C9 Newbie Game- Endgame

[Mr. Squirrel]

Yes.
vote pi

Actually, screw the vote no ynch, I just noticed SV jumping on a bandwagon, which is apparently a scummy thing to do. Let's all forget about that though eh? Spankers...

Unvote No Lynch

Vote Simon Viavant

He has only had one quick vote with a wild accusation, then an unvote.

Quick vote with a wild accusation? Let's see, what was this wild accusation? Oh yes, that's right, wca jumping on a bandwagon. I wouldn't be surprised if you and SV are the scum in this game, given the way you follow each other around with posts and votes. It's a pity I can only vote once

I'm gonna have to help out pi here. I don't see why you two are trying to lynch him for being a lurker. For starters, there has been very little to discuss so far in this game unless you wanted to start analyzing joke/random votes. Plus, he wasn't inactive for that long (he posted on page 4).

I think the fact that you two are pushing this so quickly and are trying to form a bandwagon, is far more scummy than what pi has done.
vote simon viavant

[AceArtemis]

-Vote Count-

Simon Viavant-3, (Hopscotcher, e_i_pi, Mr. Squirrel)
e_i_pi-3, (Stroop, wcaclimbing, Simon Viavant)

Not Voting: sully800

With 7 alive, it's 4 to lynch.

[AceArtemis]

-Prods-

Prodding:
Hopscotcher

All prodded players have 48 hours to post, or they will be replaced.

[Simon Viavant]

really guys

Voting for someone who has other votes doesn't qualify a "suspicious bandwagon"

If it did no one would ever get lynched.
Nice trying to wriggle out of it though, especially the no lynch.
FOS mr. squirrel you really are obvious.

[Stroop]

Yes.
vote pi

Actually, screw the vote no ynch, I just noticed SV jumping on a bandwagon, which is apparently a scummy thing to do. Let's all forget about that though eh? Spankers...

One bandwagon is not necessarily scummy. We need bandwagons to lynch people and you'll see them every day in every game.

The people you have to watch out for are those that jump on (almost) every bandwagon and never contribute in other ways, like forming theories about who is and isn't scum. You'll find a lot of scum in that set of people. All they are doing is going with the majority, so they don't attract attention.

[Stroop]

Vote No Lynch

Oh, and voting no lynch? After the explanation of why it's bad for town?

[Hopscotcher]

So here's my theory...

I THINK Simon Viavant is Mafia.

Could I be wrong?

Sure I could.

But I'm accusing you, Viviant! If I show up dead, I'm probably right.

I am by no means suggesting we lynch Simon. He may be totally innocent. If the vote were close to a lynch for Simon, I'd Unvote. But I'm sticking to my guns.

[Mr. Squirrel]

am by no means suggesting we lynch Simon. He may be totally innocent. If the vote were close to a lynch for Simon, I'd Unvote. But I'm sticking to my guns.

You think he's scum but you don't want to lynch him, how in the world does that make sense? And btw, he is very close to a lynch. In fact, one more vote for him and he is lynched.

FOS mr. squirrel you really are obvious.

I decided to side with pi simply because I don't see the case you have against him. He didn't post for two days, so what? In that whole time there was only a handful of posts so it is not like he was the only one not active. Plus, he says he was busy with work, which should always come before an internet game. I'm not saying he's innocent or guilty (I'm still not sure myself). I just don't think your reasoning is strong enough to deserve him getting lynched. If you could find some more concrete evidence of his scumminess, I would have no problem casting the fourth vote against him.

I think you are just trying to push a lynch early on in the game when we have very little information to go by. That way, when you and your mafia partner decide to kill off somebody tonight, you guys won't look suspicious since no enemies or connections were made on day 1. Very sneaky of you.

And FOS on wca. You seemed awfully eager to place your vote on pi despite the fact that a few pages ago you were dead set in voting no lynch.

[Simon Viavant]

lol and you guys accuse me of bandwagoning.
sully it's down to you.

[sully800]

I am by no means suggesting we lynch Simon. He may be totally innocent. If the vote were close to a lynch for Simon, I'd Unvote. But I'm sticking to my guns.

lol, Simon and pi are each one vote away from being lynched, and I'm the only one that hasn't voted. This is nice though because you all have essentially formed two camps. If one side gets lynched and is innocent then I have heavy suspicions against the other side. If one side gets lynched and is mafia then this will be a quick game I think.

And FOS on wca. You seemed awfully eager to place your vote on pi despite the fact that a few pages ago you were dead set in voting no lynch.

I agree, that is one of the scummier things I have seen so far in this thread. Your suspicions seem pretty well founded which is why I am still choosing not to force the lynch on one of our guys.

