|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 10:34:22 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 23, 2012 10:34:22 GMT -5
Did anyone vote you after you claimed? I can get down with your thought Vote: Hoopy Frood [/color] Mr Special Ed - I'm not going to vote for myself Vote: CatInASuit [/color] Vote: Nanook [/color] septimus - likely coroner Silver Jan - Mason? guiri - Town according to Idle[/quote] Seeing as Idle Thoughts was talking about people who voted for him and not Mahaloth... As both I and Nanook voted for both Idle Thoughts and mahaloth AT THE SAME TIME, your reasoning for this vote is flawed. Would you care to try again?[/quote] Nope, I'm good. I figure we're likely to have some wolves voting for Idle before he claimed. I took off the ones I felt were least likely to be wolves. So, while it might not be powerful reasoning, it's certainly not flawed.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 10:42:07 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 23, 2012 10:42:07 GMT -5
We need votes people:
Post count:
CatInaSuit 15 Idle Thoughts 12 Høøpy Frøød 11 septimus 8 Mr Special Ed 7 guiri 7 Suburban Plankton 5 Merestil Haye 5 gnarlycharlie 4 Boozahol Squid, P.I. 3 Drain Bead 2 peekercpa 2 scathach 2 Silver Jan 2 BillMc 1 texcat 1 Nanook 1 colby11 1 hirkatbawa 0 Pollux Oil 0 Inner Stickler 0 Sister Coyote 0 deon 0
Not voting: BillMc colby11 texcat Nanook Drain Bead hirkatbawa peekercpa Pollux Oil Inner Stickler Sister Coyote Suburban Plankton Boozahol Squid Merestil Haye deon
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 10:44:26 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 10:44:26 GMT -5
I think lyching lurkers is a really easy way for scum teams to try to lynch other roles other than the ones they're in (for example: Why not vote for one of the current vote leaders? Is that because one of them is your wolf buddy? Why go for the inactive players when a wolf could come along at the last second and choose any of the inactives they want (that aren't wolves)?) Harumph. Yeah, except the people voting LtL are likely town. You know, the coroner, Septimus. And Guiri, the guy you confirmed as town. So I don't think they have any wolf buddies among the leaders. And if you pull the votes for lurker votes out, there really isn't a vote leader other than me. So what you want to know is why they aren't voting for me? Maybe because the case on me comes down to 3 people who are voting me because they didn't like an early Day 1 vote I put on you. Even though there's never been shown to be any correlation in any mafia games between early Day 1 votes and scum. I don't like your Day 1 playstyle. Never have. So I voted you to get you to explain why you did what you did. Because you felt a need to do it, but you've done it as scum in the past. So I wanted you to explain your motivations. And you OMGUS me for it. And then somehow get 2 others to bandwagon on your OMGUS. I am the lynch leader, because of a Day 1 OMGUS that actually survived to Day 2. You do realize that, right? Harumph back at you.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 10:48:38 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 10:48:38 GMT -5
NETA: By the vote-leader thing, I was referring to the time Idle wrote that post. Obviously some new votes have come in since then. Though, I'm still in the lead. I can follow the Hoopy vote despite pro-Town sentiments involved, Care to elaborate on that? Because all I see is one OMGUS and two bandwagoners, one of whom I think is scum. So what exactly are you following?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 10:54:57 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 10:54:57 GMT -5
NETA: Of course, I'm discounting CIAS, because he just votes everybody, and is playing consistently to the style he's chosen this game. Unfortunately, it makes it hard to discern and disparage motives that way. I'm still trying to decide whether he's doing this more for scum or town reasons. It's a good way to hide your true feelings on someone and mask your votes in noise. It also makes it so no one can dispute your case, since you don't need a case to place a vote in that matter.
It's a good scum strategy for anyone. And possibly a good town strategy for him, but it makes it much harder for the rest of us to figure him out.
