Minimal Mafia: Day One

[Jo Baer]

I'm wondering, what is everyone's character known for? I am a famous sculptor. Could the works of art included in the introduction have anything to do with our loyalty?

I advise us to all go back and "google image" search famous things created by us and see if anything matches up. I remember someone mentioning that Dan Flavin is good with lights. One of the works of art included in the introduction shows up in the google image search. What does this mean?

You're joking right? Please tell me you don't really think our works of art have anything to do with our allegiance? Then we could all just google each other, find the artworks our color schemes are based on, and get the list of scum. Yeah, not going to help.

[Dan Flavin]

Still not liking the bandwagon in McKraken, the fact that three people are willing to vote him based on one thing that he hasn't even gotten the chance to defend himself from is unsettling

Jo, please give us your opinion instead of insulting other's ideas. Yes, Tony's idea is meaningless as a method of catching scum, but just mocking him won't help us out. If you don't have anything to add to the conversation yourself you shouldn't be calling out others for bad ideas. At least a bad idea gives us an opportunity to analyze said idea and form an opinion on whether it's scum trying to mislead us or a misguided townie. You're being abrasive isn't helping us catch scum

As for my vote, I've mentioned multiple times now that this bandwagon is bothering me

Anne is the only one who voted for John legitimately

Ell was willing to add to the discussion when pressed and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now (slight scumread still, though)

So I'll Vote: Eva Hesse for the fact that she literally just voted for the first person to vote without providing any reason other than his sense of humor, which she found strange

Seriously, what the hell

[John McCracken]

Wow.... Okay...

How is it fishing to state: If there are no apparant gambits or people using roles, we will have no real information to go on. Period. That is not fishing, that is stating a fact.

The second portion was also just a logical and apparant fact. Your argument is based on nothing. It just seems to me like you got scared of me voting (incorrectly, it would seem ) for you, and this is your reaction.

Elsworth's reaction is perhaps the most interesting, as he thinks this argument is reasonable. Still, Anne's reactionalism and skittishness seem more suspicious to me. Vote: Anne Truitt

[Sol LeWitt]

I tend to agree with Dan and Carl about the John versus Anne argument. The spotlight is always on the first person to vote, so I doubt John would want to draw attention to himself like that if he were scum. The same goes for Anne's vote. Brice has been overly defensive, to the point where it could actually be seen as a towntell. The reasons Ellsworth gave for voting for John aren't convincing, but I also don't see why the scum felt the need to set a bandwagon in motion, knowing that the person with the most votes is lynched anyway.

Jo, Tony and Frank still haven't given their opinion on anything.

Enlighten me oh wise one, has there been much of substance to discuss? Because I have only seen typical day 1 accusations over nothing, and haven't seen anything of substance worth commenting yet.

I honestly don't know who to vote for. The day really just started and people are barely talking. I don't know what to do, realistically.

You must have some opinion on the accusations and subsequent votes. It might not help us right now, but if we don't get people's opinions, we'll allow the scum to hide and we can be sure to have nothing to go on, now or on later days.

I hope more information comes up soon, since like others have said, it is day one and we don't have anything solid to go on. I personally don't see any blatant scum yet, and I'm right now only looking at those people who have voted immediately. I know I'll be waiting to vote until later when we hear a bit more, even if we don't hear much more today.

Why are you looking at the people who voted early? Of course you're going to vote today, because it's mandatory. Who are you going to vote for "if we don't hear much more today"?

An artist who's flying under the radar is Donald. He only showed up to tell us he doesn't have a clip attached to his side and explain how forced perspective works.

[Tony Smith]

I'm a bit iffy towards Dan, Anne, and Eva, and it's only a gut feeling, as the kids say.

I don't like the bandwagon against John, so I'm going to Vote: Eva Hesse because I don't like the way she's acting.

[Eva Hesse]

hmm ich find one thing strange some of the people who vote for mich, say that they don' like the band vagon against john (what one could not call a bandvagon),

votes for me with that same reason.

