Dr. Who Mafia - Night 12

#101

sabie12 wrote:Maybe this poll will decide what season our story is based on or what season we begin with at least?

Shit, abort abort abort, I don't even know the bad wolf story line!

#102

Made wrote:
sabie12 wrote:Maybe this poll will decide what season our story is based on or what season we begin with at least?
Shit, abort abort abort, I don't even know the bad wolf story line!

Haha I don't know much about Doctor who and I don't think you have to, to enjoy the story or succeed in the game. I'm sure they will make it user friendly for all of us even those of us who aren't avid fans.

#103

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Dom wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Oh god, those things. Okay, terrible story arc, I will admit that.
I love Eccleson, but I just hated the farting aliens.
Agreed entirely. The rest of his episodes were great.

I had forgotten about that aspect. There were many unfortunate things about that season, but after a whole season with eccleston I had grown to really like him, even if the effects, etc. were so bad.

#104

Yay game!

I've never seen a single episode of the show so I have no preference for this poll. But I have some friends who really liked David Tennant so I guess I'll vote there.

#105

Bullzeye wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:Yay, game begins!

MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol, fair response. Is the role listing going to be updated to 31 roles or are those 3 roles secret?

I know you have a LOT to do, so I'm only curious.

What if the other 3 roles are the Silence and they're totally there but every time we look away we forget? Also, why are my arms covered in tally marks?
Wow, nice theory. That's a definite possibility and would explain why they're not listed. Would that be a third mafia team then? If so, that's kind of scary, but might actually be kind of a good thing since the baddies will have a lot of competing factions to worry about, and won't focus on just ridding civvies. When I had three mafia teams in Classic Rock, there was more fighting among mafia teams than I expected, with the Satanists rising to an advantage among the ashes of the other two. So I wonder if that's what's going on here.
I was actually kidding at first! I suppose they could seriously be the Silence though, which would lend to the idea of them being bad.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Does anyone have any ideas as to what this poll might cause game-wise?

I know it could be unlikely we'll guess correctly, so it probably is sort of pointless to speculate, but there's really nothing wrong with discussing it, especially since it appears we can change votes.
I just assumed it was like a check in activity really.

Oh man, the Silence would be an awesome secret or weeping angels!

#106

*peeks into thread*

Is it ok to post now? *sheepish*

I tried watching the reboot of Dr Who a few years back. I got to the episode where aliens invade London, an episode I was looking forward to since I am a born and bred Londoner. But then the aliens just farted all the time and it was just, sorry to say, stupid. I stopped watching at that point. I may well pick it up at some point in the future, since I think my wife would enjoy the show.

So I only experienced the one doctor, and to be honest I wasn't that captivated by his performance, so I obviously have no idea which option to pick.

Having said all that, I feel compelled to pick the Doctor played by Matt Smith, which I believe is #11. *votes*

#107

keys56000000000 wrote:*peeks into thread*

Is it ok to post now? *sheepish*

I tried watching the reboot of Dr Who a few years back. I got to the episode where aliens invade London, an episode I was looking forward to since I am a born and bred Londoner. But then the aliens just farted all the time and it was just, sorry to say, stupid. I stopped watching at that point. I may well pick it up at some point in the future, since I think my wife would enjoy the show.

So I only experienced the one doctor, and to be honest I wasn't that captivated by his performance, so I obviously have no idea which option to pick.

Having said all that, I feel compelled to pick the Doctor played by Matt Smith, which I believe is #11. *votes*

Those would be the Slitheen. Most people agree they're stupid and I'm actually pretty sure they never show up again after 9's run. You should check out some of Tennant or Smith's work. Actually the fourth episode of the current series is probably one of the best ever and might be still available on IPlayer.

#108

MovingPictures07 wrote:Given The Master appears to be an LMS, which makes complete sense, I would bet he has a pretty powerful role, so yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he would resurrect after dying. I suppose The Doctor can as well though? Which means someone automatically regenerating after death could be either of those roles, potentially. So why wouldn't you mention that?

