If it's normal, it shouldn't be. I usually pre-screen who I'm playing with. I know it's "cliquey" but it helps avoid games where everyone decides to die, figuratively or mentally.Lacey 370 wrote:Just a general question for the more experienced players. I've run into low levels of enthusiasm except from 2-3 players in nearly all of my games, with 50%+ of the players lurking. Is this normal? It's a let down.
Even if --> Come on, Don't tell me you honestly believe, I even remembered you accusing me in one post during D1, and then during D2 re-reread I thought to myself 'my gosh, Jason is suspicious of me, OMGUS!'. Please, maybe that would have any sense if:Jason wrote:Col, I see OMGUS as not only voting your voter, but also accusing someone who has accused you. Maybe not OMGUS in the conventional sense but still borderline OMGUS, at least thats how I have always seen it.
Huh?jasonT1981 wrote:And with that ,sorry but I am off on my weekend V/LA as I do not get PC access as much during weekends. Cols response avoided what I had mentioned about him, putting each wagon at -1 so
vote: Col Cathart
I adressed that point about putting L-1 right here:Why am I not voting? its L-1 thats why and I want to give Mae time to respond. Also note.... Col putting Mae at -1 exactly like he did in day 1 with Cirdua... I find that very suspicious... it seems like he does not want to be the hammer in case he comes under suspicion, but this really caught my interest given the circumstances are the same, and once again he puts someone at L-1
I avoided anything? If so, what?I wrote:Oh, and about me L-1ing again - I'm not afraid of anything. It just happened again, that my scum suspect is at L-2, and if I find someone scummy... Why should I not vote for him/her? If Mae/Cirdua would be at L-1, and I wouldn't hear anything to clear them (claim, some really good points or whatever), I would've hammer without any doubt if there wouldn't be any important discussion going on.
Eh, not really. Lots of people give excuses for lurking as scum. The problem comes from letting them get away with it. I don't question V/LAs really. I'm sure he has legit enough reasons, but the thing is that if he's scum he's more likely to be searching for a reason to not be posting content in thread. I'm not being rude about it, just calling it like I see it.Lacey wrote:Be careful here VP Baltar. The way I understand things V/LA is not something you are allowed to use for in game reasons as a plot. I feel this accusation you're making is bordering on unsportsmanlike conduct. Let's keep it civil and friendly, ok?
The fact that you claim to be so aware of your own meta makes this entirely null.Jason wrote:OK, as scum I throw my vote around jumping on the popular wagons piggy backing of others cases, as town though I like to ask questions and get responses first before committing to a vote. As I like to make sure my vote is going on the right person, as scum I don't care who gets lynched.
this is why I have not voted yet.
I'd like to keep that close to my chest at the moment. Ask me after today's lynch.Lacey wrote:Can you propose your scum teams then, and who you think is connected?
Well, she WAS at L-1...so I don't think he'd vote her even if he wasn't on her scum team. His willingness to vote her seemed legit to me.Lacey wrote:What makes you sure Maemuki and Jason are on opposing scum teams?
Jasons refusal to vote Maemuki, and insistence on the weaker (but still valid) case on Col.Cathart almost suggests Jason-Maemuki if you are certain Jason is scum (a fact of which I am slowly being convinced).
Alex wrote:I now remember why I stopped using this account. I fucking HATE being called Alexithymia. For the love of cheeze and all things good, call me Alex. Alexithymia just winds me up.
see, you have to learn to create drama. It keeps things exciting.Vi wrote:Full post to come elsewhen (maybe) but the drama ITT is too pathetic even to warrant a snippy Advice Dog pic.
Depends on the game really. I would say this is an abnormal amount of whiney/lurking in my experience.Lacey wrote:Just a general question for the more experienced players. I've run into low levels of enthusiasm except from 2-3 players in nearly all of my games, with 50%+ of the players lurking. Is this normal? It's a let down.
Attempt to get modkill after claiming to go V/LA noted!jason wrote:Vi, thats against the rules lol
I said I don't think she's obvTown. But it's not like anyone's reputation compares to hers at this point.VP Baltar 379 wrote:@Vi, if I was picking townies out of that group it'd be Col. Cathart and Alex probably. Why the change of heart re:Lacey?
I'm not attacking you. I'm saying specifically that I feel if Jason were using V/LA as in game rule, it violates the trust given to players and the community with V/LA, and would qualify as unsportsmanlike conduct.VP Baltar wrote:Hey Lacey, why do you attack me over jason's V/LA and then go on to say Haylen is making excuses with hers?
Good to know, the level of disinterest in the games I've played in are starting to flag my enthusiasm for the site. :-/Depends on the game really. I would say this is an abnormal amount of whiney/lurking in my experience.
It's part of the learning curve of the site I think. You have to find out who you like to play with based on styles and then try to sign up for games with a lot of those people in them. Unfortunately, the only way to learn this is either by reading a ton of games or just playing with as many different people as possible to start. It is definitely annoying when a good portion of the game just wants to lurk and not play, so I like to make a mental note of those kinds of things for future reference when I am signing up for games and have found it has greatly improved my experience since doing so.Lacey wrote:Good to know, the level of disinterest in the games I've played in are starting to flag my enthusiasm for the site. :-/
I still think Maemuki is scum, but I wanted to see if anyone would vote her if she wasn't at L-1 (looking specifically at jason when saying this).Col.Cathart 385 wrote:Vi, I don't really understand what did you mean in your unvote explanation. Care to elaborate?
With her continued absence, it looks more and more likely she is scum just avoiding posting.Vi wrote:I still think Maemuki is scum, but I wanted to see if anyone would vote her if she wasn't at L-1 (looking specifically at jason when saying this).Col.Cathart 385 wrote:Vi, I don't really understand what did you mean in your unvote explanation. Care to elaborate?
That was horrible, I know many polish who are living here so I can kinda sense how you are feeling at this time. Truely a shocking accident. Take your time and post when you feel ready to again.Col.Cathart wrote:Apologies in advance. I'll try to be as active as yesterday, but I'm not going to lie, that I'm not really in a mood for mafia right now (and if you checked the news you should know why), so I don't know if my activity today will be satisfying.
Wow... thats bad... Yea, I believe it is time for a claim also.Lacey wrote:Maemuki posted 12 times yesterday, and yet not once here even with the pressure of a potential lynch.
I would like Maemuki to claim. Unless it is something amazing, I believe it is time to lynch.
Later.. is now nearly a full dayDeathRowKitty wrote:Here. Will post later. Busy in general early on Sundays.
