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!!
As far as I’m concerned if LD hasn’t closed it then the round is still open. That being said I think that jr is more suspicious than zolah. You said your feelings about him are changing. Can you expand more on that? Legitimately asking.
Yeap.
I started probing JR and voted for him for voting for you. It was different than what he did in 105 and seemed out of character. I am also always suspicious of people who vote for you early. There are a handful of people who for various reason tend to get targeted to be set up by the mafia and you are one of them. In rereading though, as I probed, he laid out the sequence in which he did things pretty clearly, answered the questions completely and nothing he really said was dishonest. The cheating conversation was interesting, but ultimately, he tried to clear it up and move on. It was just targeting you that really was left and ultimately, you do make some interesting moves.
When Zolah jumped in to help explain, JR fades out a bit. She really took all the things I was probing and blew them into major issues. I think she is using him as cover and some of the remaining suspicion I have of him is based on things she actually said, but that is a separate issue.
The next JR moment is the vote switching to tainted, which he got criticized for, but it actually helps him in my mind. Tainted had not posted much, had tripled up on someone, and JR was trying something different. If he is / was mafia, why put himself way out there like that when you are an easier target to defend voting for given he had a reason for voting for you? Tainted is interesting because of the triple stack so he could have thought he could transfer suspicion, but again, you were a much easier target. It just feels like the move was from honest intent to look at Tainted and that feeling strengthens every time I reread the sequence.
Then switching back to you and starting your running argument doubled down on the suspicion. This was actually the whole impetus behind the 3 of you being mafia together because it feel so suspicious as to be fabricated to deliberately separate you two. In addition, not much of substance is said in this whole exchange as it slides more to personal insults than game play making it seem even more contrived. But at the end of the day, feelings just could have been hurt and people get sucked into the paranoia of the game. You both had been in the spotlight all game which adds to stress and tension. Him complaining about me sledgehammering him reinforces it because I had not even really used a ball-pin hammer on him, but says he has been on the defensive from the start and not be able to really breathe. Everything he has done has been second guessed.
He also again, covers for Zolah. He is right, I hold everyone to a different standard. A much lower standard than I hold myself. His "Viking is picking on Zolah" comments are to be expected in the frame of their relationship, but Zolah actually lies and even admits she frames words differently than how I write them. However, again, given their relationship, it is to be expected. Kind of similar to how LLL used her fiance dying of cancer to try and hide her being mafia. I wouldn't expect anything different from him than for him to defend her if she was saying I was picking on her. Zolah is an entire separate conversation though.
Am I convinced he is a townie? No. Just as I never definitively said ZIG was a townie, and simply felt he may be. But I am much less convinced he is mafia every reread. It seems like a mafia member may have drafted on my initial suspicions and he is getting targeted at this point instead of a true mafia feel. Again, could be wrong, but that is how I feel.
Deadline time is deadline time. If I say the round ends at X, and there's no request for an extension made, then X is the deadline. If moves happen afterwards, then it is for the following round based upon whatever has happened in the round before it. (Since Zolah was out of the runoff at Noon ET, Viking could not switch his vote over to her. If Zolah was still in the runoff after Noon, then Viking could make a move on round three to Zolah even though I technically never "closed" round two.)
If someone calls for an extension before the deadline (or makes a late vote that may warrant an extension) and I do not answer before said deadline time (say someone requests an extension at 10, but I don't see it until my lunch break at 12:05) - then the game is essentially paused at Noon until I respond granting or denying an extension.
Got it, Thanks for the clarification. We all have lives and everyone is busy, especially this time of year.
At the expense of stirring up trouble, I decided to look up the rule.
4) Each day a vote is held for the player to be eliminated. For online play, deliberation and voting is combined; thus, you can vote and explain yourself in the same post. Every player is free to change their vote at any point up until the Referee declares that voting is closed. The Referee will then post the final tally, announce which player is eliminated and how they died.
So Danbob, I want to ask you the same question you asked me in reverse on JR. Why are you so intent on him? I have to say, in writing my response to you, you have been very intently focused on him for those 2 changes and haven't really built a supporting argument.
For reference, when I reread the thread, I actually do it 2 or 3x. I read the whole thread as it stands, then search out each player and read JUST their posts in sequence, then I will go back and reread portions that stand out to me again that stand out from exchanges.