I was concentrating on the baddies, don't think it's helpful to discuss the potential secret powers of civs until necessary.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Consequently, while I do believe you have some logical and astute observations, in the end, I question the true intent behind your post. I've seen baddies (and I always try to do this myself as bad) who try to appear as helpful as possible but while simultaneously causing unnecessary paranoia, so just because I find myself agreeing with you, when I read your post part of me wondered if you are trying to set up misconceptions and paranoia.

Because you agree with me and I was trying to be helpful, I might be bad? I'm not, I was simply trying to help inform the non-Whovians who are playing. If the baddie teams were the Weeping Angels and the Slytheen I still would have speculated on likely secret powers. Due to the nature of those groups there wouldn't be a potential recruitment though, so would I have drawn your suspicion?

It's Day 0, and I've never played in a game with Day 0 before. I don't know how you guys play on this site. I don't want this to sound like tit for tat... but I find it weird you're making a big deal of my post.

#109

Ohhhhh my goodness I'm so stupid excited for this game that I'm posting at work like a bad teacher (don't worry - the kiddos aren't in here

) I'm also glad we pick more than one Doctor, because I have the hardest time picking between 9 and 10. Eccleston was my first Doctor and got me into the show (and yeah, while our lovely farting alien friends tend to turn people off of the show, I didn't mind them so much. They were stupid but made me laugh in a stupid way and realize the show could be serious and absolutely ridiculous at the same time. And it's TOTALLY worth it going forward, if that's what's stopping you!). So anyone, love for 9 and his sass.

And then 10. I love David Tennant with all my being (my tumblr may or may not be half dedicated to him and Michael Fassbender *swoooooon*), and like people said, he was freaking born to play the role. He is an incredible actor. I'd put 4 in there since 4 was his influence, but I confess I haven't seen more than snippets of Classic Who (I can't get past the campiness...sorry y'all). Perhaps I'll give it another shot someday when I finish watching everything else I say I'm going to watch. Including catching up past the first episode of Season 8 of New Who.

Anyway. Wow. So excited. Voting 9 and 10.

#110

Mister Rearranger wrote:Dr. Dre, Dr. Demento, Dr. Doom, Dr. Strangelove, Dr. Loveless, Dr. No, Dr. Dog, Dr. Scholl, Dr. Zhivago, Dr. Drew, Doctor Doctor Gimme the News I've Got a Bad Case of Loving You, etc...

I think you're forgetting a doctor...

#111

zeek wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Given The Master appears to be an LMS, which makes complete sense, I would bet he has a pretty powerful role, so yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he would resurrect after dying. I suppose The Doctor can as well though? Which means someone automatically regenerating after death could be either of those roles, potentially. So why wouldn't you mention that?
I was concentrating on the baddies, don't think it's helpful to discuss the potential secret powers of civs until necessary.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Consequently, while I do believe you have some logical and astute observations, in the end, I question the true intent behind your post. I've seen baddies (and I always try to do this myself as bad) who try to appear as helpful as possible but while simultaneously causing unnecessary paranoia, so just because I find myself agreeing with you, when I read your post part of me wondered if you are trying to set up misconceptions and paranoia.
Because you agree with me and I was trying to be helpful, I might be bad? I'm not, I was simply trying to help inform the non-Whovians who are playing. If the baddie teams were the Weeping Angels and the Slytheen I still would have speculated on likely secret powers. Due to the nature of those groups there wouldn't be a potential recruitment though, so would I have drawn your suspicion?

It's Day 0, and I've never played in a game with Day 0 before. I don't know how you guys play on this site. I don't want this to sound like tit for tat... but I find it weird you're making a big deal of my post.

Right, but if The Doctor can regenerate after death, as a Time Lord, just as The Master, then consider this scenario: The Doctor is NKed, then regenerates. Players then lynch The Doctor based on your original observation that the Master regenerates. Why would you not mention that the Doctor can regenerate as well? It might lead to someone who knows nothing about the show not fully understanding that regeneration does not necessarily equal a baddie.

