CAPITALISM MAFIA

[Aqua]

The first time I'd argue against being 'misquoting'. You voted me right after TWG, I quoted you both. I didn't 'misquote' you, the quote was correct and so was the timing of when you did it.

The second time, as I already pointed out, I didn't 'ignore' the explanation for it. I used two ** and came back to it later on in the same post. So again, I didn't misquote you.

I'll give you the second time as I didn't realise you were using asterisks to structure ur points.

First time you had no mention of me responding to oog or any other context, all you had was mine and TWG's posts lined up. Whether you believe me or not but at the time I hadn't actually read TWG's post but regardless of it lying up with mine you removed all context, which I would consider misquoting.

Either way I didn't lie so I don't know why you're liking Iggish's posts as if he's on to something.

 

[Iggish]

Whether you think my posts are scummy is a different matter but ur reason for suspecting me seems beyond bs.

Erm, no, this is not my only reason for suspecting you. Inf specifically asked me when you were lying and so I'm trying to answer. I have other reasons of course. By "pretty self explanatory" or whatever I put there, I was referring to why I think it's obvious why I think you're scummy as there have been reams of conversation devoted to it, not only to my accusation of you lying.

 

[Infected_alien8_]

I'll give you the second time as I didn't realise you were using asterisks to structure ur points.

First time you had no mention of me responding to oog or any other context, all you had was mine and TWG's posts lined up. Whether you believe me or not but at the time I hadn't actually read TWG's post but regardless of it lying up with mine you removed all context, which I would consider misquoting.

Either way I didn't lie so I don't know why you're liking Iggish's posts as if he's on to something.

Yes, because you voted right after TWG. That is a fact. And even if I quoted Oog as well, my point about you contradicting yourself on your stance on me still remains. You said you doubted I'd lie about being silenced, then when someone else, whether it was TWG or Oog I don't care, said otherwise, you jumped onto the bandwagon and agreed. Sure, I said you said that it was 'exactly something inf would do' in response to TWG saying I was making it up, and you however say that you said that in response to Oog saying that I purposefully rated a post with 'oh no' that wasn't the post you wanted me to rate to indicate I was silenced, as an excuse to be able to say later that I didn't rate that post and therefore didn't lie, or that I accidentally rated the wrong post, depending on the story I wanted to create in the future, 1) I don't have to beleive you on that, and 2) that doesn't change the fact that you had a sudden change of opinion on the situation simply from some theory of ratings that Oog made. I mean personally I thought it was pretty obvious that I rated Oog's post 'oh no' because he said paige was a man. And I know you say that, when you said you doubted I'd lie about it, it was banter or a meme or whatever, again, I don't have to believe you on that.

Just because I might have interpreted why you did that incorrectly, that doesn't mean I misquoted you. I was quoted you just fine.

I liked Iggish post because he actually went back to form an accurate opinion on you. I could have just left it at that and said 'yeah Aqua lied, everyone vote him', but I actually told Iggish to go back and be sure about his stance on you, you're welcome. Whether you 'lied' or not is up for debate. You've contradicted yourself, but given explanations, but that doesn't mean those explanations are believable. And depending on how you interpret your whole 'the reason I thought my post was similar to oak's was because you said so', that could also be seen as a lie, considering the original reason you thought your posts was similar to oaks was because you read it and then said 'oh I just realized I posted what oak said'. Sure it's possible you just forgot about that but like I said before, it's easier to forget something if you lied about it and other things in the first place and are getting tangled up in lies, which would make sense with my other theory that you did in fact try to 'copy' oak on purpose and pretend that you didn't notice.

 

[Nottykitten]

Also why WOULD I accuse inf of misquoting me unless he actually did?

Surely if, hypothetically, I did lie. Anybody could go back and look and call me out. It would make no sense. No mafia would do that, regardless of their ability to play this game, so if your reasoning is Aqua's shit lol, then you're dumber than you appear Iggish :eyes:

But Inf is calling you out

 

[Infected_alien8_]

Aqua Iggish literally said:

Ok, I had a gander and it seems to me that Aqua repetitively lied about you misquoting and messing with contexts (though looking at it again, this would be a matter of opinion), but this is not why I thought Aqua was lying, I think I missed it or looked at the wrong bit. I also remembering thinking that Aqua changed their stance on the oak message but I'll have to re-read it.
I'll provide a fuller answer later.

