Fractal wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 3:41 pm
nijuukyugou wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 3:35 pm
Marmot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 19, 2018 2:12 pm
I'm gonna
[VOTE:
nijuukyugou] aubergine
Her greatest contribution thus far is stating that she dislikes when someone asks another player for their meta, and then she describes her meta as congruent between her civilian and mafia play.
Well, that answered my question about your vote when looking at the poll. And this is why I don't like questions about meta - I wouldn't win whether or not I chose to answer it, hence being backed into a wall. But fair enough - I chose to answer it as I did. I actually appreciate the suspicion from you and Luna - I'm noticed! It's sig's trust that weirds me out a little.
Obligatory Day 1 philosophy/early commentary: if none of you buggers catches my eye significantly, I will vote a very low poster. I'll repeat and re-repeat (in reference to other games I've played) that I'd rather lynch a nonplayer and get a chance of catching a baddie lying low than lynch a civ who's actually playing Day 1 because they talk. I'll be here, checking in and out, for a bit. Conversation is nice since I have time to do it, yay!
Do you have any leans, one way or another of some of the people you mentioned? I know you called sig's trust of you weird, but do you actually find it slightly scummy, or neutral?
As Day 1 feelings go, I'll give Marmot and Luna a civ lean, and give sig a neutral eyebrow. He's contributing, at least, like a puppy (I mean that in the best way, sig - this is my mental image of your posts!) if not all over the place. But everything else that I've read, suspicion-wise, feels like darts thrown in the dark, as usual. Better than no darts, I suppose.
I'm curious to see how nutella reacts to speed's suspicion of her, at the moment, since that's the most recent thing that's caught my eye.
(Also, descriptions of Vomps' gameplay is like trying to describe Night Vale to someone - it's impossible with hilarious results. Welcome back, Vomps!)