In doing this preparing my response to you, I noticed you were not really building the argument, and drafting a lot on the heat already on JR, but intently focused on him making the runoff. Why were you so intent on him making it?
Not saying I think you are mafia, but admittedly, a few alarm bells were ringing.
At the expense of stirring up trouble, I decided to look up the rule.
4) Each day a vote is held for the player to be eliminated. For online play, deliberation and voting is combined; thus, you can vote and explain yourself in the same post. Every player is free to change their vote at any point up until the Referee declares that voting is closed. The Referee will then post the final tally, announce which player is eliminated and how they died.
This should be clarified in future rules.
Thats what I thought it was and has always been. I agree it needs to be clarified because technically, the deadline was not enforced and my vote should still have counted according to the posted rules. LD is the ref though and it is up to him.
I would say game should pause until he can clarify this. Jaz may also want to weigh in as commissioner.
I also think that the rule should be looked at once the game ends to make it clear in the future. Refs need to follow the rules too, but at the end of the day, if this rule is too hard to follow, then it should be amended.
At the expense of stirring up trouble, I decided to look up the rule.
4) Each day a vote is held for the player to be eliminated. For online play, deliberation and voting is combined; thus, you can vote and explain yourself in the same post. Every player is free to change their vote at any point up until the Referee declares that voting is closed. The Referee will then post the final tally, announce which player is eliminated and how they died.
This should be clarified in future rules.
Thats what I thought it was and has always been. I agree it needs to be clarified because technically, the deadline was not enforced and my vote should still have counted according to the posted rules. LD is the ref though and it is up to him.
I would say game should pause until he can clarify this. Jaz may also want to weigh in as commissioner.
I also think that the rule should be looked at once the game ends to make it clear in the future. Refs need to follow the rules too, but at the end of the day, if this rule is too hard to follow, then it should be amended.
Thats what I thought it was and has always been. I agree it needs to be clarified because technically, the deadline was not enforced and my vote should still have counted according to the posted rules. LD is the ref though and it is up to him.
I would say game should pause until he can clarify this. Jaz may also want to weigh in as commissioner.
I also think that the rule should be looked at once the game ends to make it clear in the future. Refs need to follow the rules too, but at the end of the day, if this rule is too hard to follow, then it should be amended.
So you are saying that because the rules state the round does not end until the ref officially closes it the vote counts, just as the rules state the ball cannot touch the ground, so no catch?
A mafia official replay red flag would be great right now.
So Danbob, I want to ask you the same question you asked me in reverse on JR. Why are you so intent on him? I have to say, in writing my response to you, you have been very intently focused on him for those 2 changes and haven't really built a supporting argument.
For reference, when I reread the thread, I actually do it 2 or 3x. I read the whole thread as it stands, then search out each player and read JUST their posts in sequence, then I will go back and reread portions that stand out to me again that stand out from exchanges.
In doing this preparing my response to you, I noticed you were not really building the argument, and drafting a lot on the heat already on JR, but intently focused on him making the runoff. Why were you so intent on him making it?
Not saying I think you are mafia, but admittedly, a few alarm bells were ringing.
Interesting. I feel as if zolah’s arguments with you added up more than JRs to mine.
The main reason I feel that JR should advance is because when I’ve been mafia with him he has had a tendency to bs his opening vote and then over compensate when called out. I see many parallels of that in this game. I remember one game we were Mafia and he pretended he did some random vote but the math didn’t add up. He was called out and it was an uphill battle after that. Not saying this makes him Mafia but I feel it’s enough that he should advance.
So Danbob, I want to ask you the same question you asked me in reverse on JR. Why are you so intent on him? I have to say, in writing my response to you, you have been very intently focused on him for those 2 changes and haven't really built a supporting argument.
For reference, when I reread the thread, I actually do it 2 or 3x. I read the whole thread as it stands, then search out each player and read JUST their posts in sequence, then I will go back and reread portions that stand out to me again that stand out from exchanges.
In doing this preparing my response to you, I noticed you were not really building the argument, and drafting a lot on the heat already on JR, but intently focused on him making the runoff. Why were you so intent on him making it?
Not saying I think you are mafia, but admittedly, a few alarm bells were ringing.
Interesting. I feel as if zolah’s arguments with you added up more than JRs to mine.
