Mr. Flay: 2 (VitaminR, Glork)
BrianMcQueso: 2 (Simenon, Erg0)
Glork: 1 (CES)
VitaminR: 1 (Mr. Flay)
Simenon: 1 (distad)
Not voting: BrianMcQueso, Nocmen, Xdaammo
Does this mean you think that the kill on LmL was not determined by truly random means?Flay wrote:...and wish he hadn't been quite so cavalier about outing his role and painting a target on his own back.
Mostly 'cause I said so.distad wrote:You've told us that Simenon is town.
That's great.
Um... WHY?
I don't know what "randomly slain" means - do you? What I mean is that by describing his role, he made himself more likely to be a nightkill target, and I don't see how he didn't know that - even if we had a Doctor, two killers could have taken him out if they'd both targeted him. Why we had two deaths instead of a double-kill, I'm not clear on.Glork wrote:Does this mean you think that the kill on LmL was not determined by truly random means?
Silly Flay, what Glork says is law around here! Did you not see the role somebody devised where anybody "Glork" helped to lynch became Mafia upon their death?Flay wrote:Glork, you have to convince others for your "knowledge" to do any good....
That's because you weren't there, silly. Not much use wagoning someone who isn't going to post.Simenon would be a close second choice, if the bandwagon leans that way, for the already addressed SK theory and paradoxically for the fact that he dropped my wagon yesterday, after lobbying so hard for it on previous pages.
lolI think this theory that I'm the SK because I mentioned the "SKs claim Vigilante" metagame is absurd. Give me a *little* credit for not being completely transparent, will you?? But latching onto that is opportunistic and counterproductive in my view.
Ahhh, that would be the Kingmaker saga? No, I missed that during my hiatus from playing, apparently...Glork wrote:Silly Flay, what Glork says is law around here! Did you not see the role somebody devised where anybody "Glork" helped to lynch became Mafia upon their death?Flay wrote:Glork, you have to convince others for your "knowledge" to do any good....
Cool, that's what I wanted to hear:But if you want an explanation, it's almost entirely meta-based. This sounds like protown Simenon, whereas I recently saw scum-Simenon who behaved differently. I realize that won't do you or Distad much good, but it's what I've got, and I feel comfortable enough with that read to state that I think he's protown.
I can't say as I understand that logic. I said when I was getting back in town, I'd started to respond already, and it's not like I was going to disappear/be replaced...Simenon wrote:That's because you weren't there, silly. Not much use wagoning someone who isn't going to post.
The game dies if we are all expecting to hear from a player that won't show up. Even if the absense is temporary, it's still reason to back off.Mr. Flay wrote: I can't say as I understand that logic. I said when I was getting back in town, I'd started to respond already, and it's not like I was going to disappear/be replaced...
Of course I see it as "counterproductive" to bandwagon me when I know my alignment, but that's unprovable to anyone else.
The word opportunistic implies a mafia member seized the chance attack something.I'm not clear what happened with the copy-paste error in the end of your sentence, but since the statement was made three weeks ago, why wouldn't it be "opportunistic" to make a case based on it when actual voting started?
*shrug*Erg0 wrote:Ask yourself this: if the SK were truly random, what are the odds that on Night 1 he would randomly kill the only claimed power role?
(Well 1 in 11, obviously, but hopefully you see my point)
Glork wrote:The reason I think it's random is because the signups and opening post indicated to me (fairly clearly, I might add) that nobody would be able to choose night actions after D0 had finished. I wanted to doublecheck this with Stoof, but instead of confirming that, he chose to put in the "unless your role specifies" clause. I honestly think that he did so to antagonize me, partly because of the whole "I didn't read my role" bit.
I just got the feeling you were trying to bring out his "loud" side.Mr. Flay wrote:In response to #1 from the followup post, my belligerence toward LML is real and goes back to previous games we've played together. Lee is a very aggressive player and I respond in kind, plus we have a positive rapport that tends to build discussion. In that sense, I'm sad to see him go, and wish he hadn't been quite so cavalier about outing his role and painting a target on his own back.
You were the only player to do that. I didn't single you out. You're very quick to call something "bad logic."Mr. Flay wrote:Regarding #2, what else did you expect to do Day Zero except discuss how to proceed? Presumably the point of that exercise was to allow people to make semi-informed decisions if they had lists to create, and I wasn't the only one doing it. I think your singling me out was bad logic, but you're far from the scummiest person around at this point.
This has a scummy "building a case on one player, but voting the other"-feel, and I don't like either cases. Calling Glork unhelpful is a stretch and I don't see how joining a wagon is necessarily all that scummy. Your Simenon case is also not that convincing.Mr. Flay wrote:Unvote: VitaminR, Vote: Glorkwho is unhelpfulin additionto being opportunistic. Simenon would be a close second choice, if the bandwagon leans that way, for the already addressed SK theory and paradoxically for the fact that hedroppedmy wagon yesterday, after lobbying so hard for it on previous pages. I think this theory that I'm the SK because I mentioned the "SKs claim Vigilante" metagame is absurd. Give me a *little* credit for not being completely transparent, will you?? But latching onto that is opportunistic and counterproductive in my view.
Another example of one-sentence posts that are extremely unhelpful. Joining a bandwagon without any real explanation to accompany it. What, specifically, do you agree with? What parts of my play do you find scummy, so that I can address them? I demand specifics.distad wrote:I did a quick re-read and page 6 is rife with anti-BMQ points that I agree with.
I'm perfectly willing to look at others. I outlined my opinion of everyone in the game in the post before that.distad wrote:Okay... you've made it abundantly clear that Flay is your choice for the day. I don't agree, but fine. I'm just asking if you'd be willing to entertain the thought of investigating others today for future looks. In particular, what do you think of Simenon's BMQ "wagon"?