Don't mean to sound rude/picky but votes should be in bold.Vote: TheMasterSword
Seems like a 'copout'
While all of your own votes should be based on your own feelings, that doesn't mean they won't correlate with others' theories, nor does it mean you won't or shouldn't agree with people if they make a good argument. Bandwagoning is an actual part of this game. The Majority Lynch exists for a reason (so the game can get rolling faster when people agree), and people agreeing on probable suspects is the ideal way to scumhunt.You shouldn't go off of other's suspicions. You should have your own suspicions, and gather your own evidence. Never go off of what someone else has gathered. For all we know, univpark could be an inactive Townie. Does her inactivity make her suspicious? By God yes, she looks hella suspicious right now, but no matter how suspicious or scummy someone looks, they can always turn out innocent.
Inactivity is suspicious. Townies have no reason to hang back. Rather, they're supposed to actively investigate. Scum benefit from being unseen. Obviously both need to strike a balance. Scum don't want to be obviously hanging back, nor do all Townies -- especially those with valuable roles -- want to be the only ones noticed, because they are obviously innocent and don't want to earn the suspicions of the Town or the attention of the Mafia.There are three problems with this statement. One, the ignorance thing has to do with not understanding the rules of the game. Not understanding an acronym is something completely different. Two, Atticus assuming that just because I wasn't around means I'm being suspicious significantly comes across as jumping to conclusions, which is never a good thing in Mafia. And three, if I were leading a bandwagon against Atticus, I'd be going out of my way to find evidence against her, which is not what I did. If someone has their eye on me for reasons I don't feel are legit, I'm going to keep my eye on them, as well. That's a pretty natural response, don't you think?
In a similar vein as the argument against JJ, this specifically is a poor one to me as well. Dr3W21's post, while poorly worded, simply said he was voting for Raindrop14 for the same reason that TheMasterSword did: "I have a gut feeling".He based it off of someone else's gut feeling. Then he says...Ehh... I'll have to Vote: Raindrop14.
I very well may undo this vote later, but it is for this reason
I have this gut feeling that Raindrop is scum. I don't quite know how to explain my reasoning yet, however I am extremely confident in him being scum. I'll give my reasoning soon
that I vote for her.
If you were trying to imply that, you did a very poor job of it. Your reasons for voting were someone else's gut feeling. This in any way does not imply at all that you had a gut feeling. And the later post seems like a cover up for your lame voting excuse. You knew it wasn't valid after people said stuff, so you put this out there, that is completely contradictory to your orriginal statement.I would never vote for somebody just because somebody else had a gut feeling... that just wouldn't make any sense. I was trying to imply that I had a sort-of gut feeling, and I guess agreeing with another person who had a similar feeling sort-of makes it look like I was agreeing with them just for the sake of it. I should've been more specific (or just not quoted him at all).
I've already voted for you, but this really confirms it for me that you are mafia.
You never voted for anyone. There's a specific format for voting and unvoting stated in the rules in the first post.Maybe I'm wrong, but the evidence so far has given me good faith. So my vote for Raindrop14 stands.