Sammich[1](Simenon)
Not Voting[8](AlSleet, Samruc, Lemming1607, ChaosOmega, Jex, Sammich, Shanba, Per)
To be honest, my activity day 1 sucked. I was truly suspicious of Crub to begin with and didn't like his defenses. Then I lost internet for 2 weeks because I was moving. The few posts I made during the internetless weeks were quick throw ins because I didn't truly have time to read through the posts. In fact I still haven't had time to read the last few pages of day 1, which I plan on doing very soon. My suspicions never really changed because I wasn't reading the thread. You'll notice my activity in all of my games during this period was incredibly poor. Normally when I know I'm going to be inactive I remove my vote from anyone, however, I felt strongly that Crub was scum, so I chose to keep my vote on him while I was gone. He never gave me any reason to think that he wasn't scum. Unfortunately, my instincts were not correct.Sammich wrote:FOS Jex
You haven't found anyone but Crub suspicious during day one. You and Simenon had been pushing his lynch for almost the whole day.
Well, during D1 you were jumping on bandwagons with no reason (as in "reason to suspect/lynch someone"), and now it seems as though you want to start bandwagons zith no such reason. I'm asking whether that is indeed the case, and if this is another well-considered strategy of yours.Simenon wrote:what.
Crub was my main suspect the whole time. I thought I saw something a bit off with Samruc, so I changed my vote over to see his response.Sammich wrote:Chaos: Why did you agree with Simenon that Crub should've died?
This is the worst reason for a hammer I've ever seen... I would have voted you, but I can't find anything else to back up a case against you, on the contrary you looked pretty townish to me up to this post....Lemming wrote:ending this long ass day.
UNVOTE: Sammich VOTE: Crub
A townie doesn't ask for votes, how many times do I need to say this?Shanba wrote:Then vote me.
Since you are talking to/about people as though they were scum, I find it very scummy that you do not dare to put your vote on anyone.Sammich wrote:What's wrong with multiple FoS's?
This was more to point out that he was being stupid about his suspicions on me than anything else (calling me most suspicious, but not voting me.)Samruc wrote:A townie doesn't ask for votes, how many times do I need to say this?Shanba wrote:Then vote me.
That's stupid.Samruc wrote:Since you are talking to/about people as though they were scum, I find it very scummy that you do not dare to put your vote on anyone.
Examples:
"Did you NK Sir T to put the extra heat on me you couldn't achieve during day 1?"
"Are you happy now? Crub's dead, are you ready to try and kill Lemming?"
It looks like you are trying to sow as much suspicion as possible, leaving your vote free to fall where it can help you the most. I'm putting this one back where it belongs:Vote Sammich
By all means I wouldn't either, but there are lots of things to be desired in means to what happened in Day 1, and it's a priority to not lose another townie. It's a simple question, can be read in one or two breathes, but you still claim it to be loaded. Wtf.Shanba wrote:Sammich, I don't respond to loaded questions.
If this is the case I would have had a good, maybe even better chance of getting lynched after Shanba and I (and Sir T and Lemming at one point) had a brief discussion about mason finding so early in the game, which I lost that argument. I was uneasy about the attack conducted on Crub after he said that. I didn't find that scummy at all, and there was no reason for the masons to distance themselves, because I, and most of the people here (other than the masons themselves) still don't know who are the masons.ChaosOmega wrote:Crub was my main suspect the whole time. I thought I saw something a bit off with Samruc, so I changed my vote over to see his response.
As to why I wanted Crub dead, the initial reason was him saying "I think I know who the masons are." There were some other things too, but what sealed it were all of his appeals to emotion afterwards. It just seemed like he didn't think he could win arguing his point, so he just tried to say he's town a lot so we wouldn't lynch him.
I didn't actually plan to lead a bandwagon, because I couldn't have. Otherwise, yes, I'm changing my playstyle because this one doesn't seem to be working, or rather, the town doesn't want me to use it.Per wrote:
Well, during D1 you were jumping on bandwagons with no reason (as in "reason to suspect/lynch someone"), and now it seems as though you want to start bandwagons zith no such reason. I'm asking whether that is indeed the case, and if this is another well-considered strategy of yours.
is a ridiculous question. It uses WIFOM about nightkills, makes an assumption about alignments and is completely useless. Not to mention, I only attacked you once yesterday, and with the way you're playing, it would be completely unnecessary. To hell with this.
FOS Shanba
Did you NK Sir T to put the extra heat on me you couldn't achieve during day 1?
But there are THREE scum. Not FOUR. You FoS'd more than there are scum, so obviously you can't think everyone is scum. That's why it's spaghetti strategy. You're throwing your suspicions around hoping some of it will stick and THEN you'll vote that person.Sammich wrote: I didn't HAVE to put my vote on anyone. I would and most likely will put my vote on people. I refuse to be too conservative, but sometimes I don't think a vote is needed. Is that too much?
I'm not trying to sow as much suspicion as possible, I'm saying who I think is scum and if you think it's scummy, then God help you.
That's BS, but only because I just heard what spaghetti strategy is. No matter, I stand by my decision.Lemming1607 wrote:But there are THREE scum. Not FOUR. You FoS'd more than there are scum, so obviously you can't think everyone is scum. That's why it's spaghetti strategy. You're throwing your suspicions around hoping some of it will stick and THEN you'll vote that person.
Poorly drawn OMGUS? I don't think so, but:Shanba wrote: I'm sorry, but this:is a ridiculous question. It uses WIFOM about nightkills, makes an assumption about alignments and is completely useless. Not to mention, I only attacked you once yesterday, and with the way you're playing, it would be completely unnecessary. To hell with this.FOS Shanba
Did you NK Sir T to put the extra heat on me you couldn't achieve during day 1?
Vote: Sammich
Way to completely miss my pointSammich wrote:Poorly drawn OMGUS? I don't think so, but:Shanba wrote: I'm sorry, but this:is a ridiculous question. It uses WIFOM about nightkills, makes an assumption about alignments and is completely useless. Not to mention, I only attacked you once yesterday, and with the way you're playing, it would be completely unnecessary. To hell with this.FOS Shanba
Did you NK Sir T to put the extra heat on me you couldn't achieve during day 1?
Vote: Sammich
Mafia is basically a game about assumptions. You don't know who scum is, and you have to assume someone is scum by their actions and the process of elimination, etc. etc. etc.
It doesn't matter if you attacked me once or a thousand times. I'm not going to put off my vote or try to get defensive. I still think you're scum and if I get lynched for my suspicions or the way I play, FOS's or not, then so be it.
This is exactly the same thing: "Did you NK Sir T to put the extra heat on me you couldn't achieve during day 1?" If he says no, it just means he NK'ed for another reason, thus it's *not* a simple yes or no-question.The Wiki wrote:A loaded question is one that generally contains unverified assumptions, logical errors, orexcludes "reasonable" answers by virtue of the way it is phrased."When did you stop beating your wife?" is a classic example; no matter if the answer is "I didn't..." or "I never...", it implies that they either continue to beat their wife currently, or they have at some time in the past. A clever answer will instead point out the implicity assumptions carried in the question as stated.