Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Mexal

AGOT Mafia 46.5

Recommended Posts

This is my quick check in before work. I will not be back in before the day is up. Since the only viable choices are Prester and Ambrose, I will have to lay my vote on Ambrose, as I think Prester is getting lynched for being a poor player rather than a FM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um. So, time is running out and I'm not going to have access to a computer for days end. I'll make another post in half an hour or so with my choice.

Looking at the candidates at this point, we have Ambrose and Prester and I'd like to say Lefford and Norcross as well, seeing as how I don't feel that good about Norcross at the moment.

The Prester case as I see it is based on erratic (read poor) play on his part followed by an inability to escape the spotlight for a variety of reasons. My reading of events is that Prester fucked up in his overzealous attack on Elesham and massively overstated his position but saw no way of admitting that without looking bad so he tried to bluff his way through. Didn't really work as his reasoning wasn't all that good. Basically he's spent the rest of the day fielding (most some) questions aimed at him and distancing himself from his unwise Elesham position (aided by Elesham's disappearance). Prester's definitely made some mistakes that suggest inexperienced FM to me so this would probably be a lynch I can support if necessary.

Ambrose I'm torn on. I mean his misstep is basically the same as Prester's, caving to peer pressure. It can be a sign of someone placating as many people as possible in order to slip out of the spotlight which makes most sense for an FM (although it must be said, innocents can do similar things). However, right now I feel there's something a little odd about the way his little mob came about which leads me to favour lynching Prester more than Ambrose if I had to choose.

Lefford I don't find especially suspicious.

Norcross is my favourite to lynch right now. Their second most recent post was what raised my hackles as it looks very much like someone trying to reinforce a momentum shift in the game without appearing on the voting record with a few bits of extra fluff thrown in on the side. That combined with the absence of any other contribution of note makes them my first choice unless it looks impossible to get a lynch.

Edited for: Clarity (Crossposted with Norcross)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to leave my vote on Lefford still. :| But now that I've written this whole damn thing, as sheeplike as it would make me seem, I'm almost convinced that Ambrose might be a good choice too as a potential partner to Lefford OR Upcliff.

Far-fetched. To me this rules out an Upcliff-Ambrose partnership. There was no need for Upcliff to get off Prester - everybody would understand if he remained fixated on Prester for a bit longer. If Upcliff is guilty, it seems almost certain Prester and Ambrose are both innocent.

I'm still with you of course on the Lefford suspision. Lefford being disarming and saying he's not surprised we think he's suspicious doesn't make me feel any less suspicious of him. He seems to me to be into 'rationalising after the event'.

So, we have just a few hours left, it's a CF game, and we need information. Let's get someone lynched. Waiting to the last minute is a risky strategy.

Checking back before work. Didn't quite get as complete a re-read as I would have liked. At this early point i'm unwilling to add what could be the catalyst vote to the lynch of either Prester or Ambrose, so I'm leaving it where it is. Good luck.

Oh great - so you're completely bottling out? Does this mean you are convinced both Prester and Ambrose are innocent, or are you just afraid people will think badly of you if you make 'the wrong decision'? It's day 1 - we don't have a lot to go on yet, but you could at least weigh in with some views. If you are certain Hasty is the best lynch, try harder to persuade the rest of us.

Now, I agree it's not easy to take responsibility for 'choosing' one of the two, but I'll show you.

As I said earlier, I think Prester most likely innocent. Ambrose is one of those who does not. Ambrose has been on my 'slightly suspicious' list for some time, though Lefford and Upcliff are my top suspects. Lefford for fitting the classic FM profile and Upcliff because I don't feel he is sincere in his faith about suspecting either Prester or Sunglass, yet has put a lot of time into pursuing these cases and making it look justified, while letting everybody else slip by. While everything Upcliff says about Prester's words is true, Prester's careless impulsiveness, admission of being swayed by popular opinion (rather than being covert about it) and his non-panicky but consistently disorganised defences make me wonder how Upcliff can persist in thinking Prester a top suspect.

Really the main thing which makes Ambrose look more suspicious is his fuelling of the case against Prester (assuming Prester is innocent), though he didn't put a vote on Prester until people said he (Ambrose) looked suspicious for not committing to a vote. Ambrose put the vote down saying he was swayed by Sarsfield's arguments. Actually until then Ambrose seemed to be reasonably hesitating. So really that one decision of Ambrose's made a lot of us eye him askance. The one thing which bothers me is that Upcliff seems happy to get Ambrose lynched, and I suspect Upcliff more than I suspect Ambrose.

Nevertheless, anyone could be guilty, and choosing between Ambrose and Prester I feel Ambrose is more likely to be so. It's not easy to vote someone who if he is innocent seems fairly reasonable (whereas Prester as an innocent is more erratic), I'd vote Ambrose for the slightly higher probability of getting an FM. I would vote for Prester too, if that was the only way to get a lynch today.

ETA: I wrote this before Norcross's or Uller's posts. I do take your point Uller - I don't feel the case on Ambrose is that strong - and I do have Norcross higher up my list, so should the lynch head that direction I would move there.

