I’m linking posts because if I did quotes this would be way too long.
The deadline. One of the lesser reasons, but it is a factor. We have to choose someone by the 24th. We have to lynch (I know we can do a no lynch, but it would be a bad idea to do so) and you are the best candidate – for the reasons listed in my previous post and those listed below.
Post 37 - You start the game off wondering how to find out information. That’s fine, most people with their first mafia game have no clue how to go about doing things on the first day. But, and I’m not trying to nitpick you here, you could have easily done a little research into other games and checked out what actions were taken in those. This is not a serious offense by any means and I’m not trying to blow it out of proportion, but it shows that you didn’t take the time to look into the game seriously.
Post 70 - As of this point in the game you have said nothing of any worth and continue to ask “What do we do?” You had mentioned that maybe a no lynch was an option here but that you were unsure, which I thought was good, seeing as I was the one who asked people to throw out every option. But when it was brought up that a no lynch on day one is always a bad idea you never mentioned it again and went back to your, “I’m new to online mafia” defense.
Post 77 - I’m using this post to point out that you talk about MexicanBJ stating that “Mafia members tend to stay active to divert attention away from each other.” You also semi-support the “lynch an experienced player” here, something Stratford was for.
Post 94 - You say that inactivity isn’t a big deal, when it really is, and then continue to point out an inactive person as suspicious because of his inactivity. Eor is a known around here as a very good mafia player. It’s easy to point the finger at him and people are often willing to jump on him because he is good. Ronike at least can probably back me up on that one. It’s easy to say that people might not have time to post constantly or big posts, and then immediately put suspicion on someone who is always looked with a wary eye. But you use the reasoning of him being inactive to begin. That logic makes no sense.
Post 95 - The post I pointed out earlier regarding your comment on MexicanBJ’s comment was so I could reference it here. There you agree with him that mafia would probably be active. You then point out here that most people assume that mafia lay back so they stay active. As supported by my previous comment, you are promoting the idea that “inactivity means someone isn’t mafia.” Maybe not in those exact words, but close enough. Who was inactive at this time that you hadn’t pointed fingers at? Stratford?
Post 113 - This is a very weak case of you defending Stratford, but it’s subtle and it’s there. The rest of the post goes along with your following two posts.
Post 115 and Post 116 - You go back to your “Nothing to go off of, I don’t know who to vote for.” It should have been pretty apparent by this time that day one there is never much to go off of. I know it is hard on day one and when you are new, but posting that you don’t know what to do just to be active doesn’t help anything and in fact makes it look like you want to stick around but don’t want to be noticed – a very similar strategy to Stratford.
Post 127 - Another case you semi-defending Stratford. It is a logical point to make and many of us had this issue around this time, but you still made the point to do this for Strat.
Post 156 - You act like you want to talk about something, but you never actually do. Figuring out who targeted Marshy, or who Marshy talked about would have been a good idea – still is in fact – but you don’t elaborate. Instead you show us how little dedication you have and aren’t willing to go back and look. Either you didn’t care, or you were lazy.
Post 159 - You do the same thing here as with your post I linked above. You state something to do, don’t elaborate on it, and then never bring it up again. It’s as if you want us to think you’re contributing something and then not really doing it. This is poor play even if you are town.
Post 162 - You again talk about how you don’t feel like going back through the thread. As I said before, going back and looking at previous posts is an integral part of mafia. So either you don’t need to because you don’t have to look for reasons, or you don’t care about the game enough to do your research.
Post 188 - You barely defend yourself here and instead shift the attention to omis?. Yes I agree omis? has some suspicion behind his posts, whether it be the general makeup of them, the leadership thing, or his poor posts at the beginning of the game. I have stated my reasons previously why I don’t think we should lynch him today and I don’t like the fact that you completely divert the attention away from you onto someone who had a lot of people against him on day one. Don’t get me wrong, no one likes to be targeted in mafia, but you did a poor job of stating your case.
Post 191 - This is still a poor reason. If you have something to say, even if it is repeating what someone else said or agreeing then at least you are contributing something that pertains to the point of the game. Even an “I agree that omis? is suspicious” would be better than, “others said it so I don’t see why I should post.”
So you want my reasons out on the table? There they are. You post strategies to seem useful, and then do no follow up of any kind. You defend inactivity, and yet attempt to use is as a starting point of discussing Eor. You defend Stratford, even if it was meant to be as a kind thing to do, it now comes off as a subtle way to stop him being targeted. You show us through various posts that you don’t have the dedication to the town to even go back through the thread and read. Instead of giving valid reasons towards your defense you divert attention to someone else, conveniently someone who had plenty of people against him on day one.
Yes I found you suspicious when I originally voted for you and there is why. I feel we will be taking out a mafia with a junglefever lynch, and if he turns out to be town, then we're taking out a weak link.
