So you don't like it when someone places a first vote, and you don't like when someone places a third vote -- do all votes have to be second votes with you? :p

I just know that when I'm the first to add on to votes like that I get all jumped on for appearing wolf-ish. So I just wanted to point out someone else in the same situation :)

Well then let me say that the fact that you haven't voted yet appears wolf-ish.

Actually, upon further reflection, I'm much more like Chief Bromden. Only not Indian and not 6'11".

huh?

You don't have to be confused anymore, we switched games.

did you get hold of Poli's crack?

Do you mean qrack?

Point of interest:

This might be metagaming, but Danny as much as said in the leadup that he was trying to get all of the roles in, and more or less succeeded. It sounded like the one role not there (the "interesting" one or whatever) was a non-essential side role.

This sounds to me like every role in the rules is in the game.

And that means we, for sure, have at least four standing wolves, with an additional sympathizer in this game.

Quick question for Danny: Do players with publically known roles (i.e. roles revealed in the first post of the thread) also have non-essential side roles (the ones that can't be revealed)? Or for the public roles, is that their only role?

Catching up.

as long as you don't take that second vote off them


that line of thinking was in vogue for a while but people don't really apply it anymore but if you want to use that as an excuse to vote me go right ahead.

I honestly had no idea how many votes EF had when I voted him, but his actions I felt warrented a vote.

Vote count:

So he votes PB, then Hoops for a while to see if anything happens. Nothing happens so he goes PB again and then jumps off PB to go Lathum. I'm normally a vote changer at heart, but good god what the hell is he doing.

Everything that I've seen so far today EF looks the worst, almost like he is fishing for votes on some of the top players today.

It's always something, isn't it :) I generally don't vote early on Day 1 because there is so little to go on and I don't like just randomly voting.

So how the hell do you vote day 1 then?

its a good thing the theme of this game is mental illness, because i think this is the most F*#ked up thread i have ever seen.

vote ntn

Been quiet this game, is quiet generally and the longer a game goes on the harder it generally is to vote out the quiet ones.

I throw out something based on gut feeling before I leave from work for the day. Admittedly not that much better :)

Or else I wait until it's a two or three horse race and put my vote where it keeps things slightly even.

Could be but what role? Must unvote three times every day? Must move vote with no rhyme or reason? I would get it if there was a reason for all the wackiness, but "just playing the role" is only going to lead to shitty vote analysis as the game goes on.

At some point it has to stop and it seems EF has wasted most of day 1 just moving his vote around for no reason whatsoever.

Yea, but as was pointed out to me last game that is just what ntn does.

He hasn't been quiet.. he's been absent. He hasn't checked in yet. I think it's a bit disingenuous to make him one of the lead vote getters when he hasn't even had a chance to play yet.

Vote ntndeacon

This makes it a tie. Let's see what shakes where.

That's right. It's what he does. If he's a wolf it's a real problem trying to vote him out later in the game. Hence my D1 vote. Plus as Telle points out he's not been quiet, he's been absent.

According to pass's vote count that actually puts him ahead a vote.

But that's the thing. He's usually this quiet. So you can wait for him to have a chance to play, but when he does, you'll probably be disappointed. I think 49 hit the nail on the head, that it gets harder to vote for the quiet folk later in the game -- because by then, we've all got our own pet theories based on what the less quiet folk have said.

doesnt mean you shouldnt vote for him.

I think you're missing dubb's vote.

I've got four on each. Did you miss Dubb voting for EagleFan?

True, however if read through last game my vote for him was shit on for that same reason. Just thought I should get that out there as it was pointed out to me.

Yes.

You think there's a person in this game who doesn't need therapy? ;)

You post that as if encouraging a no lynch vote.. Is that even possible this game? If so, what is the mechanic for that? Just out of curiosity.

:D

me :)

I think it was just a joke. The story relates to making someone leave therapy even though the werewolf mechanic is to vote out needies.

Like Dubb said, it was just a joke. Moderators need to have fun too. What happens in a tie is not known to the group. So, you can vote no lynch and what not, but you won't know what happens for sure.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

My lack of getting the joke might suggest that I suffer from "Paranoid personality disorders"

UNVOTE NTNDEACON
VOTE NO LYNCH


If all the villagers have some sort of role, I think the risk of getting rid of one is just too great.

Pass: I don't read Danny's message as suggesting there is a no lynch option at all. Merely we can try and see if there is one, but there's no promise about what will happen if we go that route.

Fixed.

How do we vote out needies if we are too afraid to lynch villagers? How do we get information that leads to the lynching of needies if we are afraid to lynch villagers? I do not think this is a good idea Pass.

I'm wary of anyone who has a run on them this early, so I'd like to introduce a third person to the mix.

I'm kind of stuck on the ntndeacon issue. I'm all for getting rid of quiet players, if only for a long-term deterrent. However, it's an easy vote for wolves to hide behind, or argue against. I'm thinking something more random is more likely to rile the Needies up.

As less-than-enthusiastic as I am about our current vote-getters, I don't like the idea of no lynch. Plus from the way Danny phrased things I'm guessing that somebody's getting lynched regardless and we just don't know who.

I just popped him an email to ask. I read it the same way you did, but I also read what Abe said last game the same way, so I thought it was just me.

BTW, I think it's time for our absolute ban on editing to come to an end. Back in the old days we use to be able to do an immeadiate for punctuation, spelling, missed word, etc. This was, to my knowledge, never abused. I liked it.