Mini 471: End.

[NabakovNabakov]

Wait... what? Our fountain exploded? Ok, guys, no need to look for the Mafia now, we'sa going after the terrists.
[/off-topic]

@Kravhen: Yes, it was time to get serious. I saw three votes on Adel in a row and smelled scum (even though BZ's was already there). The fact that you turned around and called

me

scum for being suspicious of a third vote being placed under stupid meta-game reasons hardly seems pro-town. Not liking early wagons =/= scum.

[Atticus]

"Top-of-Page vote-count"

Adel

(3):

Albert, kravhen, pickemgenius

Sir Tornado

(2):

Blue Zebra, camisade

Albert B. Rampage

(1):

Adel

Erotomachia

(1):

deadscilent

deadscilent

(1):

Erotomachia

pickemgenius

(1):

NabakovNabakov

CrashTextDummie

(1):

Patrick

Not voting: Sir Tornado, crashTextDummie

I will be gone until Monday, try to behave while I'm gone.

[NabakovNabakov]

Pssst,

Mod

, I've seen other Mods edit their votecounts into the top post no matter who's it is. If you really want Top of Page Vote Counts, feel free to piggyback.

[camisade]

unvote

I'm not going to vote until we have a good reason for suspicion.

[Blue Zebra]

unvote, vote: camisade

[Albert B. Rampage]

House totally owns you noobs. Should we wait for CTD to post or do we shoot this bitch to page 10 in his absence ?

[kravhen]

@Nabakov: I see where you're coming from, and to be honest, I didn't previously post after 100% analyzing the situation. I just read the thread, noticed people suddenly get all serious after having made equally "stupid meta-game moves" and not get serious until a specific person gets targeted, and then both of them turning the attention to someone else... Meh, at the very least, I wanted to see how you guys were going to react.

My vote's staying on Adel for now, my gut feeling is still there, and if you ever get nervous about 4 votes on Adel, well there are a couple of others that can take out their votes on her ( votes under "stupid metagame reasons" ) mine's staying.

[Adel]

@Nabakov: I see where you're coming from, and to be honest, I didn't previously post after 100% analyzing the situation.

Here he is trying to relieve himself of responsibility when I turn up town.

I just read the thread, noticed people suddenly get all serious after having made equally "stupid meta-game moves" and not get serious until a specific person gets targeted, and then both of them turning the attention to someone else... Meh, at the very least, I wanted to see how you guys were going to react.

When silly & random voting yields a bandwagon, there is something fishy going on. Placing a forth vote on someone on page two means that you are awfully willing to see a quicklynch based upon two or three posts from most people. How could you possibly be confident of someone's alignment on page two? Oh, that is right, if you are mafia than you know everyone else's alignment.

My vote's staying on Adel for now, my gut feeling is still there, and if you ever get nervous about 4 votes on Adel, well there are a couple of others that can take out their votes on her ( votes under "stupid metagame reasons" ) mine's staying.

With a vote that wasn't based upon solid analysis, on a player that said "what is with this wagon?". Page 2 is still randomness, yet you are willing to not only hop onto a silly wagon, but you are also willing to try to turn it serious and deadly, while avoiding responsibility for it.

unvote Albert B. Rampage vote:kravhen

[Sir Tornado]

@Nabakov: I see where you're coming from, and to be honest, I didn't previously post after 100% analyzing the situation. I just read the thread, noticed people suddenly get all serious after having made equally "stupid meta-game moves" and not get serious until a specific person gets targeted, and then both of them turning the attention to someone else... Meh, at the very least, I wanted to see how you guys were going to react.

My vote's staying on Adel for now, my gut feeling is still there, and if you ever get nervous about 4 votes on Adel, well there are a couple of others that can take out their votes on her ( votes under "stupid metagame reasons" ) mine's staying.

Really? Let me remind you why your voted for Adel:

Vote: Adel

for being scum, also her complexe diagrams are meant to confuse the town...

If that wasn't metagaming or random, then what was it? If that was metagaming (or even random) then why are you saying others should take their votes off her because they are "stupid metagame reasons"?

So, basically, you are saying your vote is staying on someone because they put up complex diagrams?! (I find her diagrams very useful, I might add)

[NabakovNabakov]

(I find her diagrams very useful, I might add)

Lying scum, nobody can actually make sense of her diagrams, we just stare at them until the drugs take over.

@Kravhen: I

hate

it when people do scummy stuff to see how others would react because I sometimes get the sneaking suspicion that they were actually doing scummy stuff for the sake of doing scummy stuff.

"Act, react, but don't act for a reaction."
-Me,

Mini 471, post 59

[pickemgenius]

I totally rule at getting the game started FTR..

[Adel]

we just stare at them until the drugs take over.

Than you must love my avatar

[Adel]

[Patrick]

Hmm, ok. I didn't see any problem at all with someone putting a third vote on Adel. Even the fourth one is no big deal with 7 to lynch. How does putting 4 votes on indicate a desire to quicklynch someone? A quicklynch hardly seems likely.

@Kravhen: I hate it when people do scummy stuff to see how others would react because I sometimes get the sneaking suspicion that they were actually doing scummy stuff for the sake of doing scummy stuff.

I agree with the principal, but I'm not convinced that's what we had here. Exactly how scummy is it to add a 4th vote with 7 to lynch? What were the chances of a speedlynch? It seemed like an ok way to get reactions to me. I can't bring myself to get too worked up about it.

