[dktorode]

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 09:45 AM, said:

I'm seriously having doubts as to whether we'll get a lynch - unless Grief makes it back on and changes to Vengeance (as I highly doubt PB will vote for himself, even if he is online for timeout), and even if I vote for Vengeance before I go to bed, we'd still be L-2. Who else is likely to be on for day's end?

At this point in time, I can't see a vote going anywhere but Vengy, unless you switch up, dkt. Come out very strong all of sudden, ain't ya?

Ofcourse i come out strong...im not fucking silencer...oh wait...erm...no offence


I could switch out to any of 4 of my suspects.
At the moment Alt is making a good run of trying to be my number one suspect.
But no one else has a vote him.

Although...PB has a vote and does sound tempting as a last resort. Only because of his last few statements that dont sit quite well with me.
Im not sure if i want to vote just for the sake of getting a lynch though. I dont mind voting two people today as long as there is some kind of reasoning/case behind it.

[Silencer]

Lol, nice one. And yeah, you're normally a vocal bastard dkt, I admit.

I seriously doubt we will get two lynches today. Especially as I'm out before day ends (about 2 hours now, I believe, maybe 3) and I have no idea when the yanks/brits get on, but it's probably going to be (perhaps conveniently for some) after day times. One lynch we can manage, but the question of who still remains.

Voting for the sake of a lynch is what normally screws us over, I admit, but a lynch is still a lynch, and gives info no matter the reasons (even if it's info that x, y and z were all willing to vote to get a lynch just for the sake of a lynch ) and I think we can usually play from there on out. PB isn't really on my scope for lynching at this stage - he's said stuff that rings out as being distancing/symping (in the sense of setting people up for a fall), but he's generally made sense. But it's the sort of thing I'd rather follow up at a later stage rather than day one.

I guess I'm just conscious of the fact at the moment that if I participate in a Vengy lynch, then I brought his suspicious post up, and didn't vote immediately - it's a fairly typical scenario which often results in the player in my shoes getting lynched for jumping on the train later, even though I technically 'started' it, and something that I try to avoid at all times. But hey, if a man can't take a bit of heat, right? XD

[dktorode]

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:11 AM, said:

Lol, nice one. And yeah, you're normally a vocal bastard dkt, I admit.

I seriously doubt we will get two lynches today. Especially as I'm out before day ends (about 2 hours now, I believe, maybe 3) and I have no idea when the yanks/brits get on, but it's probably going to be (perhaps conveniently for some) after day times. One lynch we can manage, but the question of who still remains.

Heh...i never meant i desperately WANT or need two lynches, I was just stating my position on the subject, and that if the opportunity is there and the cases are half decent I dont see why we should not use it....meh

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:11 AM, said:

Voting for the sake of a lynch is what normally screws us over, I admit, but a lynch is still a lynch, and gives info no matter the reasons (even if it's info that x, y and z were all willing to vote to get a lynch just for the sake of a lynch ) and I think we can usually play from there on out. PB isn't really on my scope for lynching at this stage - he's said stuff that rings out as being distancing/symping (in the sense of setting people up for a fall), but he's generally made sense. But it's the sort of thing I'd rather follow up at a later stage rather than day one.

yea yea, hence my point about perhaps going the PB route if needed

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:11 AM, said:

I guess I'm just conscious of the fact at the moment that if I participate in a Vengy lynch, then I brought his suspicious post up, and didn't vote immediately - it's a fairly typical scenario which often results in the player in my shoes getting lynched for jumping on the train later, even though I technically 'started' it, and something that I try to avoid at all times. But hey, if a man can't take a bit of heat, right? XD

This is a rather self serving statement Silencer... well worthy *of dropping a vote-bomb on your ass!


edit -added *of

This post has been edited by dktorode: 13 July 2010 - 10:28 AM

[Silencer]

As I said, if I can't cope with the fallout from that mistake, assuming I vote Vengeance, I shouldn't be playing the game, should I? It's a self-serving sentiment, rather than a statement, anyway. The statement just points out why I'm not sold on voting Vengy, though I see where you're coming from.

And as I said, I don't think the one/two lynch thing at this point is a case of want, either way, but a case of time. XD

[alt146]

dktorode, on 13 July 2010 - 09:38 AM, said:

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 09:09 AM, said:

@ DKT - If this game had more than 10 people in, I'd be a lot less hesitant to lynch twice in the day. We have a track record of going off in completely the wrong direction early game and I can see that going even worse with two lynches. Not knowing the CFs until day ends makes the mechanic a bit of a double edged sword, so we should be careful not to cut ourselves with it. The biggest advantage it gives us is manipulating the numbers so we go into the final day with 5 people rather than 6, with the increased info and narrower suspect pool that gives us. Or at least that is my opinion.