I have to go for a while though and I'm worried I might not be back in time to put a vote somewhere effective - I'll try and check back in a couple of hours.

Edit: sense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is it for me for the day. Looks like Ambrose is on 6 votes, so there should be no difficulty getting a lynch on him in the remaining three hours or so. Not the outcome I'd prefer, but immeasurably better than no lynch at all.

Anyway, I'll keep my vote on Norcross as I'd like to keep that on the record.

Be back later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have just gotten back to come back to -1. Lovely.

People are thinking that I caved to some sort of pressure for voting Prester. I expressed my concerns and had one thing holding me back. When presented with a counterpoint to that one thing, and that it didn't make sense otherwise, I put my vote down. Was it because of pressure? No. Was it because I felt that was a legitimate counterpoint? Yes, I did. Knowing that I had to leave at that time and being gone, not knowing if I would be back for the deadline, I decided to put my vote on. I read for a little bit and looked around, but I had to leave.

I'm going to catch up quickly, but this is god damn bad timing because I have to leave soon. Having these forums down all day only to come up NOW pisses me off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh great - so you're completely bottling out? Does this mean you are convinced both Prester and Ambrose are innocent, or are you just afraid people will think badly of you if you make 'the wrong decision'? It's day 1 - we don't have a lot to go on yet, but you could at least weigh in with some views. If you are certain Hasty is the best lynch, try harder to persuade the rest of us.

Now, I agree it's not easy to take responsibility for 'choosing' one of the two, but I'll show you.

Well, thanks to Westeros being down, I guess the day didn't end? Anyway, it wasn't about me bottling out or trying to persuade you about Hasty. I didn't get answers from him, and due to the new job that started today, I wasn't going to be around to try to get any. The only reason I wasn't prepared to pick a horse is because I like to be around to hear that person's answers to the cases on them. If I'm not going to be here, I can't contribute, or decide if someone else is a better lynch.

When we find out what's going on now, I'm more than willing to work on the current cases and 'choose' one of the two, or one of the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have an extension. I checked with the mods while the board was down. No idea how much time we get added to the day though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really the main thing which makes Ambrose look more suspicious is his fuelling of the case against Prester (assuming Prester is innocent), though he didn't put a vote on Prester until people said he (Ambrose) looked suspicious for not committing to a vote. Ambrose put the vote down saying he was swayed by Sarsfield's arguments. Actually until then Ambrose seemed to be reasonably hesitating. So really that one decision of Ambrose's made a lot of us eye him askance. The one thing which bothers me is that Upcliff seems happy to get Ambrose lynched, and I suspect Upcliff more than I suspect Ambrose.

Nevertheless, anyone could be guilty, and choosing between Ambrose and Prester I feel Ambrose is more likely to be so. It's not easy to vote someone who if he is innocent seems fairly reasonable (whereas Prester as an innocent is more erratic), I'd vote Ambrose for the slightly higher probability of getting an FM. I would vote for Prester too, if that was the only way to get a lynch today.

ETA: I wrote this before Norcross's or Uller's posts. I do take your point Uller - I don't feel the case on Ambrose is that strong - and I do have Norcross higher up my list, so should the lynch head that direction I would move there.

I have to go for a while though and I'm worried I might not be back in time to put a vote somewhere effective - I'll try and check back in a couple of hours.

Edit: sense

Maybe I'm nieve, but I'm missing the point on not "putting a vote" down. I expressed my opinions for everyone to see, I took a definite side in the argument and commented on it. I did say there was one thing holding me back, and it was truth. I've seen headstrong players before, and they are hard to get a read on, because most of the time, they don't make logical arguments, and trying to deal with them becomes a hassle. I still think Prester is FM, I think that despite his headstrongness, he did it for malicious intentions. But like any other Innocent in any game, I can't be sure, and that's always going to lead to doubt. I have my doubts, but I'm staying with the vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I can't see what the big fuss with Norcross is. He's been very quiet, but he's not alone in that. If anything, he just seems to be quite "anti-day 1" which is a stance i personally dislike, but doesn't suggest guilt.

If he's still as quiet, reserved and generally uninvolved in day 2, I might get a little more suspicious.

But then, i am certain that there will be one FM on my vote list, one on my "support" list and one quiet guy, seeing as I was the main focus of a large chunk of the day. the first real battle lines were drawn over me, and it's fairly logical for the FMs to split up and cover all groups.

edit: Last paragraph is a mix of rehashing that idea and pointing out that Norcross could be the guilty quiet guy. Then again, he might not be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless I'm even worse at counting than I thought, you're at -2, Ambrose.

Tell me, what do you think of Norcross?

I don't like the fact that he provided reasoning for vote on how he thought one person was innocent, not why one was an FM. The case should be whether or not the person is an FM, not because you think if the other one is "more" Innocent.

Here's hoping my professor doesn't mind me having a laptop open during class.....I may be around for longer hopefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is day 1.

14 players remain: Ambrose, Caron, Elesham, Hasty, Inchfield, Jast, Lake, Lefford, Norcross, Prester, Sarsfield, Sunglass, Uller, Upcliff.

8 votes are needed for a conviction or 7 to go to night.

