Read Your Role Mafia - Game Over

[wolframnhart]

2)I don't care if he regurgitates his reason is the same as another persons, it is a reason, and that is the point. I am not going to guess why someone votes another person if they don't say why, they just vote and expect us to know why.

You're on your own on that one, then. Don't expect people to parrot other's reasoning, when its pretty clear why they're voting, like in this case.

That's absolutely fine with me Sens, i don't mind being on my own. As it is, there are 5 votes on charter now, so him being at L-3 I think yaw getting touchy that people didn't keep going on charter's wagon is a little weird.

FoS yaw

[Yaw]

MafiaSSK -- Please don't make us read other minis to try to figure out what you personally saw. Summarize or quote whatever it is you want to add. (Except if the game's still running, in which case...probably shouldn't have been mentioned in the first place.)

[MafiaSSK]

MafiaSSK -- Please don't make us read other minis to try to figure out what you personally saw. Summarize or quote whatever it is you want to add. (Except if the game's still running, in which case...probably shouldn't have been mentioned in the first place.)

Kay. he was town in both games and acted WAY differently.

[Electra]

MafiaSSK -- Please don't make us read other minis to try to figure out what you personally saw. Summarize or quote whatever it is you want to add. (Except if the game's still running, in which case...probably shouldn't have been mentioned in the first place.)

Kay. he was town in both games and acted WAY differently.

Can you describe the differences?

PS. sorry for lack of posting, I'm too used to going to little italy, and not theme park.

[MafiaSSK]

MafiaSSK -- Please don't make us read other minis to try to figure out what you personally saw. Summarize or quote whatever it is you want to add. (Except if the game's still running, in which case...probably shouldn't have been mentioned in the first place.)

Kay. he was town in both games and acted WAY differently.

Can you describe the differences?

PS. sorry for lack of posting, I'm too used to going to little italy, and not theme park.

Way more aggressive.

[Caboose]

MafiaSSK -- Please don't make us read other minis to try to figure out what you personally saw. Summarize or quote whatever it is you want to add. (Except if the game's still running, in which case...probably shouldn't have been mentioned in the first place.)

Kay. he was town in both games and acted WAY differently.

Can you describe the differences?

PS. sorry for lack of posting, I'm too used to going to little italy, and not theme park.

Way more aggressive.

Can you get any more vague than that?

[petroleumjelly]

Day One Vote Count #6

5 charter (Yaw, forbiddanlight, Caboose, ooba, MafiaSSK)
3 ooba (wolframnhart, SocioPath, charter)
2 Natirasha (Natirasha, SensFan)
1 Caboose (Seraphim)
1 SensFan (Electra)
1 Yaw (RandomGem)

With

14

alive, it takes

8

to lynch, and

7

to No-Lynch. Deadline October 22, 9:59 pm CDT.

Not Voting – 1 – ShadowGirl

[Yaw]

Let's see here, why have we stalled...

Caboose -- 17 posts, last post yesterday
charter -- 7 posts, last post yesterday
Electra -- 2 posts, last post yesterday
forbiddanlight -- 24 posts, last post yesterday
MafiaSSK -- 8 posts, last post yesterday
Natirasha -- 6 posts, last post yesterday
ooba -- 8 posts, last post yesterday
RandomGem -- 4 posts, last post Sunday
SensFan -- 15 posts, last post yesterday
Seraphim -- 4 posts, last post Sunday
ShadowGirl -- 9 posts, last post yesterday
SocioPath -- 2 posts, last post Sunday
wolframnhart -- 19 posts, last post yesterday
Yaw -- 20 posts, last post yesterday (before this one, obv)

Which means, surprisingly, we don't need prods. That said, there's a lot of people (Electra, RandomGem, Seraphim, SocioPath most severely) that need to start contributing a lot more. Either support the charter-wagon, support the ooba-wagon (I'd personally prefer this option accompany more logic for the wagon), or start another one. Do something productive.

