Mafia 52: Doctor Who

[House Reed]

[quote name='House Stackspear' post='1361469' date='May 20 2008, 00.05']:stunned:
So I take from this you never want me to clarify what I say in post and just move on?[/quote]There are a lot of degrees in between "never" and "always". It's needless to clarify things which are quite clear.
[quote]No offense but that sounds rather stupid to me, why even reply to my google post then?[/quote]Because I tried to RP. No other reason.
[quote]Is this post of your even worth replying to? Let me know. Thanks.[/quote]Decide by yourself. You won't be able to mistake if we will tell you what to do. ;)

[House Frey]

I don't see my vote on Tarbeck doing much at all while I'm gone, so I'll switch to [b]Grandison[/b] and ask that they respond to Yarwyck's case.

[House Stokeworth]

[quote name='House Tarbeck' post='1361481' date='May 20 2008, 00.13']There are a lot of degrees in between "never" and "always". It's needless to clarify things which are quite clear.[/quote]

Well you were trying to RP, in which you would expect a RP response, because it's kind of hard to RP by yourself. So how would that qualify as a post not worth replying to? Why try to RP towards me and then not expect a reply?

[quote]Because I tried to RP. No other reason.[/quote]
[quote name='House Tarbeck' post='1361250' date='May 19 2008, 21.24']Nobody wants to RP anymore? Ok.[/quote]

So you're coming me because I didn't rp back? Interesting.

[quote]Decide by yourself. You won't be able to mistake if we will tell you what to do. ;)[/quote]

Oh yes, I really need your guidance.

[b]Tarbeck[/b], and I'm gone for the rest of the night.

[House Reed]

[quote name='House Stackspear' post='1361497' date='May 20 2008, 00.30']Why try to RP towards me and then not expect a reply?[/quote]I wanted IC reply, not OOC one.
And when I later said I stopped RP, that evidently hadn't needed reply at all.

And there was no reason to put a retaliatory vote when there was nothing to retaliate to. :)

[House Baratheon]

[quote name='House Moore' post='1361321' date='May 19 2008, 22.28']Hrm weird that he would repeat those same players.[/quote]

Hey, Moore?

I'm catching up with the thread and I noticed you don't like to explain things. Do you think you could elaborate on why you think this? (Not that I even remember who 'he' is...names are your friends!)

Just a helpful reminder. ;)

[House Baratheon]

Hmm.

To be honest, I didn't come to the same conclusions at all from Yarwyck's post on Grandison--the suggestions Yarwyck made seemed like a stretch. When I looked at the quotes again, however, I realized that out of context they look like a symp clue from Grandison to Vyrwel. Same two suspects, raises some suspicion on V being a little suspicious. Calls V 'nasty'. But never votes for V. A little of "I know you're evil, but I like you anyway V."

I'd be willing to lynch Grandison, but maybe I'm stretching too much here.

[House Connington]

Hello.
[quote name='House Royce' post='1361526' date='May 20 2008, 01.40']Hey, Moore?

I'm catching up with the thread and I noticed you don't like to explain things. Do you think you could elaborate on why you think this? ([u]Not that I even remember who 'he' is[/u]...names are your friends!)

Just a helpful reminder. ;)[/quote]
I believe it was even quoted in the same post or a few posts above. Pay attention, you should.

[House Connington]

When it comes to the seriousness, I do think that Stackspear tried too hard to point out that he wasn't serious. Two posts? perhaps, but that's two posts over the line. :P So it seems to me that Stacky tried desperately not to stick out there, which is enough for me to place a vote. [b]Stackspear[/b]

[House Connington]

[quote name='House Royce' post='1361549' date='May 20 2008, 02.27']To be honest, I didn't come to the same conclusions at all from Yarwyck's post on Grandison--the suggestions Yarwyck made seemed like a stretch. When I looked at the quotes again, [u]however[/u], I realized that out of context they look like a symp clue from Grandison to Vyrwel. Same two suspects, raises some suspicion on V being a little suspicious. Calls V 'nasty'. But never votes for V. A little of "I know you're evil, but I like you anyway V."

I'd be willing to lynch Grandison, but [u]maybe[/u] I'm stretching too much here.[/quote]
Royce, walking the middle of the road is dangerous. You may get hit by cars coming from both directions. Just sayin'.

