PurdueBrad - 3 - AlanT (44), ntndeacon (72), path12 (88)
Alan T - 3 - PurdueBrad (73), Schmidty (76), RendeR (90)
path12 - 1 - jeheinz72 (74)
ntndeacon - 1 - Passacaglia (75)
Schmidty - 1 - Anxiety (80)
Chief Rum - 1 - Thomkal (84)
Barkeep49 - 1 - Chief Rum (94)

I'm not arguing for the argument. I'm just answering Barkeep's question.

Chief, if you're around before deadline, I agree that I'm not a good choice for day one and, although I have a minute doubt, Alan T. isn't a better choice either (except for that last post, I've got nothing on Alan), so which way would you go? Is Barkeep your best option?

There is no best option. It's Day One. No one is more guilty than anyone else right now. At least I have a reason for voting Barkeep, even if it's a crappy, out of game one.

If this is really the case, then you had hours to bring this up, but instead you waited until after I left. You said I did a hit and run? Are you purposely trying to mislead everyone else or just saying things to save your skin? Want me to really go back and read out the timestamps of my "hit and run"?

Your lies are making less sense the more you post. Every single person who voted for me was around while I was all day, and only chose to vote me hours after I voted you and right after I left. How convienant

Hehe, I hear you. I'm willing to go another route, but at this point I've got to keep the self-defense vote on Alan T.

Alan, I just thought I'd let you know I'm leaning toward voting for you. I think PB is getting an unfair shake enough as it is getting at least one vote just because he was the seer in our first attempt. Plus I think you're coming onto him too hard for voting for you -- I could see it for the other two that have voted for you, but you voted for PB first.

And for people to see the hit and run that Purdue claims:

11:40am - my vote on purduebrad after the day 1 reset
11:56am, 11:58am, 2:56pm - Purdue brad posts
2:51pm, 2:52pm, 2:53pm, 2:54pm, 2:55pm, 3:24pm - Render posts

3:41pm - I post I am leaving for possibly the rest of the night

At this point I have 0 votes. All votes came after this.

My problem isn't necessarily that. It is this: You vote for me earlier, we re-roll/re-start, and you put your vote on me early for no other reason than, "I was going to vote for him last time, might as well do it again." ??? So, I was going to vote for you four games ago, might as well do it now?

If you're a villager, you and I are doing a fabulous job of screwing ourselves.

So then vote for one of the people who you think is using faulty logic about the day 1 seer thing. I haven't said that was my reason once. Unless you have some reason to protect him that you would like to share with us.

Again, my claim is much more based on the idea that because you were going to vote for me before, might as well do it again. Your voting instincts are great, you would've lynched the seer game one, trying again? Maybe I'm too close to it because the vote is on me, but I don't see the logic.

Hmm, PB seems to wonder just what your reason is then, I believe.

I am not screwing anything. I placed a day one vote on someone for as good of a reason as anyone usually has for a day 1 vote. I placed it with plenty of time for anyone to rebut and instead you chose to wait for me to leave to sneak attack me.

If you had a problem with my vote, why did you not choose to even bring it up or mention it once while I was here? You totally ignored it and only came after me while I had no defense.

Are you afraid that I am the duke or seer or bodyguard or something and will either kill you or reveal and get you killed? So you chose to strike at someone to remove a villager day one who couldn't fight back?

Thats what it seems like to me.

I have been this aggressive in my defense only one other time and I was a villager then and I am now. Unfortunately my appeal went to Hoops who of course was a wolf so maybe I'm going through the same problem here. Look, vote me, vote me. Arguing with you isn't going to help my case with our other villagers so fine.

I just told you what my reason for protecting him would be -- it's the principle of the thing. I think ntn knows better than to get things started on PB than to use such faulty reasoning -- he is a math professor, after all! It just makes me worried about the bandwagon on him in general. I'd still been content to see what happens with the tiebreaker, but I'm starting to think this is a situation where I need to be involved.

Who has a reason to vote for someone on day 1? Only the wolves do. He has given me a much better reason to vote him with his sneak attack though.

I am amazed by how many people are coming to defend purduebrad though. I wonder which of you are wolves.

I think Alan's attempt to hide beind a repeat vote is good enough to tip the scales in his favor.

Vote Alan

Well my vote is staying on Purdue Brad. If you feel that is a good reason to lynch me then bring it on. I will single handedly pick through all of your pieces to figure out which of you are the wolves if I must.

Well since you all are amazing with your deductive reasoning. I am the bodyguard.

So, I will kill every last single one of you until I figure out which are the wolves.

Alan, look, you aren't changing, I'm not changing. We're stalemate, fine.

But how do day one votes go? The person that gets defensive gets voted out. So you wanted me to spend all day arguing with you? That wouldn't stink of desperation, so yeah, that would help. So I made the assumption that you would be around at deadline (which you announced you wouldn't be at 3:41 and bolted and yet here you are) if someone actually followed suit voting-wise. So now it's debate time simply because we're on the block. You're mad because at 3:41 you post, without any other warning, I'm out and think people voted when you couldn't defend yourself? Like we had warning.

