This is just not true...or backed up with anything...I've been playing this game as if there's 1 joker to start with, and then every night thereafter he might get a scum into play. While you can't disregard the possibility that one of them will kill him, the odds are much greater that they'll benefit him. The number doesn't actually matter a lot initially, though it increases our chance of hitting someone scummy because there isn't just the joker. This is distinct from 3 scum WHO ARE ALL ON THE SAME SIDE. You've been trying to play as though the joker doesn't actually have any motives or anything.

Your last post is too long and complicated!

But ok, I'll go through some of the points, although nested quotes are annoying on these forums.

1. The ones I have I addressed, and then you ignored it and pretended it was an unsolved issue. You haven't raised any other valid points.
2. That's not true. They are not legitimate scum tells. You just make things up and assert they are. And you've been doing a lot of actual scum tells, as I mentioned, like the no lynch thing, the jumping on people and refusing to adapt to facts as we uncover them, etc. And now you're saying we win when Shiri dies? Desperation at work.
3. What. It's not irrelevant. You can't just make a scum tell, then when someone calls you on it, call it irrelevant. It's standard scum behaviour.
4. Um, no, you said that. You said we shouldn't vote him, flailed around a bit, THEN came up with the jester thing, presumably to try and buy time.
5. You contradict yourself with this point too. The joker wins if everyone is abnormal or dead. <-- correct. It doesn't matter to the joker which ones they are. <-- proven wrong by the previous sentence. Of course he cares which ones "they" are, because he would want to abnormalise someone that wasn't going to be lynched (and vice versa) on the basis that he then has better odds of winning if the abnormals outnumber the normals (both because of the SK thing and because they might lynch badly trying to get at the joker. Actually, you're partly right on the second half of this one. It did "prove" that you weren't scum. Or rather, it counted in your favour. But you've just been acting so obviously badly apart from this one thing that I can only assume you're playing suboptimally, either deliberately or on purpose as a facade. It's like you were going for me, then decided you'd "prove" yourself as town by lynching someone you knew was abnormal (i.e Silferras.)
6. That's because you just quoted an arbitrary line. He knows perfectly well he was being silly, though depending on whether it's you or him that's the joker it could be either innocent fun that just happens to get in our way, or a "hiding in plain sight" thing.
7. You read it wrong. The "and what he does" is a seperate thing. You might attribute that to my long sentence structure, to be fair.
8. Only half of that is "I deleted the PM." Part of it is an explanation because if I just heard that without the actual RL context I'd be skeptical. There's also the relevant fact that you're not jumping on Dugan for it, and then the last sentence which is about something else.

Shiri, would you mind quoting the post where I voted for a no lynch?

I can't seem to remember when I did that.

What other scum tell do you think I have done?

And might I suggest you try reading this link, because I know you havn't actually bothered to search the internet like Fania suggested, I'll help you out a bit.

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.ph...mp;postcount=11

The thread is general is really good btw...

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=3645568

I noticed that I asked you where I did what you said I did 3 times now, and each time you have responded by comming up with some new action that I didn't actually do.

Sorry wrong link. This is the one I wanted you to read Shiri

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.ph...mp;postcount=12

post 12 not 11. my bad.

http://forums.lusternia.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=634180

No, it's no use using specific wording to try and avoid the thrust of the point. You know perfectly well what you said.


What other scum tell do you think I have done?




Not only have I already read those threads, since I go to MTGsalvation like every week to see MTG rumours anyway, but you should also check the mafia scum wiki, particularly on scum tells.


Examples: chainsaw defence (jumping on me to try and save Jack), argument from repetition (repeating that I haven't addressed your accusations when I keep doing so, then repeating the accusations), the no lynch thing, trying to obfuscate scum motives, and you know, I'm going to go through the whole thread and quote sections.

I am getting really tired of this pissing contest between you two.