 

[Infected_alien8_]

And Runemen4 what's your opinion on Aqua?

 

[Rune]

No, it is definitely you trying to avoid it. We have said this countless times but you refuse to acknowledge it. Why did you say I was leading a lynch and being very vocal when I wasn't showing any of these traits and there were no similarities to how I was playing the game.

Holy shit, let me say this in baby speak so you can understand

What it might look like to you:

YOU LAST GAME: HEYYY GUYS, I PERSONALLY BELIEVE WE SHOULD REALLY REALLY REALLY LYNCH THIS GUY
THIS GAME: I GOT JUSTIFICATION FOR LYNCHING SOMEBODY BUT THEY COULD STILL BE POTENTIALLY TOWN

This is how it looked like to me:

YOU LAST GAME: HEYYYY GUYS, LETS LYNCH THIS GUY BECAUSE HE'S 100% MAFIA
THIS GAME: I AM REALLY REACTIVE AND IT MAKES ME LOOK LIKE I WANT TO PUSH A LYNCH FOR SOMEONE.

That's literally it, but you're making it look like that I'm scum because of my PERSONAL EVALUATION of the last game compared to this one. You can have a different opinion but it doesn't justify you constantly pushing for answers when its just my opinion. Are you that threatened that you keep asking for a reasoning why, possibly due to the fact that it could possibly result in you looking like Mafia?

And I've already concended in the fact that you might be town due to the reactivity of your posts being explained by you and notty and the fact that the second time reading through everything; you look less scummy.

 

[Rune]

And Runemen4 what's your opinion on Aqua

I'll have a re-read right now but currently, he looks a lot more scummy that you do.

 

[Aqua]

Likewise if there were a censorer, they would definitely target inf due to his... bombastic posting. Then again, infs equally aware of this, so could be some dumb plan but I don't see inf have enough forethought to think of something like this.

As Claire was the first accuser I guess we should point the spotlight on her.

Not exactly sure what else to say or how it's suspicious, I reached the conclusion since Inffy is literally the most active mafia player and he's been silent since the game started. I just wanted to bring up an observation in case anyone else has more information, because a mafia/third party silencer would probably stay quiet about it until someone else notices?

NGL this does seem exactly like something inf would do tbh

• Lynching inf would determine whether or not there is a silencer

• I don't think just because arelic was the first to accuse inf that she's scummy, at this point we're grasping at straws and infs silence is definitely the most fishy thing here.

• It's day 1 so we have to stick to tradition

All that in mind I'm in favour of an inf vote (unless anything else comes up):

vote inf

So I've had a reread and just realised that I never even suddenly 180'd

Firstly all I said in regards of Claire was since she brought it up let's point the spotlight at her. This is by no means "bandwagoning" This is just simply grilling her to see how she responds, which she did later the same day, which I then gratify also the same day with "I don't think just because arelic was the first to accuse inf that she's scummy, at this point we're grasping at straws and infs silence is definitely the most fishy thing here."

So thinking about it I don't know where you got the idea I was bandwagoning claire from. Right now I believe my stupidity this game has done more damage than I can feasibly undo. But looking at this from an outside perspective inf has no real ground to stand on.

Furthermore, I don't suddenly change my mind about inf "not being smart enough to do this" to "inf is clearly lying about being silenced". Since A) FOR THE LAST TIME INF, I WAS JOKING. YOU KNOW ME, YOU KNOW I CONSTANTLY INSULT UR INTELLIGENCE HOW ARE YOU CONSIDERING THIS A POINT.
and B) In my post I simply state that lynching you would determine whether or not there is a silencer, giving us info. Because inf would either break out of his charade if he were about to get lynched or if he didn't it would prove there is a silencer and we'd get information from inf about his role, who he is (he might have been mafia and the silencer was 3P.)

Sorry for not replying sooner, forgot about this game. Nothing really has happened yet? Maybe except for how Inffy hasn't posted anything yet, I see two possibilities: he is knowingly not speaking, or he is actually silenced. The latter makes no sense because it doesn't make sense to have a silencer in a FORUM mafia game, but hey this is Eacape restart mafia so it's certainly possible(would be dumb as fuck tho).

The former makes more sense because everytime Inffy is mafia, he makes himself have a negative ability day1 or some dumb shit. I think he does this because he wants to confuse town. So Inffy if you're town pls speak(if ur mafia don't)


Vote Inffy

I don't even agree with TWG, having a silencer WOULD make sense in forum mafia. Unfortunately I mistimed my post and have been called out for it, but I really implore you to actually take a step back and look at this. Voting me is a waste of a vote. Especially if Ender DOES win come nightfall we all lose.

