Game Over! Monty Python and the Holy Grail

#1001

I got some stuff to do and may not make it back to the game before the poll closes. I'm going to vote for juliets today. I'm not feeling comfortable voting for MP, and I feel pretty good about S~V~S so far. I'm 50/50 on Made as I pointed out yesterday. juliets is the only person on the poll that I am getting vibes from.

#1002

S~V~S wrote:
Enrique wrote:No, I'm saying I don't like early bandwagoning like that.
You would rather have the votes spread? That opens thing up to manips, if there are any, and generally favors the baddies in general.

I read this as "mah nips".

#1003

I think today I'm gonna go with a Juliets vote. I think she is trying to be quite blendy... or maybe blendy isn't the word but I feel like she's trying too hard to avoid getting into anything and even when she does she sits firmly on the fence. I'm not getting great feelings from her and her defenses have been lacking IMO.

In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.

#1004

Well, so I have to shower / get ready for class / finish laundry / go to class within the next 50 mins. I'm leaving with a vote for MP, as originally intended.

Don't expect me to stop calling out potential baddie behavior where I see it, though. Sure, a lot of the time I will be looking and nothing and just bring more heat onto me than anybody else. idc I'm not one for letting things fly without any discussion.

^votes*

#1005

I don't (and never) vote MP lightly. Particularly on the first damn day, so I hope this is a good move.

#1006

S~V~S wrote:Same question as for Enrique, MR, do YOU think the people who voted for MP are bad? Or do you just think they might be cause they voted for MP?

That block of BWT, Daisy, and Canuck is coincidental, to say the least. So they might be, but it'd be a very ballsy move by Daisy to push that strongly against MP so my thought (and vote) relied on me doubting that she's bad.

#1007

Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.

I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.

#1008

thellama73 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.
I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.

Meh, I have to do it now. It's peer pressure and stuff. I'm kinda annoyed tbh, I'd hoped to avoid it.

#1009

Enrique wrote: Don't expect me to stop calling out potential baddie behavior where I see it, though. Sure, a lot of the time I will be looking and nothing and just bring more heat onto me than anybody else. idc I'm not one for letting things fly without any discussion.

On the contrary, I encourage you to keep calling out baddie behavior. That's very useful. What I find odd is you saying "I don't think X is bad" right after calling out all their supposed baddie behavior.

#1010

Bullzeye wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.
I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.
Meh, I have to do it now. It's peer pressure and stuff. I'm kinda annoyed tbh, I'd hoped to avoid it.

Rubbish. You don't have to do anything. Say no to peer pressure.

#1011

MR -
So you non-nonchalantly left us, 3 of us, on our own to do that whole challenge? Do you know how hard that was? So really what I get out of what you're saying is you didn't care - you had no desire to help the team out. This explanation just doesn't help me with my uneasiness about you. I think there is a fair chance you not only didn't care you planned to not help us after you checked out who was there and saw we were not your teammates. No one else who was part of our group did this and some people like bwt and mp came in as soon as they could after they found out about the event. So bottom line, you intentionally didn't help us and as a result we struggled and ended up here. I am uneasy about you so you get my vote today -

votes MR

#1012

I think Canuck is super-bitchin'.

I voted for S~V~S because she's my biggest suspect. Looks like MP is far ahead at this time though, so it will take a bunch of people voting for the same person to save him.

Suspenseful!!

I vote now because I'm going to work.

#1013

Ok - so - I got a birthday cake with Misha Collins cuddling an orange kitty on it and DINOSAURUSUS!! I've had lunch and about a half ton of my candy - Apparently there's more to come tonight.

I'm going to vote MP. The case against him feels the strongest and my gut hasn't really changed about him.

holy linkiuts!!!!!

#1014

Long Con wrote: Looks like MP is far ahead at this time though, so it will take a bunch of people voting for the same person to save him. Suspenseful!!

Made? Just sayin'.

#1015

thellama73 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.
I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.

My cousin has a son with ALS, and she thinks the Challenge is the greatest thing ever. So

#1016

I just saw the host/mod/non option.

Well played hosts.....well played.