Daganev, Shiri never said you voted no-lynch, he simply mentioned the "no-lynch thing"

However, Daganev was right about it. If we had started on Day 1, instead of Night 1, I too, would have considered voting no-lynch, because there would be a 16:1 chance of lynching a vanilla, unless we had somebody acting suspicious from the get-go.

However, we did start Night 1, and the only person who suggested we vote no-lynch wasn't actually Daganev. He explained to that person why it wouldn't be a good idea to vote no-lynch because of when the game started.


Shiri, he's jumping on you for deleting your PM because you have exhibited more scummish behaviour than Dugan has so far.

Umm what?!? Shiri, I went after Silfferas because she voted number 3.
I went after you because of your consistant use of bad and wrong logic.

How is any of that a chainsaw defense?

What I said was, that it was stupid to go after Jack when he was so obviously just begging to get targeted. And it was. I'm not going come right out and tell people what I think they should claim to defend themselves. That would just be stupid.

So now you have for a 4th time, changed what "scum tell" you think I have done, when infact I did not do it. Seriously, just stop it's getting foolish.

I'm gonna go on a hunch, and say that neither of you are scum. Notice that once you two start arguing, everyone suddenly stops talking. That's gonna be in favour of the scum, which I do not think is the two of you.

I see, ok. I assumed the "no lynch thing" meant it was a scum tell. Since it would only be a scum tell if I actually suggested or did vote no lynch, but I didn't, I was confused what he was saying.

So shiri are you suggesting that talking about a hypothetical situation where no-lynch would be a good idea is a scum tell or not?

Normally I would agree with you, however after his solid snake shenanigans I'm not inclined to unvote him. Also, you are assuming that shiri isn't the scum when you say it must favor the scum that everyone else is quite.

I think everyone else is quite because 1) They are already voting for Shiri, and nothing has changed their minds and they have nothing to add 2) they have been successfully confused enough to not want to put the last vote on him.

Yes, but notice how your arguments have become absolute. It's becoming like the Silferras/Jack situation where we assumed that if one was telling the truth, then the other must be lying. We've become so certain that either one of you is scum, that we're not looking at the other players.

Edit to above: your arguements refer to both Daganev and Shiri.

Ok, then what are you suggesting?

I'm suggesting that you let the others give their view on Shiri and you. That way, when and if we lynch one of you,we'd be able to better anaylse the behaviour of the rest. At the moment, most people voting for Shiri either did so because 'Daganev says so', or 'I just want this day to be over and Shiri has more votes.'. I'm gonna go through the posts for this Day again, and hope I do not get a blinding headache again.

Warning: extremely long post because Daganev wanted examples. If you don't need examples, just read my explanations above. Also, ran out of quote tags, ugh.



Misrepresents no lynch. As he has pointed out this is mainly a hypothetical but since it's still wrong and as you'll see below he misrepresents the "information" deal, I thought it was a good enough scum tell to start off with as we got into the game, before Jack opened up with his can of worms.


Ok, I got a detail wrong, my apologies. Daganev doesn't jump to Jack's defence with anything before the jester thing. But jump to his defence he does, randomly accuses me despite being unable to deal with the logic yet, IDs Silferras.



Talks about "having info." But the only one who's certain to gain info is the joker, i.e him. Also, "bad logic" nonsense again. Worried about my strategy on Jack.


Blatantly misrepresents joker's motives.


Wait a minute...the Joker would know that on a day start too. Misrepresentation.



More trying to keep Jack alive. It seems like he already went for Silferras, but that one is probably explainable if he's town.


Talking about Silferras being scum. Obviously she would expect us to think she was a vanilla townie. If I were a cop, SK or in fact vanilla I'd expect you to think I was a vanilla townie. Or rather, that would be my claim. Under what circumstance is this not true? If Daganev already knows Silf's not a vanilla townie because he converted her. Mistake. (I didn't pick this up the first time! Filtering this stuff is useful if time consuming.)

