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!!
Also, bogart and Son of a Beek - Since both of you said that some of your suspicions of me are based upon me "wanting" to be in the runoff. Where does that put me in your eyes considering potent just offered himself up for the lynch?
Also, bogart and Son of a Beek - Since both of you said that some of your suspicions of me are based upon me "wanting" to be in the runoff. Where does that put me in your eyes considering potent just offered himself up for the lynch?
I need to catch up on the thread, but from what I've read I've made a 180 on my opinion of Potent. I'll make a more informed post later
I don't know if there's a mafia in the runoff or not, but I think that just "getting the round over" is dangerous, too. Right now, there are four people in the runoff. The mafia can easily separate their votes and hide with that big of a group. I strongly feel we need to have another runoff. I could go either way with a 2 or 3 person runoff next. A 2 person runoff will obviously be most beneficial, as that gives the mafia the least amount of room to hide.
I think 2-person is better than 3, as well.
Did we ever get thoughts/comments from jfg108 or surfbumdj ? Would really like to hear something, anything, from them.
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
Also, bogart and Son of a Beek - Since both of you said that some of your suspicions of me are based upon me "wanting" to be in the runoff. Where does that put me in your eyes considering potent just offered himself up for the lynch?
I had a message typed up (for your other message to me) then lighting hit my office, that might sound like bullshit but that is what is going on in bogarts life right now (that wasn't the only important thing to get erased )The point of letting you know that this one is going to be shorter, and more up to date.
I think your last message had some good points, but I also think you put some words in my mouth. I never meant to come off as you "wanting" to be in the runoff. It was more about how ok you were with it.
I also think you're putting too much emphasis on me and jim voting together. IF I was mafia with Jim there is no way I would come out and use the same reasoning to vote for someone.
Where I stand right now is I think potent is being way too erratic with his votes/movements. It does nothing but cause confusion, which is not good for the town. The town doesn't know anything right now, the mafia have the upper hand. Even if all four people in the run off are townies (which i'm going to be honest I have no idea). I think we should whittle this down to two (less places for mafia to hide), and then vote someone off (unless things change that is going to be potent for me).
Also, bogart and Son of a Beek - Since both of you said that some of your suspicions of me are based upon me "wanting" to be in the runoff. Where does that put me in your eyes considering potent just offered himself up for the lynch?
I had a message typed up (for your other message to me) then lighting hit my office, that might sound like bullshit but that is what is going on in bogarts life right now (that wasn't the only important thing to get erased )The point of letting you know that this one is going to be shorter, and more up to date.
I think your last message had some good points, but I also think you put some words in my mouth. I never meant to come off as you "wanting" to be in the runoff. It was more about how ok you were with it.
I also think you're putting too much emphasis on me and jim voting together. IF I was mafia with Jim there is no way I would come out and use the same reasoning to vote for someone.
Where I stand right now is I think potent is being way too erratic with his votes/movements. It does nothing but cause confusion, which is not good for the town. The town doesn't know anything right now, the mafia have the upper hand. Even if all four people in the run off are townies (which i'm going to be honest I have no idea). I think we should whittle this down to two (less places for mafia to hide), and then vote someone off (unless things change that is going to be potent for me).
There's at least the 5th vote (since Rummy said "not so fast my friend" in her best Lee Corso voice) and Jim has done a 180 on me as the 6th vote. Why do you all want to delay this with more talking? Just vote me off now. How can two more rounds of this back and forth possibly be good for the town?
Apparently me wanting to be voted off is the cause of Jim's 180. Check the timing my friend, if you think I was playing a game of chicken as a mafia member, JFG didn't switch his vote from me until right around when the deadline was supposed to be, and nobody could have known that Viking had an urgent business matter. I was ready to be voted off and maybe should have been had the deadline been imposed (I don't have the time stamps). Maybe this makes me a bad townie but it would make me a downright dreadful mafia member. There's a difference between Krissy "being OK" with being in the runoff and me putting myself in the position to be voted out, at least in my opinion. I guess others could see it differently.
I had a message typed up (for your other message to me) then lighting hit my office, that might sound like bullshit but that is what is going on in bogarts life right now (that wasn't the only important thing to get erased )The point of letting you know that this one is going to be shorter, and more up to date.
I think your last message had some good points, but I also think you put some words in my mouth. I never meant to come off as you "wanting" to be in the runoff. It was more about how ok you were with it.
I also think you're putting too much emphasis on me and jim voting together. IF I was mafia with Jim there is no way I would come out and use the same reasoning to vote for someone.
Where I stand right now is I think potent is being way too erratic with his votes/movements. It does nothing but cause confusion, which is not good for the town. The town doesn't know anything right now, the mafia have the upper hand. Even if all four people in the run off are townies (which i'm going to be honest I have no idea). I think we should whittle this down to two (less places for mafia to hide), and then vote someone off (unless things change that is going to be potent for me).
There's at least the 5th vote (since Rummy said "not so fast my friend" in her best Lee Corso voice) and Jim has done a 180 on me as the 6th vote. Why do you all want to delay this with more talking? Just vote me off now. How can two more rounds of this back and forth possibly be good for the town?
