[Official] Breaking Bad Mafia 4/18 Blue. Town&DEA+rug win

[Iron Butterfly]

As for not giving my opinion yet on anybody... I usually only badger the new folks... Since you are doing such a fine job of that yourself, why jump in and just confuse the situation?

Is this you softclaiming the role of "Badger"?

Neb correct me if I am wrong but this question by superkeener is the genesis of the weather Anarchist was soft claiming/bread crumbing that he was Badger. Why did you not include it, as it your case takes what he said completely out of context without this exchange? I read it as he was actually using the word badger as an actual verb as was not soft claiming.

Second can you come up with a theory as to why a player such as Anarkist would claim so early when there was absolutely no reason to? Why would mafia faction do so when there was no real case?

Now please explain again how anarchist was lying about claiming Badger when you put Superkeeners question in response to Anarchist.

On the surface your argument almost convinces me...but something about it just does not sit right with me.

[Rugbirn]

I want to beleive Anark, but the way he keeps posting virus' "pat on the back" makes me think that they are part of the same scum clan.

Heres the skinny on back patting sigs...It's a good thing you are not playing with Edocsil...mind like a brick and all.
I don't expect the new players to get my in joke.

IB, (or Skinny Pete), you better watch what you say and how you say it.....In-A-Gadda-Da Vita (Oh my, I'm not suppose to know that - being in high school and all)

[pancakemix]

Pancake... It was a gambit on my part, but everyone was so fixated on x-stor that something epic had to be done to get the ball rolling. Another few days of that and we would have ended up having to rush lynch someone.

True, it did get us off debating whether x-stor was too aggressive. Still don't agree with the tactic, but it's happened now so nothing to be done about the fact itself. That, and I have a hard time believing that that was your plan from the outset. I'm trying to recall if something like this has happened in the past. I feel like it has, but I can't nail it down...

1. You quite clearly state that are NOT Badger. I'm sure you'll try to spin this somehow, but your post is pretty clear that you were not "saying I was badger."

He quite clearly DIDN'T state that. Look again:

As for saying I was badger... That isn't what I did at all... I dropped clues in previous posts, not the one I was replying in...

He's saying he didn't say he was Badger, not that he wasn't Badger. A technicality yes, but it stands. (As for whether the "badgering" comment was a coincidence or a subtle pun, I'm not sure. Seems Nark didn't intend it, but he's a smart fellow)

Next post...This is rather nice. It's a rather long one with lots of finger pointing going on...but it's essentially an OMGUS on anyone voting for you. Very nicely veiled, but still an OMGUS. Let's remember, you are the one with the half-claimed VT with a 2 vote pressure on you...You are the one who has been playing oddly quiet, and then suddenly coming up with a half VT claim when two people vote you. There surely could be mafia on your "wagon"...the percentages dictate that possibility...but percentages also dictate that I could name any 5 players and one of them are mafia. Your play was stupid and attracted attention. Votes were warranted. To come back with an OMGUS vote does you no favors.

Well, take in to account that I now feel it would be far too risky to try to pull a fast one like this D1 as scum and that Badger's decently important enough to end up in a filler role: I appreciate the maneuver. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. That said, Nark wants to turn it around on the people who jumped thinking it was uncouth play, but I'm not sure that works either. You don't smell of someone who got caught in the act here. It's understandable that you'd be against being voted that way, but since your remaining case is largely based on him flip-flopping on claiming Badger, I don't know that it holds water.

[Nebuchadnezer]

As for not giving my opinion yet on anybody... I usually only badger the new folks... Since you are doing such a fine job of that yourself, why jump in and just confuse the situation?

Is this you softclaiming the role of "Badger"?

Neb correct me if I am wrong but this question by superkeener is the genesis of the weather Anarchist was soft claiming/bread crumbing that he was Badger. Why did you not include it, as it your case takes what he said completely out of context without this exchange? I read it as he was actually using the word badger as an actual verb as was not soft claiming.

I didn't include it because Anarkistsdream never responded directly to Superkeener's post. He did respond to Betiko's post. I read his response as..."I am not Badger, I left clues to who I am in other posts...go figure it out." Only after multiple players asking for his full claim, did he finally claim.

