Jets Things Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 One thing I did find interesting in the voting: Not really sure what to make of it, but I just found it interesting that 3 of the most experienced players are all going after the same guy, plus JMJ who has shown himself to be a very logic-oriented person in his other board postings. Not that I think all of these guys are mafia or anything, but its just one thing that immediately jumped out at me when reading the vote count and figured I'd throw it out there. I think I find it especially interesting since based on what I've seen, the prevailing logic is that slats may be the SK. If that's the case, I would think it would make sense to wait a day to see what happens at night and find out if a SK even exists considering I'm not sure how one would even fit into this game layout. Exactly. Cops infiltrating mafia, ok. SK infiltrating mafia, makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 EY and Doggin are always quick on the trigger finger though Doggin and I have vastly different styles of play. However, where we are similar is in the fact that we both put votes out there, rather than sitting on the sidelines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jets Voice of Reason Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 At the same time though, we're seeing how these 3 inexperienced players deal with a little pressure. Going into the game I had no idea how they play this game and that's an advantage to them. Again, with a game this large, it'd be really easy to fly under the radar, especially if you are new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 One thing I did find interesting in the voting: Not really sure what to make of it, but I just found it interesting that 3 of the most experienced players are all going after the same guy, plus JMJ who has shown himself to be a very logic-oriented person in his other board postings. Not that I think all of these guys are mafia or anything, but its just one thing that immediately jumped out at me when reading the vote count and figured I'd throw it out there. I think I find it especially interesting since based on what I've seen, the prevailing logic is that slats may be the SK. If that's the case, I would think it would make sense to wait a day to see what happens at night and find out if a SK even exists considering I'm not sure how one would even fit into this game layout. I realized this also. At first I thought to myself, "Cool. I'm on to something if my feelings are the same as people who are veterans at this." My next though was, "Wait, could that be a bad thing?" I ultimately decided, "Fock it." I only voted it because I feel he is the only person that said anything worth going off of so until someone else says something incriminating, I'll just stick with it. And oh yeah, "Trust me." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norway'sWaddlingMarmaloof Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I have to be honest, I'm a little perplexed at the targeting of all the first timers. Maybe its just me, but I generally feel like those guys are a little less of a threat and little more prone to mistakes, be it as innocents or scum, and will eventually get caught. For that reason, I usually don't agree with going after them early. I feel like we're jumping down their throats for not exactly playing the way we think the game should be based on our experience. Plus to be honest, being so early in the game we're likely to lynch an innocent anyway, so I'd rather at least give the new guys a little chance to play. That makes sense. But nobody is very close to being lynched at this point. It seems that the new guys are among the most active posters, so there's more food or thought than with the less active players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jets Things Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Doggin and I have vastly different styles of play. However, where we are similar is in the fact that we both put votes out there, rather than sitting on the sidelines. You could also use that tactic to FOS those of us on the "sidelines" looking for a bit more information rather than throwing out a random vote. Yes, the first vote is almost always arbitrary, but that doesn't mean some of us don't want to make the most informed vote possible. (no nomo) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I have to be honest, I'm a little perplexed at the targeting of all the first timers. Maybe its just me, but I generally feel like those guys are a little less of a threat and little more prone to mistakes, be it as innocents or scum, and will eventually get caught. For that reason, I usually don't agree with going after them early. I feel like we're jumping down their throats for not exactly playing the way we think the game should be based on our experience. Plus to be honest, being so early in the game we're likely to lynch an innocent anyway, so I'd rather at least give the new guys a little chance to play. I sorta agree with your analysis and then I think maybe your trying to protect your scum buddies. The latter is probably because I despise your lying treacherous ass. The newer guys are getting a lot of heat for nothing more than talking about the game, and styles. Yet, I