Mini #509: Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, Game Over!

[Blight]

JMar

I agree that JMar doesn't seem to be "lurking in plain sight" just yet, but I did find it odd that he needed Originality to explain to him why Peers's slip-up was a slip-up.

Vote: JMar

Originality voting JMar then backtracking looked suspicious to me.

Peers...I don't know. I understand that him backtracking after possibly revealing that he's not a plain vanilla could be suspicious. But, I could see a townie doing the exact same thing.

Mirth is another possibility. UA's BW was obviously a joke, but the fact that she was seriously opposing it could be her trying real hard to look like town. Maybe she thought that everyone would really lynch UA and then she'd have some credibility by being the only one to oppose it. I just saw this in another game with UA. But...again...I don't know. I'm kind of in between with her too. I see her as pro-town, but then she keeps bringing up the UA BW like it was more than just a joke to get things started.

[originality]

1. originality -- Jumping on a bandwagon for the sake of jumping on a bandwagon, then jumps off when he realizes he's in the "position of suspicion".

unvote, vote: Originality

What? You jumped in right before I did. You have no right to accuse me of bandwagoning just for the sake of it. I jumped off because there were too many votes on the dude, why would I keep my vote on him, its not like he had anything substantial against him anyway.

[Mirth]

Mirth is another possibility. UA's BW was obviously a joke, but the fact that she was seriously opposing it could be her trying real hard to look like town. Maybe she thought that everyone would really lynch UA and then she'd have some credibility by being the only one to oppose it. I just saw this in another game with UA. But...again...I don't know. I'm kind of in between with her too. I see her as pro-town, but then she keeps bringing up the UA BW like it was more than just a joke to get things started.

"Joke" bandwagons bother me when they pass 3 votes. I dont see a point in themto begin with, but when you carry it past a certain point, I have to wonder "why"? (By the way, no one had yet explained that to me)

[Flameaxe]

Jokewagons are what get the game moving, if you can't tell by what is going on here by NOW...

[Unright]

What? You jumped in right before I did. You have no right to accuse me of bandwagoning just for the sake of it. I jumped off because there were too many votes on the dude, why would I keep my vote on him, its not like he had anything substantial against him anyway.

Too many votes on him to what? Lynch him? 4 out of 7? Are you saying that you seriously believe that we were too close to a lynch?

If JMar had 5 or 6 votes, I would understand you unvoting. Hell, I would be unvoting. But 4 (or 3 like you thought) is not a danger zone number.

You look like someone who is doing his damnedest not to look like scum. Why?

[originality]

What? You jumped in right before I did. You have no right to accuse me of bandwagoning just for the sake of it. I jumped off because there were too many votes on the dude, why would I keep my vote on him, its not like he had anything substantial against him anyway.

Too many votes on him to what? Lynch him? 4 out of 7? Are you saying that you seriously believe that we were too close to a lynch?

If JMar had 5 or 6 votes, I would understand you unvoting. Hell, I would be unvoting. But 4 (or 3 like you thought) is not a danger zone number.

You look like someone who is doing his damnedest not to look like scum. Why?

He might not have been dangerously close to a lynch, but why would I keep a fourth vote on someone I don't find especially suspicious? Now if he had some sort of case against him thats a different story, but it was a pressure thing anyway, and 3 votes are enough for some pressure. I don't know how to answer your last question, I haven't been voluntarily doing anything of the kind.

[Flameaxe]

If you don't find them 'especially suspicious', why even bother voting?

[Blight]

What? You jumped in right before I did. You have no right to accuse me of bandwagoning just for the sake of it. I jumped off because there were too many votes on the dude, why would I keep my vote on him, its not like he had anything substantial against him anyway.

Too many votes on him to what? Lynch him? 4 out of 7? Are you saying that you seriously believe that we were too close to a lynch?

If JMar had 5 or 6 votes, I would understand you unvoting. Hell, I would be unvoting. But 4 (or 3 like you thought) is not a danger zone number.

You look like someone who is doing his damnedest not to look like scum. Why?

He might not have been dangerously close to a lynch, but why would I keep a fourth vote on someone I don't find especially suspicious? Now if he had some sort of case against him thats a different story, but it was a pressure thing anyway, and

3 votes are enough for some pressure

. I don't know how to answer your last question, I haven't been voluntarily doing anything of the kind.

And you thought your vote was the third one. So, why unvote?

[UltimaAvalon]

and if 3 votes is enough for pressure, whats wrong with 4?