Reaching for excuses. This is something of a half-truth. Scum ALSO tend to just agree with people without saying much of anything. "I agree with Daganev, vote blah" is as much a scum tell as going through the motions and explaining why when you're clearly reiterating what other people said rather than having gotten there on your own.



Firstly, considering someone easily checked when I would be awake today, you'd think he would know that I wasn't asleep when Casilu posted day end. I don't know if Daganev was asleep at the day end, but we now know that might be irrelevant because Shamarah might have a night power so I won't press this point. Secondly, still can't explain the logic, calls it bad for no reason, then randomly asserts I didn't find it odd the joker would convert two people and he did.


Woah, wait a minute! Now he's hedging his bets on the "joker does not want to lynch abnormals" deal! Presumably because he did it. Tries not to completely betray his own previous position with waffling about maths.

QuoteAfter that pitiful attempt at grasping at solanis, I'm going to keep my vote firmly on Shiri.

someone poke me if new information actually becomes available.

Also, Dugan has my FOS
Sorry, let me rephrase.

Putting people into "damned if I do, damned if I don't" situations, and then further pressuring them even after they complain about being in that situation is just scummy. (most people with something to hide won't acknowledge the pickle in fear that it makes them look guilty)

((I'm amazed how much better I've gotten at this since watching "Lie to me" on fox. ))End Quote

Leaps to the defence of Solanis, who has been following him like a lost puppy and acting scummy on top of it. This is kind of strange since you wouldn't expect Solanis to reciprocate the relationship even if Daganev is the joker, but maybe he actually figured it out, and that triggered his stopping the weird behaviour. Even then, though, he doesn't actually win with Daganev...unless that's his converted role (unlikely but plausible.)

QuoteOh! yeah that is a good point and something I missed.

It does seem strange that Shiri would claim not having his original question, unless he knows it's an incriminating question.
End Quote

Doesn't like my RL explanation for why I can't quote my original question, even though I already paraphrased it in the thread (and why the hell would I lie about something like this? That would be way too obvious if I was the joker. I would just have faked a quote since we already knew the rule by that point.) Makes up his own reasoning so he doesn't lose steam.

QuoteLet's put it this way. If Shiri turns out innocent, odds are people will jump on you for doing the ninja lynch. But if you are certain that Shiri is guilty, (like I am), then people will support you and be happy for not making us wait.End Quote

Waffles about wanting to ninja lynch me before I can reiterate my defence, having posted like ten minutes earlier that I should have a chance to roleclaim.

Then the last two pages. Sorry about the length of that.

If you REALLY don't want to lynch Daganev, we can try and lynch Solanis and see if he was A) joker or abnormal and Daganev's protecting him. It's not like it's certain since there are a couple of things that don't add up there, though, so I still recommend killing Daganev today.

You know, at this point, I want to lynch one of you two simply so you will shut up and stop arguing with each other.

But that's not a good reason to lynch somebody.

Unvote

I am going to go back and look at the posts for the people I had my own hunches on before you two started going at each other's throats.

I don't know why you think I've been following daganev like "a lost puppy." I might have said something like "OMG DAGANEV IS SO PRO WE'LL JUST FOLLOW HIM HE'LL LEAD US TO VICTORY", but did I straightaway vote where daganev voted? No.

I really have no idea who to vote for. Though am more inclined to vote Shiri than daganev right now.

Ok, I've gone back through the thread, and I've seen enough.

Vote: Tekora

I have my notes for why I am voting for him, but they probably only make sense to me.

My suspicion right now?

Tekora is the joker and he -may have- converted Shiri last night.

I want to hear your actual reasons. Tekora hasn't struck me as particularly scummy so far. He's aggro, but he did that last game as Pichu too. (Although wait, what was his alignment there?)

his alignment in the SSB game was convertable, but he didnt know it

here are my notes. I'm warning you, they really only make sense to me

and I'm going to start where Tekora enters the picture, since everything before that doesn't pertain to what I noticed

this is where I left off, because he just really jumped out at me as scummy at that point.

I'm still going through to finish and get my notes to where we are now