|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 14:23:19 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 23, 2012 14:23:19 GMT -5
and, given that if one is Town, it's likely that a majority of the subset that includes all players except for oneself, Idle, septimus, peeker and Jan are non-Town, having reasons for votes really isn't all that necessary.
And given that it's less than 25 hours until DayEnd and we need 12 votes to lynch someone, it's better to have many votes than few votes.
And yes, I'd like very much to lynch someone in the subset that I mentioned. Because I want someone to be lynched rather than rely on non-Town cross kills. Because wolves have a much higher probablity of hitting Town than any other factions (especially with the number of claims) and vampires also have a higher probablity of hitting Town than the other factions.
Lynches have the highest chance of us killing non-Town.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 14:36:55 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 23, 2012 14:36:55 GMT -5
P.S. This is not regular mafia. The numbers are different. The information is different. The objectives are also somewhat different. The requirement to lynch is different. To use regular mafia standards without careful consideration is a mistake.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 15:05:39 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 15:05:39 GMT -5
Many players are voting few As one of those, I'm sorry. I do want to look at a few more players when I get the chance, but I'm not going to vote for most of the vote leaders (i.e. lurkers/flakers and texcat) because I believe Charlie to be scummier than anyone else. The lurkers/flakers don't need much comment, since there's not much to say. They haven't been around. In a game like conspiracy, lynching people who aren't playing is better strategy than in most games because there are no substitutes or modkills, non-town is a typically higher percentage of players, and with such high requirements for lynching anyway, it's harder to see scum trying to save others through vote manipulation. And you can't rely on a vig to take them out, because if the vig hits town the vig has to try to suicide the next Night. So it's a valid strategy, but I still think lynching someone you think is scum is better. So I'm not going to vote a lurker except if its needed to guarantee a lynch happens. As far as texcat, I think you're point on texcat is worth noting, but not voteworthy at this point because I see someone who's scummy by his own actions and there were four votes on texcat that came from people who haven't been all-but-confirmed town. They could be wolves, in which case there might not have been enough wolves to save mahaloth anyway. So I don't think texcat is a good choice at this point. As far as Sister Coyote who hasn't been around at all toDay, I don't really see Guiri's case about her first Day 1 post and then the vote switch. The vote switch is a believable enough typo. Now the vote switch without even commenting on the Mahaloth thing is noteworthy, but I didn't get involved in the Mahaloth thing either, so I can't fault her too much for that at this point. (In my defense, I was really busy near end Day and liked my vote on Inner at the time, and was trying to suss out gnarlycharlie. But not realizing that mahaloth was only barely at the lynch threshold when I did post really was a bad play on my part. And all I can say is I had other things in real life I was trying to deal with and I really did just brain fart on the fact that we almost didn't get a lynch going off that Day. So mea culpa.)
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 15:08:51 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 15:08:51 GMT -5
Ed, Your logic is unassailable, although largely irrelevant. Yes, the bad guys have a better chance of hitting Town than non-Town. Yes, the Town's best chance of killing non-Town is with the lynch.
None of this is actually any different than any other Mafia game. Yes, the details are different, but from a Town perspective it still boils down to "try not to lynch other Townies".
The point that you are skipping over is that Town can't just shoot blindly into the 'unknown pool' and expect to win the game. town is more likely to lynch Town in that case, by virtue of sheer numbers, and that's the one thing that Town doesn't want to do. You seem content to "lynch someone", but you haven't shown any real concern that the person we lynch is non-Town, nor have you made any effort to try to identify who among us is non-Town. It seems that one death is as good as any other in your book, and that doesn't sit well with me.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 15:19:07 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 15:19:07 GMT -5
Regarding the votes on texcat:
Let me see if I understand the logic here. Six people voted texcat. All of these people, as noted, voted for mahaloth. The theory then is that since mahaloth is a Wolf (assuming septimus' claim is both genuine and true), other Wolves should have voted for texcat in an effort to get him lynched instead of mahaloth, since he (texcat) was the second leading vote-getter. Since nobody voted for texcat that didn't also vote for Mahaloth, that means texcat must himself be a Wolf.
I just don't see it.
The biggest problem is that the premise is false. texcat was never a viable lynch candidate. By the time Idle made his claim (at which point he, not texcat, was the second leading vote-getter), mahaloth was 3 votes ahead of anyone else, and his lead quickly grew from there. There was never any real chance that we were going to lynch anyone other than mahaloth yesterDay. There was a very real possibility that we were going to have a no-lynch, but there was never another viable candidate.
