A little time off, some thinking, and this post:
Paul wrote:basically im being misunderstood b/c its d1 and there is almost nothing to go on so i created stuff to go on
i waited long enough for d1 i can't believe people deal with that
i also can't believe people are taking me so srs i am trying to hunt scum by fishing for reactions to the stuff i say how else do you hunt this early
...gives me a new perspective on Paul. I have not seen such an aggressive, relentless, button-pushing fisher in a long time but now Paul makes a lot of sense to me. Were you really suspicious of Samuel initially or did your lasting suspicion come from the reactions he gave you? After coming out the other side of this issue, it's going to be difficult for me to take you seriously when you go after someone. I will always have to wonder whether you really suspect someone or if you are just fishing for a reaction from them or anyone else.
While I respect your cowboy style of play, I can tell we're not kindred spirits and that may lead us to be at odds as this game progresses (assuming we're both alive come Day 2). For better or worse, I am an empirical observer. I don't care about pings and feelings. Nor do engage in "forcing it" as Paul has done. I simply wait for people to expose themselves to me. This occurs through patterns in voting, process of elimination, and patterns of defensive and supportive behavior in the thread. If I survive past Night 3, I'll let you know what I've come up with.
Ruth wrote:My thought was that in this community, we give new players the BOTD their first game, and pretending to be one of those new players would be a smart strategy for a Mafia. We tend not to lynch noobs day one of their first game. It would be a way for a veteran to get to play the noob card. A Get Out Of Jail Free card, if you will.
This goes hand in hand with the other reason people are suspectng me: the thought that I was trying to determine peoples identities. No, I was only trying to see if Paul was what he appears to be. I don't think he is, personally. In other words, I doubt new players would ACT like new players.
Having caught up after a busy Saturday, though, it is also possible there are just "woo hoo fun" reasons for pretending to be new to this forum, especially if Paul has an especially highly recognizable game. But it is something I think needs to be kept in mind if he ever does play the noob card.
Having skimmed the day so far, I need to read more in depth today. I will probably post as I catch up.
An interesting theory. I can think of 2 or 3 regulars from TS that might go this route. I say no slack to new folks though. It's pointless to engage in some kind of affirmative action policy. The only way to truly learn is by doing. You signed up for the game, so sink or swim. There are no water wings in mafia.
Ruth wrote:Also, whoever said that all the avatars look the same, oh my God, yes!
Yeah, it's definitely tricky. I'm used to determining posters by their avatar not their name. This aspect of the sock game has been challenging because they're all so similar.
Paul wrote:maybe people should stop focusing on me being new and actual focus on what I am saying and on catching scum
do you see how many people have been forced to show their hands already by issuing opinions on me let alone others? if so why aren't more of you talking? I don't mean this as condescending or
Anything but it's a genuine question
No I don't see it but, then again, it's not my style. Who has been forced to show their hands and what makes you say so about them? I'm trying to keep tabs on who you suspect so I can determine whether or not you're actually as good as you're intimating.
I bear no grudge against Paul at the moment, but the ruthless, unfeeling player in me thinks the best way to deal with an aggressive fisher like Paul is to put him to the test. Let's take him up on his three suspects and lynch one of them. He seems fairly confident that they are bad (though he threw up a smoke screen about not being 100% on anything). We can always call his bluff. If we lynch one of his top three and they're not bad, either Paul will cool it with the gunslinger rhetoric or the rest of us will know to take his words with a grain of salt.
What else do we really have to go on? Aside from Paul steering much of the conversation, it's been a typical Day 1 where not much else happens and a few low posters sneak in to say something nondescript. At least Paul gave us something to talk about and potentially a voting theory to test out. If not for that, wouldn't most of us have made random-ish votes with little to no direction?
As an aside, I have been curious about the Day 0 poll. I can't help but wonder if one of the Horsemen voted for Apocalypse because that is their purpose in the Bible. Normally, one would suggest that the Horsemen would steer clear of voting Apocalypse because it would be to obvious- aka WIFOM. But over time, WIFOM gets so played out that players do the very thing they shouldn't do because it would otherwise seem to obvious. I'm not sure how sock logic plays into the circular logic of WIFOM but I wouldn't be surprised if one of the Horsemen is among the eight who voted Apocalypse. If we come to understand them to be a threat, we can look there.
Absalom wrote:Paul wrote:Paul wrote:
I am curious what everyone thinks of everyone else no joke try to force yourself to make an opinion of those who have posted and share it b/c that's now town wins this game
actually how about everyone instead name their top 3 scum atm
1 Samson
2 Lot
3 Nicodemus
i await your thoughts, wonderful people
Okay, the Paul show is getting a little old. I don't think he's bad, but he's drowning out everything else in the thread, make it hard for me to get a read on others.
I wish Cain would come back. He is my biggest suspect at this point. I am not reading Nicodemus as bad, but it seems like Lot said something to make me nervous a while ago. I will have to reread. I have no reason to suspect Samson.
Re: Paul, CFA Absalom. CFA. Cain's vote threat was intriguing but it was probably just fluff. Or it was circular logic/wifom.
Rahab wrote:And more biblical jokes based on socks.
Does this avatar make my ass look big?