![Haha :haha:](./images/smilies/hilarious.gif)
<3
Return to “Dr. Who Mafia - Night 12”
Could you have come to this conclusion by giving that suspicion a chance to be vetted?MovingPictures07 wrote:Daisy is not bad though.Roxy wrote:Thats right MP you gave him NO time to respond to the votes coming in.
No chance to defend.
You and zeek all over the place.
Snows first game back.
You know him better than me which is why I was dismayed when you did not give him the same chance as Daisy.
You all set up w/e I am going after baddies. Hedge is my target. Idt anything will change my mind about her.
Zeek you did not give him the same chance as say hedge or daisy or MP ffs everyone had more time to respond and defend than he did. plus he had the 2 top posters all up in his grill.zeek wrote:Forget this talk of ties, it will most likely end in the death of another civ.
That is simply not true. I voted Snow Dog when he was here and gave my reasons, which he proceeded to ignore. Everybody else voted after he'd gone and couldn't defend himself. You can say I'm not helping but I'm trying my best. Not exactly easy to read a bunch of people I don't know.keys56000000000 wrote:I'm looking at MP, Zeek and Enrique. They may well be civs, but if they're leading last-minute charges against civs like Snow Dog, who wasn't even around to defend him/herself, they're not exactly helping the civvie cause.
Turnip Head wrote:Could you elaborate on your thoughts re: Hedgie, Roxy? She's been off my radar so far.
I laid it out a few posts backSnow Dog wrote:haven't paid her much attention. Anything specific bothering you there?Roxy wrote:How do you feel about Hedgeowl Snow?Snow Dog wrote:I am kinda happy with Elo's response which is a shame.
How do you feel about Hedgeowl Snow?Snow Dog wrote:I am kinda happy with Elo's response which is a shame.
But what if the people keeping up and you are following are bad? I understand about hard to keep up but I am hostying and playing-----I still have thoughts to share.Elohcin wrote:Sorry, I have no suspicions. I thought I made it clear I wasn't really keeping up with this game. I simply cannot do two games at once. But, I am trying to be a helpful civ by voting for who everyone else (who is keeping up) suspects. I joined this game b/c I was asked to by a few people. I guess it was a bit slow in sign-ups or something.Roxy wrote:
Elo - every game we have played together I question your votes. I figured out why last game. It is bc you often latch onto anothers suspicion and vote without saying why you are voting just that you agree with whats been said without ever adding your own thoughts. I would love it if you would list the 2 people you are looking at for todays lynch and why. Your vote for Juliets caught my eye.
inre: Hedge: Let me add she did not vote that I could see - which is odd considering she was around.Roxy wrote:Elo can you respond to my post since you responded to everyone else?
MP - My Hedge suspicion comes from her fence riding during the Juliets fiasco. She thought Epi made a "valid" case yet she could still see Juliets as being good. Fence riding at its best.
Dana by decoding civ roles all you are doing is helping the baddies.Dana wrote:The Doctor wrote:If he finds one companion, --- --t- -- ----a---t-- -------. If he finds two companions, a-- --t-- against --- ----t a- -----a--. If he finds three companions, he gains the ability to create a -a- -- -------- --- a-- -------. -- ------- -a- -- ------- t-- --------- -a- ------, a-- a-- ----t a----t--- ---- -- -a----- -- t-- ---- ---- --- a----t ------- t-- --------- ----t ------. Also, since he is a Time Lord, he can regenerate. If he is -------, he will regenerate (---- -a-- t- ----) after t-- --------- ----t ------ ----.
MP wrote:A response to Rox (which elaborates why I find her suspicious): Thank you for your thoughts. I'm sad to hear you don't "buy" my true intentions, but I suppose that's your right. I gave up my Enrique suspicion because his responses seemed genuine to me, and my back and forth with Dana made me reexamine the strength of my thoughts against him. On the flipside of your POV, I thought what Juliets did was incredibly suspicious and I'm still shocked she flipped civvie, to be honest. She must have just been WAY overthinking what she was attempting to post and her inability to attempt to decide things for herself seemed OOT moreso than normal. And personally, I have no reason to believe we're seeing a baddie Epig here, and despite the fact that I appreciate your contributions, I think some of them are off the mark.