will leave my vote where it is because I have no place better to put it. I will be away most of the day but will check in to make sure the vote doesn't get out of hand. I will be back after 8:00 to get back into things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norway'sWaddlingMarmaloof Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Grasp at straws much? On day 1? All the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Oh yeah. One more thing before I go. I would like to see Sharrow show up and share some of his thoughts. He only has 6 more posts than Ecurb andPatriotssuck7, and their not even playing. Now that's laying low. Sheeeeesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jets Voice of Reason Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Oh yeah. One more thing before I go. I would like to see Sharrow show up and share some of his thoughts. He only has 6 more posts than Ecurb andPatriotssuck7, and their not even playing. Now that's laying low. Sheeeeesh. I noticed that as well, I'd also add AVM to that list. I know these are all the new guys, but like I mentioned before, even if you are new I think it's better to have them talking instead of just lying in the weeds. I'm not saying lynch the new guys, I just want to be able to get a read on the way they play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 You could also use that tactic to FOS those of us on the "sidelines" looking for a bit more information rather than throwing out a random vote. Yes, the first vote is almost always arbitrary, but that doesn't mean some of us don't want to make the most informed vote possible. (no nomo) Slats: who may be a serial killer, or aware of a serial killer, or just speculating. JMJ: who may have initially overstated how much he knew of the game, but has since renegged. Dan X: who things slats is suspicious, but not enough to vote for him. A FOS on SMC: for being too agreeable and quickly jumping from one voting line to another. Bleedin' Green: who wants us to vote for a more experienced player, like, perhaps him. What more do you suppose you're going to get today? Perhaps someone will have a guilty conscious and come clean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I meant to preface the above with something along the lines of: Well, here's what we have to work with: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 JMJ: who may have initially overstated how much he knew of the game, but has since renegged. I say we lynch this piece of sh*t for assuming we would all figure he didn't really read all 124 pages of the other two game threads. How could he possibly think we'd figure out he only skimmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I say we lynch this piece of sh*t for assuming we would all figure he didn't really read all 124 pages of the other two game threads. How could he possibly think we'd figure out he only skimmed. Why should we believe him, a guy who admits to only skimming the first 15 pages of each thread over the guy who mentioned a serial killer being present in this game when there was no reason to assume there was one, and then in an attempt to defend himself goes on to say he DID in fact read all 124 pages of the other two threads in order to have that info. What is more believable? Someone skimming 30 pages, or someone saying they in-depth and fully read 124 pages of previous threads and that is how he as a first-time player knows that these games can contain serial killer roles. To help you in making up your mind, do keep in mind that reading 124 pages of these threads requires you to read 3,720 posts! Yeah. I'm WAY more suspicious than him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Why should we believe him, a guy who admits to only skimming the first 15 pages of each thread over the guy who mentioned a serial killer being present in this game when there was no reason to assume there was one, and then in an attempt to defend himself goes on to say he DID in fact read all 124 pages of the other two threads in order to have that info. What is more believable? Someone skimming 30 pages, or someone saying they in-depth and fully read 124 pages of previous threads and that is how he as a first-time player knows that these games can contain serial killer roles. To help you in making up your mind, do keep in mind that reading 124 pages of these threads requires you to read 3,720 posts! Yeah. I'm WAY more suspicious than him. I'm going to vote for you if you don't stop talking to yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Slats: who may be a serial killer, or aware of a serial killer, or just speculating. JMJ: who may have initially overstated how much he knew of the game, but has since renegged. Dan X: who things slats is suspicious, but not enough to vote for him. A FOS on SMC: for being too agreeable and quickly jumping from one voting line to another. Bleedin' Green: who wants us to vote for a more experienced player, like, perhaps him. What more do you suppose you're going to get today? Perhaps someone will have a guilty conscious and come clean? On the first page of this game, with nothing going on, Doggin said this: +1 - I've actually been toying with a "bad guys are really the good guys" setup but couldn't figure it out (because I was too damn stupid