I voted for cristigale. She was the second to say that her Prize Power implied that none of the Prize Powers could have been responsible; right on the heels of dedoporno saying such. I found the positioning of her statement questionable, as well as some of her other posts (which admitted always ping my scumdar for some reason).

If you will look at my posts, I have been trying to push discussion on the post restriction angle, to see what people have to say on the issue. My hope was to see who would vote and say what. At that point I would have posted more on my reasoning.

Now with flubbucket's ambiguous statement above, I am unsure what to think. I don't know if he was saying that it wasn't a player at all, and just a triggered event, or he was just reminding us all of a point he thought we all might be ignoring. I think that was flubbucket's plan; to be ambiguous. I find it a little maddening, but... fair enough. ;)

lol

Folks, I was kidding about drealmer as replacement. That's not something I can imagine for any mod-killed player unless the situation is absolutely dire.

Yeah, it's still bad even if you heard people do it.
Although I broke it few times, it was almost always one-off message, with little substance. Some taunt or little teasing after one of us died. I never had real conversation when I was player.
As admin I would appreciate very much if you and other stopped doing that.

Also, if you don't see difference in AFP's drealmers department from the game then I suggest you get better glasses.


You think he was under lynch-pressure? From whom?
He had 1 vote (by trent) and only one other person seemed to suspect him more seriously (bler) but otherwise I haven't noticed like there was much pressure on him.

Hi, flub. Remember this post?

Yes. The Cult Leader talk was gaining traction, from my perspective. The way Day 1 goes.. little things become big things towards the end. The timing of the post restriction was odd in that respect; it made it harder for him to defend himself.

Huh, no that's now how I see it.
Only person pursuing him for being cult leader was bler and if you look at post before he got his restriction imposed there doesn't seem like there is any movement against drealmer because of it. Like at all.

It was as much what was not being said as what was being said. Look at who is the top lynch target now: someone who hasn't even posted! I think drealmer7 was certainly an easier target than most.

Possible, but I don't think so.

Ahhh.

Don't make me vote for you. Let me be content to kill someone who isn't posting. Please?

I tend to agree with both of these.


Unless you want to consider some wild theory of a role/prize/whatever-type-of-power that makes you haiku for N amount of posts and then kills you, and drealmer's outburst was immediately followed by the modkill why do you think someone might have restricted him if it was a strategic move?

I would rather you vote for me than A_Future_Pilot. At least my wagon would have something decent to analyze.

To make it harder for him to defend himself, so that he would be easier to lynch. I already answered that in a previous post.

Clearly that is a forgery. Someone has hacked my account.

Point me towards Town's latest effective Day 1 wagon analysis, please.



[more dick pictures incoming]

Strawman (I am not even going to try and find one; too much effort). How about you talk about the merits of lynching someone who hasn't posted over someone who actually has a voting/posting history? That would be super.

Wouldn't a modkill or replacement with an active player, PLUS an actual lynch give us more information? Seriously, I am fine with you guys not agreeing with my reasoning with the drealmer7 thing; most people don't when I post analysis (one of the reasons I stopped bothering). However, I can't wrap my head around why lynching a player with NO posts at all is a good idea.

That's not a strawman at all. Not at all. You said that we should lynch someone with a posting history so we can do a lynch analysis. I'm asking for an example of the specific thing you mentioned - an effective Day 1 lynch analysis.

I'm sorry your memory suddenly turned up short when pressed for details of your reasoning.

Hi, I’m yog, have you met me? I give lots of detailed information about why I think lynching inactive/unhelpful players is a good idea on Day one. I bet if you hunted around, you might even find a link to a good explanation in this very thread. Unless, of course, that’s a strawman too, and also not worth the effort to investigate.


Hey, sweet! The old “you all are too dumb to get me so I stopped trying” argument! We’ll all try harder next time to agree with your brilliance if you’ll only promise to continue showering us with it.

More often than not drealmer ended up being the D1 lynch because he talks himself into trouble. Talking more seems more dangerous for him than talking less, wouldn't you say? I just don't see why someone would resort to exposing this ability as a strategic play to incapacitate drealmer and lynch him easier. Given his [drealmer's] history of wild theories and being suspicious of basically everyone else, especially on D1, letting him do his thing has worked quite good so far in getting him lynched. More often than not with next to no scum votes, too.

Anyway, I don't see much benefit in discussing this further right now. I'm with you regarding AFP. I see lynching a non-playing person for not playing practically useless. Especially one who asked for a replacement. Some people would say that it's better than no lynch. How is it better in this specific case?


@flub, is the original timer still on and relevant or are you looking for a sub?


Something that crossed my mind - we know that the player with the most votes at the end of the day will get lynched anyway. What we don't know (or at least I don't think so) is what will happen if there is a tie. I strongly suggest to try and avoid such a thing because we may end up losing 3 townies before the night has even started.