EddieColeslaw Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Sudden thought: if Smeagol is mafia, surely there would be a few mafiosos trying to make distractions and saving him from being lynched?
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 What freudian slip? Town as a whole. Then why the second person? You don’t follow my logic? You don’t want to know who was potentially roleblocked from killing? Of course I do, but you're acting as if the roleblockers hold the key to the entire game. For being a rolecop who conveniently shares his info today. That’s some subtle mafia manipulation right there. Of course, it’s not so subtle when you’re on the receiving end. For someone complaining about being painted as a mafioso, you're being pretty hypocritical when adamantly claiming Peeps is a mafia rolecop. Sudden thought: if Smeagol is mafia, surely there would be a few mafiosos trying to make distractions and saving him from being lynched? Possibly, though with the current state of the discussion they might not dare interfere.
EddieColeslaw Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 I'm not a rolecop. I simply have information that states you are a brutal roleblocker. Information that I 100% trust. You brutally roleblock with a blast of fire. Whoa. Are you sure you're not a rolecop? Perhaps an unconventional one?
heroicjanitor Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Sudden thought: if Smeagol is mafia, surely there would be a few mafiosos trying to make distractions and saving him from being lynched? I always hear those arguments but there are two sides to every one of those coins If X is mafia shouldn't Y happen? No because doing Y would make them look mafia. Or it could be yes because they are mafia. They're usually used by someone who wants to stay alive but can't find a good reason as to why they should stay alive. In fact you're the one defending someone you have no reason to defend. All you know is that he is an aggressive roleblocker and someone has come forward with a mafia result on him. Unless you have other reasons to defend him, you look pretty suspicious.
EddieColeslaw Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 (I know it's kind of dodgy to dig up an old post, but it didn't register until all of the rolecop talk above.) In fact you're the one defending someone you have no reason to defend. All you know is that he is an aggressive roleblocker and someone has come forward with a mafia result on him. Unless you have other reasons to defend him, you look pretty suspicious. Nope, that's not all I know about him. I'm just conscious of flavour/red herrings/people playing dumb/aggressive to get info out of people. Since the votes are getting close, how about this to help with decision-making: Smeagol is also immune to tracking and redirecting. If he's lynched, I hope to be trusted because I tell the truth (hopefully you'll all find out then and not have to rely on this post).
Frag Grimes Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 I've got no information to give. The internet at the hospital has been terrible, so I couldn't even get my PM in. Sorry!
DuD Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 And the fact that on the flip side.. IF smeagol is town... Tales is a dumb cop?.. You are Mafia???
EddieColeslaw Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 And the fact that on the flip side.. IF smeagol is town... Tales is a dumb cop?.. You are Mafia??? Are you talking about me? If Smeagol is town, either: a) He is a dumb cop, and I am mafia because he found me to be town. or b) He is lying, and making things up and my alignment is unknown. (Well, I'm town, but I can hardly expect people to just believe that :p) Though it's in the write-up that Tales targeted Smeagol (Chandelure), so idk.
Sméagol Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 [..]Of course I do, but you're acting as if the roleblockers hold the key to the entire game. They do not, and I already said I think it’s more likely the intended victim was protected, I personally don’t suspect Jonnas at all. My actual point was that a real townie roleblocker should've have capitialised on the various situations long before. There’s no hurt in questioning the roleblocker’s targets, yet I’m the only one who has actually revealed them. Not revealing them is not townie play. For someone complaining about being painted as a mafioso, you're being pretty hypocritical when adamantly claiming Peeps is a mafia rolecop.No. I understand perfectly why people want to follow an investigation, but the way Peeps adds to the suspicion, is simply suspicious. Conveniently I’m a brutal roleblocker now, something he decides to share this day. It could be that my roleblocks would be described a brutal in the write-up, but they haven’t so far. And Heroic brought it up (agressive, same thing) before Peeps decided to share it. How is that possible? The mafia forum of course, they decided this was a good tactic to get rid of a townie, only they got their order of posting reversed. Note that I’m actually not blaming Tales..[..] And of course he has this information but denies being a rolecop.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 They do not, and I already said I think it’s more likely the intended victim was protected, I personally don’t suspect Jonnas at all. My actual point was that a real townie roleblocker should've have capitialised on the various situations long before. There’s no hurt in questioning the roleblocker’s targets, yet I’m the only one who has actually revealed them. Not revealing them is not townie play. I understand what you're getting at, but townies are always reluctant to come forward with info in the beginning due to the obvious fact that it draws attention to them. Plus, people don't always play optimally. This doesn't really prove anything. No. I understand perfectly why people want to follow an investigation, but the way Peeps adds to the suspicion, is simply suspicious. Conveniently I’m a brutal roleblocker now, something he decides to share this day. It could be that my roleblocks would be described a brutal in the write-up, but they haven’t so far. And Heroic brought it up (agressive, same thing) before Peeps decided to share it. How is that possible? The mafia forum of course, they decided this was a good tactic to get rid of a townie, only they got their order of posting reversed. Note that I’m actually not blaming Tales..[..] And of course he has this information but denies being a rolecop. It's not at all suspicious if you ask me. He didn't want to reveal information before it was useful, and it didn't become useful until today. And there are plenty of ways you can get information without being a rolecop. Really, you seem to be grasping at straws here, trying to turn suspicion onto those accusing you.
