Open 26 - Vengeful Mafia (Abandoned) before 462

[Per]

There is nothing to say. Unfortunately I'm getting prods like you all so I HAVE to make posts. I'd rather make useful ones than silly ones once we have left the random voting stage...

[xyzzy]

There is nothing to say. Unfortunately I'm getting prods like you all so I HAVE to make posts. I'd rather make useful ones than silly ones once we have left the random voting stage...

If nothing else, speculate on why people aren't posting.

[Sir Tornado]

Aimee: I am still waiting to hear your reasons for your preemptive FOSes.

[Sir Tornado]

Hello? Is anyone still reading this?

Aimee please respond!

[Aimee]

Sure, I'm alive. I was hoping for IH to respond, but oh well. Bigger post coming latah.

[Per]

Mod:

please prod IH, he's been active in other games.

[IH]

nope, I just forgot about this game, I haven't quite caught up, and I can't go through my games like I usually do on my watchlist, so some games end up getting skipped.

[IH]

Ok. First of all, my thing I kept referring to. I was trying to jumpstart some conversation by doggedly attacking one player, and seeing who jumped on.

Jumping on someone with NOTHING? Just trying for reactions. Thought someone saw it.

At the moment, my main suspect is Per. Seriously, the guy jumps on a newbie for just taking a townie role to mean townie, and then, after specifically stating "look at my sig" which the mod even drew attention to, there was this

As long as you remember you're joking, I don't see a problem. Seeing as IH is an experienced player, I don't think he will lose control. I bet my money on it that he was joking.

That said, joking can stall the game. And it certainly is doing so here. IH comes on, makes some jokes, goes away. No contributions. Lurking in plain sight. Unvote, vote: IH.

For the record: I still think cmckinney is scummier, but I don't really feel like hammering him on P2.

With Per being all opportunistic, it screams scum, imo, not to mention this looks a little uncommittal.
"It's not a problem, but it CAN stall the game." AKA, I'll sound like I'm disputing you, but throw a vote on anyways.

my next suspect is Xyzzy, for a little bit of this contradiction.

Indeed, if we mislynch and misvig today, we lose.

And I'm at lynch -1, by the way, so if I'm quicklynched, the killer can call himself vigged.

No big deal, if he's town, we pretty much have a 1/3 chance of getting scum. If he's the goon, awesome, if he's the GF, game ovah.

He seems to recognize this.

Because we're already in LyLo; if two townies act stupid in the same direction, we risk immediate loss.

It's never a good idea to joke in LyLo.

It just looks like a completely different spin on it. We're in lylo. get serious. It's bad. It's probably suspicious. Not exactly a contradiction, but the turnaround looks sharp IMO.



Also, look Per's at post 55/56, to not end the day was enough, and then he kind of puts a defense on him, but attacks him at the same time. Just looks uncommittal.

Sir Tornado hasn't made a single comment on his own (If He has, please correct me) The closest was FoSing someone for not paying attention to the game as a joke (Which was, in fact, Xyzzy). It just looks like he's riding the coat tails..... I'd say that he's the most likely candidate for a GF IMO, with one of the other two as the goon. I'd think that a Goon would take a more active role, why a GF would want to hang back more.


Also I should become a whole lot more active = )

[Aimee]

I partially agree with IH. I think xyzzy and Sir Tornado are scum.

I disagree about Per. I thin my gut is calling him a townie right now.

xyzzy I am suspicious of. xyzzy, when someone goes "you are scum, obvobv" on page 2, they aren't being serious. They are either joking or searching for reactions. The very fact you became suddenly so completely uber wow defensive suggests you had something to hide, which is scummy.

Sir Tornado, whilst you are a very nice person, your post definitely emphasised my thoughts on you. I asked you who you thought was suspicious. You promptly described how my predecessor was suspicious, but then unvoted me. I was wanting your thoughts on current players. The very fact you didn't do this emphasised the way I considered you to be incredibly non-committal.

IH, if you find Per to be most suspicious, and Sir Tornado to be most like a godfather, why are you voting xyzzy?

I am going to

vote: Sir Tornado

.

[Sir Tornado]

Sir Tornado, whilst you are a very nice person, your post definitely emphasised my thoughts on you. I asked you who you thought was suspicious. You promptly described how my predecessor was suspicious, but then unvoted me. I was wanting your thoughts on current players. The very fact you didn't do this emphasised the way I considered you to be incredibly non-committal.

Ok.

About Per.

Are you both purposefully stalling the game or just stupid? I think it's quite clear that IH was joking. Just like he was when he did his cop claim ("first post", remember?).

Why is it a bad idea in a small game in particular, or why is it a worse idea in a game of 5 than in a game of 12?

As long as you remember you're joking, I don't see a problem. Seeing as IH is an experienced player, I don't think he will lose control. I bet my money on it that he was joking.

That said, joking

can

stall the game. And it certainly is doing so here. IH comes on, makes some jokes, goes away. No contributions. Lurking in plain sight.

Unvote, vote: IH.

For the record: I still think cmckinney is scummier, but I don't really feel like hammering him on P2.

