Werewolf XXXIX: The Lady of La Rochelle–GAME OVER.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Jonathon Ezarik-- he seems to be questioning me too hard on the Cardinal guard thing. Why? No one says they're a musketeer (a bad guy, whatever), even the bad guys, and yet there are always bad guys. So what's the big point about actually saying "I am a guard" or not? Ask me once, okay, no big. Ask me a second time, much, much later, seems like an attempt to divert attention from oneself.

The point is if we have a role that allows us to check the validity of a statement then the claims of being in the guard are very important. I'm not saying that we do have such a role, but by avoiding coming out and declaring openly that you are in the guard seems like you're worried that someone might check to see if you're telling the truth or not.

I'll drop this whole thing once you come out and claim to be in the guard. What's the harm in doing that?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

The point is if we have a role that allows us to check the validity of a statement then the claims of being in the guard are very important. I'm not saying that we do have such a role, but by avoiding coming out and declaring openly that you are in the guard seems like you're worried that someone might check to see if you're telling the truth or not.

I'll drop this whole thing once you come out and claim to be in the guard. What's the harm in doing that?

This is a topic that comes up from time to time.. about if it is too much OOG to force people or to strongly encourage people to come out and say "I'm a villager" or such at the start. Some people liken it alot to reading lines out of PMs to associate fellow villagers. At times the GM puts rules on a person with the soothsayer type role (one who can read if someone's sentence is true or false) and don't even allow them to scan sentences like that, but instead force them to only scan sentences that occur during normal conversations.

I do remember one time that we had a game with no soothsayer role where someone (maybe it was barkeep? I don't remember who) made the observation closer to the end of the game that checking in everyone had said they were a "villager" except those who were wolves at the start.

I guess I see it as a fine line between being too OOG to force people to say sentences like that...

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Following up on what I said before (matching two UTR players), I think we should start the focus now. BrianD has a vote already. I have pointed out Fouts, LSG and path as three players with low post counts at this point.

So I will vote for one of them to get the ball rolling on a second candidate (hopefully).

VOTE FOUTS

Why Fouts? Well, we have had a history in past games, so I figure a vote from me on him will probably get his goat and he'll come on here and rip me a new one. If he does, then I'll switch over to one of the others (since they will be less active than that). If he doesn't, then I will truly know Fouts isn't paying attention.

You are correct. I haven't been paying attention to this thread. I have just now realized this game has started.

[Fouts]

Going to throw a vote up, just in case I am out late shopping today.

vote Chief Rum

reasons;
1) voted for me
2) isn't a guard
3) get him talking before he disappears for the week

I got many more reasons, but those will do.

[Chief Rum]

Sheesh. This is so pointless. It's sad that the need to say a simple sentence is so important, despite the fact we all know the wolves are lying about it, and everyone says it anyway.

Okay, I am a Cardinal guard. Satisfait?

You're all sheep, and I guess I am one, too. Fitting feasts for wolves.

I'm not changing my vote for Fouts. You're telling me, in the very same forum where has been posting in the other game, that he doesn't even notice this thread has leaped past that one in post count? Or that it is constantly ahead of his other game, despite being a "game that hasn't begun" yet? How about the role PM he had to have received? He even came into this thread and acknowledged it (post #74)!!

And now he's disappearing all day to shop. Since it appears he intends to remain UTR, despite the dangers of doing so, I am not moving my vote. In fact, he seems even more like a good candidate for the above reasons, but I will admit most of those are OOG reasons and shouldn't count. I will just note he is still good under the previous UTR reasons we outlined.

[Lathum]

I'll be out shopping today as well then at a bar for the games. I see no reason to change my vote but will be home before the deadline just in case.

[Alan T]

Hmm. good point chief..

Game started post #63

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Role PMs sent

GAME STARTS

If you voted prior to this post, please re-vote.