I'm switching my vote to Ender because I think he is the bigges tthreat. I know your gonna call me out on trying to draw attention away from my self but think about it. If Ender's win ends the game, we lose. Alternatively you can lynch me tomorrow if nothing comes up like damning evidence against me or someone else.

 

[Infected_alien8_]

Holy shit, let me say this in baby speak so you can understand

What it might look like to you:

YOU LAST GAME: HEYYY GUYS, I PERSONALLY BELIEVE WE SHOULD REALLY REALLY REALLY LYNCH THIS GUY
THIS GAME: I GOT JUSTIFICATION FOR LYNCHING SOMEBODY BUT THEY COULD STILL BE POTENTIALLY TOWN

This is how it looked like to me:

YOU LAST GAME: HEYYYY GUYS, LETS LYNCH THIS GUY BECAUSE HE'S 100% MAFIA
THIS GAME: I AM REALLY REACTIVE AND IT MAKES ME LOOK LIKE I WANT TO PUSH A LYNCH FOR SOMEONE.

That's literally it, but you're making it look like that I'm scum because of my PERSONAL EVALUATION of the last game compared to this one. You can have a different opinion but it doesn't justify you constantly pushing for answers when its just my opinion. Are you that threatened that you keep asking for a reasoning why, possibly due to the fact that it could possibly result in you looking like Mafia?

And I've already concended in the fact that you might be town due to the reactivity of your posts being explained by you and notty and the fact that the second time reading through everything; you look less scummy.

Ok rune so if I say, guys Rune is acting really suspicious because he's not speaking at all, would you just say "okay well it's his interpretation of what I'm doing so it's fine!!!'

No, you said Iggish was leading town and trying to lead lynches, and he wasn't. And I don't quite understand your leap from 'you seem reactive' to 'trying to lead a lynch'. I also don't understand *where* Iggish was even being reactive at all from your point of view, because when we asked you about where, you pointed to a post which was made AFTER you said he was acting strange, so then why did you say that before?

 

[Rune]

Holy shit, let me say this in baby speak so you can understand

What it might look like to you:

YOU LAST GAME: HEYYY GUYS, I PERSONALLY BELIEVE WE SHOULD REALLY REALLY REALLY LYNCH THIS GUY
THIS GAME: I GOT JUSTIFICATION FOR LYNCHING SOMEBODY BUT THEY COULD STILL BE POTENTIALLY TOWN

This is how it looked like to me:

YOU LAST GAME: HEYYYY GUYS, LETS LYNCH THIS GUY BECAUSE HE'S 100% MAFIA
THIS GAME: I AM REALLY REACTIVE AND IT MAKES ME LOOK LIKE I WANT TO PUSH A LYNCH FOR SOMEONE.

That's literally it, but you're making it look like that I'm scum because of my PERSONAL EVALUATION of the last game compared to this one. You can have a different opinion but it doesn't justify you constantly pushing for answers when its just my opinion. Are you that threatened that you keep asking for a reasoning why, possibly due to the fact that it could possibly result in you looking like Mafia?

And I've already concended in the fact that you might be town due to the reactivity of your posts being explained by you and notty and the fact that the second time reading through everything; you look less scummy.

Extention, I think it's literally due to the fact that because of your diagrams and stuff like that; it looked like you were trying to explain something which made you look more vocal and more controlling of the argument. I'll be honest again, I'm not sure why but it felt like a vibe to me so

 

[Aqua]

Tho I would like to state inf NEW I wasn't paying much attention to this game and was away from a PC to participate from page 5/6 to like 11 for 3 IRL days.

If he is scum, he did a fucking good job manipulating me. I even believed some of the stuff he said about me being scummy in the regards stated above and put it down to dumb mistakes. because I didn't think to check (plus lazy zzzzzz)

 

[Rune]

Ok rune so if I say, guys Rune is acting really suspicious because he's not speaking at all, would you just say "okay well it's his interpretation of what I'm doing so it's fine!!!'

No, you said Iggish was leading town and trying to lead lynches, and he wasn't. And I don't quite understand your leap from 'you seem reactive' to 'trying to lead a lynch'. I also don't understand *where* Iggish was even being reactive at all from your point of view, because when we asked you about where, you pointed to a post which was made AFTER you said he was acting strange, so then why did you say that before?

