I agree with those who think there's no reason to withhold the info, but I doubt Squidy is going to budge so eh. As long as he discloses it with enough time for us to react I can't complain.
I'm not sure how to read Ferret's reactions towards the bandwagon against him. he seems cool and doesn't afraid of anything, which at the very least tells me he knows what he's doing, so I'll at least be paying attention to what he says.
At this point I don't think picking on newbies is necessarily bad. Depending on what Squidy says maybe we won't need to go down the inactivity-lynch path, but newbies should know they're exposing themselves to being lynch candidates if they don't step up their posting game after the 24 hour mark.
Also I think the Ferret bandwagon is a reflection that the meta has evolved a bit and it now takes more than a single vote to get people to feel any pressure. I've had my pressure vote on Mike for a while and he hasn't posted since, if I'm not mistaken.
We still have 3 days lets not rush on the inactive on Day 1 people probably haven't got used to checking gaf every single time to answer. If we do need a replacement Retro will take care of it. So no dont vote for someone who cant defend themselves as it wont give any info.
So adorable
That's how they get you. They lure you in with their cuteness, only to swarm you and strip you to the bone like piranhas.
Also I think the Ferret bandwagon is a reflection that the meta has evolved a bit and it now takes more than a single vote to get people to feel any pressure. I've had my pressure vote on Mike for a while and he hasn't posted since, if I'm not mistaken.
I don't personally see the benefit in waiting longer, but I trust you have your reasons. I am worried that a lot of people are going to hold off saying anything until you talk though.
I still want Seath to come reply and answer my question about his vote. I know it's been early and it's hard to contribute in D1, but he could at least answer my questions about his voting philosophy here.
I never thought that having votes on you is any pressure as long as you aren't around 50% of majority... Well, I guess it's context sensitive. If there is concrete evidence against you and it maybe is some kind of thunderdome, then you could be concerned, but as far as simple D1 votes come (that often are even explicitly stated as "pressure votes that won't stay". I'm not surprised others have come to this conclusion as well.
I don't want to talk about the how and why of these reads at this time, I think I'll talk about it before I go to bed tonight. until then, murmur nervously amongst yourselves please.
As for Mike, he has actually posted twice, he just ignored you
I sure hope that's not the case but even if it is I think it will be helpful, at least to me, to know who is interested in ducking the subject.
So let me ask the 3 people here who have responded to me to discuss at the very least, razmos and trigger. What do you think about them, can you guess what it is I might be looking at to say they are scum? how do you feel about Trigger's "I am town" post? Sorian already responded to the last point but I'd like to hear everyone's take on Razmos and Trigger.
That confidence is gonna gnab you, fella. Throwing out names for the heck of it, then downplaying it by brushing off for later.
I'm not nervous!
You poke in and out so I'm going to go with a more direct question. Just off your interpretation of the thread right now, give me your two most suspicious individuals and which of the two would you vote for if I was holding you down and saying that the time is now?
That's rape.
I must admit, I quite like the idea of the wheel. It won't lead to a conclusive result, but it gets the ball rolling, especially for indecisive first day players like me who feel bad trying to think of a reason to vote for a random person.
I'm definitely not going to stick with my RNG vote, but it is better than nothing until something actually starts happening and I find someone to be suspicious of. I'd rather throw out a random vote (which pretty much everyone does on the first day anyway, not sure why it's a problem) than be accused of sitting on the fence and not voting at all, it's also better for me to vote now than to leave it until the last minute.
I gave my reasoning for my RNG vote and said that I was more than willing to change it when something happened. I didn't even realize it was something that needed defending on the first day on the first day phase of the game.As for Razmos, I went back and read his posts just now. I'm really just getting a null read at this time. I guess I don't like that he tried to defend his RNG vote but that seemed more like a crossed wire miscommunication. Myself and anyone else against RNG votes at that time were talking about the last vote you have for the day and he seems to be talking about any vote he puts up for the day. That's how I'm reading it at least.
I gave my reasoning for my RNG vote and said that I was more than willing to change it when something happened. I didn't even realize it was something that needed defending on the first day on the first day phase of the game.
I didn't realize you were talking about the last vote of the day, I thought you were talking about the first vote, but now that I know that, yes I agree with you that the deciding vote should not be RNG based.
I don't get how any of that makes me suspicious really.
I haven't done anything with it yet, there is nothing for me to do yet. I put out a vote so that nobody can claim I'm inactive on the first day like they do in every game.Looked over all Razmos' (relatively few) posts and these were the only things that really stood out. He commented a bunch on flavor things, but it didn't seem particularly important. The only thing really concerning here is that he claims it gets the ball rolling, but then never did anything with it at all. As far as I can tell, Trigger (the "victim" of Razmos' wheel spin) never responded to it. For someone who seemed quite antsy to get started before D1, and who saw the wheel as a way to "get the ball rolling for indecisive first day players", it seems a little odd he would never bring it back up.
I sure hope that's not the case but even if it is I think it will be helpful, at least to me, to know who is interested in ducking the subject.
So let me ask the 3 people here who have responded to me to discuss at the very least, razmos and trigger. What do you think about them, can you guess what it is I might be looking at to say they are scum? how do you feel about Trigger's "I am town" post? Sorian already responded to the last point but I'd like to hear everyone's take on Razmos and Trigger.
I think I may see Trigger as a slightly more solid read, but only because you've directed my attention towards him. Sorian had already said that theorizing about potential roles could be harmful to town and Trigger brought it up again. He also seems to be stressing he doesn't know about the flavor or is behind in listening to NV as a way to justify hid flavor-related mixups, but maybe he's trying to hammer that point a bit too much? I honestly can't see anything wrong with his "ordinary member of NV" post, you (or the others who've brought it up) will have to illuminate me on that one.