Also, I never said you might be bad because I agree with you. I implied you might be bad because it's not a poor strategy to take for a baddie to seem overtly helpful while attempting to manipulate the thread, and I believed you left out some important considerations in your analysis. But anyone might be bad at this point. I never gunned after you, but merely stated an observation that I wondered what your intentions are. So I see your response here as a bit of an overreaction. I didn't necessarily even think your chances of being bad were more than anyone else's, just I noted your post and thought it was worthy to mention that I questioned your intentions in doing so. It struck me as possibly insincere. Should a civvie not point out such observations?

You don't agree with my assessment that a recruit on one baddie team only might be lopsided?

Wow, and finishing with not only a deflection of suspicion but also a statement saying that you don't know how we play on this site? If you don't know how we play, what does that have to do with anything you originally said, or why you think I'm making a big deal out of your post? I also find it certainly very interesting you say it is "weird" that I'm making it a big deal. Baddies often do this when they want to comment on something without committing to whether they believe it's suspicious or not. I was really just gauging you to see how you'd respond, but I find your response more suspicious than your original post.

So am I suspicious for making "a big deal" out of your post or aren't I?

#112

Also, I want to be sure you understand, zeek, I am not intending to come across as hostile in any of that, so I hope that my tone does not convey as such. I know you don't know me yet, so I just wanted you to know that.

I just am defending my right to make an observation of something I perceive as a possibility for baddieness, in real time, as I see it. I never said I was even going to vote for you D1; although your most recent response does crick my brow a bit, I'm intrigued to see what else you have contribute.

I am certainly not branding anyone as a baddie this early, as that would be nearly impossible to determine, but I'm not keeping the fact that D0 tends to be mostly off-topic banter from expressing something I thought was worthy of consideration.

I look forward to hearing whether you think I'm bad because of it.

#113

*Votes MP*

#114

Epignosis wrote:*Votes MP*

Here we go again.

#115

Like I said, I'm not speculating on civ powers at this point in the game because that would only help the baddies. But any Who fan would bring up regeneration could mean the Doctor or the Master. And as I said in my original post, they both can regenerate.

You're welcome to question my intent and my tone. I didn't respond angry or frightened, so perhaps my wording made you think I was overreacting, I just don't want to be accused of hiding from your questions.

I'm not sure of your assessment but it's possible.

I don't know how you play on this site but Day 0 suspicions seem odd, especially when I was genuinely just trying to help everyone out. And it was my second post. That's not weird? I haven't played mafia in years but that seemed weird to me. Suspicious even. But only slightly. Seriously, I could just lay low but I'd rather help. You say baddies often do this and that, but baddies generally change strategy a lot and this could be applied to anyone at any time.

linki: I do feel a little defensive MP and I'm not going to play any sympathy cards but I'm new to this site and someone start interrogating me on first post of substance. But I appreciate your response.

#116

MP for real you're acting super fishy. Is this just your normal play style? You've been killed in the first few days in every game I've seen you in so far.

#117

As far as I know zeek has only played at STV, which doesn't even use polls, so I'm not too surprised he finds Day 0 a bit weird.

#118

zeek wrote:Like I said, I'm not speculating on civ powers at this point in the game because that would only help the baddies. But any Who fan would bring up regeneration could mean the Doctor or the Master. And as I said in my original post, they both can regenerate.

You're welcome to question my intent and my tone. I didn't respond angry or frightened, so perhaps my wording made you think I was overreacting, I just don't want to be accused of hiding from your questions.

I'm not sure of your assessment but it's possible.

I don't know how you play on this site but Day 0 suspicions seem odd, especially when I was genuinely just trying to help everyone out. And it was my second post. That's not weird? I haven't played mafia in years but that seemed weird to me. Suspicious even. But only slightly. Seriously, I could just lay low but I'd rather help. You say baddies often do this and that, but baddies generally change strategy a lot and this could be applied to anyone at any time.

linki: I do feel a little defensive MP and I'm not going to play any sympathy cards but I'm new to this site and someone start interrogating me on first post of substance. But I appreciate your response.

I appreciate the response, thanks. Sure, everyone plays differently, and baddies do all sorts of things, especially depending on who the baddies are.

I'm not saying you're suspicious for being helpful; civvies and baddies can both be helpful. It's really just what I wondered when I read your post. I am just being honest, your post struck me as a bit odd originally, so I felt I should comment on it.

