Classic Super Mario Bros. [Endgame]

[Nevinera]

Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

So why gleam and not MP who voted first?

This post raises my brow a bit. It makes me want to vote for you, or maybe even MP.

Because mp gave a reason for voting early and gleam didn't, or at least that's what I recall.
I'd have been fine with voting for mp too.
I had to vote and run, and I only had a couple of minutes to look over the state of the game.
It's day 1 anyway, I might as well have randomized.

Okay, so it seems to me that a bandwagon just started rolling and to me, it looks like Nevinera got it rolling. I really don't see what was wrong with gleam using the term "elaborate ruse" regarding Vomp and Lizzy's obvious friendly banter.

Therefore, since this is a speed game, I am going with a gut vote on Nevinera for opportunistic bandwagon vote.

*vote Nevinera"

How does one join a bandwagon as the first voter for someone?
I can't both be a "bandwagon vote" and "start it rolling".

I did not in any way reference gleams terms about liz and vomps.
Is it possible you have me confused with someone?

[S~V~S]

But....that isn't what you said when you voted, you said:

Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

No mention of MP having a good reason for his vote, just stating that early voting smells a bit. You don't say it smells unless you give a reason for it, or that drive by votes smell a bit.

Don't you think that someone who has read the bad roles thoroughly could potentially make up a reason for a vote? So not sure how having a reason for early voting excludes someone from smelling due to making an early vote.

[Tangrowth]

Christ. What a terrible slew of posts to read. Really sorry to see you go, Gleam, RIP, and I hope you play with us again in the future. I was really looking forward to playing this game with you.

Don't take it personally, someone always has to go, and I find that when other players often are trying to develop a baseline for a new player, it often leads to early game lynchings. Trust me, it'll pass. I personally thought what you had to say was quite insightful, and I think we will find at least one mafia member who bandwagoned in your lynch.

This is interesting. Hedgeowl did get defensive awfully fast for Day 1. Then again, she has yet to win a game and less experienced players do often resent the possibility of being voted out so early.

I could also see this as a ploy by MP. He put out some feelers, got a reaction and pounced on it. Does he really have to vote this early, or is he trying to get a bandwagon going? A lot of people who are unsure of what to do on Day 1 will follow the first vote. It is also easy to handwave a civ lynch on Day 1 since it almost always happens, so MP might feel that he could get out of any accountability if he succeeds.

I don't know how I'm voting yet today, but I will be watching this situation very carefully. If Hedgeowl is lynched and flips civ, MP will be in the spotlight, for sure.

Yes, I really have to vote this early. I didn't get home until 6:30PM EST and I am incredibly busy now that I'm finished with training at CPA firm. Most of the time I even take lunch, it's quick, or I go out with co-workers. So it's either I vote early every day period (which I hate, for the record, I prefer to hold my vote to the last minute as well for a similar reason as you expressed previously) or I run a serious risk of missing the vote (which I hate even more).

And why would I be in the spotlight if Hedgeowl had been lynched and flipped civ? Can't civvies be wrong and lynch civvies? Anyone who thinks that just because I gun after a civvie hard means I'm baddie needs to remember my previous outings as a civvie (yes, these exist) and my often not so amazing track record.

so Hedgeowl and MP please explain how being curious over water voters makes me suspicious? I never said i ws voting for any of them just that I wondered about their votes. Is it b/c I pointed out that if we are in a water land or level that some baddies votes would or can be worth 4?
it is a powerful ability for a baddie tbs they kill at night AND have a chance at controlling lynches.

I totes do not understand how pointing out the obv makes me suspicious? so explain it to me. Especially you MP you really need to explain it to me. b/c you flip flopped in your own posts.

Rox, I think you misunderstand. I do not find you personally suspicious one bit; as you may recall, I said it told us nothing whatsoever of your alignment, or so I believe, because I've played with you for years and I know this is typical Rox behavior regardless of alignment.

However, I did at some point say that, if taken alone, your action was suspicious. If someone else had done what you did, it might have drawn my eye more so. Seemed like a real easy way to incriminate a set of voters that could have voted Water for any number of reasons -- and especially considering all the baddies turned up Goombas and not anything water-related, it's pointless to try and analyze whether any of those people could have possibly been sinister in it or not. A worthwhile baddie strategy could have been to vote Water in that first poll just as much as it would have been to not to, because they surely would deduce that it could likely bring attention from at least someone.

I have to vote now; reading back I'm finding MP's discussion with Hedgeowl mildly pingy. As I said, I thought she seemed sincere, so I think it's a bit strange MP couldn't see her side of it at all.

votes MP

I'm sorry, what?

Where did I say Hedgeowl was bad? I had literally four hours after the end of Day 0 to re-read the thread, analyze, and try to make a vote (the first one at that) to condemning someone, and I believe I was more than fair in my assessments. I hadn't even intended on voting Hedgeowl at all; I honestly didn't know how I was going to vote, and then she responded. Her responses after I brought up what I had made me re-consider, and even still NOW I am far from certain regarding her alignment one way or another. I had to go off of something, so I made a best guess, and followed what my gut was telling me, even if it was slight.

Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

So why gleam and not MP who voted first?

This post raises my brow a bit. It makes me want to vote for you, or maybe even MP.

Why would that make you want to vote for me? Don't you think that's awfully unfair to me considering I and Nev don't speak for each other at all?