[Mirth]

4 is crossing over into legitimate wagon territory past pressure votes and past joke votes.

[Mirth]

Or rather, let me correct that: past pressure votes without too much to base them on. Now if someone did something that might actually be damning, I think the line moves up to 5.

[Flameaxe]

I don't see the issue of a jokewagon over 4 votes. All I see...Is a jokewagon over 4 votes...

[Peers]

Mirth is another possibility. UA's BW was obviously a joke, but the fact that she was seriously opposing it could be her trying real hard to look like town. Maybe she thought that everyone would really lynch UA and then she'd have some credibility by being the only one to oppose it. I just saw this in another game with UA. But...again...I don't know. I'm kind of in between with her too. I see her as pro-town, but then she keeps bringing up the UA BW like it was more than just a joke to get things started.

It wasn't obviously a joke. I didn't know that; it's not hard to believe people who'd never played with UA or any of the others involved would think that way, too.

[Flameaxe]

Unvote PlayswithSquirrels, Vote UltimaAvalon

Only 3 more, guys!

Also

FoS Flameaxe

for morphing.

This post REALLY does seem TOTALLY serious...[/sarcasm]

Now you say 'It wasn't obviously a joke.' So please tell me why you decided to jump on a wagon you now say wasn't a joke.

unvote: Flameaxe

I guess he won me over with his "You're stupid!" defense.

vote: UltimaAvalon

I guess I'm an enabler.

---

Killerbob: Your lurking isn't helping the town at all, stop it, or I will bring out the paddle.

[originality]

And you thought your vote was the third one. So, why unvote?

Because I had just gone back and looked at the last postcount, which to my surprise showed that there was one vote more then I had previously thought. Pretty implied. Did you even read my unvoting post? It says there, "I didn't see the votes". You then are supposed use logic to understand that I did see them later.

[Mirth]

It wasn't obviously a joke. I didn't know that; it's not hard to believe people who'd never played with UA or any of the others involved would think that way, too.

I was aware that it wasn't a completely serious bandwagon, I just happen to not have a sense of humor. Especially when probability tells me that at least one person who was on that bandwagon is probably scum.

And why do I keep bringing it up? Because y'all keep trying to write it off as "Avalon always does this." Regardless of what he always does or does not do, you should not automatically go along with it. And I honestly don't believe that everyone who at some point voted for him was only voting to be "funny"

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

I was aware that it wasn't a completely serious bandwagon, I just happen to not have a sense of humor. Especially when probability tells me that at least one person who was on that bandwagon is probably scum.

This doesn't have anything to do with probability. You don't know how many scums are in the game, and even if you knew, this argument doesn't make sense at all. If there was one scum on the wagon, that means two scum (assuming there are 3 scum total, which seems to be the usual number in mini's) weren't on the wagon, and that means the people not wagonning have a higher probability of being scum. I also don't see why the possibility of a scum being on the wagon makes you wary of the wagon itself. Do you honestly believe anyone on the wagon was ever intent on lynching Avalon? Because I'm pretty sure you don't. Let's face it: Votes have no practical value whatsoever if they're not actually used to lynch someone.

[Blight]

And you thought your vote was the third one. So, why unvote?

Because I had just gone back and looked at the last postcount, which to my surprise showed that there was one vote more then I had previously thought. Pretty implied. Did you even read my unvoting post? It says there, "I didn't see the votes". You then are supposed use logic to understand that I did see them later.

This is what I read:

Oh crap,

I didn't see he already had two votes on him

.

unvote

To me, that implies that you realized your vote was the third one and decided to unvote. If you decided that three votes were enough for pressure, why unvote?

Or am I misreading this?

Mirth is another possibility. UA's BW was obviously a joke, but the fact that she was seriously opposing it could be her trying real hard to look like town. Maybe she thought that everyone would really lynch UA and then she'd have some credibility by being the only one to oppose it. I just saw this in another game with UA. But...again...I don't know. I'm kind of in between with her too. I see her as pro-town, but then she keeps bringing up the UA BW like it was more than just a joke to get things started.

It wasn't obviously a joke. I didn't know that; it's not hard to believe people who'd never played with UA or any of the others involved would think that way, too.

Unvote, Vote: Peers

The fact that you voted for UA unaware that it was a wagon that shouldn't have been taken seriously scares me.

I think you need to take another look at the comments from those who voted for him. There was no serious arguement against UA, which should tell you that it was a wagon that wasn't all that serious, especially since it's the first few pages of the game.