I hate to hit and run, but I will be out for most of the evening and will answer any questions late tonight or tomorrow AM

Fouts checked in post 74

Originally Posted by Fouts

Cardinals Guard checking in.

Then this morning..

Originally Posted by Fouts

You are correct. I haven't been paying attention to this thread. I have just now realized this game has started.

THe previous two quotes seem rather hard to both exist and be true.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Okay, I am a Cardinal guard. Satisfait?

Yes, thank you.

[BrianD]

Hey all. I've had a bunch of stuff going on this weekend so I haven't been able to check in until now. We have an open house in a couple of hours, but I hope to be able to read through the thread and contribute before lynch time.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Sheesh. This is so pointless. It's sad that the need to say a simple sentence is so important, despite the fact we all know the wolves are lying about it, and everyone says it anyway.

Okay, I am a Cardinal guard. Satisfait?

You're all sheep, and I guess I am one, too. Fitting feasts for wolves.

I'm not changing my vote for Fouts. You're telling me, in the very same forum where has been posting in the other game, that he doesn't even notice this thread has leaped past that one in post count? Or that it is constantly ahead of his other game, despite being a "game that hasn't begun" yet? How about the role PM he had to have received? He even came into this thread and acknowledged it (post #74)!!

And now he's disappearing all day to shop. Since it appears he intends to remain UTR, despite the dangers of doing so, I am not moving my vote. In fact, he seems even more like a good candidate for the above reasons, but I will admit most of those are OOG reasons and shouldn't count. I will just note he is still good under the previous UTR reasons we outlined.

You're trying awful hard to lynch me. Doesn't matter much to me, my role is pretty boring and duplicated. Have a nice day.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by BrianD

Hey all. I've had a bunch of stuff going on this weekend so I haven't been able to check in until now. We have an open house in a couple of hours, but I hope to be able to read through the thread and contribute before lynch time.

Welcome to the game Brian You're a bit behind the 8 ball right now

I'll make it a bit closer then since you're here

UNvote BrianD
vote Fouts

I read this as the current vote count now:

(3) BrianD - Ntndeacon (165), Blade (197), Sndvls (228)
(2) Dubb - Barkeep (120), Lathum (160)
(2) Fouts - ChiefRum (194), Alan (x)
(1) Coffee Warlord - Izulde (110)
(1) Lathum - Dubb (170)
(1) Lonestargirl - St.cronin (195)
(1) St.cronin - Anxiety (209)
(1) Chief Rum - Fouts (254)

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Welcome to the game Brian You're a bit behind the 8 ball right now

I'll make it a bit closer then since you're here

UNvote BrianD
vote Fouts

I read this as the current vote count now:

(3) BrianD - Ntndeacon (165), Blade (197), Sndvls (228)
(2) Dubb - Barkeep (120), Lathum (160)
(2) Fouts - ChiefRum (194), Alan (x)
(1) Coffee Warlord - Izulde (110)
(1) Lathum - Dubb (170)
(1) Lonestargirl - St.cronin (195)
(1) St.cronin - Anxiety (209)
(1) Chief Rum - Fouts (254)

Sorry, my vote count was slightly off. missed Tyrith's vote for hoops in it.

Here is what it should be:

(3) BrianD - Ntndeacon (165), Blade (197), Sndvls (228)
(2) Dubb - Barkeep (120), Lathum (160)
(2) Fouts - ChiefRum (194), Alan (261)
(1) Coffee Warlord - Izulde (110)
(1) Lathum - Dubb (170)
(1) Lonestargirl - St.cronin (195)
(1) St.cronin - Anxiety (209)
(1) Chief Rum - Fouts (254)
(1) Hoopsguy - Tyrith (92)

[SnDvls]

now that I see Brian has checked in
unvote BrianD

[Jonathan Ezarik]

I'm going to go with Fouts, too. I have a hard time buying someone saying they didn't know the game had started when they already checked in on the first day.

