Moderator: Community Team
Nero's vote (moreso than MP's) means it's not gonna be doable at every location, but if we skip out on the Docks tonight, we can still get 3 players almost everywhere and 4 on a few others. I like it a lot tbh.
I suppose it depends on how I feel when I decide to cast my vote.Enrique wrote:If no one went to the Docks tonight, is that where you'd go tomorrow?
btw I'm still liking my/Matt's buddy system for this poll
1. Moderately unlikely. I don't agree with your stance, and it still feels unhelpful to the town, but I was in a hurry and slightly pinged by it. If any stronger suspicions arise I'll be voting for them instead.Scotty wrote:Question to my voters yesterday (Dom, Mac, juliets, and DFaraday):
How likely are you to vote for me again tomorrow at this point in time?
Hypothetically if you don't vote for me, who would your vote go to right now?
Following the Day vote.Enrique wrote:@Hosts: When does the Penguin learn the roles of the people he voted for?
I do plan on it at the moment. However, there's lots of time.Scotty wrote:Question to my voters yesterday (Dom, Mac, juliets, and DFaraday):
How likely are you to vote for me again tomorrow at this point in time?
Hypothetically if you don't vote for me, who would your vote go to right now?
Yeah, Magnus - I think you need to explain this... I think for someone to be online at the very EoD with a tie in play and not vote and then subsequently claim they'd have voted for a player who was not one of those tied is suspicious - especially as it seems there was no rule or precedent to determine the consequence of a tied vote. I'd have presumed that someone with as much experience as SVS apparently has would have used their vote to break the tie one way or the other. Yes, certainly subsequent votes could have restored the tie, but one can only work with what one has to work with at the time.Nerolunar wrote:Are you guys sure about that? She might have broken her meta and is trying a new strategy. Just because it´s traditional to do something doesn´t make it true.
Rubs me the wrong way that you don´t consider that option.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Glorfindel is always nicer than a puppy.
Golden wrote: I agree. Let glorf be glorf.
What do you think of someone who is not SVS voting last with the tie in place but not voting for one of the tied players? Would you consider that suspicious? Because it happened but I dont see you pointing that out.Glorfindel wrote:Yeah, Magnus - I think you need to explain this... I think for someone to be online at the very EoD with a tie in play and not vote and then subsequently claim they'd have voted for a player who was not one of those tied is suspicious - especially as it seems there was no rule or precedent to determine the consequence of a tied vote. I'd have presumed that someone with as much experience as SVS apparently has would have used their vote to break the tie one way or the other. Yes, certainly subsequent votes could have restored the tie, but one can only work with what one has to work with at the time.Nerolunar wrote:Are you guys sure about that? She might have broken her meta and is trying a new strategy. Just because it´s traditional to do something doesn´t make it true.
Rubs me the wrong way that you don´t consider that option.
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
Nah. SVS has a certain code you can rely upon. Never missing the vote on purpose is one of those things.Nerolunar wrote:Are you guys sure about that? She might have broken her meta and is trying a new strategy. Just because it´s traditional to do something doesn´t make it true.
Rubs me the wrong way that you don´t consider that option.
I agree. But we should also let Nero know that it isn't suspicious for people not to even consider it either. SVS is like a Swiss clock on some things.Scotty wrote:Well Nero probably doesn't know her as well. As an unaffiliated observer, I would think the same thing. I don't think this is necessarily suspicious to hypothesize.Typhoony wrote:Svs would not miss a vote on purpose, no matter what. Anyone that knows her and seriously thinks she would gets an
All of SVS mafia experience has not led her to be a conformist. I don't find it surprising that she would vote for who she most suspected.Glorfindel wrote:with as much experience as SVS
This is a weird post. Is what I said incorrect? I didn't say you were standing by my side. I made the observation that we had the same reads. That is true. Am I seeing that aggressive mean scum Dom again? Because I see no reason for this antagonism.Dom wrote:....Why am I suddenly being mentioned as if I'm standing by your side? I'm not.MacDougall wrote:I'm unsure that your explanation directly relates to what I was saying was suspicious. I felt that your explanations for your play, when questioned by Dom and I, were found to be lacking. While at the time you were carrying them off as though they were something that you felt strongly enough about to making movements towards casting doubt against the players subjected to your play.Turnip Head wrote:At the end of the Day I think it's fair to say I tried to influence. I felt Wilgy was a much better choice than Floyd, Scotty or Zebra. That doesn't somehow invalidate or contradict everything I was doing before that.
Your explanation that your day 1 play is generally feeling out and developing reads, is not an explanation for why your case came across weak to both myself and to Dom when placed under a microscope.