[SensFan]

Yaw's list, sorted by post-count for easier reference.

forbiddanlight -- 24 posts, last post yesterday
Yaw -- 20 posts, last post yesterday (before this one, obv)
wolframnhart -- 19 posts, last post yesterday
Caboose -- 17 posts, last post yesterday
SensFan -- 15 posts, last post yesterday
ShadowGirl -- 9 posts, last post yesterday
MafiaSSK -- 8 posts, last post yesterday
ooba -- 8 posts, last post yesterday
charter -- 7 posts, last post yesterday
Natirasha -- 6 posts, last post yesterday
RandomGem -- 4 posts, last post Sunday
Seraphim -- 4 posts, last post Sunday
SocioPath -- 2 posts, last post Sunday
Electra -- 2 posts, last post yesterday

[charter]

So what is the point of those again? There really isn't anything else to say for those voting me. If you want to lynch me over that, I've already explained, so be it.

Ooba, why jump wagons so much?

[ShadowGirl]

FoS: MafiaSSK

For the really, really vague answers. It looks like you just want to have a reason, any reason for jumping onto his wagon. :/

[Yaw]

So what is the point of those again?

What's the point of which? The list? We hadn't had a post in around 21 hours, so I wanted to see who was lurking and how severely. Partially to call out those who weren't helping us find scum, and partially to see if we needed prods on anyone. If I'm going to figure out who is lurking, I prefer statistics.

[charter]

Fair enough, I personally didn't see any usage for them, but I generally don't go after lurkers. (I was talking about the lists by the way).

[forbiddanlight]

Wow...I really do post way too much, lol. But, that won't continue for a little bit:

I'd like to mention I'm going V/LA starting Thursday, but I'm going to be low activity most of this week anyway. I should be back monday.

[SocioPath]

Wow...I really do post way too much, lol.

Don't worry about posting too much, as long as you have content that is included. Fluff and filler is the only thing in terms of posting too much is what holds back a town.

[forbiddanlight]

Unfortunately I tend to have a fair amount of that. I tend to get accused of high signal to noise *sigh*

[RandomGem]

Unfortunately I tend to have a fair amount of that. I tend to get accused of high signal to noise *sigh*

Cough cough cough.

Sorry for not posting, but weeding through all the noise is difficult.
(And I tend to only post every other day, even though I go on the site every day... I'm lazy like that...)

[Seraphim]

Sorry about not posting lately; real life has been kicking me around in the shins the last week and probably will to some extent this week as well. I'll try to be more active, however. Here's my thoughts on stuff:

MafiaSSK: Your case on Charter is weak. While I do find his entire 'I'm fairly certain Sens is town' statement very...odd...it's not enough for to qualify for a vote. Ooba has been acting way more oddly with his random bandwagon jumping. Still, I don't see why had to pry information from your cold, dead fingers about his meta; if that's your case, be more specific.

Ooba: I covered this above, but your bandwagon jumping, IMO, is scummy as hell. Not to mention you stated that you hated random voting. I don't like that in the slightest.

Charter: I want to know why you are so certain Sens is town. It's very easy that it's his meta. That's fine, IMO, but if that's your only reason, then I'm not just taking your word for it.

Nat: Post moar. You didn't post much until prodded and you haven't posted since your meta discussion was completed. Lurking is frowned upon.

From my perspective: I think we should lynch Ooba until I see otherwise. His obvious following the leader with no reasoning of his own. Also, not much activity. Also, a hatred of random voting, even while random voting leads to discussion and scum-finding. IMO, all scum behavior.

Unvote, Vote: ooba

[Yaw]

OMG! Seraphim just changed his vote! He must be scum!

Seriously, anyone want to explain how what ooba did is any different from that? I've been far more bandwagon-hoppy on day 1s in the past as town than ooba's been here. I really think you guys are reaching with this argument.

