Mewbie 1472 ~ Game Ovah~

[Hopkirk]

Confirmed

[Hopkirk]

Town goon does not exist as you obviously know, do you want to carry on with this or end it early?

@Cheese: What kind of justification can there be for a random vote page one?

Cheese spent too long talking p1 about town goons-“How do I know your not trying to fake us out, saying there's definitely no doctor or roleblocker”-when he knows they don’t even exist.

VOTE: Cheese

[Hopkirk]

@Guyett: “XLAV and Cheese now that Pharp has said it was all a joke why continue voting him? Do you”: Why do you think someone saying their scummy (from cheese and xlav’s view) acts were a joke is justification for the votes to be removed?

I dislike the way the Pharp said “fun” rather than “gambit”, and doesn’t say what his conclusions are- something that it seems pointless to have done the gambit without doing.
So I’ll do that bit. Cheeses interactions I mentioned +47 suggests cheese was trying to be opportunist- get an easy lynch on a “vi”.

I conclude that cheese looks the worst so far and thus my vote shall not move yet.

(Stuff like vi can be searched on mafiascum wiki if you don’t know what it means.)

Pedit- karlos also going in the potential scum pile. There's a difference between voting because you didn't understand what he was doing and voting because you think it was scummy. @Karlos: Why would scum have any reason to claim there and why do you think other sites don't exist?

[Hopkirk]

So karlos and cheese leaning scum from it and pharp leaning town from it.

[Hopkirk]

@Guy: I'm asking why should "i was joking" be an excuse for scummy play? I don't view his play as scummy, in fact i view the ones complaining about it as scummy, but you're telling people who say its scummy that's a valid excuse.
Also why do you think it was "dicking around">a reaction test?

I view it as a successful reaction test- i suspect that karlos and cheese (at least one of them) is scum.

[Hopkirk]

Pharphis has played on other sites before. I can believe he was trying to lure a newer player into jumping on that.

So do you think he was scum trying to mislynch new players or town trying to catch new scum?
---
Obviously in a newbie game he's going to be voted for a gambit. His was pretty town- out of rvs quick and showed some pretty scummy stuff up.

@Pharphis: Pedit/ post-edit.
Would you like to explain to the other players your reason+conclusions?

@Guyett: Ok so we agree it was a gambit rather than just "joking".

[Hopkirk]

VOTE: king kenny
lurking

So why are you saying this instead of responding to my qs?
Why do a risky gambit then not use what you get from it...
Why go for a policy lynch while on L-1?

First is most important there.

[Hopkirk]

Pharphis has played on other sites before. I can believe he was trying to lure a newer player into jumping on that.

So do you think he was scum trying to mislynch new players or town trying to catch new scum?

I'm not sure. I have played with him before and he is telling the truth that he makes bold moves early, but whether that means he is town or scum, I don't know. He has a habit of getting lynched D1 as scum or dying N1 as town (or other).

This is bad logic. It sounds like you're saying he's usually lynched as scum so if he's being lynched it's always because he's scummy. That just gives scum the opportunity to lynch him easily.
You play on the same forum? How much.

Random vote stage is the usual way a game is started. There is generally no justification for votes if you are the very first poster- as there can't be. The aim is to get people talking.

@Cheese: I am not new to this site and am even less new to mafia. (though you're probably asking the townspeople/goons)

[Hopkirk]

Joking=fun in that neither = a reaction test= what it should be/looked like.

Karlos was opportunistic i feel.

B/w?

Now three things.
1.) Doing a reaction test then voting someone else despite getting a scumread from the reaction test defeats the point of the reaction test making you look bad.
2.) "I vote for who I think needs prodding" is a really stupid thing to do. Only vote for those who should be lynched.
3.) A policy lynch is a bad reason to vote someone- lurkingetc doesn't make someone town or scum and you want to be lynching scum- thus supporting the worst kind of lynch (naturally this makes you look bad) when on L-1 could get you lynched.

"Oh, and for future reference, players can vote for themselves, right?": Why would you vote yourself as town.

@Bipolar: Then why is he only lynched day one as scum rather than being lynched day one as either alignment? The way you said it sounds like you were subtly trying to make people think if they were voting him they should stay there.

[Hopkirk]

The gambit he made seemed pretty town.
The wagon grew a bit quick for a wagon on scum- thus suggesting he's town.
His play after the gambit however is pretty scummy.
I need to see more of his responses before i decide for sure what he is.

[Hopkirk]

So why would he be lynched more d1 as scum than as town?

