Mini 735 - Bad Times In Kuribonia- Game over!

[12]

I suspect Kierean (reason in bold)

I totaly agree, prof gumpy.

I think Random votes are a waste of time. We should investigate and put pressure on people,

lets say three votes, enough to make them sweat,

He may just be saying this to cover up the fact that he's Mafia.

I fail to see how this is relevant. Any among us may be saying anything to cover up our mafia connection. This seems to me to be an attempt to add undue suspicion.

[12]

Vote Kieraen

saying to watch out for people bandwagoning seems a little scummy

This, also is irrelevant. Bandwagoning leads to speedy lynches, which are good for scum. A reminder to avoid a lynch until we have a decent idea that the victim is scum only benefits the town. Your suspicion sounds like scum taking an easy target to me.

[ting =)]

Don't forget post 49 by monkeyman.

[Kieraen]

I think people are just jumping on the first person to say something controversial. However, at least there is some more discussion. I don't believe there would be any discussion if we had random votes.

I use this tactic in other games and bring attention to myself, but what can I say, Im not too scared of getting attention because i can defend myself as long as people are able to listen.

Also, if I am mafia, what advantage does it hold for me to come up and say 'dont random vote'? Vote to put pressure on someone will make them talk more.

ironically that person is first of all me. and im talking loads, and so are other people. Mission acomplished! And I bet some of you other people are having a few thoughts not just about myself, but about people who would vote so swiftly against myself.

Even if i am quicklynched, i will maintain this tactic in other games.

[Kieraen]

I agree with 12. Whether myself or any other person we put pressure on, we definitely should NOT lynch this early before deadline.

[Reecer6]

Well I say either Kieraen or Tovarish. I'm still not voting, though.

[Polymorph]

lol, okay fair enough, why not let it be me who is pressured first.

Ill defend myself. I do believe in pressuing people. Whats the point of a collection of random votes. What can assertain from that? We must push people, check their voting styles, make them sweat, even if that sweaty player is me.

Also keep your eyes open for people bandwagoning on me. Me being pressures isnt just a tell on my game but the people who vote for me.

I won't OMGUS vote on Tovarish, as I can understand his reasons for voting for me. However I hope you are open to the idea of retracting your vote when you see my innoncence.

Vote Kieraen

saying to watch out for people bandwagoning seems a little scummy

You know why he's saying that right? It's because a lot of the bandwagons (not all, mind you) suddenly get accellerated by those who

a) want a quick lynch, because of their personal suspicion

or

b)want a quick lynch and are scum, because that person has become a lot easier to lynch.

Usually the initial bandwagon consists of 3-5 people (at least, that's what I consider to be a bandwagon in the random stage), depending on the person's defense (or lack thereof). Now, if there are some reasonable doubts about his town/scum status, usually people will want to withhold voting to make sure that it's not going to end up with a dead townie, especially if it only takes 2 or less votes to lynch. But sometimes people act of their own accord and decide to lynch him anyways.

Now say you were part if that accellerated voting and he turned up town. How does that reflect upon you? You'd probably be the next bandwagon. Would you want to be the next person in the noose because of some rash action? Certainly not. Not many people would be willing to have that chance of death upon them.

Unvote Ting
Vote houseofcards

[MonkeyMan576]

lol, okay fair enough, why not let it be me who is pressured first.

Ill defend myself. I do believe in pressuing people. Whats the point of a collection of random votes. What can assertain from that? We must push people, check their voting styles, make them sweat, even if that sweaty player is me.

Also keep your eyes open for people bandwagoning on me. Me being pressures isnt just a tell on my game but the people who vote for me.

I won't OMGUS vote on Tovarish, as I can understand his reasons for voting for me. However I hope you are open to the idea of retracting your vote when you see my innoncence.

Vote Kieraen

saying to watch out for people bandwagoning seems a little scummy

You know why he's saying that right? It's because a lot of the bandwagons (not all, mind you) suddenly get accellerated by those who

a) want a quick lynch, because of their personal suspicion

or

b)want a quick lynch and are scum, because that person has become a lot easier to lynch.

Usually the initial bandwagon consists of 3-5 people (at least, that's what I consider to be a bandwagon in the random stage), depending on the person's defense (or lack thereof). Now, if there are some reasonable doubts about his town/scum status, usually people will want to withhold voting to make sure that it's not going to end up with a dead townie, especially if it only takes 2 or less votes to lynch. But sometimes people act of their own accord and decide to lynch him anyways.

Now say you were part if that accellerated voting and he turned up town. How does that reflect upon you? You'd probably be the next bandwagon. Would you want to be the next person in the noose because of some rash action? Certainly not. Not many people would be willing to have that chance of death upon them.

Unvote Ting
Vote houseofcards

It takes what, 7 to lynch, and we should be afraid of voting because of what would happen if someone that's acting suspicious turns up town? That doesn't make any sense, and if we went by your advice, no one would ever vote on anyone.

