Since there seems to be recruiting, who do we think LITT would recruit?
i'm curious why as well. i've stated numerous times that i'm looking for quiet people, and at this point i'm just sort of trying to thin the heard. i, for one, don't want doublem to be around late in the game because of a combination of him being new, and right now he's using the "he voted for me, he must be bad" method. he has recently picked up his activity so i'm close to letting him go for a little while. probably azkar or beerman are next if his activity keeps up.
Well, for one, doublem is new to the games and cant learn if he's knocked off early. I'm not saying that is the reason to keep him around but I do see him participating and I do see him picking up how the game works and he might turn into a good player. You say you want to knock off the quiet folks, but doublem has been more active than several others.
I just have a feeling that a doublem voter is bad. No evidence and no vote has been cast yet so don't get your panties in a bunch (that's a baddie tell....)
PensFanInDC wrote:
Good work doublem. I can get on board with a TL vote but he was bad last game so the odds are pretty low that he would be 2 games in a row. It has happened though.
PFIDC looks more suspect to me now, and not just because he randomly picked a group and decided one of them must be bad. He's going along with doublem here, but also hedging his bet by saying that "odds are pretty low" he'd be bad again (obviously the odds are always 50/50). Playing both sides of the fence is what baddies like to do.
MWB wrote:PFIDC looks more suspect to me now, and not just because he randomly picked a group and decided one of them must be bad. He's going along with doublem here, but also hedging his bet by saying that "odds are pretty low" he'd be bad again (obviously the odds are always 50/50). Playing both sides of the fence is what baddies like to do.
I saw that, too. Plus he had a comment questioning LITT yesterday and then switched off of nan on to c2i far too late to make any sort of difference. Common attempts at misdirection, IMO. I could see a PFIDC vote. Just a thought.
MWB wrote:PFIDC looks more suspect to me now, and not just because he randomly picked a group and decided one of them must be bad. He's going along with doublem here, but also hedging his bet by saying that "odds are pretty low" he'd be bad again (obviously the odds are always 50/50). Playing both sides of the fence is what baddies like to do.
I saw that, too. Plus he had a comment questioning LITT yesterday and then switched off of nan on to c2i far too late to make any sort of difference. Common attempts at misdirection, IMO. I could see a PFIDC vote. Just a thought.
I agree, but I still think doublem is bad, so I'm sticking with him this round.
PFIDC made me suspicious last round big time. The only reason I'm holding back this round is that he does it every single game.
MWB wrote:PFIDC looks more suspect to me now, and not just because he randomly picked a group and decided one of them must be bad. He's going along with doublem here, but also hedging his bet by saying that "odds are pretty low" he'd be bad again (obviously the odds are always 50/50). Playing both sides of the fence is what baddies like to do.
I saw that, too. Plus he had a comment questioning LITT yesterday and then switched off of nan on to c2i far too late to make any sort of difference. Common attempts at misdirection, IMO. I could see a PFIDC vote. Just a thought.