I do not find Hedge suspicious for disagreeing with my assessment - if you had read it properly you would know I have a *ping* from her for riding the fence. I know you need to keep saying you thought Juliets was suspicious but can you step back a second and look at it without your preconceived suspicions and try to understand where I am coming from? The more you hammer that Juliets did this to herself the more I have to wonder if you are finding me suspicious for not just simply agreeing with you and letting it go.MP wrote:This is demonstrated especially since you suspect Hedge for thinking Epig's thoughts were valid; you even just essentially say you think she's bad because she disagrees with your assessment on the juliets situation. I am a civvie and I saw it unfold and I firmly believe juliets's actions were incredibly suspicious, so the fact that you're not willing to consider an alternative perspective as a possible civvie one seems suspicious to me.
MP wrote:I am also suspicious of why you mention Elo's vote but not Sabie's (more on this later). Lastly, I get this "oh, the case on JC was so bad, how could anyone believe it?!?!?!" feel from you, which seems very opportunistic, especially since you weren't around (understandably for RL reasons, I won't blame you for that). It just strikes me as an easy way for a baddie to come in after the fact and be all, 'well, how could anyone believe that?? These people who did must be bad!!' Strikes me as suspicious as well.
I already told you why in my first response it was only day 0 and day 1 I don't like going off half cocked pulling suspicion out of my hat. That is your style not mine. Now that some time has passed and we have learned things from lynches and thread talk I do have opinions. You are now saying you called me out? Thats funny since you have the answer to this in my first response today yet you do not mention that here.MP wrote:Additionally, I had my eye on you when you seemed to be setting up suspicion against me, but consequently never expressed any firm opinions about anyone at all, and now all of a sudden you have tons of opinions after being called out for it.
No not a Newp lol he is in fact a Newt ^.^Chris wrote:Wait, Metalmarsh is Newp?
Exactly my point! <3 I don't think you are Fish either tbh.Epignosis wrote:But I'm not a good civvie.
Why????? Did you learn NOTHING from your last major kill off? wow weeMovingPictures07 wrote:Honestly, if 15 out of 31 players missed the D1 vote and I was hosting, I'd be half tempted to just modkill them all. That's insane.
This exchange has me wanting to look closer at Dom. Why lie about a simple random vote? You voted one then changed your vote to another - that is NOT random in my book. Then you post to zeek a picture/cartoon - "stop patronizing me teacher" - as a way to laugh it off bit I ain't laughing tbh.Dom wrote:Please tell me how you know this.zeek wrote:Doubt it. And even if you were voting randomly you wouldn't have voted Alfava Metraxis and then changed.Dom wrote:I voted for a random planet tbh
I was faithful to my randomizer. I read four, accidentally voted one, and then changed my vote.
How is this even remotely civvie minded?? Its spiteful - not helpful at all.Dom wrote:k
When I voted for Azure, I was the second vote, I think. I don't like how the pile up has been after that at all. I think I want to change my vote, but I don't like how pedantic seek is being about his option. I liked SVS's reasoning much better, but I almost don't want to vote that option to spite zeek.
hush up Newt!!Metalmarsh89 wrote:You're such an asshat Roxy.Roxy wrote:MP - I did mean to hurt your feeling or upset you in anyway. I do think what you and Enrique did to zeek was the same in that you both punced on something insignifigant and tried to turn it into something it never was. You both tried to start suspicion rolling on him for an easy lynch vote reasoning for Day 1. I am sorry your posts you made do not read as a gambit nor did it seem like you just wanted discussion they seemed like you genuinely were suspicious of him enough to state you would vote for him day 1. Does that seem like who just wanted discussion?
Linki: agenda
<3 Right on!my online time has been more occupied with the Monty Python game I'm still a part of... I have prioritized that game.
Catching up this is where I had left off I wanted to respond to MP now then get on to reading.MovingPictures07 wrote:Rox, I'm glad you find it "hilarious" that I find Enrique suspicious. If you'd pay attention closely, I've almost all abandoned my suspicion of Enrique after letting the facts sink in. Even still, he did NOT do the same thing as me. Wow, Enrique and I both questioned something totally different in zeek's posts, we must both be doing the same thing!!! Except not at all. Enrique didn't even say zeek was bad. The situations are so totally different it's not even funny. Why are you trying to say they are?
Okay, well I may have been "riding the fence" but I already said I was trying to get people talking because that's how you catch baddies. What have you done? You still don't even say if you think ANYONE is bad, you're just "oh, we have time". So don't criticize me for my methods please. I'll play my way and you can play yours.
