Mini 829 - Internal Struggle Mafia (Over)

[DeathRowKitty]

Vote: JasonT1981

Because I hate Jeff Gordon.

You don't like Jeff Gordon, so you put the

third

random vote on Jason?

Unvote, Vote: Zachrulez

@Everyone
If anyone has a shorter version of his/her name that he/she deems acceptable or preferable, it would be nice to hear so I can be lazy and not type full names. Any abbreviations of my name are fine.

[DTMaster]

@DeathRowKitty

You can just do DTM for me since it is basically the same thing.

Also your thoughts on hiphop because he also put someone at L-4 with his second vote in the RVS.

[hiphop]

I didn't put anyone at L-4. I put someone at L-5. Seven to lynch.

unvote

@Zachrulez
I don't like hiphop music, I just like the username, should I vote for myself? And, no I won't vote for myself, so don't answer the question that way.

[DTMaster]

@Hiphop
The latest vote count before your unvote. I'm pretty sure you put Idiotking at L-4. 4 votes till lynch which in my mental math: 3 + 4 = 7.

Those in danger of suppression #1:

hiphop (2)

-

DTMaster, dank

Idiotking (3)

-

jasonT1981, Paradoxombie, hiphop

jasonT1981 (3)

-

Shrinehme,Toro, Zachrulez

ryan2754 (1)

-

DeathRowKitty

Not Voting (3)

-

Idiotking, RedCoyote, ryan2754

Happiness with Posting Level:

NEUTRAL

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.

[hiphop]

I am sorry, I was looking at the wrong part of the post. You are right. Anyways I unvoted, so it doesn't matter right now. I thought I was only the second.

[DeathRowKitty]

Also your thoughts on hiphop because he also put someone at L-4 with his second vote in the RVS.

He had a real reason, as opposed to not liking someone's avatar (nice avatar btw DTM). Then again, as I look back I'm pretty sure hiphop was wrong in saying that Idiotking voted twice. For now, I'll just be happy with the explanation that he miscounted votes.

[Paradoxombie]

FOS:

Hiphop and Idiot King. I don't like the way they each unvoted immediately when their votes were called into question, and how they didn't put any other votes down in place of them.

[DTMaster]

Bye bye RVS. You died in record time.

Actually when looking at Idiot King's post:

Holy bandwagon, Batman!

unvote

What's with the rapid dogpile on jason?

I'm confused. Normally you would unvote when you see a bandwagon forming if you were part of that bandwagon. You voted for danks first though not jason.

[hiphop]

Bye bye RVS. You died in record time.

Actually when looking at Idiot King's post:

Holy bandwagon, Batman!

unvote

What's with the rapid dogpile on jason?

I'm confused. Normally you would unvote when you see a bandwagon forming if you were part of that bandwagon. You voted for danks first though not jason.

@ idiotking it is almost like you don't want to be voting for someone else, if the bandwagon ends in lynch. This looks scummy to me. However there are some people who haven't posted yet, Ryan2754 and Redcoyote, so conclusions should not be drawn yet.
Since Ryan already has a vote on him I will

vote:redcoyote

at least until he makes his first post.

[Zachrulez]

Vote: JasonT1981

Because I hate Jeff Gordon.

You don't like Jeff Gordon, so you put the

third

random vote on Jason?

Unvote, Vote: Zachrulez

That's a bit of an overreaction isn't it? Early bandwagons are a good way to get a game started in the absence of any other discussion. It's 7 votes to lynch anyway, 3 is hardly all that menacing.

[DeathRowKitty]

Since Ryan already has a vote on him I will

He doesn't. I unvoted him.

@hiphop
Do you think they're scummier for not posting than Idiotking is for his unvote or are you just waiting for them to post?

[DeathRowKitty]

That's a bit of an overreaction isn't it? Early bandwagons are a good way to get a game started in the absence of any other discussion. It's 7 votes to lynch anyway, 3 is hardly all that menacing.

Voting people for small things like this also gets a game started. Random bandwagons about Jeff Gordon start discussions about Jeff Gordon.

[hiphop]

@DeathRowKitty Actually I don't think they are scummier. I believe they are just lurkers, and I despise lurkers. They make the game less fun for everybody else, and they hurt the side that they are with. Their posts no matter how small can give us more activity and more discussion. I am waiting for them to post, but that does not mean I won't be active in trying to locate the rest of the scum.
As for idiotking, right now I believe he is scum number 1, but that is my opinion, and I would rather have him give him time to give us his opinion on why he unvoted and did not vote for someone else.

[dank]

1. what's your case for idiotking being scum number 1?

2. why are you not voting for scum number 1?

[Paradoxombie]

Bye bye RVS. You died in record time.

Actually when looking at Idiot King's post:

Holy bandwagon, Batman!

unvote

What's with the rapid dogpile on jason?

I'm confused. Normally you would unvote when you see a bandwagon forming if you were part of that bandwagon. You voted for danks first though not jason.

@ idiotking it is almost like you don't want to be voting for someone else, if the bandwagon ends in lynch. This looks scummy to me.

You were also quick to unvote. And you didn't give any explanation either. You say you want to give him a chance to answer, but I don't think that makes sense when you were already voting him for something else altogether.