Your response here makes me feel a bit better, but I have my eye on you.

Dana wrote:MP for real you're acting super fishy. Is this just your normal play style? You've been killed in the first few days in every game I've seen you in so far.

I'm acting super fishy? What constitutes super fishy behavior? Because in the course of reading the thread I made an observation that I thought was worth mentioning? Is a civvie's duty not to baddie hunt? I realize it's Day 0, but why should I let that keep me from expressing what I really think? It's mafia -- it's not personal -- my job is to sniff out baddies.

Would you think I am less fishy if I skated by and never expressed my thoughts?

I'm not going to keep the fact that it's Day 0 prevent me from expressing something I thought when I read a post. Nobody else should either.

And if you mean my normal play style = aggressive and talkative, yes, that is my MO regardless of alignment.

#119

I'm seriously perturbed by the assertion that apparently trying to actually play the game is super fishy.

#120

MovingPictures07 wrote:Your response here makes me feel a bit better, but I have my eye on you.

And I, you

#121

I'm not saying that you can't baddie hunt, of course that's the goal, but you just seem really angry and really attack-y and I think it's way too soon to really have a case based on anything substantial.

#122

Did no one else seriously have that little voice in the back of their head question zeek's sincerity when he made that post? Or am I just the only crazy individual here? Just out of curiosity.

zeek wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Your response here makes me feel a bit better, but I have my eye on you.
And I, you

I wouldn't have it any other way.

Dana wrote:I'm not saying that you can't baddie hunt, of course that's the goal, but you just seem really angry and really attack-y and I think it's way too soon to really have a case based on anything substantial.

I'm not angry, sorry that it's coming across that way.

I think you misunderstand me. I am not saying zeek is bad. I made a single observation where I thought he made a lot of really good points, but left out a couple of details, and I wondered if he was maybe a baddie attempting to appear helpful. I have no idea if that's true. I just made an observation because I was curious if anyone else read it the same way. In a game of mafia, everything inevitably comes down to intentions and deception, and you'll have to excuse my natural tendency to question someone's intentions or think that they're being manipulative because I've been had many times before.

I am not saying he is bad nor am I presenting a case. Trust me, when I present a case on someone, you'd know.

I just am growing tired of the D0 off-topic discussion because I saw something that pinged me ever so slightly.

#123

Dana, I know what you are saying; I tend to view manic MP as baddie MP myself. But it is my observation that he was equally manic before the game started. I think he is just really, really, really excited about the game starting.

#124

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Dana wrote:I'm not saying that you can't baddie hunt, of course that's the goal, but you just seem really angry and really attack-y and I think it's way too soon to really have a case based on anything substantial.
I'm not angry, sorry that it's coming across that way.

I think you misunderstand me. I am not saying zeek is bad. I made a single observation where I thought he made a lot of really good points, but left out a couple of details, and I wondered if he was maybe a baddie attempting to appear helpful. I have no idea if that's true. I just made an observation because I was curious if anyone else read it the same way. In a game of mafia, everything inevitably comes down to intentions and deception, and you'll have to excuse my natural tendency to question someone's intentions or think that they're being manipulative because I've been had many times before.

Okay, this makes a bit more sense. It just sort of seemed like you jumped on someone to try and build suspicion before anything has really started yet. But if you're just purely commenting then I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Trust me, when I present a case on someone, you'd know.

Well. That's terrifying.

#125

S~V~S wrote:Dana, I know what you are saying; I tend to view manic MP as baddie MP myself. But it is my observation that he was equally manic before the game started. I think he is just really, really, really excited about the game starting.

Thanks for that, SVS, that's pretty helpful. I still don't know everyone and their styles all that well, so I was just a bit confused and found it sort of odd.

#126

Seriously, I just read his post again and to me it reads like, 'I'm trying to appear helpful by saying I'm providing insight because some people aren't Whovians', 'but here's some information regarding recruits, oh, and probably only one baddie team has recruits'. I think they were interesting and astute observations, largely anyway, but it just seems so random and odd, I can't get over my initial gut reaction to it. I realize the rational part of my brain thinks my interpretation is ridiculous, but nonetheless, that's why I commented on it. I realize there's practically no evidence to incriminate anyone on being bad this early, and even sometimes I would think Llama is crazy for some of us suspicions he generated on D0, but that's just how I read it.