#1017

S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.
I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.
My cousin has a son with ALS, and she thinks the Challenge is the greatest thing ever. So

I think it can be a good thing if the people in the video actually explain why they're doing it and how people can donate money. Most don't though, it seems to have been co-opted into a bit of a fad among certain groups of people.

#1018

S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.
I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.
My cousin has a son with ALS, and she thinks the Challenge is the greatest thing ever. So

Charity is good. Posting on your Facebook wall saying "Pay attention to me! I'm so altruistic! Look what a good person I am! Follow me on Twitter! Look how much ice water I can dump on my head! Look at meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!" is less good. At least in my view.

#1019

thellama73 wrote:
Enrique wrote: Don't expect me to stop calling out potential baddie behavior where I see it, though. Sure, a lot of the time I will be looking and nothing and just bring more heat onto me than anybody else. idc I'm not one for letting things fly without any discussion.
On the contrary, I encourage you to keep calling out baddie behavior. That's very useful. What I find odd is you saying "I don't think X is bad" right after calling out all their supposed baddie behavior.

Potential* baddie behavior. I'm not making my mind based on something so small.

I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.

Well, that's where the awareness comes from. Ice Bucket Challenge has resulted in a HUGE boost in donations. Once you've seen a video you've seen them all, but eh, it's doing good.

#1020

She says more people have shown an interest in Chris' condition, and are asking questions etc., since this started. So maybe sometimes even narcissism can be a not terrible thing

#1021

Enrique wrote: Well, that's where the awareness comes from. Ice Bucket Challenge has resulted in a HUGE boost in donations. Once you've seen a video you've seen them all, but eh, it's doing good.

The ends justify the means. Nothing bad ever came from that philosophy.

#1022

Bah Humbug!

I am going to employee hell for the amount of time I have spent online today

#1023

... I would've put that under another layer of . I gotta go, but really man? You have that big of a problem with the fad?

#1024

Hedgeowl wrote:[ He is a new player and people were convinced he was bad in misfits, because he played how they expect a baddie to play. Expand your horizons, open your minds.

Nobody do this, it's a trap, trust me. Go back to sleep Sheeple.
Ok catching up.

S~V~S wrote:
Enrique wrote:No, I'm saying I don't like early bandwagoning like that.
You would rather have the votes spread? That opens thing up to manips, if there are any, and generally favors the baddies in general.

How so? Personally I perfer that over 2-3 candiates because
1. More leads means more people (being critical of others opens you to suspicion imo) actively playing, by that logic more civvies.
2. Theories have a weird way of tying into each other, giving civvies the best possible chance of a good lynch
3. Less of a chance everyone'll gang up on me.
People in this color i plan to reread before the vote
The Hedgeowl Hedging, and now Llama arguing that Enri's hedging... pretty sure one of them's bad...
With everything I just read here's a list of who i would suspect. At this point...
SVS (For accusing me harder than llama, this poisition specifcally could change radically depending on my reread) > Juliet( Lack of talking on issues not directly related to them/ adding nothing to conversation) > MP (Same as juliet but to a lesser extent.) > Hedgeowl (Hedging) > Dana + Canuck (Just gut..they haven't pinged me, but the fact that they've been around for so long and haven't slightly is off putting.)

linki- The MP V. Juliet comment....that's probably the biggest thing of suspect i've noticed this game.
linkie x2
Linkies rule everything around me L.R.E.A.M (x3)
dolla dolla dolla linki y'all (x4)

#1025

S~V~S wrote:
I am going to employee hell for the amount of time I have spent online today

As a government employee, I'm sure it's not that bad.

#1026

Enrique wrote:... I would've put that under another layer of . I gotta go, but really man? You have that big of a problem with the fad?

Yeah personally I don't see why people have such a problem with something so innocuous tbh.

#1027

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:
Enrique wrote:... I would've put that under another layer of . I gotta go, but really man? You have that big of a problem with the fad?
Yeah personally I don't see why people have such a problem with something so innocuous tbh.

Because clearly fun with potential attention seeking sprinkled in is worse than ALS. WAKE UP, SHEEPLE.

