Ace Attorney Mafia - Game Over (Won the Lawsuit!)

[Ken Masters]

Working on something. BrB

[Elieson]

Elie, who is most likely to be scum other than Eurykins? I know you said you had a bunch of nulls but yeah.

Eurykins should claim because I'm going to vote her. The only reason I voted DF was because I didn't want Eurykins to be at L-1.

I could sheep the DF case primarily because my only defense of her is on Meta and we all know Meta Ain't Worth It.

I already said I thought JB was super coasty. It's not solid, but calling out the Vig Crumb doesn't seem like a super townie thing to do despite thinking it.

I'd say top 3 scumdidates could arguably be those three (Eury, JB, DF in Most->Least order).

I'm tossing you and Quote up in the air because I've proven time and time again that I have a super hard time reading either of you two correctly. I think I'd lean you as slightly less scummy than Quote, for reasons like:

They promised results, and then came back and delivered specifically that

They've been against the idea of self-defense

While you've been fairly active but it's been just overall active. Quote's up-and-down activity spikes make her stuff more noticeable I guess?

[Dragonflare7]

I'm having a hard time getting into discussions that I can't quite follow. Regardless, yes, I know I have been inactive. I didn't want to be but when I can't exactly follow a good amount of the things being said, what am I supposed to do? In OC I didn't mind asking people questions to help me understand because I wasn't getting in the way of other things being said because of the OC, but I wasn't sure if I should just jump into a conversation to ask questions in an NOC game.

With regards to votes...I would have considered Toren...but...after the few things he's said (and the fact that he claimed Vig) I don't really know who else I would vote. I need to reread the other votes to see if any of them make sense to me this time... ^^'

Is a claim from me wanted by the way?

[Elieson]

I'm having a hard time getting into discussions that I can't quite follow. Regardless, yes, I know I have been inactive. I didn't want to be but when I can't exactly follow a good amount of the things being said, what am I supposed to do? In OC I didn't mind asking people questions to help me understand because I wasn't getting in the way of other things being said because of the OC, but I wasn't sure if I should just jump into a conversation to ask questions in an NOC game.

With regards to votes...I would have considered Toren...but...after the few things he's said (and the fact that he claimed Vig) I don't really know who else I would vote. I need to reread the other votes to see if any of them make sense to me this time... ^^'

Just pretend that this is the SkypeChat for an EiMM mass chat, and throw out your thoughts/questions.

Is a claim from me wanted by the way?

If Refa's gonna hop on Eury, then it might not be that big of a deal to hold it back. If people are still up in the air about who to vote for, then probably. I'd see if others weigh in. Personally, I'd liek to see a claim.

[Ken Masters]

I'm not buying it, Quote. While the fractalization of human behaviour is a proven Theory, it holds no weight in a stand alone game, an isolated situation.
So, statement in question: "Hystorical behaviour should not be considered"

Reasoning 1: If a player consistently behaves in a way that is deemed scummy, in the long run, given that statistically the players is bound to flip more times as Town as the amount of games played increases, said "scummy" characteristics would not apply to said player, effectively allowing the player to perform sai "scummy" actions without being called on it.
Reasoning 1: Given the past reasoning, a player can effectively harm the Town and be absolved under the basis of "he always plays like that"

Notice that I'm not implying a big, obvious scummy action in no way, but a pattern of play that would characterize the behaviour as harmful.

So given this, I say that I think you, Quote, had no real reason to vote Proto in the hypothetical situation of you being Town, and if you did, you certainly did not voice them in the thrtead, effectively denying the Town valious information.

I want a real, solid explanation on why you voted for Proto, NEVER decided to vote on someone else, and at the first mention of FEEL, VIBE OR GUT I will punch you through the screen, I swear.

To be continued---->

[Ken Masters]

Also before the tunneling chants come in, yes, I'm writing about more stuff as I type this

[Refa]

I'm having a hard time getting into discussions that I can't quite follow. Regardless, yes, I know I have been inactive. I didn't want to be but when I can't exactly follow a good amount of the things being said, what am I supposed to do? In OC I didn't mind asking people questions to help me understand because I wasn't getting in the way of other things being said because of the OC, but I wasn't sure if I should just jump into a conversation to ask questions in an NOC game.