I don't know if I have a bigger problem with septimus, for proposing this theory, or with the others who have gone along with it unquestioningly.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 15:57:06 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jan 23, 2012 15:57:06 GMT -5
Suburban, you're wrong. At the time of my claim, Mahaloth and I were TIED in votes. He was not three votes ahead of me.
Anyway, I'm going to vote Texcat[/color] because I'd rather see an active player lynched than a lurker (which I believe a whole scum faction could easily vote for to get out quickly).
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 15:57:33 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 23, 2012 15:57:33 GMT -5
Ed, Your logic is unassailable, although largely irrelevant. Yes, the bad guys have a better chance of hitting Town than non-Town. Yes, the Town's best chance of killing non-Town is with the lynch. None of this is actually any different than any other Mafia game. Yes, the details are different, but from a Town perspective it still boils down to "try not to lynch other Townies". The point that you are skipping over is that Town can't just shoot blindly into the 'unknown pool' and expect to win the game. town is more likely to lynch Town in that case, by virtue of sheer numbers, and that's the one thing that Town doesn't want to do. You seem content to "lynch someone", but you haven't shown any real concern that the person we lynch is non-Town, nor have you made any effort to try to identify who among us is non-Town. It seems that one death is as good as any other in your book, and that doesn't sit well with me. You're wrong, both in what you've directly stated and what you avoided commenting on. 1. In most mafia games, Town does NOT have a better chance of lynching non-Town than Town blindly. In most mafia games, as soon as mafia outnumbers Town, they generally win. 2. In this game, the Scum factions are also sorely lacking in information. In reality, you can think of this as a 4 Scum faction game. 1. One Scum faction generally has smaller numbes. They have NightKill and a mad bomber type which can add to their numbers from the dead players. (Undead) 2. One Scum faction has decent numbers and a NightKill. They also have a godfather role. (Wolves) 3. One Scum faction has no NightKill but a block power. They don't need to outnumber all of the other factions to win, however. (Cabal) 4. One Scum faction is the largest, but has no idea who the others are. They have a variety of powers but no NightKill (aside from a limited power). (Let's call them Town.)
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 15:58:54 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jan 23, 2012 15:58:54 GMT -5
We (Mahaloth and I) were tied, so I voted for Mahaloth. Nanook then unvoted Mahaloth to tie it up again. Then there was another vote for Mahaloth and another for me, as far as I remember (although I don't remember who cast those votes without looking back, at the moment).
That's when I claimed. We were tied.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 16:22:16 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 16:22:16 GMT -5
Suburban, you're wrong. At the time of my claim, Mahaloth and I were TIED in votes. He was not three votes ahead of me. You claimed in Post 156. At that point, the votes were: mahaloth (8): CatInaSuit (105), scathach (113), peeker (117), Special Ed (120), Nanook (125-145), septimus (133), Pollux Oil (138), Idle Thoughts (144), JustBeingGinger (151) Idle Thoughts (6): Hoopy Frood (53), Special Ed (77), Nanook (125), septimus (133), Silver Jan (142), guiri (149) texcat (4): guiri (36), Special Ed (77), CatInaSuit (105), Pollux Oil (138) So I was incorrect in that he was only 2 votes ahead of you at the time, but I think my argument is still valid.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 16:39:56 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 16:39:56 GMT -5
Anyway, I'm going to [ color=blue]vote Texcat[/color] because I'd rather see an active player lynched than a lurker (which I believe a whole scum faction could easily vote for to get out quickly).[/quote] The necessity to have a majority vote in order to lynch, along with the multiple voting, does seem to encourage "voting for the sake of voting" and "voting for the leader because it's better than failing to lynch". I'm still reluctant to place a vote without some identifiable suspicion to back it up. I was struggling with that near the end of Day 1 when we faced the possibility of someone removing their vote and leaving us one vote shy of a lynch; fortunately that scenario didn't prevent itself and I was saved from having to actually make a decision
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 16:43:45 GMT -5
Post by scáthach on Jan 23, 2012 16:43:45 GMT -5
