Marvel Mafia - The game is over, the Sinister Six have conquered Earth!

[MD4L]

Looks like our guy Matts is scum. Tough thats how went out.

[MD4L]

I’m glad we took a risk and didn’t vote a guy that was not anonymous player that just received suspicion.

[Utley]

1 hour ago, Counselor said:

It’s called Mafia not Teletubbies

Could’ve fooled me.

[Utley]

1 hour ago, DingoLadd said:

Malf.

Also for anyone wondering, no one is going to CC malf. He's either mafia with a built in cover role (or would claim a role that would likely not be CCed ), or town. 

Well then let’s do Matts then ET

[DingoLadd]

3 minutes ago, Utley said:

Well then let’s do Matts then ET

Hoping someone kills Matts tbh, ET I have a vague town read on.

[SwAg]

On 5/27/2019 at 2:42 PM, rackcs said:

Vote Count

The Orca - 1 - bcb1213

Pickle Rick - 1 - Ragnarok

Matts4313 - 10 - Dome, Pickle Rick, The Orca, DingoLadd, kingseanjohn, Mwil23, Counselor, Utley, ET80

Ragnarok - 1 - SwAg

Forge - 1 - Matts4313

DingoLadd - 1 - Whicker

kingseanjohn - 3 - MD4L, Malfatron, squire12

With 23 alive and 23 voting, it's 12 to lynch!

Haven’t voted: Forge, theuntouchable, TheKillerNacho, The LBC, Tk3, mission27

Vote count on matts when he is peaking at votes.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:03 PM, SwAg said:

matts has 11 votes with hardly any commitment, and one person willing to die if he’s wrong.  If that’s the place you want us to be, I’d rather be all over the place.

I said this.  As you can see, I said 11 instead of 10.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:08 PM, MWil23 said:

@SwAg looks like 10 or did I miss 1? You said 11.

Apparently 10 instead of 11 is inordinately significant.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:09 PM, SwAg said:

Is that seriously your contribution?  I said 11 instead of 10?

MWil is around for all of this development, but is hardly doing anything.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:09 PM, MWil23 said:

I’m always down for a hammer, even though my quick trigger on BCB cost us overwatch LOL.

Then he mentions he would be down for a hammer on matts.  I don't think I'm stretching the bounds of reasonability by saying that's why he was curious about 11 vs. 10.  If anything, the next few posts implicate that further.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:10 PM, SwAg said:

This is absolutely ridiculous.

I think that matts having a count ran up with little to no commitment to the rationale on it is ridiculous.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:11 PM, MWil23 said:

Because if I missed 1 and it was 11 then one more would get us the hammer. That’s significant. I’m not scum baiting, I’m clarifying, so yes that’s my contribution.

There is little-to-no significance in the distinction between 1 and 2 votes removed from the hammer, as I am about to explain below. 

However, that is not the significant aspect of this post.  The significant portion is that he is clarifying, and not scum baiting with this post.  Keep that in mind.  It becomes significant here shortly.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:12 PM, SwAg said:

So, one away is significant, but two away is insignificant?

 

On 5/27/2019 at 3:13 PM, MWil23 said:

Apparently from my overwatch experience a hammer is usually scummy. I prefer the action. Over 30 hours seems like an eternity from now LOL

 

On 5/27/2019 at 3:15 PM, MWil23 said:

One away is simply more significant than 2 since it would only take 1 more person to ice it. 

 

On 5/27/2019 at 3:18 PM, SwAg said:

So?  Two quick succession votes is not uncommon.  Look at the rate of votes and amount of people who committed with little commentary.  One is basically no different than two.

 

On 5/27/2019 at 3:20 PM, MWil23 said:

The final two would be more to our advantage though because that would imply some type of coconspiracy from the final two I’d imagine if he flipped town. I would be easier to explain away. Or we could just ask Rags since he went 0-8 last game as town...he’s due.