If you prefer to dip your toes in, why proceed to influence the thread with your reads?
All of SVS mafia experience has not led her to be a conformist. I don't find it surprising that she would vote for who she most suspected.Golden wrote:Glorfindel wrote:with as much experience as SVS
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
Yeah and the most recent game I suspected you in you were bad so let's just overlook that.LoRab wrote:Caught up. Interesting there was no lynch. I doubt it was Robin--more likely a character trait, I'd think.
Thank you for properly using wary, first off. And I'd expect nothing less. A game without you suspecting me would be a game without one of us playing--and, let's be honest, you'd likely suspect me in a game that I wasn't playing, lol.MacDougall wrote: I remain wary of Matt, Bea, Lorab and Bass. DharmaHelper has also started to worry me.
I'm voting Enterprises. Because gadgets are cool, yo.
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
Frankly, if it was someone that would be considered experienced then yes, I would. The thing is, I feel that any analysis of that is hampered simply by the way the site is set up. I should think a list of the voting sequence over the last hour/half hour or so before the EoD may be an interesting read...juliets wrote:What do you think of someone who is not SVS voting last with the tie in place but not voting for one of the tied players? Would you consider that suspicious? Because it happened but I dont see you pointing that out.Glorfindel wrote:Yeah, Magnus - I think you need to explain this... I think for someone to be online at the very EoD with a tie in play and not vote and then subsequently claim they'd have voted for a player who was not one of those tied is suspicious - especially as it seems there was no rule or precedent to determine the consequence of a tied vote. I'd have presumed that someone with as much experience as SVS apparently has would have used their vote to break the tie one way or the other. Yes, certainly subsequent votes could have restored the tie, but one can only work with what one has to work with at the time.Nerolunar wrote:Are you guys sure about that? She might have broken her meta and is trying a new strategy. Just because it´s traditional to do something doesn´t make it true.
Rubs me the wrong way that you don´t consider that option.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Glorfindel is always nicer than a puppy.
Golden wrote: I agree. Let glorf be glorf.
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
It can be easily compiled from the polls thread in non-changeable vote games.Glorfindel wrote:Frankly, if it was someone that would be considered experienced then yes, I would. The thing is, I feel that any analysis of that is hampered simply by the way the site is set up. I should think a list of the voting sequence over the last hour/half hour or so before the EoD may be an interesting read...juliets wrote:What do you think of someone who is not SVS voting last with the tie in place but not voting for one of the tied players? Would you consider that suspicious? Because it happened but I dont see you pointing that out.Glorfindel wrote:Yeah, Magnus - I think you need to explain this... I think for someone to be online at the very EoD with a tie in play and not vote and then subsequently claim they'd have voted for a player who was not one of those tied is suspicious - especially as it seems there was no rule or precedent to determine the consequence of a tied vote. I'd have presumed that someone with as much experience as SVS apparently has would have used their vote to break the tie one way or the other. Yes, certainly subsequent votes could have restored the tie, but one can only work with what one has to work with at the time.Nerolunar wrote:Are you guys sure about that? She might have broken her meta and is trying a new strategy. Just because it´s traditional to do something doesn´t make it true.
Rubs me the wrong way that you don´t consider that option.
Regardless, I think Nero should be lynched on grounds that he's my partner, your partner, Enrique's partner, the Joker, the Riddler, the Gingerbread Man, and Toto.
Regardless, I think Nero should be lynched on grounds that he's my partner, your partner, Enrique's partner, the Joker, the Riddler, the Gingerbread Man, and Toto.
Quite likely. Wilgy's baseless comment is completely irrelevant to me. After the shit we pulled in GoC I wouldn't put it past him to just make stuff up for the fun of it to tailspin us.Scotty wrote:Question to my voters yesterday (Dom, Mac, juliets, and DFaraday):
How likely are you to vote for me again tomorrow at this point in time?
Hypothetically if you don't vote for me, who would your vote go to right now?
Lots of players here exploit their meta.Nerolunar wrote:Hey guys.
Im not necessarily suspicious of people who take SVS at face value, just kind of baffled if you could say so. I believe it´s definitely possible for someone/anyone to intentionally refrain from voting, even SVS. I don´t know her playstyle, and regardless of what you tell me I would much rather try to form viewpoints without any influence from meta.
From the eye of an outsider its just weird how you all seem to agree that this is SVS´s playstyle. Im not reeeeaaallly suspecting her, I just realized how much meta means to you guys and how much it influences your view on someone.
If I ever develop meta here, I would definitely exploit it once in a while.