Vote Fouts

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Fouts and BrianD historically are players I enjoy having around. Not that LSG isn't a good player, but there have been a couple of games where she has been pretty much invisible.

I've only caught up to this post so far, but wanted to stop and say thanks. I sometimes feel like a bit player in these games and it is nice to see that I am at least noticed.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Fouts

You're trying awful hard to lynch me. Doesn't matter much to me, my role is pretty boring and duplicated. Have a nice day.

Actually, it has nothing to do with you. It has to do with getting two UTR players in a duel for the lynch. You just fit the bill, and your inconsistency about the game start just adds frosting to the cake.

Were it someone else who was playing UTR, I would focus on them.

Speaking of which, I actually am very much wondering where LoneStarGirl is. She always frets about losing early and getting killed off, so I try not to make her the focus on Day One, but she really is now the most obvious UTR player.

My vote sticks with Fouts, and I hope the rest of you will continue to make sure this ends up in a duel. I am truly out of a good while now, as I am heading to work, then probably working out, and then I might have plans. So could be back well after the lynch. Good luck, everyone.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Welcome to the game Brian You're a bit behind the 8 ball right now

I see that. I figured that I would have a bunch of no-check-in votes on me by the time I got here, but what can you do?

The only real issue I noticed as I was catching up was the Dubb/Barkeep situation. I found it odd that (to me) Barkeep didn't even hint at his dueling abilities and Dubb seemed to read two polar-opposite ability descriptions out of his words. It seemed like Dubb was trying very hard to put suspicion on Barkeep.

The part of that situation that worries me is that Dubb gets an awful lot of heat just for making the statements and would get even more if he killed Barkeep in a duel and Barkeep showed up good. I don't think a Muskateer would want that much heat at the start of the game. It could be a situation of Dubb hiding in plain sight, but I am not sure this is the case.

I think it might be worthwhile to look at the people that jumped on Dubb early. We may have Muskateers that saw an opportunity for a bandwagon and decided to jump on. This doesn't give us many people (Barkeep and Lathum), but it is something to think about.

[path12]

Originally Posted by BrianD

I've only caught up to this post so far, but wanted to stop and say thanks. I sometimes feel like a bit player in these games and it is nice to see that I am at least noticed.

We're all bit players on the bad guys and roled players stage.....

[Coffee Warlord]

Holy lot of pages to catch up on. Reading and voting after I give this a quick once over.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Okay, so I just went back and reread the rules and saw this:

You are all members of the Cardinals Guard, an elite fighting unit charged with protecting the Cardinal and to do his bidding. You have been sent ahead to enter St.Martin and assist holding the fort until the Cardinal arrives.

Chief, I'm sorry for busting your chops on this earlier. I didn't realize that we were all in the Guard, so it doesn't matter if someone claims to be or not.

I'm an idiot.

[Coffee Warlord]

Well, there's a lot of....something going on. Dubb I think is probably kosher, going off the gut instinct that wolves are rarely that gung-ho early on.

I never saw Barkeep say yay or nay on the duel request (may have missed it). Curious to see how that ends up.

That said...consider this a little ping to wake up one of my favorite WW players. Aren't you supposed to be competing with Blade for top posts?

Vote Hoops

[hoopsguy]

CW, not so far this game. If I'm around long enough I'm sure that will end up happening, however.

I haven't been around a whole heck of a lot over the weekend and when I have been I didn't see a ton of logic to pick sides in the Dubb/Barkeep showdown, for reasons I outlined in my one real post of "analysis" so far.

That said, if I was playing the role of a bad guy I would be trying very hard not to deviate from my standard operating proceedure. So any signs of me being overly quiet would, I think, be more likely to indicate I'm good than bad. Of course, maybe that would be an example of thinking too hard ...

[Blade6119]

UNVOTE BRIAND

VOTE LONESTARGIRL
Now she is the quietest person in the game(in my opinion) since brian came around for a little while...I dont think anyone questions what side of the talkative/quiet argument im on, hence my vote.