The main reason I feel that JR should advance is because when I’ve been mafia with him he has had a tendency to bs his opening vote and then over compensate when called out. I see many parallels of that in this game. I remember one game we were Mafia and he pretended he did some random vote but the math didn’t add up. He was called out and it was an uphill battle after that. Not saying this makes him Mafia but I feel it’s enough that he should advance.
I will pause the game until we get a ruling from New York Jaz on this rules issue.
Nope, this is your call, this is your job as ref. Either way you decide is fine with me. Rule needs to be clarified in future games.
Viking I will respond to your question later when I can quote things, I'm on mobile right now. I'm watching a movie with my girlfriend and not pausing it for mafia. Just popping in because LD messaged me on Facebook.
Zig made note that we should be in R3 before vikings vote. Even if LD didn't post, at the very least two players knew for sure when it closed (Pablo) so I feel like we should move on. Zolah gets off the hook but there's always next day.
As I said, I should have known. The rules are the rules but there was a deadline. Either way LD decides is the way it is. As a former rugby player, I was trained you never argue with the ref.
So Danbob, I want to ask you the same question you asked me in reverse on JR. Why are you so intent on him? I have to say, in writing my response to you, you have been very intently focused on him for those 2 changes and haven't really built a supporting argument.
For reference, when I reread the thread, I actually do it 2 or 3x. I read the whole thread as it stands, then search out each player and read JUST their posts in sequence, then I will go back and reread portions that stand out to me again that stand out from exchanges.
In doing this preparing my response to you, I noticed you were not really building the argument, and drafting a lot on the heat already on JR, but intently focused on him making the runoff. Why were you so intent on him making it?
Not saying I think you are mafia, but admittedly, a few alarm bells were ringing.
Interesting. I feel as if zolah’s arguments with you added up more than JRs to mine.
The main reason I feel that JR should advance is because when I’ve been mafia with him he has had a tendency to bs his opening vote and then over compensate when called out. I see many parallels of that in this game. I remember one game we were Mafia and he pretended he did some random vote but the math didn’t add up. He was called out and it was an uphill battle after that. Not saying this makes him Mafia but I feel it’s enough that he should advance.
So Danbob, I want to ask you the same question you asked me in reverse on JR. Why are you so intent on him? I have to say, in writing my response to you, you have been very intently focused on him for those 2 changes and haven't really built a supporting argument.
For reference, when I reread the thread, I actually do it 2 or 3x. I read the whole thread as it stands, then search out each player and read JUST their posts in sequence, then I will go back and reread portions that stand out to me again that stand out from exchanges.
In doing this preparing my response to you, I noticed you were not really building the argument, and drafting a lot on the heat already on JR, but intently focused on him making the runoff. Why were you so intent on him making it?
Not saying I think you are mafia, but admittedly, a few alarm bells were ringing.
Interesting. I feel as if zolah’s arguments with you added up more than JRs to mine.
The main reason I feel that JR should advance is because when I’ve been mafia with him he has had a tendency to bs his opening vote and then over compensate when called out. I see many parallels of that in this game. I remember one game we were Mafia and he pretended he did some random vote but the math didn’t add up. He was called out and it was an uphill battle after that. Not saying this makes him Mafia but I feel it’s enough that he should advance.
Sorry for the last one. Tabbing through mobile tabs.
Thanks for the insight. I appreciate the additional thought. I need to ponder it a bit more. It is a battle in my head of objective voting vs feel. Just need to sort it out.
Not going to forget about Zolah but nothing we can do now. Sorry town.
I do want to note that jr falling out here gives the other two members of the ro their vote back. Not sure if that was deliberate, Viking wouldn't have if he moved in time, but I feel like it's worth noting.
And as Pablo stated, him and potent voting again, not awesome for getting information on everyone, so not sure if that's deliberate or not.
Not necessarily the people involved shaping the RO but others working the count so that the same people are deciding seems like it works for mafia.
I haven’t gotten time for a reread yet. Holy crap. What a day. (On the thread and in real life apparently). I think going forward that end time is end time on rounds unless an extension is requested prior to end time (and then it’s ref’s discretion). It’s posted 24+ hours in advance and I think we can all read. I can see that getting abused otherwise and used to twist things. Just my opinion.
