Newbie 624: Kodak City, Flour District (Game Over)

[Acidmix]

/confirm

[Acidmix]

vote Robro

last to confirm

I agree

Vote: Robro

[Acidmix]

Vote: Acidmix

Agreeing is for wimps and scum.

Come on now how was I supposed to know he was going to vote for the same person for the same reason?

[Acidmix]

Are you implying that you were going to vote for the last to confirm anyway? Your original post suggested you were simply agreeing with what he had said, not that you had coincidentally thought of the same thing.

Do you believe that "last to confirm" is a good reason to vote for someone?

Well considering that the first day is supposed to be random (or so thats what
I've heard anyway) I don't see how the "last to confirm" is a bad or good reason to vote only that its a bit random which is what I was going for.

And so yes I was going to vote the last to confirm anyway.
Since someone already voted that way I figured it would make for a shorter
post just to quote the first guy, then vote, and then put down "I agree"

[Acidmix]

@Acidmix:

-Why didn't you change the "random" factor you were going to vote for once it was already taken?
-Please explain how a post with a quote and two lines of text is any shorter than a post with two lines of text.
-Why didn't you answer mith's question to the next person to post?
-Do you know who mith is?

1. I don't know, I just didn't

2. well its not any shorter its the same, the only difference is I clicked on the quote button instead of the reply button. What I meant by making a shorter post is that what I did would be shorter then say a post with my vote and then say a long paragraph of why I decided to vote for that person thats all.

3.I just didn't want to.

4. I have no clue who mith is. I am new to this game and these forums.
This really is my first game ever.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The reason I am the current "confusing Influence" is because people keep asking me questions.

[Acidmix]

I think the mod missed a vote.

MOD: Fixed.

[Acidmix]

Well going by the mod I might have one vote. I don't quite think thats enough to luynch me just yet.

[Acidmix]

UNVOTE

Vote: hasdgfas

-------------------------------

f you had to vote for one of the players who had already posted, and your life depending on whether or not you were right, who would you vote for and why?

I would vote for hasdgfas because he voted but didn't really join into any discussion at all. Sure there are other people who did the same thing, but
the one thing that I did noticed that was different is that mith called him on
being deceptive and that makes me suspicious of him.

[Acidmix]

(Ugh. Ok, this is completely irrelevant as far as catching scums goes, and I understand what NabNab was trying to say, but the phrase "random voting stage" really agitates me. It's accurate, I suppose, in that the start of day 1 generally has some random/arbitrary voting, but this is certainly not necessary and referring to it as a stage tends to lead to new players thinking it is some well-defined period of the game at which time nothing productive can happen.

Interesting. So because mith asked you a question about who you would vote for, you decide that you're going to go even further than he asked and vote for that person.

In addition, I made the 4th post of the day, before anyone had done anything to start discussion. Why is that more suspicious than the people who decided to random vote after discussion had already started? Sure, mith said that we've been in a game together before, but it's always fun to vote mith, because he plays in games so rarely, from what I can tell.

This vote makes me more suspicious of you than I was before, not just because it's on me, but because after people called you out on how it's the townie thing to answer it, you decide to answer it

and

switch your vote, when mith didn't say you had to switch your vote when you answered the question. Why did you feel it necessary to throw in the vote there?

I figured since we are no longer supposed to vote random, then I would change my vote to reflect that.

it seems like everytime I post people become more and more suspicious of me so maybe not posting was the right way to go after all.

[Acidmix]

Personally, I think that scum would probably rather lay low and try not to get noticed and draw attention to themselves. But I'd like to wait and see everyone get involved first.

You know thats a rather interesting post considering the person you just randomly voted for (Chelsefan) fits your own description of mafia scum.

seems kinda dodgy to me, not enough to change my vote however

[Acidmix]

Robro, Could you give me a better explanation of why your voting for mith?

I feel like I'm missing something.

[Acidmix]

Mith, what if hasdgfas is mafia scum, who do you think his partner is? ^_^

[Acidmix]

Mith, what if hasdgfas is mafia scum, who do you think his partner is? ^_^

same question to you.

personally, i dont like the question since we are assuming cow is scum, which may not be true. but since you posed it, id like to hear your answer as well.

Well I don't really see how it matters if you like the question or not considering the question was never directed at you and clearly directed at Mith.

Are you trying to protect Mith from the question for some odd reason?

And to answer your question for now I'm thinking either seahawksfan2863 or Robro.

[Acidmix]

Seahawks because I don't completely believe post 52
Robro I find confusing, which makes me suspicious of him

[Acidmix]

Chelseafan, so who are you most suspicious of, taking in consideration of everyone's play style and the current discussion?

[Acidmix]

Well I don't really see how it matters if you like the question or not considering the question was never directed at you and clearly directed at Mith

Surely he has the right to give his opinions on the topic too
Sure it wasn't directly put to him but meh the more opinion the better.

opinions and comments are fine

I just don't see what the problem with voting for someone and then asking someone who voted for the same person a question about possible ties to the person they voted for.

now I can see that being a problem if neither one of us had voted for anyone and then trying to figure out who someones partner is because at that point I'm not even sure who I'm most suspicious of. So it really wouldn't even make sense.

[Acidmix]

I've noticed a lot of people saying I'm scum with Robro, but I think you have to remember that even newbie scum in newbie games rarely blatantly defend their partner, the way Robro did with me. I find it significantly more likely that Robro is scum who was trying to defend me, a suspicious townie, and trying to get townie points if I were to end up lynched. (Note: In newbie games, this has been the most consistent scumtell I've seen. Both times it's happened, the person doing it has been scum.)

It seems like to me though if Robro wanted to appear more townie he couldn't defend you, defending you only put a spotlight on him and his post. I don't think he would have wanted that kind of attention. he would either stayed out of the discussion or would've been against you or maybe even change the subject and targeted someone else. I also find it interesting that you and robro both voted for mith at one time or another.

even newbie scum in newbie games rarely blatantly defend their partner,

Rarely isn't never

Well thats my opinion anyway

[Acidmix]

On another note:

Does anyone find NabakovNabakov suspicious?

[Acidmix]

On another note:

Does anyone find NabakovNabakov suspicious?

Not particularly to be honest.
Out of the 3 experienced players he's the one I find most "town like".
Do you find him suspicious then?

not really
I'm just curious to see what people think of him.
I think one of the reasons that the cow & robro discussion is so big is because of him. Which makes him an interesting character.

[Acidmix]

Robro: if you don't find cow to be scum and you think me and mith are pro town, what do you think about seahawksfan since he has been agreeing with the majority since page 3?


Chelseafan: What is your read on mith, cow, and A_Squirrel?

Which brings me to a question: Is offering an explanation/defense against a point good or bad? I looked at a few games, and it seemed like letting the accused defend himself was the best, since it gave town more material to use. But when there are perfectly fine explanations for odd behavior or whatnot, should they be presented by the accuser or left unsaid?

I think more material for the town is always a good thing. If there are good explanations for odd behavior if someone requests for that explanation then I think it should be provided.