Second can you come up with a theory as to why a player such as Anarkist would claim so early when there was absolutely no reason to? Why would mafia faction do so when there was no real case?

No. I can't climb into the mind of Anarkistsdream and figure out what he's thinking. Are you really looking for WIFOM here? Can you explain why a VT would partial claim after two votes and then drag out a full claim?

Now please explain again how anarchist was lying about claiming Badger when you put Superkeeners question in response to Anarchist.

On the surface your argument almost convinces me...but something about it just does not sit right with me.

Again, Anark didn't address Superkeener. He addressed Betiko. I will allow that the sentence can be interpreted in more than one way. You are choosing to interpret it as "I didn't claim Badger in THAT post...I claimed Badger in my OTHER posts." Either way, it was a bit dodgy for him to do that.


fastposted

[rishaed]

As for not giving my opinion yet on anybody... I usually only badger the new folks... Since you are doing such a fine job of that yourself, why jump in and just confuse the situation?

Is this you softclaiming the role of "Badger"?

Neb correct me if I am wrong but this question by superkeener is the genesis of the weather Anarchist was soft claiming/bread crumbing that he was Badger. Why did you not include it, as it your case takes what he said completely out of context without this exchange? I read it as he was actually using the word badger as an actual verb as was not soft claiming.

I didn't include it because Anarkistsdream never responded directly to Superkeener's post. He did respond to Betiko's post. I read his response as..."I am not Badger, I left clues to who I am in other posts...go figure it out." Only after multiple players asking for his full claim, did he finally claim.

Second can you come up with a theory as to why a player such as Anarkist would claim so early when there was absolutely no reason to? Why would mafia faction do so when there was no real case?

No. I can't climb into the mind of Anarkistsdream and figure out what he's thinking. Are you really looking for WIFOM here? Can you explain why a VT would partial claim after two votes and then drag out a full claim?

Now please explain again how anarchist was lying about claiming Badger when you put Superkeeners question in response to Anarchist.

On the surface your argument almost convinces me...but something about it just does not sit right with me.

Again, Anark didn't address Superkeener. He addressed Betiko. I will allow that the sentence can be interpreted in more than one way. You are choosing to interpret it as "I didn't claim Badger in THAT post...I claimed Badger in my OTHER posts." Either way, it was a bit dodgy for him to do that.


fastposted

This is indeed a more thorough case, however a few things.
First off, let me say that I agree with PCM's take on this.
For Example the two Sentences:
He was playing like a douche.
vs.
He is a douche.
The two have two entirely different meanings!
The first is using a similie to describe the PLAYSTYLE, the second is used to describe a person.
Now for those unfamiliar with English, these might seem like the same things, but they aren't. For that reason it is also reasonable that some of us took his statement literally, and when he claimed, didn't view it as an inconsistency. Sure, he shoehorned around Betiko's question of who he was initially by saying I wasn't claiming that with that phrase, but he didn't lie.
I'm not defending him, just remarking on how the grammer can change the meaning of the entire sentence. More later today, I have Z's calling my name.

[iAmCaffeine]

Okay, I'm here, and I have caught up. Apologies for the lack of activity lately.

It seems I've missed a lot of interesting stuff. I don't have a whole lot of time right now, so here are my thoughts in brief:

1. I believe Nark is town-sided

2. I still don't like how X-Stor-X pushes. He is trying to lead but I haven't really seen much benefit from it yet. As someone said earlier, he is pushing but doing it wrong to get decent reactions, and the majority of reactions he does get he doesn't find satisfactory.

3. Can we lynch Rugbirn? Town or not, he's a detriment.

[betiko]

In any language "to play like" or "to be" has the same difference as in english.. Do you really think people can't express these rather simple concepts in their native language rish

Anyway, the way I understood nark's posts is the following:
1)super asks if he is softclaiming badger
2) i accuse him of softclaiming both role and name
3) in response, anark clearly says that he didn't drop a clue about his nameclaim in that post.
4) he reveals he is badger.

