Printable View
Because he could be a new player or a terrible player, so he doesn't know what the hell he's doing. Or it's an experienced player trying to trick us :shifty:
Either way, it just doesn't sit right, especially because he really had no back up, simply "I'm certain he's innocent." Poor. Very poor.
##Unvote: Nixon
##Vote: Thomas Jefferson.
I am likely to change, but I'm off for a while and I'd like to apply some pressure. Keep interrogating people! There are too many directions which aren't leading anywhere.
I'm going to hold back on my vote until we hear from some more people. I'd like to give those under the microscope to at least have a chance to explain.
Votecount
FDR (1) - Thomas Jefferson
Nixon (0) -FDR
Teddy Roosevelt (1) - Ronald Reagan
Thomas Jefferson (1) - FDR
Not Voting
Bill Clinton, John Adams, Andrew Jackson, Taft, George W. Bush, Theodore Roosevelt, Barack Obama, Abraham Lincoln, George Bush Sr., Richard Nixon, John F. Kennedy
I agree with Sr. after my horrid play yesterday I'd like to take a little wait and see approach. There are a few of us that are pretty active and many that aren't I'd like to hear more from them before I make any votes or any more assumptions.
How much time left, Washy washy?
At around 8 AM EST tomorrow. So that's about 15 hours from now.
Okay.
Also, can you update the post count? I'm not sure which posts you actually count towards the quota and I want to make sure i'm good to go so far.
Hmmm... What Jefferson said seems pretty familiar to me... Oh right!
Yeah I said that first, but you can't be sure that Bill is innocent. If he doesn't improve, and if I don't find someone better, as I said, he will be getting my vote. I would rather vote off someone who I am not fully sure of then vote off a possibly useful townie.Quote:
Originally Posted by [M] Abraham Lincoln
These inactives I just have to wait on, hopefully they will be replaced. I can only really look at the active people, and on day three there will be a rush of people who don't want to be replaced, so we can hopefully learn something there. As Roosevelt just said, we have to wait and see.
And now Thomas...
How the heck is this defensive in any way? It seems to me like you are trying to give him some extra attention for some reason...Quote:
Originally Posted by [M] FDR
Expanding on the idea of my last post(I just made the connection)...
I think you are trying to give him a little bit of attention so he might possibly be discreditted a little bit because you feel threatened by him. By saying he is a defensive player, people may not believe his offence quite like they would before. FDR does seem like a very smart player, so thats why I think you are doing this. Now, with your role changing, I find it just as likely that you would have stayed a townie as you would have become a mafia, because George might not want someone to be so confirmed.
Also, with FDR's deleted post, I originally thought that he made a post here that he possibly meant to do at the mafia forum, but he seems too smart to do that right now.
I regret the deleted post. I assure you it was me whining though. I was annoyed the day wasn't starting, but the hosts don't need any hassle.
And yes, thank you very much for pointing the "defensive" thing out to me. It makes me more suspicious of Jefferson.
There where a few posts made before day one which did not count toward peoples total. (You only made one of these so minus 1 from your total thread post count and you have your total post count).Quote:
Originally Posted by [M] George Bush Sr.
ooh ok
Allright, I'll try to get more into this. I've been quite busy with friends lately, I've been having a blast actually, I simply can't say no if a friend asks to hang out. I've asked for a partner though, so maybe this will increase my activity.
Allright, here's my thoughts..
I'm very interested in knowing Bill Clinton's alignment. Interested enough to kill him? I'm a bit tempted, but I'm not sure if I want to go in that direction. I think it would pretty much clear Reagan if he flipped town, and it would incriminate some of the later voters for Clinton if he flipped scum. At one point it seemed Clinton was the clear loser with a massive bandwagon on him. If he's mafia, maybe it would be wise of one or two of his fellows to also cast a vote on him. Reagan did a risky move and pretty much saved his ass by ending the bandwagon and calling out those who had piled on top. That would be a risky move from a mafia on day 1. They could risk losing two mafia.
edit: If Clinton is mafia, then maybe Taft or Nixon is too. I'm definitely getting some vibes from Taft.
I think Reagan is on to something with his arguments towards Roosevelt. I was thinking some of them myself while reading through this thread actually. He was suspecting both Reagan and Clinton, but as I see it, it's very unlikely that both Clinton and Reagan are mafia. Looks more like he's searching for someone to throw suspicion on. Could just be that he slipped up or missed some information before posting though.
Abraham Lincoln I'm getting a vibe from. I don't have anything concrete, but it's just a feeling of him being a little too helpful without actually being helpful. Sure, he brings some logic and actual helpfulness to the plate, but some of it seems like he's trying too hard, asking casual questions he already knows the answer to.
I'd like to vote for Roosevelt for now, see what that leads to. I... promise to check back in again before the day is over!
##Vote: T. Roosevelt
And roosevelt, about yesterday, I didn't mean that I would expand on why I suspected you, I already said everything in my post then. What I meant by saying I would be back was that, if anyone more suspicious than you popped up, maybe I'd vote for them. Same now actually, I'm waiting and thinking, I'm not holding anything back.
If he was mafia, he'd know I was town.Quote:
Originally Posted by [M] Theodore Roosevelt