I could, but I won't.Golden wrote:Nah. SVS has a certain code you can rely upon. Never missing the vote on purpose is one of those things.Nerolunar wrote:Are you guys sure about that? She might have broken her meta and is trying a new strategy. Just because it´s traditional to do something doesn´t make it true.
Rubs me the wrong way that you don´t consider that option.
She doesn't need to break her meta on her code, because she is such a good player and virtually impossible to read with it. I couldn't tell you any aspect of her meta that I have noticed as being alignment indicative.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
Is Scotty a lynch proof baddie then? Mac what do you think happened at lynch yesterday? Sorry if you explained this already and I missed it.MacDougall wrote:Quite likely. Wilgy's baseless comment is completely irrelevant to me. After the shit we pulled in GoC I wouldn't put it past him to just make stuff up for the fun of it to tailspin us.Scotty wrote:Question to my voters yesterday (Dom, Mac, juliets, and DFaraday):
How likely are you to vote for me again tomorrow at this point in time?
Hypothetically if you don't vote for me, who would your vote go to right now?
That being said I find you and Turnip Head equally suspect, so depending on how things play out my vote may not end up on you.
Lol Wilgy he's explained it twice!DrWilgy wrote:Is Scotty a lynch proof baddie then? Mac what do you think happened at lynch yesterday? Sorry if you explained this already and I missed it.MacDougall wrote:Quite likely. Wilgy's baseless comment is completely irrelevant to me. After the shit we pulled in GoC I wouldn't put it past him to just make stuff up for the fun of it to tailspin us.Scotty wrote:Question to my voters yesterday (Dom, Mac, juliets, and DFaraday):
How likely are you to vote for me again tomorrow at this point in time?
Hypothetically if you don't vote for me, who would your vote go to right now?
That being said I find you and Turnip Head equally suspect, so depending on how things play out my vote may not end up on you.
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
Blah! I have two tabs open. One that's about 600 posts behind and one that is recent being F5'd every few min.juliets wrote:Lol Wilgy he's explained it twice!DrWilgy wrote:Is Scotty a lynch proof baddie then? Mac what do you think happened at lynch yesterday? Sorry if you explained this already and I missed it.MacDougall wrote:Quite likely. Wilgy's baseless comment is completely irrelevant to me. After the shit we pulled in GoC I wouldn't put it past him to just make stuff up for the fun of it to tailspin us.Scotty wrote:Question to my voters yesterday (Dom, Mac, juliets, and DFaraday):
How likely are you to vote for me again tomorrow at this point in time?
Hypothetically if you don't vote for me, who would your vote go to right now?
That being said I find you and Turnip Head equally suspect, so depending on how things play out my vote may not end up on you.
Here you go my friend. Enjoy analyzing!Glorfindel wrote: Frankly, if it was someone that would be considered experienced then yes, I would. The thing is, I feel that any analysis of that is hampered simply by the way the site is set up. I should think a list of the voting sequence over the last hour/half hour or so before the EoD may be an interesting read...
Maybe she spent too much time trying to formulate a post?DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who feels SVS would not intentionally miss the vote, explain to me how she missed the vote after explicitly stating that she had to vote 10+ minutes before EOD
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
She's a human being.DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who feels SVS would not intentionally miss the vote, explain to me how she missed the vote after explicitly stating that she had to vote 10+ minutes before EOD
Typh, this says I voted for Wilgy when I really voted Scotty. Unless I'm reading it wrong.Typhoony wrote:Here you go my friend. Enjoy analyzing!Glorfindel wrote: Frankly, if it was someone that would be considered experienced then yes, I would. The thing is, I feel that any analysis of that is hampered simply by the way the site is set up. I should think a list of the voting sequence over the last hour/half hour or so before the EoD may be an interesting read...
Day 1 Voting graph
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
OK, I just thought it was funny. No ill intent in my laughter.DrWilgy wrote:Blah! I have two tabs open. One that's about 600 posts behind and one that is recent being F5'd every few min.juliets wrote:Lol Wilgy he's explained it twice!DrWilgy wrote:Is Scotty a lynch proof baddie then? Mac what do you think happened at lynch yesterday? Sorry if you explained this already and I missed it.MacDougall wrote:Quite likely. Wilgy's baseless comment is completely irrelevant to me. After the shit we pulled in GoC I wouldn't put it past him to just make stuff up for the fun of it to tailspin us.Scotty wrote:Question to my voters yesterday (Dom, Mac, juliets, and DFaraday):
How likely are you to vote for me again tomorrow at this point in time?
Hypothetically if you don't vote for me, who would your vote go to right now?
That being said I find you and Turnip Head equally suspect, so depending on how things play out my vote may not end up on you.