It became more reactive from the notty + iggy argument, and before that was most likely me looking at the diagrams and thinking he was more vocal/more likely to lead a lynch because of it.

 

[Aqua]

Also Runemen4 pretty sure comparing styles from previous games is meta play and is frowned upon, I got called out about it by Oak63 a few games back for accusing Mulb based ont he same things

Infected_alien8_ since ur a mafia nerd feel free to explain if this OK.

 

[Iggish]

THIS GAME: I GOT JUSTIFICATION FOR LYNCHING SOMEBODY BUT THEY COULD STILL BE POTENTIALLY TOWN

THIS GAME: I AM REALLY REACTIVE AND IT MAKES ME LOOK LIKE I WANT TO PUSH A LYNCH FOR SOMEONE.

What? I wasn't pushing for a lynch and when was I reactive before you said it? Please please please just answer the question.

That's literally it, but you're making it look like that I'm scum because of my PERSONAL EVALUATION of the last game compared to this one. You can have a different opinion but it doesn't justify you constantly pushing for answers when its just my opinion. Are you that threatened that you keep asking for a reasoning why, possibly due to the fact that it could possibly result in you looking like Mafia?

You're making yourself look like scum because you aren't answering the question. I'm trying to understand you "personal evaluation" here. You said that I was being vocal and pushing for a lynch when the simple fact is; I wasn't, at that time when you said it.

You're ignoring the question again Rune!

 

[Rune]

What? I wasn't pushing for a lynch and when was I reactive before you said it? Please please please just answer the question.

You're making yourself look like scum because you aren't answering the question. I'm trying to understand you "personal evaluation" here. You said that I was being vocal and pushing for a lynch when the simple fact is; I wasn't, at that time when you said it.

You're ignoring the question again Rune!

At this point, I'm inclined to believe it was me thinking at a time when you were doing the diagrams and the larger posts; that this made you look more vocal and therefore made you look like you were pushing for a lynch.

 

[Rune]

Also Runemen4 pretty sure comparing styles from previous games is meta play and is frowned upon, I got called out about it by Oak63 a few games back for accusing Mulb based ont he same things

Infected_alien8_ since ur a mafia nerd feel free to explain if this OK.

Yeah probably, looking back; my argument was pretty shit in the first place and was done both on mobile and when I was busy with other things

 

[Iggish]

At this point, I'm inclined to believe it was me thinking at a time when you were doing the diagrams and the larger posts; that this made you look more vocal and therefore made you look like you were pushing for a lynch.

But, but, the large posts were defending my choice of saying Canada and all that and there was only one diagram before you said I was being reactive. I can't understand why you thought I was being vocal though. I wasn't urging anyone else to vote for anyone. Maybe you have another interpretation of vocal which is more-so linked to activity and then I can understand it.

However, how the hell did you get the idea that I was trying to get a lynch going on anyone, especially if the long posts were about me defending myself.

 

[Infected_alien8_]

So I've had a reread and just realised that I never even suddenly 180'd

Firstly all I said in regards of Claire was since she brought it up let's point the spotlight at her. This is by no means "bandwagoning" This is just simply grilling her to see how she responds, which she did later the same day, which I then gratify also the same day with "I don't think just because arelic was the first to accuse inf that she's scummy, at this point we're grasping at straws and infs silence is definitely the most fishy thing here."

You said that after sure but that doesn't change the fact that you jumped onto her when you thought Oak was doing the same. It doesn't dismiss the argument. You could easily have changed your mind because you had, what you thought to be, an easier target in mind (me). And again the fact that you had to go back and analyze your own posts as a defence for yourself suggests that you're lying. If you were just town and everything you did had a reasonable reason for it then you should have no trouble recollecting that.

THEN AGAIN, it is you, and your memory sucks, so I don't really know.

Furthermore, I don't suddenly change my mind about inf "not being smart enough to do this" to "inf is clearly lying about being silenced". Since A) FOR THE LAST TIME INF, I WAS JOKING. YOU KNOW ME, YOU KNOW I CONSTANTLY INSULT UR INTELLIGENCE HOW ARE YOU CONSIDERING THIS A POINT.
and B) In my post I simply state that lynching you would determine whether or not there is a silencer, giving us info. Because inf would either break out of his charade if he were about to get lynched or if he didn't it would prove there is a silencer and we'd get information from inf about his role, who he is (he might have been mafia and the silencer was 3P.)