#1028

Made wrote:
Hedgeowl wrote:[ He is a new player and people were convinced he was bad in misfits, because he played how they expect a baddie to play. Expand your horizons, open your minds.
Nobody do this, it's a trap, trust me. Go back to sleep Sheeple.
Ok catching up.

S~V~S wrote:
Enrique wrote:No, I'm saying I don't like early bandwagoning like that.
You would rather have the votes spread? That opens thing up to manips, if there are any, and generally favors the baddies in general.
How so? Personally I perfer that over 2-3 candiates because
1. More leads means more people (being critical of others opens you to suspicion imo) actively playing, by that logic more civvies.
2. Theories have a weird way of tying into each other, giving civvies the best possible chance of a good lynch

Spread votes make it easier for baddies to manipulate the results with only one or two votes, or if they have vote manipulations. If you have only a few major vote getters, it is harder to employ shenanigans.

#1029

Made wrote:
Hedgeowl wrote:[ He is a new player and people were convinced he was bad in misfits, because he played how they expect a baddie to play. Expand your horizons, open your minds.
Nobody do this, it's a trap, trust me. Go back to sleep Sheeple.
Ok catching up.

S~V~S wrote:
Enrique wrote:No, I'm saying I don't like early bandwagoning like that.
You would rather have the votes spread? That opens thing up to manips, if there are any, and generally favors the baddies in general.
How so? Personally I perfer that over 2-3 candiates because
1. More leads means more people (being critical of others opens you to suspicion imo) actively playing, by that logic more civvies.
2. Theories have a weird way of tying into each other, giving civvies the best possible chance of a good lynch
3. Less of a chance everyone'll gang up on me.
People in this color i plan to reread before the vote
The Hedgeowl Hedging, and now Llama arguing that Enri's hedging... pretty sure one of them's bad...
With everything I just read here's a list of who i would suspect. At this point...
SVS (For accusing me harder than llama, this poisition specifcally could change radically depending on my reread) > Juliet( Lack of talking on issues not directly related to them/ adding nothing to conversation) > MP (Same as juliet but to a lesser extent.) > Hedgeowl (Hedging) > Dana + Canuck (Just gut..they haven't pinged me, but the fact that they've been around for so long and haven't slightly is off putting.)

linki- The MP V. Juliet comment....that's probably the biggest thing of suspect i've noticed this game.
linkie x2
Linkies rule everything around me L.R.E.A.M (x3)
dolla dolla dolla linki y'all (x4)

What Juliet v MP comment??

#1030

juliets wrote:MR -
So you non-nonchalantly left us, 3 of us, on our own to do that whole challenge? Do you know how hard that was? So really what I get out of what you're saying is you didn't care - you had no desire to help the team out. This explanation just doesn't help me with my uneasiness about you. I think there is a fair chance you not only didn't care you planned to not help us after you checked out who was there and saw we were not your teammates. No one else who was part of our group did this and some people like bwt and mp came in as soon as they could after they found out about the event. So bottom line, you intentionally didn't help us and as a result we struggled and ended up here. I am uneasy about you so you get my vote today -

votes MR

Fair enough. My apologies again, especially after what little interaction we did get to have in the chat.

#1031

Fixed

Made wrote:
Hedgeowl wrote:[ He is a new player and people were convinced he was bad in misfits, because he played how they expect a baddie to play. Expand your horizons, open your minds.
Nobody do this, it's a trap, trust me. Go back to sleep Sheeple.
Ok catching up.

S~V~S wrote:
Enrique wrote:No, I'm saying I don't like early bandwagoning like that.
You would rather have the votes spread? That opens thing up to manips, if there are any, and generally favors the baddies in general.
How so? Personally I perfer that over 2-3 candiates because
1. More leads means more people (being critical of others opens you to suspicion imo) actively playing, by that logic more civvies.
2. Theories have a weird way of tying into each other, giving civvies the best possible chance of a good lynch

Spread votes make it easier for baddies to manipulate the results with only one or two votes, or if they have vote manipulations. If you have only a few major vote getters, it is harder to employ shenanigans.