Apparently me wanting to be voted off is the cause of Jim's 180. Check the timing my friend, if you think I was playing a game of chicken as a mafia member, JFG didn't switch his vote from me until right around when the deadline was supposed to be, and nobody could have known that Viking had an urgent business matter. I was ready to be voted off and maybe should have been had the deadline been imposed (I don't have the time stamps). Maybe this makes me a bad townie but it would make me a downright dreadful mafia member. There's a difference between Krissy "being OK" with being in the runoff and me putting myself in the position to be voted out, at least in my opinion. I guess others could see it differently.
Okay, working under the assumption that you're about to be lynched and this might be your last opportunity for a plea, can you give a quick explanation for why you "erratic voting" (that numerous people have mentioned as reason to find you suspect) occurred? What were your rationales for each switch, timing wise and content wise? You might have said this already, spread out through a couple posts and throughout the past 4/5 pages, but could you repeat for us succinctly here?
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
For transparencies sake, I'll go ahead and concisely state what I think our next step should be: There should be a 2-person runoff and I would like potent to be in the runoff. The second player is truly a toss-up for me. I won't be changing my vote from potent unless something insane happens. I think it's a bad idea to straight vote off potent in this run-off and him just wanting to get the day over doesn't sit well with me. Getting it to a 2 person runoff will force at least two of the three mafia to vote together. This information will most definitely be helpful down the line.
For transparencies sake, I'll go ahead and concisely state what I think our next step should be: There should be a 2-person runoff and I would like potent to be in the runoff. The second player is truly a toss-up for me. I won't be changing my vote from potent unless something insane happens. I think it's a bad idea to straight vote off potent in this run-off and him just wanting to get the day over doesn't sit well with me. Getting it to a 2 person runoff will force at least two of the three mafia to vote together. This information will most definitely be helpful down the line.
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
For transparencies sake, I'll go ahead and concisely state what I think our next step should be: There should be a 2-person runoff and I would like potent to be in the runoff. The second player is truly a toss-up for me. I won't be changing my vote from potent unless something insane happens. I think it's a bad idea to straight vote off potent in this run-off and him just wanting to get the day over doesn't sit well with me. Getting it to a 2 person runoff will force at least two of the three mafia to vote together. This information will most definitely be helpful down the line.
.Agreed
It's nice to want this, but votes are going to have to move to make it happen, and we've got 2 hours 9 minutes. I just don't see it happening.
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
These are the 6 players with votes on someone other than Potent. To go along with my suggestion of having a two-person runoff with potent and someone else, one of these votes would need to null or move. If you don't agree with me, that's perfectly fine. Let's just get some discussion happening with more than 3-4 people involved while we still have 11 in the game.
You guys filled up ten pages before the end of the second run off on the first day (quite a bit of it of dubious to no value) all the while expressing your opinion regarding the lack of discussion from me, among others.
So, obviously, the town should shorten the day by a round by skipping a three way run off, freeing up two of those on the block with no further scrutiny.
Brilliant.
I won't be changing my vote, unless I can do something to make sure we don't skip to a 2 way without a 3 way first.
It's really not the end of the world if we have a 3 person runoff.
You're right - It's not. I'm fine with going to three then two.
My main concern is not just ending the day by voting someone out of a 4-way runoff. But if that's what people want, they still gotta move to make it happen.
You guys filled up ten pages before the end of the second run off on the first day (quite a bit of it of dubious to no value) all the while expressing your opinion regarding the lack of discussion from me, among others.
So, obviously, the town should shorten the day by a round by skipping a three way run off, freeing up two of those on the block with no further scrutiny.
Brilliant.
I won't be changing my vote, unless I can do something to make sure we don't skip to a 2 way without a 3 way first.
This has been a very informative run off.
I think part of the reason we filled up so many pages was because the deadlines kept going by without a ref, so there wasn't a way to move the game along.
You guys filled up ten pages before the end of the second run off on the first day (quite a bit of it of dubious to no value) all the while expressing your opinion regarding the lack of discussion from me, among others.
So, obviously, the town should shorten the day by a round by skipping a three way run off, freeing up two of those on the block with no further scrutiny.
Brilliant.
I won't be changing my vote, unless I can do something to make sure we don't skip to a 2 way without a 3 way first.
These are the 6 players with votes on someone other than Potent. To go along with my suggestion of having a two-person runoff with potent and someone else, one of these votes would need to null or move. If you don't agree with me, that's perfectly fine. Let's just get some discussion happening with more than 3-4 people involved while we still have 11 in the game.
You neglected to include me and surf and incorrectly stated there are six votes not on potent, implying there are five players voting for potent.
OK folks.. i can focus now and hold down the fort for a while this evening. Because I saw mention and I am in the 'no standing null vote camp' please note the following rule:
d) A player may choose to vote 'null' as a temporary vote place-holder by stating this vote in the same manner as a traditional vote. If the player does not replace the Null vote by the close of the round, this will count as a missed vote for the player.
You guys filled up ten pages before the end of the second run off on the first day (quite a bit of it of dubious to no value) all the while expressing your opinion regarding the lack of discussion from me, among others.