Regarding the votes on texcat: Let me see if I understand the logic here. Six people voted texcat. All of these people, as noted, voted for mahaloth. The theory then is that since mahaloth is a Wolf (assuming septimus' claim is both genuine and true), other Wolves should have voted for texcat in an effort to get him lynched instead of mahaloth, since he (texcat) was the second leading vote-getter. Since nobody voted for texcat that didn't also vote for Mahaloth, that means texcat must himself be a Wolf. I just don't see it. It's not as implausible as you're making it out to be. There was only 2 votes between them and Texcat had already made a fairly scummy seeming post where s(he) dithered back on forth about Ed. www.idlemafia.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=consp5&thread=1814&post=85121I would have expected more wolves to try and save Maha by casting suspicion on that. It's only one case and not even my preferred one, but it's still better than you voting for Ed for acting the same as he has in every single game recently where he's been town. The only difference is that with multivoting he can cast even more unsubstantiated votes. And what about Sister Coyote, or Gnarlycharlie? If you don't like the Texcat case, then they are the current runners up. You argued against the Mahaloth lynch yesterday to place a one off on me, and now you're arguing against the Texcat vote to place a one-off* on Ed. Do you only vote on cases before they become cool or something? ________________________________________________________________ *at the time
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 16:59:31 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Jan 23, 2012 16:59:31 GMT -5
So I was incorrect in that he was only 2 votes ahead of you at the time, but I think my argument is still valid. Your vote count is missing CatInASuit's vote on Idle in #105, the official vote count is missing Peeker's vote on Mahaloth in #117. Looking at the official vote count, it was a 7-7 tie however Ginger's vote had really made it 8-7.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 17:06:43 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 17:06:43 GMT -5
So I was incorrect in that he was only 2 votes ahead of you at the time, but I think my argument is still valid. Your vote count is missing CatInASuit's vote on Idle in #105, the official vote count is missing Peeker's vote on Mahaloth in #117. Looking at the official vote count, it was a 7-7 tie however Ginger's vote had really made it 8-7. You're right; somehow I completely missed marking down CIAS' vote and unvote on Idle, while noting his votes on everybody else.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 17:19:55 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 17:19:55 GMT -5
It's not as implausible as you're making it out to be. There was only 2 votes between them and Texcat had already made a fairly scummy seeming post where s(he) dithered back on forth about Ed. www.idlemafia.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=consp5&thread=1814&post=85121I would have expected more wolves to try and save Maha by casting suspicion on that. It's only one case and not even my preferred one, but it's still better than you voting for Ed for acting the same as he has in every single game recently where he's been town. The only difference is that with multivoting he can cast even more unsubstantiated votes. And what about Sister Coyote, or Gnarlycharlie? If you don't like the Texcat case, then they are the current runners up. You argued against the Mahaloth lynch yesterday to place a one off on me, and now you're arguing against the Texcat vote to place a one-off* on Ed. Do you only vote on cases before they become cool or something? ________________________________________________________________ *at the time I didn't "argue against" the mahaloth lynch yesterDay; I simply stated that I didn't see a reason to vote for him. I pointed out that a number of people were voting for what I thought to be poor reasons, and voted them for it. The fact that mahaloth may turn out to be a Wolf doesn't automatically make all the votes against him "good", they may be merely lucky (or strategy that backfired). And I voted for you, Ed, and Pollux Oil for lumping mahaloth and I together when you placed your own votes. In fact, I voted for you well before I made any comments on the case against mahaloth: OK, finished a quick read. First item: Regarding mine and mahaloth's "questioning" of Special Ed, which seems to have creted a bit of a stir: <snip>[ color=blue]vote scathach[/color] <snip>[ color=blue]vote Special Ed[/color] Also, [ color=blue]vote Pollux Oil[/color] He too treats mahaloth and I as a single unit. Also, he pointed out Idle's apparent PIS slip but didn't vote him for it (the same sort of behavior he uses as a basis for his vote on me). Now I need to look at the case against mahaloth in a bit more detail... [/quote] I certainly did not "argue against the mahaloth lynch yesterday to place a one off on you". Those two things both happened, but they were not related in the manner you present them. Ad on the subject of making "one off votes": I'll vote for whomever I think is most likely to be a threat to Town. If I am the only person who thinks that way, so be it. You would rather I simply vote with the crowd?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 17:43:30 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Jan 23, 2012 17:43:30 GMT -5