The reasonable approach is to apply pressure to people acting suspicious or scummy through voting, although not enough to lynch them. That being said, anyone casting a vote needs to be prepared that the vote could eventually result in a lynch, but as long as you are voting for who YOU think the most suspicious person is, you shouldn't be afraid of voting out of fear of retalliation.

[Qanqan]

After rereading all the posts, I found quite a few times MonkeyMan576 raised my eyebrow of suspicion a few times (even if by only a little). His first vote felt like an overly optemistic hope for a bandwagon, and his following posts (eg post 23) he has tried to throw suspicion for almost nothing, but not voting untill the bandwagon is 'safe' to stay uner the radar. Though I wouldn't say trying to stay under the radar in itself is necessary scummy... staying under the radar and suspicion casting is.

Also, I find the bandwagon people are putting on Kieraen mildly suspicious. Reecer and houseofcards seem a little eager to bandwagon, so

Fos: Reecer & houseofcards

But

Unvote: Ting =) ; Vote: MonkeyMan576

[MonkeyMan576]

After rereading all the posts, I found quite a few times MonkeyMan576 raised my eyebrow of suspicion a few times (even if by only a little). His first vote felt like an overly optemistic hope for a bandwagon, and his following posts (eg post 23) he has tried to throw suspicion for almost nothing, but not voting untill the bandwagon is 'safe' to stay uner the radar. Though I wouldn't say trying to stay under the radar in itself is necessary scummy... staying under the radar and suspicion casting is.

Also, I find the bandwagon people are putting on Kieraen mildly suspicious. Reecer and houseofcards seem a little eager to bandwagon, so

Fos: Reecer & houseofcards

But

Unvote: Ting =) ; Vote: MonkeyMan576

I didn't say staying under the radar was good, I said you shouldn't be afraid to vote in fear of retaliation. Vote on who you think is most suspicious, not because someone else threatens you. You're totally misinterpreting what I said. I'm not casting suspicion, I'm giving my opinion. And I'm hardly staying under the radar.

[Qanqan]

I never said you said staying under the radar was good, I was never challenging anything you were saying.

... I'm saying I think you

are

staying under the radar, to me it feels as though you're throwing some suspicion in the midst in the hopes others will jump on it, and thus jump on each other while you sit back and stay safe. I do agree you shouldn't be afraid to vote in fear of retaliation, but again, that's not what I am arguing.

And the type of 'under the radar' I was referring to is not when you try and stay unnoticed by not posting; but when you post often enough, but in a conforming manner so as to not to draw to much attention to yourself. (Also note I am not saying playing under the radar by itself is necessarily suspicious.)

[MonkeyMan576]

I never said you said staying under the radar was good, I was never challenging anything you were saying.

... I'm saying I think you

are

staying under the radar, to me it feels as though you're throwing some suspicion in the midst in the hopes others will jump on it, and thus jump on each other while you sit back and stay safe. I do agree you shouldn't be afraid to vote in fear of retaliation, but again, that's not what I am arguing.

And the type of 'under the radar' I was referring to is not when you try and stay unnoticed by not posting; but when you post often enough, but in a conforming manner so as to not to draw to much attention to yourself. (Also note I am not saying playing under the radar by itself is necessarily suspicious.)

I've noticed when people "rock the boat"(like by self voting or saying they don't like random voting), they have a tendancy to get voted on and attacked. There are ways to go about scum hunting besides being overtly confrontational.

[Qanqan]

How was that even slightly relevant?

[MonkeyMan576]

How was that even slightly relevant?

Well, it was to me.

[ting =)]

I didn't have time to elaborate on why I didn't like monkeyman's post 49 at the time I mentioned it.

Vote: Kieraern

In my opinion random facilitates discussion and puts pressure on people. And it's much better than lurking.

This strikes me as a rather contrived reason for a third vote. You're voting kieraern because he doesn't like random voting and you do? And how does random voting even apply any pressure at all? And yes, of course it's better than lurking, but how does that even reflect anything on kieraern's alignment? And as far as facilitating discussion goes, there are far better ways, like pressuring people as kieraern suggested.

It seems to me like you just wanted to hop on the kieraern wagon and cooked up something that doesn't even apply to do so.

[MonkeyMan576]

I didn't have time to elaborate on why I didn't like monkeyman's post 49 at the time I mentioned it.

Vote: Kieraern

In my opinion random facilitates discussion and puts pressure on people. And it's much better than lurking.

This strikes me as a rather contrived reason for a third vote. You're voting kieraern because he doesn't like random voting and you do? And how does random voting even apply any pressure at all? And yes, of course it's better than lurking, but how does that even reflect anything on kieraern's alignment? And as far as facilitating discussion goes, there are far better ways, like pressuring people as kieraern suggested.

It seems to me like you just wanted to hop on the kieraern wagon and cooked up something that doesn't even apply to do so.

Random voting facilitates discussion, first of all, by showing who is lurking and who is not, and second of all, to see if anyone is jumpy and gets overly defensive. My reason for voting is valid.

[Qanqan]

Random voting facilitates discussion, first of all, by showing who is lurking and who is not, and second of all, to see if anyone is jumpy and gets overly defensive. My reason for voting is valid.