[Hopkirk]

I am saying that if he's lynched d1 most of the time then just saying he's lynched d1 appears to be an attempt to make people feel justified in voting him- do you understand what i mean?

"tells me nothing about his alignment": Fair enough i suppose. Usually a risky gambit like that that helps the town would be a town play but him asking "can we self vote" could mean he's suicidal rather than being pro-town.

@Cheese: Why are you asking people why they are still voting the person you are voting in the same post you acknowledge the wagon is probably scum motivated? If karlos is scum then pharp probably isn't so why voting pharp over karlos?

[Hopkirk]

@Para: If you have scum reads you vote them before voting lurkers- do you disagree here because a vote on kk suggests you do.
Yeah why vote lurker when you have actual scumreads?

@Chesse: As town your vote is your best weapon so should be used to pressure people (into talking), people you think are scum that it.

[Hopkirk]

The point of voting a scumread is to put pressure on them to help you become more/less confident in the reads. Vote for people you think are scummy or they can just ignore you.

[Hopkirk]

What is the point for your vote being there atm?

[Hopkirk]

Lets pressure karlos then. He seems scummiest.

[Hopkirk]

Opps thought i voted karlos in 74.

VOTE: Karlos

[Hopkirk]

@Karl: Want to explain why his play was scummy then? Seems a lot like you're just wagoning atm.

[Hopkirk]

Getting the scallywag?

[Hopkirk]

"his actions suspicious"
Statement=/=explination. What about his actions suggests a scum motivation.

[Hopkirk]

Since i last posted:
Cheese now looks worse.
Xlav looks towner.
Karlos still looks scummy.

[Hopkirk]

"Pharphis another mistake that you did, was voting on me for no reason whatsoever than: If you vote me I vote you back.": What do you mean here? You weren't voting for pharp when he voted you.

[Hopkirk]

"Not Voting: King Kenny, BipolarChemist, XLAV [3]"
Generally in mafia you should be voting someone. Not using your vote allows scum to hide easily.
If you aren’t voting please vote a scumread of yours.

Kenny is giving off a scummy feel. He wants a hammer on someone… but still hasn’t said anything about them or voted them now para is off l-1. This suggests he doesn’t actually think para is scum but he just wants to lynch anyone. You could say that him not hammering discounts this theory but idk if anyone would hammer in their first post without saying anything- no way he’d get away with it.

143 and 146 support the view he’s lurking+doesn’t care about scumhunting. Doesn’t think game’s moving, complains it’s not (trying to make himself pro-town for wanting the game to move) despite he’s got the least content and posts of anyone.

@Kenny: Nothing to go on? What about para and that wagon that reacher L-1 very quickly? Do you still think para is scum? If not why did you feel like hammering? If so why aren’t you voting him? Who on the wagon do you think is scum- bussing or leading it.

[Hopkirk]

@Xlav: Please explain the vote you just made with justification. While king is scummy voting without saying why looks like you're voting "for a lynch" rather than "for a scum lynch".

Top suspects: Kenny and Karlos
Secondary suspects: Cheese and Xlav

I fell as if both scum are there.

[Hopkirk]

"Reason: For voting for me."
Scummy why?
And answer my other q.

[Hopkirk]

Furthermore you keep avoiding posting anything- to the extent of not having voted anyone yet. You complain about no content while not giving any and so forth.
@Kenny: If my questions (142) i asked are not responded to soon i will be voting you.

[Hopkirk]

@Xlav:
"Because I wanted to hear what other people think of his post before I decided.": Why do you care what over people think about it? Avoiding lynching/voting someone you think is scum because you think people won't agree with you... that's not going to find scum and you appear not to care about finding scum.

[Hopkirk]

The whole town goon thing was not a joke. It was an effective gambit done by phara to get reactions and end rvs quicikly.

What i said in 181 was that you said you "Because I wanted to hear what other people think of his post before I decided."
That appears as if you care more about being populist than you do of scumhunting.

[Hopkirk]

@Bipolar: You haven't mentioned anything about me (indicative of being scum) so please explain your reasoning. Or your vote means nothing.

Also @Bipolar: I've already said my top two picks are karlos and kenny. Why do you think my vote being on karlos+me saying he's my top scumread would suggest anything other than that he's my top scumread? Any Kenny being my second one should tell you I think he’s scum, but I would not hammer until he has had a chance to claim and respond to my qs.

