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!!
I don't think that what he did was so egregious that he needs to be insta-lynched, fine with him staying in the runoff. dan votes first as mafia and all.
So I’m being stacked to three for voting before I was tagged? I’m not gonna scream mafia but I think this is a BS reason to be pushed to three votes in round one. Also I think cheater is a word being thrown around too easily around here. I have never cheated and never will. The worst offense I have committed is a like rule violation (or rule 3 if you count this game) and I find it terrible that multiple rule abiding players, including myself, are being accused.
I don't think that what he did was so egregious that he needs to be insta-lynched, fine with him staying in the runoff. dan votes first as mafia and all.
I cleared up something that had my name involved, so yeah, I referenced it. You can come at me for "being mafia" about it, but you're wrong. You're making mountains out of molehills on day 1 round 1 and it's only going to hurt the town.
You didn't really clear anything up. You inserted yourself in a conversation that had nothing to do with you, then told me to "check" myself which I am taking to mean stop asking questions. Correct me if I am wrong there but if true, why should I stop? You got aggressively defensive over a very small thing instead of trying to promote understanding.
IMO, that is much more of a mafia move than town since townies are operating in a knowledge void. There will be misunderstandings and incorrect assumptions as we try to figure it out. You were not adding to our discussion, just attacking and shutting down lines of questioning. If you have nothing to hide, why did you insert yourself and why try to shut questions down?
Now you're putting words in my mouth. Never did I say or mean to stop asking questions. The "check yourself" was to your comment of, "You and JR keep bringing it up." You yourself said that I keep bringing it up when I brought it up once and now you've been on me ever since. And in a sense, it did involve me, because JR threw my name into it. I'm not clearing him. I don't know his role. But I do know that saying, "you missed some rules on your game," when it's in between games is not cheating.
You didn't really clear anything up. You inserted yourself in a conversation that had nothing to do with you, then told me to "check" myself which I am taking to mean stop asking questions. Correct me if I am wrong there but if true, why should I stop? You got aggressively defensive over a very small thing instead of trying to promote understanding.
IMO, that is much more of a mafia move than town since townies are operating in a knowledge void. There will be misunderstandings and incorrect assumptions as we try to figure it out. You were not adding to our discussion, just attacking and shutting down lines of questioning. If you have nothing to hide, why did you insert yourself and why try to shut questions down?
Now you're putting words in my mouth. Never did I say or mean to stop asking questions. The "check yourself" was to your comment of, "You and JR keep bringing it up." You yourself said that I keep bringing it up when I brought it up once and now you've been on me ever since. And in a sense, it did involve me, because JR threw my name into it. I'm not clearing him. I don't know his role. But I do know that saying, "you missed some rules on your game," when it's in between games is not cheating.
2 points, first I didn't put words in your mouth. I asked for clarification on the proverbial checking of myself.
Second, your explanation here to your first comment is well made and makes sense. If this had been your original response, it would have ended there and saved us all from this delightful tet a tet, but alas, here we are. So why was this well reasoned explanation not your first response? Why instead did you see fit to attack over a simple question you obviously have a good answer to 5 hours later?
I mean, I stopped talking about that last night. You and JR keep bringing it up. I am more interested in why he voted prior to the names being linked in Mafia 105 (second vote there too) but 5 games later, treats it like a mortal crime. He was a townie in that game. Maybe it was a more carefree time in his life, or maybe it is something more...
Check yourself. JR kept bringing it back up. I mentioned it once to clarify this morning why it was edited.
Don't need to check. I know you only brought it up this morning. But WHY did you bring it up at all? I mean, I know you have many conversations at home, but the only converation between players that should be occurring about the game outside the thread is the mafia conversation.
That means either
1 - You are a regular Bonnie and Clyde with your sidekick still to be found
2 - Scofflaws breaking a much bigger rule than #3
Happily, you are both in the runoff atm, so I will abide by the rule of thumb and keep the bigger switching sticks in the rack until the runoff.
And by check yourself, I meant put yourself in check. You said JR and I keep bringing it up, which was a lie on me anyway. I did one time.
And why did I bring it up at all? Because I'm a part of this game too. I frequently post a lot. Get used to it.
And by check yourself, I meant put yourself in check. You said JR and I keep bringing it up, which was a lie on me anyway. I did one time.
And why did I bring it up at all? Because I'm a part of this game too. I frequently post a lot. Get used to it.
You weren't clear because detail matters. You didn't mention timing or fully explain intent as you did in the most recent post. Additionally, you threw in your colloquialisms and started making baseless accusations instead of explaining more fully as you just did. Attacking does not promote understanding and in fact makes it look like you specifically wanted to avoid deeper inquiry.