to think "mafia", apparently) OK, 18 players - that means we should expect 4-5 mafia (I'd guess 4, including a godfather, to balance out the game). Oh, and I'm here (but I've got passover shopping/cooking to do this weekend, plus we're taking the kids to Ringling Bros. tomorrow, so don't expect to see me much until Monday, when (being at work) I'll be able to spend hours goofing off). Oh, and vote: Bleedin. He's won two straight games as scum without any pressure on him until end game. So, just in case I lose to him again, I'm putting this vote out so I can say "I told you so" later SMC then asked: Godfather, as in head informer. Or are you equating the godfather with the role of a the doc or cop? Then with the 41st post in the thread, I chimed in with all my wisdom from having read the previous two threads and suggested: I've got a couple ideas about how the game might be set up, too, including the "serial killer," angle. Seems this game construction could easily lend itself to a rogue murderer. That's the birth of any suspicion on me. Don't know how many times I have to say it (although I expect I'll be repeating myself before it's all over), but it would be absolutely idiotic for me to raise the idea of a SK role if I was that role, or somehow knew of one (? - seems an SK would be a lone role, no?). I'm a speculating innocent newbie, all excited to show off my original ideas. That's all. There's evidence of that in a lot of my posts in the football forum, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I'm going to vote for you if you don't stop talking to yourself. Sorry. But that JMJ mother*****er really riles my feathers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious89x Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I'm going to vote for you if you don't stop talking to yourself. I'm going to vote for him cause I think I've got all I need. Vote: JMJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 What is more believable? Someone skimming 30 pages, or someone saying they in-depth and fully read 124 pages of previous threads and that is how he as a first-time player knows that these games can contain serial killer roles. To help you in making up your mind, do keep in mind that reading 124 pages of these threads requires you to read 3,720 posts! Yeah. I'm WAY more suspicious than him. Never said anything like, "in depth," but I read them. I know what these guys are talking about with the Peter Petru-somethingitalian role reveal. I was suspicious of it right away with the line about a mafia member PM'ing him when he "temporarily became mafia." I wasn't fooled there. I was mistaken about EY in that game who I was sure was scum because he "knew" Thor was innocent. I didn't understand how he could be so sure of anything that early in the game, but it turned out he could because he and Thor were masons. I don't know if I'd pass any tests on those threads, but I read them. Working 12 hour midnight shifts with no emergencies to handle gives you an amazing amount of time on your hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norway'sWaddlingMarmaloof Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Why should we believe him, a guy who admits to only skimming the first 15 pages of each thread over the guy who mentioned a serial killer being present in this game when there was no reason to assume there was one, and then in an attempt to defend himself goes on to say he DID in fact read all 124 pages of the other two threads in order to have that info. What is more believable? Someone skimming 30 pages, or someone saying they in-depth and fully read 124 pages of previous threads and that is how he as a first-time player knows that these games can contain serial killer roles. To help you in making up your mind, do keep in mind that reading 124 pages of these threads requires you to read 3,720 posts! Yeah. I'm WAY more suspicious than him. Bro, I'm not sure why you keep pushing this. However, I did read the first two games threads at JI in their entirety before I played there. Now, I had a job at the time with a lot of downtime, so it was not a big deal. So I didn't think much of it when Slats siad he read the first two here. Then you said that you read the threads so I assumed you did the same. Although I could see why you would skim them, I did not assume you did. I don't know, you making such a big deal about this just seems very strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jets Things Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 What more do you suppose you're going to get today? Perhaps someone will have a guilty conscious and come clean? Well, there ARE a few new to this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Never said anything like, "in depth," but I read them. I know what these guys are talking about with the Peter Petru-somethingitalian role reveal. I was suspicious of it right away with the line about a mafia member PM'ing him when he "temporarily became mafia." I wasn't fooled there. I was mistaken about EY in that game who I was sure was scum because he "knew" Thor was innocent. I didn't understand how he could be so sure of anything that early in the game, but it turned out he could because he and Thor were masons. I don't know if I'd pass any tests on those threads, but I read