[DaddyTorgo]

HOME

[DaddyTorgo]

leaning toward voting fouts. as i said yesterday i think getting a duel under our belts early is sensible, particularly with an UTR player. i should be around more or less till lynch so i'll hold off on an actual vote now until things get a little more fleshed out, but a duel seems to be wise, in order for us to see the mechanic and get a little more information about people's skills and how a duel would play out. plus it's as good as just straight-up lynching anyone hmm?

[Tyrith]

UNVOTE HOOPS

Lots of random comments:
-Given a choice between equals today I'm going to vote for dubb. I honestly don't want to play WW with someone that can't refrain from having to play a bully role to get ahead, and can't keep the insults out of their play. I don't like feeling this angry day one and knowing that it's likely to be something that doesn't blow over.
-Related to Small Game 3 also: STOP READING SO MUCH INTO WEEKEND POST COUNTS. At this point we should all be aware that the weekend is _not_ a good time for a lot of people to play. Let people have lives, lest we start driving people off; I don't recall this rash of weekend play in the past.
-Fouts play is kind of weird, although I think it's possible for someone to just write a 10 second post then forget about this game for a while, and come back and say that. It doesn't make any sense as a deception play, it's too obvious.

No replacement vote for now, I'm too emotionally charged right now.

[Alan T]

Tyrith had his wheaties this morning

[Tyrith]

I really feel no compulsion to vote for LSG, because she's not the type of player that's going to remain under the radar for the entire game. She is quite capable of being loud and making her opinions known. I prefer to get rid of players that will stay turtled for the entire game. Post count is secondary to me; the important thing is making sure everyone takes a stance, and I think LSG isn't going to give us trouble in that regard.

Anyone have a vote count right now?

[BrianD]

I don't worry too much about people concerned over early post counts. I didn't check in until late and had a bunch of people vote for me. Once I showed up, people started taking their votes back, and I would be surprised if I stay on the block at the end of the day.

People use post counts for their early votes but then usually adjust when the late-comers finally show up. It is good for early conversation if nothing else.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I really feel no compulsion to vote for LSG, because she's not the type of player that's going to remain under the radar for the entire game. She is quite capable of being loud and making her opinions known. I prefer to get rid of players that will stay turtled for the entire game. Post count is secondary to me; the important thing is making sure everyone takes a stance, and I think LSG isn't going to give us trouble in that regard.

Anyone have a vote count right now?

(3) Fouts - ChiefRum (194), Alan (261), Jonathan (264)
(2) Lonestargirl - St.cronin (195), Blade (273)
(2) Dubb - Barkeep (120), Lathum (160)
(1) Hoopsguy - Coffee Warlord (271)
(1) Coffee Warlord - Izulde (110)
(1) Lathum - Dubb (170)
(1) BrianD - Ntndeacon (165)
(1) St.cronin - Anxiety (209)
(1) Chief Rum - Fouts (254)

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Tyrith had his wheaties this morning

Let me put the weekend post count thing another way: if any of you has a really busy day or two at work, would you want us to vote you out just because of that? Especially if the situation was temporary, you almost certainly would not. Then why are we going to crush people for having things to do on the weekends? These people we're voting for today aren't the classic quiet players; they are going to mix it up. So why are we going out of our way to kill them on day 1? There's also the theory that more information on Day 1 helps the bad guys much more than the good guys, which I can't really disagree with.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I prefer to get rid of players that will stay turtled for the entire game.

And who would that be? I dont think many players do that anymore, and i strongly attribute that to our day 1/2 lynching of the quiet players usually. I guess ill wait to see who you vote for for the answer to that question, since you got so worked up over i assume likely being lynched in the small game over your not showing up(granted, the wolves not killing was the nail..without it fouts or I would be dead)

[Tyrith]

brian, the only thing about the early vote thing is the danger of raw momentum if people show up too late. And it isn't something that ever really stirs up "conversation" beyond the same arguments about voting out quiet people that we've had in half the games before this. That said, I'm all for voting out quiet people, if they're actually quiet, and not people like you or Fouts that are usually talkative. You all aren't UTRs, so I know you'll get in there when the time comes.