And that isn't meant as a smudge. You've employed a strategy, and I'm pointing out my opinions on it. I have no position on whether it's a town gambit or a scum gambit, yet. But the more I think about it, the more I feel it's anti-town on the whole.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 10:57:41 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 10:57:41 GMT -5
Obviously some new votes have come in since then. Though, I'm still in the lead. Actually, maybe not. I didn't realize Pleo hadn't updated the vote counts since the new bunch of votes. Looking at timestamps, FTW!
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 11:01:29 GMT -5
Post by scáthach on Jan 23, 2012 11:01:29 GMT -5
And looking back over it, of the people who didn't vote mahaloth after that point... gnarlycharlie (#218) votes a load of people, but no comment on the Mahaloth lynch. I agree with this also. vote gnarlycharlieSimilarly to Sister Coyote, he ignored the Mahaloth bandwagon while it was in full swing.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 11:12:26 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 11:12:26 GMT -5
Hoopy Frood: You missed something important from #46. The effect of crosskills on the Cabal numbers as well, who will also be hiding in the unknown pool. Any reason why. It's almost as important to the town to have them killed as well. If you notice, I was making that post from the viewpoints of the undead and wolves. You know how many cabal, in the specific sense, undead and wolves need dead to win? None. You now how many town, in the specific sense, undead and wolves need dead to win? None. A dead cabal is as good as a dead townie to them because they are playing a numbers game. However, town have powers that can lead to direct discovery and death of wolves and vampires. Cabal get a block, and they get that as long as one cabal is alive. So cabal are only a threat if they zero in and block the kills, and there's not much the undead and wolves can do about it anyway. But they can take out town. Freemasons are safe for wolves to target, so they will, to avoid the vampires. Vampires will likely target the unknown pool, because they don't really fear much backlash from their kills, and are more likely to avoid the magician or witchdoctor who may have used a power on an outed townie. Town is a threat to them, individual cabalists and wolves are not. And they want to keep at least one wolf alive to aid them in their killing goals. So to sum up, from the perspective of wolves and vampires, cabal aren't much of a threat. They'd much rather take down town if they have their choice.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 11:15:47 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 11:15:47 GMT -5
NETA: And the word None is probably better represented by "no specific number".
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 11:29:20 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 11:29:20 GMT -5
My suspicion of Merestil is less than that of texcat, and is based strictly on the vote that didn't count at 12 noon exactly. In his follow-up, Merestil admits to being well aware of the deadline. On my windows screen, the time is always visible at lower right, and I'd write " ... hold that thought; clicking Post while there's time" rather than letting the deadline come and go, and ending up with only a pretend vote. (Are such ploys common, and is Merestil the type to use them? I don't know.) Such ploys aren't common. I've played in about a dozen mafia games, and observed considerably more spoiled. I've never seen anyone pull it as a gambit, because for the most part a post like that should be treated as if it wasn't made. It's kind of when a lawyer moves to strike a statement from the judicial record in a court case. Everyone's seen it, it's put out there, but they are supposed to disregard it as much as possible. As I said ealier, MHaye always votes late and not often. It's his thing, regardless of alignment. In fact, I've seen him make the comment once when he was scum that he's got to consciously do it as scum otherwise people will get suspicious because he always does it as town. So as town, it's what he does by default. As scum, it's what he does to look like his default townie self. So the fact that he missed the deadline isn't surprising. But you do make a good point that he could have gotten his vote in before the deadline to make sure it was there and then explain it afterward. That would have made more sense, and I've seen others do it that way. The fact that he didn't is an important point and one I didn't even think of last time I commented on it, so good catch.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 11:41:47 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 11:41:47 GMT -5
Three other matters. 1. Assuming I, the Coroner, am informed of Lynchee's identity, my plan is to tell alignment early Night 2, but not exact role. Since strategy discussion is disallowed at Night, any advice needs to be offered now. In the case of town, I would say this is likely a smart thing. (Depending on the role, but offhand I can't think of one offhand that would be necessary for town to know is gone. And letting scum know which town roles are dead allow them to plan their kills better.) However, for wolves and cabal, it's better to full expose. For example, if the omega wolf dies, the investigators know that their town alignment discoveries are true. Undead are an interesting matter. If the necromancer dies, we know that undead have dramatically been reduced as a threat. (Since the zombies are dusted, but that won't be revealed by Pleo.) If a vampire dies, we know that kill frequency should decrease. That's good for town to know. However, the risk of revealing a dead vampire is that the wolves get a lot of information from that. And they also would like to know the necro is dead. So I'd say what you do should largely be up to the gamestate at the time. For now, I'd say don't reveal the role of the undead, but I'm not strongly in that corner.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 11:44:21 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 11:44:21 GMT -5
NETA: And I see that CIAS thinks you should reveal the undead roles.