Why does early voting smell a bit? I had to. You've played enough games with me over the years to know that I hold my vote if I can, and I am seriously busy this week.

Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

So why gleam and not MP who voted first?

This post raises my brow a bit. It makes me want to vote for you, or maybe even MP.

Because mp gave a reason for voting early and gleam didn't, or at least that's what I recall.
I'd have been fine with voting for mp too.
I had to vote and run, and I only had a couple of minutes to look over the state of the game.
It's day 1 anyway, I might as well have randomized.

What, why would you have been fine with voting me? You never explain this unless I missed it. If so, sorry.

[S~V~S]

I did not actually vote for you, MP. My point was that his vote for an early voter that was the SECOND voter, not the first, made me question why not vote for the FIRST early voter. I thought that perhaps he was protecting you, the FIRST early voter. Since early voting seems so suspish to him and all. Which seemed fairly baddie for him, and not a good reflection on you, either.

Like i said, I voted for him, not you, and likely will vote for him tomorrow unless a srs smoking gun type thing happens. If he comes up bad, we'll talk. But surely you can see why I voted this way?

[Tangrowth]

I haven't even caught up on Bioshock since last night, but I had a bit more I wanted to say.

I am currently eyeing Llama, Bullzeye, and Nevinera just a bit, and will continue to do so with Hedgeowl. I may not even vote any of these players tomorrow; I am still attempting to develop reads on them and everyone else for that matter. But I wanted to point out some observations I had reading all of that over just now.

A few of llama's posts struck me as a bit odd. Not sure what to make of them. I highlighted one in the post previously. Call it mostly vibe, but the way he seems to be subtly pushing throughout the last day period seems to be a bit different than the llama I usually observe on Day 1. Am I crazy or did anyone else sense this as well?

Bullzeye's vote on Gleam felt most opportunistic to me, out of recollection, so I have an eye on him for that reason. I also want to look at the other Gleam voters. I think it would assist us to remember that three players' votes counted as 0 this past day period due to there being three Goombas, so if there is any way we can discern baddies through repeated voting behavior/patterns using this knowledge, I think it would be helpful. I certainly believe it's possible one Goomba hid among the Gleam voters, but I doubt it was all three. Just something to keep in the back of our minds as we go forward.

Nevinera's posts seem a bit shifty to me similar to how my gut is reading Bullzeye the past period; a little bit struck me as insincere. There's really nothing for him to defend though, and it's minor, but I am keeping on eye on him, naturally, and I await his clarification of some posts that have been questioned by myself and others.

All of these are very minor things, and I don't think any of them are particularly worthwhile leads, but they are further discussion points. Want to see what feedback others have as well (positive, negative, whatever), as well as any other reads/thoughts.

Oh, and I also want to say that I agree with whoever it was (sorry, can't recall) that Desert now seems like a silly option to vote, since Gleam is gone. Which is a bummer because I was enjoying traveling in the correct order. Desert makes the second least sense to vote now, IMO, after Water.

I am currently casting my vote for Giant land for this reason since it is the only option even near Desert.

Linkitis with S~V~S: Yes, I noted how you actually voted. I just find it strange you would even say that and I wanted to have clarification because to me it read as though you were remotely considering a vote for me out of no result of my behavior whatsoever, which just read as unfair to me, and I just wanted to try to understand your train of thought. I understand that better now, thank you. But aren't you jumping the shark? You don't even know what alignment Nevinera is. And even if he is baddie, which I'll entertain but I am far from being convinced, couldn't he just as likely acted the same way, setting me up, as I am clearly a relatively easy target for baddies to manipulate to get lynched? The amount of games I get lynched over people misunderstanding my intentions or reading baddie intentions into them (which, I can sort of get, due to my huge gambits and oft appearance as a baddie throughout certain periods, but it doesn't change the laws of probability which reset after every game) lends that to a possibility as well. So... can you explain to me how that logically does not reflect well on me? I realize you're not voting me nor considering it now, but like I said, I am trying to understand yours (and other players' for that matter) train of thought as well as possible, because, as I said in a previous post, if I've learned ANYTHING from my immense amount of mafia games I've played, it's that often times players are lynched due to misunderstandings, or the very nature that all humans inevitably have a different train of thought and communication style in attempting to convey such an understanding, especially early on in games.

[S~V~S]

I considered a vote for you due to behavior of what i considered to be a potential teammate. Yes.

My main reason for suspecting him is his voting reason paired with the fact that he did NOT vote for the earliest voter (you). Should he come up bad, we can talk. Until then, it is academic.

[Tangrowth]

I considered a vote for you due to behavior of what i considered to be a potential teammate. Yes.

My main reason for suspecting him is his voting reason paired with the fact that he did NOT vote for the earliest voter (you). Should he come up bad, we can talk. Until then, it is academic.

I agree, but I still don't get this at all. How does someone else's behavior even incriminate me as a potential teammate when there is a reason for him to act in such a way in possibly any scenario (him being bad, me being bad; him being bad, me being civ; him being civ, me being civ)? Isn't that a clear logical fallacy and can you not understand how I feel that's unfair to me?

I can't decide what to make of your intentions, but if they are civvie-minded (and I have no reason to think you are civvie or a baddie at this point), I think it's a bit dangerous to be following that kind of lead.

[S~V~S]

I felt that he potentially did not vote for you as you were baddie teammates. I thought that was abundantly clear.

