Messages

151

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: February 03, 2010, 01:20:58 AM »

Apologies for my absence, I have had other... PLANS!
And, on this note, my talk of plans is no more than mere flavour, much like the flavour of... POTATO CHIPS! The potato has nothing to do with me, and I can clarify what my role does entail.

As bad as it is to make anti-flavor arguments vs Light?  I tried to target him with a night action last night and my action failed.  I do not know why.  I assumed it was a roleblock, but then Beatrice claimed to be roleblocked as well, and no one claimed being blocked night 0, and the description I got was not clear in the slightest.

I will clarify now that roleblocking is a side-effect of my role, if you will. I would rather not reveal my PLANS now by saying what the main effect of the role is, but I targeted you last night, so... my apologies, Joker-san.
Ikari-san. Where have I "dismissed an entire thought process" against me, as you say? Raise the concerns, and I will tell you why your argument is misplaced.
Burns-san, please reassess your view on Gig/Gaston, considering we have had no evidence that this summon has gone... JUST AS PLANNED!

My vote remains on the Warboss. The only ones to have raised suspicions during my absence have been those without much of a presence, and Gendo's WIFOM logic for dismissing him does not sit well with me at all.
Yes, Ikari-san is suspicious as well. Not only does he clear the Warboss based on WIFOM, he then uses the fact that he's dismissed the case to dismiss those on the Saiyan and Koopa-san without providing any actual argument.
---
They're called ninjas, Ryuk. They intercept our discussions with their own, it seems...

Burns-san, I'm curious as to your reasoning for voting. Gig and Dahlia? Day 1 reveals many people affiliated with the case on Dahlia, so what exactly is it you are referring to? And if you believe Gaston has already been saved, would it not be wise to keep hold of the person capable of doing it?
Another meaningless post from Ikari-san. WIFOM arguments are mostly meaningless, and the fact that you are aware of this does not help your position. I am, however, agreed on leaving Gig/Gaston alive overnight, at least. If we are to look at role information, we should do so with the most information available possible, and there are more viable lynching targets today.

152

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: February 02, 2010, 11:26:53 AM »

Gaston-san has told us that he began with the potato, and that he passed it on. He has not mentioned why he chose to throw it to the Warboss, nor has he specified whether or not this is, in fact, his power. Confirmation of the latter, at the very least, would be appreciated.
You thought the same as Vegeta-san, Ryuk? Ah, my initial thought upon seeing the potato was that it was yet another joke from our moderator...

153

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: February 02, 2010, 10:33:58 AM »

* Light Yagami laughs maniacally.

A pleasant joke from our moderator here. I presume this means Dahlia will be unable to enlighten us on the details of her power, though.

The Warboss at least posted some content, even if the content itself is questionable. As Wily-san mentionds, Burns-san never mentions you surviving being a reason for looking scummy.
No, you're right, Ryuk. That last line does seem intended to make us look worse, despite it being his first post with good content.

Gaston... If you are already doomed to die, would it not aid us to supply information on your night actions? These may help things go... JUST AS PLANNED!

154

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: January 30, 2010, 06:18:20 PM »

"So called statements," Burns-san? My posts have looked at Wily's D1 actions, and that query has been answered, and at Edna, who continues to remain suspicious (albeit now for mostly different reasons), but has amassed quite a number of votes. Until we get a vote count, I'm happy voting for the Warboss. As things stand, both rank highly in my suspicions, and I would be happy to see either eliminated.

And you're voting for the Warboss yourself based on his lack of decisive vote. I presume the fact that he essentially started one of the major trains means nothing to you then? Ryuk is telling me that I should assume that vote was there solely due to absence - a lot of votes did change in the last hour of D1.

Looking back again, this potato, deliverer of POTATO CHIPS, has caught my eye. Gaston-san, you mentioned those you found suspicious at the time you posted. Can you explain, then, why the Warboss does not make an appearance in your post, yet was worthy enough to pass the potato to?

155

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: January 30, 2010, 04:51:15 PM »

Hm.. As much as I may look, there appear to be no major problems with Wily-san's actions. His other actions have also been satisfactory thus far, meaning he is no longer likely to be a hindrance to my plans.

My plans require some assistance, Ryuk. I need to eliminate those who will not stand with us.

Edna's initial suspicion is partially cleared, although she herself raises a point as to why her plans still fall through - if she had not moved her vote, then her desired target would have been eliminated instead. Her latest post contains an odd, albeit minor contradiction, where she states that Burns-san is the worst so far, before suddenly changing to Wily-san by the end of the post. Whether or not this is a scumtell remains to be seen, but the FoS is there.