I don't think that what he did was so egregious that he needs to be insta-lynched, fine with him staying in the runoff. dan votes first as mafia and all.
No, the insta-lynch is a problem.
Potent > Dan > Tainted
any particular reason for tainted? not in a way that goes into the pros/cons of a 5 way specifically, more in regards to in the event someone moves onto him, etc.
My personal preference is always for larger runoffs, so I prefer 5 to 4. More votes mean more patterns giving you more to go off of later. Plus, you improve your odds mathematically to have a mafia member in the runoff at the time when you have the least information.
My personal preference is always for larger runoffs, so I prefer 5 to 4. More votes mean more patterns giving you more to go off of later. Plus, you improve your odds mathematically to have a mafia member in the runoff at the time when you have the least information.
But that's just me.
Well, there was a pretty big debate about it last game, and the last two people to do it have been pushed through to the lynch (both town/inspector), so safe to say it has scared people away.
any particular reason for tainted? not in a way that goes into the pros/cons of a 5 way specifically, more in regards to in the event someone moves onto him, etc.
Tainted was the one who pushed Dan to 3. That was good enough for me.
My personal preference is always for larger runoffs, so I prefer 5 to 4. More votes mean more patterns giving you more to go off of later. Plus, you improve your odds mathematically to have a mafia member in the runoff at the time when you have the least information.
But that's just me.
Well, there was a pretty big debate about it last game, and the last two people to do it have been pushed through to the lynch (both town/inspector), so safe to say it has scared people away.
There is always debate. That's why I said 5 was my preference. If everyone thinks 4 is the magic number then so be it as long as JR is in it. Zolah would be a nice to have, but atm I feel like they are a package deal.
Well, there was a pretty big debate about it last game, and the last two people to do it have been pushed through to the lynch (both town/inspector), so safe to say it has scared people away.
There is always debate. That's why I said 5 was my preference. If everyone thinks 4 is the magic number then so be it as long as JR is in it. Zolah would be a nice to have, but atm I feel like they are a package deal.
between potent, tainted, and zig i don't know who i would rather have in. tainted with the 3 stack, potent with the move, zig hasn't done much, he created the third stack (could go either way). zig dropping out would give zolah a revote with her name in the ro, but having her choose between the remaining four might not be the worst thing.
There is always debate. That's why I said 5 was my preference. If everyone thinks 4 is the magic number then so be it as long as JR is in it. Zolah would be a nice to have, but atm I feel like they are a package deal.
between potent, tainted, and zig i don't know who i would rather have in. tainted with the 3 stack, potent with the move, zig hasn't done much, he created the third stack (could go either way). zig dropping out would give zolah a revote with her name in the ro, but having her choose between the remaining four might not be the worst thing.
All 3 are good choices. Personally would prefer potent and tainted. They are quiet atm and for reasons I prefer not to share right now, I am leaning toward zig being town
Post by piggy pablo on Dec 22, 2017 17:40:51 GMT -5
I know I was sarcastic about it earlier, but I really would like to hear something resembling reasoning for why Tainted stacked Dan to three and then refused to move.
I know I was sarcastic about it earlier, but I really would like to hear something resembling reasoning for why Tainted stacked Dan to three and then refused to move.
Tainted has done similar moves as town before. I’d still like an explanation but the move seems within his play style.
Post by piggy pablo on Dec 22, 2017 17:56:47 GMT -5
I mean, I've made an unconventional move out of curiosity/boredom in D1R1 before and not given much of an explanation beyond "who cares", but I did pretty much get lynched for it, so I'm just wondering if he'll give us anything along those lines.
Not trying to make mountains of molehills. If anything, he seems less like Mafia and more like someone who's not all that invested in this game.
Danbob = not really a cheater (as far as I know) Zolah = not a cheater JR = not a cheater
One person cheated and I slammed him so hard he quit Inforoo all together.
Kdogg was a serial cheater. You accused Danbob of cheating either in jest or not, but did the same thing as him in mafia 105 and were a townie. They are just small breadcrumbs that add up to finding a rat.
And again, if you were not cheating by talking at home, then LOGICALLY you are mafia together. You can understand how Zolah jumping to your defense looks bad especially if you claim not to be a cheater, no?
I forgot about the 105 thing and the 110 thing was a joke. If you kill me based on my first post, you'll find a way to kill me in just about every game, because I usually say weird shit on page one because the first few pages tend to be boring.
I'm intrigued why you lean town on ZIG so early. Maybe later you can share.
I actually intended to move off Dan if he was still at 3 as I started catching up on the thread a few minutes ago. In fact, I think Dan has had enough attention for only 3 pages without actually standing out.
