Bookwyrm627: GR had a chance to at least express which town PRs interested him. He did not.
I don't know about you, but I was already contemplating the possibilities before I was able to post.
I don't fault GR for not having time to read the thread. I don't even fault him for not placing actual votes when he posted, but he certainly did have a chance to say something like "I'm leaning toward X and Y for the roles. More explanation later." Such an initial opinion does not have any reliance on what anyone else might be saying.
Just checked that post myself. Can it be really a chance if he asked if it's okay to check tomorrow and that's it? The way I see it, he could have had just enough time to post what he said before running off to catch his train or something. Or he could have held back his judgement because he has no idea what are the preferences of the other players are, and if their opinions affect how he sees these roles.
Bookwyrm627: This feels like an isolated demand for rigor. Please point out if I missed something, but quick scanning of your previous posts shows no interest in querying reasons for voted roles, including Flub's initial Roleblocker vote, and most players didn't provide much explanation with their votes so there was plenty of room for you to ask.
Considering a single vote for Cop OR Watcher would have selected Cop/Watcher as our roles, and who knows what an unvote might have done, I find it hard to fault Flub for finishing things if he prefered Cop + Doctor. And,
as you sort of note, it was kind of nice that Town was actually decisive instead of hemming and hawing into the deadline.
I didn't give it much thought at first because I thought like usual, we'd stall until the deadline four days later, and that this wasn't as critical because we wouldn't have lost a player to overeager mafia. As far as I'm concerned, most of what I've seen of votes explained why the cop should be present and why watcher or doctor. I took flub's initial roleblocker vote as...flub being flub. But as Lift is saying, why should flub
continue being given free passes for his play style? His vote had me interested in the reasons behind it because of how suddenly it came and how scummy it looks given the "hammer." This alone makes the vote a prime interest.
Even if you think my case doesn't warrant further pursuing of flub at the moment, don't you think there's merit in getting him to show more about himself so that we can decide whether he leans mafia or town rather than just think "that's flub alright"?
ZFR: His "defence" for Lift seems very odd. For starters, why? Bookwyrm and myself already mentioned the issue. Second, his "defence" brings nothing new. It's obvious that Lift's post could have been an honest mistake and it's obvious too that Lift is going to claim it as such regardless of his alignment. All in all it reminds me of Pooka's jumping to defend a Townie scene very early in the previous game. There is also the addition of "while not entirely innocent" in his post that I don't like.
It was a town blotunga. Note that I would have jumped to his defense even if I was town, and I would have pursued the lightning rod scene even if I was town. And again, it was my question that provided me the answer I needed about where the three came from; why are you still omitting that part?
Also you keep bringing up that you and Wyrm already mentioned the issue. Fine, let's play that game. What if you were both scum? I don't know the motives behind you mentioning the thing with Lift, but I know mine. Now, what if five people asked Lift about this thing? Or even the remaining 8 players? There's something suspect about the "but wyrm and I already did it" logic that you're using against me. And let's also play that other game. What if I omitted the "while not entirely innocent" bit that bothers you?
ZFR: His other post that I don't like is his accusation of flub in #77. I don't mind the accusations themselves (they're weak, but this is expected since it's just the beginning of the game), but the "counterarguments" part really feels like he's trying too hard to show everyone how he's analysing.
So you want me to not show my counterarguments at all? Fine by me. But I think it is healthy to bring up the arguments and their weaknesses, so that then the rest of the players can take them both into account and make a sound decision. It would be in my favor as mafia to just drop the arguments and leave the weaknesses out.
RedFireGaming: I also just read this part of Dracula where he kills people on a boat one by one while the crew grow progressively more paranoid. I thought it was pretty cool to read that just after starting mafia.
Funny. I just finished reading Dracula a couple days ago. I adore the format of the story especially.
----
As it stands, my vote priorities are now ZFR and flub. Lift and trent I am getting town reads from (Lift talking about flub "scummy" play rings true to me, trent bringing up ZFR wanting the power roles out). GR being cut off from his role voting powers reads as slightly town. Everyone else is neutral (Micro looks the same as he did in the previous games, but I did think he was liberal from his playstyle when he was actually fascist in a Secret Hitler, so I'm cautious about him, RedFireGaming hasn't showed us much to go from, Wyrm is still Wyrm but there's no sign he's town or mafia yet).