As for the Warboss, he continues neglecting to post anything of worth. At least Ryuuzaki made this difficult, but you? I say you have posted a lot while saying nothing relevant. Your response is to point out that you have posted a lot. I say you have made one solid argument in two days, and your response is that one argument should be enough? We need contribution. We need results. We do not need excuses and bad planning.

Vote: Warboss Gorgutz

Just under 2 more hours until I'm gone for about a day. Anyone accusing me of lurking after that will have to deal with Ryuk.

156

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: January 30, 2010, 03:10:32 PM »

Warboss, I believe you misunderstand my plans. Your 'input,' at that time, consisted of 3 posts which contained little more than a weak defence and pointing out that Beatrice didn't like her Day One case. Even your newest note is long and contains only one argument of any substance.

157

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: January 30, 2010, 12:21:17 PM »

I apologise for the lack of posting, Ikari-san. I'm afraid I have had other plans to attend to.

As much as it may be odd for me to be saying this, I am agreed on the case on Edna; my main concern is her "I'll post more tomorrow!" post with no presence into this day - I'm wary of those posts regardless, although the timing of it makes it less criminal.
I'm still uncomfortable with the Warboss. His D1 posts were pathetic, with little behind them, and, once the pressure on him had mostly trailed off, so did he.

The D1 end was NOT AS PLANNED, and now we have to look at what exactly went wrong. One thing that stands out to me is Wily-san's posting record. He posts asking Joker to move back to Helmet-san, then 30 seconds later posts his vote-change. Why ask somebody else to change vote if you've no intention of waiting? I can understand that the deadline was nearing, but then why not simply change your vote back with brief reasoning then? Seems careless and panicked to me, and it inevitably led to Helmet-san's lynch.

I will withhold my vote for now, at least until there has been a count. Edna and the Warboss stand at the top of my suspicions as things stand, but I will wait for their Day 2 content before making a decision.
Also, on the real-life warnings, I will be absent in about 8 hours for approximately 22 hours. After that, I shall return here to post before suffering from a heart attack. I will be around for the majority of the next 8 hours, and will still return long before the deadline regardless.

158

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: January 29, 2010, 08:01:47 PM »

Junior, I must ask why you berate Guts Man for lack of input and yet claim the Dahlia case is bad when she's just as guilty of that crime.

Wily-san. Ms. Hawthorne has been berated herself specifically for her input, has she not? Her contribution is there, regardless of how obvious the argument was. Her defences have been, as far as I can see, satisfactory and she has responded well throughout. The Warboss, on the other hand, seems to play on this... flavour, shall we say? His actual posts have contained few words, little logic and seem to be there solely to give the appearance of contribution. I'm less content with 'active lurking' than I am with people simply not being around.

Assuming this pie doesn't count towards the final vote count, we have a 4-way tie as things stand. If we fall into a situation where the time limit has been reached, I shall be willing to change my vote, with current choices being Warboss > Saiyan > Helmet-san.

Moderator-san, can we have some information on whether or not Helmet-san will be removed?

159

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: January 29, 2010, 04:37:12 PM »

No, they're expecting me to fall to their level here.

Of course I can't! These simple arguments - these 'Day One' discussions, if you will - are... simply terrible. I've better things to do with my time.

Thoughts? My thoughts are mostly unchanged. The case on Dahlia is as bad as it was to begin with, and I am still displeased with the Warboss' lack of input. The Saiyan is just as bad as Helmet-san, with low content outside of one horrendous argument.

Hm? I guess I'd be happy voting for any of them. When's our deadline?

I should be able to attend at that time. Alright, I'll change my vote later on then.

...More apples? Shit, Ryuk, we can't risk being captured...

160

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: January 28, 2010, 11:32:06 AM »

These people... So ignorant as to the truth!

Helmet-san. You say that there's a problem with claiming that Haruhi existed solely to be killed?

Miss Suzumiya's demise was not entirely unexpected.

Would you still claim the same with this in mind?

My main problem here lies with the Warboss. You say Dahlia posted "easy stuff," implying you find no fault in her logic. You also say that she's a "smart one," implying she may be helpful to our cause. And you then find this reason enough to vote her.
As I had already planned ahead perfectly, I see no reason to move my vote.

