Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Kdogg, I gotta throw one out there for you.. You have no votes and I have no idea what else to do.. I feel like the mafia got lucky this game in some sick way, and have been able to hide by voting who they NORMALLY vote with reciprocation and without raising any eyebrows.. If that makes sense...
So I think I understand what you're trying to do with the proposal to Bek, but with the stacking I am not sure you couldn't be guilty yourself, with some master plan behind the whole thing.. BUT I may be overthinking shit too, we'll see.
Kdogg, I gotta throw one out there for you.. You have no votes and I have no idea what else to do.. I feel like the mafia got lucky this game in some sick way, and have been able to hide by voting who they NORMALLY vote with reciprocation and without raising any eyebrows.. If that makes sense...
So I think I understand what you're trying to do with the proposal to Bek, but with the stacking I am not sure you couldn't be guilty yourself, with some master plan behind the whole thing.. BUT I may be overthinking nuts too, we'll see.
Higgs >>> Kdogg
Are you accusing me of being cahoots with Bek? Or maybe one of the reciprocal voting pairs in general? That's what I'm getting out of this...
I offered Bek a deal last round because I thought she was wrongfully in the runoff. I thought she had perfectly good reason to suspect you and your self-vote, and didn't think such justifiable suspicion warranted her inclusion in the runoff. I haven't seen anything to make me question my take on her, in which I'm leaning towards her innocence. She did totally own me through cooperation last game, so I have grounds to be wary... that's why I made the choice this time, whereas she did last round.
Funny thing is, Higgi, I made that deal earlier than I did last round precisely because of you. The way I saw things, we were heading to an all-tie situation with you as the deciding vote... AGAIN. Last time we went down that path, the all-tie plus Mafia whack brought us to a dead end with Bacon/NTRT. It looks like things are shaping up to be the exact same thing this time, which I was hoping to avoid. I've got a feeling I'm going to wind up railroaded for necessarily shaking things up - just like Bacon did...
It's got to be a pretty sweet gig, Higgi, laying back until everyone's votes have been reciprocated or are awaiting reciprocation. You like it so much, you've done it both rounds... Not saying that makes you guilty... just something I've noticed.
Something I've noticed to the point that I suggest everyone in Day Three wait until Higgi casts the first vote. I think it's one way to break out of this "all-tied with Higgi deciding" cycle we're falling into...
I'm keeping my vote with HGH, in line with my proposal.
i'm not accusing you, i said that i think i understand what you and your proposal with bek are trying to accomplish, I am not sure of anything right now and am just trying to 'stir the pot' as things are very unclear right now..
I was alluding to one of the reciprocal voting pairs in general.. As this round is shaping up to be just like the last, with everyone sticking to their normal vote, ie i vote Kel, you vote bek and so on.. I think the mafia might have fallen into one of those pairs and have used it to hide out and not bring attention to themselves.. I don't think i explained myself well enough up there.. Does this make more sense now??
I know I am dead and everything but I can't give up the opportunity to point out that Kdogg posted a incorrect tally. He left on his vote for Bek. I fixed it below.
Of course. I am very excited for the show. I have been listening to "I & Love & You" on repeat almost exclusively since I got it. It was a very slow winter for shows its nice that things are starting to pick up again.
Last night, I paid a visit to my 20" glass corncob after work (in custody of a friend since I've been in parental basement exile) and my brain wasn't exactly firing on all cylinders.
i'm not accusing you, i said that i think i understand what you and your proposal with bek are trying to accomplish, I am not sure of anything right now and am just trying to 'stir the pot' as things are very unclear right now..
I was alluding to one of the reciprocal voting pairs in general.. As this round is shaping up to be just like the last, with everyone sticking to their normal vote, ie i vote Kel, you vote bek and so on.. I think the mafia might have fallen into one of those pairs and have used it to hide out and not bring attention to themselves.. I don't think i explained myself well enough up there.. Does this make more sense now??
You understand my proposal, I understand what you're saying about Mafia hiding in a vote pairing. I think we're approaching the same problem from different angles here...
