Phantom Brave Mafia - Game Topic (GAME OVER)

[AndrewRogue]

Posting from work on my lunch break, so I'm trying to keep this brief.

Evil Tom's stance that Otter is trying to curry favor with me... well... makes absolutely no sense to me. Then again, a lot of Tom's logic doesn't quite carry in my head. Not really sure what to think here, although inclined to think that he remains high on my count of suspects.

Lady Door: You mixing up who had and hadn't posted. That would be your mistake.

On my vote and Otter: Well, yes, actually, I do expect some sort of explanation for that sort of slip. Suffice to say, given that it is a fairly impressive mistake (not only mixing up players, but mixing up players who aren't in the game), I feel that it does warrant more explanation than saying "I meant Corwin." As someone who makes mistakes like that a lot, I know there are certain things that can cause them, and I'm curious to hear how it happened. That's all. The fact is, it is a big mistake that implies a number of things, and I'd like to get as much on it as I can.

Excal: Well... you know, there wasn't a whole lot to say when I first posted. Furthermore... you seem to be misconstruing the reason for my vote. I don't care that Otter went after lurkers. It is well and good. I did it too. What I have a problem with is that he came out, gave a cursory nod to the rest of the topic that largely implied he either did not read the full topic, did not pay close attention to it or didn't pay much attention to his post and then threw out his lurker vote.

It isn't the lurker voting I have a problem with. It is the combination of his own quietness (which has sense cleared up some) and the fact that his post... basically says he didn't look very closely at the topic.

As such, my vote stays where it is for now. I would really like to hear more about that post. Otherwise, my next top subject is Tom for blah blah lurky and fairly... off... logic. Rest of the game is varying degrees of neutral at the moment.

[Tonfa]

Exciting and Dynamic Votecount!

AndrewRogue (1): Excal
EvilTom (1): Corwin
Excal (1): superaielman
Otter (2): AndrewRogue, EvilTom

11 hours and ~55 minutes remain in day 1. With 7 alive, 4 votes are needed to lynch.

[EvilTom]

Oh geez, this timezone thing is killing me. Between my last post and me going to bed, nobody had posted. Just got to uni & went online, suddenly there's like a gazillion posts (and I'm in a lecture so I don't have time to check them).

Basically I won't be able to catch up for a few hours since I'm currently @ uni, and I haven't been able to do it till now 'cos I'm asleep when you guys are posting. Gah. Bear with me >.<

[superaielman]

Okay, crossed wires there Lady Door.

If he just made a simple dropin post with no content and left it at that, I'd say string him up. But if he came in with a fair bit of content, okay. I'm not at all letting him off the hook for lurking, nor do I want to.  My vote at that time was most leaning towards a vote on Tom. Regardless I wasn't ready to vote at that stage of the topic barring something else major popping up.

Andrew: No comment about the rest of the goings's on in the topic?

Tom: I'm trying to be understanding about the time thing, but we have less than eight hours to go. You've got to provide some more content.

[superaielman]

Six and a half hours to go now. Any chance of an extension due to time zone concerns Tonfa?

[Lady Door]

... hooooookay. Less than 6 hours to deadline and there's no clear candidate for lynch, just one who happens to have more votes. Not cool.

Quick response/review of things that happened since my last post:

Excal: Why is Tom overreacting a thing to give him a pass for? That's perfectly scummy and/or bad town play. Obscures the issues and all of that.

What do you mean by this?: "I cannot help but feel that the argument being made here is not only poor, but is encouraging people to ignore behaviour that does not help town, and that, in and of itself, is questionable." What behavior is he encouraging people to ignore?

Andrew: I asked because you had used the plural. Posting mistakes. I wanted to know what else I had done. I found it odd because you mentioned Otter had a posting mistake in the line after. Note the singular. So was the a reason you did that?

I'm still not sure what you're expecting from Otter. I can't imagine what kind of significance his mentioning a person who was out of game would have other than that he didn't run a fine-tooth comb over his post. Inattentiveness is bad, yes, mistakes are bad, yes, but ... what else is there to say? You seem to be fishing for him to say something that will put his foot in his mouth. I can't imagine what response would prove satisfactory enough for you to drop it. It's kind of like asking for a roleclaim prior to hammer and if the response is "vanilla town," the guy's doomed. Also, what "certain things" does a mistake like that imply?

