DP12 JeepFest Mafia GAME OVER

[PeaceBringer]

A bit hypocritical, Peacebringer?

why of course, this is mafia where hypocry rules, next question?

[PeaceBringer]

Good lord, excuse me if I missed SK's vote- she does post all in blue.

FOS on Roland and Meme

for jumping on crap like that. I have stated before in other games I don't like long posts and generally skim them. I skimmed SK's post and missed the voting comments.

[PeaceBringer]

one away, i think...
wasn't there just a discussion about incorrectly counting votes?
PeaceBringer, it might be wise to err on higher side... or something... when making statements about the number of votes 'till a lynch...
-sk

well given that I skimmed your post and almost put down a vote, but thought better of putting someone one away (been in too many games where that is not a good thing to do)

[MeMe]

Overreact much, PB?

[PeaceBringer]

always, I am quite famous for my ability to "over react"

[olio]

I found SaberKitty's reasoning for her vote confusing. Can you please explain it a bit? Do you vote Vesuvan because he hasn't participated and is close to lynch even though you don't think there's a good reasoning behind that bandwagon?

Also your behaviour feels to me like somebody trying to act "just coming along and voting".

FOS: SaberKitty

[NanookTheWolf]

Fos: Vesuvan

He does seem to have disappeared in another one of my games as well. Maybe replacement is needed?

[the silent speaker]

Well well well. I waited a day or two to see what the people on the hot seat had to say in their own defense. And other than LML, who did give a satisfactory account of himself, they said not a damn thing.

SaberKitty's willingness to be number n-1 is the second time she's come up on my radar. MeMe and Mr Stoofer are absolutely right that the argument ought to be exactly the opposite, and I did note with interest who leapt on the Vesuvan wagon (which is quite likely scum-approved at this point, as Mr Stoofer also correctly pointed out) with what reasoning. I also noted this with interest:

i don't understand why this whole bandwagon formed because someone posted right after it was made apparent that they hadn't said anything. suspicious as it is- i don't understand why vesuvian hasn't said anything since.

Later in the post, SK voted Vesuvan. So... you don't understand why the bandwagon formed, and you just jumped on anyway? (This, or a similar, was olio's point, too, I think.) All in all I'm happy with a

vote: SaberKitty

. Her post is

concentrated

scummy.

I'm not sure what to make of the PB thing that sprouted. I think it will depend on who else is revealed scum later. Overall he seems scummier than not, but I would be less happy with a PB vote on the basis of it than I am with the SK vote I have now.

[Dragon Phoenix]

Vote count, 10 to lynch:

Vesuvan 9 (EnterYourNameHere, Commodore Amazing, Olio, Someone, PBug, rolandofthewhite, the Shadow, LoudmouthLee, SaberKitty)
MeMe 1 (PBug)
Leonidas 1 (Peacebringer)
Axelrod 1 (Vesuvan)
EnterYourNameHere 1 (MeMe)
Mr Stoofer 1 (Fuldu)
Someone 1 (NanooktheWolf )
Olio 1 (Leonidas)
SaberKitty (the silent speaker)

Vesuvan has been prodded.

[Vesuvan]

Well I obviously disagree. Early speculation

can

be effective. More to the point, I do it all the time, and by all the time, I mean every game I have ever been in--with some small success I might add. So for you to suggest that it means I am more likely to be a mafia is flatly untrue.

Even more to the point, you appear to realize this (or possibly you only realize it now?), but you are still trying to argue the point. Or are you just making a general game-theory-meta-game type argument that has nothing to do with me?

Look, it has nothing to do with you personally, and it's something that I consider only for making my first (i.e. usually at least semi-random) vote of the day. Usually it doesn't get this sort of attention to it, as it shouldn't be taken too seriously.

The only reason I "argued" the point at all was because you brought up a past game - and as we noticed then, you were town in that game so as I said, it really isn't much of an indicator. I just like to discourage it when there is no pattern to go on (i.e. it's usually not very useful until night 2 or 3 at the earliest)

sorry i haven't posted in a few days... my mom was in the hospital, but she's ok now...
anywho, i don't understand why this whole bandwagon formed because someone posted right after it was made apparent that they hadn't said anything. suspicious as it is- i don't understand why vesuvian hasn't said anything since.

