|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eloquent Conversationalist
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:02 pm
Well
Bye again.
I love playing only two or one days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:04 pm
: ( Man. And I wonder what you learned, too.... And the cop.... if he did learn anything....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:06 pm
SoThatAznGirl
Allegro - Well, I mean, if lynch takes priority, in your game, didn't it work where if not enough of us settled on one lynch, no one was lynched, and therefore a "free shot" was given to mafia?That was meant to engender activity: if you don't play, you suffer the consequences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:10 pm
SoThatAznGirl I didn't vote because I didn't think Glaru was mafia, and I have stated that I do not believe in two day no lynches. Clearly I must rethink this policy. Yeah, I didn't like the idea of a no lynch either, but the lynch is our only weapon, and if we just sit back and let them use it against us we're ******** really want to hear from VDV about why he was so eager to get a lynch. I explained to him several times that the Mafia wins if we lose too many townies, so I think his recklessness could be reflective of an anti-town alignment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:17 pm
Hmm. Amber didn't vote either. And gah, I understand his schedule is busy, but Glaru couldn't just put in a vote for no lynch when he saw the category? Maybe stayed alive a little longer for town and pass any info to us somehow? Wishful thinking.
It still sounds like, players choose to be active and get the kill they want. So if they vote not to lynch, they should deal with it. I dunno, I see where you're coming from, but I don't think I'll be swayed on this right now.... so, back to this game.....
Glaru - 4 (Petrey, VDV, Dess, Swyff)
Petrey - 1 (Allegro)
No Lynch - 4 (Zahmen, Cabron, Rhed, Kuzo)
I'm semi-rationally guessing there's at least 1 mafian edit:non-townie in each group. My suspicions are on...... Petrey and Rhed primarily, Dess, Zahmen, and Cabron secondary.
Petrey did vote third on Glaru, without providing original thought, if I recall correctly. But she might have wanted to get the ball rolling...
And as for Rhed.... nothing solid, but I get the feeling his persuasion could be a mafia tactic.
Zahmen I'm not worried about yet, he switched his vote off Glaru, and if he were mafia, why should he change it? Then again, that ought to clear all no lynch voters of suspicion.
So, inconclusive, but you did ask what I'm thinking and I'm starting to sort it all out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:20 pm
SoThatAznGirl Hmm. Amber didn't vote either. And gah, I understand his schedule is busy, but Glaru couldn't just put in a vote for no lynch when he saw the category? Maybe stayed alive a little longer for town and pass any info to us somehow? Wishful thinking.
It still sounds like, players choose to be active and get the kill they want. So if they vote not to lynch, they should deal with it. I dunno, I see where you're coming from, but I don't think I'll be swayed on this right now.... so, back to this game.....
Glaru - 4 (Petrey, VDV, Dess, Swyff)
Petrey - 1 (Allegro)
No Lynch - 4 (Zahmen, Cabron, Rhed, Kuzo)
I'm semi-rationally guessing there's at least 1 mafian edit:non-townie in each group. My suspicions are on...... Petrey and Rhed primarily, Dess, Zahmen, and Cabron secondary.
Petrey did vote third on Glaru, without providing original thought, if I recall correctly. But she might have wanted to get the ball rolling...
And as for Rhed.... nothing solid, but I get the feeling his persuasion could be a mafia tactic.
Zahmen I'm not worried about yet, he switched his vote off Glaru, and if he were mafia, why should he change it? Then again, that ought to clear all no lynch voters of suspicion.
So, inconclusive, but you did ask what I'm thinking and I'm starting to sort it all out. Petrey pretty much directly bandwagoned Zahmen's vote, and then when he changed his, she didn't. I don't find this suspicious as much as I find it odd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:26 pm
Well, they're either not a team, or realized that both of them switching would have been suspicious. Maybe Petrey is the serial killer, lol..... o.O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:58 pm
SoThatAznGirl Well, they're either not a team, or realized that both of them switching would have been suspicious. Maybe Petrey is the serial killer, lol..... o.O That would be the coolest game ever. Honestly, I've found that trying overly much to defend myself hardly changes anything, so be suspect and vote against whomever you want. Zahmen and I aren't working together though. He was the one earlier who voted for me and tried to make others suspect of me. Not much of a partner then. Allegro's whole role claim thing earlier threw me off though, so I'd like to point out the odd nature of that decision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharkbutt The Orgiastic Crew
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:24 pm
Cabron LaSwan Allegro Last Night's Votes: Glaru - 4 (Petrey, VDV, Dess, Swyff) Petrey - 1 (Allegro) No Lynch - 4 (Zahmen, Cabron, Rhed, Kuzo) CIs bolded. Hey STAG, why didn't you vote?
Cookie too. You were both here the whole time and neither of you were certain of the lynch.
I'd like to hear from both of you - your suspicions and your reasons for not acting. Wantcookie Well, I'm afraid I'm just not suspicious enough of anyone to vote for them to be put on the chopping block, but going without a lynch on the second day is inadvisable. I'm still convinced that Glaru is innocent, but there's no changing that now. We'd need something big to get a majority shift in votes. I think I'll abstain from voting unless I figure some things out. It might work better to watch for a little to see what people do, or to go back a few pages and reread a few things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:35 pm
Well damn that sucks.
I still find no real reason to believe Allegro on his role-claim other than the "fffuuuuuuck we lost three this round this is brutal" factor.
Mafia is going to town on us.
Get it?
Town.
Ohhhh yeaaaaah I DID throw suspicion on Petrey earlier didn't I?
That was funny.
Actually, I'm a little suspicious of one person in particular but I'd rather give it a little more time before I voice it and why, just to gather up more evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:04 am
Tip: if you want to convince us you're not working together, don't throw suspicion on the same person in -consecutive posts-.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:56 am
Allegro Tip: if you want to convince us you're not working together, don't throw suspicion on the same person in -consecutive posts-. We've been dating for 3 1/2 years so we're sort of automatically sort of working together just from all the talking we do offline and on MSN, but even then we sure as s**t don't trust each other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:11 am
You aren't automatically working together just by talking to each other, I talked to Steffani yesterday for a while and mafia did not come up once, I talked to Amber on MSN the other night, the mafia did not come up. Zach and I have been dating for 4 1/2 years and we don't consider each other working together unless we actually are. And we live together and spend all of our time together, it is entirely possible to be in a relationship and not be in an alliance.
If you are working together, then you are in an alliance and that is something you choose do because you want to not because you are in a relationship.
Don't use your relationship as a an excuse for working together or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:23 am
Annyways, I already explained my reasoning for the reveal. If you choose to believe it, our suspect pool is relatively smaller
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