I spent the day grocery shopping and exchanging a few Christmas gifts with my kids. I will have time for a reread tomorrow but these are some thoughts I had while out and about thinking about the game: I do find it odd that Viking called out 3 potential mafia working together in some sort of fashion and they were the other 3 in the runoff with him. And that he said I’m usually on facts and not spinning and that I’m spinning this game? It’s quite the opposite. I still haven’t seen him citing my lies. He lied and I cited it in detail. I feel like he’s bullying an agenda.
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.
This is one example of you spinning in order to accuse Zolah of lying. You've said she kept bringing the issue up, and she clarified that she only did so once. To say that someone keeps doing something implies persistence, which does not correspond with Zolah saying something about it once. Spin. Though to be fair, this is equally pedantic on her part as well. I have no issues with your explanation of it being a "verbal trip", etc, but she refuted your point (multiple times) and you steamrolled over her explanation even though her refutation is correct. She only mentioned the rules thing once, which is indeed different from "keep bringing it up", as you said. Perhaps this is pedantry on my part as well, but it's what I saw as being possible spin. I had thought I picked this up from you multiple times, but after I reread I realized it was just you and Zolah arguing the same point over multiple posts. I fully admit it's not much for me to go off of in regards to you - it's just what has stuck out to me.
Call stands, continue as I originally announced runoff for R3
Better that you decide and not someone who is in the game.
I agree, which is why I flipped it back to the ref. Any decision I would have made - or indeed the decision not to make a decision - could be used against me if affected parties turned out to be Mafia. So I kinda resent being asked to make a ruling, tbh.
Check yourself. JR kept bringing it back up. I mentioned it once to clarify this morning why it was edited.
This is one example of you spinning in order to accuse Zolah of lying. You've said she kept bringing the issue up, and she clarified that she only did so once. To say that someone keeps doing something implies persistence, which does not correspond with Zolah saying something about it once. Spin. Though to be fair, this is equally pedantic on her part as well. I have no issues with your explanation of it being a "verbal trip", etc, but she refuted your point (multiple times) and you steamrolled over her explanation even though her refutation is correct. She only mentioned the rules thing once, which is indeed different from "keep bringing it up", as you said. Perhaps this is pedantry on my part as well, but it's what I saw as being possible spin. I had thought I picked this up from you multiple times, but after I reread I realized it was just you and Zolah arguing the same point over multiple posts. I fully admit it's not much for me to go off of in regards to you - it's just what has stuck out to me.
Fair enough. We can agree to disagree. Getting kind of tried of playing this game again honestly.
Kill me if you want. Going to be posting a lot less if I live. Too many people with preconceived notions. Note, you will be killing a townie. I'll just keep my opinions to myself just like everyone else.
This is one example of you spinning in order to accuse Zolah of lying. You've said she kept bringing the issue up, and she clarified that she only did so once. To say that someone keeps doing something implies persistence, which does not correspond with Zolah saying something about it once. Spin. Though to be fair, this is equally pedantic on her part as well. I have no issues with your explanation of it being a "verbal trip", etc, but she refuted your point (multiple times) and you steamrolled over her explanation even though her refutation is correct. She only mentioned the rules thing once, which is indeed different from "keep bringing it up", as you said. Perhaps this is pedantry on my part as well, but it's what I saw as being possible spin. I had thought I picked this up from you multiple times, but after I reread I realized it was just you and Zolah arguing the same point over multiple posts. I fully admit it's not much for me to go off of in regards to you - it's just what has stuck out to me.
Fair enough. We can agree to disagree. Getting kind of tried of playing this game again honestly.
Kill me if you want. Going to be posting a lot less if I live. Too many people with preconceived notions. Note, you will be killing a townie. I'll just keep my opinions to myself just like everyone else.
Fair enough. We can agree to disagree. Getting kind of tried of playing this game again honestly.
Kill me if you want. Going to be posting a lot less if I live. Too many people with preconceived notions. Note, you will be killing a townie. I'll just keep my opinions to myself just like everyone else.
Awww, Viking’s massive ego has been damaged
Haha no. Just takes too much energy to melt you snowflakes into actual functioning human beings. I really just don't care enough to invest more energy into it.
Better that you decide and not someone who is in the game.
I agree, which is why I flipped it back to the ref. Any decision I would have made - or indeed the decision not to make a decision - could be used against me if affected parties turned out to be Mafia. So I kinda resent being asked to make a ruling, tbh.