On rereading post 49 (which I missed before) it sounds more like you are voting him on a differing of opinions, more than anything else.

And is trying not to seem 'overly defensive' the reason you didn't defend yourself after the claims I made?

[ting =)]

Because Kieraern was against random voting and would rather work on pressuring people instead of random voting? Random voting serves to jump start the game, as you put it, 'facilitate discussion.' If anything, Kier was getting the ball rolling by starting discussion.

[kuribo]

Day 1
Vote Count 1

:

Tovarish- 3 (qwints, ting =), Kieraen
Kierean- 3 (houseofcards, Tovarish, MonkeyMan576)
houseofcards- 1 (Polymorph)
MonkeyMan575- 1 (Qanqan)

With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch!

[Kieraen]

Because Kieraern was against random voting and would rather work on pressuring people instead of random voting? Random voting serves to jump start the game, as you put it, 'facilitate discussion.' If anything, Kier was getting the ball rolling by starting discussion.

My intentions entirely. I maintain that even though I have three votes, I am more pleased with the discússion in this game than if it had continued with random voting.

I havent had a chance to reread the game, and will be posting again with suspicions thoughts, etcetra.

God its still scary being at three votes, lol

[Kieraen]

FOS:REECER

That is TWICE now that you have said you are suspicious of the person with high votes.

First on page two you said you were suspicious of me with no reasons (beacause I had suspicioun on me from controversial speach).

Second of all, post 55, where he was suspicious of the two people with 3 votes (Myself and TOVARISH), whilst not commiting to voting.

For me it seems decidely suspicious to state your suspicion, sitting on the fence, whilst not putting yourself in a position to be attacked as you 'didn't vote yet'.

Also MONKEY MAN seems to be putting pressure on me with a third vote, which is what I initialy suggested as a way of encouraging discussion and debate, yet still argues in a 'random vote'. This is for me seemingly contradictionary.

TOVARASH: I want you to answer some questions satisfactorily, before I retract my vote. First do you feel under pressure on three votes? even though you know this is pressure voting do you feel like you could be lynched, either by mafia bandwagoning, or by townies being unsatisfied with your arguments.

If yes than your vote against me is unqualified by argument, as you stated there is no pressure if it is initialy stated, a stance I disagree with. I am only 4 votes away from being lynched. As are you.

Also, as an alternative to my stratergy of systematically voting for a player (by three votes) to force some pressure and response, what would you suggest. random votes? Votes based on names? Avatars?

Votes based on last nights night kill....oh wait we havent had one yet!

I am open for suggestion.

[ting =)]

Also, as an alternative to my stratergy of

systematically voting for a player (by three votes) to force some pressure and response,

what would you suggest. random votes? Votes based on names? Avatars?

Putting three votes on someone just because you want to put pressure on them - does not put pressure on them. The whole point of a 'pressure vote' is the threat of lynch, that's what makes people talk. If you're telling everyone you're just putting votes on them for pressure, then there's no threat of anything at all. It's like pointing a gun at someone and telling them you don't actually intend to shoot.

There's no pressure in a vote unless you have a case backing it, or at least a reason for suspicion. Dropping votes on people systematically wouldn't achieve anything.

[MonkeyMan576]

Putting pressure on people is good for discussion, but random voting is also good for discussion. I just disagreed with Kierans logic, and often poor logic is a sign of scumminess. I'm not saying he's scum, just scummier than everyone else at this point. If a better candidate comes along that's scummier, I'll gladly change my vote.

[Kieraen]

Ah but TING there is a threat of lynching.
say three people put a vote on someone. There is always mafia ready to follow suit, 'weak' players and 'bussing' players who will follow suit. No one likes being on three votes and i believe even if it is a deliberate 'pressure vote' there is always a threat of vote.

MONKEYMAN I dont believe that random voting is good for discussion. You can always blame it on a joke or on a silly choice but the chances are, is that a random vote leads to a random lynch....probably townie.

Right now, finish the defensive, on with the offensive.
I want to see some justification in the votes from TOVARISH and particularly HOUSE OF CARDS.

I am satisfied with MONKEYMANS logic.

I would also like to hear some NEW ideas coming from REECER, who has just followed suit with current voting trends.

Where have your suspicions come from?

[ting =)]

Ah but TING there is a threat of lynching.
say three people put a vote on someone. There is always mafia ready to follow suit, 'weak' players and 'bussing' players who will follow suit. No one likes being on three votes and I believe even if it is a deliberate 'pressure vote' there is always a threat of vote.

Let's take you as an example. You have three votes. Do you see any chance of you being lynched at this point?

Do you really think the mafia would quick lynch you now?
Do you think there's 4 weak players who would pile their votes on you to a lynch without a case?
Do you think the scum would hammer their team mate when there's no case behind the votes on their buddy besides 'pressure'? (this is a hypothetical for bussing, I'm not calling you scum.)

I have no problem with pressure votes. I just think saying flat out it's just 'for pressure' and not 'I find you suspicious and will lynch you if you don't answer me' is pointless. You've already admitted you're not trying to lynch.