[Hopkirk]

@ Bipolar: You made a vote. You have mentioned no reasoning behind the vote. You say it's justified. Conclusion=it isn't justified thus i am asking for you to provide reasons for the vote.
Furthermore kenny has 4 posts. I have said why he's looking scummy already.

Your point on xlav is just wrong too. He says people are null for not posting much-not much they say, while xlav says kenny is scum-his posts have been scummy.

So many lies+misreps make bipolar suspicious. I think i'll be taking a look through his iso.

[Hopkirk]

Bipolar:
First person to try for the easy looking policy lynch.
The stuff about playing with phar before.
“My read on Pharphis right now is cautiously leaning town.” While voting phara.
Misrepping people’s motivations.
Not justifying votes.

Seems like he wants to take the opportunities he can to vote people/discredit people so others will vote them- voting people while not doing so.

Please justify your actions.

[Hopkirk]

First obviously wasn't rvs i know. The point of the gambit was to see who'd be happy to do a policy lynch/easy quick lynch - you were the first to bite were you not?
What have i misrepped?
"I've explained why I did not remove my vote from Pharphis, and it was to garner reactions from other players while he was at L-1.": You never leave your vote on town. This is one of the scummiest things to do imo- voting someone you read as town regardless.

I've already said about kenny and there's nothing more to say until he posts again.

What's the point of a "pressure vote" if you have nothing to back it up? A single vote with no logic behind it doesn't actually pressure anyone.

[Hopkirk]

You had already acknowledged the whole "town goon" thing meaning you placed it there for a reason other than purely a random vote.

You're not "attempting to question back at you" unless you actually use questions.

[Hopkirk]

How am i what?
Or are you merely questioning my general feeling at the moment?

[Hopkirk]

In which case i hope you don't expect an answer since you won't tell me what you what an answer to.

[Hopkirk]

freudig

[Hopkirk]

You don't vote people who you think are scum.
You don't vote people without justification.

Those are my views.

[Hopkirk]

Is "to pressure" a satisfactory justification?

I think i've already said this but- one vote on someone that's just a vote with no reasoning behind it isn't pressure.

[Hopkirk]

Not only did he not see the gambit (see 23) but he says he didn't think para was scum.
But he's not really a scumread for me either.

@Xlav: I know, I'm getting a bad feeling that he's getting replaced- where all his actions will be excused as "oh he was bad town" rather than him responding.

[Hopkirk]

We wait for them to get prodded. We can do other stuff while we wait but my top scumread atm is king.

[Hopkirk]

"I don't see any questioning of him. ": So how is other people not asking me qs my fault? You were voting me and couldn't even give any reason for me being scum.

All of bipolar's qs have been answered before (recently), seems like bios trying to look town by asking "town" questions.

@Mod: Can we have the kenny and karlos prods now?

[Hopkirk]

You're only trying to get people to talk about stuff they've already said.

Hey bipolar, want to do a read list?

[Hopkirk]

“I see a lot of questioning coming from him”
“And you're trying to shut down any conversation at all.”
Pick one.

I want to see original questioning. For example, you asked Cheese who he wanted lynched when he’d said 4 post before that Kenny is his top scum. What does this actually help you with? You don’t seem to be hunting scum.

@Bipolar: What could have changed guyett’s opinion when Kenny hasn’t done anything else? The wagon has one more person than before.

[Hopkirk]

"no one is asking hopkirk many questions "
This reflects badly on the rest of you, not on me. I can't ask myself questions and

you're choosing not to

ask me any.

Pedit: Who claimed?

[Hopkirk]

I think you misread the word clammed.

@Bipolar and pand: You say i'm not being asked questions but...don't ask me questions? Ask me questions if you want questions asked of me or you're just massive hypocrites.

[Hopkirk]

So you want me to answer what? You're still not responding to this question.

It's a bit annoying that the scummiest people both need prods.

[Hopkirk]

Burden of proof.
You have provided no reason that i am scum so there is no evidence i need to prove wrong. It lies with you to provide reasoning.

"Answer what?"
You're not even making sense now. You two say you don't like the way i'm not being asked any questions and that makes me scummy- that's basically saying i'm scummy because of YOUR actions rather than mine which is a basic fallacy.

I'm asking him what he wants answered as obviously he wouldn't be saying "Hop should be asked more questions" without asking questions about my motivate or actions unless he's stupid/really hypocritical/scum.

What is making you uncomfortable. You haven't said why anything I've done is bad you've only said why things you+others do in relation to me is bad.

[Hopkirk]

Why would i look suspicious for not being asked questions? If you view not being asked questions as scummy then logic should clearly tell you that it's a reflection on the people NOT asking the questions.

