Moderator: Community Team
"With a name like that, he must be mafia!" Lol, I know it's clever but it's oldelonpuckhog wrote:Vote No Survivors because you were the oddest name on the list.
It's not omgus, it's counter, learn the difference.new guy1 wrote:zimmah wrote:Counter vote new guy!new guy1 wrote:The rules say 7, but who cares? Its day one. Vote zimmah for being first to confirm
.
Also, your avatar is scummy
Lol, OMGUS'ing already? Guilty conscience? Though its early, I will FOS you.

Commander9 wrote:I am convinced by your argument.Rodion wrote:Vote Commander9 for being Commander9.
Vote Commander9.
Kanin Usagi wrote:Well, everyone's confirmed, but not everyone has posted anything of substance. Vio has only confirmed, but elonpuck hasn't posted anything except one joke vote, so I dunno who to put pressure on, if anyone.
Its the one you quoted.elonpuckhog wrote:Kanin Usagi wrote:Well, everyone's confirmed, but not everyone has posted anything of substance. Vio has only confirmed, but elonpuck hasn't posted anything except one joke vote, so I dunno who to put pressure on, if anyone.
Where exactly is your post of substance? Or anyones really?
Commander9 wrote:I am convinced by your argument.Rodion wrote:Vote Commander9 for being Commander9.
Vote Commander9.
Yeah, but Zimmah and NoS were at least being somewhat active. I was just trying to point out the two least active so we could get something going on here and get both of you involved (which I've just partly succeeded with, judging by your response. Hah.) I definitely was not trying to point to either of you as being scum yourselves.elonpuckhog wrote:Not buying it. Vodean looked to be a joke vote, as I took No Survivors comment towards my vote as a joke and vodeans comment on that as also a joke. Also, your post only points out that I haven't posted much. What about Zimmah and No Survivors? Why did you not mention them as having yet to post "anything of substance?" Fos Kanin...are you protecting Zimmah and No Survivors? Trying to lynch someone else as "inactive"? Seems pretty scummy to me.
And yes, I do realize that having three mafia is unlikely, but it makes no sense for Kanin to call out me and Violet for not posting when no one has posted.
Commander9 wrote:I am convinced by your argument.Rodion wrote:Vote Commander9 for being Commander9.
Vote Commander9.
I did not write anything of substance.. I was just trying not to go inactive until the joke stage was over lol.Kanin Usagi wrote:Yeah, but Zimmah and NoS were at least being somewhat active. I was just trying to point out the two least active so we could get something going on here and get both of you involved (which I've just partly succeeded with, judging by your response. Hah.) I definitely was not trying to point to either of you as being scum yourselves.elonpuckhog wrote:Not buying it. Vodean looked to be a joke vote, as I took No Survivors comment towards my vote as a joke and vodeans comment on that as also a joke. Also, your post only points out that I haven't posted much. What about Zimmah and No Survivors? Why did you not mention them as having yet to post "anything of substance?" Fos Kanin...are you protecting Zimmah and No Survivors? Trying to lynch someone else as "inactive"? Seems pretty scummy to me.
And yes, I do realize that having three mafia is unlikely, but it makes no sense for Kanin to call out me and Violet for not posting when no one has posted.
Also, I specifically said "I don't know who to put pressure on, if anyone." Mainly, I was just responding to newguy1's post.
new guy1 wrote:IMO, there's not much time for a joke stage considering day was only 5 RL days. Ill unvote since I believe joke vote stage to be over.
Basically what new guy1 said. We've got, what, two days left? That is NOT enough time for us to be wasting 90% of it joke voting.zimmah wrote:well, seems like vodean and kanin where the ones that ended the jokevote stage, not sure if that's a good thing, but it's worth noting i think.
Commander9 wrote:I am convinced by your argument.Rodion wrote:Vote Commander9 for being Commander9.
Vote Commander9.
Yes, I think we should get a prod on Vio.new guy1 wrote:I think if we pressure anyone for a claim, it should be someone who is innactive. Also, I believe I am the one who ended joke voting, so you can add me to your note. I dont think its a bad thing because of the really short length of time we have and the simple fact that someone has to end it. Is it bad to advance the game when it has to happen anyways? Nope. In fact, I will make a small note on you, Zimmah, for not wanting the game to advance (apparently, since ending joke voting is noteworthy to you). So, who is currently the most innactive person? Wouldn't it be vioIet?
off course ending the jokevote stage is not scummy in itself, but the rush for a lynch without information is.new guy1 wrote:I think if we pressure anyone for a claim, it should be someone who is innactive. Also, I believe I am the one who ended joke voting, so you can add me to your note. I dont think its a bad thing because of the really short length of time we have and the simple fact that someone has to end it. Is it bad to advance the game when it has to happen anyways? Nope. In fact, I will make a small note on you, Zimmah, for not wanting the game to advance (apparently, since ending joke voting is noteworthy to you). So, who is currently the most innactive person? Wouldn't it be vioIet?
Well, I wouldn't say that people are rushing too much, because it has been like 3 days since this started if I'm correct. Therefore, even though the transition started after 2 days, we have waited long enough (maybe even too long) for the transition IMO, although you have explained your thought process and I can see where we differ in thoughts, so I am erasing the note on you.zimmah wrote:off course ending the jokevote stage is not scummy in itself, but the rush for a lynch without information is.new guy1 wrote:I think if we pressure anyone for a claim, it should be someone who is innactive. Also, I believe I am the one who ended joke voting, so you can add me to your note. I dont think its a bad thing because of the really short length of time we have and the simple fact that someone has to end it. Is it bad to advance the game when it has to happen anyways? Nope. In fact, I will make a small note on you, Zimmah, for not wanting the game to advance (apparently, since ending joke voting is noteworthy to you). So, who is currently the most innactive person? Wouldn't it be vioIet?
off course there can not be very much information day 1 and 5 days is not a lot of time, but still it seemed to me like certain persons were rushing it a little too much.
fixed typoszimmah wrote:with 7 people a miss-lynch is quite costly, but on the other hand a no lynch is not very useful either.
still, i'd say, if we don't have a decent lead, i'd vouch for a no lynch, since lynching just for the sake of lynching does not give us enough information to warrant the loss of a player in such a small game, where we may have as little as 5 townies. On the other hand, if there's any reason to assume a lynch will provide a good lead for the next day, we should surely do it, as sacrificing a townie to catch a scum may seriously hurt the mafia since they too have very small numbers.
with so little players the game will probably end in like day 3 no matter what side wins, so even if there are any investigative roles in the game they will have very little opportunity to get some information out, if even they survive that long.


I re-read through page one to make sure that I wasn't skimming or blatantly missing something. I did not see any posts where crazymilkshake5 referred to this game as a C9. I wonder how I could've missed that? It could be great if someone could quote that post for me.new guy1 wrote:Well zimmah, the first page says that it will be very unbalanced towards town, making me believe this isnt your normal C9 game, etc.
