Conquer Club

Victor Sullivan wrote:As for ShaggyDan, I'm not too keen on voting him, myself. I prefer to vote off loose ends, even if they're town, simply based on the fact that whether an active player is scum or not, they should stick around at least until Day 2, just cuz it makes for a better game. I guess that's my philosophy on Day 1 voting. I'm always happy to vote off an inactive (or on occasion, an obnoxious scumzor).

But, of course, I'm not against voting an active player off 100% of the time... I do have a win condition after all.

-Sully

LOL now thats subtle. And maybe a little early.

Alright, deadline is the 17th, and here is your first official VC. Using a new program to tally votes, (SG's thing) and I THINK I have everything tallied right, but it is different from what I am used to. My original method with excel just wasn't going to cut it for a larger game like this. Long story short, if something is wrong, tell me and I apologize in advance.

Vote Count:

Jonty (1) - Djfireside
gregwolf (1) - victor
jgordon (1) - Shaggy
victor (1) - aage
hensow (3) - safari , DRoZ , violet
Illiad (1) - crazymilkshake
chapcrap (1) - Jonty
Shaggy (1) - F1fth
Vodean (1) - /
crazymilkshake (2) - lsu tiger josh , nagerous
aage (1) - Jak

With 25 alive it takes 13 to lynch

Well, I thought my vote was on jak. Lets fix that unvote vote jak

jgordon1111 wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:As for ShaggyDan, I'm not too keen on voting him, myself. I prefer to vote off loose ends, even if they're town, simply based on the fact that whether an active player is scum or not, they should stick around at least until Day 2, just cuz it makes for a better game. I guess that's my philosophy on Day 1 voting. I'm always happy to vote off an inactive (or on occasion, an obnoxious scumzor).

But, of course, I'm not against voting an active player off 100% of the time... I do have a win condition after all.

-Sully

LOL now thats subtle. And maybe a little early.

Why do I feel like I am missing something here? Maybe Victor can elaborate a bit on this win condition. It almost must seem as though he needs ShaggyDan to stay alive.

And Unvote. I feel like my joke vote against Henslow, his response to my vote, people questioning him and so forth all went a bit too far. I have no serious vote as of yet.

Internet is playing up. Can post tomorrow.

VioIet wrote:

jgordon1111 wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:As for ShaggyDan, I'm not too keen on voting him, myself. I prefer to vote off loose ends, even if they're town, simply based on the fact that whether an active player is scum or not, they should stick around at least until Day 2, just cuz it makes for a better game. I guess that's my philosophy on Day 1 voting. I'm always happy to vote off an inactive (or on occasion, an obnoxious scumzor).

But, of course, I'm not against voting an active player off 100% of the time... I do have a win condition after all.

-Sully

LOL now thats subtle. And maybe a little early.

Why do I feel like I am missing something here? Maybe Victor can elaborate a bit on this win condition. It almost must seem as though he needs ShaggyDan to stay alive.

I don't think that is what he was implying by that comment. I greatly disagree with his assessment, but its not one I'm going to argue against. In my opinion its a little scummy, but not enough that I could really build a case around it.

VioIet wrote:

jgordon1111 wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:As for ShaggyDan, I'm not too keen on voting him, myself. I prefer to vote off loose ends, even if they're town, simply based on the fact that whether an active player is scum or not, they should stick around at least until Day 2, just cuz it makes for a better game. I guess that's my philosophy on Day 1 voting. I'm always happy to vote off an inactive (or on occasion, an obnoxious scumzor).

But, of course, I'm not against voting an active player off 100% of the time... I do have a win condition after all.

-Sully

LOL now thats subtle. And maybe a little early.

Why do I feel like I am missing something here? Maybe Victor can elaborate a bit on this win condition. It almost must seem as though he needs ShaggyDan to stay alive.

I really can't see that from the post; but then again I can't see much from it.

VioIet wrote:Why do I feel like I am missing something here? Maybe Victor can elaborate a bit on this win condition. It almost must seem as though he needs ShaggyDan to stay alive.

To me it seems Victor is being quite vague by mentioning his win condition, but I assume it's a jest towards scum being active. ShaggyDan was posting fairly regularly until his internet died. I read it as "he might have to die, but not yet". As to why he would post it in this wording, I have no idea.