Sméagol Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Well straws is all I have, since I have the bad luck of not having the proof that Tales is a dumb cop :|. The device, the Pokédex, simply has bad connotations with me, from what I remember from previous Pokémafias. Eddie’s info is actually clean.. Peeps just not clear about things. I mean, there could be multiple possibilities why there is no kill, but tell me how many possibilities there are how he can “know this information” without being a rolecop? I’ll tell you the possibilites: - he is a rolecop. - he is some kind of super investigator, and knows more than just my abilities. - the actual role cop shares this info on the mafia forum. - And the most obvious thing, he simply takes my claim and uses it against me.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 - Peeps receives info in other ways. - There's someone who sends his info to others. - Some third factor resulted in Peeps getting the info. - He's a rolecop who doesn't want to reveal it for safety reasons.
Sméagol Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Except the Peeps is carying his little Pokédex. Why beat around the bush? Why not clear things up and be done with it? Because he’s mafia. Eddie (that is bad mafia play by the way, though I feel bad for incriminating my only “supporter”) , heroic and Peeps. They all share their info. I actually think you’re one of them too now.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Except the Peeps is carying his little Pokédex. Why beat around the bush? Why not clear things up and be done with it? Because he’s mafia. Eddie (that is bad mafia play by the way, though I feel bad for incriminating my only “supporter”) , heroic and Peeps. They all share their info. I actually think you’re one of them too now. Oh, come on, this is getting ridiculous. You're accusing everyone who's participating in this discussion. And the Pokédex is incriminating him now? Pray tell, how?
Sméagol Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 I don’t know for sure of course, but I already said that the Pokédex has bad connotations. You remember with who the Pokédex previously has been associated with? And what else is he going to do with his Pokédex?
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Because there's only one single Pokédex in the entire Pokémon universe ... ¬_¬ Granted, it does imply an investigative power, but so what? I fail to see how that implies he's mafia.
EddieColeslaw Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Wasn't Nintendohnut/Tentacruel town in one of the Pokemafias in which he used his device/Pokedex? It wasn't exclusively mafia every time it appeared, iirc? (Can anyone else remember?) Smeagol...what have you got to say about being immune to tracking and redirecting? Seems a bit powerful for an innocent townie? And is Peeps still around? He hasn't responded to my previous post about his rolecopness.
Sméagol Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Not being able to be tracked would have come in handy if I went for a more traditional playstyle (i.e. release info on a need-to-know basis). I only got that power from my evolution, I didn’t have it on night 1. Recall that EEVIL was able to track me just fine. I guess ReZ planned for a stealthy character, but didn’t foresee me blurting out all my info, which completely negates me being untracable. Just humour me. Eddie, when did you target me? It could only have been last night. Same question for Peeps, I assume it was night 1.
Tales Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 I don’t know for sure of course, but I already said that the Pokédex has bad connotations. You remember with who the Pokédex previously has been associated with? And what else is he going to do with his Pokédex? I have a Pokedex....
Sméagol Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Maybe I’m wrong about the Pokédex, you still read the other things I’ve said.
Cube Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Not being able to be tracked would have come in handy if I went for a more traditional playstyle (i.e. release info on a need-to-know basis). Well, it would have been handy if you were mafia and weren't found out early on, essentially forced to reveal your targets.
The Peeps Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 My PM isn't definitive. It says I use devices - note the plural. Sméagol I targeted you this last night, night 3. I could not possibly have revealed your brutal roleblock before then. I said during day 2 that I was roleblocked night 1 and I said during day 3 that I targeted Yvonne night 2. Eddie, I am not a rolecop. I was curious about heroicjanitor because he brought up your aggressive roleblock on his own but maybe he's working from his own information. My PM specifically uses the word brutal to describe your roleblocking. Again I'll state that the other roleblocker also appears to roleblock in an aggressive manner (I was smashed by a large pokémon) but I haven't seen that player's power so I don't know how the PM describes it. It's also possible it had to smash me because I'm heavily armoured. The more people you class as suspicious, the less weight your argument holds tbh. Not a townie thing to do. It's going to look very bad for me if you're town so I hope you're not. Oh I've also had a pokédex before as Venusaur when I was town so a pokédex isn't related to alignment. Not that I officially have a pokédex - my PM does not say I do.
Sméagol Posted April 24, 2012 Posted April 24, 2012 Well, the mafia can’t possibly have 2 (semi-) rolecops, I’m sure about Eddie, so if it’s between you and her, it’s her, but from my perspective, you’ev been acting suspicious all along. To me heroic’s post is nothing but a mafia slip, revealing the info shared on the mafia forum. Tales is seen with me, whereas you’re not.
The Peeps Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 I seriously don't see how I'm suspicious. As soon as Tales revealed his info I said this: Vote: Sméagol I have reason to mistrust Sméagol on top of what Tales says. Wasn't enough on it's own but I trust Tales' result. You asked me what my reasons were and I said this, to see if you'd come out with it on your own: It relates to your power. Eventually I came out with knowing about your brutal roleblocking. I clearly had the information all along. I like how you've decided on a whim that Eddie is a rolecop and I'm mafia. What information do you have to trust her and not me? Could it have anything to do with her defending you all day while I've been arguing your points? You've not helped your case by casting suspicion at everyone who's argued against you today. Sure a townie is going to look for any excuse not to be lynched but you've been overly aggressive in pointing the finger. And I am in no way a rolecop, semi or otherwise.
Recommended Posts