Madge wrote:Carlington, Christophoros, Bartimaeus, Eculc; could you start thinking about making some votes? Votes are easy to change, especially if you're the first to place one on someone.
They are easy to change, but I dislike voting just for the sake of it.
But despite my suspicions of Madge, I do not consider this to be a scummy call for votes. The intent seems more to spurn people to contribute. In a strange way, yes, but this IS Madge.
5th vote is Bartimeus
Underline added by me.
I am torn with this vote, one the underlined sentance is very wishy washy but I can also see what he is going for. If Bartimaeus comes up scum we need to have a very good look at chris. And vice versa.
In my defense, I had discussed the causes of my suspicions earlier within that post, and in a previous post.
Silknor wrote:(not to mention, we don't have a unitary scum faction: the assassin adds further incentive, especially since they can get townie brownie points for getting the assassin lynched).
I think that this is actually the most important aspect. I'd imagine that mafia would be happy to get rid of the assassin, as there's a fair risk that he'd kill one of their number. However, considering that it DOES make so much sense for mafia to attempt to eliminate the assassin, perhaps they deliberately did not do so. There were quite a few people going at Snark, so perhaps they didn't see the need to take a risk? Whether scum were on that wagon is pretty ambiguous I think.
I'd like to wait and see how Christophoros responds to BoomFrog's reiteration of the request to post a list of views before I pass final judgement, but if that does not happen by tomorrow I'll move on without it. I don't really see a (legitimate) excuse for why Chris wouldn't post it though.
Bartimaeus wrote:Madge - I don't at all like her last minute vote change D1. Her play today hasn't been confusing to say the least. As others have noted, she seems to say things in a way which might be scummy, but it's difficult to tell. However, I think that some of her comments are inexcusable(ie claim fishing), and that added to the Snark vote leave me unhappy with her. Scum.
I'd also like to amend this. For some reason I remembered that her last minute vote change put a vote on Snark, when in fact it took a vote off a Snark and put it on eculc. The truth is actually that she attempted to get eculc lynched instead of Snark, and that would have been the case if it weren't for (you meddling kids) the deadline extension.
This doesn't condemn Madge, but it does make realize definitively that Madge and eculc very very likely cannot both be mafia. (I feel like somebody's probably already said this).
Between Madge and eculc, I would choose Madge. However, in the current situation, voting Madge would just cause another tie, something which as others have pointed out is not good either in this general situation or so close to the deadline(I wonder if she voted deliberately to try to prevent a vote on herself?).Vote: Madge
Considering that this is causing a tie, I have every intention of revisiting tomorrow and adjusting my vote if necessary. I will vote for whom I believe to be scum, but if a no-lynch seems at all possible I intend to try to stop it. I only have one class tomorrow, so I should have no problems checking in.