So while I wasn t giving much credit to neb s acusation in the first place, (i remembered that anark was playing on words and saying he didn't softclaim badger, not that he isn t badger)
He did say that no clue was dropped regarding his nameclaim after that. How could it not be a clue when we all immediately thought the same thing, and a few posts later nark confirms he is badger?
It doesn t add up.

[superkeener]

A Nark lynch just isn’t sitting well with me.
First we have this:

As for saying I was badger... That isn't what I did at all... I dropped clues in previous posts, not the one I was replying in...
Haven't people heard the term "badgering the witness?"

I know he doesn’t straight out say “I’m not Badger”, but even at my first read, I instantly interpreted it as him denying the role of Badger. And I still feel he was denying it.
Then he posted this speaking of the term “to badger”:

Actually, it is very commonly used in my line of work... The term, that is...

Since badgering a witness is something a lawyer would do, I had a thought…. Maybe he is Saul, since he says he drops “hints” in his post…
A think Saul could be a town PR.
Next:

And of course I am Badger... So, that makes me assume Skinny Pete is out there somewhere, too.

Can I believe this? I don’t know.
Finally:

WHERE ARE YOU:
3. Rishaed
9. Iamcaffeine
12. Rodion
13. Theforgivenone

Maybe this is just my thought, He could be trying to get the inactives more involved and I do not blame him for that, but I get the sense he is trying to redirect the attention currently on him... maybe we should look somewhere else.

I have no idea what to think about nark. However, I am leaning that he is either Badger, Skinny Pete, Combo, or Saul. All of which I believe to be a town role. And for this reason I cannot support a lynching of him right now.

But I have no strong feelings about any other players right now. This has been the topic that has held my attention the strongest. I think a re-read can perhaps shed some more light for me.

[jonty125]

Virus, you were the first to sign up - who are you?

OK, your new here, to get someone to claim. You need to build a case on them, that has the support of a near majority.

3. Can we lynch Rugbirn? Town or not, he's a detriment.

Unfortunately, stupidity, isn't a crime.

[strike wolf]

Official Vote Count

Metsfanmax
Anarchist (4)-x-stor, betiko, Nebuchadnezer, Jonty125
Virus90 (1)-Pancake
Rodion
Pancake
Cooldeals (1)-rugbirn
Mob Deadly
Nagerous
Theforgivenone
iAmCaffeine
Betiko
x-stor-x (2)-Iron Butterfly, Nagerous
nebuchadnezer (1)-Anarkist
Ironbutterfly
Superkeener
Rugbirn
Jonty125
Rishaed

With 18 alive it takes 10 to lynch. Deadline is Tuesday, March 4th in 4 days. Reminder anyone 5+ votes with the most at the end of the day will be lynched. As of right now, no one would be lynched upon reaching deadline.

Sorry I did indeed forget to go back and delete Neb from the cooldeals vote count.

In regards to a couple things that have happened in the thread. It hasn't gotten out of hand and seems to be settled down somewhat but please refrain from trolling, spamming and/or continually insulting players in this game. I understand that this is Mafia and debates can get heated and less than civil at times but I would rather not see debates turn into mud flinging contests here. If it just happens a few times, I am not going to say anything but if it gets to be a constant problem than I will have to take action.

[Iron Butterfly]

unvote x-stor-x

[StorrZerg]

Said i would do some stuff, will try to do that today.

So besides that, Anyone who does not vote by Monday. I would consider those actions of choosing to not vote very scummy + lurky. I would prefer not going down the list of inactives and pressuring with votes to get them to talk. but If i have to i will. (not i would not do this by random, i would be picking the inactive that looks scummiest.) 9/18 have votes up (counting iron cause he is active with voting) There might be a few more,but still. That is half the game choosing to be inactive on voting.

[Metsfanmax]

Said i would do some stuff, will try to do that today.

So besides that, Anyone who does not vote by Monday. I would consider those actions of choosing to not vote very scummy + lurky. I would prefer not going down the list of inactives and pressuring with votes to get them to talk. but If i have to i will. (not i would not do this by random, i would be picking the inactive that looks scummiest.) 9/18 have votes up (counting iron cause he is active with voting) There might be a few more,but still. That is half the game choosing to be inactive on voting.