Stroop seems like a good poster so far, glad to have you (if you are town!). I don't want to rescind my FOS though because it is day one and I'm definitely suspicious of everyone

Pi and Simon - care to plead your cases before I send one of you to the guillotine? If you are innocent and end up getting lynched you won't be able to help the town, so the more you say now the better. And plus, you can potentially argue yourself out of the gallows if you make some good points.

[Simon Viavant]

My main case is that the people voting for me are either the suspicious ones or the random ones.
I think most of us agreed squirrely-poo is suspicious with his no lynch and just "sit back and wait it out" attitude.
Hopscotcher is totally random, I think we all know that.
And then there's pi, the other no lynch advocate and a lurker as well.

[sully800]

Hopscotcher I have no read on at the moment. I'm very suspicious of e_i_pi and wca. Stroop and Simon were the two I found myself agreeing with the most. Mr. Squirrel I'm pretty neutral on but seems to be town to me.

This is all a lot of guessing at this point, but I want to lay my thoughts out in case I am killed in the night. After a lynch we will have wayyy more info and a lot of this will be revised.

pi - anything to say?

[wcaclimbing]

And FOS on wca. You seemed awfully eager to place your vote on pi despite the fact that a few pages ago you were dead set in voting no lynch.

I agree, that is one of the scummier things I have seen so far in this thread. Your suspicions seem pretty well founded which is why I am still choosing not to force the lynch on one of our guys.

First you guys call me scum for not wanting to vote.
Now you call me scum because I DO want to vote?
Give me a break

Seemed like everyone else agreed that lynch on day 1 = good. So I figured my 'no lynch' vote would do nothing more than slow down the game (which was having very few new posts in it) . So I put a vote down for the person I found most suspicious at the time.

[Mr. Squirrel]

And FOS on wca. You seemed awfully eager to place your vote on pi despite the fact that a few pages ago you were dead set in voting no lynch.

I agree, that is one of the scummier things I have seen so far in this thread. Your suspicions seem pretty well founded which is why I am still choosing not to force the lynch on one of our guys.

First you guys call me scum for not wanting to vote.
Now you call me scum because I DO want to vote?
Give me a break

I know it sounds silly but I see your voting history as really scummy behavior. We have no idea what you are thinking and when your posts clearly contradict each other we are gonna get suspicious.

Seemed like everyone else agreed that lynch on day 1 = good. So I figured my 'no lynch' vote would do nothing more than slow down the game (which was having very few new posts in it) . So I put a vote down for the person I found most suspicious at the time.

So you were willing to jump on a bandwagon just because everyone else was?

[Hopscotcher]

WCA does seem to be very jumparoundish. It's almost as if he doesn't care who gets hung, which screams Mafia to me.

As for Viavant.... maybe. ep also sounds suspicious.

Those three stick out to me. I'm stayin with my vote for now, but if there's a surge toward WCA, I'm willing to back that.

[wcaclimbing]

So you were willing to jump on a bandwagon just because everyone else was?

I was the first vote for pi. there was no bandwagon-jumping.

[e_i_pi]

Vote No Lynch

Oh, and voting no lynch? After the explanation of why it's bad for town?

I voted no lynch after realising it might be best to get some more information gathered. I don't want to rush into the first mafia game I've ever played.

Now, recalling previous posts...

by wcaclimbing » Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:59 am
I was the first vote for pi. there was no bandwagon-jumping.

by Stroop on Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:45 pm
vote -1 - because I get his name... (plus I wanted to random vote before getting serious)

by wcaclimbing on Fri Jun 05, 2009 5:53 pm

Sitting back is a scum tactic. You do nothing to attract attention to you and when someone leads the town into a poor lynch, you silently hop onto the bandwagon.

I think we could call out e_i_pi on that one.
He only has two posts that actually count for anything in this thread (the third is just a question on rules). He has only had one quick vote with a wild accusation, then an unvote. No real participation in our discussions.

Hasn't really done much in this thread, other than those two posts.

vote e_i_pi

Wrong wca, Stroop voted me randomly, then you voted me, then in the very next post after wca's vote...

by Simon Viavant on Sat Jun 06, 2009 1:01 am
Yes.
vote pi

That's it - that's the sum total of SV's accusation... "Yes". I stand by my vote for SV, as he voted for me pushing it to a majority vote (ie - lynch) for me, and did nothing to back up his vote. I also keep the FOS pointed at wca for contributing to the majority vote when the initial vote was largely random - his reasoning for the vote on me is that I made a "wild accusation"... he neglects to mention that this accusation was against him, and while at the time it may have been premature, in retrospect I see no reason to apologise for it, and every reason to stick by it.

[Mr. Squirrel]

WCA does seem to be very jumparoundish. It's almost as if he doesn't care who gets hung, which screams Mafia to me.

As for Viavant.... maybe. ep also sounds suspicious.

