quite trueMeMe wrote:Bandwagon starved, more like. Careful -- two quick votes will lynch him and, even if he's scum, we'll have very little information for day two. Let's just chat a while, shall we? After all, we're still waiting for two of our playmates (Fishbulb & Totem) to speak up.
JereIC wrote:I don't know about mikeheart. I really don't buy the 4-bandwagoner thing (being an innocent victim of it in Sherlock Holmes), and I've seen plenty of games where people just hop on the first bandwagon of the day. Maybe I'm just not seeing the case against him clearly enough?
On a similar note, unvote: mathcam, becuase there's no real evidence to think he's scummy.
My translation: "Well there's not a strong case against mikehart -- but, gee, wemathcam wrote:Well, I'm certainly not saying that there's that strong of a case. It takes a fairly remarkable event to have a strong case against someone on day 1. I'm just saying that if we had to pick someone, and we essentially do, then I'd go with one of the people that might have hoped to get in a quick day 1 so they could get back to killing people. Punishing people for reckless bandwagonning? No. Ok, well, maybe a little. Punishing them for being a sheep? Certainly. That's the way its easiest for the mafia to remain inconspicuous.
I think it's a bit late for random voting today. Or did you get a new number generator, and wanted to try it out?FinalFear wrote:vote: JereICThere's no reason to think anyones scummy really...random vote btw.
On the other hand, dragging it out might be risky if we don't know the deadline rules - suppose we miss the deadline - will it be no lynch? Person with most votes lynched - in that case are ties resolved by lynching them all? By a random toss? By sudden death? Seems like too many variables. On the other hand, lynching a townie doesn't exactly help the town. I think we should find out before we commit to a long drawn out campaign - but unfortunately, that will also draw it out - any ideas?JereIC wrote:I think it's a bit late for random voting today. Or did you get a new number generator, and wanted to try it out?FinalFear wrote:vote: JereICThere's no reason to think anyones scummy really...random vote btw.
I don't know what to believe now; there seem to be a lot of votes that are just coming out of the blue with some but not much explanation. C'mon, we can sit and talk it out, drag the day on until some scum confesses and hangs him/herself out of boredom. Quick votes/lynches almost always disadvantage the town.
I don't agree with this at all. I don't think we should look at what people are doing outside the individual games. Maybe it took him 30 min. to write the post, but maybe he just got interrupted (phone, kids, parents, boss, whatever). I know that sort of thing happens to me all the time, so I hope no one would look at my posting speed to determine if I am scum or not. And, in fact, I'm not sure I agree with your first point either. I was ready to believe you, but these points just didn't jive with me.MeMe wrote:2. mathcam's a posting machine -- very quick. He posted in general discussion...and then it took him a half hour to come up with the post I quote above. For him, that's an eternity. I think it's possible he was being very careful with his post wording.