[Blade6119]

Tyrith, who do you consider quiet then..you keep saying certain people are talkative, and would prefer to vote off actual quiet players. Who are they?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by BrianD

I don't worry too much about people concerned over early post counts. I didn't check in until late and had a bunch of people vote for me. Once I showed up, people started taking their votes back, and I would be surprised if I stay on the block at the end of the day.

People use post counts for their early votes but then usually adjust when the late-comers finally show up. It is good for early conversation if nothing else.

Like I said before, I think someone can post less but have meaningful posts, or post alot and say a bunch of nonsense. People are correct that weekends do affect some people's posting habits.. so I've tried to keep that in mind, but to some extent we have to have some reason to vote for someone on day 1.

Right now my vote is on Fouts simply because of the combination of the low post count, the less amount of participation so far in the thread and the "perceived" mistake he made in saying he didn't know the game was running after already checking in.

Last game showed how its very easy for someone to make a mistake and not be a wolf when it happened to me However its back to the whole have to have a reason to lynch someone. Unless something changes, I probably will keep my vote on Fouts, since even if he is telling the truth, he says we dont lose any great role with him so it feels like a win-win to gamble with to me.

I'm not pushing for anyone to follow a vote with me, just stating why I think you can't just give someone a pass because its a weekend though. I've tried my best to balance the weekend into my considerations.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

And who would that be? I dont think many players do that anymore, and i strongly attribute that to our day 1/2 lynching of the quiet players usually. I guess ill wait to see who you vote for for the answer to that question, since you got so worked up over i assume likely being lynched in the small game over your not showing up(granted, the wolves not killing was the nail..without it fouts or I would be dead)

I don't really care about SM3, that was just bad luck or highly skilled play by certain people. What has me worked up is DUBB, who would without a doubt be my vote if I had to put it in right now.

If people don't go UTR the entire game anymore then the tactic has perhaps outlived its usefulness. There's no need to keep doing the same things just because they worked in the past; if the situation that caused the problem is gone, let's do something else.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Tyrith, who do you consider quiet then..you keep saying certain people are talkative, and would prefer to vote off actual quiet players. Who are they?

My first vote for that would be ntn.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I don't really care about SM3, that was just bad luck or highly skilled play by certain people. What has me worked up is DUBB, who would without a doubt be my vote if I had to put it in right now.

If people don't go UTR the entire game anymore then the tactic has perhaps outlived its usefulness. There's no need to keep doing the same things just because they worked in the past; if the situation that caused the problem is gone, let's do something else.

I think your last statement is exactly what I have tried to outline. If everyone is scared to stay under the radar, then good we can use people's words or actions to try to lynch them. However I have yet to see a game of WW ever where there weren't people going under the radar. Usually day 1 is the day most people are around, but I gurantuee you that people will start being quieter as the week starts and they won't get any attention either as we all chase around after hunches.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I don't really care about SM3, that was just bad luck or highly skilled play by certain people. What has me worked up is DUBB, who would without a doubt be my vote if I had to put it in right now.

If people don't go UTR the entire game anymore then the tactic has perhaps outlived its usefulness. There's no need to keep doing the same things just because they worked in the past; if the situation that caused the problem is gone, let's do something else.

So basically your whole you would rather vote off truly quiet players was fluff. Got it...tyrith, i just dont understand your comments here..i likely wont, so im going to say have a good day and leave

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

My first vote for that would be ntn.

I retract my statement, thank you.

