@stupidfighter
The town doesn't need to know what the power-roles are doing. The Mafia and SK do, though, since it's some of the information they don't have. We should be voicing suspicions.
I agree that we shouldn't be killing people who talk, though. That sets really bad precedent.

We should be killing people who talk if the talking shows they're scum. You can't just ignore anyone who talks, because then the mafia will talk.

It is a decent idea for the vig to kill non-talkers though, because they don't provide much information with their press or the voting record surrounding their lynchings.

Day 1 Vote Count Update 2:

uclabb (4): Maniac, Fluminator, bo_sox48, Jeff Kuta
tvrocks (1): uclabb
No lynch (1): VashtaNeurotic
VashtaNeurotic (2): OB_Gyn_Kenobi, ghug
Yoyoyozo (1): SandgooseXXI
phil_a_s (1): stupidfighter

No vote (9): tvrocks, Mintyboy4, y2kjbk, captainmeme, ALEXEXTREME333, thdfrance, phil_a_s, guak, Yoyoyozo

End votes (0/10)

~37.5 hours remain

@Vashta So I'm scummy because I voted for you? Tbh I have no idea what to think and bo gave a pretty insightful exposition of your suspected scummy-ness and I followed it in the thread. Hell, even if his accusations were pulled out of his ass, I got o hand it to him, he knows how to convince people. I fall back on my previous decision:
#VOTE Vashta

Jeff is voting bo_sox, not uclabb.

^not official yet

Day 1 Vote Count Update 2.1:

uclabb (3): Maniac, Fluminator, bo_sox48
tvrocks (1): uclabb
No lynch (1): VashtaNeurotic
VashtaNeurotic (2): OB_Gyn_Kenobi, ghug
Yoyoyozo (1): SandgooseXXI
phil_a_s (1): stupidfighter
bo_sox48 (1): Jeff Kuta

No vote (9): tvrocks, Mintyboy4, y2kjbk, captainmeme, ALEXEXTREME333, thdfrance, phil_a_s, guak, Yoyoyozo

End votes (0/10)

~37.5 hours remain

What do you mean by "not official yet"? Either you're voting or you're not.

I'm not casting it just yet. I hate to keep voting and then new idea come up and then I have to #unvote. I'd rather just wait until tomorrow when I've made up my mind because even though I have my suspicions, they aren't very strong and could mean nothing to reality.

You can just change your mind and cast a new vote or wait completely. Pretending to vote just makes everything confusing.

How is that any more confusing than casting multiple votes. Whatever floats your boat, I guess. ##VOTE Vashta

Phil, I'm not suggesting the officers come out and TELL the aliens what they're gonna do, just that we as crew members help 'em to think things through. Since I can't force the officers to do what I say, the aliens can't predict the officer's actions based on my or anybody's suggestions.

To me, it seems like the thrust of the voteUc movement comes from the idea we shouldn't discuss officer actions, but I plain disagree. Now I've admitted to being a novice, and I'm happy to hear why some of the crew thinks its a bad idea, but so far, I haven't heard a compelling reason to break our rule of thumb. More communication is better.

And for the love of Jesus, everyone please stop throwing around #votewhoever. All these 'fake votes' are making my head spin, and dammit we've got ENOUGH to think about without sowing deliberate confusion.

It's really useful to be able to track voting records when scumhunting.

@stupid, it's OK to give suggestions, but it's bad to make bad suggestions, and uclabb, being smarter than the rest of us, knows that.

Use Ctrl+F to search for double # like GM does.

Yeah, but then what's the purpose of a single # but to confuse the rest of us?

To communicate your current, but possibly changing, voting intentions. Ithink it would be easier to just look at all the fake votes leading up the the real votes than to have everyone doing "vote" "unvote" all day. Its also more convienent than having a certain number of people wait. Knowing which people certain people are suspicous of is helpful, no? Well it is more information that can be tabulated by you geniuses out there.

Then you should just say: "I find this and this person suspicious, for these and these reasons".

That's why it's good to cast votes frequently and without concern. The pressure is a valuable tool, and so are the records. It's not any more trouble to add a second #, and it's helpful to the town.

Good to hear your thoughts on voteUc, Ghug. "I think his suggestion was bad and that he knows it was bad" is a better explanation than what has been offered so far. While you haven't convinced me he's an alien, at least now I know why you think he might be.

I agree with putting uclabb and Vashta up front. uclabb has a peculiar voting history, while Vashta hasn't really said much with regards to the game itself, but more the meta-game. Since they're both ahead with 3, I'm not too keen on putting one ahead of the other, since for all the increased pressure on one, we lose pressure on the other.

Another player with odd play so far has been Jeff Kuta. From what I can tell, he has made no posts of significance and one unexplained vote on bo.

##VOTE Jeff Kuta until he explains his behavior.

