Conquer Club

AceArtemis wrote:

neanderpaul14 wrote:not sure why but I Vote Penguin.

Unvote, Vote: neanderpaul14 for lurking and not contributing anything to the game. He has only posted three times, each with no useful information. The first two were on page 2, an OMGUS and a joke post. Then, he comes out on page 5 with another random vote. Care to help us find the scum?

Seeing as this is his first game, I think your vote was unneeded. Especially when captianwalrus, a more veteran player, has been lurking just as much.

AceArtemis wrote:

captainwalrus wrote:I don't like to post too much, I find that I get sucked into bandwagons unless I can step back and think things over.

It helps if you share your thoughts every once in a while. You don't have to jump on every bandwagon you see, but the more players we have actively discussing, the better chance we have of catching the scum.

He doesn't want to have a better chance at catching scum. Otherwise he would be actively posting. He has no excuse (like neanderpaul). vote CW until we see some activity.

Vote Count!

fuzzy pengui 1 - (neanderpual)
suspect101 2 - (falkomagno, captainwalrus)
captainwalrus 2 - (suspect101, Mr. Squirrel)
stroop 1 - (simon v)
neanderpual 1 - (ace)

Not voting- fuzzy penguin, sully, stroop

With 10 alive it takes 6 to lynch.

DEADLINE

A lynch must be reached in 7 days from this post or the player with the most votes will be lynched.

Current Lynch: Suspect101

Several people have been called out for inactivity and/or lurking, but we have all missed that one player has been lurking since the beginning: Falkomagno.

I counted four posts, only one contained something remotely useful and every post is ten words max.

vote Falkomagno

sully800 wrote:Start talking more or you are no help (which means you are probably concealing something)

I'm not really ever much of a help on the first day. I don't think any of you are more likely to be scum than any other person. Someone has to be scum, so why not pick a random person to see if they expose themselves. I voted for suspect without a strong reason just to get him to do something. I will be able to post more soon, but I have finals next week and a lot of last minute projects to work on due Friday. I have no more or less to contribute than anyone else does on the first day.

captainwalrus wrote:

sully800 wrote:Start talking more or you are no help (which means you are probably concealing something)

I'm not really ever much of a help on the first day. I don't think any of you are more likely to be scum than any other person. Someone has to be scum, so why not pick a random person to see if they expose themselves. I voted for suspect without a strong reason just to get him to do something. I will be able to post more soon, but I have finals next week and a lot of last minute projects to work on due Friday. I have no more or less to contribute than anyone else does on the first day.

Exactly, so why should you stay silent and we shouldn't?

It's a small game, I know from experience that finals and last minute projects aren't much of a problem.

captainwalrus wrote:I'm not really ever much of a help on the first day. I don't think any of you are more likely to be scum than any other person.

This has to be the lamest excuse I've ever heard.

Fair enough, neanderpaul. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this one. You can help out by sharing your thoughts about who you find suspicious. Remember, the more people are actively discussing, the easier it is to catch scum. Unvote

Stroop wrote:Several people have been called out for inactivity and/or lurking, but we have all missed that one player has been lurking since the beginning: Falkomagno.

I counted four posts, only one contained something remotely useful and every post is ten words max.

vote Falkomagno

Vote: Falkomango because I have seen him in other games, so he must have some idea of what he is doing. When people lurk like that and only contribute short, meaningless posts, they are usually hiding to avoid suspicion.

I'll also offer an FoS on CW because CW isn't helping the town at all.

Plenty of people who aren't noobs go inactive, lynching an inactive isn't going to do us any good.
My vote stays on Stroop, FOS Artimis

Simon Viavant wrote:Plenty of people who aren't noobs go inactive, lynching an inactive isn't going to do us any good.
My vote stays on Stroop, FOS Artimis

I thought you had been around long enough to know the difference between inactivity and lurking.

well, the true is that in another mafia game, (in another site btw) I was scum, and one player could unmask all of us, by posting short and no so often post. short post but so meaningful. It's really irritates me, but I realized that is a valid game play, and is effective against scum. Anyway, sorry if I was so inactive.

Before I've been called by inactivity I was thinking in vote for simon V. but I didn't see strong reasons to do that. It's just that his uses of FOS are being so scumm to me, since town doesn't afraid to acussing anybody, and shouldnt, meanwhile, scum hesitate more to compromise his word.

so, what the heck...


unvote vote simon viavant

Falkomagno wrote:well, the true is that in another mafia game, (in another site btw) I was scum, and one player could unmask all of us, by posting short and no so often post. short post but so meaningful. It's really irritates me, but I realized that is a valid game play, and is effective against scum. Anyway, sorry if I was so inactive.

Before I've been called by inactivity I was thinking in vote for simon V. but I didn't see strong reasons to do that. It's just that his uses of FOS are being so scumm to me, since town doesn't afraid to acussing anybody, and shouldnt, meanwhile, scum hesitate more to compromise his word.

so, what the heck...


unvote vote simon viavant

but there are at least 4 different people who have posted FOS. I do not think that there are 4 maifa in this game.

don't misundertood me. I mean no the use of FOS itself, but use of FOS instead a vote. For example, I I voted for simon, I just could say FOS Suspect, for example, because I just have one vote. but, If I'm not voting nobody, why FOS someone and not just vote for him? Scum is the answer.

Falkomagno wrote:well, the true is that in another mafia game, (in another site btw) I was scum, and one player could unmask all of us, by posting short and no so often post. short post but so meaningful. It's really irritates me, but I realized that is a valid game play, and is effective against scum. Anyway, sorry if I was so inactive.

What do you mean? I am very confused.