[Adel]

Common scum tactic:

1. Place vote on someone who already has a vote.
2. Wait patiently
...
4. Mislynch!

Lynches on day one are often close to random, so resting a vote on a player early is an easy way to shift the odds a little in the direction of that innocent townie player getting lynched. I think it is interesting that lynch -2 isn't close to a mislynch in your eyes... two votes away, and those two can come quick, and when the result is a mislynch it is hard to say who is the scummiest, esp. if it is a VI who cast the hammer vote.

[Patrick]

Did I miscount? I thought he only put you at lynch-3.

[pickemgenius]

esp. if it is a VI who cast the hammer vote.

pssssst.

How do you know we have a VI?

[Adel]

Did I miscount? I thought he only put you at lynch-3.

Blue Zebra unvoted his early voe putting me back down to three votes.

Pickem: I don't know that we do, but I haven't been in a game yet that didn't have at least one.

[NabakovNabakov]

Adel, I think your math is just a tad off. The highest you ever had was 4 votes. L-2 is 5.

However, the basic principle holds. I'm perfectly comfortable with jokes flying around the first two pages, and if somebody happens to accrue 2 or 3 votes because they're good at chess, no big deal. But when I see three votes on the same person in three posts in a row, I can't help but comment. I'm not calling Kravhen out as scum here, but it's little things like that which snowball into real discussion.

Now that he has calmed down, I will

Unvote

Pickem. He also gets a cookie.

[Erotomachia]

Here are my thoughts on the Adel bandwagon: I think 3-4 votes is relatively harmless, considering that every vote at this stage has been completely random and doesn't mean much. Plus they're leading to a discussion. Although 5-6 votes this early in the game would definitely bear some looking into.

What's a VI, by the way?

[NabakovNabakov]

Villiage Idiot. A player so out of touch with strategy, grammar, and decorum that it is almost impossible to get a good tell or opinion out of them. They tend to lurk and every so often post an unexplained vote or cryptic sentence. (Not in the BabyJesus style, in a bad way)

[kravhen]

SirTornado you just quoted my vote: because she's scum... Take a look at the whole thread and you might find out what sparked the feeling in me that she's scum..

[camisade]

Is Village Idiot an actual role? Or is it just someone that's stupid? [/noob]

Cause pickemgenius sure acts like one, no offense.

[kravhen]

@Nabakov: I see where you're coming from, and to be honest, I didn't previously post after 100% analyzing the situation.

Here he is trying to relieve himself of responsibility when I turn up town.

Here you are trying to put FULL responsibility on me for whatever happens to you. It takes SEVEN votes to lynch you, you only have FOUR. Do you realize that out of those four votes, if you take out all the random and silly voting, only mine stays as a "valid vote"? If I was in your spot I wouldn't get too nervous if you were town because of that. Besides, if the random voters keep their vote on you, you still need THREE more votes to get lynched. I really don't see this happening anytime soon.

I just read the thread, noticed people suddenly get all serious after having made equally "stupid meta-game moves" and not get serious until a specific person gets targeted, and then both of them turning the attention to someone else... Meh, at the very least, I wanted to see how you guys were going to react.

When silly & random voting yields a bandwagon, there is something fishy going on. Placing a forth vote on someone on page two means that you are awfully willing to see a quicklynch based upon two or three posts from most people. How could you possibly be confident of someone's alignment on page two? Oh, that is right, if you are mafia than you know everyone else's alignment.

Once again, you are making my blowing my vote out of proportions and making it look horribly outrageous. I did not put the hammering vote on you. I also did not put you at Lynch -1. I put a fourth out of seven vote on you. And not any kind of fourth vote. This fourth vote is really the first valid one after 3 bandwagon votes. So just because there was a silly bandwagon i was supposed to not vote for you, or wait until the bandwagon dissapears before doing so? No way a silly bandwagon's getting in the way of my gut feeling that picked something up about you and made me drop one little valid vote.
Don't get me wrong though, if there was a 6-vote bandwagon on you, I wouldn't have voted. 6-vote bandwagon is ridiculous though.
If there was a 5-vote bandwagon, I probably would've had a bit of a hard time putting you at Lynch-1. Dont know what I would've done if that happened.

My vote's staying on Adel for now, my gut feeling is still there, and if you ever get nervous about 4 votes on Adel, well there are a couple of others that can take out their votes on her ( votes under "stupid metagame reasons" ) mine's staying.

With a vote that wasn't based upon solid analysis, on a player that said "what is with this wagon?". Page 2 is still randomness, yet you are willing to not only hop onto a silly wagon, but you are also willing to try to turn it serious and deadly, while avoiding responsibility for it.

unvote Albert B. Rampage vote:kravhen

My move may have been reckless and unusually offensive especially for page 2, but hey, at least I'm getting responses/results I wanted out of it. At least now you know, Adel, that you are under my loop. Weigh carefully every word you speak as they are going to be analyzed letter by letter. Be paranoid.

[kravhen]

Is Village Idiot an actual role? Or is it just someone that's stupid? [/noob]

Cause pickemgenius sure acts like one, no offense.

Yes Village Idiot is an actual role, it's actually more deadly and dangerous than the mafia itself! It does not kill during the night, but it SUCKS YOUR BRAINS OUT DURING THE DAY AND MAKES YOU WEAR SOCKS WITH SANDALS! I also think Pickem is a VI lolz so lets vote him!

...

Just kidding. Chill Adel. Don't start quoting the hell out of this reply.