green wrote:so no one thinks that i'm voting wickedswami because belini also voted and that makes us look like mafia buddies.
Two people voting together are necessarily mafia buddies? Indeed, mafia buddies do not collaborate so openly from the very beginning in newbie games...
But notice how you have maintained your vote once you realized that belini had also voted him...why didnt you unvote? you were not so worried that we thought you were mafia buddies? or why? I just pretend to know your reasons...telling the reasons help us to understand who is simulating (because they are mafia who need to invent attacks and votes etc) and who is not...
green wrote:Explain why you called me a friendly voter.
It was kinda a joking way to call you. I was not knowing if your vote was totally random (friendly) or you were suspicious of him. Notice how your vote is not explained. I took it as a random one, but I also asked the person you voted for to give his opinion, as reactions are important.
green wrote:Don't you mean my second post? And i was just asking a question because the second cop role said sane but the first one didn't have sane infront of it so i was curious...
Your second post. Your first game post, yeah. And I clearly see now the motive of your question. I didnt notice such difference in the mod ways to describe the cops.
weeping wrote:GreenDude is posting an awful lot.
Greendude is very satisfactorily participating. We need activity, especially in day 1. Only town benefits from activity. Mafia desires to make uninformed random lynches to have more chances to win. Hopefully everyone participates as much as green, whichever their roles.
green wrote:Thats because i'll type one thing then think of another. At least I DO post. You've barely posted weepingwind.
Do you find weeping suspicious for not posting?
edmund wrote:@nureins: I agree with GD, please explain the 'friendly voter' expression, could sound like your trying to vaguely and non-committedly cast suspicion on an, as I read, it completely random vote.
I am not casting any suspicion yet. I am typically a very active participant, and I like to promote debate and ideas that we can use later. How? Knowing how we behave and trying to discover the two people who are simulating to be townies.
When I cast accusations, they will be very very open. Indeed, I typically make summaries of how I perceive the players, which I find more suspicious and why, etc. Then I cast serious votes and try to wagon and lynch the players I consider more suspicious. For that, I need to convince others with my arguments.
Right now, we are simply in a starting stage. Launching questions and getting reactions is a first step to know why people do the things they do.
lab wrote:so random voting has a big chance of killing a good guy, which is why we should watch out with it.
I will start for now with: vote: No lynch
In newbie games, there is almost a consensus that voting NoLynch day 1 only benefits mafia. We have 3 chances to find mafia by lynching. If you dont do it today, you just go down to 2 attempts. That loss is extremely important in terms of town chances to win. It cannot be compensated by the marginal positive things that could suggest NoLynch (if you think some, yes, there might be some, but they are less important). There is a serious consensus on that, you can read the wikipedia and discussions about this topic.