I think your waiting to vote last is creating the conditions for the all-tie. It led us to (I believe) a dead end after Day One, and I think we're replaying the same situation - curiously absent one complete voting pair - again this round. I'm not entirely sure what you are, but I know your voting behavior seems to be creating a favorable situation for the Mafia. That's why I'm suggesting that you, as the odd man out from established pairings, not linger until the end in Day Three. I figure you casting the first vote is the exact opposite of you waiting until votes are all lined up... I'd hope the exact opposite course of action on your part would lead to the exact opposite of a dead end.
I see what you're saying about two members of a voting pair being guilty. I'm going in that direction too, wanting to send a voting pair into a runoff. I still tentatively stand behind my arguments for expanding the runoffs to be as large as possible - it increases the likelihood a Mafia winds up in the runoff. (And I'm quite curious to discover whether we had a Mafia in our first runoff...) I think bringing a voting pair into a runoff helps to achieve that end. Unfortunately, I don't think we're likely to get another four-way runoff with nine players... but I'm still for having the biggest possible slate of candidates.
Even if you are correct about two Mafia hiding within one voting pair, that still leaves us with (if you believe both Bacon & NTRT were innocent) one floating Mafia who's not part of that pair.
So what you said makes sense to me - we seem to be heading in the same general direction here - except the part where your vote says that I (and by extension, Bek?) are guilty. She might be Mafia, but if she is I'm not in cahoots. I don't think she is, after what I saw in Day One, so I'm willing to trust her more than your average bear with the deal-making. I'm just trying to broaden the runoff field and get to the bottom of this.
You did get me thinking about which pair of players looks most guilty in tandem, though... I like where you're going with it, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree with Bek & myself. I think that if any voting pair looks suspicious together here, it would be Jack & Airline.
Bacon changed his vote to Airline when he stirred the pot; Bacon died in the vote. Jack sent Airline into the runoff; Jack changed his vote in the first runoff which kept Airline from being a viable candidate. Airline received zero votes in the runoff - a sure sign that zero Mafia wanted to vote for him. Jack & Airline have both voted for one another this round, and from their posts it seems to me both are telegraphing that they're hesitant and willing to change their votes.
You think maybe we should be barking up that tree?
Just for clarification I didn't intend to vote last or near last during this round... It was my girlfriends birthday so I was in Phoenix and drunk all weekend haha. I did notify everyone of my absence early on so everyone knew I wouldn't be in until Sunday.
Also, I wasn't actually trying to put guilt on you and Bek as i was trying to see if anyone would follow suit, 'stir the pot.'
I definitely think at least two of our mafia are in a voting pair, and if not, they are all just utilizing their regular votes with reciprocation to hide.
I do like the thought of getting a reciprocating pair in a runoff. I overlooked Airline's lack of votes and I believe that is a good avenue to go down. I feel semi-comfortable changing my vote to him. So that is what I am going to do.
Higgi >>> Airline
Additionally, if you would like me to cast the first vote next round that's cool with me, it hasn't been my intention to do it thus far, it is just how it worked out, but I'm down with that.
I think your barking up the wrong tree, maybe not entirely.
I was completely prepared to be in the runoff and was sort of surprised when i wasnt.
I am fine changing my vote from jack, but only if i was swayed by something. Im completely ok with voting for jack and keeping my vote that way because as a townsperson im always suspicious of the person who votes for me in the first round.
why decide on a pair (eap, hgh) and then immediately say the most likely pair are me and jack?
-When I Hear My Name -Dead Leaves and the Dirty Ground -Blue Orchid -Passive Manipulation -Red Rain -Death Letter -My Doorbell -Hotel Yorba -Same Boy You've Always Known -Lovesick -Little Ghost -We're Going to Be Friends -The Hardest Button to Button -Black Math -The Nurse -I Just Don't Know What to Do With Myself
Encore: -Ball and Biscuit -Seven Nation Army -Screwdriver
Post by handgunhipster on Mar 22, 2010 18:16:45 GMT -5
I don't know why I'm being voted for either.