I don't think Victor meant anything by mentioning the win condition. seems he was just talking about his general win condition. saying that he can't just always vote for inactive over whole thinks should be based on his role in the game whether town or evil because it cab prevent him from winning. he cent win a game as town by always voting off inactive townies over active scum not can he win as evil by voting his inactive evil buddies over active townies (who could later cause problems for evil).

When is Victor not acting scummy? He just can't help himself.

I'd rather not clarify my statements. I am enjoying this discussion too much.



-Sully

I will vote Crazymilkshake
As I said, I am willing to focus pressure in order to get something done before night.
But besides that, I find it interesting that on page 11, two posts after I note that I may bandwagon a person with the most votes, crazy; who had the most votes; suddenly starts an inactivity case. (which IMO, for a day one is largely random, and likely counterproductive if deliberate submarining can't be proven, as it often ends in a replacement, or is easily dismissed with a quick "sorry, I'll be more active") Seems as though he mayhaps have something to hide?

/ wrote:I will [color=#0040FF]vote Crazymilkshake[/color]
As I said, I am willing to focus pressure in order to get something done before night.
But besides that, I find it interesting that on page 11, two posts after I note that I may bandwagon a person with the most votes, crazy; who had the most votes; suddenly starts an inactivity case. (which IMO, for a day one is largely random, and likely counterproductive if deliberate submarining can't be proven, as it often ends in a replacement, or is easily dismissed with a quick "sorry, I'll be more active") Seems as though he mayhaps have something to hide?

sorry, bold

Well ****
UNVOTE VOTE CRAZY

/ wrote:Well ****
UNVOTE VOTE CRAZY

I would like to point out that i was not the only one with 3 votes, hensow had 3 votes at the time of me posting that also.

Alright, internet is finally back and going again.

In response to people's FOSing or voting of me. The semi-serious part . I always seem to have trouble transitioning from joke votes to actual votes, in normal circumstances I wouldn't have voted for the reason I did but it was in an attempt to move forward. I now see that saying it was a "semi-serious" vote was redundant. I figured because it wasn't a reason that I would push hard and knew I was grasping at what I could for day one I should mention it. I was more just typing stream of thought than anything else.

On how to progress; I'm not sure how much time we have left (if there is a deadline set at all) but we're a little all over the place at the moment. We should try and focus down on someone and at least get some serious and consistent pressure happening. No case has stood out at me yet. I'll re-read once I've caught up on my other games.

The alternatives are to pressure an inactive to get in here and vote, or continue with the clustertruck of people bringing different weak cases up with little bearing.

crazymilkshake5 wrote:so i shall Vote Illiad for inactivity

Still hasn't posted from this point which was a few pages ago. Unvote and Vote Illiad for now until I either find something on a later re-read or something better pops up.

With a game this size, we can't afford inactives anyway. I don't really think that crazy going for an inactive is that out of hand, to be honest. It's day one and no one had a case. I think it's more odd that / made a case because of going for an inactive.

unvote vote Iliad

A bit less than 2 days till deadline.

Damn, we really need to pressure an inactive here. An inactive could really hurt our ability to get lynches later on in the game should they survive that far.

unvote vote iliad

Yeah this close to deadline. I think we don't have much choice but to try to get the pressure in. Since Illiad seems to be the inactive Du Jour.

Vote Illiad I believe that puts him at 5 votes.

Sorry, keep get logged out, maybe cookie trouble or something. Will to try and post.

Fastposted. Good to see you're still here.

Another suspect within two days is hard, but I'll vote shaggydan for diverting attention so quickly after /'s post on cms by hopping on cms' case. It strikes me as off. Might be nothing. We have two days to find out.

Iliad wrote:Sorry, keep get logged out, maybe cookie trouble or something. Will to try and post.

And once you got on,this is all you had to say. Vote Iliad I think you could have taken a minute to say something,anything and for some reason choose not to.

jgordon1111 wrote:

Iliad wrote:Sorry, keep get logged out, maybe cookie trouble or something. Will to try and post.

And once you got on,this is all you had to say. Vote Iliad I think you could have taken a minute to say something,anything and for some reason choose not to.

As much as I dislike the quick pressure being applied here, we are fairly short of the deadline. anything as soon as possible would be appreciated.