[hiphop]

First of all, my case for idiotking being scum number 1, well he unvoted for someone, and his reason was that people were bw another person. What little evidence that is nobody else has more, so that makes him scum number 1. I didn't see this at first until dtm pointed it out.

As for why I am not voting for him, it is because he already has two votes on him, and I don't want scum to pounce on him without giving himself a chance to defend for himself. As I already explained I didn't know he had three votes on him.

Why I am voting for someone else, because he should at least have as long as someone else

who hasn't posted yet

. As far as I am concerned they haven't done anything yet to prove they are scum or town, and they are not giving me the fair chance of deciding whether they are scum or town.

The reason I voted for him in the first place was because of an abstract reason, the same as what everybody else was doing at that time.

Any questions I didn't answer yet?

[dank]

First of all, my case for idiotking being scum number 1, well he unvoted for someone, and his reason was that people were bw another person. What little evidence that is nobody else has more, so that makes him scum number 1. I didn't see this at first until dtm pointed it out.

As for why I am not voting for him, it is because he already has two votes on him, and I don't want scum to pounce on him without giving himself a chance to defend for himself. As I already explained I didn't know he had three votes on him.

Why I am voting for someone else, because he should at least have as long as someone else

who hasn't posted yet

. As far as I am concerned they haven't done anything yet to prove they are scum or town, and they are not giving me the fair chance of deciding whether they are scum or town.

The reason I voted for him in the first place was because of an abstract reason, the same as what everybody else was doing at that time.

Any questions I didn't answer yet?

So, you are fairly certain that Idiotking is "scum number 1" because he unvoted when a bandwagon was forming, yet don't want to vote him, the guy you confidently say is scum, because that'll build a bandwagon?

That makes sense. So does my vote.

[Idiotking]

Simply put, I unvoted because my vote against dank was essentially a random vote (the reason I gave is usually a pretty good random reason). When a bandwagon started to form, I unvoted because I'd expected the RVS to be over, and was considering investigating the bandwagon. I didn't revote because I can't exactly vote for 3 different people at the same time.

As far as I can tell, this should answer all the questions asked of me. If I've missed any, please point me to them.

[DTMaster]

@Hiphop
Um wait what?

As for why I am not voting for him, it is because he already has two votes on him, and I don't want scum to pounce on him without giving himself a chance to defend for himself. As I already explained I didn't know he had three votes on him.

Even with the three votes if you counted your old vote, Idiotking needs 4 more votes. The game has barely left RVS so no scum in their right mind would quick lynch within two pages of the game. That would be immensely more telling then any analysis. You are being very sensitive about this bandwagon.

But you are right we have 2 people that haven't contributed anything to the game and RVS is over. One more day and we might need a prod ("sigh" already)

@Danks
He unvoted you when a bandwagon was forming, not jason. With his vote he put you at L-6 which is hardly a bandwagon. The bandwagons that started are jason and Idiotking.

@Idiotking
We can see that your random vote is part of the RVS. But your wording in your original unvote post makes it look like you originally voted for jason, not danks. This is the big WTF moment.

Also why are you "just considering" looking at the bandwagon hopping. The RVS is easy to start bandwagons so scum can fly under the radar with the RVS flag. I want to hear more about your case on the 3 voters.

[Idiotking]

What case could I possibly have? "A bandwagon was formed, and those 3 were part of it." That's all the information available; everything else that I can see could be explained away as being merely part of the RVS, as you say.

And my wording in my original unvote post was exactly what I intended it to be. I saw a problem with a bandwagon forming, and so unvoted my random vote. My post makes sense in this context.

Who thought I was voting for jason instead of danks?

[RedCoyote]

DRK, you can call me RC or Red if you'd like.

hiphop, I hope my

vote: dank

satisfies your concern with my absence.

[Shrinehme]

Anyone is free to refer to me as Shrine or Nehme. My username is simply those two words slurred together.

he also put someone at L-4 with his second vote in the RVS.

DTMaster, about how suspicious do you consider this? L-4 doesn't seem very significant to me [or maybe it's just the way it's worded; "3 vote for x in RVS" seems more significant than "X is at L-4 in RVS".]

[alexhans]

Those in danger of suppression #2:

dank (1)

-

RedCoyote

hiphop (2)

-

DTMaster, dank

Idiotking (2)

-

jasonT1981, Paradoxombie

jasonT1981 (3)

-

Shrinehme, Toro, Zachrulez

RedCoyote (1)

-

hihop

Zachrulez (1)

-

DeathRowKitty

Not Voting (2)

-

Idiotking, ryan2754

Happiness with Posting Level:

SATISFIED

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.

[Zachrulez]

Unvote Vote: Hiphop

Would you have us spend the entire day never putting any real pressure on anyone ever?

You seem to give the impression of that stance by avoiding a vote on anyone who has a vote/multiple votes on them.

Some insight to your thought process please.

[DTMaster]

@Red
We left the RVS already so I suggest you read up.

@Shrine

DTMaster, about how suspicious do you consider this? L-4 doesn't seem very significant to me [or maybe it's just the way it's worded; "3 vote for x in RVS" seems more significant than "X is at L-4 in RVS".]

3 votes and putting someone at L-4 are the same thing. I wouldn't consider this very suspicious because in the RVS bandwagons come and go on the flip of the dime. But this reason is a start to leave the RVS and start adding pressure to people. Their reactions will give us a better tell then their bandwagon votes.