Checking in before finishing the day. Tired beats verbose this time.

Ok. Since I actually have very little or even no issue with Cristi I found your statement puzzling. And I don't really recall many folks saying anything bad about her. Would appreciate if you or anyone pointed them out.

For example. Even worse. "Hej spies, there's enough Resistance voting to trust your buddy already."
Spy signaling buddies is smart play but should be risky.
Resistance giving info or camouflage unnecessarily is not smart play, and is rather tragic.

See above. As to answering Dess, I needed to run out right after answering JMich. Answering JMich is tricky, because he's good with numbers and at misdirection. My wife was practically screaming at me already. So yeah, no. I'll be getting to Dess eventually.... going from the bottom this time.

Lying about votes is far from out of the question. You can headfake spies by pretending to trust people. Or whatever... don't have the brainpower right now to think of less typical scenarios.

As to being manipulative. Every one of you should be doing the same. That's precisely the point. The spies try to manipulate the Resistance, the Resistance tries to manipulate the spies. Both are difficult in somewhat different ways.

Finally, if we seating around a table you would be able to see who is hesitating about voting. Like this, you don't.
There is nothing in the rules actually saying one needs to tell the others they voted. Since you are telling me I'm not helpful, go see who was the first person to announce they had voted. Leading by example is something that exists - but you need to look.

This crowd is unconventional though. Also slips can always happen. And if special roles were in play some interesting bluffing possibilities open up. That said with how slow this is going and vanilla roles I'm more thankful than I'm letting on. It's a small change to adapt to. No biggie ;)

Are you really?

A is a blanket treatment throughout. I don't think I made a mistake, but as mentioned I hit post under pressure.

As to the ratio, you're not wrong, but you're alarming me more and more by being this disingenuous.
I said the ratios were equivalent, and therefore the blanket approach of benching everyone somewhat ill considered in post 223 which includes this neat explicit sentence: "3 go out, one sabotages".

I never posited anything about the ratios if spy distros were other.
And I'll point out that was following on (among others) your post 219 where you mention explicitly "that would leave ... 2 spies ... for the next missions"

See also my post 69 on related topic. I'm being consistent.

You're also being consistent, in kind of trying to put words in my mouth at least. That's good play of sorts. I hope you're not fooling any of my 5 buddies though. And that you're not one of those 5 yourself.

See above, and sorry I didn't tell you earlier.
In fairness, any possible harm was already done. And we're only Mission 2 so there will be more votes.

Also, see post 126 where I'm explicitly refusing to confirm to Drealmer how I voted.
Consider how I've been signposting no votes but leaving room for doubt with comments such as "I like this team"
And I announced in advance only when I was jumping on Hijack's mistake - to highlight it the more strongly.

I mean, I haven't been succesful convincing / influencing / manipulating you all into being less trusting. Despite having exposed myself hugely, by the way.
You'll forgive me for leaving the "Do not announce votes but reveal simultaneously" as a lower priority I'm sure.


OK. Think that's everyone. Night all.