No logical fallacy whatsoever.

[Tangrowth]

I felt that he potentially did not vote for you as you were baddie teammates. I thought that was abundantly clear.

No logical fallacy whatsoever.

.....Okay. You're clearly not getting my point. But it doesn't matter. You and I obviously approach things very differently, so I am done with the matter.

[S~V~S]

Also, ebwop~ teammates actions can implicate people ALL THE TIME. So not sure why you are trying to say that the whole potential BTS tells line of suspicion is without merit because it involves the actions of other people.

[S~V~S]

And i do get your point.

[Nevinera]

What, why would you have been fine with voting me? You never explain this unless I missed it. If so, sorry.

Because it's day 1, and we're all basically voting randomly.

But....that isn't what you said when you voted, you said:

Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

No mention of MP having a good reason for his vote, just stating that early voting smells a bit. You don't say it smells unless you give a reason for it, or that drive by votes smell a bit.

Don't you think that someone who has read the bad roles thoroughly could potentially make up a reason for a vote? So not sure how having a reason for early voting excludes someone from smelling due to making an early vote.

It's *day one*. I picked gleam almost out of a hat.
I voted him because he voted early, but I could have voted snow for being quiet, or llama for 'squashing discussion'.
The core of the matter is that you don't get to have a good reason for voting on day 1. Often on day 2 either.
So I'm sorry that I don't have a solid reason for voting for gleam.
I didn't have time to make one up like you guys do.

The real reason that I *didn't* vote for MP is not because he had a reason for voting early, it's because I didn't want to attract his fire.
You and he both do this thing where you come out swinging hard - you don't have any more of a clue than the rest of us do on day 1,
but you choose to pretend that you do, so you make up *reams* of complete crap to throw around,
piles of pseudo-logic in a full-court press.
The reason you're going to vote for me, the reason you're going to swing at me constantly until you get me lynched?
It's because I'm *not you*, and you don't want to get lynched early.
You've discovered that a good offense is the best defense at this stage.

But you know what? Vote for me.

Henceforth you can have my vote on Day 1.
I'll give my reason as:

SVS will declare me a baddie today, as is traditional. Have a pre-emptive vote.

[Tangrowth]

Also, ebwop~ teammates actions can implicate people ALL THE TIME. So not sure why you are trying to say that the whole potential BTS tells line of suspicion is without merit because it involves the actions of other people.

Yes, I understand that. But I know that I'm not bad, so it's clearly not the case here, and you fail to remember that supposed "teammate's" actions end up implicating wrong parties ALL THE TIME as well. I'm just warning you to jumping to conclusions that I know to be false because it really feels like you're jumping the gun.

If I had a nickel for every time someone voted for someone else based off of what was perceived to be a "linking" action via teammates and was wrong, I'd certainly be rich.

In my opinion, it would be just as much a worthwhile strategy for Nevinera to subtly defend someone that is NOT his teammate just as much as it would be for someone to defend his teammate. That's my take on the matter. Obviously you disagree and I respect that. I'm just trying to discuss my thoughts, encourage others (and I appreciate your contributions), and sift out baddies, like anyone else, so I realize you could be doing the same. But that's why it's so important for me to feel as though I can express my opinion regarding what you are supposing, and I think you're thinking WAY too far ahead here. I just want to prevent laser-focus that can often cloud both mine and your judgments (and I mean this as respectfully as possible) because you and I both know that we can both be heavily guilty of getting too focused and caught up on one thing at times as a civvie. Occasionally it leads somewhere, but I've done that way too many times incorrectly personally by now that I'm trying to be much more conscious of my behavior. If you want to, though, feel free, I don't want to dictate your or anyone else's actions -- but am merely having a discussion.

As such, can I not defend myself against something that someone is suspecting me for that isn't even of my own accord? I can't control Nevinera's actions as much as I can anyone else's, so naturally I felt unfairly singled out, and still do a bit TBH. Maybe it's because I get so much attention every game I play now from the very start and it's sort of grating to have it happen literally every time.

That being said, I get your point, but I know you're wrong, so hence my point to really drive it through. I still can't figure out your intentions, but after all of this, I'm actually more inclined to believe you might be a civvie, because having learned a lot about your playstyle in recent games, you don't strike me as insincere. But I don't know at all.

Now, do you have thoughts regarding anything I pointed out in my previous post, or no? Hedgeowl, Bullzeye, llama, or anybody else?

[Tangrowth]

What, why would you have been fine with voting me? You never explain this unless I missed it. If so, sorry.

Because it's day 1, and we're all basically voting randomly.

But....that isn't what you said when you voted, you said:

Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

No mention of MP having a good reason for his vote, just stating that early voting smells a bit. You don't say it smells unless you give a reason for it, or that drive by votes smell a bit.

Don't you think that someone who has read the bad roles thoroughly could potentially make up a reason for a vote? So not sure how having a reason for early voting excludes someone from smelling due to making an early vote.

It's *day one*. I picked gleam almost out of a hat.
I voted him because he voted early, but I could have voted snow for being quiet, or llama for 'squashing discussion'.
The core of the matter is that you don't get to have a good reason for voting on day 1. Often on day 2 either.
So I'm sorry that I don't have a solid reason for voting for gleam.
I didn't have time to make one up like you guys do.

