38 minutes ago, Visovics said:

Although his vote on Cninj is quite unsubstantiated...

What you said is the scummiest thing ever!

4 hours ago, WigTii said:

I'm back. The only comment I'll make about the film is that I'm so glad it was dedicated to Carrie Fisher. She truly was a princess.

You are close to get my vote...

9 hours ago, EbonHawk said:

No, we're all currently smuggling but that doesn't make us actual smugglers

Sure, bust whilst performing the act we are, as that is what the word means.

Sorry for my lack of serious comments up to now. Somehow I accidentally skipped all the drama.

I find Rajam suspicious. An unexplained vote, and then he jumps on one person of everybody who didn't question it? Then the deal thing. I am also mildly suspicious of Gink, as his argument is reaching. However I do not know how serious he was when he posted it, given the phase of Day 1 we were in at the time. I myself see nothing sinister in Pod's or Toad's comments.

Just now, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

Sure, but whilst performing

Freaking froof read, amiright?

Well, Pod not being suspicious is... suspicious.

Nah bruv, mans on a watching tip ya get me?

Rajams a player.

skkrrt.

Good morning. I will be offline until my lunch break in 6.5 hours. If the consensus regarding the suspiciousness of Rajam continues to grow during the time I am away, I'll cast a vote to lynch him when I check in.

1 minute ago, WigTii said:

Good morning. I will be offline until my lunch break in 6.5 hours. If the consensus regarding the suspiciousness of Rajam continues to grow during the time I am away, I'll cast a vote to lynch him when I check in.

Without any analysis yourself? We'd still have a day left. It's not like you would be pressed for time. What's your hurry?

18 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

Without any analysis yourself? We'd still have a day left. It's not like you would be pressed for time. What's your hurry?

I offered my opinion last night before I turned in for the evening. I firmly believe action should follow words if the collective opinion of the group is that Rajam is acting suspicious and is therefore scummy. If the collective has gone elsewhere, I'll reevaluate my opinion.

I'll check in on my lunch. Definitely signing off now.

10 minutes ago, WigTii said:

I offered my opinion last night before I turned in for the evening. I firmly believe action should follow words if the collective opinion of the group is that Rajam is acting suspicious and is therefore scummy. If the collective has gone elsewhere, I'll reevaluate my opinion.

I'll check in on my lunch. Definitely signing off now.

See below:

7 hours ago, WigTii said:

I think @JJs Juggernaut observation succinctly captures the essence of the conversation here thus far. I agree that Rajam's Gink post reads a bit suspicious. I don't like the "let's make a deal" aspect of it as it doesn't seem like something a townie would do.

The above is what you stated. 'A bit suspicious' does not seem to warrant a vote without due thought, I would think. What if the town decides to vote him, but you would have been more suspicious of somebody else, had you analyzed rather than merely voted? Would it not be better to double-check that you yourself agree with the majority read, and perhaps discover a flaw in the thinking instead, rather than follow? I'll point you to Pod last game. While it is true that his actions eventually led to his death, the initial reason he was voted was minor, and though apparently 'not something town would do', he was town. Vis can be seen to jump back and forth in voting myself and Pod that day, and perhaps had one looked at players other than those in the limelight, they would have been suspicious of him sooner. Therefore I would imagine that each player analyzing all other players' actions prior to any voting would be recommended.

3 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

See below:

The above is what you stated. 'A bit suspicious' does not seem to warrant a vote without due thought, I would think. What if the town decides to vote him, but you would have been more suspicious of somebody else, had you analyzed rather than merely voted? Would it not be better to double-check that you yourself agree with the majority read, and perhaps discover a flaw in the thinking instead, rather than follow? I'll point you to Pod last game. While it is true that his actions eventually led to his death, the initial reason he was voted was minor, and though apparently 'not something town would do', he was town. Vis can be seen to jump back and forth in voting myself and Pod that day, and perhaps had one looked at players other than those in the limelight, they would have been suspicious of him sooner. Therefore I would imagine that each player analyzing all other players' actions prior to any voting would be recommended.

Actually a lot of people were suspicious of vis, and if Pod had been playing a more comventional game that hadn’t distracted the town at the time, maybe Vis would have been prioritized higher as a lynch target.

That said, the point you are making regarding this game and how to view pods actions through what I shall be referring to as “Podnoculars” stands. Consider the source.

Only have a couple minutes to post, but I'm pretty torn. On the one hand, that vote bloc deal offer looks super hinky. On the other, it's also super obvious, which makes me wary of it being used as manipulation.

But what would be the intended point if it were? Sacrifice one scum to protect the others by naming them in the accusation, possibly?

I'll have to think, but for now gotta run.

From a meta game perspective, seems like the new guy would be a weird choice of sacrifice if it were a sacrificial gambit.

Checking in...I don't have much time.

I was hoping to see more conversation than what has occurred since my post this morning. Maybe later things will pick up.

Ghost: I have a couple of points to make in reply to you but it will have to wait until later.

Quick Post on my break n ting....

Mans not lurking and ting... I beez in the trap..

Ya get me?

As well me think @EbonHawk may have been fishing yesterday...

boom

Hey guys! Watched star wars last night and then crashed. Lots of convo to catch up on, but I'm reading as fast as i can

Just home from work pulled the overtime shift, next week Monday-Thursday I'll be working 9am-6:30pm GMT.

catching up on posts now

2 hours ago, PodRacer said:

Quick Post on my break n ting....

Mans not lurking and ting... I beez in the trap..

Ya get me?

As well me think @EbonHawk may have been fishing yesterday...

boom

Not this again...

how on earth have I role fished this game?

Also nothing much has really gone down just other players adding to the ranging consensus

Interested to see what Rjam has to say

Hey guys, Mr. Toad has collected himself after venting on the TLJ spoilers page... now back to Mafia.

I think Gink was just giving me a hard time for the Freudian thing. I do however find the new guys reaction to it interesting.

Interesting!

You said the word of the day!

1 hour ago, EbonHawk said:

Not this again...

how on earth have I role fished this game?

I think I missed this also.

On 12/14/2017 at 4:50 PM, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

Oh, never mind, I misread the post. Oh well. . .

? Care to explain?

22 hours ago, EbonHawk said:

No, we're all currently smuggling but that doesn't make us actual smugglers

Moving them Cornflakes?