As for the votes on Ikari-san, I'm wondering why he's escalating in suspicions, while Beatrice, who presented the original argument, has been mostly ignored. Ikari-san's logic of Joker "handwav[ing] away the thought of speculating on the casualties" seems like a logical argument to me, and I see no reason to see him as more suspicious than Beatrice. Could those voters please elaborate on this?

161

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia - Day 1

« on: January 27, 2010, 09:49:41 PM »

A potato? It needs more refining (and some slicing and cooking in oil) to become the PERFECT PLAN!

* Light Yagami writes a note reading "Not now, Ryuk. We're being watched..."

##Vote: Gorgutz

I need loyal worshippers of Kira for my plans. Some 'warboss' is likely to be loyal solely to himself, and so he must fall so that I can become the GOD OF A NEW WORLD!

162

Forum Games / Re: Villainous Anonymafia Signup

« on: January 27, 2010, 10:56:24 AM »

L expects me to confirm, but if I don't, he will realise something is suspicious, so I shall give the expected response! Let's see what he thinks of that...

163

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - GAME OVER - SCUM WIN

« on: December 20, 2009, 04:46:51 PM »

Thanks a lot, pal! You kept me alive to see my next bowl of instant noodles! It was helpful to both Town and Scum to sort out Whim/Guild today instead of tomorrow, but that does mean I can live. Thanks again!

164

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 3 LYLO

« on: December 18, 2009, 11:29:13 PM »

What the hell, pal?! Keep in mind that this is Lylo. LYLO, pal! We lose if I get lynched now, you hear me?
Seeing those votes and no scum jump in the last however long makes me suspect the Axems even more - although I'm seriously wondering why Smithers is voting me, and considering that I may've been wrong about Oddjob. Gah.
Naturally, I'm gonna be voting for the one who, you know, is ACTUALLY MAFIA. I'm Town Watcher, I've said that. If you guys choose not to believe it, then... well, our loss. Simple as that.
##Vote: Gilgamesh
Most likely to get support. I'm fairly certain it's Gilgamesh/Axem, at least, based on the votes, and that 3rd place is anyone's guess. I'm thinking it likely to be Oddjob, with Smithers as the least likely due to the scuff with the Axems. Possible scum gambit? Maybe, but damn unlikely.

165

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 3 LYLO

« on: December 18, 2009, 01:31:58 AM »

Alright, pal. I'm a detective. I find, y'know, the leftover pieces of evidence at a crime scene, pal, and can tell who's been there. For those not in the industry, I guess you could call me a Town Watcher.
As it goes, I checked Smithers Night One, and he was targeted by Gilgamesh. Night Two, I got nothing from the Axems.

I'm... naturally reluctant to believe that copclaim, pal. I'm not really willing to accept that we've had two major Town/Town conflicts going on while the scum just sit on the side and watch, but... well, if the claim is true, I think it's fairly obvious who the remaining scum are.
I'm looking to see what evidence i.e. roleclaims the others put forwards. As it goes, I'm somewhat suspicious of an Axem scumteam, mostly looking at Oddjob > Smithers if that's the case. Somewhat more willing to trust the Axems though, thanks to the setup, and look at a Whim/Guild/Gilga scumteam.

166

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 16, 2009, 11:41:33 PM »

Alright, pal! Taken a quick flick through the evidence, and I'm liking the look of them weasels much more still. That said, I'd like to know if Whim's gonna be found guilty without trial anyways.

Is it possible to vote based on modkill or not? Either way, I'll:
##Unvote and then... are we allowed conditional voting, sir? If Whim's being modkilled, I'll ##Vote Weasel Squad, but otherwise, ##Vote: Whim. Seems pointless lynching someone who's about to die anyways.
--
Jammin' Ninjas. S-sorry then, pal... Take my vote on Whim above as my actual vote then.
--
More ninjas. Alright, I'm really not liking this situation, so... Sorry, sir!
##Unvote, Vote Weasels.

167

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 16, 2009, 11:30:07 PM »

Ggh, time rush is annoying. Not posting pictures now either (although not abandoning roleplay, pal!) Any chance we could have that extra hour on today's trial, sir? Seems like it'd help, since we were expecting it.

Happy to see either Weasels or Whim go, but some discussion first would be nice, even if minimal. Today's discussion has ignored them completely and I don't feel like either's done anything.