To be kind, ill say this...quiet is relative...if everyone talks more, the players who were average before fall to quiet. No matter how much everyone talks, people will be quiet. Quiet may mean 1 post or 50, it all just depends on how much everyone else has posted. So its very opinionated, and therefore prone to error

[Grammaticus]

I did not put this in the rules post, but will you please try to BOLD all future CHALLENGES and RESPONSES.

I realized this would help me and anyone else tracking to minimize any mistakes.

Thanks

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I'm not pushing for anyone to follow a vote with me, just stating why I think you can't just give someone a pass because its a weekend though. I've tried my best to balance the weekend into my considerations.

I agree that you don't give someone a pass because it is a weekend....mostly because I wasn't disagreeing with voting for quiet people. Weekends give a different availability for people, and early votes for quiet people tend to change when those quiet people show up and start playing.

[Tyrith]

Well, there's a difference here. If I were going to start voting for quiet players today, I would vote for NTN. Dunno if I'm going to do that. Quiet today doesn't really bother me like it used to. Alan brings up a good point; we should be aware of people that get quieter as the week goes on. However, some of that is also the way life goes -- for instance, I have two finals thursday, so if I'm still alive then and get quiet, and get lynched for it, that's not because I was necessarily a bad guy, but because life interfered. The main deal is that we've rooted out a lot of the perma-quiet players, which was I thought the point of the tactic when we started doing it.

Right now part of me would rather focus on getting rid of the perma-mean players that make the game less about strategy and more about revenge, which is a desire I myself am open to sometimes. So I don't know.

When I go back and forth like this sometimes that's because I can fully believe multiple different tactics might work. We could be served well by voting out people that aren't talking so far; we might not. This isn't cut and dry like that usually, so I have mental debates about it that sometimes show up in my posts. That's the way I am, for better or worse.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by BrianD

I agree that you don't give someone a pass because it is a weekend....mostly because I wasn't disagreeing with voting for quiet people. Weekends give a different availability for people, and early votes for quiet people tend to change when those quiet people show up and start playing.

All that serves to do is to screw the person that shows up last. We have to vote for someone, but when weekend play hasn't been standard procedure...

OOC: We need to come up with some board-wide policy for if we're going to do weekends or not. Get some open, out of game discussion going, and figure out how the players schedules go. The way that it usually gets made up as we go causes problems like non-participation: "What does everyone want to do about the weekend?" usually doesn't get everyone to respond, and if it happens sometime like mid-day Friday there isn't always a chance for everyone to respond. Mainly I think it'd be a good thing for everyone to KNOW what the schedule would be when they sign up instead of all this conjecture that can get randomly used against people.

[Alan T]

Well for whatever its worth, the last three games I was in that I've pushed for the vote the least active player strategy, we got a bad guy, a sorcerer role type bad guy and a good guy who was able to be used by a bad guy. So I don't think this strategy is necessarily outdated.

Does that mean this is the best strategy to use? Obviously getting those three were just luck.. but for me day 1 isnt about trying to throw the hailmary and get lucky.. for me day 1 is trying to reduce risk and limit damage we do to ourselves. Sometimes thats going after people who aren't going to be very talkative or contribute much anyhows.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

All that serves to do is to screw the person that shows up last. We have to vote for someone, but when weekend play hasn't been standard procedure...

OOC: We need to come up with some board-wide policy for if we're going to do weekends or not. Get some open, out of game discussion going, and figure out how the players schedules go. The way that it usually gets made up as we go causes problems like non-participation: "What does everyone want to do about the weekend?" usually doesn't get everyone to respond, and if it happens sometime like mid-day Friday there isn't always a chance for everyone to respond. Mainly I think it'd be a good thing for everyone to KNOW what the schedule would be when they sign up instead of all this conjecture that can get randomly used against people.

You're obviously very heated up over this because of your personal situation and impacts of it on your WW playing this weekend. While trying to not trivalize your concerns, I don't think a board wide stance is really needed. I personally like playing on some weekends because I get bored without WW.. and other weekends I dont have any availability. I personally don't see any problem with doing as we always have and just leave it up to the GM for eac game.

