Quote Originally Posted by [M] Catherine the Great View Post
Elizabeth I would like take issue with a number of points you have made.

Firstly, I would very much appreciate it if in this mafia game and all other future mafia games, people stop using the logic of "Person Y did X and they were scum, so all people who do Y are scum." It's faulty logic. I can provide you with countless examples of someone being a driving force in the town who turned out to be town. I can also provide you with examples of scum members saying "In mafia game ABC, Joe the Dude did this and he is mafia". We have played a lot of mafia games now, it is likely that people of both affiliations have taken a variety of different actions, and you can use it to justify whatever you want. It is not constructive and I will hope any long time EoFF mafia players will agree with me on this one.
First off, I really don't think that was what she was getting at, she makes an interesting point that Alex was saying your not acting scummy because you were a driving force in the game, kind of ironic that you twist her words to get the finger pointed away from you when you claim she did the same, the Mao = Guilty = You = Guilty was just one of the points that she made, Alex said you weren't doing anything suspicious and it seems both Lizzy and myself disagree, pointing fingers at alot of people is in your opinion a good way to play the game, I do not agree.

Secondly, I did not say Gandhi was suspicious. I said he was on my radar because I wanted further clarification on his vote for me. You will note that once he did so I did not pursue the matter further. I feel that you have twisted my words to suit your agenda and I am not grateful for this misrepresentation. I would like to note that Tokagawa also voted for me and I did not question him; you should note I questioned the why, not the what. However, supposing I had accused Gandhi. Are you saying that I cannot question or accuse anyone of being suspicious if they vote for me? Using your logic, a mafia member should vote for every single other player in the game and be above suspicion. I am sorry but I am going to question anyone who has acted suspiciously regardless if they have voted for me, and if that makes me suspicious to you then so be it, but I would have little time for any opinion based on this.
You ask him to clarify this, then the next day you vote for him, how is that twisting your words, you can call it whatever you like but the fact remains that you voted for him the day after he voted for you, now seeing that you have been pointing your finger at alot of people I would think that was a scummy tactic, whether or not your agree is inconsequential, its my way of thinking. Having little time for it to me that says your trying to get others to come around to your way of thinking, trying to discard the fact.

I also believe that pointing the finger at more than one person is a good tactic, and not a suspicious one. I would be more suspicious or perhaps, exasperated, at players who only concentrate on one player. Remember that, in all likelihood, there is more than one member of the mafia. Naturally it makes sense to therefore look at more than one person if you want to contribute to the town's success. I feel that to accuse someone of suspicion because of this is inherently flawed.
As for my suspicions I think Cat is acting pretty scummy, Hard questioning of Mao, it could be a Mafia ploy, having a Mafia sacrifice themselves by acting stupid would have vindicated Cat by her in most peoples eyes
You will also notice how Ghandi voted for Cat yesterday and today Cat find's him suspicious, acting very scummy indeed, now, some people might say I'm acting scum like for casting my vote now then possibly not showing up again for the rest of the game, but if I get lynched then w/e that would prove my innocence and therefor have the finger firmly pointed at Cat, who I think could very well be scum
So let me clarify this. You put forward the theory that Mao was mafia and I was also mafia, sacrificing Mao would vindicate me. Therefore mafia voting for mafia team mates to vindicate themselves is a tactic they use. And now Mao has flipped town. Now what? And yet you - let's suppose you are right and you are indeed confirmed town - voting for me somehow proves I'm scum? I don't think this makes much sense. Are you saying town members only vote for the mafia and because a confirmed town votes for someone we should use that as a damning indictment? I honestly do not understand where you are coming from here.

I would like you to consider these points I have made. I would also like Simon who seemingly agrees with you to do the same. Thank you for your time.
Why should it matter if Lizzy or I go after one person at a time? the whole point of saying if I (or lizzy as the case is now) get hung and she (or I) flip innocent then that would add weight to our apparent shared beliefs that you could possibly be scum, if I am to win (with town) I can't afford to spend my time pointing my finger at every single person I think is suspicious, I need to get on the trail of the Mafia and get them hung, words are my only friend right now, I can only vote for women, and I am not Mafia so I can't afford to spend my time going after multiple people, one step at a time ya know, I go for people who I think are guilty and if I am wrong then I apologise, but I am not going to change my beliefs.