Seriously, I don't like this post at all. Both opportunistic and middle of the road. Furthermore, the case on Grandison is solid for day one standards-let's not comment on it too much before Grandi gets the chance to respond to it, ok?

[House Connington]

Just my luck. When I have the time to post, no-one is around, and it's still too early to make quality re-reads. I hereby salute you and declare my return during the Euro evening.

[House Baratheon]

[quote name='House Hunter' post='1361565' date='May 20 2008, 03.23']Royce, walking the middle of the road is dangerous. You may get hit by cars coming from both directions. Just sayin'.

Seriously, I don't like this post at all. Both opportunistic and middle of the road. Furthermore, the case on Grandison is solid for day one standards-let's not comment on it too much before Grandi gets the chance to respond to it, ok?[/quote]

The case on Grandison based on the analysis of the quotes isn't particularly good. What I'm saying is that I read it, wrote up a post saying I thought the case was crap :P and then read the quotes again and realized I liked my own interpretation more.

And I [i]am[/i] paying attention. I'll just say what's bad writing: quoting someone's post that doesn't mention another player by name, and then use vague pronouns like 'he'. That's called ambiguity, and I normally advise my students to avoid it at all costs. It's just that I came into the game late and when faced with 100 posts to read, I just don't want to have to deal with inspecific accusations.

Speaking of playing both sides and walking the middle of the road...

[quote name='House Hunter']Seriously, I don't like this post at all. Both opportunistic and middle of the road. Furthermore, the case on Grandison is solid for day one standards-let's not comment on it too much before Grandi gets the chance to respond to it, ok?[/quote]

So you think the case on Grandison is solid, but you don't want people to comment on it before Grandison gets back? What?


Edit: I just realized in an earlier post I said I'd lynch Grandison as a symp to Vyrwel, but in retrospect, that's wrong. I actually mean I'd be willing to lynch Vyrwel for a possible connection to Grandison.

[House Connington]

Royce, I want Grandi to respond to the case, and any discussion of the case makes it easier for him. From your edit, I take that you wouldn't be willing to lynch him? Yes or no, please? No detailed elaboration.

[House Targaryen]

Good morning :)

It is day 1.

13 players remain: Coldwater, Dondarrion, Footly, Grandison, Hunter, Moore, Mullendore, Royce, Sarsfield, Stackspear, Tarbeck, Vyrwel, Yarwyck.

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

2 votes for Grandison (Yarwyck, Mullendore)
2 votes for Stackspear ( Moore, Hunter)
2 votes for Tarbeck ( Grandison, Stackspear)
1 vote for Dondarrion ( Sarsfield)
1 vote for Yarwyck ( Footly)

5 players have not voted: Coldwater, Dondarrion, Royce, Tarbeck, Vyrwel.

[House Clegane]

[quote name='House Yarwyck' post='1361311' date='May 20 2008, 04.20']Grandison's posts set off my "vibes" so I decided to go back and look at his posts. What concerns me is the whole Vyrwel "nasty question" interaction below:

I fond this odd cos it was bandwagoning on my question to Vyrwel and he's characterizing Vyrwel's question as "nasty" but he made essentially the same observation in his intro. It looked to be that her was attempting to cast suspcion at Vyrwel, but also continue or promote the Mullendore/Footly suspicion. It just struck me as odd.[/quote]
Sorry, all I could remember of you was that you resigned to your lynch. :P

And yes, I [u]was [/u]attempting to cast suspicion at Vyrwel, [u]and[/u] I also continued to promote Mullendore and Footly. I send a rquest to the mods, and they ensured me that I was allowed to suspect more than one player, even in the beginning of the game with having nearly no evidence at all. :thumbsup:



[quote name='Yarwyck']Here he reiterates the suspicion of Vyrwel and Mullendore/Footly again. I don't understand what he means by "nasty players" here. And why we should be voting for either of these two.[/quote]
By 'nasty' I mean those players who are leaning out of the window too much in the RP phase and who usually get the one or the other vote for this.