Im not going to be roped into yet another long back and forth discussion on this thread about the merits of lynching 2 people today. The pro's and cons have been stated more than once on the thread already.
I for one, am simply going to go with the ebb and flow of the game...and if i find one or two or three people that are scummy i will push all their lynches for that same day, at least while its still reasonably safe to do so...the more we wait the less chances we can take...the less we will actually use this ability.
thats the real gist of it. imho

My point was that i think it would be more likely that scum would be the ones not wanting us to use this ability early on and would have come out immediately with a knee jerk reaction with regards to us using it today and try and make us doubt our selfs at every turn.
Much like yourself, venge, Edrigan and The Dude have.
And it also would be scum who would want to draw out this debate for as long as possible.

Conversely, scum might push to get people to use it while they have the least chance of getting hit due to the large suspect pool and little information. I can understand your point of view, but I dont see how the fact that mine differs from it makes me suspicious. I think my approach is the better option, but I've been in enough pissing contests with you to know better than to try argue the point though

[dktorode]

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:30 AM, said:

It's a self-serving sentiment, rather than a statement, anyway. The statement just points out why I'm not sold on voting Vengy, though I see where you're coming from.

bah... semantics

[Edrigan]

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 07:03 AM, said:

I suppose PB's actions could be seen as defending me, have no idea why he would be doing that though. Unless he's trying to fake-symp me, which is dangerous play since there aren't any actual symps.

No-one really jumps out at me at this point - PB and Grief are the most active, but that doesnt necessarily equate to scum. Ed's attack of me seemed a little 'go for anyone who looks easy', which is typical of scum play; up to the point that he clarified he was mistaken. Maybe going for an easy lynch, then covering his back when he realised he'd messed up?

I didn't actually attack you in a sence. I just noted that your post striked me as one that while it offers two options (1- go to a 3v2 and 2- go to a 4v2), it tried to secretly underline more the 3v2 option as better than the 4v2 option. Which means to me you're pushing to have rather the first one than the second. Also that looks to me as someone who would rather stir things that way, instead of laying down options to the rest of the town players , and let them decide and see which one 'feels' better or sounds more reasonable.Scumms will try to offer solutions or ideas without making it appear that they lead the agenta, they'd rather say thing 'A' and wait until others comment and say they agree with thing 'A' in order to let it sip in their minds that its logic and reason that led them to that conclusion rather than someone else leading them there.
That's why I decided to take a stab at you. Nothing personal, stricktly business.

I don't know why PB came up to your defence per se, in a sence his reasoning could be very well the same thing I felt when I read your post. Still I don't know why he wouldn't rather give you the opportunity to comment more, we need as many people involved in here as possible, and we shouldnt really give the chance to people to 'lowball' or 'lowpost' imo - so when we do decide to double-lynch , we will have more posts to analyse and enough suspects to consider - our double-lynch day should have more reasons behind it other than 'low posting low profile' players.

I'll be around for 4-5 hours give or take, I'm done with some work but I will have to leave at a point due to an appointment, and will be back after a couple hours.

[dktorode]

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 10:31 AM, said:

dktorode, on 13 July 2010 - 09:38 AM, said:

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 09:09 AM, said:

@ DKT - If this game had more than 10 people in, I'd be a lot less hesitant to lynch twice in the day. We have a track record of going off in completely the wrong direction early game and I can see that going even worse with two lynches. Not knowing the CFs until day ends makes the mechanic a bit of a double edged sword, so we should be careful not to cut ourselves with it. The biggest advantage it gives us is manipulating the numbers so we go into the final day with 5 people rather than 6, with the increased info and narrower suspect pool that gives us. Or at least that is my opinion.

Im not going to be roped into yet another long back and forth discussion on this thread about the merits of lynching 2 people today. The pro's and cons have been stated more than once on the thread already.
I for one, am simply going to go with the ebb and flow of the game...and if i find one or two or three people that are scummy i will push all their lynches for that same day, at least while its still reasonably safe to do so...the more we wait the less chances we can take...the less we will actually use this ability.
thats the real gist of it. imho

My point was that i think it would be more likely that scum would be the ones not wanting us to use this ability early on and would have come out immediately with a knee jerk reaction with regards to us using it today and try and make us doubt our selfs at every turn.
Much like yourself, venge, Edrigan and The Dude have.
And it also would be scum who would want to draw out this debate for as long as possible.

Conversely, scum might push to get people to use it while they have the least chance of getting hit due to the large suspect pool and little information. I can understand your point of view, but I dont see how the fact that mine differs from it makes me suspicious. I think my approach is the better option, but I've been in enough pissing contests with you to know better than to try argue the point though

Naa.. they have the same chance to get lynched at any other time aswell...its exaclty the same as normal just without giving THEM a chance to night kill in between lynches.