Those three stick out to me. I'm stayin with my vote for now, but if there's a surge toward WCA, I'm willing to back that.

So basically you are claiming that you will vote for any of the three most suspicious people as long as other people are voting for them? You say that maybe viavant is scum but WCA "screams" scum to you. If so, why don't you change your vote? Why would you keep a vote on someone who you are unsure about, especially when they are this close to a lynch?

The reason is because you want to see a lynch. Despite what you said earlier here:

If the vote were close to a lynch for Simon, I'd Unvote.

Simon has been one vote away from a lynch for a while now and you still have yet to unvote. You just want to see a townie get lynched. That is why you are willing to change your vote to wca if there is a large surge towards it but for now you want to stay on the one with the most votes.
unvote simon
vote hopscotcher
This guy just "screams" scum to me.

[AceArtemis]

-Vote Count-

e_i_pi-3, (Stroop, wcaclimbing, Simon Viavant)
Simon Viavant-2, (Hopscotcher, e_i_pi)
Hopscotcher-1, (Mr. Squirrel)

Not Voting: sully800

With 7 alive, it's 4 to lynch.

Deadline is about 3 days and 8 hours from the time of this post.

[Hopscotcher]

So basically you are claiming that you will vote for any of the three most suspicious people as long as other people are voting for them? You say that maybe viavant is scum but WCA "screams" scum to you. If so, why don't you change your vote? Why would you keep a vote on someone who you are unsure about, especially when they are this close to a lynch?

You have a fabulous way of twisting my words around. All I said was that I would vote WCA if people were going to back that.

Of course I want to see a lynch!

I'm probably not taking this as seriously as I should, but it's no fun unless someone gets hung lol.

Viviant is at 2 now and I'm still not changing my vote.... yeah... I'm sooooooo scummy lol

[Simon Viavant]

This might help you hopscotch:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mafia_(game)
In case you think it's like a survivor thing where you're trying to be the last one left or something.

[Hopscotcher]

This might help you hopscotch:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mafia_(game)
In case you think it's like a survivor thing where you're trying to be the last one left or something.

I know how it's played. Hell I've hosted mafia parties, but this is my first one online.

[Mr. Squirrel]

So basically you are claiming that you will vote for any of the three most suspicious people as long as other people are voting for them? You say that maybe viavant is scum but WCA "screams" scum to you. If so, why don't you change your vote? Why would you keep a vote on someone who you are unsure about, especially when they are this close to a lynch?

You have a fabulous way of twisting my words around. All I said was that I would vote WCA if people were going to back that.

Of course I want to see a lynch!

I'm probably not taking this as seriously as I should, but it's no fun unless someone gets hung lol.

Viviant is at 2 now and I'm still not changing my vote.... yeah... I'm sooooooo scummy lol

If all you want is a lynch, why aren't you changing your vote to pi. You admitted yourself that he was suspicious and he is only one vote away from a lynch. Changing your vote would cause that lynch and proceed the game. Or do you not want to see a scum buddy lynched?

Personally, I don't know what to make of you at this point. At first I thought you were a newbie that accidentally gave away his scumminess. But now you are blatantly admitting that you would happily hop on a bandwagon. Even if you are town, I'm not sure I want you in the voting pool.

[Hopscotcher]

So basically you are claiming that you will vote for any of the three most suspicious people as long as other people are voting for them? You say that maybe viavant is scum but WCA "screams" scum to you. If so, why don't you change your vote? Why would you keep a vote on someone who you are unsure about, especially when they are this close to a lynch?

You have a fabulous way of twisting my words around. All I said was that I would vote WCA if people were going to back that.

Of course I want to see a lynch!

I'm probably not taking this as seriously as I should, but it's no fun unless someone gets hung lol.

Viviant is at 2 now and I'm still not changing my vote.... yeah... I'm sooooooo scummy lol

If all you want is a lynch, why aren't you changing your vote to pi. You admitted yourself that he was suspicious and he is only one vote away from a lynch. Changing your vote would cause that lynch and proceed the game. Or do you not want to see a scum buddy lynched?

Personally, I don't know what to make of you at this point. At first I thought you were a newbie that accidentally gave away his scumminess. But now you are blatantly admitting that you would happily hop on a bandwagon. Even if you are town, I'm not sure I want you in the voting pool.

I'm not voting for pi because I think Viavant is mafia (this should be an obvious reason).

I don't just want to see a lynch for lynch's sake, but I'd rather see a lynch than not see one.

You always read everything i write so seriously, Squirrel. I wouldn't happily hop on a bandwagon for just anyone. ONLY WCA I don't know how many times i have to write the same thing before people actually listen

[e_i_pi]

Jeepers, it's my head on the chopping block, but it's everyone else getting flustered. You guys are gonna have aneurisms if you ever get voted