Jump to content

Archived

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

House Targaryen

Mafia 75 -- Revolution in Vanillaville

Recommended Posts

What bugs me about Estermont is this here:

I find this kind of reasoning rather disturbing when we're only at the start of the game with not much material to work with. I have trouble to find a single player that I can vote for with some conviction, but Estermont already has two ion his list? That doesn't ring true to me. To much justification here.

Vote Estermont

I like to use my vote, and that doesn't always mean that I have a ton of 'conviction' behind it or that I'm 100% certain of somebody's guilt.

Why exaggerate the need for 'conviction' to cast a vote? Especially so early in the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Than, why so late? What prevented you from voting Fossoway a couple of hours earlier? You were here, you posted something... but, somehow, you've noted Fossy's old post only now. And accused him of "not taking a stand" - that early. When there were nothing to take a stand at all, until, later, I claimed to make a serious vote, going into serious stage much earlier than in average day 1. And, I think, Fossy even haven't posted till then.

So, as I see this: you were aware about serious stage starting, you've made slight defence of Reed and than, after your defence was ignored, you've made weak attack against a player who made an evidently joking post at the RP stage and left berore serious stage started.

Do you see how awful this looks?

I know you're supposed to overstate your cases early on, but you're also supposed to be subtle about it ;). There's a fine line between pushing something on weak evidence and sounding ridiculous, and you're straddling the wrong side of that line here. Almost as if you wanted not to be taken seriously...

Remove Vote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Begone, evil mods! Begone! We in Vanillaville have only vanilla vote counts, which are entirely conventional and orthodox, and contain no creative flavour.

It is day 1.

10 players remain: Ashford, Bolton, Connington, Estermont, Fossoway, Frey, Reed, Tarth, Vance, Westerling.

6 votes are needed for a conviction or 5 to go to night.

2 votes for Reed ( Westerling, Estermont)

1 vote for Estermont ( Tarth)

1 vote for Fossoway ( Vance)

1 vote for Tarth ( Connington)

1 vote for Westerling ( Bolton)

4 players have not voted: Ashford, Fossoway, Frey, Reed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Estermont is bothersome. I don't like the whole thing with Reed and Westerling. Reed is obviously playing with Estermont, and he's rising to the bait. Reed's too obvious in his teasing and not vote worthy (at least not for this). Westerling I am not sure of.

We're obviously distancing ourselves, silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has nothing to do with when you voted, it has to do with the continue back and forth. You say you hate something, Reed does it it big bold red, obviously not being agreeable, which is the reason you voted for him, but he (Reed) is being snarky about it. You quoted his "be an ass" comment, but I thought that was you, rising to his bait (not quoting him). I had to go back and double check that, sorry.

Huh? Your account of events doesn't make sense.

1) Reed made his post where he tried to smooth things over with Westerling.

2) I called it suspicious.

3) I voted for Reed.

At this point, there wasn't any back and forth. Just him doing something and me commenting on that.

4) Reed came back with a few sarcastic posts.

5) I clarified and reiterated my suspicion.

6) At the same time as I posted #5, you posted this -

Reed is obviously playing with Estermont, and he's rising to the bait. Reed's too obvious in his teasing and not vote worthy (at least not for this).

And it was probably a cross-post, given the time stamp and the length of your post.

So my vote came before any possible 'teasing', I don't think anything I posted could be described as 'rising to his bait', and the only back and forth came in what looks to be a cross-post with your own post - not something you really had time to comment on (meaning you were probably commenting on just numbers 1-4 above). Your claim doesn't fit with the way things actually happened.

Were you just confused in some way? Because right now, it looks like you were just bullshitting a response to Bolton after he pressed you for thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to use my vote, and that doesn't always mean that I have a ton of 'conviction' behind it or that I'm 100% certain of somebody's guilt.

Why exaggerate the need for 'conviction' to cast a vote? Especially so early in the game?

I am irritated that you felt the need to mention Westerling as your other choice when there was absolutely no need to. It makes your vote on Reed look more solid or serious than it actually is.

Compare "I vote Reed" with "I vote Reed over Westerling". The former sounds like, uhm, stuff, but the latter sounds serious and reasonable.

I mean, apparently you wanted to tell us something when you mentioned Westerling. Perhaps you wanted to demonstrate that you're putting some thoughts into this game? IMO an innocent player would not have that thought process that early in the game.

ETA: or Estermont is just the kind of detail-possessed person?!? :P

ETA 2: have to leave you now to get some sleep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So your vote is serious? :unsure:

:P Well I'm still holding a grudge. But fear not, I shall put it aside for the rest of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am irritated that you felt the need to mention Westerling as your other choice when there was absolutely no need to. It makes your vote on Reed look more solid or serious than it actually is.

Compare "I vote Reed" with "I vote Reed over Westerling". The former sounds like, uhm, stuff, but the latter sounds serious and reasonable.

I mean, apparently you wanted to tell us something when you mentioned Westerling. Perhaps you wanted to demonstrate that you're putting some thoughts into this game? IMO an innocent player would not have that thought process that early in the game.

I was just conveying my dislike of Westerling's answers, even while voting somebody else.

And my vote for Reed is serious. It's not built on much, because it's day 1 and the game just started. But it's not a joke vote either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this all you have to say? No comments on the game or anything?

Not really, no.

Lots of silly back-and-forth between what's the proper way for an innocent to react in such-and-such situation --guilty of it myself-- that I have my doubts will actually get us anywhere.

If that's what we're basing evidence on at this stage, I still say Westerling over-thought Reed's question on the 'hider' role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh? Your account of events doesn't make sense.

