VioIet wrote:No one has been scummy yet, so I see no need to place a vote. I'm not going to vote someone just for the sake of voting them. I think this game is slowly starting to move from the joke vote stage to the real stage- thus I will refrain from voting.
unvote vote violet for not following the rules
DoomYoshi wrote:
To encourage activity, and discourage stalling,
a) deadlines will be set at 14 days per day phase and 3 days per night phase.
b) Your first post of the day must include a vote and unvotes are not allowed. This doesn't mean you can't change your vote, just that you must always have one. Vote no lynch is a valid option. I won't modkill or anything over this rule, but please remember that by signing up you agree to follow the rule.
c) Whoever has the most votes at the end of a day will be lynched, as long as they have 1/4 of the votes.
@ redhedge: the rule says you have to vote in your first post of the day not in EVERY post of the day.
My first post of the day? I wonder if that mean game day or RL day since there is the expectation of posting every day. Just wondering. Anyway, in case it is every RL day, UNVOTE VOTE COUNT only because he has no vote on him yet.
I've come down with a bad flu so my posting may be slightly more erratic... just managed to get on to take my turns... I'll try to make sure that I keep up and still post at least once a day... waiting to see what will happen with Count... given that his problen dealt with rl issues I wouldn't be surprised if he has to go past Wednesday but we still shouldn't give too much time past that imo.
10:16:35 ‹Ace Rimmer› haven't looked at work in ages
10:42:43 ‹Sackett58› fine, I'll take my panties elsewhere
trinicardinal wrote:I've come down with a bad flu so my posting may be slightly more erratic... just managed to get on to take my turns... I'll try to make sure that I keep up and still post at least once a day... waiting to see what will happen with Count... given that his problen dealt with rl issues I wouldn't be surprised if he has to go past Wednesday but we still shouldn't give too much time past that imo.
This game is beginning to stall, I have a few people who I think are scummy; but constructing a case with only 6 pages is nigh on impossbile. I know we have 9 days until deadline; but at this rate we could end up at 3 days to go, with only 8 pages, and be in similar circumstances.
Lynching an inactive, also wouldn't be a good idea at this point because 9 days, is plenty of time to buck up.
In all KEEP POSTING PEOPLE
War doesn't determine who's right; it determines who's left.
jonty125 wrote:This game is beginning to stall, I have a few people who I think are scummy; but constructing a case with only 6 pages is nigh on impossbile. I know we have 9 days until deadline; but at this rate we could end up at 3 days to go, with only 8 pages, and be in similar circumstances.
Lynching an inactive, also wouldn't be a good idea at this point because 9 days, is plenty of time to buck up.
Why does chuck post about the rules? He must be a rules guy, but I don't necessarily think thats scummy. It is funny that he is pointing out rules in the joke vote like he is holy than thou, though.
Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone, so I wonder if he is hurrying, or if he truly is interested in the game mechanics.
I do agree that any case that is brought forward now would be flimsy at best, though. But those are just some of the observations I have made.
samgrossy wrote:Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone,
The games is going slowly, and I've seen games like this where no one says anything and the clock runs down until its too late to do anything meaningful
Iron Butterfly wrote:
who do you think is scummy and why?
Samgrossy, seems to be posting little and of little value.
Redhedge, a bit of bandwaggoning in the jokevote stage.
But these are pretty weak. unvote, vote no lynch until something tempts my vote to move along.
War doesn't determine who's right; it determines who's left.
samgrossy wrote:Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone,
The games is going slowly, and I've seen games like this where no one says anything and the clock runs down until its too late to do anything meaningful
Iron Butterfly wrote:
who do you think is scummy and why?
Samgrossy, seems to be posting little and of little value.
Redhedge, a bit of bandwaggoning in the jokevote stage.
But these are pretty weak. unvote, vote no lynch until something tempts my vote to move along.
hmm... jonty wants to move the game along, but wont take any initiative. he simply votes no lynch (something most people think is scummy), and waits for other people to take action. unvote vote jonty
<NoSurvivors› then vote chuck for being an info whore
samgrossy wrote:Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone,
The games is going slowly, and I've seen games like this where no one says anything and the clock runs down until its too late to do anything meaningful
Iron Butterfly wrote:
who do you think is scummy and why?
Samgrossy, seems to be posting little and of little value.
Redhedge, a bit of bandwaggoning in the jokevote stage.
But these are pretty weak. unvote, vote no lynch until something tempts my vote to move along.
hmm... jonty wants to move the game along, but wont take any initiative. he simply votes no lynch (something most people think is scummy), and waits for other people to take action. unvote vote jonty
I'm not willing to vote for a weak case yet, I've voiced my suspicions but I don't feel they're case worthy. I'm just voitng no lynch because I have to have a vote; and if a case is made on the person who my vote is on, and I disagree with the case, they can get to L-2, before I withdraw and falsely claim.