The real reason that I *didn't* vote for MP is not because he had a reason for voting early, it's because I didn't want to attract his fire.
You and he both do this thing where you come out swinging hard - you don't have any more of a clue than the rest of us do on day 1,
but you choose to pretend that you do, so you make up *reams* of complete crap to throw around,
piles of pseudo-logic in a full-court press.
The reason you're going to vote for me, the reason you're going to swing at me constantly until you get me lynched?
It's because I'm *not you*, and you don't want to get lynched early.
You've discovered that a good offense is the best defense at this stage.

But you know what? Vote for me.

Henceforth you can have my vote on Day 1.
I'll give my reason as:

SVS will declare me a baddie today, as is traditional. Have a pre-emptive vote.

So no reason for me whatsoever? At all?

I can speak only for myself, but I didn't "make up" a reason for voting, and your blanket accusation reads ridiculous to me.

I realize entirely how I do that and it's why I'm trying to be much more conscious of it. I often err way too much doing that and cause a fellow civvie death (when I am civvie) and then a prompt baddie bandwagoning onto me, yet another civvie death, when I do this.

I resent your remarks (in-game, not outside of game, I'm not offended by them), assuming you are lumping me in them. I never once said I was sure of anything regarding Hedgeowl. I honestly have no clue as to her alliance, I'm just making what I hope is an educated guess based on what I either reason or instinctively believe to be true, but I am no more wrong or right than anyone else by nature.

[Tangrowth]

S~V~S, just one last thing to say on the subject, and then I greatly await seeing what you have to say regarding anything else.

Remember in Minecraft when I came in the thread after being rezzed and how I was all 99% certain you and Eloh were Epig's teammates and how you felt after reading that? Surely you can understand how dangerous it was for me to read so incredibly much into things that could have been interpreted any way, and yet I gunned (wrongly) after both of you. I realize how that tunnel vision really led to my playing a terrible game and I felt upset a bit when you posted that one post demonstrating that you were considering voting for me for something I didn't even do and when I wouldn't even be around to defend myself.

[S~V~S]

MP, calm down, I did not vote for you.

[Tangrowth]

MP, calm down, I did not vote for you.

I am not upset.

[S~V~S]

What, why would you have been fine with voting me? You never explain this unless I missed it. If so, sorry.

Because it's day 1, and we're all basically voting randomly.

But....that isn't what you said when you voted, you said:

Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

No mention of MP having a good reason for his vote, just stating that early voting smells a bit. You don't say it smells unless you give a reason for it, or that drive by votes smell a bit.

Don't you think that someone who has read the bad roles thoroughly could potentially make up a reason for a vote? So not sure how having a reason for early voting excludes someone from smelling due to making an early vote.

It's *day one*. I picked gleam almost out of a hat.
I voted him because he voted early, but I could have voted snow for being quiet, or llama for 'squashing discussion'.
The core of the matter is that you don't get to have a good reason for voting on day 1. Often on day 2 either.
So I'm sorry that I don't have a solid reason for voting for gleam.
I didn't have time to make one up like you guys do.

The real reason that I *didn't* vote for MP is not because he had a reason for voting early, it's because I didn't want to attract his fire.
You and he both do this thing where you come out swinging hard - you don't have any more of a clue than the rest of us do on day 1,
but you choose to pretend that you do, so you make up *reams* of complete crap to throw around,
piles of pseudo-logic in a full-court press.
The reason you're going to vote for me, the reason you're going to swing at me constantly until you get me lynched?
It's because I'm *not you*, and you don't want to get lynched early.
You've discovered that a good offense is the best defense at this stage.

But you know what? Vote for me.

Henceforth you can have my vote on Day 1.
I'll give my reason as:

SVS will declare me a baddie today, as is traditional. Have a pre-emptive vote.

Um what? I don't recall having a tradition to this effect.

And how would you know how MP & i always behave?

[S~V~S]

MP, calm down, I did not vote for you.

I am not upset.

But you are getting incredibly defensive over this.

[Tangrowth]

MP, calm down, I did not vote for you.

I am not upset.

But you are getting incredibly defensive over this.

Don't I have a right to defend myself? And you'll have to excuse me for feeling buttsore because pretty much every mafia game I play anymore I come right out of the gate on Day 1 having to defend myself for some sort of reason. This is the first Day 1 in a long time I've only received one vote and I still had a few people mentioning me for either no reason (Nevinera) or for reasons of pure association (yourself). You can't possibly understand why I'd be feeling overdefensive?

You have absolutely nothing to say in response to literally anything else I've said?

[S~V~S]

It's *day one*. I picked gleam almost out of a hat.
I voted him because he voted early, but I could have voted snow for being quiet, or llama for 'squashing discussion'.
The core of the matter is that you don't get to have a good reason for voting on day 1. Often on day 2 either.
So I'm sorry that I don't have a solid reason for voting for gleam.
I didn't have time to make one up like you guys do.

The real reason that I *didn't* vote for MP is not because he had a reason for voting early, it's because I didn't want to attract his fire.
You and he both do this thing where you come out swinging hard - you don't have any more of a clue than the rest of us do on day 1,
but you choose to pretend that you do, so you make up *reams* of complete crap to throw around,
piles of pseudo-logic in a full-court press.
The reason you're going to vote for me, the reason you're going to swing at me constantly until you get me lynched?
It's because I'm *not you*, and you don't want to get lynched early.