#1032

Enrique wrote:
DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:
Enrique wrote:... I would've put that under another layer of . I gotta go, but really man? You have that big of a problem with the fad?
Yeah personally I don't see why people have such a problem with something so innocuous tbh.
Because clearly fun with potential attention seeking sprinkled in is worse than ALS. WAKE UP, SHEEPLE.

Enough with the "sheeple" moniker.

#1033

juliets wrote:MR -
So you non-nonchalantly left us, 3 of us, on our own to do that whole challenge? Do you know how hard that was? So really what I get out of what you're saying is you didn't care - you had no desire to help the team out. This explanation just doesn't help me with my uneasiness about you. I think there is a fair chance you not only didn't care you planned to not help us after you checked out who was there and saw we were not your teammates. No one else who was part of our group did this and some people like bwt and mp came in as soon as they could after they found out about the event. So bottom line, you intentionally didn't help us and as a result we struggled and ended up here. I am uneasy about you so you get my vote today -

votes MR

This one.

#1034

Made wrote:
juliets wrote:MR -
So you non-nonchalantly left us, 3 of us, on our own to do that whole challenge? Do you know how hard that was? So really what I get out of what you're saying is you didn't care - you had no desire to help the team out. This explanation just doesn't help me with my uneasiness about you. I think there is a fair chance you not only didn't care you planned to not help us after you checked out who was there and saw we were not your teammates. No one else who was part of our group did this and some people like bwt and mp came in as soon as they could after they found out about the event. So bottom line, you intentionally didn't help us and as a result we struggled and ended up here. I am uneasy about you so you get my vote today -

votes MR
This one.

Thats MR not MP. And what do you find suspicious about this post?

#1035

Open the Snapple, see all the sheeple...or however that saying goes...

#1036

juliets wrote:
Made wrote:
juliets wrote:MR -
So you non-nonchalantly left us, 3 of us, on our own to do that whole challenge? Do you know how hard that was? So really what I get out of what you're saying is you didn't care - you had no desire to help the team out. This explanation just doesn't help me with my uneasiness about you. I think there is a fair chance you not only didn't care you planned to not help us after you checked out who was there and saw we were not your teammates. No one else who was part of our group did this and some people like bwt and mp came in as soon as they could after they found out about the event. So bottom line, you intentionally didn't help us and as a result we struggled and ended up here. I am uneasy about you so you get my vote today -

votes MR
This one.
Thats MR not MP. And what do you find suspicious about this post?

While I agree that we were short on people and disorganized and things were chaotic, this just seemed to come out of no where.

Also,sorry bout that, too many M's (btw Mr Moustache isn't MM, it's the other MM right?)

#1037

Made wrote:
juliets wrote:
Made wrote:
juliets wrote:MR -
So you non-nonchalantly left us, 3 of us, on our own to do that whole challenge? Do you know how hard that was? So really what I get out of what you're saying is you didn't care - you had no desire to help the team out. This explanation just doesn't help me with my uneasiness about you. I think there is a fair chance you not only didn't care you planned to not help us after you checked out who was there and saw we were not your teammates. No one else who was part of our group did this and some people like bwt and mp came in as soon as they could after they found out about the event. So bottom line, you intentionally didn't help us and as a result we struggled and ended up here. I am uneasy about you so you get my vote today -

votes MR
This one.
Thats MR not MP. And what do you find suspicious about this post?
While I agree that we were short on people and disorganized and things were chaotic, this just seemed to come out of no where.

Also,sorry bout that, too many M's (btw Mr Moustache isn't MM, it's the other MM right?)

No it didn't. I already asked MR why he left the chat and never came back. He didn't answer which is why I brought it up again today. Obviously I was thinking about it or I never would have asked the question the first time.

#1038

thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.
I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.
My cousin has a son with ALS, and she thinks the Challenge is the greatest thing ever. So
Charity is good. Posting on your Facebook wall saying "Pay attention to me! I'm so altruistic! Look what a good person I am! Follow me on Twitter! Look how much ice water I can dump on my head! Look at meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!" is less good. At least in my view.

I'm so sorry your facebook/twitter has been flooded with people bringing attention to a serious disease in an interesting, fun and creative way, and raising over 50 million dollars to research it in the process. That must be incredibly inconvenient for you. On the bright side, at least you don't have ALS.