You want to know exactly why? Well if you had carefully read the posts Ronike and myself made you would see a few outlined ideas as to why. But if you want I’ll point them out more directly.
The deadline. One of the lesser reasons, but it is a factor. We have to choose someone by the 24th. We have to lynch (I know we can do a no lynch, but it would be a bad idea to do so) and you are the best candidate – for the reasons listed in my previous post and those listed below.
Post 37 - You start the game off wondering how to find out information. That’s fine, most people with their first mafia game have no clue how to go about doing things on the first day. But, and I’m not trying to nitpick you here, you could have easily done a little research into other games and checked out what actions were taken in those. This is not a serious offense by any means and I’m not trying to blow it out of proportion, but it shows that you didn’t take the time to look into the game seriously.
Post 70 - As of this point in the game you have said nothing of any worth and continue to ask “What do we do?” You had mentioned that maybe a no lynch was an option here but that you were unsure, which I thought was good, seeing as I was the one who asked people to throw out every option. But when it was brought up that a no lynch on day one is always a bad idea you never mentioned it again and went back to your, “I’m new to online mafia” defense.
Post 77 - I’m using this post to point out that you talk about MexicanBJ stating that “Mafia members tend to stay active to divert attention away from each other.” You also semi-support the “lynch an experienced player” here, something Stratford was for.
Post 94 - You say that inactivity isn’t a big deal, when it really is, and then continue to point out an inactive person as suspicious because of his inactivity. Eor is a known around here as a very good mafia player. It’s easy to point the finger at him and people are often willing to jump on him because he is good. Ronike at least can probably back me up on that one. It’s easy to say that people might not have time to post constantly or big posts, and then immediately put suspicion on someone who is always looked with a wary eye. But you use the reasoning of him being inactive to begin. That logic makes no sense.
Post 95 - The post I pointed out earlier regarding your comment on MexicanBJ’s comment was so I could reference it here. There you agree with him that mafia would probably be active. You then point out here that most people assume that mafia lay back so they stay active. As supported by my previous comment, you are promoting the idea that “inactivity means someone isn’t mafia.” Maybe not in those exact words, but close enough. Who was inactive at this time that you hadn’t pointed fingers at? Stratford?
Post 113 - This is a very weak case of you defending Stratford, but it’s subtle and it’s there. The rest of the post goes along with your following two posts.
Post 115 and Post 116 - You go back to your “Nothing to go off of, I don’t know who to vote for.” It should have been pretty apparent by this time that day one there is never much to go off of. I know it is hard on day one and when you are new, but posting that you don’t know what to do just to be active doesn’t help anything and in fact makes it look like you want to stick around but don’t want to be noticed – a very similar strategy to Stratford.
Post 127 - Another case you semi-defending Stratford. It is a logical point to make and many of us had this issue around this time, but you still made the point to do this for Strat.
Post 156 - You act like you want to talk about something, but you never actually do. Figuring out who targeted Marshy, or who Marshy talked about would have been a good idea – still is in fact – but you don’t elaborate. Instead you show us how little dedication you have and aren’t willing to go back and look. Either you didn’t care, or you were lazy.
Post 159 - You do the same thing here as with your post I linked above. You state something to do, don’t elaborate on it, and then never bring it up again. It’s as if you want us to think you’re contributing something and then not really doing it. This is poor play even if you are town.
Post 162 - You again talk about how you don’t feel like going back through the thread. As I said before, going back and looking at previous posts is an integral part of mafia. So either you don’t need to because you don’t have to look for reasons, or you don’t care about the game enough to do your research.
Post 188 - You barely defend yourself here and instead shift the attention to omis?. Yes I agree omis? has some suspicion behind his posts, whether it be the general makeup of them, the leadership thing, or his poor posts at the beginning of the game. I have stated my reasons previously why I don’t think we should lynch him today and I don’t like the fact that you completely divert the attention away from you onto someone who had a lot of people against him on day one. Don’t get me wrong, no one likes to be targeted in mafia, but you did a poor job of stating your case.
Post 191 - This is still a poor reason. If you have something to say, even if it is repeating what someone else said or agreeing then at least you are contributing something that pertains to the point of the game. Even an “I agree that omis? is suspicious” would be better than, “others said it so I don’t see why I should post.”
So you want my reasons out on the table? There they are. You post strategies to seem useful, and then do no follow up of any kind. You defend inactivity, and yet attempt to use is as a starting point of discussing Eor. You defend Stratford, even if it was meant to be as a kind thing to do, it now comes off as a subtle way to stop him being targeted. You show us through various posts that you don’t have the dedication to the town to even go back through the thread and read. Instead of giving valid reasons towards your defense you divert attention to someone else, conveniently someone who had plenty of people against him on day one.
Yes I found you suspicious when I originally voted for you and there is why. I feel we will be taking out a mafia with a junglefever lynch, and if he turns out to be town, then we're taking out a weak link.