I don't think that I am inactive simply because I chose not to vote for any weak case, but since you asked...

vote X-Stor-X

[StorrZerg]

if you think all cases out are weak, why dont you present a case you feel strongly about? seems odd for a single person to take a general psa so personally. so much so they feel the need to insta vote on a "weak case"

btw i have 2 inactive-ish people im going to pressure once i get to a computer. can write more on anark but in short.

he is being active even if i dont like his play.
he is causing discussion
he is voicing his opinion, and getting others to make reads.

[Metsfanmax]

if you think all cases out are weak, why dont you present a case you feel strongly about?

I don't have any case I feel strongly about. Welcome to D1.

[rishaed]

With the deadline showing up in two days, we need to decide about lynching. The breaking point is five votes, therefor I believe we can get a lynch off today, and maybe another claim. However I think its getting a bit to late in a day (unless we are all on) to get another claim without effectively lynching whoever we choose to get a claim from. I don't have any strong scum reads, some town reads. Rugbirn is obviously new from his posts, to these forums and CCMafia, but that doesn't justify lynching him. My best lead is Mets with his lynching the annoying one comment. Vote Mets. Rugbirn deserves a bit more time/advice before I'll support lynching him, and he is nowhere near disruptive to a game as Yomiel ever was from what i've seen from the Archives.

[StorrZerg]

Unvote

SuperKeener and Virus.

Wow. I wake up to a lot of X-Stor

I agree with Nebuchadnezer that XStor is dominating the conversation, but I disagree with Nebuchadnezer that it is a negative thing. Maybe just a little overbearing, but I can see how many would find it "off-putting"

However, after getting caught up on the 3 pages... It was basically noise to me.

I have always been on the fence about pushing for a D1 lynch on the inactives. I think it is still too early in D1 to start lynching inactives, hopefully we can get some more replacements if they do not have time for this game.

So this bothered me when i read it originally. I was trying very hard to generate discussion, making cases on people, giving my reads, asking others to answer questions and to have someone come into the game and say it was "noise" and basically say past 3 pages don't mean anything.

I agree with betiko on the case of nark.

My read on him right now is on the fence. Was his VT claim a mistake or a tactic? I am tending towards mistake; however, regardless it may be unsurmountable at this stage.

At this point, I will choose not to cast a vote on him just yet since we do have a few more days to see if another option presents itself.

@Mets
What do you mean by “awful misread of a post.”? If you are talking about when I asked if he softclaimed the role of Badger. I do not think it is an “awful misread.”
Badger, even though not a main character, is a good friend/dealer for Jesse. If Walt and Jesse are Town PR’s the badger would fit the role of VT very nicely.

Also, badger is a crappy enough character to be one of the fake claims.

I can see Badger has a fake claim, but I think he maybe one of the top 18 characters of the show and has a real chance of being an official role. However nark did say he wasn’t claiming Badger, so I don’t know.

So this post just baffles me a bit. You make it sound like to push a vote on him would be ok. Yet you also say, you are on the fence, and you are waiting for something else to happen, so you will not vote.

This quote is longer, so i will input my comments in blue.

A Nark lynch just isn’t sitting well with me.
First we have this:

So you start off with "THIS IS NOT SOMEONE WE SHOULD LYNCH" ok you said some other words, but thats how i see it.

As for saying I was badger... That isn't what I did at all... I dropped clues in previous posts, not the one I was replying in...
Haven't people heard the term "badgering the witness?"

I know he doesn’t straight out say “I’m not Badger”, but even at my first read, I instantly interpreted it as him denying the role of Badger. And I still feel he was denying it.
Then he posted this speaking of the term “to badger”:

Actually, it is very commonly used in my line of work... The term, that is...

Since badgering a witness is something a lawyer would do, I had a thought…. Maybe he is Saul, since he says he drops “hints” in his post…
A think Saul could be a town PR.

I can kinda see your thought process in arriving to Saul, how ever to keep with "theme" saul doesn't smoke meth iirc. So this seems like you are reaching to get to this point.
Next:

And of course I am Badger... So, that makes me assume Skinny Pete is out there somewhere, too.