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
You forgot the "was busting to the go to the toilet" option.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Maybe she spent too much time trying to formulate a post?DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who feels SVS would not intentionally miss the vote, explain to me how she missed the vote after explicitly stating that she had to vote 10+ minutes before EOD
Maybe she got caught in linkitis hell?
Maybe she was posting on her phone, and was getting inconsistent wifi?
Maybe she got caught up in the discussion and lost track of the time?
Maybe DH was pestering the hell out of her in mafia BTSC and distracted her from voting?
You just have Scotty and Wilgy as the wrong colour I think.Typhoony wrote:
All the votes are fucked up. Lemme fix that
None of these explain anything.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Maybe she spent too much time trying to formulate a post?DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who feels SVS would not intentionally miss the vote, explain to me how she missed the vote after explicitly stating that she had to vote 10+ minutes before EOD
Maybe she got caught in linkitis hell?
Maybe she was posting on her phone, and was getting inconsistent wifi?
Maybe she got caught up in the discussion and lost track of the time?
Maybe DH was pestering the hell out of her in mafia BTSC and distracted her from voting?
Maybe you should ask her specifically about those 11 minutes. She's the best one to answer the question, not us guessing.DharmaHelper wrote:None of these explain anything.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Maybe she spent too much time trying to formulate a post?DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who feels SVS would not intentionally miss the vote, explain to me how she missed the vote after explicitly stating that she had to vote 10+ minutes before EOD
Maybe she got caught in linkitis hell?
Maybe she was posting on her phone, and was getting inconsistent wifi?
Maybe she got caught up in the discussion and lost track of the time?
Maybe DH was pestering the hell out of her in mafia BTSC and distracted her from voting?
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
Nah more stuff is wrong, like somehow LC ended up on the graph. I modified an old graph, changed the names in the Excel sheet but the graph wasn't using the cells, it was just using the names I implemented by hand. So now it should be fixed.MacDougall wrote:You just have Scotty and Wilgy as the wrong colour I think.Typhoony wrote:
All the votes are fucked up. Lemme fix that
Wow! That's pretty cool :-0 And yes, Sig - I think you have some explaining to do...Typhoony wrote:Here you go my friend. Enjoy analyzing!Glorfindel wrote: Frankly, if it was someone that would be considered experienced then yes, I would. The thing is, I feel that any analysis of that is hampered simply by the way the site is set up. I should think a list of the voting sequence over the last hour/half hour or so before the EoD may be an interesting read...
Day 1 Voting graph
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Glorfindel is always nicer than a puppy.
Golden wrote: I agree. Let glorf be glorf.
I intend to. But with everyone dismissing it as a nonissue, I'd just like to know what logical explanation they have for it.juliets wrote:Maybe you should ask her specifically about those 11 minutes. She's the best one to answer the question, not us guessing.DharmaHelper wrote:None of these explain anything.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Maybe she spent too much time trying to formulate a post?DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who feels SVS would not intentionally miss the vote, explain to me how she missed the vote after explicitly stating that she had to vote 10+ minutes before EOD
Maybe she got caught in linkitis hell?
Maybe she was posting on her phone, and was getting inconsistent wifi?
Maybe she got caught up in the discussion and lost track of the time?
Maybe DH was pestering the hell out of her in mafia BTSC and distracted her from voting?
Just be sure to use the New version!Glorfindel wrote:Wow! That's pretty cool :-0 And yes, Sig - I think you have some explaining to do...
I was trying to find Zebras post myself, tbh, and then I started reading it when she posted it. THEN Matt said he still wasn't responding. I got too involved in that situation and lost track of time. When I realized it the poll was over for literally less than a minute.DharmaHelper wrote:I intend to. But with everyone dismissing it as a nonissue, I'd just like to know what logical explanation they have for it.juliets wrote:Maybe you should ask her specifically about those 11 minutes. She's the best one to answer the question, not us guessing.DharmaHelper wrote:None of these explain anything.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Maybe she spent too much time trying to formulate a post?DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who feels SVS would not intentionally miss the vote, explain to me how she missed the vote after explicitly stating that she had to vote 10+ minutes before EOD
Maybe she got caught in linkitis hell?
Maybe she was posting on her phone, and was getting inconsistent wifi?
Maybe she got caught up in the discussion and lost track of the time?
Maybe DH was pestering the hell out of her in mafia BTSC and distracted her from voting?
Which is it?S~V~S wrote:I was waiting for that last second train, lots of people droplast second votes, and several had mentioned me. I was mediating and lost track of time. I almost never miss votes.
Fiddler on the Roof