It wasn't obviously a joke. I didn't know that; it's not hard to believe people who'd never played with UA or any of the others involved would think that way, too.

I was aware that it wasn't a completely serious bandwagon, I just happen to not have a sense of humor. Especially when probability tells me that at least one person who was on that bandwagon is probably scum.

I'll give you that. There could be at least one scum member on that wagon, but how can we know who it is when every vote was made without any serious nature?

Plus, there's a very good chance that scum would want to stay away from any BW with no rationale behind it. That seems just as logical as scum jumping on the BW, doesn't it?

[Mirth]

I was aware that it wasn't a completely serious bandwagon, I just happen to not have a sense of humor. Especially when probability tells me that at least one person who was on that bandwagon is probably scum.

This doesn't have anything to do with probability. You don't know how many scums are in the game, and even if you knew, this argument doesn't make sense at all. If there was one scum on the wagon, that means two scum (assuming there are 3 scum total, which seems to be the usual number in mini's) weren't on the wagon, and that means the people not wagonning have a higher probability of being scum. I also don't see why the possibility of a scum being on the wagon makes you wary of the wagon itself. Do you honestly believe anyone on the wagon was ever intent on lynching Avalon? Because I'm pretty sure you don't. Let's face it: Votes have no practical value whatsoever if they're not actually used to lynch someone.

This train of thought however still makes more sense than a pointless bandwagon, as I'm trying to find motives and not just jump for the sake of jumping. You are right, however, that my use of probability is naive. I should have included the following clause: If Avalon is town, then there was probably more than one scum on the wagon. If Avalon is scum, I'd suspect they stay clear entirely.

Blight: Maybe. It in part depends on Avalon's alignment and in part on vote order. I doubt scum would be vote 6 or a hammer, but if it's seemingly innocuous, with me being the only person in this game paying very much attention to it, well, there's no harm in jumping and letting an idiot townie hammer, but it depends on timing it right and playing well over all.

[originality]

And you thought your vote was the third one. So, why unvote?

Because I had just gone back and looked at the last postcount, which to my surprise showed that there was one vote more then I had previously thought. Pretty implied. Did you even read my unvoting post? It says there, "I didn't see the votes". You then are supposed use logic to understand that I did see them later.

This is what I read:

Oh crap,

I didn't see he already had two votes on him

.

unvote

To me, that implies that you realized your vote was the third one and decided to unvote. If you decided that three votes were enough for pressure, why unvote?

Or am I misreading this?

with only, what you thought was 2 votes in a 7 vote lynch (It was actually 3). I mean, 3 votes is not going to kill jmar. Yeah it would have been actually putting him over 50% but no scum will quicklynch with L-3 unless they have a death wish.

Unvote, Vote: originality

Nope, he had 3 votes in him already, with me it would make it 4. When I say I hadn't seen he already had two votes I meant the votes on the previous page, because one of them was right above me. There was no sense of me putting him at -3.

Also, lol@one person saying I'm suspicious for bandwaggoning and another saying I'm suspicious for not bandwaggoning.

[Flameaxe]

Yea....because the difference between L-4 and L-3 is HUGE when it comes to pressure...

[killerbob]

Sorry guys, I have gotten behind in the thread. I will get back with some content hopefully tonight.

[Blight]

Alright, originality. I must have missed that post. It still seemed odd that you unvoted with only 4 votes, but I'm willing to let it slide for now.

I still feel comfortable with my vote on Peers.

[Peers]

unvote: Flameaxe

I guess he won me over with his "You're stupid!" defense.

vote: UltimaAvalon

I guess I'm an enabler.

---

Killerbob: Your lurking isn't helping the town at all, stop it, or I will bring out the paddle.

Unovte

Vote: Flameaxe

Reason: The above quote was made by Unright, not me. He put my name on it... why? To try to rally suspicion around me? Don't know. But he's trying to put words in my mouth, and I don't like that.

[Peers]

Unvote, Vote: Peers

The fact that you voted for UA unaware that it was a wagon that shouldn't have been taken seriously scares me.

I think you need to take another look at the comments from those who voted for him. There was no serious arguement against UA, which should tell you that it was a wagon that wasn't all that serious, especially since it's the first few pages of the game.

Note that I did not vote for UA until post 89 (or so), after I was aware it was some sort of joke bandwagon, and I gave as my reason for voting the fact that such jokes are not helpful to the town.