Guiri, septimus, posts #68 and #69 respectively, you add the same three people deon colby11 scathach (Sister Coyote is voted by guiri following Day 1, septimus votes for lurking) for, in general, lurking. Apart from looking incredibly dodgy, why did you not include other people such as Pollux Oil or Inner Stickler who also haven't posted? They were online at various times since D2 started but didn't post. Pollux said he was going to be away, Inner doesn't appear to have been online for a week. Scathach's explained herself and is participating: Unvote ScathachColby's posted only in response to the poke, Deon hasn't posted.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 17:51:36 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 23, 2012 17:51:36 GMT -5
hey, peeker, I'd go all-in that Suburban Plankton is not Town.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:05:10 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Jan 23, 2012 18:05:10 GMT -5
Okay I'm back everyone. I'd like to start with this to address my absence: Case against them: Pollux Oil and Inner Stickler are not posting and possibly lurking, and lurking is scummy Being away =/= lurking. I was at at a friend's for the weekend. He's getting married and best man duties trump mafia. I posted as such in the going to be away thread. Guess I should also post in here so people notice. Moving on. It was a weak accusation, you suspected he made a slip, asked him about it, but never followed it up with a vote. I'm not sure why scum are more inclined to point out PIS slips but Drain's theory seems to have some basis so you're on my radar. Uh, I don't think your reasoning here has much validity. I asked him a question, but why is it necessary for me to follow up with a vote? Or is vote first, ask questions later the only accepted policy here? And scum aren't more inclined to point out PIS slips. Colby's "slip" in Paranoia's game was pointed out by Bill (3rd party) and moodymitchy (town), and the first to vote for him was Silver Jan (also town). Although, you may semantically only be talking about set-up PIS slips, in which case colby's slip only kind of falls into that category, but still. 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!" I know this argument is kind of over with right now with an "I agree to disagree" finish, but I'd like to add my two cents in agreeing with Hoopy Frood. Having lots of town confirmed in the mid-to-late game is great. Having lots of town in the open in early game, especially in a game like Conspiracy with several killing factions/roles, means town are likely to get wiped out that much quicker. Knowing guiri is town isn't a net gain of information. Now that the scum know guiri is town, they have one more target to safely not cross-kill, and pro-town protective powers have one more target to choose from, making it more likely scum kills go through. But what's done is done, so c'est la vie. Anyway, I'm going to vote Texcat because I'd rather see an active player lynched than a lurker (which I believe a whole scum faction could easily vote for to get out quickly). This is absolutely ballsack reasoning. I'm sorry, but after I was struggling my ass off with lurking/not-around people at the end of Paranoia's game trying to pull a win out for town (that we barely did) I think that lynching an active person solely because they are active instead of inactive is stupid stupid stupid stupid. Inner and peeker both dropped off the face of the earth and lurked/didn't post much in that game and were both scum. I'd much rather have an active person around that can be analyzed through posts they've made in the game, then having to vote and pray at lynch time that a lurker may be scum IF we're basing it solely on activity vs. inactivity. Of course, you're lucky I find texcat suspicious anyway, otherwise I'd really go off on a rant. Okay I've got to get to a class, so I'm going to do this real quick: Vote: Inner Stickler Vote: CatinaSuit Vote: texcat For the same reasons I stated yesterDay when I voted them. I had to run through the entire Day pretty quick, but nothing really jumped out at me to change my opinion. I'm retracting my vote on Suburban for now, because he's posted a lot toDay and I want to take a more in depth look at him when I'm not scrambling to get ready for my first college class in several years. Gnarlycharlie is also on deck as a possible added vote as well, but again, need to take a closer look.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:13:35 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 23, 2012 18:13:35 GMT -5
7 votes texcat: septimus (17), CatInASuit (20), guiri (54), scathach (79), Mr Special Ed (80), Idle Thoughts (125), Pollux Oil (136).
5 votes Sister Coyote: CatInASuit (20), guiri (68), septimus (69), scathach (79), Mr Special Ed (80). gnarlycharlie: CatInASuit (20), Hoopy Frood (37), septimus (65), scathach (96), Silver Jan (109). Inner Stickler: CatInASuit (20), Hoopy Frood (37), septimus (108), texcat (111), Pollux Oil (136).
4 votes CatInASuit: Mr Special Ed (16), peekercpa (103), Suburban Plankton (119), Pollux Oil (136).
