-=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Five? (3/21)

Vote Mathgirl for killing conversation.

This wasn't random? Suddenly this vote really looks odd to me. I don't know anyone's experiences with mafia after I quit way back (I don't know who's new to mafia and who's not), but this seems kind of counterproductive, to vote a player who tried to end RVS (no matter how the attempt actually went).

I was going to unvote Mathgirl in light of the day extension and the fact that the ball is rolling now, but her suck-up post was just kinda scummy. I think other people said enough about it though. Painting every single person as town very rarely ever contributes much.

Dini seems kind of bleh (not town not scum) to me honestly, which probably means a lot, considering he normally plays strongly. On the other hand, meta-based reads are rarely ever accurate or even viable, so I'll just leave it as a light suspicion.

re: Tea, cool, he's back. I honestly don't feel that much against an infolynch, though. It's Day 1, we don't have much info to go off of, so it doesn't really seem as bad as you make it out to be. But, /just/ for information is not a good reason, like you said, yes. The thing is, there was a bit going around on Mathgirl, so you basically just ignored that. (after looking again) Okay, you didn't, but you only really mentioned other people's reads, then said your infolynching reason was more important than them, then you dismissed that very same reason. This does not sound good to me.

I don't really have a problem with the TehPilot lynch though. I just don't really see it. Then again, I did kind of feel a little bit weirded out by his latest post, which was a definitive "Okay, that wraps up suivig discussion," then prodding lurkers. I just can't really explain it, but the tone feels ... off. Like, trying too hard to look like a town leader, maybe.

So... Math, Tea, then Pilot are my top scumreads right now, in that order.

Oh, and on Dini's vote:

finally Vote: garuru for his remarkably strange logical leap from "Ethically speaking, we should just no lynch... but that doesn't sit right with me [so I will dismiss ethical play here]" to "a lurker lynch feels really wrong" to "well I guess we just lynch this person that's stuck out and actually played the game then".

I think I may have been misleading. When I said "ethical decision" I meant, like, the morally right thing to do, whether or not it's actually best to do, gameplay wise. So, no lynching is "polite" but gets us nowhere. On the other hand, a lurker lynch, I just didn't really feel right with. Normally, I would, but this game had a remarkably long RVS. It would make sense to me that some people would not want to talk unless they had something to contribute, and there was nothing going on at the time. At the time of my comment, new things were only barely starting up, so there wasn't really a strong separation from lurkers and others. Heck, a lot of people had already posted only once, for RVS. That makes them no different from someone who didn't post in RVS.

That's why I didn't feel right with a lurker lynch, because they weren't even lurkers, just people who didn't participate in RVS. Last I checked, I didn't think that /everybody/ had to participate. So, yeah I much prefer voting people who has at least spoken up, because they are the only people I can read!