|
Post by Maverick on Jul 27, 2004 20:38:35 GMT -5
It seems as if the town’s records are a bit outdated. pieisgood, a representative of the Anonyma City Council, recently sent me notice that he is having trouble locating Beniah. But I remember that Beniah temporarily left Anonyma to tend to family matters in a neighboring town. Since some people are still unaware of his absence, I thought it would be best if I picked up for some of Beniah’s responsibilities until he comes back.
Now, I have several observations about this thread so far. Superhappyjen’s random voting should be held suspect. Her random voting seems to serve no purpose except for inciting paranoia and fear. She has targeted both Yaw and Griffey for placing random (but calculated votes) on people to start discussion. But Superhappyjen’s votes have been irrational or reactionary.
She first voted for Yaw and accused him of “being a meanie and voting for me.” She then voted for Griffey and implied that her recent absence from the board was suspicious. But why was Griffey’s absence suspicious? She didn’t say. Then she voted for ck for coming in late, which again isn’t supported with any kind of convincing reason. Then, without any prodding by Yaw after her last vote, Superhappyjen switched her vote back to Yaw. I can only assume that her contempt for Yaw’s vote is what caused that shift back.
We need to find the mafia in this town. They have overtaken this game three times and killed many people in the process. With that said, we don’t have time to watch this kind of voting circus. It only distracts us from finding the mafia members that control Anonyma.
In my younger days, I came to learn that serial killers are often very unpredictable and reactionary. For this reason, I am leaning toward the idea that Supperhappyjen is the serial killer rather than a mafia member. With the opportunity to talk to each other at night, mafia members tend to be more coordinated in their attacks.
Also note the following comment by Supperhappyjen:
Supperhappyjen
Serial killers are paranoid people. Knowing the chaos they put into the lives of other people, it’s difficult for them to not fear that they will die by the same fate.
After having investigated this thread so far, I choose to Vote: Superhappyjen.
|
|
|
Post by AuntieSocial on Jul 27, 2004 20:53:10 GMT -5
Welcome to Anonyma, Maverick. In most small towns it might be customary to send a Welcome Wagon representative with a nice basket of goodies. I'm sure you will understand our reluctance to do such things, especially in light of the use of the town's wagons in recent history. Instead, please accept my humble welcome.
It is quite admirable of you to step in and tend to Beniah's business while he is tending to family business. Since this is such an honourable jesture, I will lift my previously random accussation in the direction of your predecessor (as it was only random at this point)
Your case against Jen is interesting, but I will refrain from any action at this time.
UNVOTE: BENIAH (MAVERICK)
|
|
|
Post by Griffey on Jul 27, 2004 21:17:38 GMT -5
jen quote
Ok, I thank you for actually giving me a reason for your FOS. However, I find this logic to be a little difficult to follow. First of all, 2 votes (random votes, at that) on someone, out of six, really don't mean much at this point in the game. I really was just trying to be random. I admit it probably could have been more productive to prod as many different people as possible. But whatever, two votes (even if random) are more likely to get a more interesting response, so it gets info either way.
Second of all, I didn't change my vote because your pointed that out; it was because more people had posted and I was actually starting to get evidence (if shaky and circumstantial) to start making some kind of vote that wasn't completely random. Because to be quite honest, watching people random vote a bazillion times is not my favorite thing in the world. My schedule is messed up enough as it is, I can't get on that often, and if I check in I'd like it to have some point other than seeing who random-voted who today.
Third, I wasn't so much defending you, jen, as trying to discredit ck's argument. You haven't done anything that sends up a little red scum flag in my mind, so I don't have any real reason not to defend you. So you annoyed me a little with random votes, that doesn't mean you're a criminal.
Well, that's all. My vote still stands until ck says something to change it.
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Jul 27, 2004 21:53:12 GMT -5
AuntieSocial, thank you for your welcome and for removing your vote. I understand your not sending out a Welcome Wagon in our current circumstances. I remember a time when the wagon was a courteous service provided by our local sheriff. The local patrol officers used to provide the Welcome Wagon to residents as a kind gesture toward the community.
I should take a moment to caution people on my case against Jen. Please, don't take my word for it but judge her for yourself. My vote for her at this point is to pressure her to come up with reasons for her votes. At this point, it looks like her reasons are weak and incoherent. But, I'll admit, sometimes well-meaning townspeople can become quite scared themselves.
Jen must do two things to absolve my suspicion of her now.
1. She must tell us why she has shifted her vote several times.
2. She must tell us why she voted for Yaw twice, including why she is sticking with her vote for Yaw now.
I'd also be interested in hearing Jen tell us why we should trust her votes. Right now, I'm not sure any of us can gain anything from her randomness except for confusion.
|
|
|
Post by Yaw on Jul 27, 2004 22:01:18 GMT -5
FOS: Maverick
Looks like he has quite a bit invested in justifying an unvote of Superhappyjen.
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Jul 27, 2004 22:08:35 GMT -5
FOS: MaverickLooks like he has quite a bit invested in justifying an unvote of Superhappyjen. I find this interesting considering the fact that you are currently voting for her also. Besides, you are the first one to point out the following: YawAccording to the quote above, you and I both agree that voting randomly over and over doesn't serve much of a purpose. Why, then, would you turn a finger of suspicion at me?
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Jul 27, 2004 22:12:54 GMT -5
I'm sorry, I misread Yaw's statement. I read the words an unvote as a vote, which confused me. But now I understand.