6 votes for Ambrose ( Jast, Prester, Sarsfield, Upcliff, Norcross, Caron)

4 votes for Prester ( Elesham, Lake, Ambrose, Lefford)

2 votes for Norcross ( Uller, Sunglass)

1 vote for Hasty ( Inchfield)

1 vote for Lefford ( Hasty)

Day 1 deadline will be at 8:30pm EST!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't like the fact that he provided reasoning for vote on how he thought one person was innocent, not why one was an FM. The case should be whether or not the person is an FM, not because you think if the other one is "more" Innocent.

Here's hoping my professor doesn't mind me having a laptop open during class.....I may be around for longer hopefully.

I should clarify this that I meant here that when voting, he gave little reasoning, but then voting for me only because he thought the other was more innocent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I should clarify this that I meant here that when voting, he gave little reasoning, but then voting for me only because he thought the other was more innocent.

If you look at it in the overall scheme of things rather than in isolation though, we had a situation where the game had gone very quiet, time was ticking down and people were trying to get their votes in before life took them away. We had two likely lynches (you and me), as well as one unlikely lynch (him himself), so what is he to do? He has to help make A lynch of day one, after all, it's better to lynch than not to lynch, even for the CF result. Therefore, it's not that bad to vote for the person you feel to be more likely to be CF.

The reality is that if the day had carried on there and then, one of us would be gone now. Even as it stands, chances are that will happen, although the six hours now, at slightly more prime time, is a definate variable, as everyone now has a good chance to be convinced into starting on a whole new lynch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you look at it in the overall scheme of things rather than in isolation though, we had a situation where the game had gone very quiet, time was ticking down and people were trying to get their votes in before life took them away. We had two likely lynches (you and me), as well as one unlikely lynch (him himself), so what is he to do? He has to help make A lynch of day one, after all, it's better to lynch than not to lynch, even for the CF result. Therefore, it's not that bad to vote for the person you feel to be more likely to be CF.

The reality is that if the day had carried on there and then, one of us would be gone now. Even as it stands, chances are that will happen, although the six hours now, at slightly more prime time, is a definate variable, as everyone now has a good chance to be convinced into starting on a whole new lynch.

No, I definitely understand that. What I don't understand is voting for some over being the less innocent, rather then voting for someone who is the more likely to be FM. He did not provide reasoning for why he thought I was FM. Instead, he voted me because he thought you were Innocent. I understand that there's a correlation "Well, If he's more likely to be innocent therefore he thinks that you are more likely to be FM then him", but it's not the point. People should be reasoning on why a person is FM, not because why a person is not to be less Innocent. I want him to give reasoning on why he thinks I'm FM, not because he thinks yuo are more Innocent.

Understand what I'm saying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I definitely understand that. What I don't understand is voting for some over being the less innocent, rather then voting for someone who is the more likely to be FM. He did not provide reasoning for why he thought I was FM. Instead, he voted me because he thought you were Innocent. I understand that there's a correlation "Well, If he's more likely to be innocent therefore he thinks that you are more likely to be FM then him", but it's not the point. People should be reasoning on why a person is FM, not because why a person is not to be less Innocent. I want him to give reasoning on why he thinks I'm FM, not because he thinks yuo are more Innocent.

Understand what I'm saying?

Yeah, i understand, and would generally agree, only you still seem to miss the point.

He has to go out. He won't be back again soon. There are two people likely to be lynched. He wants a lynch today.

What choice does he have BUT to vote for one of them? Sure he coudl leave it to everyone else, but if more than a couple of people do that, and more than a couple of people can't get on in time, we have a no-lynch day 1.

He probably felt that the most important thing was ensuring a lynch, so had to pick between us.

Therefore, if he feels I am innocent, it makes sense to vote for you, and vice versa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, i understand, and would generally agree, only you still seem to miss the point.

He has to go out. He won't be back again soon. There are two people likely to be lynched. He wants a lynch today.

What choice does he have BUT to vote for one of them? Sure he coudl leave it to everyone else, but if more than a couple of people do that, and more than a couple of people can't get on in time, we have a no-lynch day 1.

He probably felt that the most important thing was ensuring a lynch, so had to pick between us.

Therefore, if he feels I am innocent, it makes sense to vote for you, and vice versa.

He said he felt that he felt you were more Innocent, but provides no reasoning on why he thinks I'm FM. I mean, if you are going to vote forsomeone, provide the reasoning why you think they are FM. That kind of vote I think makes me suspicious of him because he provides no reasoning why he thinks I'm scummy, he provides reasoning why he thinks YOU are innocent. If I were a lynched, and flipped Innocent, he could easily point out later that he just thought you were more Innocent, not necessary that he thought I was FM. I find that to be suspicious in its self.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MOD NOTE:

I am a complete idiot and fucked up the time. There was 2.5 hours til deadline and as such, there should have been 2.5 hours to the end of day. I accidentally included the down time of the board as well which really screwed up what should have happened.

That means, anything I said before about the day ending at 10:30pm was a mistake and a lie.

The game will end in 3.5 hours.

That means, day 1 ends at 8:30pm EST.

I'm sorry for the confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×