I haven't been around much, but I had a pretty brutal foot surgery two weeks ago and I've been recovering. I should be around more now that I'm not in a constant painkiller haze.. Other than not being around much for medical reasons, I really haven't done anything suspicious except, I guess in some peoples minds, continue voting for my round one partner, and I only voted for her this round because she voted for me first.
I think you're looking in the wrong direction with a vote for me.
Jack & Airline don't seem so committed in their votes for one another, so I don't know if we should stack there.
Jen & Chief again? Or would we be better off with HGH & EAP?
At the time, I thought your & Jack's non-committal approach to your votes meant you two weren't so comfortable with keeping your votes for one another.
Once Higgi brought up this theory that Mafia were working in tandem, things changed. I had some puzzle pieces lying around that didn't fit until he put them into context. For better or worse, he's influencing my thought process here...
After Higgi suggested two of our Mafia are in a pair, I saw your & Jack's hesitance in a different light. Hiding behind reciprocal votes gets riskier the less players we have, which might explain your hesitance. Your zero votes from Mafia members also does not sit well with me.
I am not necessarily saying you are guilty. If you hadn't noticed, I was fine looking at other voting couples until Higgi threw his two cents in. What I see is Higgi suggesting that Mafia are a voting pair, and I'm just building on that theory by saying exactly which pair looks most suspicious to me.
so ur saying if i voted for someone with a vote already it would be less suspicious?
i voted for jack because
1) he didnt have a vote 2) the game was running slow 3) he voted for me initialy first round (which as a townie myself doesnt mean hes mafia, but inreases the chances if each mafia voted for a different townie)
-When I Hear My Name -Dead Leaves and the Dirty Ground -Blue Orchid -Passive Manipulation -Red Rain -Death Letter -My Doorbell -Hotel Yorba -Same Boy You've Always Known -Lovesick -Little Ghost -We're Going to Be Friends -The Hardest Button to Button -Black Math -The Nurse -I Just Don't Know What to Do With Myself
Encore: -Ball and Biscuit -Seven Nation Army -Screwdriver
so ur saying if i voted for someone with a vote already it would be less suspicious?
i voted for jack because
1) he didnt have a vote 2) the game was running slow 3) he voted for me initialy first round (which as a townie myself doesnt mean hes mafia, but inreases the chances if each mafia voted for a different townie)
You've got a good point there. I'm starting to debate whether Higgi is being misleading, or merely misguided.
I'm not saying Higgi's pair=Mafia theory is necessarily correct. I was just thinking out loud, playing around with the idea because it was something I hadn't thought of before.
When I look at things assuming what Higgi's saying is right, then yeah, you & Jack look guilty... but as I said, I'm not so sure about that.
Two Mafia in a pair isn't the only possibility Higgi brought up. He also mentioned that Mafia could be split up amongst the different voting pairs (or possibly the odd man out?) I think that's more likely to be the case.
I'm still in favor of sending pairs into the runoff, because I'm not certain about anything else at this point. All I know is that it would let us get a closer look at a particular pair, and a broader runoff field is more likely to include a Mafia member.
Keeping my vote for HGH until Bek gets a chance to respond.
So, it appears we're still waiting on Bek and Chief... Voting was open before the weekend, and 36 hours from the end of the weekend is noon Tuesday. This has implications.
If Chief - who already has one strike against him - does not vote by noon tomorrow, Rule 11 applies:
11) Voting will be open for 36 hours each round, or until everyone has cast their vote - whichever comes first. Voting will never follow the 36-hour rule on the weekends. I will only ever close voting on a Saturday or Sunday if everyone has cast their vote already. If you haven't voted by that time, your vote will not be counted. If you miss two votes, you are out of the game regardless of how good your reason is. When it is decided that you are out, you will be killed off during the day alongside whoever would have been killed by vote.
If Chief does not vote by noon tomorrow, the rules mandate that he be ejected from the game. Which is fine by me... I do believe he's a major part of the reason this game is moving so golly gee slow. Last time I reffed, I had to re-recruit and re-draw roles because he went AWOL. Now this... I say good smurfing riddance.
I should also note that Bek will earn a strike against her if she doesn't vote by that time.