Actually, usually i do have a reason, and sometimes i am quite effective. i have a good gut that way. I don't make up any of this, it is how i see it. I think i am pretty good at this, sometimes I am horribly wrong, as are we all, but sometimes I am spot on, and it is usually over a little thing. It has nothing to do with you being "Not Me", and everything to do with you saying you voted for one reason, and that was not why you actually voted.

Where did you hear about how i play my game? I don't think you have ever seen my Day One full court press.

Linki @ MP, and you are not hearing me. I said lets see how Nevin comes up.

[Tangrowth]

It's *day one*. I picked gleam almost out of a hat.
I voted him because he voted early, but I could have voted snow for being quiet, or llama for 'squashing discussion'.
The core of the matter is that you don't get to have a good reason for voting on day 1. Often on day 2 either.
So I'm sorry that I don't have a solid reason for voting for gleam.
I didn't have time to make one up like you guys do.

The real reason that I *didn't* vote for MP is not because he had a reason for voting early, it's because I didn't want to attract his fire.
You and he both do this thing where you come out swinging hard - you don't have any more of a clue than the rest of us do on day 1,
but you choose to pretend that you do, so you make up *reams* of complete crap to throw around,
piles of pseudo-logic in a full-court press.
The reason you're going to vote for me, the reason you're going to swing at me constantly until you get me lynched?
It's because I'm *not you*, and you don't want to get lynched early.

Actually, usually i do have a reason, and sometimes i am quite effective. i have a good gut that way. I don't make up any of this, it is how i see it. I think i am pretty good at this, sometimes I am horribly wrong, as are we all, but sometimes I am spot on, and it is usually over a little thing. It has nothing to do with you being "Not Me", and everything to do with you saying you voted for one reason, and that was not why you actually voted.

Where did you hear about how i play my game? I don't think you have ever seen my Day One full court press.

Linki @ MP, and you are not hearing me. I said lets see how Nevin comes up.

I get that. It's why I wanted to be done with the discussion, but I realize I got a bit tied up in it even after the fact.

So I'm assuming you had no thoughts regarding literally anything else I said (Bullz, llama, etc.).

[S~V~S]

i think i am being very, very clear. sorry if you are having issues seeing my points, but like i said, i think i am being crystal clear

[Tangrowth]

i think i am being very, very clear. sorry if you are having issues seeing my points, but like i said, i think i am being crystal clear

You're not, sorry. I don't see how ignoring my question asking you about Llama and others is crystal clear. I brought up what I believe to be several points of discussion yet you are only responding regarding Nevinera and repeating how defensive I seem and that you get my point. Maybe I missed where you addressed something else and if so, I apologize, but I don't think I missed it. I realize you strongly believe Nev to baddie. He could be, as he is someone I'm keeping my eye on, but I'm not near as convinced. Wouldn't you be willing to consider anything else?

Respectfully, as was one of my major points earlier (even more so than defending myself, honestly, and I'm repeating this because you seem to have missed it), you seem to be very much suffering some tunnel vision. I do the same thing, so I understand completely, and I'm not debating your instinct nor your right to do it, but I'd appreciate to get discussion going all around. If you don't want to contribute or have no thoughts, that's fine, but you haven't even explicitly said that.

[Tangrowth]

Anyway, I want to say sorry to everyone for domineering the thread. Lol. I will be gone tomorrow night after work, possibly even Friday night (not sure if I'll be busy with an engagement that night yet or not), and then I am going out of town Saturday, so I will be more sparse, and wanted to post while I had the chance. This will be my last... so, go ahead, start cheering now. I know you want to.

I do think the Day 1 lynch could be illuminating... the question remains in what possibility presents the correct lead. Determining that is NOT easy. I very much await what you all have to contribute.

[Mongoose]

Christ. What a terrible slew of posts to read. Really sorry to see you go, Gleam, RIP, and I hope you play with us again in the future. I was really looking forward to playing this game with you.

Don't take it personally, someone always has to go, and I find that when other players often are trying to develop a baseline for a new player, it often leads to early game lynchings. Trust me, it'll pass. I personally thought what you had to say was quite insightful, and I think we will find at least one mafia member who bandwagoned in your lynch.

I agree with this. I think those of us who started in the Thomas game were lucky because there was such a legion of newbs, so we got lost in the shuffle. I blended in with the pack (and was Thomas!) so vets were able to get to know my style and personality before I was lynched (I was NK'd pretty far into the game).

If you stick around, we'll be able to learn what you're like and not do these things.

[Mongoose]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

[thellama73]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

I do! But only if it includes te objectively best pizza topping ever: anchovies.


MP seems excessively defensive for some one who got votes on Day 1, when no one really has any idea what they are doing.

I will also point out that almost every game I've been in, when a civ is lynched on Day 1, people come after those that voted for the civ, and this results in a second civ being lynched. Come on, people, baddies are smarter than that. If a bandwagon is forming against a civ, they will be sure not to add their vote, content to let others do their dirty work for them. As for me, I will be looking at people who did NOT vote for I Gleamed a Gleam of Days Gone By.

[Hedgeowl]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

Oh oh, I do!

[Mongoose]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

I do! But only if it includes te objectively best pizza topping ever: anchovies.


MP seems excessively defensive for some one who got votes on Day 1, when no one really has any idea what they are doing.