168

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 16, 2009, 08:49:22 PM »

Ah, sorry about that, pal. We missed that evidence on our latest sweep of the court record.
As for saying who you'd vote, I'd still see it as bad to list that many, since you could easily switch to a number of targets - just because it's better than not posting anything, it doesn't make it good, since posting less people would be even better.
Buuut all that's negated by the order of preference - as long as we're told if that changes.

Hm.. It's just an idea, pal, purely meta for now, but I'll say it anyways, since there's nothing else happening... There are two major conflicts going on right now, it seems - Smithers/Axems and Oddjob/moi. It seems likely to me that at least one of these four is Mafia, since the chances of two major town/town struggles is quite low. Obviously, I'm thinkin' Oddjob is scum - hence the vote - and it wouldn't surprise me for one of Smithers/Axems to be as well.
Means nothing until we get a flip on at least one of these four, even if I do decide to follow meta logic, pal, but just thought I'd put the, uhh, thought out there.
If anyone argues I'm using meta - even when I say I'm not judging on this now - and votes me based on this, I'm going to explode, pal. I think Oddjob's entire post record shows exactly why.

169

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 16, 2009, 07:08:32 PM »

It's game meta that is simple and boring. I can't understand why you're basing your case on things like this.

*Gumshoe slams his head against the computer table repeatedly*
Seriously, pal?! I repeat: READ THE TOPIC. This started with the Guildenstern "Oddjob/Weasels" theory, which I agreed was stupid. I then pointed out that what you said on the matter was pure WIFOM. (And if you doubt that, you need help, pal. To prove it, how do we know you're not scum and just knew you could use that argument to escape? We don't, it's WIFOM, end of.)
As for my case, it is based on nothing of this, although you using WIFOM is undoubtedly bad. My case has been presented several times and you've insisted on ruling it off as opinions, before electing to excuse the Axems' behaviour due to liking their playstyle. ARGH.
--
Hunh. Forgot to post this before goin' for some instant noodles. Whoops. In that time, Jammin' Axem Ninja swoops in with an attack on the Smithers Samurai! I'm... really not seeing the case on Smithers, pal, and constantly pushing that alongside questionable logic isn't doing your reputation any favours. For said logic, the main one that stands out:

Not only that, but they've already set up a huge escape route to vote for practically anyone else (#146),

Putting these together since they're essentially the same thing, and the second one is pretty hilarious. You say this like I would not have switched off you anyway if still no one had joined me while time was running down, and you say it like it's a bad thing. I would say this is badpainting but I'm biased so I'll let others make the call there.

The problem isn't with you changing votes, pal. It's the fact that you suggest almost anyone as a viable target, meaning you can switch to whichever train you need to. Thought that was pretty obvious, and the constant response of scumpainting against some decent arguments is making you seem more scummy to me, pal.
Moving up in suspicions, but there are still more than enough other cases ahead at the moment. Oddjob/Whim/Weasels still stay ahead in my eyes, and Oddjob's recent actions are questionable at best, and scummy at worst.

170

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 16, 2009, 01:05:10 PM »

Not impressed with Gumshoe's "arguments". A bunch of opinions does not a case make. Where's your evidence? (as they would say in the game).
I don't have much to add on that, other than pointing again to his dodgy arguments(opinions); there's nothing really to 'defend myself' from, as I can't defend from an opinion.

...What the hell, pal? The fact that you claimed I had posted no arguments? The fact that you posted... nothing of content at the time? The 5-minute switch from Tony to Weasels to Prinnies? Your arguments have been weak, narrow-minded (up until that last one) and I've seen nothing in your actions that looks even remotely Town - you've been neutral at best, and even that's rare.

Guildenstern's allegation of an Oddjob/Weasel scumteam is baffling, bizzare and bloated. I like alliteration. I don't like his accusation, but it seems he doesn't either, wtf. Accusing me of being scummy for voting Weasels for scumcredit then jumping off the train when it got dangerous is a contradiction. Scum would do one or the other, not both. But whatever, it seems you're not even serious (so why mention it at all?)

While I agree on the idea of the scumteam being a stupid theory (and, apparently, so does Guild - agree with you on the not needing to mention it too!), this argument stinks like the Butz, pal. Why would scum do one or the other? Why are you even looking at that... WIFOM, pal? Yeah, WIFOM.
Also don't agree on your Axem assessment - railroading is scummy, even if only slightly. The fact that you're reading it as neutral seems to reflect solely on post-style, but you seem to be avoiding actually admittin' that, pal.