The reason I haven't posted anything since is that I haven't been on the internet since. I'm catching up on the thread now. There have been some rather extreme circumstances keeping me from getting online, as it is certainly not usual for me to be offline for this long at a stretch.

For people calling for me to claim (Stoofer, LML), I don't generally believe in claiming unless there is some real reason to do so - it's not necessarily something I believe a townie should do when under a bandwagon if there is no reason behind the bandwagon.

As I understand it, the only reason for suspicion on me is a (labelled as semi-random) vote for Axelrod for what I admitted outright was a very weak scum tell, for posting shortly after someone noted that I hadn't posted for a while, and for not posting for a while? Unless the people calling for me to claim have any better reasons than this (and if so, then I'll quite happily claim), I don't see any reason to do so.

I'm able to check up on the thread regularly again, so supposed lurking can be looked at from this point on rather than by a bandwagon-forced claim. I have explained my position regarding my vote on Axelrod (which I'm leaving there until I see a stronger reason to vote for someone). Unless there is something else, I see no need to claim, which I believe is not something that benefits the town under these circumstances

[Commodore Amazing]

unvote: Vesuvan, vote: SaberKitty

. Her reason for getting on the bandwagon seems sort of weak. Coming on as late as she did, I would have expected pressure, but not a vote. Especially when she claims to be unsure. I'm now happy to push the bandwagon over to her. It's not like we really had much on Vesuvan besides random day-one shenanigans anyway.

[olio]

I'm waiting for some sort of explanation from SaberKitty before considering switching. I still think that popping up right after being called out for lurking AND having participated on the site otherwise while the thread has been open is scummiest tell at this point. SaberKitty is close though.

[Vesuvan]

I still think that popping up right after being called out for lurking AND having participated on the site otherwise while the thread has been open is scummiest tell at this point.

Not noticing a thread is open when the other threads I've posted in are in a different forum is a scum tell now?

Though if by this you're saying that we have no "reliable" tells at the moment, then fair enough.

[PeaceBringer]

unvote, vote saberkitty--

[Axelrod]

I must say, Vesuvan is either innocent or one of the most cool-headed mafia I've ever seen.

Right now, I'm mainly agreeing with the silent speaker in his assesment of the situation. I'd like to hear more from SaberKitty about her reasoning before putting another vote on though.

[The Shadow]

This is classic. Is it just me, or did Commodore Amazing and Peacebringer switch awful fast? I mean, I can understand unvoting, but they suddenly move to the next potential bandwagon with little or no explanation. How do you know TSS isn't scum defending a partner? I'm not saying he is, but changing votes without giving even a reason (PB) is rather strange, imo.

Regarding Vesuvan, he was one of the lurkers for the past couple days. Suddenly he's back and is one vote from the lynch and he starts off his post discussing the use of speculating on day 1 with Axelrod? He says the bandwagon has no point so he refuses to claim. Well what if some nut didn't like that and voted you anyway and we lost a powerful role? Would that be a good time to claim? Oh wait, it's a bit late by then.

[PeaceBringer]

This is classic. Is it just me, or did Commodore Amazing and Peacebringer switch awful fast? I mean, I can understand unvoting, but they suddenly move to the next potential bandwagon with little or no explanation. How do you know TSS isn't scum defending a partner? I'm not saying he is, but changing votes without giving even a reason (PB) is rather strange, imo.

Regarding Vesuvan, he was one of the lurkers for the past couple days. Suddenly he's back and is one vote from the lynch and he starts off his post discussing the use of speculating on day 1 with Axelrod? He says the bandwagon has no point so he refuses to claim. Well what if some nut didn't like that and voted you anyway and we lost a powerful role? Would that be a good time to claim? Oh wait, it's a bit late by then.

shadow, you haven't played with me before. I play this way, pure and simple. I don't find a need to or have a desire to explain my votes and reasons. My vote wasn't "quick" and I want information given what I am observing in the game so far. So moving from a random- meaningless vote to a vote for info especially when my current reaction to Vesuvan and Alexrod is a pissing contest.