And Dan it was not only his strange humor but the thing as Ich also said that ich found it strange that he fished as somebody called after metods. But frankly ich have little to go on because of d1 and my vote stands for now

[Jo Baer]

Jo, please give us your opinion instead of insulting other's ideas. Yes, Tony's idea is meaningless as a method of catching scum, but just mocking him won't help us out. If you don't have anything to add to the conversation yourself you shouldn't be calling out others for bad ideas. At least a bad idea gives us an opportunity to analyze said idea and form an opinion on whether it's scum trying to mislead us or a misguided townie. You're being abrasive isn't helping us catch scum

I'm sorry, what? You call that being abrasive, insulting, mocking? You don't think you're overreacting just a little bit here? If you haven't noticed, spewing useless theories is a good way for scum to appear active without helping, I called him out on that, and did not use any foul words, but I feel you are using some harsh words against me now, for no good reason. I don't see why you would feel the need to defend him like that, unless the two of you are better friends than the rest of us ...

Jo, Tony and Frank still haven't given their opinion on anything.

What excatly do you want me to provide my input on? All I see is meaningless day 1 banter, people being accused for nothing substancial. Some people role-playing, some people getting accused for being quiet. All very common, nothing very scummy. And this so called "bandwagon" of a whoopping 3 votes. You think scum is "hiding" in there? Unlikely, as it is unwise for scum to stick their necks out on a non-substantial bandwagon so early.

Now, as for my own vote, I'm going to think about it a little bit more while I review the events so far more thoroughly, even though it's hard to spot anything properly scummy on day 1s.

[Donald Judd]

An artist who's flying under the radar is Donald. He only showed up to tell us he doesn't have a clip attached to his side and explain how forced perspective works.

The substance of what I've said has added up to more than that. Is it possible you read through the day in a hurry?

I don't think I've been "flying under the radar" any more than anyone else. I've said things that were relevant to discussion. If you really feel what I've done is suspicious, vote for me. That's what the voting system is there for.

The only person I feel comfortable in placing a vote for right now is Ellsworth Kelly. Her statement when she first voted for John about it being between that and no lynch was a false statement considering that according to Rule 12, everyone must vote. That necessitates a lynch unless we had a very unlikely tie vote.

Sure she explained the reasons she voted for John after some prying from Dan, but she never really explained this original reasoning. It just seems like she didn't have a good reason to begin with but thought of one (or was coached by a teammate) when someone else wasn't satisfied with her first one.

Vote: Ellsworth Kelly

[Ellsworth Kelly]

The only person I feel comfortable in placing a vote for right now is Ellsworth Kelly. Her statement when she first voted for John about it being between that and no lynch was a false statement considering that according to Rule 12, everyone must vote. That necessitates a lynch unless we had a very unlikely tie vote.

At the time it was starting to look like that. Maybe I judged that too quickly. My point is that it was starting to appear like votes were being thrown in every which direction, as is usual on Day One, and I feared maybe they would be scattered enough for no lynch to occur. It's not as unlikely as you think in this situation. We number only thirteen, and I count five different people already being voted for.

Sure she explained the reasons she voted for John after some prying from Dan, but she never really explained this original reasoning. It just seems like she didn't have a good reason to begin with but thought of one (or was coached by a teammate) when someone else wasn't satisfied with her first one.

Did you read what I explained? I agreed with Anne's reasoning and elaborated on it when pried, I didn't change my reasons or bring out any new ones.

[John McCracken]

Just want to point out, I'm getting lynched as it stands. I am innocent. To give myself a chance I will Unvote: Anne Truitt, and Vote: Eva Hesse.

I still have heard no reason at all for why I would be scum. Anne's reasons are no reasons, as they lay words in my mouth I have not said.

[Sol LeWitt]

And this so called "bandwagon" of a whoopping 3 votes. You think scum is "hiding" in there? Unlikely, as it is unwise for scum to stick their necks out on a non-substantial bandwagon so early.

No, I don't. Given that the person with the most votes is lynched, I don't see why the scum would feel the need to get a bandwagon rolling.

The substance of what I've said has added up to more than that. Is it possible you read through the day in a hurry?

No, I read everything carefulty, I just didn't see anything of substance from you. At least you're offering some thoughts now.

At the time it was starting to look like that. Maybe I judged that too quickly. My point is that it was starting to appear like votes were being thrown in every which direction, as is usual on Day One, and I feared maybe they would be scattered enough for no lynch to occur. It's not as unlikely as you think in this situation. We number only thirteen, and I count five different people already being voted for.

Wasn't it a bit too early to be "worried" about that? I could perhaps understand those reasons towards the end of the day when you'd rather see one of the candidates tied for a lynch lynched than no lynch at all.