1) Reed made his post where he tried to smooth things over with Westerling.

2) I called it suspicious.

3) I voted for Reed.

At this point, there wasn't any back and forth. Just him doing something and me commenting on that.

4) Reed came back with a few sarcastic posts.

5) I clarified and reiterated my suspicion.

6) At the same time as I posted #5, you posted this -

And it was probably a cross-post, given the time stamp and the length of your post.

So my vote came before any possible 'teasing', I don't think anything I posted could be described as 'rising to his bait', and the only back and forth came in what looks to be a cross-post with your own post - not something you really had time to comment on (meaning you were probably commenting on just numbers 1-4 above). Your claim doesn't fit with the way things actually happened.

Were you just confused in some way? Because right now, it looks like you were just bullshitting a response to Bolton after he pressed you for thoughts.

Wow, now that's what I call a defensive post. Thanks :)

I explained my reasoning (yes, it involved a little confusion). How is one off the cuff question "pressure"? I had no pressure from anyone, just a question I felt was fair based on my earlier post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Targ, any chance you could update the day timer please?

Thanks.

Sorry. The deadline is 11 AM EST tomorrow.

Which reminds me, there's still no opening scene. Poor Mayor Beige is like Schrodinger's Cat, perpetually both dead and alive.

Yep, I'm keeping to the spirit of the game by being a totally disorganized mod.

It is day 1.

10 players remain: Ashford, Bolton, Connington, Estermont, Fossoway, Frey, Reed, Tarth, Vance, Westerling.

6 votes are needed for a conviction or 5 to go to night.

2 votes for Reed ( Westerling, Estermont)

1 vote for Bolton ( Fossoway)

1 vote for Estermont ( Tarth)

1 vote for Fossoway ( Vance)

1 vote for Tarth ( Connington)

1 vote for Westerling ( Bolton)

3 players have not voted: Ashford, Frey, Reed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, now that's what I call a defensive post. Thanks :)

I explained my reasoning (yes, it involved a little confusion). How is one off the cuff question "pressure"? I had no pressure from anyone, just a question I felt was fair based on my earlier post.

Not defensive. Offensive. :D

Bolton's question may have prompted you to feel that you had to offer up some thoughts. So you threw something together. But in an attempt to say something new, you failed to make any sense.

You really haven't explained your reasoning. Unless you're basically just saying that you were confused and wrong?

Also, can you clarify - was your post 55 a cross-post with my post 54?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, no.

Lots of silly back-and-forth between what's the proper way for an innocent to react in such-and-such situation --guilty of it myself-- that I have my doubts will actually get us anywhere.

If that's what we're basing evidence on at this stage, I still say Westerling over-thought Reed's question on the 'hider' role.

People often focus on how an innocent would behave, which as you say isn't really that useful since there isn't a right answer. A more useful question is: how wouldn't a killer behave? Later in the game there is an answer to that question, and you can actually get somewhere. But until that point, this is what we're left with to tease over.

There's no need to focus on the Westerling/Estermont/Reed triumvirate though - what do you think about Tarth? He seems to have just been floating around until something interesting appeared and then jumped on the first thing that came up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not defensive. Offensive. :D

Bolton's question may have prompted you to feel that you had to offer up some thoughts. So you threw something together. But in an attempt to say something new, you failed to make any sense.

You really haven't explained your reasoning. Unless you're basically just saying that you were confused and wrong?

Also, can you clarify - was your post 55 a cross-post with my post 54?

aw, I see what happened. Look, the back and forth seemed to me like Reed was teasing and you were getting upset. On a read that happens after the fact, that is the way it looked to me.

When I looked back again, there was another comment that fit with my original impression, so yes, we cross posted, but added into what I previous thought, it fit my impressions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

Early day one tone tends to be tit-for-tat, why are you so forgiving of Westerling, Reed?

I don't like this post from Bolton. I admit I'm a little biased since I'm not suspicious of myself, but for someone that thinks Day 1 needs to be a tit-for-tat and then comes back to ask how Ashford's hangin', I'm not impressed. Doesn't help that he merely echoes Estermont's sentiments here either.

Bolton before I call it a day. Nothing else has struck me as any more suspicious than the next. Catch you all tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep forgetting how small this game is. It feels like we're still waiting on more people to show when in reality pretty much everyone is participating. Has Frey shown up yet?

There's no need to focus on the Westerling/Estermont/Reed triumvirate though - what do you think about Tarth? He seems to have just been floating around until something interesting appeared and then jumped on the first thing that came up.

Um, isn't that sort of how you get conversation going? Jumping on things that stick out to you.

No opinion yet on Tarth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep forgetting how small this game is. It feels like we're still waiting on more people to show when in reality pretty much everyone is participating. Has Frey shown up yet?

Um, isn't that sort of how you get conversation going? Jumping on things that stick out to you.

No opinion yet on Tarth.

Well sure, but if your objective is to get a conversation going, you do more than just say "I agree with you."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like this post from Bolton. I admit I'm a little biased since I'm not suspicious of myself, but for someone that thinks Day 1 needs to be a tit-for-tat and then comes back to ask how Ashford's hangin', I'm not impressed. Doesn't help that he merely echoes Estermont's sentiments here either.

I forgot, no two people can find the same thing suspicious in this game, otherwise one of them is evil :P

Your reaction to Westerling's accusation just rang a little false to me. Like for example, I'm taking a more adversarial tone right now in addressing people because I want them to react in a way that helps me get a better read on them.

You dismissed Westerling instead of trying to get your own read on him. That I find suspicious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×