[quote name='Yarwyck']Lastly we have a random vote on Tarbeck before slipping away into the night. It just looks to me to be attempting to stir up suspicion in several directions at once without being direct about it. Sympy yes, evil maybe. Better than anything else so far? I'll vote for that.

[b]Grandison [/b][/quote]

The vote was random in sense that I am only able to vote for one person (the mods didn't allow me to vote more of you fellows) so I had to un-bold all the other names on that list (I promise you the list would have looked much more impressive than it does now ;) ).

BTW, I explained my vote in [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=28378&view=findpost&p=1361281"]post 76[/url].




[quote name='House Tarbeck' post='1361304' date='May 20 2008, 04.16']And why did you omit Footly?[/quote]
I copied the players that were listed in M's vote count. I must confess that I was too lazy too look for the list of players.

I think it's interesting that you found out that Footly was missing, but not Sarsfield. I applause everyone who reads my posts that closely to spot things like this, except when he is a killer who missed the name of his partner on that list.

Jealousy is such an awful word. :P

[House Clegane]

[quote name='House Tarbeck' post='1361300' date='May 20 2008, 04.12']For the beginning, I want to do something. If it turns to be helpful, that's a bonus.
No, I don't agree with Stackspear. In fact, Stacky irritates me a bit. He is too literal, too serious. Innaturally serious.[/quote]

I also got a weird impression by Stackspear. I haven't decided yet if he is a paranoid FM or if it's just his playstyle. I'm leaning to the latter right now, hence he doesn't get my vote.


While Dondarrion has given us a good example why talk is silver, but silence is golden, I would like him to remember him that even though he isn't here, we are still able to lynch him.

[House Reed]

[quote name='House Grandison' post='1361633' date='May 20 2008, 05.45']I think it's interesting that you found out that Footly was missing, but not Sarsfield. I applause everyone who reads my posts that closely to spot things like this, except when he is a killer who missed the name of his partner on that list.[/quote]In fact, I didn't inspect your post that closely. I counted names, found there was 11 and automatically presumed you excluded yourself. So I started checking player list and stopped by F letter.
[quote]I also got a weird impression by Stackspear. I haven't decided yet if he is a paranoid FM or if it's just his playstyle.[/quote]Same here.

[House Corbray]

Grandison - your flippant attitude and smiley responses do little to convince me of your sincerity. There's been some more responses from other players. Nothing new or is Tarbeck still your top lynch candidate? Cos I see you listing suspicions of a number of players for reasons stated by other players but your vote is on Tarbeck because "the mods wouldn't let you vote for everyone"? Are you ready yet to narrow your choices a bit?

[House Corbray]

Royce - I agree with you that Grandison is acting sympy, I'm not as convinced that he is signaling master Vyrwel. Mostly because I haven't seen/heard anything from Vyrwel and attributing Grandison's actions toward him is I think to early to say.

And I'll say right off that I'm not falling "why vote the symp when you can get the master" this early in the game. Symps are more obvious than FM. They intend to cause disruption and false leads. IMO, lynching a symp early is as good as a FM. Later in the game we may have to choose between FM and Symp, but D1 I'm voting for the evilest player I can identify.

[House Dondarrion]

[quote name='House Grandison' post='1361671' date='May 20 2008, 06.28']While Dondarrion has given us a good example why talk is silver, but silence is golden, I would like him to remember him that even though he isn't here, we are still able to lynch him.[/quote]

While unnecessary, I do appreciate the reminder. I wasn't quite sure of the rules there :rolleyes:

Out of curiosity, why are we discussing symps? I checked the rules and saw nothing about them. I guess they could be in there but to assume there are symps and then try to look for symp clues really seems counter-productive, especially since symp clues are generally not symp clues.

[House Corbray]

[quote name='House Dondarrion' post='1361749' date='May 20 2008, 05.39']Out of curiosity, why are we discussing symps? I checked the rules and saw nothing about them. I guess they could be in there but to assume there are symps and then try to look for symp clues really seems counter-productive, especially since symp clues are generally not symp clues.[/quote]

THe rules aren't terribly specific at all about what roles are in play so I think it's counter-productive to assume there aren't symps. Regardless, I'm going to vote for the most suspicious player on D1 and I'm NOT going to say "Well, he's probably just a symp so let's vote for someone else."