Mafia Time!

Geminex · 12-14-2011, 04:20 PM

Shit, 4 hours? Screw you and your 48-hour days, bard.

Okay, let's get this on.

I've gone through the thread and done a search on everyone, to get a general picture of people's activity.

Mr.Bookworm and Moogle both jumped out as having made absolutely no contribution to any sort of discussion. Bookie made two joke posts, moogle made one, and then they were never heard from again.

A couple of people made minimal contributions, but it's been a fairly small game so far, so I can understand that. Not having said anything, though, is weird.

A bunch more people contributed a lot. Some of these contributions were shakily justified (such as IC's suggestion that we lynch nikose, or nik's initial randomvote), but I don't think any of the high-activity players have displayed overwhelming suspicious activity.

And on the balance? I think I'd prefer to lynch one of the inactives on day 1.

I'm aware that silent people just might be power roles, and that, by raising this point, I'm risking that power roles end up dying. But fact is, I'd rather have talkative players than silent players. Because, whatever happens, we can keep an eye on the talkative ones, and we can analyze their behavior. We can find stuff out. We'll still gain information from the daily discussion and the lynch. And honestly, when I get a power role, I try to at least maintain a pretense of activity. I don't just shut down. And given that they signed up for this game, their shutting down seems very weird.

Honestly, my suspicion is this. The active players are (mostly) clean, and the silent ones decided to lean back and let us tear each other apart. I can't base that on anything, it's a hunch, but it'd explain the general behavior so far, and it ties into my preference of lynching the inactives.

We should definitely keep an eye on... let's see, kerensky, IC, greed, nik, and myself. But for our lynch, let's go after either Moogle or Bookie.

Vote: Moogle.

Edit:
Also, can we extend the days? Please?

12-14-2011, 04:20 PM	#11
Geminex SOM3WH3R3 Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 4,606	Shit, 4 hours? Screw you and your 48-hour days, bard. Okay, let's get this on. I've gone through the thread and done a search on everyone, to get a general picture of people's activity. Mr.Bookworm and Moogle both jumped out as having made absolutely no contribution to any sort of discussion. Bookie made two joke posts, moogle made one, and then they were never heard from again. A couple of people made minimal contributions, but it's been a fairly small game so far, so I can understand that. Not having said anything, though, is weird. A bunch more people contributed a lot. Some of these contributions were shakily justified (such as IC's suggestion that we lynch nikose, or nik's initial randomvote), but I don't think any of the high-activity players have displayed overwhelming suspicious activity. And on the balance? I think I'd prefer to lynch one of the inactives on day 1. I'm aware that silent people just might be power roles, and that, by raising this point, I'm risking that power roles end up dying. But fact is, I'd rather have talkative players than silent players. Because, whatever happens, we can keep an eye on the talkative ones, and we can analyze their behavior. We can find stuff out. We'll still gain information from the daily discussion and the lynch. And honestly, when I get a power role, I try to at least maintain a pretense of activity. I don't just shut down. And given that they signed up for this game, their shutting down seems very weird. Honestly, my suspicion is this. The active players are (mostly) clean, and the silent ones decided to lean back and let us tear each other apart. I can't base that on anything, it's a hunch, but it'd explain the general behavior so far, and it ties into my preference of lynching the inactives. We should definitely keep an eye on... let's see, kerensky, IC, greed, nik, and myself. But for our lynch, let's go after either Moogle or Bookie. Vote: Moogle. Edit: Also, can we extend the days? Please?