Per, IH isn't lurking. His sig says he'll be away till 29th.

I know what his sig says, I can read. I wasn't talking about these last couple of days, because that's not lurking, and it's not in plain sight.

When he was only being silly and not contributing anything, no matter how small, that's what I call lurking in plain sight.

None of them sound scummy on an individual basis. However, when taken together (they are his 4 consecutive posts) they don't make much sense.

First, he answers a question for IH. Then, he questions about joking being bad. Then, he says that joking isn't bad, although it stalls the game. He then votes for IH due to his "lurking in plain sight". He repeats that in the later post.

However, if he felt IH was lurking in plain sight, why post post 44, in which he sort of answered my and xyzzy's post about IH by saying IH was joking?

This is probably nothing at all. However, I can't find anything remotely scummy in any other current player's play.

[IH]

Aimee, I mostly want a votecount before I move my vote, especially in a game this small, my vote is kind of static until I see the count.

[yellowbounder]

Vote Count

1 - IH (Per)
1 - xyzzy (IH)
1 - Sir Tornado (Aimee)

2 - Not Voting (Sir Tornado, xyzzy)

With

5

alive, it's

3

to lynch.

[Per]

With Per being all opportunistic, it screams scum, imo, not to mention this looks a little uncommittal.
"It's not a problem, but it CAN stall the game." AKA, I'll sound like I'm disputing you, but throw a vote on anyways.

OK, I think the most important word is "uncommittal". English is not my native language and I don't know the word, haven't found it in me English-Dutch dictionnary and haven't found it on dictionary.com, so I'm afraid your going to teach me some vocabulary now. In another game I read it as "uncommitted" so maybe I built an entire defense against something completely wrong which could be why my defense hasn't worked, lol.

If it does mean uncommitted: I'm not uncommitted. I've been trying to get this game running all the time, without ;e it would probably have been declared abandoned by now or something.

Also, look Per's at post 55/56, to not end the day was enough, and then he kind of puts a defense on him, but attacks him at the same time. Just looks uncommittal.

Uncommittal again...

[Sir Tornado]

Per, check the word [quote=http://dictionary.reference.com/search? ... ncommittal]noncommittal[/url]...

I believe uncommittal means exactly the same thing.

[Sir Tornado]

EBWOP:

Per, check the word noncommittal...

I believe uncommittal means exactly the same thing.

[Per]

OK, thank you. So it's like inconsistent?

With Per being all opportunistic, it screams scum, imo, not to mention this looks a little uncommittal.
"It's not a problem, but it CAN stall the game." AKA, I'll sound like I'm disputing you, but throw a vote on anyways.

I don't think it screams scum, but whatever. I think I worded it badly. I was typing while thinking. My first thought: "joking is OK as long as you remember you're not being serious", so I type this out. My next thought is: "well, but joking can stall the game". This is a bit noncommittal, I must admit. I hadn't really made up my mind before posting.

And I don't mind throwing votes on too much, by the way, or not first votes anyway.

Also, look Per's at post 55/56, to not end the day was enough, and then he kind of puts a defense on him, but attacks him at the same time. Just looks uncommittal.

I'm not seeing anything noncommittal in 55/56...

[Sir Tornado]

No, not inconsistent.

It's more like sitting on the fence. (In fact, it

is

sitting on the fence)

[IH]

Sorry, uncomittal may not actually be a real English word.

It is the lack of comitting (Like undo, except for Uncommit, so you're not being committal)

Similar to not taking a stance.

Sitting the fence is an accurate description.

[Per]

OK. In that case, my response is: we had practically NOTHING to go on yet, and I was the one trying to start discussion while you guys were either not posting or joking. How am *I* the uncommittal player?

[IH]

As long as you remember you're joking, I don't see a problem. Seeing as IH is an experienced player, I don't think he will lose control. I bet my money on it that he was joking.

That said, joking can stall the game. And it certainly is doing so here. IH comes on, makes some jokes, goes away. No contributions. Lurking in plain sight. Unvote, vote: IH.

For the record: I still think cmckinney is scummier, but I don't really feel like hammering him on P2.

THis is catering to both potential sides of the argument. That is fence sitting, aka being uncommittal.

unvote, vote:Per

[Per]

As I said... I was the only one being active, yet I'm being accused of sitting on the fence. Ridiculous.

[IH]

And i say to that, what does that have to do with committing? That makes it even worse, waiting to see what the rest of the town would say.

[Per]

I don't know if it really is uncommittal. I say: joking is OK as long as you know you're only joking and no-one is taking you serious, and if you don't stall the game because of your joking. You were clearly stalling the game so I put a pressure vote on so you would start playing seriously.

Obviously you did, so I have no reason to vote you anymore.

Unvote: IH.

Mod:

I will be away from Monday the 16th until Sunday the 29th, so I'll have to be replaced.

[IH]

that joking was actually trying to start the game.

Similar to a CES style of play.

[Aimee]

IH, why were you voting for Per, when, as you say, Sir Tornado had pretty much said nothing as well? Would you say that Sir T has been equally non-committal?