This is once again not that significant.  It's portraying what I think is an artificial view of the 1-2 distinction for the purpose of explaining the above and maintaining consistency.  Then ends with a joke / disengage.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:22 PM, Dome said:

It’s wild to me that some people think using info I know about two players is somehow unethical or unfair. 

Thats how you ******* play 

This set the relevant portion in motion.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:22 PM, SwAg said:

...

 

On 5/27/2019 at 3:24 PM, MWil23 said:

LOL

Dude...right now you should just hope and pray he flips scum if he’s the lynch or you have some explaining to do.

 

On 5/27/2019 at 3:25 PM, SwAg said:

You’re willing to dangle a prospective power role for elimination based on that.  There are so many flaws in that, I would hit the character limit explaining them all.

Town is much more likely to be impatient than scum.  And we have nearly half the game hounding to lynch him.  If you think matt’s being lynched would result in any consequence then you’re being willfully ignorant.

I'm incredulous at the notion MWil is postulating.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:25 PM, SwAg said:

lol

I am reacting to MWil declaring Dome should "hope and pray" that matts flips scum because otherwise he "has some explaining to do."

On 5/27/2019 at 3:27 PM, Dome said:

Huh.... 

Dome is confused to do.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:30 PM, MWil23 said:

?

Apparently so is MWil.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:31 PM, SwAg said:

What explaining would Dome have to do?

I ask a simple question.  What would Dome have to explain?

On 5/27/2019 at 3:31 PM, SwAg said:

Keep in mind, I want to lynch Dome, but that was egregious.

I voice my view that this was absolutely egregious.  Maybe too egregious to be scum?  I don't know, why not look at how the interaction unfolds.

As part of the relevant background (which will be shown in the post sequence shortly): MWil is voting matts for reasons independent of Dome's case.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:36 PM, MWil23 said:

Egregious? Almost as egregious as missing the vote count on the previous page? Or are we applying secret unwritten rules of Mafia here that I’m unaware of?

Alright, so this is MWil's response.  He ignored the substantive question, and went right to an attack on my credibility with a false equivalency.  I said 11 instead of 10 related to a vote total on matts.  He is shackling the outcome of a matts lynch to one person, Dome, despite MWil lynching him for other reasons.  These are not alike.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:37 PM, SwAg said:

These things are not alike.

These are not alike.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:38 PM, MWil23 said:

@Dome why tunnel on bringing up a past chat? That hardly is relevant to this game IMO.

He is floundering.  This is completely unrelated to the current conversation.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:38 PM, SwAg said:

I like that you went directly to a poor relative comparison that made no sense to address me in a (poor) attempt to lower my credibility, rather than the actual question.

I call him on what I explained above.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:39 PM, SwAg said:

MWil, why are you voting for Matts if not for what Dome said?

I rhetorically ask MWil why he is voting for Dome to draw out why it is egregious that he has independent reasons for voting for Matts, but is trying to push responsibility of the lynch's outcome onto Dome.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:40 PM, SwAg said:

MWil, why do you scrutinize Dome’s case, vote alongside him, and then push all the responsibility onto him as though you’re not also culpable?  You seem to have a divergent view of the case than Dome.  Why would Dome have to explain anything more than he’s already explained?

I draw it out further here.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:41 PM, SwAg said:

I caught a bad guy.

MWil

I conclude that I caught a bad guy because there is no way of answering this in a satisfactory manner.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:42 PM, Malfatron said:

i dont see it

Malfatron somehow doesn't see this.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:47 PM, SwAg said:

I don’t know how.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I spelled it out by quoting all of it to Malfatron.  He ignored it.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:48 PM, SwAg said:

Now MWil is going to take a while to respond despite his recent rapid responses.

I was wrong here.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:48 PM, MWil23 said:

I listed 8 reason this morning. Go back and READ them.

I’m trying to talk to him and go a route here, but please continue to selectively interject yourself while ignoring the broader context.

LOL means laugh out loud here in shorthand American. 

LOL 

Too bad you didn’t have the guts to stick with your vote on me when you thought the same a day or two ago. Please keep tunneling on me. You accuse me of being scum in every game we play together and it pisses you off that you can’t read me.

