I was questioning his posts earlier. I don't even remember why Shayle voted for him, was it for a particularly scummy reason?

Again, you're better off explaining yourself than trying to defer attention to me. It's pretty obvious and even if you were are a townie you're just digging a deeper hole for yourself.

No, I'm not defering attention to you. I'm not VOTING for you. I'm voting for Dag. When I gave my rational you jumped on me. Which is odd given that you didn't vote for Shayle who did the same thing.

I say you are possibly trying to defend Dag and acting very suspicious.

Then I challenge you. What logical rational can you come up with that explains why the mafia killed rika on the first day?

Mafia kill pretty much at random plenty of times, just like people randomly vote at the start of a game. "Because they're Gloms IC" is not logical.

Also, surely it'd be more suspicious if I defended Daganev consistently, not inconsistently. (Plus I'm not defending him, I was jumping on your suspicious-sounding post. You just happened to reference him a few lines after the one I noticed was critical.)

Btw, by avoiding explaining your post and claiming my defence is suspicious, you're trying to redirect attention on you to me. You don't have to vote for me for it to be like that (though if you voted for me it'd be even more obvious, I guess.)

Actually, Kaalak is starting to act WAY too defensive for my tastes, now. Unvote: Arix, Vote: Kaalak. Sorry! Stay cool.

I explained my post. You just don't like the explanation.

I think mafia would logically kill off their opposition to maximize survival. Starting with most experienced players. Because they could pwn noobs.

This 'mafia kills are random' I just don't swallow.

Since I don't see an advantage to taking Rika out first (because I believe she was killed by the Mafia with the bullets). So there must be an ulterior motive.

The only thing that fits to me is that someone was saying 'ah Rika jumps me so I'll go after her,' which suggests a Glom.

This is the same thing I said before so either you are hiding something, logic escapes you, or I'm too naive at this. One of those three.

Also I stick to my decisions.

@ Casilu -- dudette whatever.

Unvote: Shamarah
Vote: Kaalak

Your defensiveness unnerves me

Or conversely explain why random kills benefit the mafia?

Or I could use Kaalak logic and vote for you because as a Celestian, you're always going to be a little fishy

I forgot who I voted for, but to reiterate Kaalak and my points, always quick to jump on the bandwagon, eh?

You're going to think what you want regardless of what I say, so I'm not going to bother defending my vote to you, Silvanus

So... since Shiri moved his vote to Kaalak we've had three people already jump on to Kaalak.

If find such a group mentality, especially considering arix did little more then paraphrase Casilu.

--------------

I am quite happy to agree that Kaalaks reasoning is a little odd, trying to claim that ic alliances affect how you play here is not really that good because it limits your ability to reason who the enemy could be.

By the same note there are a plethora of other reasons to become defensive and if you would just take a moment to look at the previous game, I was accused of such... and stick with me here by the mafia.

This becomes more suspicious when you attack someone for being defensive after asking them to defend themselves.

That being said I am interested in what role Kaalak will play so

VOTE: KAALAK

though I will gladly announce I am quite suspicious of Shiri and will try to act surprised someone will start targetting me soon.

Keep in mind that, as I remember it, your reasonings were nearly as flawed as Kaalak's above. Being right for the wrong reasons ends up being the same as being wrong, if nobody believes you-- and if you end up getting as worked up about it as Kaalak is, you're really not going to get any support at all. It just looks far too suspicious-- as even yourself agree. I don't think there's anything wrong at all with pointing out that someone's reasoning is flawed, because if we start making our decisions based on this sort of rambling, we're in a spot of trouble.

That said, you could be right. He may very well be dead on about Daganev, but I at least would prefer more of an actual reason than "Because he's a Glom and she's a Seren" at this point of the game.

PS: You guys really need to stop making accusations and then saying, "If I end up dead tonight, you know who did it!" You're just asking to get killed off so the blame can be placed on those you accused.

if that was to me I mean't the strange tendency for people to start acquiring votes after they declare certain people scummy, then suddenly everything they do is wrong

I was mostly referring to Kaalak's "If I end up as a corpse the next morning you know why."

However, it was indeed your final sentence that prodded me into mentioning something about it.

I feel a bit out of my depth, but a few things that strike me as odd:

Kaalak reasoned that Rika's killing can only be due to supposed Glom-Seren IC enemity, yet points out that Daganev is "sharp and wily" and "naturally suspects anyone who was part of the Shadow Court" - more IC reasoning, though the latter is a deceptively logical leap. If Daganev is as sharp and as wily as he suspects, why would he go after a presumably random townie on the basis of "it's a Seren killkillkill?"

In addition,

and

.

..together with a vote for Daganev doesn't quite add up, unless you're suggesting that the mafia are trying to muddy the waters with a supposedly random kill.

Did that make sense?

I'm going to have to unvote: Vote Shiri Shiri's post get stranger and stranger as a I read them, and especially with his first post, I would not be surprised if Shiri and Shayle were part of the same subgroup. But if they are a townie subgroup, and not a mafia subgroup, I'll happily change my vote.

At this point, I am also going to FOS: Shayle and FOS: Exeryte, I am finding both very suspicious because of thier posts and reasoning and just the general logic they are putting out there.

For those who do not remember, the reason why Shayle voted for me was because on Friday night and Saturday I was AWOL. She found my silence suspicious, saying that I'm always very chatty in these games. (which she would be correct about. However since it was my sabbath, and I'm never online on weekends, and she should know this, I found her vote strange.)

Also Kaalak, if Shiri is defending me, (and not just attacking you) he is doing a very poor job at it. Basically he is saying that your suggestion that people would use IC reasons to kill people in this game is just bad reasoning and he finds such reasoning suspicious. I don't find it suspicious, I just find it wrong. It would be suspicious however if people were supporting you, but since they are not, I am going to have to assume you are on your own on this one.

Fair enough about the "if people were supporting you" - but so far has there been any kind of consistency in who people are defending or pressing? Without looking back through the whole thread (too many members) I'd imagine not. Plus, can't scum communicate only at night in most games? Even if it's day too, it's not like that post is likely to have been run through other mafia members first (if he's part of a mafia.) So the fact no one is defending the suspicious reason isn't that great an indicator of anything.

I don't think my posts are strange (obv), but I guess that's the price you pay for being active and loud!

Oh, btw, I'm not in a townie subgroup with Shayle. I don't know anything about Shayle, it just amused me to vote for her most of all the available targets on day 1. Xenthos, Xavius and Rika would also have made good targets (I'm on fairly good terms with all of them.)