drafterman

Besides, do you think GP's claim that not voting toaster is a literal autolose for town isn't meant to be humorous?

It is called humor. I mean, it's not like anything else is going on in this DP. Things are at a stand still until the inactives come in and actually participate. Forgive me for humoring myself.

That's a mistake.

No I'm not. I'm still a vanilla. That's probably why my attempted vig failed.

Also, I tried to vig Bullish last night and it failed.

Oh look, we made posts at the same time. Can't be coincidence. I guess we're both scum.

Unless Grey explains why not lynching toaster/lynching Bullish means auto loss for town he should be written off as trolling.

This is a absurd statement to make that should call into question your affiliation, regardless of your claim.

Let's vote Bullish

The wagon on toaster has failed. It stalled, and is now losing votes. I guess you'll have to vote on someone you actually think is scum.

Unless you're suggesting that scum deliberately coordinate posting at the exact same time, it's a coincidence either way.

I was just musing, I'm just wondering why I was pinged by the game mod.

You should switch your vote and put it on a wagon that actually has traction.

???

He was the Austrian royal who was assassinated by a Serbian nationalist which tiped one of the first dominoes that set off WWI. This is grade school stuff.

What if the three main characters are the mafia? 🤔

Let's get Bullish instead. He's been suspiciously lurker this DP. I think he realizes his antics got him too much heat last phase and is trying to coast by.

No.

I’m arguing against lynching you mate

they're going to try and convince you to hammer toaster because he’s inactive. Guess what, you guys are inactive to. If you hammer toaster for inactivity, you’re basically putting yourselves on the chopping block.

Okay, singularity came clean so it's time to decide actual scum. My biggest scum read is bullish.

Except you don't have the votes. So you need to explain to someone else why getting "maybe scum" is a better choice than "actual scum."

I mean tunneling on someone you think is maf is one thing, but tunneling on an inactive to the exclusion of even talking to or about other player is ridiculous.

Actually you seem to be in a pretty big damn rush to lynch toaster.

I do not agree that there is a reason to lynch toaster.

I am saying, again, that it does not make sense for you, from a Town perspective, for you to lynch someone you think might be scum over something you think is scum.

Can you explain why it's better for town for you to lynch someone that only might be scum over lynching someone that you think is actually scum?

It still does not make sense that you would choose someone who only might be scum over someone you think is definitely scum.

You still need another vote to lynch toaster. To get that you actually need a valid argument for lynching him.

Ironically in order to policy lynch toaster as an inactive you're going to have to convince the other inactives that policy lynching inactives is a good thing.

Sorry, I didn't see where you admitted to being an experienced mafia player. If you did, I apologize.

So, no. It's a completely new stance you've taken. Are you the only one allowed to adopt new stances? Because you seem to think it's a scum tell for me

I'm not. I'm basing my stance off of Lunatics own scum reads which has toaster possibly being town.

Can you show where your stance has ever been to Lynch inactives over scum?

My stance has never been to Lynch inactives over scum.

Also singularity should be pressured to come clean even if he is town. He's constructed this false personality as a mafia noob and is deliberately acting in a suboptimal manner that he thinks a noob would act. If he is forced to come clean Then he's free to drop this personality and actually play like a good mafia player. Because I do think he is a good mafia player. But he's hamstringing himself with this fake personality.

Your position just doesn't make sense from a town perspective.

I agree as a responsibility to be more active. But you're willing to risk punishing town over this pet peeve you have about inactives rather than lynch somebody you think is actually scum and help win the game.

But there can't be another watcher. He claimed it, right?

Also, if you believe that his claim means there can't be another watcher or protective role in the game, then the fact he wasn't the mafia night kill should be suspicious to you.

Why would anyone cc a joat?

Also, people don't always cc. Lunatic didn't cc speed in virts game

You could say that about anyone anytime. Toaster could be a protective role.

On a personal level, I dont like the idea of someone exploiting the privilege of switching to an alt account to get an advantage.

In game, he has a role that gives results. We're supposed to believe his results while maintaining a lie about his experience?

And Id love to do this the "proper" way, but nobody seems to give a shit.

We also don't know that he's a protective role. Virt never claimed and pie hasn't claimed. I doubt a full doctor would CC a joat claim anyway.

Lunatic is just blindly trusting him on all things

We should pressure him. That's what I've been trying to get people to do!

This is the problem when you only read Lunatics interpretations of my posts instead of mine 

So you're going to punish town because you don't like what the mod is doing?

Sounds like a reasonable thing a totally town player would do.

If you don't come clean about your experience this day phase I'm outing you next phase.

Lol. And if he's town then you've given mafia a free lynch

And this is starting to irritate me. If no one else is willing to pressure him, and he isn't willing to come clean, then I'm seriously going to think about coming clean for him.