As I said, I'm not strongly in the corner that you shouldn't.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 11:47:19 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Jan 23, 2012 11:47:19 GMT -5
Septimus, you're making an unrealised assumption in your case against me - that of "I do it so everyone does it." My suspicion of Merestil is less than that of texcat, and is based strictly on the vote that didn't count at 12 noon exactly. In his follow-up, Merestil admits to being well aware of the deadline. On my windows screen, the time is always visible at lower right, and I'd write " ... hold that thought; clicking Post while there's time" rather than letting the deadline come and go, and ending up with only a pretend vote. (Are such ploys common, and is Merestil the type to use them? I don't know.) Bolding mine. You may have the time displayed on your screen, but that does not mean everyone does. How you would have done it is irrelevant to me. I'm forced to manage by scrolling to the window at the top.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:18:55 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 23, 2012 12:18:55 GMT -5
Hmm, Day 2 and already plenty of interesting things to talk about. Vote: 01. Mr Special Ed [/color] Vote: 02. Hoopy Frood [/color] Vote: 03. BillMc [/color] Vote: 04. colby11 [/color] Vote: 05. texcat [/color] Vote: 06. Nanook [/color] Vote: 07. Silver Jan [/color] Vote: 08. Drain Bead [/color] Vote: 09. hirkatbawa [/color] Vote: 10. gnarlycharlie [/color] Vote: 11. peekercpa [/color] Vote: 12. Pollux Oil [/color] Vote: 13. Inner Stickler [/color] Vote: 14. Sister Coyote [/color] Vote: 16. Suburban Plankton [/color] Vote: 17. septimus [/color] Vote: 18. scathach [/color] Vote: 19. Boozahol Squid [/color] Vote: 21. Merestil Haye [/color] Vote: 22. guiri [/color] Vote: 23. Idle Thoughts [/color] Vote: 25. deon [/color] [/quote] ain't no way i am bleaching everyone of these. vote catina. i've made it clear outside of the sign up thread that this is really unacceptable to me. what a shitty vote(s). aiiieeeee.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:24:00 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 23, 2012 12:24:00 GMT -5
... Do I strongly suspect Merestil Haye is a Wolf who did this trick? Not really.... [colorBlue] Vote: Merestil Haye[/color][/quote] <snipped and bleached> wonderful. so you vote for someone who you don't think would be strongly wolfie because they are wolfie? i guess the vote is because they are weakly wolfie. aiieeeeee x 2.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:31:32 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 23, 2012 12:31:32 GMT -5
But with all 3 witches alive, there really is no reason to infodump unless you find scum. Because all you are doing is giving the other factions information on who to kill. I disagree, respectfully. I don't see the logic behind revealing who is what as soon as I get it AS long as I'm already claimed.You cannot convince me it's bad to reveal people who are possible town. Scum will already know they're not on THEIR side (wasn't it you that pointed this fact out to be yesterDay, by the way?), so chances are, they're going to try killing (if they can) everyone who is NOT them anyway. I can't see how it can ever hurt slowly growing the list of possible Town. All for one. For two, if I die without ever having revealed the info gotten, that leaves only 2 witches and as soon as one reveals what they know, they're only half as powerful...because then they either protect themselves every night or risk being killed off. That pretty much takes investigating out of the question. Right now we're able to investigate AND still report on all findings...better to have Guiri placed in the "probable town" then have me killed toNight and him on the lynching block tomorrow without me to say "HEY, NO WAIT, HE COULD BE TOWN!" Again, this seems to me to be a no brainer. No idea why you think it's a good thing to keep quiet about it. as much as it pains me to say this. i agree with idle he's got a claim out their that gleans information. for him not to share would be more hinky than all get out. i am an investigator, i don't have shit to share with you. but trust me. carp.