If its a game schedule that won't fit for you, just don't play is all I can suggest. I don't mean that in a mean way, its just impossible to please everyone all the time. I usually just leave it up to folks in my games who are playing, and set the default to longer play over the weekend instead of continuing over the weekend. But I dont see any reason to limit it if the people do want to play.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Well for whatever its worth, the last three games I was in that I've pushed for the vote the least active player strategy, we got a bad guy, a sorcerer role type bad guy and a good guy who was able to be used by a bad guy. So I don't think this strategy is necessarily outdated.

Does that mean this is the best strategy to use? Obviously getting those three were just luck.. but for me day 1 isnt about trying to throw the hailmary and get lucky.. for me day 1 is trying to reduce risk and limit damage we do to ourselves. Sometimes thats going after people who aren't going to be very talkative or contribute much anyhows.

I agree. But are Fouts and Brian and LSG really those people? LSG maybe, but I've found that she usually gets her opinion out there. We're not voting for really quiet people today.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I agree. But are Fouts and Brian and LSG really those people? LSG maybe, but I've found that she usually gets her opinion out there. We're not voting for really quiet people today.

I don't see any of the people in this game who I traditionally am critical about being entire game UtR players. Schmidty, Bulletsponge, etc are folks I have commented before about that and how it makes it difficult to not vote them when they are good.

By no means do I think Fouts is an UtR type player or a poor player, however Fouts admitted himself that it isn't any huge deal if he gets killed, we don't lose a big role and there still is the discrepency of his earlier statements that I pointed out.

Obviously I will be around the entire day and fully remain open to other alternatives. Just like I moved my vote off of BrianD earlier, I would happily do so again if given a better choice. One person still in my mind that I commented on before was Izulde who I had the same critical question of that I asked Dubb. Dubbs answered my question, even though I didn't like the answer, he did answer it. Izulde completely ignored it and hasn't been back since.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Alan T

You're obviously very heated up over this because of your personal situation and impacts of it on your WW playing this weekend. While trying to not trivalize your concerns, I don't think a board wide stance is really needed. I personally like playing on some weekends because I get bored without WW.. and other weekends I dont have any availability. I personally don't see any problem with doing as we always have and just leave it up to the GM for eac game.

If its a game schedule that won't fit for you, just don't play is all I can suggest. I don't mean that in a mean way, its just impossible to please everyone all the time. I usually just leave it up to folks in my games who are playing, and set the default to longer play over the weekend instead of continuing over the weekend. But I dont see any reason to limit it if the people do want to play.

I just don't like that we usually wait until Friday to make decisions for weekend play. It's not about my situation; let me make this clear: I'm angry about _DUBB_. The weekend thing just doesn't make any sense to me. When it comes to setting schedules, it's quite possible that you just screw over a couple of people by saying, oh, you have to play today with little warning. And that they're quiet for those days doesn't make them more likely to be a wolf. When it comes to today, if people being quiet over the weekend isn't more likely to make them a wolf, and the people have a history of not being quiet during the normal playing hours, why are we using it against them?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I just don't like that we usually wait until Friday to make decisions for weekend play. It's not about my situation; let me make this clear: I'm angry about _DUBB_. The weekend thing just doesn't make any sense to me. When it comes to setting schedules, it's quite possible that you just screw over a couple of people by saying, oh, you have to play today with little warning. And that they're quiet for those days doesn't make them more likely to be a wolf. When it comes to today, if people being quiet over the weekend isn't more likely to make them a wolf, and the people have a history of not being quiet during the normal playing hours, why are we using it against them?

I don't think we've ever held it against someone if they said ahead of time they woudlnt be around much. I remember one game I played where I couldnt be there on day 1 at all and said so before roles came out. No one voted for me except for Blade if I remember right.