3 votes Merestil Haye: CatInASuit (20), septimus(42), Silver Jan (58). Nanook: Mr Special Ed (16), CatInASuit (20), septimus (65). deon: CatInASuit (20), guiri (68), septimus (69). colby11: CatInASuit (20), guiri (68), septimus (69). Hoopy Frood: Idle Thoughts (13), Mr Special Ed (16), CatInASuit (20-84), gnarlycharlie (51), septimus (65-69).
2 votes Boozahol Squid: CatInASuit (20), scathach (79). BillMc: CatInASuit (20), septimus (108). hirkatbawa: CatInASuit (20), septimus (108). Pollux Oil: CatInASuit (20), septimus (108). Suburban Plankton: CatInASuit (20-82), septimus (108), Mr Special Ed (116). Mr Special Ed: CatInASuit (20-84), Suburban Plankton (113), peekercpa (117).
1 vote Drain Bead: CatInASuit (20). guiri: CatInASuit (20).
0 votes Idle Thoughts: CatInASuit (20-21). septimus: CatInASuit (20-21). peekercpa: CatInASuit (20-21). Silver Jan: CatInASuit (20-21). scathach: CatInASuit (20-84), guiri (68-134), septimus (69-108).
Votes Cast:
CatInASuit (14) texcat, Sister Coyote, gnarlycharlie, Inner Stickler, Merestil Haye, Nanook, deon, colby11, Boozahol Squid, BillMc, hirkatbawa, Pollux Oil, Drain Bead, guiri septimus (12) texcat, Sister Coyote, gnarlycharlie, Inner Stickler, Merestil Haye, Nanook, deon, colby11, BillMc, hirkatwaba, Pollux Oil, Suburban Plankton Mr Special Ed (5) Texcat, Sister Coyote, Nanook, Hoopy Frood, Suburban Plankton scathach (4) texcat, Sister Coyote, gnarlycharlie, Boozahol Squid guiri (4) texcat, Sister Coyote, deon, colby11 Pollux Oil (3) Inner Stickler, CatInASuit, texcat Hoopy Frood (2) gnarlycharlie, Inner Stickler Silver Jan (2) gnarlycharlie, Merestil Haye peekercpa (2) CatInASuit, Mr Special Ed Suburban Plankton (2) CatInASuit, Mr Special Ed Idle Thoughts (2) texcat, Hoopy Frood texcat (1) Inner Stickler gnarlycharlie (1) Hoopy Frood BillMc (0) colby11 (0) Nanook (0) Drain Bead (0) hirkatbawa (0) Inner Stickler (0) Sister Coyote (0) Boozahol Squid (0) Merestil Haye (0) deon (0)
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:15:35 GMT -5
Post by septimus on Jan 23, 2012 18:15:35 GMT -5
Each Vampire gets to Kill every Night, or at least try to. The Wolves get to do their Nightly Kill, IIRC, even if only a single one of them is awake. But the Town's Daily Lynch seems to be an ordeal. Four of the 5 real days are used up already toDay, and only one possible Lynchee is even halfway to the 12-vote Lynch threshold. (I'm not sure texcat is my favorite to Lynch but I feel best voting all suspects, lest we default to No Lynch.) It is the vote race to Lynch that is most informative, but if that is to just occupy the last few hours of the Day, why bother to have 5 days for the Day?
Planks, you're not voting for anyone among the top four Lynch candidates. Wouldn't it be pro-Town to vote your preference from among these now rather than at 11th hour?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:34:00 GMT -5
Post by septimus on Jan 23, 2012 18:34:00 GMT -5
Unvote: Pollux Oil [/color]
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:34:49 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 18:34:49 GMT -5
Ad on the subject of making "one off votes": I'll vote for whomever I think is most likely to be a threat to Town. If I am the only person who thinks that way, so be it. You would rather I simply vote with the crowd? Ones-off are fine, but ones-off will not meet the lynch threshold. So it's still important to weigh in on the vote leaders. Because we need 12 votes to lynch. So you can say that "Player X" is your main vote, but you believe of those in reasonable standing to be lynched that "Player Y" is the one you will vote for along with "Player X".
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:39:09 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Jan 23, 2012 18:39:09 GMT -5
I feel like the case against Inner Stickler is the most interesting of the people that are in a position to be lynched.
