[starseed]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Starseed suggests that ineedanother kill someone off his list. Ineedanother's suspects at the time included:
GP_Matt
Rathji
GGG
He would later post his suspicions of:
Timbo
activeStick
hmmhmmcamo

You cut off my reservations about that idea in that it would cost us the vigilante kill in order to get a proven townie leader. That post was a response to Rathji who was spitballing an idea on how to resolve the vigilante reveal. I offered the idea as a way of going about it logically. Things were happening fast, and I wanted to slow things down and get us to solve the problem logically. There were votes still coming out for ineedanother at that point, and I was convinced that he was telling the truth.

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Ineedanother chose Timbo to kill who ends up being townsperson. GP_Matt and hmmhmmcamo have ended up being townsperson as well. If you were mafia so far following ineedanother's suggestions seem beneficial to the mafia (even if ineedanother's motives are pure).

Yes, the people on that list failed, but I am still sticking with the idea of using ineedanother to lead a voting block. At the time, they were as good of a suggestion as anyone else. I was convinced Timbo was mafia the way he was supporting Rathji in applying the pressure on ineedanother. With kermitology also quickly supporting Timbo, it looked to my like a plot by the mafia to get ineedanother to crack. After the Timbo flip, I believe I admitted that my guesses were wrong, and that my kermitology suspicion may have just been incorrect.

I maintain that I disagree that it is a bad strategy to follow ineedanother's lead, but like I mentioned earlier, we need to act slower and more deliberately. My early vote on agulati was to apply pressure to look for cracks, and I knew it was safe because hammer could not be reached for a day and a half at that point.

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

First day:

Today:

Completely contradictory. First he says to not go after low posters because Mafia will coordinate, now he's saying following a list of inactive posters?

Yes, that suggestion was a shift in strategy. This was because our earlier methods of choosing lynch nominees failed. It is also because looking through past posts of the victims, I noticed at least GP_Matt talk about the success of the method of choosing inactive players to lynch in the last game. Other posters were starting to push the idea again, so I thought the most logical way of going about it is to use the list that hmmhmmcamo gave earlier in the game. That way there is less chance the mafia had time to correct their post counts. (and that it wasnt a pro-mafia cutoff point)

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

In addition to following ineedanother's list he's mentioned at least HalifaxDrunk, Kermitology, Rathji, transplant and hmmhmmcamo.

hmmhmmcamo's list that he know wants us to be suspicious of (despite being exact opposite what he initially said) is here.


That's a lot of names Starseed wants us to look at. Yet when it comes to voting he seems, and if someone can double check, just to jump on bandwagons without getting his hands really dirty.

I mentioned my reasoning for HD before, his defensiveness earlier was somewhat of an outlier compared to other people's reactions. He also voted for ineedanother after his reveal. I was very suspect of people who piled on the votes for ineedanother without giving him time. He and hmmhmmcamo were on my list because their votes were pressuring ineedanother to act hastily. And again, I retracted my suspicion of kermitology after the Timbo flip.