Tom: Better catch up quick. Deadline approacheth.

super: I think the problem here is the tone of inevitability that was in your original post. You said you were going to pressure vote Tom if you had to vote for anyone, but you weren't going to do that until he posted. Your sentence was just ... weird. You were saying you'd do something after that person did a thing which should make you reconsider the reasons for doing that thing. That is, a pressure vote is meant to encourage a person to respond (either because they're lurking, or ignoring your points, or whatever). Your sentence implied that he would respond and THEN you would vote him. The sense of it was that you would vote for Tom to pressure him into participating but you'd only do it after he'd participated.

I get what you meant, though, so I'm done being the one hounding the question. Excal is free to pick it up if he feels I let the line loose too soon.

With deadline inching closer and closer, my vote is currently between Tom and Andrew. I'm heavily inclined to vote for Tom at this juncture, but I would at least like to give him a chance to respond. Andrew's reply to my questions will factor heavily into my final decision, too.

Edit for super's question: It's 5 1/2 hours. And I'm on the fence about extension, but thoughts on that can wait until we get word from Tonfa.

[Tonfa]

There will be no extensions during the course of this game, as I stated in the sign-up topic and the first post days are 48 hours long.

Speaking of deadline, it's 5 hours and a 10 minutes to it. No vote changes have happened since last votecount.

[superaielman]

Uh. Yeah, this sort of sucks. I know Andy's around and I would really like to see him post more. But if it's between those two, I'm leaning towards him. He hasn't really added much so far, though neither have played great games.

*Pokes Andrew*

[AndrewRogue]

Sorry, been working on homework.

Ho'kay. The rest of the day's events are a bit messy and rather uneventful. Where it stands at the end of the day, though, is as such.

Corwin has a fairly strong town read. He's sticking to a reasonable lurker attack stance, and one that appears very fair, given Tom's particularly awkward attack of Otter. Excal is... nitpicking in particularly strange ways, picking up on issues that seem to be, at best, meaningless, at worst, severely distracting (see his comments about Corwin wanting to wait for people to post before voting and his oddly phrased vote for me). Super and Lady Door, I can pull no particular reads off of. Both come across as trying to talk and get votes going, but this isn't really a read either way.

So, generally speaking, we have a pretty standard day one.

Otter stands out as a notable candidate for voting due to relatively limited presence, and a seriously major screw up in his posting.

Tom stands out as a notable candidate for his lack of presence and a rather shaky argument for voting Otter.

Excal also feels like a viable candidate at this point, due to some strange argumentation.

I would really like to hear from Otter for reasons that I stated earlier, but I consider all three to be viable votes for today and, in fact, with having had most of the day to mull on it, I'm starting to lean towards it being Excal. Still, I'd like to hear some more. Either way though, we do need to get moving on a lynch. I'll be checking in periodically for a while, so yeah.

Super, Lady Door, anyone else?

[Lady Door]

Andrew: I asked because you had used the plural. Posting mistakes. I wanted to know what else I had done. I found it odd because you mentioned Otter had a posting mistake in the line after. Note the singular. So was the a reason you did that?

I'm still not sure what you're expecting from Otter. I can't imagine what kind of significance his mentioning a person who was out of game would have other than that he didn't run a fine-tooth comb over his post. Inattentiveness is bad, yes, mistakes are bad, yes, but ... what else is there to say? You seem to be fishing for him to say something that will put his foot in his mouth. I can't imagine what response would prove satisfactory enough for you to drop it. It's kind of like asking for a roleclaim prior to hammer and if the response is "vanilla town," the guy's doomed. Also, what "certain things" does a mistake like that imply?

...
 
With deadline inching closer and closer, my vote is currently between Tom and Andrew. I'm heavily inclined to vote for Tom at this juncture, but I would at least like to give him a chance to respond. Andrew's reply to my questions will factor heavily into my final decision, too.

And lemme say now: not looking too good.

[AndrewRogue]

1. Looks like I just generally slipped and added an S. Irony is mine friend.

2. It implies the obvious: Otter wasn't paying attention to the topic and dropped in to simply put a vote on a lurker, not really bothering to check anything else out. Really, it is about the only way to explain a mistake of that magnitude. There might be some cases where I could buy it happening, but that's why I want to hear about what happened while he was making the post. There are cases where I'd consider it a more believable mistake.

[superaielman]

Yeah, I admit I'm torn here. Tom's been very defensive and now he's vanished, Andrew's stuff Ladydoor has gone over. Excal.. there's just something not right there. Augh.

[AndrewRogue]

I'll put this out here. Whatever we do, we have to do it relatively soon and have someone able to pick up the fourth vote or vote on someone who already has a vote on them.