I think a killer would have a knee jerk reaction to inno's being able to lynch more than one person in a day and would come out against it and warn caution, especially since killers get one kill but we get as many lynches as we like before they even get a chance to get to work at night.

Fine... we have our different beliefs, but i got my eye on you. Slippery scum fucker.

[alt146]

Edrigan, on 13 July 2010 - 10:37 AM, said:

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 07:03 AM, said:

I suppose PB's actions could be seen as defending me, have no idea why he would be doing that though. Unless he's trying to fake-symp me, which is dangerous play since there aren't any actual symps.

No-one really jumps out at me at this point - PB and Grief are the most active, but that doesnt necessarily equate to scum. Ed's attack of me seemed a little 'go for anyone who looks easy', which is typical of scum play; up to the point that he clarified he was mistaken. Maybe going for an easy lynch, then covering his back when he realised he'd messed up?

I didn't actually attack you in a sence. I just noted that your post striked me as one that while it offers two options (1- go to a 3v2 and 2- go to a 4v2), it tried to secretly underline more the 3v2 option as better than the 4v2 option. Which means to me you're pushing to have rather the first one than the second. Also that looks to me as someone who would rather stir things that way, instead of laying down options to the rest of the town players , and let them decide and see which one 'feels' better or sounds more reasonable.Scumms will try to offer solutions or ideas without making it appear that they lead the agenta, they'd rather say thing 'A' and wait until others comment and say they agree with thing 'A' in order to let it sip in their minds that its logic and reason that led them to that conclusion rather than someone else leading them there.
That's why I decided to take a stab at you. Nothing personal, stricktly business.

I don't know why PB came up to your defence per se, in a sence his reasoning could be very well the same thing I felt when I read your post. Still I don't know why he wouldn't rather give you the opportunity to comment more, we need as many people involved in here as possible, and we shouldnt really give the chance to people to 'lowball' or 'lowpost' imo - so when we do decide to double-lynch , we will have more posts to analyse and enough suspects to consider - our double-lynch day should have more reasons behind it other than 'low posting low profile' players.

I'll be around for 4-5 hours give or take, I'm done with some work but I will have to leave at a point due to an appointment, and will be back after a couple hours.

I wasn't secretly trying to underline anything. 3v2 is almost always better than 4v2 on D-Day for a variety of reasons and that's why I was suggesting that it be the route we take. In my experience it's scum that often play without given any sort of actual opinion; just stating facts to look like they are busy, or waiting to see what the sentiment in the thread is and going along with that. And while you didn't outright attack me, you did cast a post I made in a scummy light (another effective passive-aggressive scum tactic) and then quickly back-tracked when you realised the points you'd made were baseless.

[dktorode]

Edrigan, on 13 July 2010 - 10:37 AM, said:

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 07:03 AM, said:

I suppose PB's actions could be seen as defending me, have no idea why he would be doing that though. Unless he's trying to fake-symp me, which is dangerous play since there aren't any actual symps.

No-one really jumps out at me at this point - PB and Grief are the most active, but that doesnt necessarily equate to scum. Ed's attack of me seemed a little 'go for anyone who looks easy', which is typical of scum play; up to the point that he clarified he was mistaken. Maybe going for an easy lynch, then covering his back when he realised he'd messed up?

I didn't actually attack you in a sence. I just noted that your post striked me as one that while it offers two options (1- go to a 3v2 and 2- go to a 4v2), it tried to secretly underline more the 3v2 option as better than the 4v2 option. Which means to me you're pushing to have rather the first one than the second.

Hmm... I think you are all muddying your own waters here.
Its standard doctrine that on the last day you would want 3v2 rather than 4v2
Im not going to get into an argument over WHY it is....but trust me it is.



edit - fkn XPOST

This post has been edited by dktorode: 13 July 2010 - 10:55 AM

[Silencer]

Well, as I said earlier, I'm off for the night, and won't be back before deadline. So I'm just gonna man up and vote with my gut (and damn the consequences!) before I leave:

Vote Vengeance

For earlier reasons, and the fact that my suspicions have been reinforced by others' reactions to Vengy's post. Here's hoping we can get it right for once!

[Edrigan]

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 10:31 AM, said:

Conversely, scum might push to get people to use it while they have the least chance of getting hit due to the large suspect pool and little information. I can understand your point of view, but I dont see how the fact that mine differs from it makes me suspicious. I think my approach is the better option, but I've been in enough pissing contests with you to know better than to try argue the point though

And that's another reason I want to prode Alt.
If you believe your approach is the better option, then you should argue and stand behind it no matter what- Until a significant number of people tell you otherwhise. Unless you dont feel confident per se, or you don't want to draw any attention. Just because its dkt on the other end, and you don't feel like getting into an arguement, isn't a good enough excuse in my book. If you're town, then its your job to get things rolling the towns way.