So, obviously, the town should shorten the day by a round by skipping a three way run off, freeing up two of those on the block with no further scrutiny.
Brilliant.
I won't be changing my vote, unless I can do something to make sure we don't skip to a 2 way without a 3 way first.
This has been a very informative run off.
I think part of the reason we filled up so many pages was because the deadlines kept going by without a ref, so there wasn't a way to move the game along.
This.
Alright, for clarity's sake, I'll state explicitly - I want Krissy and Potent in the second run off for sure, and I don't really care if it is 2 or 3-person so long as they are both in it.
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
Post by Tainted Opossum on Apr 2, 2015 15:25:45 GMT -5
I would prefer a runoff between Jazmo, Potent and Krissy. With that in mind, my original and standing vote has to remain standing. I am open to hearing more from JFG about how these past few pages have been beneficial to the overall view of the pieces on the board, as I basically feel backed into a corner with my vote. I have done what I can to keep searching for possible in's and out's, but I keep landing on Jaz specifically and then Krissy. Jaz, you've pointed your guns in damn near every direction you possibly could in these 9 pages, and while I've found it informative I've also found it to be concerning. Krissy, I've yet to feel less suspicious of you. You guys have both sort of slowly brought your guns around in my direction, and I'd like to offer and conversation or answers that I can over the next two hours to be of benefit for the next round / day. My conferences are done, I have access to my laptop for about 5 more hours then I'm headed to an Of Montreal concert. I'll have my phone on me and will try to check it once or twice or at least before I drive home.
Actually, nevermind. I just reread the past two pages, and I would like to amend my statement from above: I would much prefer a three person run-off. There are too many people seeming to push for the 2-person and it is sketchy (I'm getting some vibes of "___ trying to save ____" from being in it), and I don't see why we should skip ahead to a 2-person.
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
You guys filled up ten pages before the end of the second run off on the first day (quite a bit of it of dubious to no value) all the while expressing your opinion regarding the lack of discussion from me, among others.
So, obviously, the town should shorten the day by a round by skipping a three way run off, freeing up two of those on the block with no further scrutiny.
Brilliant.
I won't be changing my vote, unless I can do something to make sure we don't skip to a 2 way without a 3 way first.
This has been a very informative run off.
Please share how it has been informative?
Things people did or said made me feel that they were more or less likely to be town / mafia.
I know that sounds snarky, but players should think for themselves for the most part. Look what trouble I got us into last game. I'm holding back on who and what until day is over - then I'll lay it out in case I don't wake up for day 2. Plus, I could see something in the upcoming run off(s) that negates my forming ideas.
Plus, what do you care? You have been lobbying to eliminate any more Day 1 run offs and get yourself lynched; what I type will be worthless to you.
If you are town, as you vehemently claim, you are asking the other townies to sacrifice the first of the few chances to pick off a Mafia. If you are Mafia, this may be the most risky scheme I have ever seen. If you are Inspector, you should never play this game again.
Post by potentpotables on Apr 2, 2015 15:30:33 GMT -5
Since we're all going for clarity here, let me be clear - I tried to vote myself off without voting for myself earlier today because I believe there's a good chance (obviously statistically but also feel-wise) that Krissy, Rummy, Jaz, and myself are all townies. That you guys are suspicious of me trying to do that is on you for reading into it too much. In fact, I might be inclined to think that those who are against it are mafia.
Jk. But my feelings that none of the four in the current run off are Mafia have grown stronger. It is true that Potent's strategy/scheme here, if he were Mafia, would be extremely risky. And a lil stupid maybe. Jaz and Krissy have both been talking a fair amount, so it is easy to pick apart shit that they's said or done (same could be said about me). Potent has done some erratic, maybe sketchy stuff but none of it really leads me to believe that he's Mafia-sketchy. It has just been a weird round, especially by way of our missing Ref.
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
Things people did or said made me feel that they were more or less likely to be town / mafia.
I know that sounds snarky, but players should think for themselves for the most part. Look what trouble I got us into last game. I'm holding back on who and what until day is over - then I'll lay it out in case I don't wake up for day 2. Plus, I could see something in the upcoming run off(s) that negates my forming ideas.
Plus, what do you care? You have been lobbying to eliminate any more Day 1 run offs and get yourself lynched; what I type will be worthless to you.
If you are town, as you vehemently claim, you are asking the other townies to sacrifice the first of the few chances to pick off a Mafia. If you are Mafia, this may be the most risky scheme I have ever seen. If you are Inspector, you should never play this game again.
I think I've explained why though. I don't think any of the four of us are mafia, and I think that people are so attuned to my sketchy behavior that I'm the one who is going to go anyway. If you disagree with that, fine, but that's what my stated reasons boil down to.
Also, bogart and Son of a Beek - Since both of you said that some of your suspicions of me are based upon me "wanting" to be in the runoff. Where does that put me in your eyes considering potent just offered himself up for the lynch?
I need to catch up on the thread, but from what I've read I've made a 180 on my opinion of Potent. I'll make a more informed post later
)The point of letting you know that this one is going to be shorter, and more up to date.