If Chief comes and votes... good - it's about smurfing time he carried his smurfing weight. I'm not going to hold my smurfing breath.
If Chief doesn't vote, we have a situation. We'll be once again facing the possibility of having rounds start with even numbers of players. I am wholeheartedly against this because I think it ruins the integrity of the game (tie-vote logjams, disrupting victory conditions - I've already gone over this before...) I won't participate in a game under those conditions, so I'm going to propose a way around it.
Here's my game plan in the scenario in which Chief is ousted from the game per Rule 11:
Noon tomorrow: initial voting closes & Chief dies for missing deadline. It is crucial that we have an inconclusive vote at this point. Killing anyone else throws the entire game out of whack.
Runoff: We have to have an inconclusive vote to avoid another kill... good thing we will have an even number of players. I suggest that, at this point: 1. Higgi & Jen become reciprocal voting partners for the round. 2. The eight of us break into our usual four pairs of reciprocal votes.
If we stick with these votes, with nobody changing, we can avoid killing off two players in one Day. If we don't do this and wind up with an even number of players in Day Three, I will do as I promised and kill myself off with back-to-back violations of the 36-hour deadline. None of us wants that.
My vote is currently the decisive one; in order to have an indecisive vote I will get the ball rolling by changing it. kdogg >>> Bek
At this point, I encourage us all to avoid a decisive vote until noon tomorrow when Chief's fate is determined. At that point, if need be, we can begin the runoff without him.
I would also like to say that I want nothing to do with any future Mafia games in which Chief is a participant. This is smurfing bullhonkey brah.
Post by awolfatthedoor on Mar 23, 2010 2:22:43 GMT -5
We aren't waiting on his vote. We are also waiting on Bek and Higgi's votes to be in. Plus this round doesn't seem to be held up by him either. I just don't want to jump the gun on invoking a rule that to my knowledge hasn't come into play before.
11) Voting will be open for 36 hours each round, or until everyone has cast their vote - whichever comes first. Voting will never follow the 36-hour rule on the weekends. I will only ever close voting on a Saturday or Sunday if everyone has cast their vote already. If you haven't voted by that time, your vote will not be counted. If you miss two votes, you are out of the game regardless of how good your reason is. When it is decided that you are out, you will be killed off during the day alongside whoever would have been killed by vote.
Look, Ref... if you don't throw the smurfing bum out at noon, you're not doing your job. I'm just asking you to enforce the rules... whether they have been previously enforced or not.
Post by ☮ superbek ☮ on Mar 23, 2010 9:14:13 GMT -5
Sorry to delay... I was gonna vote last night and I went home and my internet was broken so I was gonna type it all up on my phone but I fell asleep because that takes like three hours.
here goes nothing... kdogg I'm sorry but I just have a bad feeling about you. This nagging feeling is telling me you cannot be trusted this game. I don't want to believe it but I just feel like you find a security blanket in the reciprocal voting. It's almost like you want to pick off the voting pairs one by one. Vote HGHipster today and EAP goes tonight, it leaves no trail. Nope, don't trust it even if it means I might get picked off tonight, I vote for...
superbek>>>kdogg
Oh an I just realized that you changed your vote for me, which is even worse imo. I think you're mafia. If you were a townsperson your would be a lot more inclined to figure out who the mafia is instead of being so hasty about getting rid of chief... this also makes me think chief is innocent.
btw I am already tired of you giving me an ultimatium and if I don't accept it, you vote for me. THAT is some ol' bullshit.
I can say with confidence that Chief must have been innocent. And I know we've been waiting for him each round so far, but Kdogg, you've been lobbying for his death pretty consistently..
To put it on record, this makes me think you're going for an easy kill... one that wouldn't bring anybody into the spotlight through voting and runoff's and such. One that would have no bearing on the other players...
here goes nothing... kdogg I'm sorry but I just have a bad feeling about you. This nagging feeling is telling me you cannot be trusted this game. I don't want to believe it but I just feel like you find a security blanket in the reciprocal voting. It's almost like you want to pick off the voting pairs one by one. Vote HGHipster today and EAP goes tonight, it leaves no trail. Nope, don't trust it even if it means I might get picked off tonight, I vote for...
superbek>>>kdogg
I find a security blanket in reciprocal voting? Be more specific... are you referring to you & I voting for each other, or other players voting for each other? Because, yes, I must concede that I do choose to vote for you as a security blanket when I don't know what's up. As for other people in pairs... I'm not making any of them vote for each other. I'm looking at the existing situation, not creating it. These voting pairs would be around, regardless of my vote.