[Lady Door]

Mmkay. So. First off, ignoring my post completely until prompted is not cool. Especially without an explanation for why you did that. Funny thing is? This is looking like another example of i-r-o-n-y. You're saying Otter wasn't paying enough attention to the thread to bother getting the name of his voter right, and voting for a lurker was a "safe" thing for him to have done, and now you aren't even paying enough attention to read one of the few posts that appeared since your last which directly addresses you?

The answer to my question is not really satisfactory either. You seem to be acknowledging that there's nothing Otter could say that would clear him in your eyes. Why did you fish for an explanation? It just seems like an attempt at entrapment. Asking why someone made a mistake is ... just ... I don't know. Begging the question? "Why did you do this thing you wouldn't have done if you had been paying attention"? *Is* there a good answer for it?

And... now it's less than 4 hours to deadline. Tom hasn't shown up again. I'm utterly torn between Tom and Andrew. I have basically the same arguments against them -- mistakes, weird lines of argument, non-presence. Things are slightly differently emphasized, but it seems to balance out for me. At the moment... I think I'm leaning toward Tom. At least Andrew has the "here now" point going for him, which Tom is lacking despite having posted 5.5 hours ago that he'd be catching up.

So my vote's on Tom for now.

C'mon, people. Clock's ticking.

##VOTE EvilTom

(This puts him at -2)

Edit for ninja by super: My thoughts exactly. Except for the Excal thing. He's got off-the-wall points of attack, but I don't think anything he's saying is necessarily wrong. I feel kind of weird about his dismissal of considering Tom, but I don't think he's nearly as bad off as Tom and Andrew right now.

Edit for ninja AGAIN, this time by Andrew: ... yes, and?

[AndrewRogue]

Just providing a time reminder and putting out the realistic possibility that it will be you/me/Super deciding the lynch.

And yes, my play is a bit sloppy currently. I also had a paper I scrambled on and was at work for a good chunk of the day, which has led to me making hasty posts and trying to glean what I can from quick reads. Suffice to say that, yes, there are answers that, in my mind, could be considered good and shift my view of Otter to a more positive one. There are also answers that would do the opposite. Either way, I find it better than "Obviously I meant Corwin" when the magnitude of the mistake is so great.

Either way, yeah, I'm not having the best day one. Pot, kettle, etc. Of course, in turn, that doesn't really invalidate my points. It just means I'm failing.

[superaielman]

Mmm.

##unvote: Excal
##Vote: Andrew

Still can't shake the feeling that there's something off about Tom. I will switch this to avoid a no lynch at worst, though I'm going to be in bed before the day ends.

[Tonfa]

Exciting and Dynamic Votecount!

AndrewRogue (2): Excal, superaielman
EvilTom (2): Corwin, LadyDoor
Otter (2): AndrewRogue, EvilTom

3 hours 13 minutes left. With 7 alive, 4 are needed to lynch.

[superaielman]

Also: Andrew, roleclaim please? It could help sway things. Just flavor if you want to hold a power role close to your vest.

[superaielman]

*IF you really want to.

[AndrewRogue]

I'm Walnut, and hiding my power is pretty useless and pointless, so I feel no compunctions about coming out with it. I'm a miller. Go me.

However, since I'm moving up the lynch ladder here...

##Unvote: Otter
##Vote: EvilTom

I'd much rather go after or Excal at this point, but if I have to, I'm certainly not against Tom.

[EvilTom]

Uh, well I'm here, but it's -1, with not much to go. I'm afraid I can't claim anything more than vanilla town, so looks like I'm going to be mislynched day 1. Again. What else is new. Oh well, good luck.

[EvilTom]

Oh, and for the record, the fact that it was due to timezones blows. Such an easy thing for scum to manipulate feeling based on. 'Cos, yeah, like *I* lurk >.>


##Unvote: Otter
##Vote: AndrewRogue

(Just in case someone switches)

[superaielman]

Augh. Wow. I'm sort of torn. A miller in a game this small? Really? But.. it fits the flavor nearly perfectly. Mmm.


Something to look at if Tom flips town: Corwin votes for him and then more or less leaves the topic for the day. He's very much flying under the radar, so..eh.


Eviltom: Roleclaim the flavor at least?

[EvilTom]

Oh ok, I'll had to look up the PM (don't know the flavour myself):


I'm Raphael, army leader. I seem to be blonde? But no special powers.

[superaielman]

Mmm, thanks.

Both roles could flavor wise work as Sulphur's minions or cover stories. Walnut as a miller makes perfect in game sense, but I really doubt a game this size has a cop unless we have six town and one scum.