I guess I'll go back to working on my essay, then I have class, and will think on it. I really don't even think zeek is bad, nor am I willing to fixate on him, but I can't shake my read of that post and his response. The original post strike me as a possible suspicious comment, and if people think I'm suspicious or fishy for that, so be it!

Linki with S~V~S and Dana: Yes, I appear manic, but go look at the sign-ups thread -- I am a dangerous mafia addict, especially full games, and also a Doctor Who addict, so this is quite the potent combination for me!

#127

It's great to see players getting stuck in right from the get-go! I hate games where people are too afraid to post. Good to see some balls.

Two things I want to post on.

First, my two cents on the issue of speculating on role powers. IMO it's better to put all our cards on the table. Baddies will be trying to figure this stuff out regardless of anything posted here.

Second, while I agree that it's too soon to really judge anyone, it kinda seems like MP hit on a nerve. Do I detect a bit of Dana defending Zeek? Or is it Dana jumping the gun on what she identifies as an easy lynch? Hard to tell at this early stage, but very possibly. At any rate, I certainly don't suspect MP yet, whereas Dana has "pinged" my suspicio-meter.

#128

Dana wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Dana wrote:I'm not saying that you can't baddie hunt, of course that's the goal, but you just seem really angry and really attack-y and I think it's way too soon to really have a case based on anything substantial.
I'm not angry, sorry that it's coming across that way.

I think you misunderstand me. I am not saying zeek is bad. I made a single observation where I thought he made a lot of really good points, but left out a couple of details, and I wondered if he was maybe a baddie attempting to appear helpful. I have no idea if that's true. I just made an observation because I was curious if anyone else read it the same way. In a game of mafia, everything inevitably comes down to intentions and deception, and you'll have to excuse my natural tendency to question someone's intentions or think that they're being manipulative because I've been had many times before.
Okay, this makes a bit more sense. It just sort of seemed like you jumped on someone to try and build suspicion before anything has really started yet. But if you're just purely commenting then I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Trust me, when I present a case on someone, you'd know.
Well. That's terrifying.

To address this more properly, yeah, I'm not saying that I believe the probability that zeek is bad is any higher than anyone else (well, even than myself, but I know how that one played out realistically), I just made an observation. Certainly not even anything close to a case. Just something that caught my attention. I'm keeping my eye on him, but I'm keeping my eye on everyone at this point. And I wanted to see if anyone else agreed with me or if I was completely alone in my weird paranoid thoughts.

I'll go now.

Linki with Keys: At least someone around here appreciates my aggressive mafia behavior.

And I agree, while I do think painting a target on a civvie unnecessarily may be careless depending on the situation, baddies have BTSC. Civvies only have the thread. It's better to overspeculate than underspeculate. At least, that's my opinion.

#129

MovingPictures07 wrote:Seriously, I just read his post again and to me it reads like, 'I'm trying to appear helpful by saying I'm providing insight because some people aren't Whovians', 'but here's some information regarding recruits, oh, and probably only one baddie team has recruits'. I think they were interesting and astute observations, largely anyway, but it just seems so random and odd, I can't get over my initial gut reaction to it. I realize the rational part of my brain thinks my interpretation is ridiculous, but nonetheless, that's why I commented on it. I realize there's practically no evidence to incriminate anyone on being bad this early, and even sometimes I would think Llama is crazy for some of us suspicions he generated on D0, but that's just how I read it.

Then re-read my responses to you and feel better again, instead of rehashing a point that didn't work the first time.

keys56000000000 wrote:First, my two cents on the issue of speculating on role powers. IMO it's better to put all our cards on the table. Baddies will be trying to figure this stuff out regardless of anything posted here.

Second, while I agree that it's too soon to really judge anyone, it kinda seems like MP hit on a nerve. Do I detect a bit of Dana defending Zeek? Or is it Dana jumping the gun on what she identifies as an easy lynch? Hard to tell at this early stage, but very possibly. At any rate, I certainly don't suspect MP yet, whereas Dana has "pinged" my suspicio-meter.