Even when i directly ask for questions you have none. What questions do you want me to be asked?

[Hopkirk]

So you want to explain the logic that nobody in the game thinking there's anything to suggest I'm scum makes me scummy? Because if it's "bc he hasn't been accused" rather tha "because of what he's said/done" then it's not real logic.

[Hopkirk]

A vote implies logical backing. If it doesn't then it has no reason to be.

[Hopkirk]

Conclusions?

[Hopkirk]

Compare it to hoe you'd expect an active and logic town to react. The expected reaction to be voted for very bad/no reasons would be to ask them to substantiate and if not then scumread the voters.

Since you could not substantiate or even defend any of your "reasoning" (or lack of it) @bipolar- you've gone from null town to null scum. Phar is still town read though.

[Hopkirk]

Two posts from xlav:
“King Kenny - Scum, scummy vibes, hammering”
“Kenny is just a noob who seems like he doesn't know what he's doing. I think he isn't scum.”
@Xlav: Please explain why your view changed with no new content from Kenny.

Btw Kenny has been on the site in the last two days thus is actively choosing not to post.

@Bipolar: Short answer=yes in the way your doing it/not doing it. Long answer= If you have no logic behind the vote then it’s not being used effectively. If you’re keeping you’re vote there when I’ve said it means nothing with no reasoning behind it- and you don’t add any reasoning, as now- then I do have a problem with your vote as it is effectively not being used and you are happy to keep not using your vote.

@Guyett: I said a while back that karlos was my #2 scumread. Where are you getting null from.

I will put together a reads list if anyone wants but i've said my individual reads in the thread already.

[Hopkirk]

Hop why are you voting a null read instead of one of your 3 top scum reads?

Assuming this is for me. You have a fair point. But my vote on him seems to bother Hopkirk. So I both am entertained by it and it has gotten people talking. I'd also rather vote my null read and see what they think of it, rather than someone who I have a read on already.

It bothers me because i was lightly reading you as town and your vote was extremely scum motivated...

[Hopkirk]

I want a fully reasoned list of reads from you karlos.

[Hopkirk]

@Karlos: The problem with Bipolar is that he is only pretending to use his vote. If you can’t/refuse to justify a vote then that’s not town motivation, it’s a vote that you can’t justify and that is a vote from scum. Though he’s not a top scumread.

@Karlos: Scum can scum hunt.
“I think the next lynch and nightkill will give us a lot of informarion. Otherwise we are at a dead end here.”: Rubs me the wrong way but I can’t really explain it.

I agree guyett should post more but dislike the way you indicate it him scummy while Kenny doing much worse is town because of it- explain please.

This isn’t really indicative of alignment but I just found it hilarious “Alex hasnt posted in a while which I don’t like” (someone who hadn’t posted for 4 days about someone who hadn’t posted for one day saying lack of activity made the second person suspicious).

Karlos does look better than before (still a scumread but minor instead of second).

UNVOTE: Karlos

VOTE: XLAV

I would prefer to vote Kenny but I don’t want to hammer him until he’s responded and his alignment is fully cemented.

[Hopkirk]

That hammering when xlav started to become more suspect without a claim or even waiting for him to return is just bad. staying where it is now for a while.

“What I did was to save time.” Is bad.

“want me to hard claim?”
“Do not claim”
“Anyway, heres my claim.”
Wth? He wanted to claim townie there. Explain why you did this xlav as I see scum motivation behind it.

Currently I expect Kenny to flip scum anyway but I’m not sure about xlav as partner.

[Hopkirk]

“leading alot of scumhunts”
Being pro town is a scumtell?

Xlav and Cheese for scum then.

VOTE: Xlav

[Hopkirk]

Pretending to want to take back anti-town moves isn’t town. Claiming early as vt is often done by scum (it’s on one of the how not to be lynched guides iirc).

Karlos’s main suspect seemed to be xlav. Then Karlos dies despite being a highly suspected player (glad I didn’t lynch him now).

Xlav is a new player. I can see him just killing someone who suspected him after all xlav’s scummy stuff. I then propose that his partner was also new-as he would have agreed to the kill. Cheese is scummy them self and is new thus fits the criteria.

Thus cheese and xlav is my current read as the scumteam.

[Hopkirk]

I consider selfvotitng in this way to be a scum tell.

[Hopkirk]

gosh guys i'm so sorry. . .
I think XLAV is lynched now, and this game the town will most likely lose. Because of me and XLAV.

if XLAV is town ofcourse

This does NOT come from town. Doesn't support the idea of xlav scum though.