them. Working 12 hour midnight shifts with no emergencies to handle gives you an amazing amount of time on your hands. Just as an aside. If Thor and I were both Mafia, there is NO WAY I would have defended him so hard. Because, with a good chance he got killed, I would have been dead to rights the next day. It would have been suicide. The Peter Petrelli thing should have failed because anyone who was temporarily mafia could blow the cover off of mafia. It's the same reason I had to make JiF's bite fail, and no zombies came back from the dead. Because a converted mafia member has too much info. But that's neither here nor there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Bro, I'm not sure why you keep pushing this. However, I did read the first two games threads at JI in their entirety before I played there. Now, I had a job at the time with a lot of downtime, so it was not a big deal. So I didn't think much of it when Slats siad he read the first two here. Then you said that you read the threads so I assumed you did the same. Although I could see why you would skim them, I did not assume you did. I don't know, you making such a big deal about this just seems very strange. Guess I'm just baffled that I became a suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Guess I'm just baffled that I became a suspect. Get used to it. Everyone's a suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 NOT OFFICIAL Vote Count Slats (4) EY, Doggin, JMJ, SMC DanX (3) AVM, Crusher, Slats JMJ (5) JVOR, JIF, Irish, Norway, Vicious89x With 18 alive it takes 10 to whack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I'm going to vote for him cause I think I've got all I need. Vote: JMJ I still curious as to what you said about SMC... he hasn't answered for it, and he did make the jump you pointed out without much analysis of his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Just as an aside. If Thor and I were both Mafia, there is NO WAY I would have defended him so hard. Because, with a good chance he got killed, I would have been dead to rights the next day. It would have been suicide. I was even more of a n00b when I read that the first time. I read and learned. Just trying to point out that I did, indeed, read the two threads thru. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norway'sWaddlingMarmaloof Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Sorry. But that JMJ mother*****er really riles my feathers. Heh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Get used to it. Everyone's a suspect. True. Like I said though, I logged off the site at 7pm last night with about 6 total posts (and none since 4pm or so) and 0 votes for me. I log on the site again this morning at 7am and without having made a single post in almost 15 hours, I had 3 votes for me. Just baffled me. Guess I'm having a hard time understanding what exactly I did or said to garner such interest. Then, when asked why I chose Slats - I give an honest answer why and I pick up 2 more votes. Geesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Well, there ARE a few new to this game. Well I said I didn't get going after the newbs and to be honest JT, right now you're coming across as pulling the old "I'm going to make posts without really saying much" routine. You've got the experience and from the past games I know you have insight to share, but you're not really doing that right now, so let's hear it. Just because you f'ers let me lay low last game doesn't mean we should allow anyone to do the same here. Vote: Jets Things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Where's Doggin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 unvote Vote: SMC I'd like to hear about more about Vic's accusations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious89x Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I still curious as to what you said about SMC... he hasn't answered for it, and he did make the jump you pointed out without much analysis of his own. I'm sure we'll get a "I'm busy at work." As it stands it's always difficult to get people voting in a different direction when the suspect is absent and doesn't cause waves. At this point I believe we have some good discussions and points out there that if we lynch incorrectly we can continue the discussion the following day. SMC is at the top of my suspect list but I felt obligated to choose one of the 3 major suspects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJ Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Unvote for Slats. Vote for: Vicious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jets Voice of Reason Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I'm sure we'll get a "I'm busy at work." As it stands it's always difficult to get people voting in a different direction when the suspect is absent and doesn't cause waves. At this point I believe we have some good discussions and points out there that if we lynch incorrectly we can continue the discussion the following day. SMC is at the top of my suspect list but I felt obligated to choose one of the 3 major suspects. I'm personally not sold on any of the 3 leading vote getters and are willing to change my vote. What about SMC is bothering you? Is it just a feeling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.