Can I believe this? I don’t know.
I think it is pretty obvious to this point, yes that is what he is telling us. This is narks Claim.
Finally:

WHERE ARE YOU:
3. Rishaed
9. Iamcaffeine
12. Rodion
13. Theforgivenone

Maybe this is just my thought, He could be trying to get the inactives more involved and I do not blame him for that, but I get the sense he is trying to redirect the attention currently on him... maybe we should look somewhere else.

Could he be redirecting, sure! Yet i find this phrasing weird. You start off saying a Nark lynch is bad, yet you question something he does, yet you are ok with it. The "maybe we should" at the end is what gets me. You start off saying Nark is NOT the person to lynch, and to this point it feels contradicting.

I have no idea what to think about nark. However, I am leaning that he is either Badger, Skinny Pete, Combo, or Saul. All of which I believe to be a town role. And for this reason I cannot support a lynching of him right now.

How are you hung up on his claim? (well you are so o well) That doesn't baffle me as much as the group of names you give, and to say you believe all those to be town. As if to say "it doesn't matter what nark is, i think any possibility of what ever role he might have soft claimed to be town" Nark has clearly stated what he is, what he soft claimed as. So again i find this Very strange for you to bring up that he might have soft claimed several different people, and to conclude that all of those people are town, so by that reasoning anark is not a good lynch. That thought process does not sound town to me. I can agree its "a different opinion"

But I have no strong feelings about any other players right now. This has been the topic that has held my attention the strongest. I think a re-read can perhaps shed some more light for me.

And to end, this is the only thing he has a strong opinion on, yet it doesn't feel like a strong opinion since he ends with questioning himself again.

So the TL DR version.
His manner of play has been very odd to me, he has no strong opinions about something, and is constantly contradicting himself. The posts do not feel fluid, they feel like forced and awkward. The way in which he tries to defend nark feels off. Specially with the quote at the end "nark could be any of these guys ( Badger, Skinny Pete, Combo, or Saul. ) and since he believes all those characters to be town, nark is town. The lack of talk regarding if Narks ACTIONS have been town or scum bothers me, and when he does talk about NARKS actions its always wishy washy and could or could not.

##Vote superkeener

(small snip-it about virus)
Virus in short, my opinion hasn't changed much.
And he has not posted in several days, even though I've seen him browsing the mafia forum.
I find this very lurky and shady.

[pancakemix]

if you think all cases out are weak, why dont you present a case you feel strongly about?

I don't have any case I feel strongly about. Welcome to D1.

At this point, that's absurd. It's Day 1 but you have to have some kind of lead on someone at this stage of the day after everything that's happened.

My vote on Virus is from jokevoting, but it may as well stay. He hasn't posted in a week. I see you out there, Virus. Care to join us?

[Iron Butterfly]

VOTE SUPERKEENER

I can support this case. As I said earlier I believe Anarchist is town.

[Metsfanmax]

if you think all cases out are weak, why dont you present a case you feel strongly about?

I don't have any case I feel strongly about. Welcome to D1.

At this point, that's absurd. It's Day 1 but you have to have some kind of lead on someone at this stage of the day after everything that's happened.

My vote on Virus is from jokevoting, but it may as well stay. He hasn't posted in a week. I see you out there, Virus. Care to join us?

I didn't say I have no leads, I said that none of them were particularly compelling to me. The way X-stor is playing is slightly too aggressive for me to believe it's just good-guy-town playing. Setting an arbitrary deadline like "if you don't vote by Monday, you're scummy" is absurd playstyle to me, and it's putting pressure on everyone else so that the microscope is not on him. He's generating tons of accusations about how people play. But how many of those comments are positive, to help us figure out who is town? Essentially zero. He's throwing shit to the wall to see what sticks.

[virus90]

Yes im here and reading the posts etc, i understand, and realise the scummy position i have put myself in by not posting much, and am not offended at all by you guys focussing on that. i do want to point out however that the focus is on me, but there are other inactives aswell. I am the one mentioned as beeing inactive (for a reason, i understand) but im not the only one, im only the most mentioned (the way i feel it).