I find it interesting that you think I have much invested in an unvote of Superhappyjen. What would lead you to such a conclusion?
|
|
|
Post by Superhappyjen on Jul 27, 2004 22:13:08 GMT -5
quote author=Maverick link=board=mafia&thread=1090260807&start=75#5 date=1090978715]Now, I have several observations about this thread so far. Superhappyjen’s random voting should be held suspect. Her random voting seems to serve no purpose except for inciting paranoia and fear.[/quote] Am I making you paranoid and fearful Mav? You shouldn't have to worry, we're both just townies right?
I've been on this board long enough for everyone to realize that I often behave irrationally. This hardly makes me a criminal.
Since this is my first time playing this game I'm not sure how to do this.
I quit random voting as soon as the discussion became more interesting. I'm getting tired of people being on my case about it.
This makes no sense since the mafia members have not been able to talk to each other yet. So how would they be more coordinated than the sk at this point?
So because I was paranoid that the sk was going to kill me I must be the sk? Seems like crap logic to me.
Since Beniah is away and you've just started posting for him, I don't have much to vote on. But your jumping on the suspect-Jen bandwagon is troubling me. I don't think my random voting is SO annoying that you would rather lose the game than have it continue.
But anyway. UNVOTE: YAW
The next time I vote, I assure you, I will have a reason.
|
|
|
Post by Narninian on Jul 27, 2004 22:18:22 GMT -5
I've been on this board long enough for everyone to realize that I often behave irrationally. This hardly makes me a criminal. This makes no sense since the mafia members have not been able to talk to each other yet. So how would they be more coordinated than the sk at this point?
|
|
|
Post by Yaw on Jul 27, 2004 22:26:37 GMT -5
Maverick
You're assuming that I'm voting for her because of the excessive randomness. I'm not. And her most recent post responding to you only solidifies my reasoning.
Why would I turn an FOS on you? Because if she's mafia, she must have a partner. So I'm looking for reactions in other players as well.
Maverick
Well, it looks like you were seeing where the lynch-wagon was likely to be, and getting on it so as not to be left out. But if Jen's your partner, then you really don't want to be lynching her despite the vote. So your post looks to me like you really want her to say something good that will divert the bandwagon away from her.
|
|
|
Post by pieisgood on Jul 28, 2004 11:59:47 GMT -5
Vote Count:
Ck: (1) Griffey
Superhappyjen: (3) Yaw, Ck, Maverick
Narninian: (1) MMCL
6 to lynch.
NOTE: Deadlines will only come in the day if discussion slows down too much, or in the night if I'm not getting choices. Anybody who, at night, has not sent a night choice by the deadline will be assumed to have made no choice that night.
-pie
|
|
|
Post by Superhappyjen on Jul 28, 2004 12:23:12 GMT -5
Yaw, ck and Mav. You are distracting from finding real scum by turning your suspicions on me. (three scum, three votes, I hope that's a coincidence).
|
|
|
Post by Superhappyjen on Jul 28, 2004 12:49:33 GMT -5
I've read over the posting and I'm pointing the FOS at Mav and ck. It may seem like I am only retaliating against people voting against me, but isn't creating a bandwagon against an innocent scummy behaviour?
Yaw's vote on me genuinely seems to be random, ck's and Mav's does not.
ck was the first to vote for me for "a reason" claiming my random voting was scummy behaviour. At the time Narn had two random votes, so a vote there might have been two suspicious. The three other people with votes on them were me, Benaih/Mav, and Yaw(I was voting Yaw at the time). I believe Mav is ck's partner so he wouldn't vote for him. The two choices to vote for were Yaw and I. My random voting here made me an easy target because the mafia wouldn't have voted for Yaw and risked that I would change my vote again and it would be more difficult to lynch. Also, they knew they could easily rouse suspicions against me. When someone chided ck that he was being scummy, he replied that he was just pointing something out, or some such. But ck hadn't "just pointed something out" he'd voted.
Later, when Mav joined the board to replace Benaih, he began with a long winded bit of crap logic about why he thought I was the sk. Obviously, he was following ck's lead.
I can only vote for one of you guys, and ck already has a vote on him so:
VOTE:ck
|
|
|
Post by nonny on Jul 28, 2004 13:22:23 GMT -5
[ot] this is just from aim that ck is having problems.... [/ot]
But Jen if I remember correctly then Yaw did have a reason for voting for you and wasn't completly random. And he was the first to vote for you. But so far it seems as though you are only doing OMGUS votes.
When Mav said that you jen seems to be a sk because you hope they don't kill you that does make perfect sense. It like trying to distance yourself from the sk by thinking you are it's target.
Btw Welcome to the game Mav.
|
|
|
Post by Yaw on Jul 28, 2004 13:25:31 GMT -5
Superhappyjen
Ok, for those who don't know, here's how I play.
First vote -- Completely random. I don't bother with random.org, but there's no reasoning to this one.
Second vote -- Initiation of a bandwagon. To get the game going, I'll find the most fishy thing happening and justify a vote there as best as I can. Then I can see people react.
Third vote -- Scum. Once people are reacting to something, I can evaluate behaviour and pick out who is mafia. (I have some problems picking out SKs, as most of what I look for is mafia-specific, rather than night killer-specific. Still, in this case it'll take out one group and we can go from there.)
This game is the very strange situation where my random vote happens to be the person acting strangest for vote 2...who in turn happens to be the person with the scum tells for vote 3. Nevertheless, I can assure you that my vote is no longer random.
|
|