Need more posts from Ment, and I kinda wonder whats going on with HMQB - for someone who couldnt wait to see the game starting, he hasn't comment enough, staying on the low side of things.
Silencer looks to me he'd rather comment on other peoples ideas or posts, rather than try to shake things or bring something new to the table (even if on day 1 things tend to go slow).
DKT-Grief kinda do the same thing, but don't seem so 'hesitant' per se with Silencer.
The Dude- nothing on him at this point, didn't expect fireworks to be honest, after all thats why its so hard to find reasons to lynch this guy.

Alt-PB - got some gut feeling on them, big difference being that PB aint afraid to stand up, while Alt plays it safer.
Vengence- Carefull posting, not overdoing it, well structured arguements - well played scum trying to avoid the 'low poster' tag? Don't really know..

[dktorode]

Edrigan, on 13 July 2010 - 11:22 AM, said:

And that's another reason I want to prode Alt.

Edrigan, on 13 July 2010 - 11:22 AM, said:

And that's another reason I want to prode Alt.

Edrigan, on 13 July 2010 - 11:22 AM, said:

And that's another reason I want to prode Alt.

that sounds nasty...can i go next?

[Vengeance]

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:51 AM, said:

Well, as I said earlier, I'm off for the night, and won't be back before deadline. So I'm just gonna man up and vote with my gut (and damn the consequences!) before I leave:

Vote Vengeance

For earlier reasons, and the fact that my suspicions have been reinforced by others' reactions to Vengy's post. Here's hoping we can get it right for once!

Your not. Cause your all sheep. Mental's vote is OMGUS and then the rest of you jump on board. Baaaaa baaaaa baaaa.

[dktorode]

Vengeance, on 13 July 2010 - 11:33 AM, said:

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:51 AM, said:

Well, as I said earlier, I'm off for the night, and won't be back before deadline. So I'm just gonna man up and vote with my gut (and damn the consequences!) before I leave:

Vote Vengeance

For earlier reasons, and the fact that my suspicions have been reinforced by others' reactions to Vengy's post. Here's hoping we can get it right for once!

Your not. Cause your all sheep. Mental's vote is OMGUS and then the rest of you jump on board. Baaaaa baaaaa baaaa.

was not aware mental voted for you?

[Edrigan]

I don't think Mental voted for you , Veng.

Jump on shadows? Or skimmed things?

[Grief]

Brief response to PBs point that I'm not offering solutions: I voted you. That is what the innos solution is. They try to get the people they think are scum lynched.

I seriously can't believe that no-one thinks it's scummy that he jumps on one person for saying something that had already been said numerous times and that he hadn't commented on.

I don't really see it with venge, and find it pretty annoying that on day one of an altless, we have gone straight for one of the older players, like usual.

Anyone, I'll vote to get a lynch, but think he was really just stating the obvious with what Silencer sees as fearmongering.

I also fail to see how DKs philospophy of throwing caution to the wind is much better than people wanting to be cautious.

PBs vote made venges train 2v1, so knowing if he's actually behind it is hard. Doesn't give much justification.

Edit: That should be 1v1. I thought silencer had voted earlier.

Which brings up another point. In your list of cautious folk DK, you don't even mention Silencer. Maybe this is because he doesn't even touch on the issue of the multi-lynch?

And also, this post:

[quote name='Silencer' date='13 July 2010 - 11:51 AM' timestamp='1279018267'
For earlier reasons, and the fact that my suspicions have been reinforced by others' reactions to Vengy's post. Here's hoping we can get it right for once!
[/quote]


Innos vote to put pressure on. The only thing that's changed between when he voted and when he first attacked venge is the votes on him, the fact that a couple of people agree with him. Since when have innos waited to be sure people will agree before voting? I really dislike this vote.

Also the fact he started a train and waited for votes before hopping on(why not vote earlier? What is the downside?) . His reference to this is basically a pre-emptive defence.

Silencer is giving me scum-vibes.

[hmqb]

Ok, just got caught up and not sure who has how many votes on them, so I'm gonna go back and count then offer my input

[Tapper]

It is Day 1. 54 minutes remaining, iirc.

6 votes to lynch, 5 to go to night.

1 vote Mentalist (Vengeance)
1 vote PB (Grief)
3 votes Vengeance (Silencer, PB, Dkt)

[dktorode]

Grief, on 13 July 2010 - 11:44 AM, said:

I also fail to see how DKs philospophy of throwing caution to the wind is much better than people wanting to be cautious.

clearly...

let me try again.

As a killer, would you want the inno's to lynch without you getting a chance to put in a kill in between the lynches?