VOTE: Cheese
This is L-1

[Hopkirk]

Cheese claim.

[Hopkirk]

I just looked over the dead players (while going to see the setup) and i realized that all the prs have flipped already.

Everyone is either a townie or a goon now so claiming is totally pointless.

[Hopkirk]

I don't even feel the need to point out how everything cheese is saying is what scum would say.
Cheese is scum and dying, next is finding partner.

[Hopkirk]

Just to clarify-by the first part i mean go through he posts.

[Hopkirk]

I don't even feel the need to point out how everything cheese is saying is what scum would say.
Cheese is scum and dying, next is finding partner.

I'm kinda of laughing at this right now to! it just proves what I said. No matter what I say, I'm dead

You're scum and everyone knows so i don't feel like wasting my time showing it.
If by any chance you are town DO NOT self hammer.

[Hopkirk]

Cheese knew already not to self hammer as town.

Xlav asking cheese if he should hammer him srikes me as asking if he should bus.

@Xlav: Evey one has claimed.

[Hopkirk]

Voting quickly here isn't really recommended as scum can easily quick hammer (one town on town vote+two scum votes=scum win). Therefore voting straight away is not a good idea in lylo.

I'd say xlav is scum here.
Partner being either bipolar.
Possibly guyett but less likely than bipolar.
Most likely town being alex.

[Hopkirk]

@Bipolar: Oppertunist? The people in my probable scum are the ones i've had as null scum/scum (you/xlav) as opposed to town/null down (alex/guy). Look at my previous posts for why i want an xlav lynch (which is what i would prefer today just in case).

[Hopkirk]

I believe xlav is scum thus presenting three potential scum teams as I shall explain below.

1.) Xlav and alex: Xlav is missing a lot of detail and is pretty weird- he seriously says "consider xlav scum" but completely discounts alex? That sounds to me like he's trying to protect alex. Plus he constantly goes on about how town he is and tries to say he's 100% town with bad logic behind it. This is not something sane scum would do with their partner as if xlav is lynched then scum alex would be lynch straight away. Thus xlav most likely isn't scum with alex.

2.)Bipolar and xlav: makes the most sense it terms of individual scumminess for previously given reasons. The para kill makes sense as coming from bipolar as para is the only one who would know pol’s scum meta.

3.) Guyett and xlav: This is actually possible, albeit farfetched. Xlav hasn’t said guyett is scum ever before (and now seems to be attacking him because… he looks like an easy target) while Guyett doesn’t seem to push at all for xlav scum despite suggesting it. I could see a big bussing play between them to try and clean one of them (probably aiming to clean guyett here as they’d be more confident with him in lylo). If this is the case then if successful then guyett would probably kill alex and try to convince me to lynch bipolar in lylo. Plausible, but idk if they’d want to play a risky gambit so not that likely.

Xlav’s recent stuff is pretty inconsistent, and has a more scummy motivation than townie motivation, thus I feel this is our best option, and something I should have followed through with yesterday (sorry cheese ).

VOTE: Xlav

I feel like I'm going to be the nightkill tomorrow night.

[Hopkirk]

He's not being town.

[Hopkirk]

VOTE: Xlav

You said to not vote too early, to avoid a quick lock by mafia, yet someone else votes XLAV and you jump right on. Aren't you doing exactly what you said mafia would do?

When there's a vote on each person it's pretty much a choice between voting those two people. The only way i saw guy as scum would be with xlav while xlav could be scum with you thus scum xlav.

[Hopkirk]

@Bipolar: Oppertunist? The people in my probable scum are the ones i've had as null scum/scum (you/xlav) as opposed to town/null down (alex/guy). Look at my previous posts for why i want an xlav lynch (which is what i would prefer today just in case).

That's not an explanation of why you think XLAV is scum. Yesterday you based your scum read on XLAV as cheese and him being a scum team.

What reasoning do you have for XLAV being scum and for me being scum?

Nice misrep. I said yesterday at the start xlav and cheese were the two scummiest players therefore a scum team. I then later said that if cheese was scum i didn't think xlav would be scum.

For reasons use ctrl f xlav in my iso

[Hopkirk]

“But at the time you voted XLAV, you were putting the second vote on XLAV. That seemed like a big move in the direction of a lynch. It even seemed like Guyett noticed this bu unvoting.”

Yeah, because I fully want an xlav lynch today.