With regards to votes...I would have considered Toren...but...after the few things he's said (and the fact that he claimed Vig) I don't really know who else I would vote. I need to reread the other votes to see if any of them make sense to me this time... ^^'

Is a claim from me wanted by the way?

This doesn't read as scum to me, especially the bolded (it's too genuine). Feels frustrated because she doesn't know what to do over newb scum lurking and not having opinions because they don't want to stand out.

I don't want a claim from you.

##Unvote

[Refa]

Also yeah, fair enough on your replies, LG & Elie.

[Dragonflare7]

Will keep that in mind Elieson, thanks. I'll try to ask questions when I need to, so...while I can, an SK (Serial Killer?) was discussed earlier, that's a 3rd party right?

[Elieson]

Ya

[Dragonflare7]

Alright, those posts make a lot more sense now... ^^'

[Ken Masters]

So the long delayed Kirsche incident.

I'm affraid that given the new context, where (apparently) Mafia players have a second, easy roleclaim made for them with real powers there is no real reason for Kirsche to claim such a risky role, especially given that there's no way to prove it like Sb could by Night Talking.

I am, at this moment, choosing to bury this case and accept the fact that Kirsche was just behaving in the conditionated way that said claim an the following mod affair generated, and he is indeed a member of the Town.

To be continued----->

[Eurykins]

If I claim, I'm liable to being killed. But hey, with the vig claim, maybe they'll be hit over me. But then again, it's a one-shot, so would probably still get shot over them. Damn, life sucks.

Could bother getting some reads/thoughts out, but work is just killing me atm, so just gonna say it and be done with it (since I would probably be mislynched either way and you'd see then? Lol).

> I am a Role cop.

Also part of the reason why I wasn't overly concerned about being seen as a lynch target. Being read as super townie just gets me shot faster, and so long as there's doubt on my slot, scum would be more okay with letting me live and just get out some scans. This just may be delaying the inevitable death (dying instead due to getting shot this next incoming night phase over getting mislynched over my apathetic state), but I figure it ought to buy town at least more time to not hit town again.

[Ken Masters]

Time for some more ghost whispering from our favourite ethereal eldricht abomination, Proto! :3

Proto, read your case on me.

I did.

Maintaining a miller claim would be dumb for Kirsche,

But he chose to maintain it, by arguing against the definition of tampering. Whether that's dumb or not doesn't change the fact that he took this stance. Once Green Poet added more info from Enigmar directly, Kirsche's stance shattered (from my perspective). I've already said this before:

Kirsche chose to stick with the claim while challenging the definition of "tampering". Whether his claim was legit or not, he chose to take the stance that his claim was not contrary to the rules. But then Green Poet's clarification from Enigmar destroyed his stance (from my perspective), so I voted for him.

as scum you'd know that Kirsche was town and that you'd be unvoting him at some point (hence the planned out part) because voting him,

For the planned out bit, well, Joshaymin did draw attention to my unvote (but for different reasons), and I did clarify it:

Yes. It's kinda like, I think it's more likely for him to be lying scum than for him to be honest Miller. But it rests entirely on his Miller claim and my interpretation of what Enigmar told Green Poet (about investigations being accurate)I don't think it's productive for me to go after Kirsche solely based on that, especially after Enigmar's clarification about tampering.

so if you had any problems with my unvote, it doesn't make sense for you to ignore my response.

I wouldn't buy you not realizing that what GP said was "hey, this is a scumslip",

Just making sure, we're referring to http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?...5743&p=4498363'>this post, right?
Because all she did was quote a rule and vote for Kirsche. As I've already said, it was this rule that made me think it was a joke. I could not have suspected that he was not a Miller for any other reason (unless me and Kirsche were both scum, but your scenario d denies that possibility) if it wasn't for this rule. Whether it was Green Poet who pointed it out or if I noticed the conflict between the rule and the claim by myself, all it means is that I did observe that the claim contradicted the rule. And so I declared that the claim was likely a joke. Even if it was actually Green Poet (non-scum) who drew the conflict into my attention, my response to SB still stands:

Last time I checked, the rules were publicly displayed to all players, not just scum, so I couldn't have "known" that it was a joke any more than other Townies could have "known". The only relevance to the "As scum" bit is that I'd know that he's not my scumbuddy, but that only excludes the possibility of me knowing definitively that Kirsche would have something to gain from a serious Miller claim, so your logic doesn't make sense to me.