True, I had absolutely no way of knowing how the thread would take it, but I already explained my thought process.fingersplints wrote:But, people get lynched for nothing Day 1 all the time. I don't think there is anyway you could have predicted the thread would swing this way. I think I am more surprised at your choice of target then anything. If it was nothing and not something you were seriously trying to point out, why not pick on someone not new to the site and returning to mafia after years of not playing? I don't know. Just seems a bit of a weird way to welcome someone.MovingPictures07 wrote:Zeek, my case was totally bogus, which you obviously pointed out. AND I clearly said MULTIPLE TIMES that I wasn't crusading you as bad nor did I even really find you bad. There was no way that was going to blow up to anything.zeek wrote:Re: MP's ruse.
If every player had agreed with him, I'd be getting lynched and there would be nothing he could have done to change that. It's irresponsible play if he's a townie because I did nothing to deserve a target on my back.
The minute anyone seriously believed to me I was going to turn it onto them for agreeing with a bullshit case.
It's not irresponsible play. You tell me this: How many people think you're bad right now? In fact, I probably helped your reputation more than anyone else in this thread right now. Am I not right?
WTF I was not "picking on" anyone, and you act like I gave it a TON of thought. I wasn't looking for a way to screw with someone. I just read zeek's post, I was REALLY excited to start discussion, and then came up with the gambit thinking it would be an effective way to gauge people's reactions and get people talking, which was way better than everyone just posting on Day 1 "Well I have no idea who to vote for because nothing significant has happened so I'm just going to randomize!!" That tells us nothing almost all of the time.
Go ahead and disagree with my playstyle. People disagree with me ALL the time. I don't care. But it does not make me bad.
I'm not here to hold everyone's hand and welcome them all to a game of mafia. This is mafia. It's not personal. I see something worth discussing, I discuss it. I don't hold back. I'm sick of people holding back all the time because that's how baddies win; I've seen it so many times. Civvies just fly through the game too afraid to make accusations or start discussion because they're afraid of being wrong. I don't play that way, ever, and I never will. Other people can if they want; I'm not telling anyone else how to play, but I play my way.
I play this way all the time. So anyone insinuating that just because I am PLAYING THE GAME that it makes me bad and because they don't understand my perspective, well, sorry, I am not a wordsmith, I am an accountant. I can't explain things super well all the time. I come up with crazy theories and gambits because I'm paranoid as fuck and I love playing the game. If you don't understand me or you disagree with my methods, fine, but I'm sick of being eyeballed just because I'm intense and I did something to get people talking.
How else are we supposed to uncover baddie behavior?
I'm sorry if my tone comes across defensive but I'm sick of people insinuating my playstyle is "hilarious" or "irresponsible" just because they think differently than I do. Honestly it comes across as insulting. If you disagree with me, just say it, don't try to lynch me because you think I'm nuts or whatever.
fingersplints wrote:But, people get lynched for nothing Day 1 all the time. I don't think there is anyway you could have predicted the thread would swing this way. I think I am more surprised at your choice of target then anything. If it was nothing and not something you were seriously trying to point out, why not pick on someone not new to the site and returning to mafia after years of not playing? I don't know. Just seems a bit of a weird way to welcome someone.MovingPictures07 wrote:Zeek, my case was totally bogus, which you obviously pointed out. AND I clearly said MULTIPLE TIMES that I wasn't crusading you as bad nor did I even really find you bad. There was no way that was going to blow up to anything.zeek wrote:Re: MP's ruse.
If every player had agreed with him, I'd be getting lynched and there would be nothing he could have done to change that. It's irresponsible play if he's a townie because I did nothing to deserve a target on my back.
The minute anyone seriously believed to me I was going to turn it onto them for agreeing with a bullshit case.
It's not irresponsible play. You tell me this: How many people think you're bad right now? In fact, I probably helped your reputation more than anyone else in this thread right now. Am I not right?
um I did point it out to zeek - I said "It was like that everywhere but STV."fingersplints wrote:If it's any help... at STV, every single person said "I'm a civvie" and it was considered suspicious to not say it. I'm honestly really surprised that Rox failed to point this out. :hmm:zeek wrote:I'm not going to pretend to be an expert, but in my experience the town usually wins.
linki - STV had no such rules, at least not when I was around.
I'm not trying to defend zeek here. I honestly have no idea if he is bad, but mafia was played a bit differently on STV, so much so that players from here like Kate and SVS had a bit of trouble there. But yea, that's kind of how the games started. Your first post would be like "yay gameI'm a townie." And they were big on suspicion lists. And we didn't have polls. And dead players weren't allowed to post at all. That's all I can think of for now.