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:32:49 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 23, 2012 12:32:49 GMT -5
neta: the investigator shit was hypothetical. i am not an investigator. i was merely playing out in my head how that would go down.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:33:40 GMT -5
Post by septimus on Jan 23, 2012 12:33:40 GMT -5
You may have the time displayed on your screen, but that does not mean everyone does. Let's pursue this a bit. What OS do you run, and what does appear at the bottom right of your screen?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:36:24 GMT -5
Post by septimus on Jan 23, 2012 12:36:24 GMT -5
(Are such ploys common, and is Merestil the type to use them? I don't know.) Such ploys aren't common. I've played [or] observed [many games]. I've never seen anyone pull it as a gambit, because for the most part a post like that should be treated as if it wasn't made. It's kind of when a lawyer moves to strike a statement from the judicial record in a court case. Everyone's seen it, it's put out there, but they are supposed to disregard it as much as possible. : : Can you explain the underlined parts? Is this a question of adherence to sportsman's ethics? I really don't understand your comment. It almost makes me suspicious but, since you're single-handedly providing most of the helpful game discussion in the thread, I don't want you to die. Perhaps Cat In a Suit's voting tactic is better after all: Vote: BillMcVote: Inner SticklerVote: hirkatbawaVote: Pollux OilVote: Suburban PlanktonIn general, the charge is Lurking. In particular this seems to be a game where Town needs a lot of help, yet BillMc (and other good players listed above) are capable of great help ... yet aren't helping. Yes, yes, we're busy on the secret trip to East Asia and southern France, but even James Bond found time to dazzle and dine the local scuba girl. But maybe there's another reason you don't want to help Town. And, because she's making excellent pro-Town contributions, I retract a mistaken vote: Unvote: scathach
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:42:05 GMT -5
Post by Silver Jan on Jan 23, 2012 12:42:05 GMT -5
I hardly know what to say at the moment, I am so used to defending myself I think I have forgotten just how to look for scum. I agree with the cases on gnarly and I would just like to add a bit. He didn’t post much on D1 and so I voted for him, he then placed an OMGUS vote on me when there were others that had a higher vote count i.e. Mahaloth. He said he is skimming today which is fair enough if he cannot have the net over weekends so I do want to hear what he has to say when he has the time but meanwhile
Vote gnarlycharlie
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:49:20 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 23, 2012 12:49:20 GMT -5
My recommendation is still to Lynch texcat the Wolf, but multiple votes may be needed just to get any Lynch, so I'll vote some other cases that at least make a little sense. Vote: Hoopy Frood Vote: gnarlycharlie Vote: Nanook /color]
I'm reluctant to vote for Happy Frood, since he's the one providing intelligent pro-Town answers to my dumb questions. But among you Mafia sharks, offering good pro-Town advice may be a tell of clever scum.