I will also point out that almost every game I've been in, when a civ is lynched on Day 1, people come after those that voted for the civ, and this results in a second civ being lynched. Come on, people, baddies are smarter than that. If a bandwagon is forming against a civ, they will be sure not to add their vote, content to let others do their dirty work for them. As for me, I will be looking at people who did NOT vote for I Gleamed a Gleam of Days Gone By.

Is Gleamweaver also on your queue of puns?

My favorite topping is green olives. I will also not turn down artichokes.

Linki - Hedgeowl - Yay for portable food! After this convo, I have my lunch packed for tomorrow, but I have a feeling I'm going to end up downstairs at Westshore Pizza getting 2 slices and a drink for $4.50.

[Vompatti]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

I do but it's very expensive in Finalnd so I only eat frozen ones.

[Snow Dog]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

I do! But only if it includes te objectively best pizza topping ever: anchovies.


MP seems excessively defensive for some one who got votes on Day 1, when no one really has any idea what they are doing.

I will also point out that almost every game I've been in, when a civ is lynched on Day 1, people come after those that voted for the civ, and this results in a second civ being lynched. Come on, people, baddies are smarter than that. If a bandwagon is forming against a civ, they will be sure not to add their vote, content to let others do their dirty work for them. As for me, I will be looking at people who did NOT vote for I Gleamed a Gleam of Days Gone By.

I didn't vote for The Gleamster so I guess I'm on your suspect list. What can I say to clear myself?

[Nevinera]

Actually, usually i do have a reason, and sometimes i am quite effective. i have a good gut that way. I don't make up any of this, it is how i see it. I think i am pretty good at this, sometimes I am horribly wrong, as are we all, but sometimes I am spot on, and it is usually over a little thing. It has nothing to do with you being "Not Me", and everything to do with you saying you voted for one reason, and that was not why you actually voted.

Where did you hear about how i play my game? I don't think you have ever seen my Day One full court press.

Linki @ MP, and you are not hearing me. I said lets see how Nevin comes up.

I can call a coin flip with great accuracy! I'm pretty good at it, I have a great gut that way.
Sometimes I'm horribly wrong, but sometimes I'm spot on.

I actually had crossed you with Kate - you are doing exactly what she did in twin peaks
(and you were kind of a pair there).

[Tangrowth]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

I do! But only if it includes te objectively best pizza topping ever: anchovies.


MP seems excessively defensive for some one who got votes on Day 1, when no one really has any idea what they are doing.

I will also point out that almost every game I've been in, when a civ is lynched on Day 1, people come after those that voted for the civ, and this results in a second civ being lynched. Come on, people, baddies are smarter than that. If a bandwagon is forming against a civ, they will be sure not to add their vote, content to let others do their dirty work for them. As for me, I will be looking at people who did NOT vote for I Gleamed a Gleam of Days Gone By.

I'm not 'excessively defensive', I'm trying to prevent another civvie from being lynched, and I've been railroaded enough times lately. Not only that, but S~V~S is exercising incredible tunnel vision (and again, I mean this with no disrespect or anything), so I was trying to engage her in other discussion, to no avail.

Also, you seriously think that NO Goomba sneaked in a vote in Gleam? If you recall, we had three baddies whose votes were worth 0 last lynch.

While I agree with your observation, you appear to be going from one extreme to the other. I disagree. I think there was one or two Goombas that voted for Gleam; the fact that you are not willing to even look at any of those voters strikes me as odd indeed, especially when he was lynched for what were really silly reasons.

[S~V~S]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

I do! But only if it includes te objectively best pizza topping ever: anchovies.


MP seems excessively defensive for some one who got votes on Day 1, when no one really has any idea what they are doing.

I will also point out that almost every game I've been in, when a civ is lynched on Day 1, people come after those that voted for the civ, and this results in a second civ being lynched. Come on, people, baddies are smarter than that. If a bandwagon is forming against a civ, they will be sure not to add their vote, content to let others do their dirty work for them. As for me, I will be looking at people who did NOT vote for I Gleamed a Gleam of Days Gone By.

I'm not 'excessively defensive', I'm trying to prevent another civvie from being lynched, and I've been railroaded enough times lately. Not only that, but S~V~S is exercising incredible tunnel vision (and again, I mean this with no disrespect or anything), so I was trying to engage her in other discussion, to no avail.

Also, you seriously think that NO Goomba sneaked in a vote in Gleam? If you recall, we had three baddies whose votes were worth 0 last lynch.

While I agree with your observation, you appear to be going from one extreme to the other. I disagree. I think there was one or two Goombas that voted for Gleam; the fact that you are not willing to even look at any of those voters strikes me as odd indeed, especially when he was lynched for what were really silly reasons.

"Excessive tunnel vision"? I see your hyperbole, and call it with "excessive hyperbole".

I am not having "tunnel vision". I think Nevin is very likely bad. I intend to vote for him, for Nevin, tomorrow. I made like 2 or 3 posts before I voted, and only a few more until you began your "OMG SVS is a tunnel visioning bullshitter" full court press. BASED on that, I may or may not revisit you. I don't care if ALL of the Goombas voted for Gleam, or whatever else. It still does not change the fact that Nevins vote reason was not accurate, then when asked about it, he changed it. Sounds like baddie scrambling to me

Nevin voted for Gleam for a not true reason, then changed his reasoning when confronted with it.

I did not address any of your other points becasue they are moot until we get to a point where we know about Nevin. Until that time it is pointless speculation.