You seem to be implying that merely discussing other players' theories about who is Mafia (something you also accused me of NOT doing - how's that work?) makes me guilty. Yes, I brought up some voting pairs... might I add that I was building on an idea there that wasn't originally my own? I'm sorry, but deliberating with my fellow Townspeople in and of itself does not make me guilty - if I'm guilty because of that, EVERYONE is guilty because of that. This accusation is a catch-22.
Last round, you were in favor of expanding the runoff field. This time, I'm allegedly Mafia for wanting to do the same thing that we did last round... It was okay for us to swing our votes when YOU made the choice, but all the sudden I'm guilty for making the choice? I'm sorry, but I call that a double standard. Why is it that last round, you were all for a broader runoff on the grounds that it would be more likely to include Mafia, but now this strategy is the devil? One could argue that this shows a desire on your part NOT to increase the likelihood of Mafia in a runoff... What changed between last round and now?
Oh an I just realized that you changed your vote for me, which is even worse imo. I think you're mafia. If you were a townsperson your would be a lot more inclined to figure out who the mafia is instead of being so hasty about getting rid of chief... this also makes me think chief is innocent.
btw I am already tired of you giving me an ultimatium and if I don't accept it, you vote for me. THAT is some ol' bullhonkey brah.
Everyone, quick show of hands... how many of you are content with the rate at which this game is moving? Another show of hands... does anyone think the fact that I just want this game moving faster makes me guilty?
I issued you no ultimatum, Bek. I offered you a proposal which you did not accept. Time became an issue because of the existing rules of the game. I didn't write that rule, but I expect it to be enforced. You're calling me guilty because I want the rules enforced?
As I stated, we have a 36-hour voting deadline. This last vote started last Wednesday night and closed this Tuesday afternoon. Over 125 hours for a 36 hour deadline... Can you understand why this frustrates me?
I didn't get rid of Chief... Chief got rid of himself. Would you have preferred that we had a conclusive vote in which Chief AND someone else died? If everyone in this game has a greater statistical likelihood of being Townsperson than Mafia... wouldn't we have been more likely to have lost TWO Townspeople? The way I see things, I was trying to lead the Townspeople out of a sticky situation with the potential to throw the entire game out of whack. There's no way I would've been able to make Chief meet the deadline, but there WERE ways I could neutralize the consequences of his inaction. Now, what exactly is it about wanting ONE slacker dead instead of TWO players that makes me guilty? Don't we want to keep as many Townspeople alive as possible? Why is it that you'd prefer to see two players dead instead of one?
Bek, I already said my vote for you is a security blanket. I found myself painted into a corner, in which a decisive vote meant the deaths of a greater number of players than an indecisive vote. I'm sorry, but I wasn't about to go down a path that kills off two of our players in one round... no matter how guilty you want me to look because of it. I only had three choices at that point - you, Jen & Higgi. I was more comfortable choosing my usual vote for you, but that doesn't make me guilty as you imply.
If you want to terminate our reciprocal-voting deal, just say the word. After this game, I don't think I want to play any more Mafia until at least after Bonnaroo anyway.
So, to recap: Bek says kdogg is guilty because... 1. He is publicly deliberating who is Mafia 2. He is simultaneously NOT concerned with who is Mafia (How do you reconcile these two different charges, if I might ask?) 3. He wants a larger runoff which is more likely to include Mafia 4. He is frustrated that the game is moving so slow, and wanted the player he believed primarily responsible for that to be eliminated according to the rules 5. He preferred to see just one slacker die, rather than two players in one round 6. He cast his usual vote for Bek when he wasn't sure what else to do
OMFG I MUST BE MAFIA! Let's get Day Three started so I can vote for myself already!