The reason what charter did is scummy is that it suggests he may have more information than he ought to. What ooba did suggests he wants a bandwagon. The two aren't in the same league. Ooba may be scum, but someone needs to come up with a legitimate argument if that's the case.

[MafiaSSK]

Seraphim: How much more specific do you want?

[ooba]

wolframnhart stated it already, but at this point, I think that

ooba's indecisive wagon hopping

is only matched by his statement of refusing to random vote. Both alone are harmless, but matched together, rubs the wrong way.

Where have i been indecisive?

Sociopath, you still haven't answered this question ..

Ooba, why jump wagons so much?

The Nat vote was not a wagon. You're stretching it ..

Ooba has been acting way more oddly with his

random bandwagon jumping

.

Please explain the following parts of this statement
a) How were my votes random?
b) When did I bandwagon jump?

His obvious following the leader with no reasoning of his own. Also, not much activity.

Considering the fact that I was only on one wagon and never 'bandwagon jumped' and that I've got twice the number of posts you've got - you're just stretching the arguments the others have made before you and added a few more stretches of your own.

[SocioPath]

Sociopath, you still haven't answered this question

Really, it is because it was already essentially answered in the part you quoted.

You have made two serious votes this game in a short amount of time.
You weren't the first for either of them and just hopped from one to the other.
Your statement that you weren't going to random vote means that yes, both of your votes were serious.

The reason you stated voting for Natirasha: ______
Later reason: Not random.
Even later reason: "Obvious" because he hadn't posted.


The reason you stated voting for charter: ______
Later reason: Pressure
Even later reason: Him saying he thinks Sens is town.


Generally it is best to at least have a reason first before voting, especially if you imply that everyone of your votes has reason, as opposed to voting first and covering yourself with reasons later as more develops. Especially when stating that everyone of your votes has reason with the statement of you not random voting.

[ooba]

The reason you stated voting for Natirasha: ______
Later reason: Not random.
Even later reason: "Obvious" because he hadn't posted.


The reason you stated voting for charter: ______
Later reason: Pressure
Even later reason: Him saying he thinks Sens is town.

Both these do not point to indecisiveness
a) Not Random is not a reason
b) Pressure for what - for him saying he feels fairly sure that sens is town. Both are not different reasons.

Indecisiveness would be
You voted for Seraphim. The reason stated was: ________
Later reason: For qualifying every joke he makes with j/k
Even later reason: For making stretching attacks on me

Note in this example, the reason initially stated was different from the one states afterwards - Hence indecisiveness.

[SocioPath]

Indecisiveness would be
You voted for Seraphim. The reason stated was: ________
Later reason: For qualifying every joke he makes with j/k
Even later reason: For making stretching attacks on me

Someone voted for Seraphim?

Note in this example, the reason initially stated was different from the one states afterwards - Hence indecisiveness.

I'll assume in this 'example' you meant the people Seraphim voted for, and not people that voted him.

His first vote didn't have a reason other than it was a random vote.

His second vote was calling you out, he stated the reasons, whether you liked his reasonings or not.
Stretching attacks or not, reasons are reasons.

[ooba]

Indecisiveness would be
You voted for Seraphim. The reason stated was: ________
Later reason: For qualifying every joke he makes with j/k
Even later reason: For making stretching attacks on me

Someone voted for Seraphim?

Note in this example, the reason initially stated was different from the one states afterwards - Hence indecisiveness.

I'll assume in this 'example' you meant the people Seraphim voted for, and not people that voted him.

His first vote didn't have a reason other than it was a random vote.

His second vote was calling you out, he stated the reasons, whether you liked his reasonings or not.
Stretching attacks or not, reasons are reasons.

No you've got it wrong ..

This was a hypothetical example where I voted for Seraphim to show what indecisiveness in voting reasons actually meant ..

Initially stated reason : "I'm voting for him cause he qualifies everything with a j/k"

5 posts later : "The reason i voted for him was because he made stretching attacks on me"