Hinckley Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I'm not gonna sit here and wait for the scum to get me. I'm an AMERICAN. If they wanna take me on, bring it, Scummos. Let's dance. A wise man once said, "You have nothing to fear but your megablocks exploding". I truly believe that. May I throw a little rain on this parade and ask why you would try to have history repeat itself? Wasn't a certain investigator annoyed with you last time for putting yourself in the spotlight considering you were the one she found trustworthy and then you were gone right after being investigated. Or perhaps you are banking on people thinking that history is repeating itself and that you're once again volunteering with the Town's best interest in mind...yet you might actually be Scum this time? Li'l Foog and Li'l Kiel, now do you see why we take this mayor thing so seriously? It starts interesting discussions.
CMP Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 And that's why I said what I did, something Lil' CMP seems to have taken exception to. How would a random mayor vote give us anything to analyze for a lynch? An informed mayor vote hardly does that. I'm not agreeing with that plan, if that's what you're implying. I'm questioning your logic.
CorneliusMurdock Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 May I throw a little rain on this parade and ask why you would try to have history repeat itself? Wasn't a certain investigator annoyed with you last time for putting yourself in the spotlight considering you were the one she found trustworthy and then you were gone right after being investigated. Or perhaps you are banking on people thinking that history is repeating itself and that you're once again volunteering with the Town's best interest in mind...yet you might actually be Scum this time? I'm open to discussing things. I don't think history will repeat itself. I think scum would have to be phenomenally stupid to try that sort of thing again. And I'm not entirely sure that becoming mayor was the cause of my demise. As for investigation results, we don't have an investigator this game if the teacher has been truthful and there wasn't a night zero. Go ahead and think what you want. I don't see how I can defend myself from your circular reasoning on day one. A high approval rating is probably the least of my worries if I'm elected anyway. I can only do what I think is right. And taunting the booger-faced, poopy-head scum seems right to me. If they want to come after me, it's their funeral. I got my superman hair this time, and they're all out of kryptonite.
Nightshroud99 Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 Oh my you- er- we Earthlings sure do talk a lot! Hi all, sorry, I was just checking my own totally human @ss to make sure that it wasn't about to explode! So, about mayor. I am of a like mind as some of you Earthlings.... some of my fellow Earthings... in that the mayor vote the first day is kind of a shot in the dark, much like any vote on the first day. I'll save my vote for mayor just in case I see a real need to use it later, but right now I'm inclined to vote for Lil' Kiel, because while we all know it's a very dangerous position, he seems to think it's not. So, let's let him test it out! It's also unfortunate that we lose the irony of Lil' Big Cam so early in the school day. Lil' Big. So sad. Hold on, why are you saying Earthlings so much? I mean, really??
TrumpetKing Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 Lil' Trumpetking, why does the mayor have to be appearing townie on day one? Because if we come across the unlikely chance of making a tie, and one of the nominees happens to be scum, do you really want a scummy mayor? However, that would just put the mayor under scrutiny should they choose a town member to lynch.
Hinckley Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I'm open to discussing things. I don't think history will repeat itself. I think scum would have to be phenomenally stupid to try that sort of thing again. And I'm not entirely sure that becoming mayor was the cause of my demise. As for investigation results, we don't have an investigator this game if the teacher has been truthful and there wasn't a night zero. Go ahead and think what you want. I don't see how I can defend myself from your circular reasoning on day one. A high approval rating is probably the least of my worries if I'm elected anyway. I can only do what I think is right. And taunting the booger-faced, poopy-head scum seems right to me. If they want to come after me, it's their funeral. I got my superman hair this time, and they're all out of kryptonite. I don't think there's a need to defend yourself from it. I'm mostly just thinking out loud. It's potentially interesting that you're once again volunteering for Mayor on Day One. So, yayz! you're not Scummy, just potentially interesting! Hold on, why are you saying Earthlings so much? I mean, really?? Because he's not an alien.