Unvote: Fireblend
Just wanted to give my two cents on the whole "lynch someone on the first day" strategy. I don't really see a point in it, granted I've only ever played one game of Mafia (Star Wars) but when we did it there we ended up killing a townie/power role.
The chances of us voting off a Mafia on the first day are pretty low so what do we end up with going in to Day 2? Two dead townies because the Mafia is definitely going to kill someone in the Night Phase.
That's just how I see it and I'm sure I'm in the minority and I'm also sure there are a billion good reasons for voting someone off on Day 1.
Don't have anything else to add for now.
Used the wheel and it told me to vote for Boo Boo'n, instead I think I'll go against it and vote for someone else. Like....
Vote: Fireblend
You went against your own advice and just role claimed you're a regular townie. Highly suspicious!
Over 370 posts already ? Hoe is that possible? Oh wait.....*checks names*.....Sorian!
😃😃😃😃😃😃
Over 370 posts already ? Hoe is that possible? Oh wait.....*checks names*.....Sorian!
😃😃😃😃😃😃
So this is when you voted for Fireblend:
I'm still a little confused if you saying he claimed regular townie was a joke or not and now you are unvoting him. What happened here, what changed?
Past that, the most important part of voting someone out day 1 is the voting patterns throughout the day and how things swung, who changed behavior depending on the current front runner, etc.
Are you planning to back up your ideals with a No Lynch vote
I was mostly joking but I still find it odd. I don't see a point in keeping my vote on him is all.
Probably not, if someone makes a convincing argument against another player I may be persuaded. So far though I am leaning towards a No Lynch vote.
Could you maybe quote where he claimed to be an ordinary villager/townie? Because we were not seeing it when you brought this up yesterday and you disappeared when we asked. It seems like you do believe that he actually claimed it from your bolded.
1. For the new players, as Sorian said, do not claim unless you're minutes away from death (or are mafia-aligned, I guess. Makes my job easier)
Also, you are leaning no lynch but will probably not vote that way?
I was mostly joking but I still find it odd. I don't see a point in keeping my vote on him is all.
I actually already did on Post #154, you must have missed it. But here we go again.
It's a soft claim but in my eyes it's a claim. If you don't see it that way, well I can't convince you to.
Mind if I ask you to justify that a bit? It feels like you're using "finding it odd" as a potential fall-back if you find yourself having to place a vote, even though you have admitted you were joking when you said it.
Also, why not have an active vote? Why do you feel more comfortable with having no vote than keeping it where it was, or elsewhere? Your posts read so half-hearted so far, as if you're set on an option but then say you can be convinced to switch. It was telling such fascinating stories...
Oh right, right. I do remember this. I guess I'm just confused how this translated to ordinary town to you. All I get from this is he is claiming that he is not mafia-aligned which, yeah, everyone is going to say thatbarring Blarg I guess
No outstanding items for me, that's peculiar but not unwelcome.
Moving on to some reads:
Mikehawk/Razmos/Popomatic/Booboo: These guys are coming across pretty fluffy, possibility of a mafia among them but nothing overly alarming at this point, I suppose you could throw scrafty in here as well but I guess from others comments that's just her shtick
Sorian - keeping things moving despite a pretty sedate crowd so far, always appreciated
Setre- Seems wishy-washy but not mafia, just a townie without the will to do what must be done
No outstanding items for me, that's peculiar but not unwelcome.
Moving on to some reads:
Mikehawk/Razmos/Popomatic/Booboo: These guys are coming across pretty fluffy, possibility of a mafia among them but nothing overly alarming at this point, I suppose you could throw scrafty in here as well but I guess from others comments that's just her shtick
Sorian - keeping things moving despite a pretty sedate crowd so far, always appreciated
Setre- Seems wishy-washy but not mafia, just a townie without the will to do what must be done
You mentioned Razmos already, but do you have any thoughts on Squidy's accusations towards him and Trigger?
In an effort to get conversation flowing from another angle. What are peoples thoughts on Seath?
Scrafty and Squidy still have pending questions by the way and Boo isn't out of my woods yet until he does more so don't think I've forgotten about anyone.
In an effort to get conversation flowing from another angle. What are peoples thoughts on Seath?
If I had to guess as to why he selected them it would be the volume of fluff from Raz and the unprompted claim from trigger.
I was actually just thinking about busty girls and Scrafty came to mind. We kind of let it slip by but she is playing behind her valley girl schtick a lot which is expected and fine but I hope people didn't ignore her saying that her current intention is to hang onto her Darklighter vote. Sitting on someone who is never going to post is fine at this early stage in the day but I hope she doesn't intend to just keep that vote through the end of the day if he never shows up.
If Darklighter hasn't shown up by noon tomorrow then I'll like, totally change my vote to something more productive. But in the meantime, I wanna like, see what he has to say and he's got like, no incentive to speak up without being pressured right now.
If Darklighter hasn't shown up by noon tomorrow then I'll like, totally change my vote to something more productive. But in the meantime, I wanna like, see what he has to say and he's got like, no incentive to speak up without being pressured right now.
You don't think not being subbed out is incentive to say anything? As long as you change it when he doesn't talk, fine. But if you were to switch it right now, who's next on your list?
The claim of being an ordinary night vale citizen right after trigger was accused of being mafia by squidy? Or did I miss another claim? It's not really unprompted at that point
To be fair pretty much everyone had a "safe" vote as they used RNG with nothing to back it up. Besides a couple of votes which had good intentionsHmm... Prolly, like, gryvan. He took like, a really long time to show up and then like, placed the world's safest vote. I mean, like, why would you vote that way when it's suuuuuuuper clear that that's totally not gonna happen?