First, I disagree. Say a baddie team has nobody on it with a clue about Doctor Who, there is no way I'm giving them the info they need by speculating on civvie powers. Second, I don't need anyone to fight my battles. I don't know Dana's motives but she's entitled to her opinion and I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought MP was jumping on me. But maybe she's trying to buddy me, I don't know.

#130

MovingPictures07 wrote:Seriously, I just read his post again and to me it reads like, 'I'm trying to appear helpful by saying I'm providing insight because some people aren't Whovians', 'but here's some information regarding recruits, oh, and probably only one baddie team has recruits'. I think they were interesting and astute observations, largely anyway, but it just seems so random and odd, I can't get over my initial gut reaction to it. I realize the rational part of my brain thinks my interpretation is ridiculous, but nonetheless, that's why I commented on it. I realize there's practically no evidence to incriminate anyone on being bad this early, and even sometimes I would think Llama is crazy for some of us suspicions he generated on D0, but that's just how I read it.

I thought it was pretty nice of him to give some context since a lot of people have already said they know nothing about the show. I have no idea if he was just trying to appear helpful or is actually helpful, but I'd like to believe he was being sincere. Maybe I read your posts too quickly but it seemed like you were on the offensive without too strong of a reason, so I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.

keys56000000000 wrote:Or is it Dana jumping the gun on what she identifies as an easy lynch?

What do you mean by this? Who is the easy lynch?

#131

zeek wrote:But maybe she's trying to buddy me

Will you be my friend?

#132

I always figured the point of day 0 was off topicness

I currently see zeek as overlly confrontational, but that can easily be rationalized when you realize it's his first day 0. He (assuming you're talking about his critzing speculating about civvie roles) sounds like what I would expect in a day 1 post.

Linki- oh his baddie summary, yeah, that was really help for me, having not watched much of show, it didn't occur to be to be disingenuous. I don't understand how a character trait analysis could be disingenuous if it's true.

Linki- ok this is just a petpeev, but people describing their own tells always makes me feel weird.

#133

Dana wrote:
keys56000000000 wrote:Or is it Dana jumping the gun on what she identifies as an easy lynch?
What do you mean by this? Who is the easy lynch?

You said yourself MP is always killed early...

Dana wrote:MP for real you're acting super fishy. Is this just your normal play style? You've been killed in the first few days in every game I've seen you in so far.

#134

Made wrote:I always figured the point of day 0 was off topicness

I currently see zeek as overlly confrontational, but that can easily be rationalized when you realize it's his first day 0. He (assuming you're talking about his critzing speculating about civvie roles) sounds like what I would expect in a day 1 post.

Linki- oh his baddie summary, yeah, that was really help for me, having not watched much of show, it didn't occur to be to be disingenuous. I don't understand how a character trait analysis could be disingenuous if it's true.

Linki- ok this is just a petpeev, but people describing their own tells always makes me feel weird.

Weirder than clowns?

#135

fingersplints wrote:
Dana wrote:
keys56000000000 wrote:Or is it Dana jumping the gun on what she identifies as an easy lynch?
What do you mean by this? Who is the easy lynch?
You said yourself MP is always killed early...

I meant that in a "so we should give him a chance to live" sort of way.

#136

S~V~S wrote: Weirder than clowns?

it really depends the clown. Not as weird as "it" but weirder than puddles.

#137

Dana wrote:
zeek wrote:But maybe she's trying to buddy me
Will you be my friend?

Made wrote:I currently see zeek as overlly confrontational, but that can easily be rationalized when you realize it's his first day 0. He (assuming you're talking about his critzing speculating about civvie roles) sounds like what I would expect in a day 1 post.

I'm overly confrontational? What about MP?

Made wrote:Linki- ok this is just a petpeev, but people describing their own tells always makes me feel weird.

Who is this about?

#138

Dana wrote:
keys56000000000 wrote:Or is it Dana jumping the gun on what she identifies as an easy lynch?
What do you mean by this? Who is the easy lynch?

MP? I didn't see you call anyone else fishy..