None of this actually answered the question.  You merely declared I was tunneling, then tried to belittle my read by saying "you do this ever game," and finally concluded by taunting me about your perception that I am unable to read you.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:49 PM, SwAg said:

That’s a Town response.

I am beside myself with this response.  I have no idea how no one else is acknowledging this interaction.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:50 PM, SwAg said:

I’m not actually asking why you’re voting for matts.  That is a rhetorical device.  You think there is an independent basis for matts’ lynch beyond what Dome has said, yet you implied Dome is the one who has to answer for the outcome of they lynch.

 

On 5/27/2019 at 3:50 PM, MWil23 said:

Nope just finished typing one up to you. I don’t evade and disengage and make convenient excuses to disappear. Never h e and never will. I’m also not intimidated of you like everyone else seems to be. I enjoy watching you get angry to be honest.

For whatever reason, you all seem to think refusing to engage me is somehow akin to standing up to a bully or displaying courage.  I have no idea why anyone is intimidated by interaction, but it's not what I attempt to portray or elicit.

But anyway, you don't evade or disengage.  Yet, somehow, you have evaded and disengaged throughout this whole conversation.  I dare someone to show me a reasonable construction of these posts that is not reasonably characterized as evasive or disengaging.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:51 PM, SwAg said:

Yeah, you’re edgy and different.  You all are.  Everyone’s so brave.

I'm jeering at the concept that he's declaring he is not intimidated.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:52 PM, SwAg said:

And again, you didn’t actually address why or what Dome would have explaining to do relative to others?

I repeat this.  You haven't actually engaged me at all.  You've done some bargain bin tough talk and repeatedly some fallacies.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:53 PM, MWil23 said:

I’m 5-11 and 180, not really.

I’d love to meet you IRL TBH. 

The disengage, topic switch, banter commences.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:54 PM, SwAg said:

@Malfatron how do you not see that?  He went on the defensive immediately and tried a false equivalency to attack my credibility instead of simply explaining his post or addressing the argument.  

I once again tag Malfatron with a synopsis.  I receive no response.

On 5/27/2019 at 3:55 PM, SwAg said:

I don’t know if you’re challenging me to fight IRL or not with this post.

But somehow this received a response from Malfatron.  So, it is not as though he is not present.

On 5/27/2019 at 4:01 PM, SwAg said:

Well good, because I may be a girl, but my daddy raised a ***** and I’d kick your ***.

I permit the disengage because somehow with 10+ people present, no one is seeing what I am seeing, and I hoped permitting a disengage would further my position later.

On 5/27/2019 at 4:02 PM, Dome said:

I’d pay a LOT of money to see swag in full drag whipping the **** out of a browns fan 

Included just for the lols.

 

Additionally, I believe MWil is scum because (in addition to above) (1) MWil planted on matts the whole day and used it as a reason to abstain from most of the developments, and committed with this vigor, despite hardly pursuing matts on D1 (and in general being ambivalent on the subject) to "only matts"; and (2) he will likely continue to use it as a reason to abstain from developments.

[SwAg]

Similarly, ET spent a sizable portion of D1 drumming up what many of you took as a soft claim.  Unless I'm mistaken, the first instance in which he spoke about the game was nearly a day into the game on Saturday.

On 5/25/2019 at 9:23 AM, ET80 said:

I like drunk Swag.

Matts is totally lying, BTW.

He called matts a liar and voted for him.  Now, this may not appear to be that significant, but I think it is. 

On 5/25/2019 at 11:33 AM, rackcs said:

Vote Count

Counselor - 4 - MD4L, theuntouchable, bcb1213, Malfatron

SwAg - 1 - mission27

ET80 - 2 - SwAg, kingseanjohn

Mission27 - 1 - The LBC

Malfatron - 1 - Matts4313

Utley - 2 - The Orca, Mwil23

TheKillerNacho - 1 - Dome

Dome - 1 - Counselor

squire12 - 1 - Pickle Rick

Matts4313 - 2 - ET80

With 24 alive and 24 voting, it's 13 to lynch!