Vote: Inner Stickler
I'm sorry weekends are bad for me. I really wish we didn't have a huge chunk of the middle of the Day fall on a weekend. Is there no way we can kind of split it up, half day and half night?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:49:29 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 18:49:29 GMT -5
Planks, you're not voting for anyone among the top four Lynch candidates. Wouldn't it be pro-Town to vote your preference from among these now rather than at 11th hour? I don't know...would it? Is it more pro-Town to vote for the least objectionable among a list of candidates, or is it more pro-Town to refuse to vote for someone you don't suspect? The leading candidates at the moment are: texcat (7 votes) Sister Coyote (5) gnarlycharlie (5) Inner Stickler (5) Sister Coyote and Inner Stickler have been largely absent and neither has posted Today. gnarlycharlie was quiet most of Day 1 until he came in with a late flurry of votes, well after things had been decided. texcat has made no real effort to defend himself today (though I'm not sure how he can defend against the case against him). I could vote SisC or Inner for non-participation. I could vote charlie for lurking on Day 1 and placing his late votes on 'safe' targets. I could vote texcat for failing to put up any defense, and making no attempt to assist Town in the time he has left (presuming he will be lynched Today). Having gone through this exercise, I think the latter case is actually a fairly good one. I'm still not convinced by the argument you initially made, but texcat's complete failure to play in a pro-Town manner while his neck is on the line is more telling, IMO. vote texcat I'll also note that one of my "preferred candidates" is currently sitting in 5th place in the voting ( CatInaSuit), with votes on all 4 of the leading candidates. It's strange that I'm getting flak for not having voted for any of them, while he gets a pass for voting for all of them, since both of us basically have exactly the same effect on the voting at this point.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:53:22 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 23, 2012 18:53:22 GMT -5
I feel like the case against Inner Stickler is the most interesting of the people that are in a position to be lynched. [ color=blue] Vote: Inner Stickler [/color][/quote] Any particular reason this case is more attractive to you than any of the others?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:57:28 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 18:57:28 GMT -5
when I'm not scrambling to get ready for my first college class in several years. OOG: Good luck. I remember what a shock it was for me when I went back for graduate school part-time (company was footing the bill for my masters) and took my first class. Especially if you've been working in the industry your degree is associated with. Academia really is nothing like the real world.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 18:59:17 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 18:59:17 GMT -5
I feel like the case against Inner Stickler is the most interesting of the people that are in a position to be lynched. [ color=blue] Vote: Inner Stickler [/color][/quote] Any particular reason this case is more attractive to you than any of the others?[/quote] +1
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 19:01:46 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 23, 2012 19:01:46 GMT -5
hey, peeker, I'd go all-in that Suburban Plankton is not Town. care to share oh mr. man of international mystery?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 19:03:02 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 23, 2012 19:03:02 GMT -5
Ed, I've cast two votes as you can see by the very vote update you quoted.
Yet you only have me listed as casting 1 in your tally list.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 19:04:05 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 23, 2012 19:04:05 GMT -5
hey, peeker, I'd go all-in that Suburban Plankton is not Town. care to share oh mr. man of international mystery? oh fuck i get it. you really are a wolf and you know burby is not town because you are on his team and he eats horse for dinner. your denials were just bullshit. gosh i am so fucking naive. quit funnin' me like that.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 23, 2012 19:05:49 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Jan 23, 2012 19:05:49 GMT -5
Any particular reason this case is more attractive to you than any of the others? Because the texcat case strikes me as a whole lot of supposition without a whole lot of actual cause. For one, we don't know for sure that Maha was a wolf, though it is more likely than not. For another, that kind of massively visible vote switch would have put a big pile of bullseyes on anyone that made it, especially if Maha turned up dead and wolfy later, and for what? To lynch a random person over someone who, while he might survive this day, wouldn't survive another? And really, if the Wolf plan was to save Maha at any cost, which the texcat case requires, why wouldn't he false claim something? Hell, he might have been able to flip votes around onto Idle if he fake claimed Witch. If nothing else, he might have been able to flush out a second one to corroborate Idle's claim. He didn't do any of that. Makes me think the wolves took one look at the way things were going and said, fuck it, he's dead, time to focus on other avenues. And also because I've seen read a bunch of games lately that have been decided by scum basically not playing and never being punished for it and still winning. I know I don't make as many posts as other people, but I try to put as many of my thoughts into each post as I can. I don't understand not playing at all, and when you do play saying nothing. What's the point of signing up in the first place then?
|
|