I can't help but doubt that Eva would vote so early if she were scum (for the same reasons I doubt John would vote first if he were scum). Out of the suspicions I mentioned earlier, I'm torn between voting for Frank or Tony. Frank hasn't contributed at all today and I agree with Jo that Tony could simply be trying to appear helpful by floating theories about catching scum based our works of art. You could even read this comment as subtly trying to cast suspicion on Dan.

I'm wondering, what is everyone's character known for? I am a famous sculptor. Could the works of art included in the introduction have anything to do with our loyalty?

I advise us to all go back and "google image" search famous things created by us and see if anything matches up. I remember someone mentioning that Dan Flavin is good with lights. One of the works of art included in the introduction shows up in the google image search. What does this mean?

Vote: Tony Smith

[Carl Andre]

Thanks for answering my question, Ellsworth! Unfortunately, it wasn't what I was looking for:

At the time it was starting to look like that. Maybe I judged that too quickly. My point is that it was starting to appear like votes were being thrown in every which direction, as is usual on Day One, and I feared maybe they would be scattered enough for no lynch to occur. It's not as unlikely as you think in this situation. We number only thirteen, and I count five different people already being voted for.

There were like three votes at the time, with one of them looking like a reaction test. John had 2 votes, with 9 people still to vote. How is that bordering on a no-lynch? I'm calling BS.

And it was "looking like it might be a no lynch eventually"? That'd be a valid argument if that was your last chance to vote before leaving for the rest of the day. Yeah, that must be it! Wait, no. It's not. You're here.

Vote: Ellsworth Kelly

It'd be neat if everyone would stop splitting the votes and vote Ellsworth.

So I'll Vote: Eva Hesse for the fact that she literally just voted for the first person to vote without providing any reason other than his sense of humor, which she found strange

I did mention Eva in the novella I wrote before, but I don't think it's good standing for lynching her. While jumping on something like that so early is a neat scum move, the way she did it made me think she was dumb, not scum.

I'm a bit iffy towards Dan, Anne, and Eva, and it's only a gut feeling, as the kids say.

I don't like the bandwagon against John, so I'm going to Vote: Eva Hesse because I don't like the way she's acting.

Tony gets an honorary vote from me for this. Bad bandwagon, no reasoning.

[Ellsworth Kelly]

Wasn't it a bit too early to be "worried" about that? I could perhaps understand those reasons towards the end of the day when you'd rather see one of the candidates tied for a lynch lynched than no lynch at all.

The lynch is split between five people, it's at a tie, and there's only three people left to vote.

There were like three votes at the time, with one of them looking like a reaction test. John had 2 votes, with 9 people still to vote. How is that bordering on a no-lynch? I'm calling BS.

And it was "looking like it might be a no lynch eventually"? That'd be a valid argument if that was your last chance to vote before leaving for the rest of the day. Yeah, that must be it! Wait, no. It's not. You're here.

Vote: Ellsworth Kelly

It might've been a little early, but oh look, it still turned out to be a completely accurate prediction.

This is how Day One usually works. People post fluff and roleplay, people derive reactions, people derive reactions from those reactions, votes fly everywhere. Sorry for being right, I guess.

[Jo Baer]

Ok, finally had some time to properly read through what's been said, and I'd like to just point out some of the statements that have stood out to me.

I'm splitting hair and WILDLY speculating but based on what I could read, it appears that some of us have pre-existing bonds, some of us even lived together; is it worth exploring these connections?

This need to state very clearly that something that already obviously is wildly speculating in fact is wildly speculating stood out to me as a bit strange. Almost pre-defensive...

may be a bit far fetched brice but something to go on

This was said in response to Brice obviously joking and wildly speculating based on the images provided. Struck me as strange to feel this was something to go on. And if it's so far fetched, why is it something to go on?

I honestly don't know who to vote for. The day really just started and people are barely talking. I don't know what to do, realistically.

No shit! None of us do! Stating the obvious, and in fact really stating nothing at all. Just talk that isn't even talk.

I'm wondering, what is everyone's character known for? I am a famous sculptor. Could the works of art included in the introduction have anything to do with our loyalty?

I advise us to all go back and "google image" search famous things created by us and see if anything matches up. I remember someone mentioning that Dan Flavin is good with lights. One of the works of art included in the introduction shows up in the google image search. What does this mean?