He was the only  person voting for matts at the time. 

Three minutes after this Vote Count, ET changed his vote to KSJ.

On 5/25/2019 at 11:36 AM, ET80 said:

I'd go KSJ first.

I think he wanted people to see his double vote.  Then see it transfer to another person shortly thereafter to remove speculation that he might not be the double vote without actually having to say it.

It is not the point whether a double vote is a Town or Mafia ability.  The point is how you attempt to portray it and how you attempt to use it.  ET seemed to have been trying to broadcast that he is his soft claim and only the double vote to avoid suspicion, and it worked for several of you.  None of you said anything about how pro-Town ET is playing.  You merely remarked on what you think his alignment is because of a soft claim and ability, which I pointed out repeatedly is not a lock to be a Town ability, and scum are virtually certain to have fake claims.

Feel free to re-read the few pages from the first post for the follow-up interactions.

Also explains what Dome remarked on later.

[SwAg]

Also, he has been locking into "his scum list" and declared he's not willing to deviate from three players.  Just like MWil, that is a method of avoiding thread developments.

[SwAg]

@theuntouchable if I'm caught on the wire, it's tk3.

[MD4L]

Also, KSJ shouldn’t be dismissed from public perception. 

[SwAg]

You know he's dead, right?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MD4L]

1 minute ago, MD4L said:

Also, KSJ shouldn’t be dismissed from public perception. 

That’s what I get for posting late night. Am still reading up.

[MD4L]

2 hours ago, MD4L said:

Looks like our guy Matts is scum. Tough thats how went out.

 

2 hours ago, MD4L said:

I’m glad we took a risk and didn’t vote a guy that was not anonymous player that just received suspicion.

Direct opinion. Still maintain these points.

[MWil23]

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

Vote count on matts when he is peaking at votes.

I said this.  As you can see, I said 11 instead of 10.

Apparently pointing out when Swag makes a mistake in a potential hammer situation is a big no no and only applies to others.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

Apparently 10 instead of 11 is inordinately significant.

When the hammer is 12 yes

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

MWil is around for all of this development, but is hardly doing anything.

I was already voting Matts, nothing else to do.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

Then he mentions he would be down for a hammer on matts.  I don't think I'm stretching the bounds of reasonability by saying that's why he was curious about 11 vs. 10.  If anything, the next few posts implicate that further.

Wow I wonder what gave that away? Probably that I voted him already and said I liked using the hammer. I also said this in overwatch. Not a surprise at all.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I think that matts having a count ran up with little to no commitment to the rationale on it is ridiculous.

Yet Forge says he doesn’t think it’s Matts and tries to hammer him twice and Counselor can change his vote 20 times and that’s ignored. Interesting.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

There is little-to-no significance in the distinction between 1 and 2 votes removed from the hammer, as I am about to explain below. 

LOL. Funny, he was saved twice by a solitary vote. Must not be significant.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

However, that is not the significant aspect of this post.  The significant portion is that he is clarifying, and not scum baiting with this post.  Keep that in mind.  It becomes significant here shortly.

 

Whats there to bait? I was on Matts.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

 

 

This is once again not that significant.  It's portraying what I think is an artificial view of the 1-2 distinction for the purpose of explaining the above and maintaining consistency. 

I’m scummy because I’m consistent. Excellent detective work.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

Then ends with a joke / disengage.

I almost always do.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

This set the relevant portion in motion.

Finally

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

 

I'm incredulous at the notion MWil is postulating.

Nice to make an impression.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I am reacting to MWil declaring Dome should "hope and pray" that matts flips scum because otherwise he "has some explaining to do."

Ironically I ended with a joke/disengage with LOL. Wow I never do that. Then again, I just did, but I guess I’m too consistent for my own good

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

Dome is confused to do.