But I suspect Nevin becasue he claimed to bo voting for Gleam for early voting, when there was an earlier voter. If Nev turns up bad, then I will decide further. BASED on that, I may or may not revisit you. I don't care if ALL of the Goombas voted for Gleam, Unless i am misunderstanding you, and you are defending Nevin, not yourself?

@Nevin, Ah. I actually recall quite the opposite about us in that game, I recall that game very differently, we were NOT a pair at all, I totally disagreed with her voting for you as i recall. And I am doing NOTHING like that here. Although I have been accused of what you say in other games, but not that one. Or any other game recently.

I mentioned you one time before voting for you. I did not make a huge attempt to get anyone else to vote for you, and as I recall Kates drive for you was based on false info she received. My vote for you, and continued belief you are bad, is based on your own posts in the thread. Not at all the same.

Saying "OMG, SVS is an aggression monster falsely accusing us" when really all i have done since the post went up is defend against accusations of being waaaaaaaay out of line for my few posts.

I have to go to work, I am sure you two will have a blast today painting me as some kind of foaming at the mouth crazy person, but i saw what I saw.

[Tangrowth]

How are any of my points "pointless speculation" and yet yours are all not? I see that you believe Nevinera is bad for those reasons, and I said I was keeping an eye on him myself, for similar reasons -- he struck me as very possibly insincere. However, his subsequent posts have led me to wonder, and I'm far from being sure about him. I'm not defending him at all; I just find it sort of weird you're railroading him SO hard when there's no way anyone can know that much for sure early on in a game (like I said, I believe people get lynched due to misunderstandings, regardless of their alignment). I've seen enough misunderstandings happen as a civvie that I'm wary of this movement against Nevinera that you're making, despite the fact that he is a person I would consider voting tomorrow. Not only will baddies jump on it if he is NOT bad, but civvies will be persuaded by your incredible confidence to the lack of anything else being discussed.

Hence, why I'm trying to discuss others. Yet llama, Snow Dog, etc. don't seem to want to talk about anything I've brought up either, so -- if everyone wants to ignore me, that's fine. But in a game like this I believe everyone should tread with caution; I've learned that I've sunk way too many civvies as a fellow civvie in the past so I'm trying to make a conscious effort not to do that.

However, I consider that maybe you are absolutely spot on. I don't know that. Since I don't know, I'm a bit hesitant to follow your lead, but it's definitely something I'll mull over. I just can't help but shake there might be a few other baddie candidates out there that will go completely undiscussed.

So you don't care if all the Goombas voted for Gleam, even though that would mean we have three baddies in the Gleam voters?

And lastly, S~V~S, the only reason I'm trying to engage you is because as I said previously, I heavily appreciate your input, so I was hoping you'd have something to contribute because I like bouncing my gut reads off of other players in the thread.

But if you don't want to discuss absolutely anything else until you get Nevinera lynched, that's your decision.

That said, I do await input from others, who seem to be going more quiet due to what llama termed by "excessive defensiveness", yet ignoring all of my discussion points.

Anyway, I really have to go to work now (running late for my earlyness because of this, lol), might not be back until late tonight (seeing a local opera perform Philip Glass with Boomslang) or tomorrow.

[Snow Dog]

What are your points MP? Do I have to read through all that again. I saw nothing to comment on. You raised some names. I read it.

[Snow Dog]

Sorry just read thw whole of your above post. I agree with you actually. SVS does seem single minded on Nev and is very sure. This is the way she plays maybe. I could never be so confident. But I am still going for the water voters. Although I suspect that Vomps maybe voted water for the next world to support Lizzy who voted it the first time. If he is civ he is the most unhelpful civ around.

[Vompatti]

Sorry just read thw whole of your above post. I agree with you actually. SVS does seem single minded on Nev and is very sure. This is the way she plays maybe. I could never be so confident. But I am still going for the water voters. Although I suspect that Vomps maybe voted water for the next world to support Lizzy who voted it the first time. If he is civ he is the most unhelpful civ around.

That's a bit harsh. I'm sure there are many others as unhelpful as I.

[Simon]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

I don't like any pizza. Breadsticks only for me!

[Snow Dog]

Sorry just read thw whole of your above post. I agree with you actually. SVS does seem single minded on Nev and is very sure. This is the way she plays maybe. I could never be so confident. But I am still going for the water voters. Although I suspect that Vomps maybe voted water for the next world to support Lizzy who voted it the first time. If he is civ he is the most unhelpful civ around.

That's a bit harsh. I'm sure there are many others as unhelpful as I.

Sorry if it was harsh. I'm not sure there are "many" as unhelpful as you. At least you are admitting to be unhelpful.

[Nevinera]

Nevin voted for Gleam for a not true reason, then changed his reasoning when confronted with it.

Nevin voted for gleam for an invented reason, and then pointed out that none of the emperors are wearing any clothes when confronted about it.

I have to go to work, I am sure you two will have a blast today painting me as some kind of foaming at the mouth crazy person, but i saw what I saw.

You're being absurdly confident for no reason.
You clearly aren't interested in lynching anyone but me now, and there's nothing I can do about that.
You're not 'foaming at the mouth', you're *invested*.
It's fine.

I'd like everyone to remember that in TwinPeaks, SVS got kate off after her singleminded lynch
by pointing out that it would be terribly dumb for a *baddie* to do something like that.
She has every reason to believe that that same logic would work again this game.