<bleached> where did tex come back wolf?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 12:59:56 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Jan 23, 2012 12:59:56 GMT -5
Vote: Inner Stickler Too many inconsistencies in his Day 1 posts, no vote on Day 1, and nothing from him Today. First, he quotes the rules and does some meta-gaming about Ed asking for and receiving a wolf role in a previous game. Ok, just so everyone is clear on this, the only role reveals we trust are the ones that Pleo posts, what 2 Days later? Not any reveals that happen immediately upon lynching. Those are suspect. Also, last game some devious meta-gamers decided that based on his previous track record of asking for wolf roles, Ed was probably a wolf and decided to lynch him. Turns out they were right. My question is: dare we bet on red again? Now, he claims he didn't pay attention to who got what roles in the past. I haven't the foggiest. I didn't really pay attention to how closely people's roles matched up with their requests. Then there is some confusion about the rules and whether there are vanillas in the game. Frankly, I couldn't deal with the stress. I used to love being power roles but lately I've come to love vanilla town. I can shoot the shit, have fun, nights are stressless and if I die, well, there's probably still a chance town can win. Guiri and Frood are thinking too much. I don't choose roles in Conspiracy, the only game I'm aware of where one can influence their role like that, because it's too stressful. I take what comes trusting in luck. But this is an all power role game? Really? So every single person is submitting either a night or day action?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 13:02:10 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Jan 23, 2012 13:02:10 GMT -5
where did tex come back wolf? I didn't and I am not.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 13:15:50 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 13:15:50 GMT -5
vote Special EdEd's voting history: Day 1 Tomorrow is a holiday for some in the USA. We really do need to get some vote out there in order to have someone over 13. Also, I have a nasty cold and headache, so I'm not thinking clearly. Do we usually have a mad influx of votes later into Day 1? I actually like the way septimus is thinking, but I don't like him voting for me [ color=blue] Vote: septimus [/color] guiri is a very good player. However, I have a feeling that he isn't on my team [ color=blue] Vote: guiri [/color] Idle thoughts hasn't claimed yet [ color=blue] Vote: Idle Toughts [/color] peeker has made a pre-emptive move to avoid easy votes on himself [ color=blue] Vote: peeker [/color] In case I'm wrong about guiri, he's usually very good and he's voting texcat [ color=blue] Vote: texcat [/color] and, since I've voting for septimus and everyone who has gotten votes so far... [ color=blue] Vote: Drain Bead [/color] [ color=blue] Vote: Inner Stickler [/color][/quote] Let's see...of the 7 votes in this post, we have 1 OMGUS 1 "I have a feeling" 1 "Idle hasn't claimed" 1 "in case I'm wrong" 2 "because I'm voting for everyone else who has gotten votes so far" 1 vote for peeker ***SNIP*** [ color] Vote Mahaloth Vote Suburban Plankton [/color][/quote] +1 [ color=blue] Vote Mahaloth Vote Suburban Plankton [/color][/quote] Here he votes 2 more people who have gotten votes, but that he hasn't voted for yet. @ Idle, actually you have upset me. In the last game we played together you were scum and you went after me then too so I don't give a flying fuck what you say your role is now. You don't care that he's claimed witch? According to the rules, it seems like there needs to e 3 witches who are aware of each other if any exist. Every game so far has had 3 witches. I suppose it's possible to start with just 2 or even 4, but 1 doesn;t make sense, so he's somewhat like alconfirmable mason at this point. [ color=blue] Vote: Silver Jan [/color][/quote] Here he votes Jan for voting Idle before his claim. Two posts later, after being reminded that he is still voting for Idle, he removed his vote for Idle Day 2 NETA: I'd look to those who were voting for me yesterDay BEFORE I claimed. Did anyone vote you after you claimed? I can get down with your thought [ color=blue] Vote: Hoopy Frood [/color] Mr Special Ed - I'm not going to vote for myself [ color=blue] Vote: CatInASuit [/color] [ color=blue] Vote: Nanook [/color] septimus - likely coroner Silver Jan - Mason? guiri - Town according to Idle[/quote] At least he finally votes for someone who doesn't already have a vote on him, even though his reason seems to be "Idle thinks these people are Scummy". [ color=blue] Vote: texcat [/color] [ color=blue] Vote: Sister Coyote [/color][/quote] And here, the reason seems to be "scathach just voted for these people, so I guess I'd better follow suit" Besides his oh-so-thoughtfully-considered votes, what else has Ed posted? Well, we have less than 48 hours to get someone to 13 votes or no one will be lynched.luck Can we get some more votes on mahaloth please? Even if you aren't convinced, just so we can be sure there are no last minutes shenanigans and we end up with a no lunch. So, we're going to have Monday and Tuesday morning to get someone to 12 votes. It seems to me that Ed is very concerned that somebody get lynched, but her really doesn't give a hoot who that person is.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 13:29:08 GMT -5