#1039

Haha, MM is MetalMarsh, I think.

#1040

i voted MP because i'd been suspicious of him earlier and have nothing better to go on now

i don't watch buket videos becaue i don't want to see them, but ignoring videos i don't want to see isn't a particularly novel idea

well i did watch one fail compilation video where someone got a garbage can full of water dropped on their head but that's just morbid curiosity

#1041

DharmaHelper wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.
I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.
My cousin has a son with ALS, and she thinks the Challenge is the greatest thing ever. So
Charity is good. Posting on your Facebook wall saying "Pay attention to me! I'm so altruistic! Look what a good person I am! Follow me on Twitter! Look how much ice water I can dump on my head! Look at meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!" is less good. At least in my view.

I'm so sorry your facebook/twitter has been flooded with people bringing attention to a serious disease in an interesting, fun and creative way, and raising over 50 million dollars to research it in the process. That must be incredibly inconvenient for you. On the bright side, at least you don't have ALS.

Use blue you non-playing son of a silly person.

Also let's try not to dominate the thread too too much with this.

#1042

I literally was just shown this:

It sums up a lot of reasons why I dislike the whole thing

#1043

I have to vote now, I didn't read a thing. I'm going to vote for SVS for little pings from the beginning of the day.

#1044

Looking forward to hearing about these little pings.

#1045

thellama73 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote: In other news, my so-called best friend just nominated me to pour a bucket of ice cold water all over myself. So that's a thing.
I'm challenging you not to do it, and not to publicize your charity or lack thereof, instead of buying into a narcissistic, hypocritical fad.

Oh.my.god.

You are my effing hero.

#1046

A Person wrote:I literally was just shown this:

It sums up a lot of reasons why I dislike the whole thing

The failed attempts are the only ones I ever watch. The girl tryng it while sitting atop her horse is my favorite.

#1047

Mongoose wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
Enrique wrote:

Well this is a bit curious. The first three votes after llama (who also had his vote set to MP for a bit). Do we really feel that strongly about MP? Consecutive votes like that always make me uneasy. Grrr..

His fiancée and his best friend feel that strongly about him.
Indeed. And perhaps in the position to read him best. My vote will lie there for now.

linki - I can't get into the wifom of that right now.

So your logic here is to go along with Daisy and myself because we know him best? No other reason why?

#1048

Me? No. But the discussion at that time was about several people in a row voting MP. the fact that two of them knew him well IRL makes a baddie pile on seem less likely to me.

#1049

Voting MP

#1050

S~V~S wrote:
Made wrote:Then again.... people who would be most intrested in the game would be those with important roles, and the irresponcible....

(also, pure speculation, is that a reoccuring pattern? those talking most towards the beginng of the game being the ones that are bad, or things like that)
thirdly SVS, should we then just ignore the challege (save from things that are really suspicious of course)
No we can't ignore it, but trying to lynch people based solely on the challenge has zero to do with who is bad and who is good. When I played Roxys previous game with a very similar challenge, I was very participatory, and so were ALL of my teammates. And we manipulated the civvies hard into turning on each other for false loyalties.

No we can't ignore them. But I intend to watch for that sort of manipulation, for sure. It works. Ask Juliets

first thing that pinged me, fuunny enough it. more for Juliet rather than SVS

S~V~S wrote: The bolded part makes no sense at all. Of course I believe it. He got my eye on Day Zero for the No Lynch thing to start, but then for saying he was tempted to do the maths re odds. How? With one number? He would have to have some additional knowledge of the composition of the roles to do that, and indeed, at some later point he speculated about how many baddies were split between teams.

note to self, SVS does not like when you weight odds based on nothing.

Hmm.. intresting thing is , while actions seem to make me think SVS is the way to go, the reasoning behind these actions make sense.
I can easily follow her train of thought, reasoning and suspicion(something i could never do last game). I hate when people use this word in mafia, but she seems genuine. I have a feeling that as a new player it's very possible that with knowledge of the moves/choices i made last game, and now along with reasoning she's intentionally psyching me out. I'm not very sus of her in a textbook way anyways.

How did Das Porcu do co-hosting his first game?