This was said long after the discussion on this was already over. And I've already pointed this statement out...

Actually, let me take a wild guess. People are lynching eachother over saying stupid stuff and for voting for people who said stupid stuff.

Well, if it's between that and a no-lynch, I'll Vote: John McCracken. Not because you cast the first stone - someone has to do it - but Anne's argument against him...

...seems pretty reasonable to me.

I'm not the first to point this one out. Comes off as very odd. It was never between John and a no-lynch, at least not at that time. And it even comes after saying that people are lynching eachother for saying stupid stuff . But then it just seems odd to me that a scum would stand out like a sore thumb like this, especially when a majority is not needed... Unless someone else with votes against them is a scum, and this was an attempt to push things in another direction

I'm a bit iffy towards Dan, Anne, and Eva, and it's only a gut feeling, as the kids say.

I don't like the bandwagon against John, so I'm going to Vote: Eva Hesse because I don't like the way she's acting.

Oh, another Tony statement! Says nothing of note, but claims gut feelings against three people, then votes for one of them based on not liking how she acts, and apparently trying to slide in with the crowd in not liking the bandwagon against John...

Ok, Tony wins my vote, with 3 posts that have stood out to me (and unless I've missed something, I think that's pretty much all he's said today...)

Vote: Tony Smith

[Eva Hesse]

Johnny boy neat move jumping over to vote for mich, du are not even near to get lynched , good reasoning.

Gives mich more reason to keep mich vote based on what we have on day 1.

Carl thanks for your info good points but one thing sticks out.

Thank for calling mich dumb, what are dich reasoning for this personal move.

Because mich vote for john may be quick but based on to get some discussion and reasons from john for his comments. Und ich don' understanden, it feels like du are trying to point out that ich would had copied my vote from another und voted the same. Carl care to explain what you meant cause check the votes.

[Frank Stella]

Why are you looking at the people who voted early? Of course you're going to vote today, because it's mandatory. Who are you going to vote for "if we don't hear much more today"?

I'm looking at them, or more accurately they are standing out more to me, because they (Those who voted almost immediatly once voting opened) seemed eager to cast a lynch when the day is still young--hence their reasons for voting already lack input from others. Basically they are ready to vote based on sketchy reasons. And of course I'm going to vote, and I have heard enough today to make my future vote more solid then it would be had I jumped on something earlier.

Anywho, the people that stand out most to me thus far are Robert Mangold and Eva Hesse. Robert jumped on my alert when he attacked Brice, the person he voted for, because Brice replied soon after the vote against him so he could defend himself. Robert called Brice flip-floppy for this since he jumped in to defend himself, adding that his vote against Brice in the first place was not too firm, but that Brice defending himself confirmed his vote--this is what stood out, since it shows Robert's first reason for voting for Brice (Saying the former was trying to push the town towards a dead-end picture/art discussion) was not strong whatsoever; and then caused him to make up a seemingly stronger reason (Of "Flip Floppy") for his vote in the first place.

Eva stands out too. Aside from her accent, which is just annoying, though itself has no basis for a vote against her, she stands out to me since she cast a vote early (Second actually) against John with her reasoning being because we have to start somewhere; she has yet to give any reason whatsoever why she voted for John, other than "just because", yet she is able to say that she will keep her vote on John even though she has no reason to vote for him, strange.

But frankly ich have little to go on because of d1 and my vote stands for now

Have you yet come up with a reason you are voting John, Eva?

[Carl Andre]

Carl thanks for your info good points but one thing sticks out.

Thank for calling mich dumb, what are dich reasoning for this personal move.

Because mich vote for john may be quick but based on to get some discussion and reasons from john for his comments. Und ich don' understanden, it feels like du are trying to point out that ich would had copied my vote from another und voted the same. Carl care to explain what you meant cause check the votes.

Nah, that's not what I was saying. My problem with you is the fact that you voted John because he voted first. That's how it seems to me. I don't think you copied your vote, since you were the first to vote for John.

And I don't mean it personally or as something offensive, I'm just explaining that voting someone because they were eager to vote is a terrible move, and never catches scum. People who are eager to take the reins and vote for someone who they think is scum are more often town than scum.

Hope this helps.

Addendum: The dumb thing was a reference to an old mafia proverb, "Scum or dumb" - I don't literally think you have low intelligence.