That’s his default setting, right @ET80 and @Dome? Guy doesn’t know the difference between a mirror and window.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

Apparently so is MWil.

I’m not even sure at this point what you’re asking or the content of half the vocabulary you’re using.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I ask a simple question.  What would Dome have to explain?

Leading a lynch on Matts. In my experience, if it turns up false, usually town goes hard after the guy who either started it or piled on at the end.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I voice my view that this was absolutely egregious.  Maybe too egregious to be scum?  I don't know, why not look at how the interaction unfolds.

As part of the relevant background (which will be shown in the post sequence shortly): MWil is voting matts for reasons independent of Dome's case.

Alright, so this is MWil's response.  He ignored the substantive question, and went right to an attack on my credibility with a false equivalency.  I said 11 instead of 10 related to a vote total on matts.  He is shackling the outcome of a matts lynch to one person, Dome, despite MWil lynching him for other reasons.  These are not alike.

You should be a narrator.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

These are not alike.

He is floundering.  This is completely unrelated to the current conversation.

Wait, more like opinion blogger or columnist. Watching you spin things is classic. 

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I call him on what I explained above.

I rhetorically ask MWil why he is voting for Dome to draw out why it is egregious that he has independent reasons for voting for Matts, but is trying to push responsibility of the lynch's outcome onto Dome.

I draw it out further here.

See above 

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I conclude that I caught a bad guy because there is no way of answering this in a satisfactory manner.

And you throw your vote away on me, just as you started out the day before doing, along with MD4L at the time. 

Its also significant in that Matts just so happens to be not hammered by 1 vote. Man, I just don’t know why I would have been so caught up in a single vote.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

 

I was wrong here.

Imagine that.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

None of this actually answered the question.  You merely declared I was tunneling,

You were and are tunneling on me. Two separate days with votes on me at some point, all while giving those above a free pass.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

then tried to belittle my read by saying "you do this ever game,"

I stand by that, you do.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

and finally concluded by taunting me about your perception that I am unable to read you.

Bring it full circle to my entire NWO premise going back to the beginning of this game into the end of overwatch. Convenient you ignored this and left this out from your blog.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I am beside myself with this response.  I have no idea how no one else is acknowledging this interaction.

Because the 9-10 other people don’t care I’d assume.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

For whatever reason, you all seem to think refusing to engage me is somehow akin to standing up to a bully or displaying courage. 

I’m a teacher, you’re not a bully.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I have no idea why anyone is intimidated by interaction, but it's not what I attempt to portray or elicit.

You don’t understand how your superiority and accusatory tones while belittling others comes across. You just lack social awareness.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

But anyway, you don't evade or disengage. 

Nor will I as I’ve said over and over.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

Yet, somehow, you have evaded and disengaged throughout this whole conversation.

How about now?

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

  I dare someone to show me a reasonable construction of these posts that is not reasonably characterized as evasive or disengaging.

Forge and Counselor still getting a free pass on those two words.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I'm jeering at the concept that he's declaring he is not intimidated.

I’m telling you, if lawyer doesn’t pan out, narrating or opinion based blogging 👍👍

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I repeat this.  You haven't actually engaged me at all.  You've done some bargain bin tough talk and repeatedly some fallacies.

You just don’t like it being pointed out that you were wrong originally.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

The disengage, topic switch, banter commences.

Yep

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

I permit the disengage because somehow with 10+ people present, no one is seeing what I am seeing, and I hoped permitting a disengage would further my position later.

Translation: I am upset no one backs me and go sulk.

2 hours ago, SwAg said:

Additionally, I believe MWil is scum because (in addition to above) (1) MWil planted on matts the whole day and used it as a reason to abstain from most of the developments, and committed with this vigor, despite hardly pursuing matts on D1 (and in general being ambivalent on the subject) to "only matts"; and (2) he will likely continue to use it as a reason to abstain from developments.

That, and we have yet to have a single night action, so there’s not much to go off of...especially with 23 people and like 365 pages.

 

 

 

[SwAg]

I don't know what you're not grasping.