Falkomagno wrote:don't misundertood me. I mean no the use of FOS itself, but use of FOS instead a vote. For example, I I voted for simon, I just could say FOS Suspect, for example, because I just have one vote. but, If I'm not voting nobody, why FOS someone and not just vote for him? Scum is the answer.

Because I wanted to keep my vote on Stroop, this is possibly the lamest argument I've evr heard.

Simon Viavant wrote:

Falkomagno wrote:don't misundertood me. I mean no the use of FOS itself, but use of FOS instead a vote. For example, I I voted for simon, I just could say FOS Suspect, for example, because I just have one vote. but, If I'm not voting nobody, why FOS someone and not just vote for him? Scum is the answer.

Because I wanted to keep my vote on Stroop, this is possibly the lamest argument I've evr heard.

You FOSed me first though and you didn't have your vote on anybody. You only voted me because you were asked why you didn't vote. It seems you are eager to conform to what people want or expect from you, which is scum behavior.

Also, unvote

captainwalrus wrote:

Falkomagno wrote:well, the true is that in another mafia game, (in another site btw) I was scum, and one player could unmask all of us, by posting short and no so often post. short post but so meaningful. It's really irritates me, but I realized that is a valid game play, and is effective against scum. Anyway, sorry if I was so inactive.

What do you mean? I am very confused.

I mean that I realized that in certain gameplay, characterized by write least possible, but being straight and concise, and using the vote actively, instead of writting walls of text, is a behaviour that can be effective against scum, and I was trying that in this game.

[quote="pmchugh"]Vote Count!

fuzzy pengui 1 - (neanderpual)
suspect101 1 - (captainwalrus)
captainwalrus 2 - (suspect101, Mr. Squirrel)
stroop 1 - (simon v)
falkomagno 1 - (AceArtemis)
simon v 1 - (falkomagno)

Not voting- fuzzy penguin, sully, stroop

With 10 alive it takes 6 to lynch.

DEADLINE

A lynch must be reached in 4.5 days from this post or the player with the most votes will be lynched.

Current Lynch: captainwalrus

Simon Viavant wrote:unvote

The people voting for suspect strike me as the scummy ones, it seems an obvious conspiracy to deprive us of our rights.
capt. walrus might be a townie =, just an incompetent one, but I know stroop isn't.
Falko could also plead incompetence, but I'm a little more doubtful there.
Stroop can't.

FOS Stroop

Simon Viavant wrote:Another scumtell is that they usually don't vote on someone right away when they come out against them, as if they're considering matters. They usually get another couple people to vote first so they're safer from blame.

Poor Simon even thinks he's scummy himself.

Simon Viavant wrote:Ok since I'm so cowardly and scummy vote Stroop

When called out on it, first by Falko, then by me, he decides that a vote might be better anyway. Instead of sticking to his guns, he goes with what people seem to desire from him. Only scum need to fly under the radar like that.

His only reason for voting me is that I have more experience than captainwalrus and Falkomagno and that means I shouldn't have voted Suspect apparently. Whether that's true isn't for me to decide.

This is still a weak case, but I think it's better than anything else we can find right now; vote Simon

Sorry, this isn't adding much (mostly because I'm not really sure who to vote for since the game hasn't really developed yet); but what happens in the case of a tie at the end of the 7 days if we still don't have somebody lynched? Will all parties be lynched that have the most?

The Fuzzy Pengui wrote:Sorry, this isn't adding much (mostly because I'm not really sure who to vote for since the game hasn't really developed yet); but what happens in the case of a tie at the end of the 7 days if we still don't have somebody lynched? Will all parties be lynched that have the most?

pmchugh wrote:DEADLINE

A lynch must be reached in 4.5 days from this post or the player with the most votes will be lynched.

Current Lynch: captainwalrus

It's now 92 hours-ish away. And you may vote no lynch according to the rules.

I have found no reason to change my vote. I believe that CW is scum and thinks he should have more votes on him than he does.

Well, I didn't realize that the person with the most votes at the end of the day is lynched, so I Unvote and Vote no lynch. A lot of people think that is scummy and I was almost lynched in my other game because of it, but I don't want to lynch anything really valuable just randoly. The odds ar that we will lynch a townie if we vote with no real convictions, just cause there are certianly more townies than scum.
And I don't really know how to make people not vote for me, but I'm town, so don't. That is pretty weak I know, but trust me on this one.

That all sounds very weak indeed captain. You stated earlier that you should vote for people to force them to respond, and now with over three days till the deadline you are done with voting? It's still quite early and a sudden change of heart, which makes me think you are doing a bad job covering something up. And yet, I find myself believing you when you say you are town

Now that we have talked about it a bit (in two games for me) I really don't think a no lynch is a good idea for the town. There is a very large danger when lynching which sucks, but if the town never lynches they can never win. And if you don't lynch on day 1 then what new information do you have on day 2? Just one dead townie and no good suspects if everyone settles on no lynch. So anyway, please don't stop the dialogue, at least not when we are over three days from the deadline.

sully800 wrote:And yet, I find myself believing you when you say you are town

Why? He has contributed very little to discussion so far, and his "sudden change of heart" you just said looked scummy. I don't know why you would think he is town unless you knew something we didn't.

I'm now very conflicted. I would like to switch my vote over to you to put some pressure there, but i also think my vote should stay on CW since until now he has done very little. I guess I'll change it for now, since my vote hasn't gotten in any more activity out of CW in the last two pages anyway.

unvote vote sully

I have played 3 games not including this one and in all three we have never lynched a scum. Once we got a third party which as good, but mostly townies. And lynching isn't the only way to get people. We have investigators, mabey scum killers and other roles ment to catch scum at night.