Guild's last post reads pretty well to me, especially at a time when there was nothing else really goin' on. Still, plan to read over his posts again to see if I can get a read - he's been mostly neutral to me since about halfway through Day 1, and has garnered a fair bit of attention, so definitely worth a re-read. (I'll be doing that in about 5-8 hours. Not sure when I'll be finished on this job, I'm afraid, pal.)

171

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 15, 2009, 10:36:28 PM »

Looking over the cases people have been putting forward, Smithers presents a decent bit of evidence against Guildenstern - it's something I'd casually skipped over when reading the posts myself, but it looks pretty damning when pointed out like that. All that does in my eyes, though, is pushes him ahead of Smithers and the Axems in my suspicions, and those are pretty much at the bottom of my list, you know?

I'm still not changing my vote until Oddjob defends himself, though. (Seriously, what is it with people disappearing when they're accused in this game? Not saying it's never for a good reason, just... dammit, pal!) I just seriously can't see where the logic lies in his voting/reasoning, and I'm still surprised that nobody seems to think his 5-minute change from Weasels to Prinnies on the grounds of "They didn't say they were saving themselves!" is not suspicious at all.
Would like to know how long we have to a modkill, though. That's gotta be close, r-right, sir?
Post is mostly "Hey, I'm here, but nothing new to add right now."

172

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 15, 2009, 07:41:55 PM »

Mandatory image, since I forgot it in the last post. Must have... hit my head or something, I guess!

173

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 15, 2009, 07:39:28 PM »

Can you explain what you mean by "I've never liked seein' votes based on what people haven't done"? Are you referring to Oddjob's harping on the Prinnies for supposedly being deceptive?

Somehow missed this one earlier. Sorry, pal! Two things in this case have met this condition, pal! Firstly, I called out the Axems on it here with their "You should have spoken about Gilgamesh!" That's been mostly written off as an early Day 1 thing, though, combined with good cases from them otherwise (despite what's said below). As you've said, the other was Oddjob's "You should have said you were saving yourself!" ...Why? If it's that obvious, does it really need saying? You're better off judgin' by who's been saying what - if you're gonna create cases based around what people have not mentioned, make sure it's people they haven't mentioned, pal!

Also, looked through Smithers' posts. I'm seein' nothing that really stands out as suspicious, pal, and I definitely think there are much better cases myself. Nothing particularly pro-Town, but nothing too offensive. Things still stand at Oddjob > Whim > Weasels for me, so my vote's staying where it is.

174

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 15, 2009, 10:36:27 AM »

On this contradiction that everyone keeps mentioning, all I can say is that I phrased it badly - 'guilty' was the wrong word. I would've happily kept my vote on the Prinnies at the time - nobody seemed particularly suspicious, pal, but the Prinnies had played badly. As it got later in the day and the Weasels still hadn't returned, I decided, as I'd said, that no contribution was worse than a seemingly bad Town contribution.

As it is now, I'm liking the Weasels even less - their little scuffle with Guilstendern reflects badly on them to me. I'd put them in at 3rd for me.
2nd, Whim. As I and others have said, low contribution, a lot of lurking, but generally good points when they're there. Difficult to read, but that little content is difficult to see as anything but intentional lurking.
Naturally, Oddjob is still the most suspicious to me, pal. Hasn't returned since my last post, so nothing's changed.

As for Axem's case on Smithers, I'll look through the documents on that sometime soon, pal. I'm a little pressed for time at the moment.

175

Forum Games / Re: Henchmen Anonymafia - Day 2

« on: December 14, 2009, 10:17:16 AM »

Right. Now for my actual thoughts. I can't really say I'm surprised to see the Prinnies flip Town, pal - like I said, they played more like bad civilians than criminals.
My main sights for now are set on Whim and Oddjob. Whim was low-content for what little time she stuck around, and hasn't returned since. The main problem here is the inactivity, though, and not poor content in the posts.
Oddjob, on the other hand... reasons already stated, and poor logic on the Prinny vote. I've never liked seein' votes based on what people haven't done, pal - different playstyles an' all that. You should be voting based on what you can see, not what you can't, and everything I'm seeing from you is bad - you were stalling for time, flailing with your vote, made the decisive vote on the lynch and have used terrible arguments. Think it's no surprise for me to:
##Vote: Oddjob, pal.
---
Jammin' Ninja: I was switching from Guildenstern, so I'd've had to switch regardless. If I could have left my vote on someone suspicious at the time, I would've not bothered switching, but since I had to, I decided I should at least go for the most suspicious suspect in my suspicions.