CorneliusMurdock Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 That'd make an excellent campaign slogan! "Vote for me, I'm potentially interesting!"
CMP Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 Whoops, could've sworn I put it in my post. Mayor: Li'l CorneliusMurdock.
Capt. Redblade Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 Because he's not an alien. He makes as convincing a non-alien as he did a non-werewolf.
def Posted March 16, 2013 Author Posted March 16, 2013 Vote for mayor: Li'l Walter 1 (Kiel) Li'l Kiel 1 (C. Redblade) Li'l Corny Murdock 4 (Danny, PirateDave, Peanuts, Callmepie) Under 10 hours left.
Chromeknight Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 Because if we come across the unlikely chance of making a tie, and one of the nominees happens to be scum, do you really want a scummy mayor? However, that would just put the mayor under scrutiny should they choose a town member to lynch. So, if they were ever in a position to choose between a town and a scum, and it came out they'd saved the scum, that'd be prima facie evidence for lynching them... Knowing that, they'd likely bus the scum who was dumb enough to have votes on them anyway. So my point stands. What difference will it really make, the alignment of the first mayor? Unless its a game winning move, which ain't gonna happen day one.
TrumpetKing Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 That is what I had explained. Still, I want a mayor that we can trust. We only have one mayor until the first one dies, which seeing how the last game went will be pretty likely, but why would you want somebody untrustworthy as your mayor? Saying it doesn't matter is actually wrong. The mayor is a pretty important role. Right now it's about as useful as a pair of handerpants , but that doesn't mean it won't be useful in the future, so we should be picking trustworthy people as our mayor. We don't want to be all "Whoop-Dee-Doo, let's randomize it!" because that could lead to some trouble in the future. Does anybody else think that the Banana Pharaoh could become a recess teacher?
Chromeknight Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 We only have one mayor until the first one dies, which seeing how the last game went will be pretty likely, but why would you want somebody untrustworthy as your mayor? Now, that's just twisting my words. I didn't say I wanted,someone untrustworthy. I said that if it turns out mayor#1 ain't trustworthy, then ...meh. He (or she) can be replaced. Easily. A point you reinforce above.
TrumpetKing Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I meant metaphorically. I wasn't referring to you, but just the whole of the game. If you misinterpreted that, then I apologize. I don't know that we should be taking our chances. I think it is a better idea to elect somebody more trustworthy, even if the role isn't as useful, because you never know what will happen, and we need somebody who we can trust can look at the evidence presented on both sides, because we don't know that there will or will not ever be a tie, but it is better to play it safe and elect somebody more trustworthy. The way your phrase was worded asked why the person we elected had to appear townie. That seems like you are implying electing a scummy person as mayor. I don't know why you would do that, perhaps just a jumble of thoughts, but I have my opinion and think it is pretty self-explanatory to elect somebody who appears townie. You also have your own opinion, and you are entitled to it. While I might not agree with it, or understand it, I can live with it. I feel like we shouldn't be risking our mayoral election with somebody that we don't have a very good vibe off of yet.