“Yesterday you had associations of people. I want to hear more reasoning for an XLAV lynch than just "if cheese is scum, XLAV isn't", which I'm assuming that means the opposite as well (if cheese isn't scum, XLAV is).”

Seriously read what I said yesterday instead of pretending you remember. I said they most likely weren’t a team when cheese thought he hammer xlav- which didn’t seem like a move he’d make as town. If you look through my whole iso I’ve given specifics.

“Hypothetically: Let's say both you, Hopkirk and XLAV are town, then there are two mafia that can easily jump on XLAV and win the game. Basically the situation you laid out in your first post of today.”

The same thing can happen if both of xlav and guyett were town. It didn’t. Thus either guyett or xlav is scum. Xlav is much more likely to be scum than guyett. Thus I voted xlav.

Either xlav or guyett has to be scum (unless slow scum).

This defence reveals bipolar to be xlav’s partner.

We lynch xlav today and bipolar tommorow.

[Hopkirk]

@Bipolar: If you're not scum remove that vote as scum can quickly hammer me.

[Hopkirk]

@Bipolar: If you're not scum remove that vote as scum can quickly hammer me.

You're making my point for me!

If you are wrong about XLAV, then mafia can quick lynch him too. You are going against your own point at the beginning of the day and to me it looks like you are looking for both a quick lynch and a mafia win.

The difference of course being that xlav is scum and i am town. Xlav WASN'T quicklynched when he had a vote on him so we know for sure he or guyett is scum. You vote when you're absolutly sure on scum not when you have a slight suspicion.

“

The same thing can happen if both of xlav and guyett were town. It didn’t. Thus either guyett or xlav is scum. Xlav is much more likely to be scum than guyett. Thus I voted xlav.

Either xlav or guyett has to be scum (unless slow scum).

This defence reveals bipolar to be xlav’s partner.

You're assuming I'm defending myself, which I'm not. I'm pointing out the flaw in your voting excuse.

If you are wrong about XLAV, then mafia can quick lynch him too. You are going against your own point at the beginning of the day and to me it looks like you are looking for both a quick lynch and a mafia win.

I said you're defending xlav...

@Bipolar: So xlav or guyett- which of them is scum?

[Hopkirk]

And yet your only criticism of me was that i voted someone i am positive is scum... to which you respond to by voting me.

[Hopkirk]

""Voting quickly here isn't really recommended as scum can easily quick hammer (one town on town vote+two scum votes=scum win). Therefore voting straight away is not a good idea in lylo.""
You completely missed the point bipolar. The reason you wait is so you're absolutely 100% sure that you're going to lynch scum as otherwise you lose. Since i was totally sure xlav was scum then i voted him.

"The only problem here is say if the two scum weren't both online when they could quick hammer."
They had ample oppertunity to hammer xlav and didn't thus xlav is mafia.

[Hopkirk]

That merely confirmed what i'd being saying for several days. If he was town then scum could have hammered him (unless they were ridiculously unlucky) which supports my assumption he's mafia. I said at the start of yesterday i thought xlav was mafia so why are you trying to present me like i've never said anything like that before?

[Hopkirk]

Hopkirk says that he thinks Alexcellent is town. He has also stated that he thinks either Guyett or XLAV is scum, but the both together is out there.

So if he thinks XLAV is mafia, then Guyett has to be town, and because he thinks Alex is town, my only option from that logic is that Hopkirk and XLAV are mafia buddies.

So according to Hopkirk, if XLAV is mafia, so is he.

Actually i'm saying it's YOU and xlav which i've said and you conveniently miss out, or possibly guy and xlav.

“he believes XLAV is scum”
Xlav is not flipping town. If the scumteam is bipolar+guy, alex+guy or alex+bipolar I will eat the top hat in my avatar.

Since when did voting the person who has been a major scumread for most of the game and that you are convinced is scum become scummy?

[Hopkirk]

You really don't get this do you.
It's not a case of quickly meaning "don't vote for a few days" it means "don't vote until you're positive".
I assume it's you and xlav bipol. If not then xlav and guy. Don't even know why you'd think i was saying i'm scum as i've said he has two potential partners (and neither are me).

[Hopkirk]

Scum qt can be released.

Good show guyett.

[Hopkirk]

In retrospect i agree i shouldn't have voted xlav until someone else had, but it was my first scum lylo where i've had a partner so i wasn't sure how to play it.

People who suspected me eariler on should have looked for more reasons as overwise there is no pressure there and nobody will join you on the vote thus no pressure will be made.