You're finding pushing for some action so that we hopefully can avoid a pretty much random lynch, when we have a deadline in 4-5 days and a game full of lurkers anti-town
? You'll have to explain that one for me...
People not voting are
acting anti-town. By the current pace, if the day doesn't peter out in a no-lynch, we'll end up with a pretty much random wagon. If the target has a strong claim, there's no way we'll find a (decent) second target in time.
There seems to be some sort of consensus forming that we should lynch a lurker, as opposed to trying to find out who the scum are. Zchinque:
No, a lurker lynch is more or less forced upon us by the mod and most of the players lurking. People don't seem to be interested in finding scum, they're only interested in not sticking their necks out.
I am surprised that his is defending someone who has voted for him with no explanation other than the extremely fallacious idea that because Zchinque played this way last time and was town then he must be town this time too. I don't know what to make of this. Zchinque:
It's called a meta-read - which amusingly, nmillar earlier in the game said he wasn't too fond of. I don't think he's saying that it means I'm town, put that it doesn't indicate me being scum,
I was not calling your pushing for some action anti-town, the anti town reference is to your earlier actions. I was referring to the 3 posts in twelve days one of which IMHO derailed the game by focusing everyone's attention on that single issue and the next one being nothing more than a lot of taking issue with semantics and being generally hypocritical. I don't find these actions very pro-town at all. I also don't find your sudden push for a vote to be very pro-town especially in light of your perceived culpability in the game dragging it's heels.
I am fully aware that it is not your fault that the majority of other players (those that could be bothered, that is) decided to wait for your response to their questions, but on realising this was the case, you had the option to post sooner.
As for the question of Nmillar's "Meta-read" I was aware of what he was doing, for me there is too much
meta-gaming going on here, it automatically disadvantages the newer player such as myself and CrazyBear by reducing the game to a collection of "well in game 4 this happened, but in game 6..." statements. I don't have the time or inclination to study every game on here to check the validity of the claims. That does not alter the fact that Nmillar's statement is, as you acknowledge, a non-argument.
I agree that there are too many people lurking, that this is also anti-town, and that the most likely outcome now is that a lurker will be lynched, but I think that you need to accept that you are partly to blame. I also agree that more players need to become more involved before the game becomes a collection of random lynches.
Having said all that I really don't know who to vote for. Do I vote for the person who I find most anti-town, or the person who I find most "lurky". This boils down to should I penalise someone for posting or another for not posting?
I think on the whole I would go with the not posting. Vote Robeasy