EPT/in
Newbie Mafia XL
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
/in | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
| ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
| ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
I think he's just trying to jerk us around here and distract us. If he's fat, he doesn't have much info yet and wouldn't make so many wild accusations so quickly. | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
I looked through the rules and i didn't see any indication either way. I might just have missed it though. | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
But no one answered my question yet... Is it majority vote or plurality vote this game? | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
The mafia are (probably) gonna kill one of us tonight, so it would be good if we at least have a chance of killing one of them tonight. It might not be rainbows but I feel like the chances are better than even. | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
| ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
| ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
On April 05 2013 21:49 Smancer wrote: I'll point out also that Molock and jkirby both think Rainbows is scum in these two posts 3 minutes apart. My initial thought is that they are scum looking to get a bandwagon vote on Rainbows. + Show Spoiler + On April 05 2013 14:57 Moloch wrote: That was supposed to be a joke at that point. I didn't actually think he was scummy at that point. My original vote for him was a joke as well, since it was based upon him posting a lot early and not having enough time to eat pizza. But, I've kept my vote on him for a couple reasons. According to this post, he gets very defensive about about being called scum, whereas I interpreted Saraf's comment to not be calling out anyone in particular - just being the way he thought about stuff. (It's possible that I don't feel like anyone's been spammy so far affected how I interpreted it). I also don't like how he changed his vote from Smancer to someone else to quickly. He gave a reason he thought Smancer was a suspect, then just changed it to Saraf because he got overly defensive (but he had a couple posts in between Saraf labeling him and switching his vote, which makes me suspect that it wasn't a hasty vote-switch caused by emotion) I'm not certain about anyone, but Rainbows seems like the best bet at the moment. On April 05 2013 15:00 jrkirby wrote: So I'm worried about rainbows. I feel like he might actually be a fatty, and is just acting stupid by accusing random people for no reason. But the way he's acting is just stupid, and only helps the skinnies. And since he's just helping the skinnies I feel like I have to vote for him, because no one is acting as stupid as him. I don't want to lynch all the lurkers just yet - partially because there's 3 of them and it's a crapshot - and rainbows is the only other guy giving off that scum vibe. So until something changes, or one of the scum making a foolish post, my vote is on rainbows. The mafia are (probably) gonna kill one of us tonight, so it would be good if we at least have a chance of killing one of them tonight. It might not be rainbows but I feel like the chances are better than even. ##Unvote rainbows By this logic you and jarjar are scum trying to bandwagon me. But just because two people vote for the same person doesn't automatically mean they're scum. My read on rainbows wasn't very strong. There's actually someone else I've got my eye on now, but he hasn't shown any real evidence, it's just a hunch. | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
On April 06 2013 01:14 nobodywonder wrote: On the subject of jrkirby, I really don't like his metaphors because it is subject to interpretation and thus we cannot really know what jrkirby is thinking. Also I feel his talk about lurkers was unnecessary at the time. We hadn't really mentioned lurkers in general. Overall his whole post gives him a way out to freely switch around, something that I don't like and to indicates a level of scumminess. That said he better be thorough when he switches, because otherwise I think that jrkirby is scum. People were definitely talking about lurkers before me. Also if people don't like metaphors I won't use them in the future. And how do you expect anyone to be entirely sure of a lynch on the first night? No one except scum and maybe the wow raiders has any guaranteed info at all. I was just throwing my vote at the most likely candidate at the time, and I'll keep switching as long as I think there's a more likely candidate. Hopefully I find a better read soon. | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
he said "Anyone that votes for someone and then defends them is gonna read scum to me." I was just clarifying that I saw rainbow as scum then (and I'm still suspicious), it really isn't a solid read. But yeah, jarjar really needs to say more. Two posts in this thread and one is a vote with almost no justification. It's not clearly scum, but it makes me leery. | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
| ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
On April 06 2013 03:25 JarJarDrinks wrote: You don't think that's scummy behavior? That's not really what you said. Your exact quote was: "And since he's just helping the skinnies I feel like I have to vote for him, because no one is acting as stupid as him." How can I not read as "I'm voting for someone that i think is just a bad townie"? On the first day, no real townie can be 100% confidant about their reads. How could we? We have no real information, just superficial shit like "oh he kinda implied he wants to kill a townie in some backhand fasion." We can get guesses, like "That guy is making suspicious votes and acting like scum, while there is a chance he's just a stupid townie, there's still a better than neutral chance that he's scum." My vote for rainbows was the latter. At that time, I thought there was a better than neutral chance of him being scum. I didn't want to kill him because I thought he was a bad townie, I thought he might just be a bad townie because he's giving off scum vibes. | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
| ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
If you like people talking a lot, why have you been so quiet thus far? | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
On April 06 2013 04:41 JarJarDrinks wrote: I'm here now. Right now you're my top scumread so I'm focusing on you. Like every post you make looks more and more scummy to me. So now you were voting for him but it wasn't a serious vote? What have I said that is scummy? The only piece of evidence you've put against me is that I "Voted for someone and then defended them." Is that all you've got? The fact that I made an unconfidant vote and then retracted it? | ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
| ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
| ||
|
jrkirby
United States1510 Posts
Ok. Let me list my reads on everyone: JarJarDrinks: You vote for me for a not good reason, don't say much else. Kinda scummy. 45% scum. Smancer: I think he just misread me. Gettin good discussion, but not saying much irrelevant stuff. 25% scum. jampidampi: I think he's clever. Hasn't given any clues as to scummyness, but has done a good job of diverting attention everywhere else. I just kinda have a hunch he's scum, no evidence. 33% scum. My "Mystery read" if you can call it that. Warent: I'm really not sure on you. 27% scum. Saraf: Not enough content for a good read. 26% scum. TheRavensName: Needs to post more, and say more about his reads. 28% scum. Fishgle: Seems pretty reasonable, has a couple of insights. 23% scum. Moloch: Same as Raven. 28% scum. Obzy: Pretty clear headed, nothing out of the ordinary. 25% scum. nobodywonder: My read is probably biased because you voted for me and then left without much explaining. 32% scum. Rainbows: I've recently been leaning towards stupid townie, but I still can't understand your big deal with saraf. There isn't much either way with him IMO. 30% scum. (was higher a while ago) My reads aren't very clear, but it's the first day still and I don't have solid evidence. Hopefully after the night I can analyse who the mafia killed and who voted for who a bit better and get some solid reads. | ||
| ||