Post by septimus on Jan 23, 2012 13:29:08 GMT -5
It was slanderous to call you "texcat the (alleged) Wolf." I apologize. Only I have alleged it, and it's based on no action of your own. Your posts seem good, though relatively few. My suspicion is purely on the idea that some Wolf, seeing Wolf Maha headed for Lynch, would have found a reason to vote you Day 1, when you were almost a Lynch contender. Some of your posts that day could have been interpreted (or misinterpreted) as slipping or anti-Town. That you attracted no such Wolf votes suggests so are you. (Instead could the non-vote be a deliberate WiFom ploy by the Wolves? unlikely, since they can communicate only at Night.) I'm content to Lynch any of the four front-runners right now. I'm happy to hear from you texcat, and would like Sticks, Gnarls, and Sister to post also. Many players are voting few, and several aren't playing at all. I'll be logging out now -- it's 1:29 AM my time, and similarly may be offline at Night-fall tomorrow. That's 25 and 1/2 hours from now, right?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 13:48:36 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Jan 23, 2012 13:48:36 GMT -5
Huh? My votes yesterDay: guiri (36), Mr Special Ed (77), CatInASuit (105), Pollux Oil (138), septimus (190), Drain Bead (197)
Are you saying that none of these people are wolves? Are you clearing them because they also voted for Mahaloth? I think you are making some dangerous assumptions here.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 13:52:13 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 23, 2012 13:52:13 GMT -5
Vote: Suburban Plankton
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 14:06:07 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 23, 2012 14:06:07 GMT -5
[/color][/quote] fuck this. vote edfor the same reasons ed gives. shit on a shingle.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 14:10:23 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 14:10:23 GMT -5
Such ploys aren't common. I've played [or] observed [many games]. I've never seen anyone pull it as a gambit, because for the most part a post like that should be treated as if it wasn't made. It's kind of when a lawyer moves to strike a statement from the judicial record in a court case. Everyone's seen it, it's put out there, but they are supposed to disregard it as much as possible. : : Can you explain the underlined parts? Is this a question of adherence to sportsman's ethics? I really don't understand your comment. It almost makes me suspicious but, since you're single-handedly providing most of the helpful game discussion in the thread, I don't want you to die. No, not ethics. I'm not saying we should disregard it because it's not an officially counting post. Sorry if my analogy was unclear. What I meant was the post itself was WIFOM. Did MHaye intentionally miss the deadline so it looks like he wanted to vote but didn't? Or did he honestly intend to vote the way he did, and just didn't get it in in time. We really don't know at this point. So we shouldn't treat that post as indicating anything for what MHaye is or his goals. Because either scenario is at this point equally likely given what we know. But...the post is there. So it indicates something. And we've all seen it. But at this point, it's like something stricken from a court record. We've seen it, but it doesn't really have any official context to go with it, because it doesn't count as a valid vote and to take it to the extreme was actually a violation of the no strategy at night rules. So my analogy probably wasn't the best and wasn't meant to confuse the issue. I hope I've explained my point better. Please, no. If everyone started voting the way CIAS did, the voting record would be so full of noise that vote analysis would become really difficult.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 14:17:01 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 14:17:01 GMT -5
vote CatInaSuit
Similar to Ed, CIAS doesn't seem terribly interested in who gets lynched.
Although his voting is nowhere near as crappy as Ed's, it does seem designed to absolve him of any real responsibility for justifying his votes. We can't ask "why did you vote for XXX?", because his default position is "everybody is guilty". Unless someone presents clear evidence that they are Town, the vote remains. So he has a plausible reason to vote for anyone who is the least bit suspicious (which could be any player at any time).
|
|