Open 62 - Strawberry Mafia - Game Over! before 568

malthusis · Post Post #20 (isolation #0) » Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:49 am

Vote : Near

since he voted for himself.

malthusis · Post Post #111 (isolation #1) » Sat Mar 08, 2008 2:30 pm

First, unvote.

Neko seems to be the leader of the town, but seems a bit scummy to me. The fact that he could be steering us towards where the mafia wants us to be makes me suspicous. The random scigatt wagon could have easily been a excuse to make people vote for him so the mafia could hammer him and whenever anybody asks him why he says 'Pressure him first, ask later' makes me definatly suspicous.

Near was way too sarcastic at the beginning, and hasn't contributed much besides a anti-snix post.

Cephrir seems pretty pro-town except for his opinion switch on neko during the wagon. He seems to be contributing a bit.

Snix has a been another big contributer to the thread. He seems to be totally convinced by neko, and they seem to be working together (expecially on the wagon).

Jester's few posts were very informative, but I'd like to see him post more.

Xtoxm seems to be posting for the sake of posting, and not contributing much at all. (His argument about that took up all of page 4).

There's not much info for the other people right now (and not much in general considering how long this thread's gone on).

malthusis · Post Post #121 (isolation #2) » Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:30 am

Sorry I couldn't post a reply yesterday, RL invaded.

I don't like his analysis either.

I think he is a good lynch for today.

unvote vote malthusis.

Why do you not like it? Neko explained clearly why he didn't at least. And isn't that a bit sudden, to say the least? I didn't even say that you were scummy, just that you weren't contributing.

You have no opinion about the interaction between yvonne and thadmiral? Or just thadmiral? What about Scigatt? Peers? Marmalade? They've all posted, there just hasn't been discussion around them that much.

I just had time to post the main characters first, I'll get to the others on a later post.

I notice that your analysis here depends largely on discussion that's already taken place, and even then you seem to have missed out on some things.

I didn't want to be just saying the same stuff over again.

I'll answer the rest of the questions later today.

malthusis · Post Post #134 (isolation #3) » Mon Mar 10, 2008 2:54 pm

I don't like the way his case against Near is for being "too sarcastic". And his case against me is "posting for the sake of posting", that's not how I see it.

If this makes you so mad as to vote for me, why didn't you attack everyone who originally said those in the first place? I'm not exactly bringing anything revolutionary to the table, other people have stated these as well, just not in the same words.