Rick Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 The only loopholes I see with this one is how the town mason/investigator would publicize the night action results. We need another trusted and brave townie to be the spokesperson (much like a legendary townie Hinckley in the epic books I've read). Also, false investigation/recruitment results by the scum would also be a hindrance. I see a lot more loopholes. As others have indicated, you're ignoring the possibility of a scum recruitment or the scum blocking the mason recruitment. I seem to remember Mr. def saying that he'd give the recruitment to the scum if someone was targeted for both scum and mason recruitment on the same night. Moreover, he said the recruitment block would work on the target not on the recruiter, so a scum recruitment blocker would have an ideal target tonight. All of this assumes that li'l Corny is actually recruitable in the first place. Assuming we can safely get the mason's result out in the open (and that's a really big assumption, because I don't think there's a way to confirm them), are we going to lynch him for not being recruitable? If he's not recruitable, he can be scum, not recruitable, or blocked from recruitment by the masons. Because if we come across the unlikely chance of making a tie, and one of the nominees happens to be scum, do you really want a scummy mayor? However, that would just put the mayor under scrutiny should they choose a town member to lynch. So, if they were ever in a position to choose between a town and a scum, and it came out they'd saved the scum, that'd be prima facie evidence for lynching them... Knowing that, they'd likely bus the scum who was dumb enough to have votes on them anyway. So my point stands. What difference will it really make, the alignment of the first mayor? Unless its a game winning move, which ain't gonna happen day one. Indeed, especially early in the game, I think a scum mayor would think twice before saving a fellow scum. So, it's probably not a position they want, and not only because it makes them a night action magnet. I think the most important function of the mayoral election isn't who gets the role, but rather to see who's willing to step forward for the position. Corny might be bluffing and it by no means clears him from being scum, but I'd say the chances of him being scum are a bit smaller. Mayor: Li'l Cornelius Murdock
Palathadric Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 Seriously, you're taking this way to seriously, Li'l Trumpetking! It's not like we have anything to go on, really, in the beginning of the day anyway, so how can you really say who is appearing "townie" or whatever and who is not? A scummy mayor is not likely to do anything "game-changing" this early on anyway. Since we may as well just get it over with and he doesn't mind being mayor and doesn't strike me, as of yet, as being scummy, I will go ahead and Vote: Li'l Cornelius Murdock.
TrumpetKing Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I'm not taking it too seriously. At least, I don't think so. I'm trying to look at this at the point that although the role isn't important now, it could be at any point, so we should be wary of who we elect. So, I feel that it is less likely that Corny is scum due to his willingness to be mayor despite his previous experiences. However, he could be scum trying to dupe us by thinking this through. However, I see that less likely, because I'm not sure that a scum would bring themselves up so early, especially with the negative connotation that the mayor had last game. Because more evidence leads to him being town, I will Mayor: Li'l Cornelius Murdock. I feel like this is a decision that I can feel comfortable with at this point in time, as he does seem pretty trustworthy, being willing to volunteer himself like that.
Palathadric Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 Just wondering, just how much of a king are you at playing with your trumpet? ...I hope your furry hat doesn't get in the way...
Cecilie Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I find it interesting that there's a mayor "bandwagon" for Li'l Cornelius going on here. People afraid to stick out and just vote along with the popular choice? I also find it interesting that last time he volunteered, he boldly went out and said he'd only trust himself for mayor, and proceeded to vote for himself (if I remember correctly). This time he only volunteered after the spotlight had been put on him and he was asked if he would volunteer now as well. And he himself has yet to vote... I'm not saying that makes him scum, he could just be more cautious about the mayor role than he was last time, but I find it interesting. And now everyone is all "he volunteered, so he must be a good choice". I think I want to hold on to my mayor vote just a bit longer... But I'm actually more inclined to vote for Li'l Kiel, as he seems less stressed out about the mayor role.
Palathadric Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I have to say that I was more inclined to Li'l KDM, but he said some odd stuff regarding night actions that really should not have been talked about in public, so I switched to Li'l CM.
Fugazi Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 Li'l Foog and Li'l Kiel, now do you see why we take this mayor thing so seriously? It starts interesting discussions. I agree that the process is important, and that the discussion could lead to important clues. What I failed to understand is why you thought that nominating someone was mean because it would lead to that person being killed. I'm starting to see that it is a possibility, though I'm still not convinced about the importance of the Mayor role in itself.