#139

zeek wrote:
Dana wrote:
zeek wrote:But maybe she's trying to buddy me
Will you be my friend?

YAAAAAAAAAAY

keys wrote:MP? I didn't see you call anyone else fishy..

I wasn't sure if you meant MP or zeek.

#140

Dana wrote:
keys wrote:MP? I didn't see you call anyone else fishy..
I wasn't sure if you meant MP or zeek.

Cool. Coolcoolcool.

Just shaken' the bee hive, seein' what flies out. Fly my pretties!

#141

zeek wrote:
Dana wrote:
zeek wrote:But maybe she's trying to buddy me
Will you be my friend?

Made wrote:I currently see zeek as overlly confrontational, but that can easily be rationalized when you realize it's his first day 0. He (assuming you're talking about his critzing speculating about civvie roles) sounds like what I would expect in a day 1 post.
I'm overly confrontational? What about MP?

Made wrote:Linki- ok this is just a petpeev, but people describing their own tells always makes me feel weird.
Who is this about?

I thought you started the back in forth, not MP. My bad. Might be word choice and tone and shit, but his comments came off has less accusatory, more as a general word of caution.

And I was referring to MP's "I'm a manic" comment. It was a responce to SVS/Dana's comments, so he didn't bring it up himself, but it just kinda puts me on edge.

#142

Clowns is skerry k? :hides:

#143

Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up.

#144

No probs. Glad I could help!

#145

I was talking to Made :P But you bring up a good point, clowns can be scary

#146

zeek wrote:First, I disagree. Say a baddie team has nobody on it with a clue about Doctor Who, there is no way I'm giving them the info they need by speculating on civvie powers.

There isn't?

zeek wrote:Second, I don't need anyone to fight my battles.

No? Wait a while.

#147

I think there is a difference between decoding civvie secrets that are known to be attached to civvie roles, and speculating on unknown roles and what their powers might be. I don't think that helps the baddies, as they can speculate as well, and more openly with less distraction in that evil chatroom. I would be more worried about Who freak baddies trying to overspeculate baddie roles and misdirecting the thread that way, actually.

#148

Let them google stuff and discern what were important events to each character and likely powers. I'm just not going to potentionally help them by giving my thoughts yet, and I won't talk about it unless an event/reason requires my speculation.

Maybe I'm in the minority of this but whatever.

#149

Dammit, Alex, it's too early to be going this hard

Ambray wrote:Ten

Wrong color

Made wrote:I currently see zeek as overlly confrontational, but that can easily be rationalized when you realize it's his first day 0. He (assuming you're talking about his critzing speculating about civvie roles) sounds like what I would expect in a day 1 post.

You think zeek was overly confrontational? No, I'm actually taking Dana's side here. MP came out of nowhere guns blazing based on very little. Maybe he's onto something; it is weird that zeek would omit the Doctor's regeneration like that, but is it really to the baddies' benefit? He could've easily just not thought of that. It's still weird that MP would make such a huge spectacle out of it.

To be honest I don't think a baddie would've lashed out like that without knowing that he'd be put in the spotlight. I don't see MP as bad, just chill, dude

fingersplints wrote:
Dana wrote:
keys56000000000 wrote:Or is it Dana jumping the gun on what she identifies as an easy lynch?
What do you mean by this? Who is the easy lynch?
You said yourself MP is always killed early...

Dana wrote:MP for real you're acting super fishy. Is this just your normal play style? You've been killed in the first few days in every game I've seen you in so far.

Haha, what, you think that was a threat? Dana wasn't in any way aggressive / pushy about MP. Are we actually discussing an easy lynch of Dana and not zeek or MP?

#150

Enrique wrote:
Made wrote:I currently see zeek as overly confrontational, but that can easily be rationalized when you realize it's his first day 0. He (assuming you're talking about his criticizing speculating about civvie roles) sounds like what I would expect in a day 1 post.
You think zeek was overly confrontational?

As corrected above, I thought zeek started the conflict. As he was reacting rather than proacting, I think a better word is stand-offish?

(oh btw, why are "no u"'s bad exactly? I mean, they'll seem bad from the perspective of an accuser obviously, but if valid?)

24 Hour Days?