So, while you guys vote on lurkers, let me remind you that voting in lurkers gives us no voting evidence for the next day. If we lynch mumbles, we will be down to 22 at end of night. Then we lynch Roose and we are down to 18 at end of night (barring zero protections). It sucks that we have a few super lurkers, but we aren't in the numbers position to simply waste two game days lynching two lurkers and getting no evidence. That would simply be handing the game over to scum. That's not to say that the night kills won't be scum, or that Roose and Mumbles aren't scum themselves, but historically speaking lunching lurkers has not been something that have us good results.
I would suggest any vigilantes to kill the two lurkers so we can still have a chance to get voter evidence. Vigi's goal is a town win and we can't win if we keep lurkers around all game. We also won't win if we waste our lynches on the lurkers. Just imagine having 8 people less in this game right now with the information we have.
wyrd bið ful aræd
Great, SaintSinner is gone. Atleast Mumble has posted, but if he doesn't do anything soon, I'll consider voting.
Formerly The Dwarf Lover (TDL)
It's likely that this is the same for the other new players on these boards (eg. mumbles). The amount of fluff that you post is enough to scare anyone new off - I know that I thought about walking away when we started, because there was just so much reading involved and most of it non-game related. That's how you guys play, it's fine, it just takes some adjusting from another set of boards.
At this stage, I have no intention of voting for people who haven't posted yet - we can vote and hammer them in the last 24 hours. Voting for mumbles seems like a stalling tactic in my opinion. It's not going to get him to vote any quicker.
vote: Firebert for the reason above
Robozerim followed the BW very quickly.
Lysah, in my opinion, has added very little substance of today. From my perspective has successfully started a BW on a cop and made comments to offend someone to the extent of removing their enjoyment of the game and therefore activity. If she's been playing for as long as she says she has, then she should know better.
Edit: Oh. Majad clarified. If you have any more troubles PM Sunshine. Or bump yourself up to 20 posts.
Very glad to see SaintSinner has been replaced. Welcome Celtic209.
And what's the best way to welcome a new player?
Now post or that vote will be back before you know it!
A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one.
@Dyra, let's wait till he gets on the boards shall we - then vote for him...
@Lysah, yet another enthralling post filled with wisdom and perspective.
If you're trying to provoke me you can go ahead and give up; you don't even know what my buttons are.
Believe me, I know firsthand how Lysah likes to target people. Over the course of quite a few games I was her main target in this strategy of hers. I'm not sure why she stopped trying it with me, but I'm guessing it's because I stopped replying at all, so she knew she wouldn't learn much.
Now onto who to vote on.
Unvote Vote Mumbles85
Inactive people who don't bother to contribute anything meaningful are great for the scum to keep around. There are no positive reasons for the town to keep them around though.
I'd also like to understand why you went so hard after treann yesterday?
---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 11:52 PM ----------
I'll say it again for you though.
Treann was playing the game in a completely different manner than he usually plays. He almost always posted only a few times a day if that in previous games so it sent off alarm bells (at least it did for me) that something was up. I was wrong (being wrong happens). I still don't regret the vote though. He seemed the most suspicious out of anyone playing up till that point.
I don't remember for sure.
I stopped targeting you because I learned how to read you :3
Although your play style has changed a lot over time (since the first game that I got banned in and you were mason) and I don't really feel reliable about it anymore, I still read you as town generally and so leave it at that. So far this game I've mostly only argued with people voting on me, I think.
As was explained then, and agreed upon by a large portion of the game, Treann was acting very uncharactaristic. First, he almost always complains that he doesn't have a power role unless he has a power role, so we could figure he did have a power role. We were right about this. Second, he posted like crazy. The last time he got mafia he lurked like hell and was killed for it, so I reasoned that he was trying a new tactic this time. Considering he got 15 more votes, I know I'm not the only person who came up with this thought process. Finally, a -1 role claim and self vote are both bad behavior and warrant a lynch, in my opinion.
As we MMOC users have discussed before, Day 1 lynches will ALWAYS be a random shot in the dark, at best. When someone acts extremely out of character, they make themselves a great target for the day 1 vote tally. It is unfortunate that we lost a cop, but let's also try to use the information instead of just repeatedly complaining about a day 1 mistake and acting like the game is already lost for town. We have a great list of votes (and no votes), and like I said before, most of the scum are probably hiding in the no vote list. Scum tend to play it safe on day 1 and wouldn't have jumped on a bandwagon that was not actually likely to happen at all until NFT voted on himself and caused people to pile on.
Look at the people who conveniently didn't vote yesterday, look at how many are conveniently still hiding in the background of this discussion. Look at the people who jumped on the opportunity to bring down the hammer after NFT voted on himself and gave them a great reason to vote on him.
While I don't agree with your reasoning, there's nothing we can do now - thanks for repeating.