[John McCracken]

Right, so I'm going to sleepy sleepy, and I don't want to be lynched. By my math, if I Unvote: Eva Hesse and Vote: Ellsworth Kelly I should be alive for now.

[Robert Mangold]

I'm looking at them, or more accurately they are standing out more to me, because they (Those who voted almost immediatly once voting opened) seemed eager to cast a lynch when the day is still young--hence their reasons for voting already lack input from others. Basically they are ready to vote based on sketchy reasons. And of course I'm going to vote, and I have heard enough today to make my future vote more solid then it would be had I jumped on something earlier.

Anywho, the people that stand out most to me thus far are Robert Mangold and Eva Hesse. Robert jumped on my alert when he attacked Brice, the person he voted for, because Brice replied soon after the vote against him so he could defend himself. Robert called Brice flip-floppy for this since he jumped in to defend himself, adding that his vote against Brice in the first place was not too firm, but that Brice defending himself confirmed his vote--this is what stood out, since it shows Robert's first reason for voting for Brice (Saying the former was trying to push the town towards a dead-end picture/art discussion) was not strong whatsoever; and then caused him to make up a seemingly stronger reason (Of "Flip Floppy") for his vote in the first place.

Can you find where I called him flip-floppy? I can't. I did say he looked flop-sweaty, which has a totally different meaning, as in, being sweaty because you're nervously failing. But if you want to accuse me because you can't read, feel free.

Can we have a vote tally? I'm on a phone, and can't keep track easily. Is there a tie? Lynch is guaranteed unless there is a tie. Maybe for day one, we should try for a tie. It seems safer.

[Frank Stella]

Can you find where I called him flip-floppy? I can't. I did say he looked flop-sweaty, which has a totally different meaning, as in, being sweaty because you're nervously failing. But if you want to accuse me because you can't read, feel free.

Oh yes, how could I mix up "flip floppy" with "flip sweaty"; an equally inapproprate reason for your vote. And sure I'll feel free to accuse you of that--does anyone besides yourself even know what flip-sweaty means? I don't. Main point being, it seems like just a reason you threw out to give backing to your backless vote.

@Brice

Wow! A single vote at you, and you pop out to retort pretty quick. Convenient and maybe a little flop-sweaty. I didn't say you claimed it was hard work, just that it looks like you're doing something. I'm sorry that I didn't find your joke funny My vote wasn't so firm, but your quick reply makes it a little firmer.

---

Anyways, I'm more confident in voting for Eva, who has yet not given a reason for her vote other than "just because". So I'm fine with voting now;

<b>Vote: Eva Hesse</b>

Oops.

Fixing that mess up from above:

Vote: Eva Hesse

[Robert Mangold]

What the hell is flip-sweaty? First time you can't read, it's an honest mistake. Second time, you're just being a dummy.

Anyway, I gave two reasons for my day one vote, so it seems you don't know what backless means either.

[Ellsworth Kelly]

Can we have a vote tally? I'm on a phone, and can't keep track easily. Is there a tie?

I believe it's tied between me, John, and Eva at this point with three votes each, two votes for Tony, one vote for Brice and another for Anne.

[Robert Mangold]

I believe it's tied between me, John, and Eva at this point with three votes each, two votes for Tony, one vote for Brice and another for Anne.

I don't feel confident enough to drop the hammer on any if you. I don't think John is scum, so it would be you or Eva. I'd rather have a no-lynch for day one though.

[Tony Smith]

You're joking right? Please tell me you don't really think our works of art have anything to do with our allegiance? Then we could all just google each other, find the artworks our color schemes are based on, and get the list of scum. Yeah, not going to help.

Vote: Tony Smith

Ok, Tony wins my vote, with 3 posts that have stood out to me (and unless I've missed something, I think that's pretty much all he's said today...)

Vote: Tony Smith

It was my idea that we were supposed to come up with ideas. I presented my idea and even though it was far-fetched, you two pounced on it immediately. It was just a thought, you don't need to be so critical about it.

[Brice Marden]

I'm ok with a no-lynch tie today. There's no basis for killing anyone off. So I'm going to

Vote: Robert Mangold

Why? 1. Cause there's no threat for him to get lynched but I have to vote, and 2. Because his reason for voting for me sucked. Not just because it was me, but because it was a poorly justified vote.