I believe this quote addresses the argument in your case?

I don't need to cite SB's arguments because I was making my own point not sheeping his (you said it wasn't different but I don't see how it wasn't),

Your argument: "And if I were scum, d) I thought it was a joke because I knew Kirsche was not aligned with me and GP, another not scum,'s point was valid to me"
SB's argument: I was scum, and I thought it was a joke because I knew Kirsche was not aligned with me, and I figured he wasn't a Miller because of the rules.

The only difference between your argument and SB's argument is that SB directly referenced the rules as being the second factor while your case used Green Poet's post instead, where she simply quoted the rules. How does the fact that Green Poet mentioned it change the argument itself? Whatever your answer to this is, your original case post did not phrase it as being logically different from SB's argument.

and...that's it?

No, my quote wall had more stuff (like about what bothered you the most) that you're selectively ignoring.

All of this is you telling me "my case on you sucks" but not "this is where Refa has scum intent".

Maybe you missed my first case on you, but it's not that your case is bad. The problem is that almost everything in your case is something that I already addressed in a post before your case post. If you didn't like my responses, that would be fine, but to build a case while ignoring my responses that already addressed your case points looks very suspicious. I see it as scummy because it seems like you were looking for good reasons to vote for me without worrying about whether your case was correct, thus not bothering to acknowledge (or maybe not even reading) my responses to those points. An actual Townie would likely still consider those as being very good reasons to build a case against me, but since they're actually trying to find legit scum, they would also read, acknowledge, and evaluate my responses to those points as part of their case.

So while I actually think those are good points in your case, the fact that I did respond to almost all of them before your case post while your case doesn't acknowledge my responses to those, makes me feel that you are scum.

The one point I will concede is that your point on "Feels like it was planned" is, indeed, something that hasn't been addressed before and thus, I did not directly respond to it before your case post. However, that was not the only part of your case, nor was it the main part of your case (you even referred to it as being "maybe nitpicky"). The rest of your case still looks like scum trying to find good excuses to vote for me without caring about how I already responded to those points.

[Ken Masters]

Holy crap, cop claim.

[Refa]

...Who did you cop?

[Eurykins]

Riptor.

[Eurykins]

So it wasn't really a worthwhile scan with what happened ED2 lol. It seems my shittastic aim with scans still stands strong with me.

[Percivalé]

there's also that I have 8 hour work shifts which is why my activity has been spiking up and down

and bro if you're not "buying it" idk what I have to say to you then bc no one else wants to lynch me and you've been falling hard into my scum radar anyway because it feels like your activity/content has decayed since yesterday and you're still talking about Kirsche & I seem to be your only scum read which is weird like now that you can't tunnel Kirsche anymore you're gonna tunnel me now.

Not just that but you legitimately think I mindlessly tunneled my scumbuddy d1 which is lol

yeah I really did think Proto was scum. I'm sorry I can't hardwall gigantic cases like other people and I know my play was genuinely shit d1 but I am trying and that's something at least

[Refa]

Why Riptor over Elieson?

[Percivalé]

I'm gonna comment on everythi nng else when I get off work I'm kinda not supposed to be on my phone atm but mafia is serious business right

[Percivalé]

Sheeped my scumbuddy, not tunneled* sorry

[Eurykins]

Because Riptor felt more off to me than Elie did at the time that I sent in my action. Also felt like Riptor had the higher chance of having a more questionable role than Elie, but it seems I done goofed.

[Dragonflare7]

We're still discussing the Miller claim?

[Refa]

Well anyways, I don't buy it.

1) Your role conflicts with Kirsche's. Why would there be a miller that scans as guilty and a rolecop? And even if there were a cop and a rolecop, that brings up the second issue...

2) Your role doesn't have any limitations. All of the roles in this game that I'm aware of either have some limitation or are just bad (e.g. Quote's role).