Mafia Game 74

[House Thorne]

Oh, and Stokeworth

[House Connington]

It has happened before...now we're smarter (or more parinoid)

I don't habe another suspect at the moment, but your point is valid. What stands out to me is that they don't react to others this way. Could it be a set up by one of them to get the other lynched?

It might have happened before, but has it happened before with a coroner finder?

I'm sure if one of them turns up guilty, suspicion, and votes, for the other won't be far behind.

[House Stokeworth]

Ok you got me I'm evil, fuck I knew I couldnt get past day one, happens everytime I get an evil role. :thumbsdown:

[House Pommingham]

Ok you got me I'm evil, fuck I knew I couldnt get past day one, happens everytime I get an evil role. :thumbsdown:

well, see... now you ARE supsicious. you're probably just saying that to make us think your innocent and throw us off the track. so you probably are... wait, I'm confusing myself. nevermind!

[House Connington]

Connington is kind of up there too.

Why?

[House Connington]

Ok you got me I'm evil, fuck I knew I couldnt get past day one, happens everytime I get an evil role. :thumbsdown:

Um, maybe because you spaz out and confess it?

I really hope that was a joke.

[House Thorne]

If I could pinpoint why, I'd tell you :). Chalk it up to gut. Why so concerned? You want me to point to very specific facts so your evil brain can break it down and point out why exactly it isn't evil, and in fact a very innocent thing to do?

Stokeworth, you aren't helping yourself.

[House Connington]

If I could pinpoint why, I'd tell you :). Chalk it up to gut. Why so concerned? You want me to point to very specific facts so your evil brain can break it down and point out why exactly it isn't evil, and in fact a very innocent thing to do?

Stokeworth, you aren't helping yourself.

I'm not concerned, it's just nice when you see your name come up to have something to respond to.

[House Reed]

...You know, I've been distracted by something off-site all evening and putting off trying to write a big catch-up post.

And one of the first things I'd wanted to say was, "Actually, guys, I think Stokeworth might be innocent, because he seems genuine in his responses to Grandison, and looks like he just isn't the best debater or brightest bulb. And all these cases partnering Stokeworth with the world seem paranoid and silly."

Once again, my scumdar fails horribly.

Stokeworth

If you're innocent, then I am personally never playing another game with you again for pulling this stunt. But I'm not going to take shit like that as a joke.

So you're saying you get lynched all the time on D1 as evil? You've never made it past D1?

[House Connington]

Screw it, I won't look a gift horse in the mouth: Stokeworth.

If it was a joke, it was a poor one.

On another note, I always thought the above mentioned proverb had to do with the Trojan Horse, but apparently not.

Ya learn something new each day...

[House Thorne]

So? Normally it's more helpful to talk about people you suspect...

Not if you suspect the wrong people.

Tyrell, I think you're wrong. We can't know who are the right people to suspect if we don't eliminate people through conversation/attack/defense?

:blink:

If you don't want someone to be killed, don't SAY that you don't want him to be killed. :bang:

Um, didn't you do essentially the same thing with this ...

I extremely like this post of Swyft

He points out the flaws in Conningtons posts and also offers a solution to get Connington started. I am satisfied with the cock.

[House Reed]

Since Stokeworth hasn't taken the chance to correct himself, I'm going to act as if he's 100% confirmed evil. As in, if he flips innocent, I'll assume he's a symp.

What's funny is I totally would have voted Martell or Bracken or someone like that had he not confessed. Seriously, I had a pretty strong town read on him. There's a paranoid voice in the back of my mind saying that he could be a selfish and whiny innocent throwing a temper tantrum at us for voting him, because it made no sense for him to give up like that when Martell was a viable lynch. But like Connington said, I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

I think it's a hammer after two more votes. Do people think we should continue the day just to let others weigh in and have more discussion time, or just end his misery?

[House Connington]

Tyrell, I think you're wrong. We can't know who are the right people to suspect if we don't eliminate people through conversation/attack/defense?

Somewhat ironic coming from you as you still haven't provided me with an adequate reason to suspect me! :P

[House Thorne]

I'll remove vote to give Stoke a chance to respond if he wants. I don't want us to rush into something before we have a chance to think about it or others have a chance to discuss.

I am 50/50 on whether this is a joke or not. Maybe 60/40 in favor of evil. Weird either way.

[House Thorne]

Somewhat ironic coming from you as you still haven't provided me with an adequate reason to suspect me! :P

You're so very concerned, even if you do frame it in a joking manner. Consider this a part of the reason I suspect you.

[House Connington]

Since Stokeworth hasn't taken the chance to correct himself, I'm going to act as if he's 100% confirmed evil. As in, if he flips innocent, I'll assume he's a symp.

What's funny is I totally would have voted Martell or Bracken or someone like that had he not confessed. Seriously, I had a pretty strong town read on him. There's a paranoid voice in the back of my mind saying that he could be a selfish and whiny innocent throwing a temper tantrum at us for voting him, because it made no sense for him to give up like that when Martell was a viable lynch. But like Connington said, I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

I think it's a hammer after two more votes. Do people think we should continue the day just to let others weigh in and have more discussion time, or just end his misery?

Look, he's either an innocent who through a temper tantrum or a bad guy who through a temper tantrum. Either way it was a move in poor spirit... I say we don't prolong the inevitable.

I'd have more to say about possible connections, or reasons why he might of felt so much pressure that he revealed but I don't think it's really in the spirit of fair play to analyze such things. I suggest we all carry on as if Stokeworth was never part of the game (just my opinion).

[House Thorne]

For those who are around right now, any opinions on the Tyrell/Bracken exchange? Is it just innocuous banter? The lack of commentary on the subject makes me feel like I'm missing something.

Did you give your thoughts on the banter earlier that I missed, or are you just fishing?

[House Connington]

You're so very concerned, even if you do frame it in a joking manner. Consider this a part of the reason I suspect you.

As I said, I'm not concerned... colour me curious.

Come on, ya have to have something... even I could make a case against myself ;)

[House Thorne]

Look, he's either an innocent who through a temper tantrum or a bad guy who through a temper tantrum. Either way it was a move in poor spirit... I say we don't prolong the inevitable.

I'd have more to say about possible connections, or reasons why he might of felt so much pressure that he revealed but I don't think it's really in the spirit of fair play to analyze such things. I suggest we all carry on as if Stokeworth was never part of the game (just my opinion).

Really? You're ready to throw him out if it's just a temper tantrum? I agree, if it is, it's in poor taste but you're writing this off like it's a done deal and then you want to ignore what he's said so far?

[House Thorne]

Come on, ya have to have something... even I could make a case against myself ;)

Obviously - you were telling us exactly why you should be voted for early in the day. I don't like you constantly poking this. If/when I find something (like above), I will post it. I won't do it for your entertainment.