I don't even agree with TWG, having a silencer WOULD make sense in forum mafia. Unfortunately I mistimed my post and have been called out for it, but I really implore you to actually take a step back and look at this. Voting me is a waste of a vote. Especially if Ender DOES win come nightfall we all lose.

A) It didn't seem like a joke to me.
B) Fair enough. You still did change your view on me though because you said "this sounds exactly like something inf would do tbh". Admittedly I interpreted that as you agreeing with TWG that I was lying, and apparently that was in response to oog's rating theory and you weren't convinced I was lying and figured it would just be a good way to learn if there was a silencer or not, but why would you risk lynching me just to learn if there was a silencer, when you could probably learn that later on anyway?

Honestly though Aqua if you gave this defence right from the beginning I might have even been inclined to believe you since this at least makes sense, but why did it take you this long to come up with this defence?

 

[Infected_alien8_]

Also Runemen4 pretty sure comparing styles from previous games is meta play and is frowned upon, I got called out about it by Oak63 a few games back for accusing Mulb based ont he same things

Infected_alien8_ since ur a mafia nerd feel free to explain if this OK.

I've never heard of it being frowned upon. A lot of reads are often the result of comparable playstyles from different games.

 

[Rune]

But, but, the large posts were defending my choice of saying Canada and all that and there was only one diagram before you said I was being reactive. I can't understand why you thought I was being vocal though. I wasn't urging anyone else to vote for anyone. Maybe you have another interpretation of vocal which is more-so linked to activity and then I can understand it.

However, how the hell did you get the idea that I was trying to get a lynch going on anyone, especially if the long posts were about me defending myself.

That's probably it tbh, I think its more likely my brain saying

Activity this early = trying to push for something, and to be fair I was skimming through the posts because of my mobile phone and the blocks of text being far more difficult to read. Like I said, you already won the argument and it's most likely my gut instinct being very sensitive and paranoid for no reason. It's been a while since I first made that argument and so far been paying the price for it, I've got no clue what my brain was going through in that moment

 

[Infected_alien8_]

That's probably it tbh, I think its more likely my brain saying

Activity this early = trying to push for something, and to be fair I was skimming through the posts because of my mobile phone and the blocks of text being far more difficult to read. Like I said, you already won the argument and it's most likely my gut instinct being very sensitive and paranoid for no reason. It's been a while since I first made that argument and so far been paying the price for it, I've got no clue what my brain was going through in that moment

Well at least we finally have your answer, though I'm a bit confused as to why it took you so long to give it? Thank you though

 

[Aqua]

You said that after sure but that doesn't change the fact that you jumped onto her when you thought Oak was doing the same.

I. DID. NOT. SEE. OAKS. POST. AS. I. RESPONDED. IN. A. SEPARATE. POST. AFTER. WHEN. I. NOTICED. OAKS. POST.

Honestly though Aqua if you gave this defence right from the beginning I might have even been inclined to believe you since this at least makes sense, but why did it take you this long to come up with this defence?

Cus I wasn't really paying attention, I made my replies after being away for 3 days and didn't properly read any of the replies since; and tbh, I feel bad for Jivvi in this regard since I wasn't taking his game seriously. Most of my early posts weren't well thought through and I jumped on you quite hard without properly considering the potential drawbacks and reasons to believe you. I did tunnel vision you as you have tunnel visioned me I guess.

A) It didn't seem like a joke to me.

I thought we were friends... you don't know me at all :'(

 

[Rune]

Well at least we finally have your answer, though I'm a bit confused as to why it took you so long to give it? Thank you though

Yeah, I don't know why I took so long trying to answer it; most likely me trying to recover from some recent stuff which caused me stress which has really made my dyslexia get worse because of it.

 

[Aqua]

I've never heard of it being frowned upon. A lot of reads are often the result of comparable playstyles from different games.

EVERYONE CAN WE PLEASE LYNCH Oak63 BECAUSE I WAS A TOWNIE THAT GAME AND I WAS RIGHT ABOUT MUL, SHE WAS MAFIA AND MAFIA WON. OAK THREW THE GAME EVEN WHEN I WAS RIGHT ABOUT 3 OF THE 4 MAFIA ON DAY 0 AND 1. I AM VERY ANGRY ABOUT THIS.