Don't forget the reference to a terrible TV show.

I'm popping in for a couple of minutes before I head out. Just to remind people I did say when I signed up that I would be AWOL during the first weekend. I've skimmed the debate quickly and don't feel I'm able to give many reads. I'd also like some of the pro players to help the newbies a little more. Can someone post about what terms we use mean WIFOM, etc so everyone is aware what they mean.

My gut tells me that OB is a crew member his post about logic of keeping quiet day after day just leads to alien win is sound. We must debate and we must go for a lynch. If in the last 30mins we decide to no-lynch, then that's another story, but until then. We all go for a lynch.

Perversely I also think Vash is a crew member. He knows pushing for nolynch would appear scummy and scum want to hide. I think he I just testing others, something every good crew member should be doing.

I don't feel great about Guar right now, but it's nothing specific so I will monitor him closely when I return. I'm not going to jump to vote for him as if I'm wrong we lose someone who can think on the level we need to win the game.

For now, for no reason other than pressure ##vote Yoyoyozo

Signing out - live long and prosper

It would be nice to hear from people who haven't spoken at all yet: y2k, captainmeme, guak, thdfrance for example

It would be equally nice to hear from those who haven't said anything particularly relevant yet: ALEX, mintyboy, tvrocks ...

There are probably some I haven't mentioned, as well. We need the whole town talking here. That way scum needs to talk and can be caught.

7 pages already... I forgot how fast these threads grow. I'll post shortly after I've read up on all of this.

Okay, so I understand why a lot of you think everyone talking and contributing to the discussion is vital for the town to be successful. I agree with this on some level. The only thing is that for a newbie, like myself, talking is hard... Still trying to learn how the game is played. I want to contribute though, and as the game progresses I will add more and more as I get comfortable with the gameplay. I noticed a few of you suggested killing off the non-talkers. I agree with this for a few reasons.
1. It basically forces everyone to speak up for fear of dying right away. More voices adding ideas, and getting results.
2. With everyone talking, scum become more noticeable. If mafia members are forced to discuss they are more likely to slip up.

The only reason I don't like the idea of killing the quiet ones is simply that new players, such as myself, may not have a lot to say simply because they haven't gotten a read on gameplay yet.

I agree with Maniac's reasoning when he says that Vash seems like a crew member. A mafia member wouldn't jump up and push for a no-lynch day. Obviously it attracted your attention to Vash. That's exactly what a Mafia member would avoid. I do disagree with him. I think lynching someone is the only way to make progress. We can't just sit around and hope for the best. I still think Vash is suspicious but I'm not going to throw down a vote for him just because I disagree with him.
Uclabb is probably at the top of my list. One of the first things he said regarded the marine and suggesting he not go kill his primary accuser. The only reason someone would suggest that, I think, would be because they might just end up being his primary accuser.
But that's just my opinion and I'm open to discussion.
For now ##VOTE Uclabb

I've skimmed through it now (I know, 3 hours to skim that? I get distracted easily :( ).

##Vote Vashta

I followed the same reasoning as Maniac when I first read his post advocating for a no lynch. Bringing that subject up again in the first place is risky as hell (I think I got lynched for doing so in Mafia III? I don't remember), as it's been resolved already in the previous games and almost everyone here knows it. The only possible reason to do so would be to try to start discussion you could get information out of, but since everyone would vote lynch (townies because it is best for them, mafia because they don't want to stand out too much early) that won't give us much.

Then to make a post advocating for no lynch... My first thought was that that must be just to promote discussion. There's no way Vashta actually supports that position, and his posts show it - he's scraping the bottom of the barrel to find arguments and not responding well to a lot of the points made.

My second thought was that this was actually a decent mafia strategy. Getting everyone ganging up on you and having a good reason for it (in this case promoting discussion) should waylay a lot of the suspicion on you. Plus, if it doesn't work and you get lynched, if all your comrades are voting for you (as they probably would be) it places the suspicion on those who defended you, which there will probably be at least one, given that anyone who gets a huge vote train will have someone voting elsewhere simply because there's a huge vote train and that usually signals non-mafia this early on.

Hopefully I've explained myself clearly there. To be honest it's not the strongest reasoning, but I think if he flips mafia it will give us the most info. Also, I haven't really got strong mafia reads on anyone else, so this is my best choice at the moment.

Uclabb doesn't read like mafia to me. I think his opener about the vigilante was a legitimate attempt to open discussion, and the vig not killing his main accuser is good reasoning IMO - at least when the vig has nothing else to make him suspect that person. Given that the mafia don't know who the vig is, someone targeting the vigilante specifically doesn't really point towards them being mafia.

I am a little concerned with his initial dismissal of Ghug's argument ("@ghug trollolol I assume"). That didn't respond to any of the points he made. I don't think Uclabb has posted since this, so I'd like to hear an explanation from him.