[Axelrod]

I must say, Vesuvan is either innocent or one of the most cool-headed mafia I've ever seen.

Right now, I'm mainly agreeing with the silent speaker in his assesment of the situation. I'd like to hear more from SaberKitty about her reasoning before putting another vote on though.

Um, and in case that wasn't completely clear. I meant putting another vote on

SaberKitty

, not Vesuvan.

[rolandofthewhite]

Unvote; Vote: PeaceBringer

.

[Vesuvan]

Regarding Vesuvan, he was one of the lurkers for the past couple days. Suddenly he's back and is one vote from the lynch and he starts off his post discussing the use of speculating on day 1 with Axelrod?

This is something common to my playing style. When I am catching up on a thread after a period of time being away (most often over a weekend), I reply to any still-relevant questions directed toward me.

He says the bandwagon has no point so he refuses to claim. Well what if some nut didn't like that and voted you anyway and we lost a powerful role? Would that be a good time to claim? Oh wait, it's a bit late by then.

Again, that's part of my playing style. If I don't see a reason to claim, I state why and ask for a reason why I should do so from those calling for my claim. If someone puts the lethal vote on, then they are running a very big risk of being lynched in turn the following day and there is a very good chance of them being scum.

Of course, if I do see a "real reason" for the bandwagon, then I'll claim in that sort of situation.

[SaberKitty]

um.. right.
Well, I'd like to start off saying that i really don't like it when people stop posting. note the uncertainty of my previous post? it was because i dislike lynching the good guys, but would rather play a long and eventful game than win after only few days because there were just a few active people posting: the mafia. so, if it were to come down to -on day one- killing off someone who was potentially town but wouldn't contribute to the game or doing nothing and letting the game stagnate, i'd rather do the former. what can i say? i play mafia because i want to enjoy it. if this was later in the game where this one person would make a significant difference, then yeah, i wouldn't have voted for him. but, since it's day one, i'd gladly give the game a chance to get interesting.

but, since he's here and participating, i no longer feel it necessary to keep my vote on him.

unvote: vesuvan

also, it could be because they voted for me, but it really bothers me when people just switch votes without saying anything. peacebringer and rolandofthewhite- maybe it's just me, but it really sucks when you don't wanna explain your reasoning for a vote. even if your reason is exactly what someone else said... i'd prefer a quote of some sort.
however, peacebringer's refusal to substantiate(<-is that the right word??) his vote just pisses me off. sorry. we're here to figure out who's who and part of that involves knowing what others are thinking. help us out a bit.

vote: peacebringer

-sk

[SaberKitty]

and if i could edit...

by they, i just meant peacebringer... blah.

[Vesuvan]

Okay, taking some more time to read back over the wagon on me, I'm finding myself also agreeing a lot with SilentSpeaker's assessment in post 82. Saberkitty, the action of voting for me really didn't fit with the text surrounding it, which by itself would be more of an explanation for placing a FOS and stating a willingness to place a vote - not to place a vote yourself. The pressure on someone you feel is lurking is something that I agree with and approve of, but putting them on the verge of a lynch is not.

You have complained that people voting for you aren't explaining their reasoning, and I assume that this is to do with wanting to be able to answer the reasons they have for voting for you. Given the explanation I've given, which is very similar to reasons already stated prior to your last post.

Since this behavior is raising more red flags for me,

Unvote, Vote: Saberkitty

[PeaceBringer]

Unvote; Vote: PeaceBringer

.

:rolflmao:

FYI

SK- The good old retaliation vote. BTW, have you noticed here that I get strong reaction by voting and not giving any reasons for it. Always love that and gives behaviors to sort through. It may be a little hard for you to understand. Also can get interesting voting patterns. This is about all I care to explain about how I vote.

[rolandofthewhite]

Wha-? I didn't say anything about the way you vote... O.o