War doesn't determine who's right; it determines who's left.
samgrossy wrote:Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone,
The games is going slowly, and I've seen games like this where no one says anything and the clock runs down until its too late to do anything meaningful
Iron Butterfly wrote:
who do you think is scummy and why?
Samgrossy, seems to be posting little and of little value.
Redhedge, a bit of bandwaggoning in the jokevote stage.
But these are pretty weak. unvote, vote no lynch until something tempts my vote to move along.
hmm... jonty wants to move the game along, but wont take any initiative. he simply votes no lynch (something most people think is scummy), and waits for other people to take action. unvote vote jonty
I'm not willing to vote for a weak case yet, I've voiced my suspicions but I don't feel they're case worthy. I'm just voitng no lynch because I have to have a vote; and if a case is made on the person who my vote is on, and I disagree with the case, they can get to L-2, before I withdraw and falsely claim.
falsely claim?
<NoSurvivors› then vote chuck for being an info whore
samgrossy wrote:Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone,
The games is going slowly, and I've seen games like this where no one says anything and the clock runs down until its too late to do anything meaningful
Iron Butterfly wrote:
who do you think is scummy and why?
Samgrossy, seems to be posting little and of little value.
Redhedge, a bit of bandwaggoning in the jokevote stage.
But these are pretty weak. unvote, vote no lynch until something tempts my vote to move along.
hmm... jonty wants to move the game along, but wont take any initiative. he simply votes no lynch (something most people think is scummy), and waits for other people to take action. unvote vote jonty
I'm not willing to vote for a weak case yet, I've voiced my suspicions but I don't feel they're case worthy. I'm just voitng no lynch because I have to have a vote; and if a case is made on the person who my vote is on, and I disagree with the case, they can get to L-2, before I withdraw and falsely claim.
falsely claim?
Maybe claim unnecessarily early, is a better explanation of what I'm trying to say.
War doesn't determine who's right; it determines who's left.
samgrossy wrote:Why does chuck post about the rules? He must be a rules guy, but I don't necessarily think thats scummy. It is funny that he is pointing out rules in the joke vote like he is holy than thou, though.
Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone, so I wonder if he is hurrying, or if he truly is interested in the game mechanics.
I do agree that any case that is brought forward now would be flimsy at best, though. But those are just some of the observations I have made.
Do you think people shouldn't have to follow these rules or would you prefer that people be able to scummarine their way through Day 1?
samgrossy wrote:Why does chuck post about the rules? He must be a rules guy, but I don't necessarily think thats scummy. It is funny that he is pointing out rules in the joke vote like he is holy than thou, though.
Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone, so I wonder if he is hurrying, or if he truly is interested in the game mechanics.
I do agree that any case that is brought forward now would be flimsy at best, though. But those are just some of the observations I have made.
Do you think people shouldn't have to follow these rules or would you prefer that people be able to scummarine their way through Day 1?
I'm glad that you pointed out the rules, no doubt. And I don't think it was scummy of you to do so, but so far, there hasn't been much for any of us to really sink their teeth into. So I was just trying to generate some conversation, as per the 24 hour post rule.
VioIet wrote:No one has been scummy yet, so I see no need to place a vote. I'm not going to vote someone just for the sake of voting them. I think this game is slowly starting to move from the joke vote stage to the real stage- thus I will refrain from voting.
unvote vote violet for not following the rules
DoomYoshi wrote:
To encourage activity, and discourage stalling,
a) deadlines will be set at 14 days per day phase and 3 days per night phase.
b) Your first post of the day must include a vote and unvotes are not allowed. This doesn't mean you can't change your vote, just that you must always have one. Vote no lynch is a valid option. I won't modkill or anything over this rule, but please remember that by signing up you agree to follow the rule.
c) Whoever has the most votes at the end of a day will be lynched, as long as they have 1/4 of the votes.
@ redhedge: the rule says you have to vote in your first post of the day not in EVERY post of the day.
Oh, my bad
I'm sorry Doomyoshi. I do want to follow the rules, so I will Vote No Lynch
I am by no means advocating a no lynch, however, I am not completely sure about who I will place my first vote upon yet.
Bruceswar: I have big news coming out soonish
Violet: oh, what big news?
Bruceswar: I am leaving KORT to go to RA
samgrossy wrote:Jonty seems to be anxious to build a case against someone,
The games is going slowly, and I've seen games like this where no one says anything and the clock runs down until its too late to do anything meaningful
Iron Butterfly wrote:
who do you think is scummy and why?
Samgrossy, seems to be posting little and of little value.
Redhedge, a bit of bandwaggoning in the jokevote stage.
But these are pretty weak. unvote, vote no lynch until something tempts my vote to move along.
hmm... jonty wants to move the game along, but wont take any initiative. he simply votes no lynch (something most people think is scummy), and waits for other people to take action. unvote vote jonty
this is what i was referring to
<NoSurvivors› then vote chuck for being an info whore
