Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Mafia: Treason and Plot [Game over - town win]

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Ceres said:

@Blue Jay 22 does this concern you? He thinks your case sounded pure and transparent. 

The case was the opposite of pure. 

another case of conveniently misinterpreting what i said

 

getting pretty tiring. i specifically said that the case was FLIMSY but the way bluejay approached it was PURE. my god lol

  • Wat 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, falcon45ca said:

This is ridiculous.

 

DM didn't vote. So, what...he's talking about himself in this statement? 

 

I didn't vote because we were asking for an extension. read back. Not only that I was in the mix of that whole conversation, trying to decipher the validity of the letter. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Ceres said:

Hypothetically, BJ could be fabricating the entire thing (for various reasons). Why haven't you considered that possibility?

This could be very well true...but why. Look at the numbers. The Maf have possibly 2 remaining players.  What if we did lynch you and you came back town. That would put BJ in a very tight spot with explanation needed. and the way the sheep are in this forum...he would not have survived lol. BJ is a smarter player than that...The only thing that bugs me is the retraction of his belief in the letter. 

 

Basically everything in regards to my speculation of the letter is what I stated in my posts...but here you all are scum reading me. :picard:

Link to comment
29 minutes ago, hoggers said:

another case of conveniently misinterpreting what i said

 

getting pretty tiring. i specifically said that the case was FLIMSY but the way bluejay approached it was PURE. my god lol

I didn't misinterpret anything. I am saying that you thinking it was pure is suspect because BJ was absolutely not being pure. He had some angle and was pretending to believe this letter when he certainly didn't fully believe it. You suggesting he was pure and transparent indicates you just have TMI and already know he's a villager. 

Link to comment

One reason I don't like DM as a vote tonight is because I think he and hoggers are unlikely wolf/wolf based on their interactions (and hoggers' vote last night). Obviously, if there's a wolf between the two I think it's hoggers every time. 

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Ceres said:

I didn't misinterpret anything. I am saying that you thinking it was pure is suspect because BJ was absolutely not being pure. He had some angle and was pretending to believe this letter when he certainly didn't fully believe it. You suggesting he was pure and transparent indicates you just have TMI and already know he's a villager. 

yea and that angle is pure

 

lol. you let me know when you see a wolf do that, and i'll get back to u

Link to comment
43 minutes ago, DarthMelvin said:

I didn't vote because we were asking for an extension. read back. Not only that I was in the mix of that whole conversation, trying to decipher the validity of the letter. 

So what if every player who didn't vote was doing the same thing? You've completely invalidated your previous post

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Alain Vigneault said:

1. hoggers floats the idea of deep-wolves

2.  Blue Jay 22 gets a letter saying that Ceres is a wolf

3.  hoggers has seen Blue Jay 22 as town-aligned all game

 

Makes you wonder.

Yes. I don't think it's a coincidence his one "village read" is the same person receiving a letter. 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Ceres said:

What do you think his angle is?

I think the letter is fake or misleading. 

 

With the Sheriff having only ONE name at this time and the letter CLAIMS Ceres as scum...why trust BJ with that information. If anything the letter should have come next round.

 

Did the Maf want to throw gas on the BJ vs Ceres Banter??? 

 

Or Did BJ concoct this scheme?...to which I stated above be very risky to the 2 remaining members. 

 

10 minutes ago, falcon45ca said:

So what if every player who didn't vote was doing the same thing? You've completely invalidated your previous post

I actually meant to those that avoided the vote and voted else where...not those that DIDN'T vote. 

 

"What about those who avoided the vote. This needs more examination."

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...