XimenaPaulina Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I have to say that I was more inclined to Li'l KDM, but he said some odd stuff regarding night actions that really should not have been talked about in public, so I switched to Li'l CM. I'm sorry but I fail to see how my simple suggestion regarding night actions "should not have been talked about in public". Li'l Jesus Hinckley also called me out regarding this, and I'm not saying my suggestion was 100% fool-proof, in fact I admit it does have many loopholes, but I made that suggestion with the intention of "reaching out to other fellow townies" out there, particularly the town doctor and/or mason. At the end of the day it's still their decision on how they'll go about with their night actions. I was simply making a suggestion and "trying to reach out publicly". You know why? Because it's tough to be a townie at the start of any game, not knowing anyone, not knowing who to trust, not knowing who to talk to first. I'm sure townies out there would feel the same way and would understand what I'm talking about. It's Day 1, and I highly doubt that a town core is forming already in private this early considering (lack of) trust issues. That's the point of discussing things publicly right? You'd be able to gauge people based on their posts, reactions, etc. Hopefully, no matter how my suggestion seem implausible or not, it would eventually lead to townies reaching out to each other and start working together. I will not just sit around here and simply listen to what others have to say, if I have something in my mind that I feel merits discussion then I would say it.
Palathadric Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 It's never a good idea to suggest night action targets in thread. Granted, the scum do not know if the town PRs will actually go with those actions, but at the least it will make the town PRs wonder fi they should really go with what may have otherwise been a perfectly good plan, because now the scum will know about it as well. Of course, this would probably be fairly obvious to both teams already, but in general, it's just not a good thing to do. Besides, if our PRs were to go with your ideas of actions, what if the scum would just watch/track (I always get those two confused) CM? Then they have two town/mason (if you want to differentiate) PRs in a nice little package. ...Pre-wrapped. Not a good idea.
Pandora Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I'm not sure how much of a factor being mayor was in my death last game And I'm not entirely sure that becoming mayor was the cause of my demise. It was discussed in the land of the dead. In becoming Mayor, you became a trusted townie, and a potential leader. It was indeed what led to your demise. I'm surprised you don't remember, and are putting yourself up again, however it would indeed be a very bold move for you to do if you were scum. Whether history will repeat itself remains to be seen; expectations based on prior events and suggestions of night action moves publicly lead to a whole world of WIFOM. What I failed to understand is why you thought that nominating someone was mean because it would lead to that person being killed. I'm starting to see that it is a possibility, though I'm still not convinced about the importance of the Mayor role in itself. See above. Hopefully, no matter how my suggestion seem implausible or not, it would eventually lead to townies reaching out to each other and start working together. I'm left wondering: How?
Chromeknight Posted March 16, 2013 Posted March 16, 2013 I meant metaphorically. I wasn't referring to you, but just the whole of the game. If you misinterpreted that, then I apologize. I don't know that we should be taking our chances. I think it is a better idea to elect somebody more trustworthy, even if the role isn't as useful, because you never know what will happen, and we need somebody who we can trust can look at the evidence presented on both sides, because we don't know that there will or will not ever be a tie, but it is better to play it safe and elect somebody more trustworthy. The way your phrase was worded asked why the person we elected had to appear townie. That seems like you are implying electing a scummy person as mayor. I don't know why you would do that, perhaps just a jumble of thoughts, but I have my opinion and think it is pretty self-explanatory to elect somebody who appears townie. You also have your own opinion, and you are entitled to it. While I might not agree with it, or understand it, I can live with it. I feel like we shouldn't be risking our mayoral election with somebody that we don't have a very good vibe off of yet. Hey, no worries. I agree that we should be able to trust the mayor (and if we can't, then burn him) I guess I was making two points that may have not been expressed clearly. 1. This early in the game 'appears townie' is very subjective. Since the scum will not have had to lie (much) yet, one person's solid gold townie is another's top suspect. 'Appears townie' is so flexible a category as to be nearly worthless. My comment is, why bother setting it as a criteria if it's that subjective. 2. (And I realise this is in counterpoint to the above). If 'appears townie' is actually a useful category and people choose the mayor on that score, and broadcast that's how they made their choice then the mayor's sash does become a big fat target, since it says "here's a guy a whole bunch of other guys trust!" My comment is, that's giving information to the scums for free. Oh and Boing!
Recommended Posts