Okay, now that I see what Alan posted, I'll change. If you're BG and I hope you are, let's try this:

unvote Alan T.

Actually you did have warning. I posted last night that I would be gone all afternoon/evening.

Want to dig your hole deeper?

I am still not changing. You sneak attacked me, lied and tried to mislead people. Either you are a wolf or a villager with some other agenda.

Barring another reveal, I'd like to see people head elsewhere now. How about ntn?

You seem to be mistaken. My vote's not on you. If PB was a brother wolf, it would be, don't you think?

I'm just pointing out the irony of you telling someone to vote because of their reason when you yourself haven't even stated a reason for your vote. Just because you have "reason" now because PB came back hard on you doesn't mean I look away from your reasonless vote early on.

All votes have reasons, regardless of whether they're good or not. I think it's reasonable you be more forthcoming why you voted for PB.

Sorry for not going back through what happened last night, that's my fault. I take the blame there and I'll trust that rather than go find the exact post. My vote is off you, keep your's on me, you're still wrong but I can't waste time diagnosing the reason any more. I've got to find someone else to put the tie on.

What sneak attack btw? Even though I'm not voting for you, my vote was on you well before you left. So who's the liar now?

The fact that he missed this is why I think PB is not really after you in a wolfish way.

Aren't you playing both sides of the fence nicely?

I had 0 votes when I left. You voted after I left.

I have to go somebody that is already on me rather than risk bringing someone else over.

vote path12

:rolleyes:

At some point, NOT aggressively attacking back at PB might have been a good idea.

I swear, I don't know why good roled players ever even open their mouths on Day One (that's a general criticism, not specifically aimed at Alan).

Yup, that's me! Being all wolfy again.

I didn't attack anyone until I came back tonight earlier than I expected.. What do you think my reaction was seeing that a bunch of people who could easily have voted for me while I was around chose to do so only after I left?

You get mad at people voting you for being quiet on mondays that you work and aren't around yet don't see my issue here? That doesn't sit right with me at all.

Looking at the time, you're right Alan. I put my vote in when I saw that you bailed. My fault again. As I said, we're probably screwing ourselves with this vote but my attention to detail is bad this game so if that gets me lynched, so be it. No motive other than putting a vote on somebody that didn't have any kind of reason but I wasn't a pile on vote and we do need to examine that and those that piled on me (assuming you're a villager).

Unvote Alan

I'm inclined to believe him D1, I suppose.

I agree with this. There seems to be some kind of rule people have that if they post that they're going to be gone, they should be treated with kid gloves. I'm usually the wuss of the WW group, but I don't follow this line of thinking. Show why you shouldn't be lynched while you are here, rather than assuming you should get a chance to defend yourself once attacked.

That said, pretty much any Day 1 vote is going to be unfair.

I don't think you should just sit and take it, especially as BG. But I think you came out too strong and with poor reasoning. The "too strong" pinged everyone's radars, and then the poor reasoning locked us in.

Your issue and mine are apples and oranges. You were coming back. And you were here for a good deal of the day. Everyone knows I won't be around to defend myself, so votes on me are extremely suspicious.

As for me "getting mad" about Monday votes, I don't bother anymore, because I know those people are just stupid.

Well I would assume a villager wouldn't want to blindside a seer without a chance of letting him defend himself. Only a wolf would do that right?

Alan and I both probably came out too strong so Alan, my bad for my part. Again, at this point, at least I know I'm going to get lynched for lack of attention to detail. Anyway Alan, no hard feelings hopefully.

How would anyone, wolf or villager, know who the seer is?

Well good, then I don't have to try to be leniant and less likely to vote for you on day 1s anymore then. Glad you cleared that up for me!

I guess I always assumed that unless you have some devious underhanded reason for it, you don't kill a new person on day 1, you don't kill someone after they leave on day 1 and you give people a chance to defend themselves on day 1.

Later in the game, more has been established, and its all fair game, but on day 1, I just assumed everyone would follow the same "gentleman" rules so to speak.

I guess thats not the case. So be it

I never have hard feelings, its just a game and even though your move today was very anti-villagerish, it doesnt make me think less of you as a person.

I think you're being too focused on yourself here. The wolves on Day 1 don't decide to go after someone because he can't defend himself -- I've never seen that. In fact, if anything, the wolves are much more sporting than that. Anyway, there's a ton of options out there for the wolves -- they usually sit back and ride the wave.

I assume you know what i meant and are being overly difficult for dramatic effect.

Let's get some stuff going.

UNVOTE NTNDEACON
VOTE PATH12

Not to be a complete smart ass but then logic would be to follow these rules if one is a wolf:

Pick new guys to be wolves with you (assuming you are the brutal or captain or whatever)
Always be gone on day one

I think people would find it pretty unsporting to see someone lying about Real life stuff just because of a game. I am pretty sure most people don't do that. When Chief says he will be working, we assume he isn't just sitting at home refreshing this page laughing at us all.

I think it's likely we're looking at villager vs villager here. I'll go ahead and cast a vote for the only other guy who has multiple votes.

Vote path

FTR: I hadn't see Pass's vote when I cast mine.