Lynch SVS after me.
I think that her behavior is the best evidence of badness we've gotten so far,
and it will also help to discourage this pretense of utter certainty in the early days of future games.

[Vompatti]

Sorry just read thw whole of your above post. I agree with you actually. SVS does seem single minded on Nev and is very sure. This is the way she plays maybe. I could never be so confident. But I am still going for the water voters. Although I suspect that Vomps maybe voted water for the next world to support Lizzy who voted it the first time. If he is civ he is the most unhelpful civ around.

That's a bit harsh. I'm sure there are many others as unhelpful as I.

Sorry if it was harsh. I'm not sure there are "many" as unhelpful as you. At least you are admitting to be unhelpful.

I might be helpful later though if I get any helpful ideas.

[Snow Dog]

Sorry just read thw whole of your above post. I agree with you actually. SVS does seem single minded on Nev and is very sure. This is the way she plays maybe. I could never be so confident. But I am still going for the water voters. Although I suspect that Vomps maybe voted water for the next world to support Lizzy who voted it the first time. If he is civ he is the most unhelpful civ around.

That's a bit harsh. I'm sure there are many others as unhelpful as I.

Sorry if it was harsh. I'm not sure there are "many" as unhelpful as you. At least you are admitting to be unhelpful.

I might be helpful later though if I get any helpful ideas.

k

[thellama73]

Also, you seriously think that NO Goomba sneaked in a vote in Gleam? If you recall, we had three baddies whose votes were worth 0 last lynch.

While I agree with your observation, you appear to be going from one extreme to the other. I disagree. I think there was one or two Goombas that voted for Gleam; the fact that you are not willing to even look at any of those voters strikes me as odd indeed, especially when he was lynched for what were really silly reasons.

Goombas votes are worth zero, so why would they bother going on record voting against someone they knew would flip civ? I know how carefully people analyze past votes and if I were bad, I would not want to be counted among those that lynched a civ if I could help it. Maybe one goomba did indeed vote for Gleam, but I think we have better odds in looking elsewhere.

I agree that SVS' pursuit of Nev is a bit much for it being so early, but I also know that that is her style, so I don't mak too much of it. I also think she makes some valid points about him, so he is someone I will have my eye on going forward.

Regarding the "excessive defensiveness" comment, I generally think it is a mistake to get one's hackles up over day one votes, when most people will collect at least one vote. It makes you stand out and look like you have been caught as a baddie. However, I know that you are an experienced enough baddie to be unlikely to respond in this way, so I am not looking at you with too much seriousness right now.

I'm happy to respond to any other concerns you have about me.

[Hedgeowl]

Sorry just read thw whole of your above post. I agree with you actually. SVS does seem single minded on Nev and is very sure. This is the way she plays maybe. I could never be so confident. But I am still going for the water voters. Although I suspect that Vomps maybe voted water for the next world to support Lizzy who voted it the first time. If he is civ he is the most unhelpful civ around.

That's a bit harsh. I'm sure there are many others as unhelpful as I.

Sorry if it was harsh. I'm not sure there are "many" as unhelpful as you. At least you are admitting to be unhelpful.

I might be helpful later though if I get any helpful ideas.

k

As to the explosion of posts between MP and SVS it's a bit like a posting contest. We are not required to play to stay alive (maybe nev is) and it seems stupid to stick our bear paw in that bee's nest.

MP - I think if you would like to get further discussion going from multiple players, highlighted questions are helpful. In long paragraphs, read late at night, specific questions get lost or forgotten by the time you finish reading.

1. How does everyone feel about SVS' focus on Nev?

I noted that when she asked about his initial vote reasons and I explained what I thought they might have been, she apparently never read or saw my post. Rather than engaging in discussion she continued to post 'why haven't you answered me nev?' Now nev then explained that really he had no better reason to vote gleam or MP. Which while upsetting to those who would like a darn good reason if we will be lynched, is perfectly logical to me in this point in the game. We can all pretend its great insight, but how many times have people lynched a baddie the first day? BWT can speak more to being lynched as a baddie over a typo I believe.

That said we are all suspects on each other's lists right now.

Linki - if that is SVS' style, then what is Nev's? Points? You mean point. She has one point, that he voted for no reason.

I think you are right about Goomba voting. It will be more useful later hopefully, but right now feels just as much of a shot in the dark.

[Snow Dog]

I don't know what a Goomba is and why their votes are zero. Must look through the roles again.

[Snow Dog]

Ok...got it! It's actually cool to be baddie this game. And now I understand the water world concerns and maybe we SHOULD go there as soon as possible Ie> next

[Mongoose]

My friend just bought a ferret.

[Mongoose]

Sooooo. Who likes pizza?

I don't like any pizza. Breadsticks only for me!

Hi there, Simon! I'd hoped you might stick your head in this game! I just started liking pizza not that long ago myself
Vompers, I'm sorry there's not a lot of cheap pizza available. Frozen isn't too bad, especially if you have a toaster oven k.


All - I'm still scared to go to Waterworld next but if everyone else thinks it's a good idea, I'll go along with it.

Hedge - Yes, I'm staying way far over here, playing with these golden retriever puppies I found in Level 1-2.

Save us civs! How about if you are bad, you just type the word "starfish" someone into your post and then we will know. (Quoting my post won't count, obv).


MP - Enjoy your opera, that sounds amazing!