As for who to vote, i rather not vote on x-stor-x, i think he attracted enough heat to be either nightkilled, inspected, blocked or otherwise nightactioned so i assume that maybe tomorrow we might know more. Also i think for that reason he is town-alligned, He knows he is attracting heat and i think he knows the consequences and likelyhood of a cop investigating him. so unless he is like a maffia godfather (immune to cop inv) i think he is town. For now i go with the odds that he is not the maffia godfather. since the odds are bigger that he is town and we might enjoy his company if he is town indeed.

Because i now go with the assumption that x-stor-x is town i will join his vote on superkeener. and in my opinion the best day 1 case yet. But well day 1 cases are always based on interpretation and assumption so kind of weak. But we need a lynch (=information) and well i rather not have it be me.
Vote superkeener

Looking forward to day 2. i love information, and maybe the scene will help us a bit aswell

[Nebuchadnezer]

X-Stor-X...thanks for the input. I actually like the case he presents.

I'll back off Anark right now. As I said before, his comments can be read in two different ways. The Superkeener case is better in my mind. Very scum-like with all the noncommittal verbiage. Very well presented, X-Stor-X.

Vote Superkeener

[StorrZerg]

Yes im here and reading the posts etc, i understand, and realise the scummy position i have put myself in by not posting much, and am not offended at all by you guys focussing on that. i do want to point out however that the focus is on me, but there are other inactives aswell. I am the one mentioned as beeing inactive (for a reason, i understand) but im not the only one, im only the most mentioned (the way i feel it).

As for who to vote, i rather not vote on x-stor-x, i think he attracted enough heat to be either nightkilled, inspected, blocked or otherwise nightactioned so i assume that maybe tomorrow we might know more. Also i think for that reason he is town-alligned, He knows he is attracting heat and i think he knows the consequences and likelyhood of a cop investigating him. so unless he is like a maffia godfather (immune to cop inv) i think he is town. For now i go with the odds that he is not the maffia godfather. since the odds are bigger that he is town and we might enjoy his company if he is town indeed.

Because i now go with the assumption that x-stor-x is town i will join his vote on superkeener. and in my opinion the best day 1 case yet. But well day 1 cases are always based on interpretation and assumption so kind of weak. But we need a lynch (=information) and well i rather not have it be me.
Vote superkeener

Looking forward to day 2. i love information, and maybe the scene will help us a bit aswell

A lot of talk with little comments on others. I Say this because you have mentioned that you like putting + and - for how people play. Why not share some opinion about someone else that isn't myself or super

[Metsfanmax]

X-Stor-X's latest case is downright awful. He's trying very hard to make Superkeener look like scum by using confusing arguments and by questioning the fact that Superkeener didn't want to vote for somebody. I'm amazed that anyone would jump on this wagon.

So the TL DR version.
His manner of play has been very odd to me, he has no strong opinions about something, and is constantly contradicting himself.

Nothing in his post was contradictory. For example, one of your statements was "And to end, this is the only thing he has a strong opinion on, yet it doesn't feel like a strong opinion since he ends with questioning himself again." keener didn't say he had a strong opinion, he said that it was the most compelling situation. You can't generate a case just because someone is making a post that's stream of consciousness and doesn't have a necessarily strong conclusion. Not everything ends with a definite opinion one way or the other. Most of us are on the fence about what to make out of nark's situation -- keener just happened to say so, and as a result you're pegging him.

The posts do not feel fluid, they feel like forced and awkward. The way in which he tries to defend nark feels off. Specially with the quote at the end "nark could be any of these guys ( Badger, Skinny Pete, Combo, or Saul. ) and since he believes all those characters to be town, nark is town. The lack of talk regarding if Narks ACTIONS have been town or scum bothers me, and when he does talk about NARKS actions its always wishy washy and could or could not.

This is a huge straw man. What you've done is assert that this is how superkeener sees the situation: he wanted nark to be town, and then found a justification for how that could be true. There's no evidence in the post for that. Instead, he came up with specific reasons why the softclaim could be Badger or one of the other related roles. Remember, Saul, Badger, Skinny Pete, and Combo are all closely related characters, and keener is explaining clearly why the softclaim means he has to be one of these characters. Since these characters are likely town, he thinks nark is town. That's hugely different from saying "I think nark is town, now here's some characters he could be that would fit."

[betiko]

this superkeener wagon is quite funny. noted.