I know that the partial votes are hard to keep track of, but I think they encourage meaningful discussion. I am having a hard time coming up with 4 votes, but think it’s better to get the votes I do have on the table now.
Vote: Hal Briston I do hope he returns to make some more reasoned votes.
**Vote: Idle Thoughts **for insisting that everyone make all 4 votes at once
NETA Ending the day with partial votes WILL be scummy in my opinion. It would give scum the ability to make town-like and town-helping votes without having them count.
It’s Day 1. Everyone is scrabbling to vote for people. I’m having a hard time finding people to vote for reeks of I’m too scared to put my opinions out on the line. There are only 4 people who should be legitimately afeared of that.
Did you even look at the vote count? It was counted, it just doesn’t contribute to the lynch count until I have four in place. Also read the rules, you don’t have to make all four votes in the same post. geez. I’m just a little confused about how that would be scummy either way.
vote Idle Thoughts
Next up is Inner Stickler:
Who is voting for behavior which seems to be pro-town to me. Nudging people, making them back up their statements, etc. I can’t see how encouraging discussion (especially about players as opposed to general strategy) is not pro-town behavior, I understand that people are trying to strech to meet the required votes, but voting for pro-town behavior strikes a scummy chord.
vote Inner Stickler
and those 4 people would be who exactly?
Peeker already voted for a fourth player. Twice. One not even in the game and another, made-up name. So what I was left wondering is why he didn’t want to cast the fourth vote, for some reason (he has since cast it now, though).
And here I thought that’s what we were supposed/had to do to make them count. My mistake then.
That is left as an exercise to the reader.
ya wanna give me a hint?
So did you read the rules, Idle? Cause it sure looks like you didn’t, in spite, of voting peeker and skeez for that exact reason, not reading the rules.
I did. I was still under the impression that it was wanted to make all four votes at once. Even in the post right after RS makes his one-off vote, someone asks him why he’s just casting one vote…so I wasn’t totally in the wrong. Same with the first two or three players who cast votes at all (Hal, Nphase, peeker)…they all voted for four people at once.
Here I thought it’d be frowned upon to cast just one vote at a time. Don’t understand how that’s so hard to believe.
Anyway, regardless of it, I’m still happy with my four votes. Mostly because we’re forced to vote for four people if we want any votes to count. None of the reasoning I have for each of them is strong, I admit. They’re all weak reasonings…but again, having to pick four people to make any one vote count is the way it is.
<snipped>
i think i’ll give this the understatement of the year award since one of the votes is because you didn’t understand the rules.
Day One Vote Count
All Votes by Voting Player
Hal Briston => fluiddruid (74), TexCat (74), peekercpa (74), Mahaloth (74).
fluiddruid => no votes.
TexCat => Hal Briston (241), Idle Thoughts (241).
peekercpa => [del]Normal Phase (65-126)[/del], [del]Stanislaus (65-126)[/del], [del]fubbleskag (65-126)[/del], Normal Phase (126), Hal Briston (126), Drain Bead (126), Idle Thoughts (237).
Mahaloth => no votes.
Inner Stickler => Hal Briston (223), Crackrat (223), Idle Thoughts (223), Normal Phase (223).
Red Skeezix => Hal Briston (173), Idle Thoughts (244), Inner Stickler (244).
glowacks => no votes.
Natlaw => no votes.
Normal Phase => [del]NAF1138 (72-92)[/del], [del]Stanislaus (72-92)[/del], [del]peekercpa (72-92)[/del], [del]Drain Bead (72-92)[/del].
fubbleskag => no votes.
Crackrat => no votes.
Stanislaus => no votes.
Drain Bead => no votes.
Idle Thoughts => peekercpa (235), Red Skeezix (235), Inner Stickler (235), Natlaw (235).
NAF1138 => no votes.
Net Votes
peekercpa (2) <= Hal Briston, Idle Thoughts.
Hal Briston (2) <= peekercpa, Inner Stickler.
Normal Phase (2) <= peekercpa, Inner Stickler.
Idle Thoughts (2) <= peekercpa, Inner Stickler.
fluiddruid (1) <= Hal Briston.
TexCat (1) <= Hal Briston.
Mahaloth (1) <= Hal Briston.
Drain Bead (1) <= peekercpa.
Crackrat (1) <= Inner Stickler.
Inner Stickler (1) <= Idle Thoughts.
Natlaw (1) <= Idle Thoughts.
Red Skeezix (1) <= Idle Thoughts.
With 16 players eligible to vote, 8 votes are needed to space. With these votes, no one will be spaced.
Thinking about lurkers: there is no reason to lynch them in this game. We just put them in the brig.
We can even investigate them and they can’t be killed at Night.
Which brings me to:
I don’t like this reasoning, mainly because I think there are better targets
It’s, in my opinion, a bad tactic proposal but since I need four votes and the “I wonder if this” phrasing seems off to me (reads as “Shouldn’t we be suspicious of NAF here with his cracker claim?” instead of simply stating the fact “cracker can be scum or town”).
Vote Inner Stickler
What you vote me for that but not NAF who makes a full claim (with both an underlined Loyal and Cracker!)?
Vote Idle Thoughts
I think Inner Sticker more suspicious than Idle at this point for my previous reason and also his vote for NPhase for poking and then using three poke votes himself (I only reread those now so didn’t mention these in my last post).
To clarify the Head of Engineering can see the following actions:
-scum doing scum kill (bingo! he found scum)
-commissar doing a kill (looks redundant since he’ll be in the brig the Next Day but it’ll still give info on who the commissar killed and who scum killed)
-a hacker swapping ranks (confirms power but not alignment)
-a cracker freeing someone (confirms power but not alignment)
by either targeting the actor or one of the actors targets. He only gets the names but the actions should be obvious from the Dawn result (players dead, escaped from the brig or changed rank).
Which one? Enlighten me? If you’re meaning RS’s vote, I’m still happy with it because I got nothing else on anyone right now..so it’s as good of a vote as any* and I need four of them to count.
*Any vote I were to place on anyone else would just be random votes, so seems to me just keeping it like it is changes nothing.
You were first, for one. For two, I can’t rightly vote for anyone just because they made a full claim, speaking as someone who has made many full claims on Day One.
And here’s another to add to my Day One claims (since I now have three votes on me):
I asked a few clarification questions of Pleonast afterwards:
and
First vote, not really the most solidly felt, but the easiest:
vote: Drain Bead
(ORLY? 
)
Those are her only posts since confirming PM receipt. By itself the lack of posts probably wouldn’t put her on my list, but the statement of “I’m reading”, promise to respond at some later date, then lack of follow through all fit behavior I’ve seen from scum many times. Good enough for day one, and I hope she turns up so I can suspect her properly in the future (in-joke).
Okay, so while partial votes do show up in the vote count they do not show up in the net vote count.
Pleonast, would you consider to use the following format for net votes? It’s more work though 
With 16 players eligible to vote, 8 votes are needed to space. With these votes, no one will be spaced.
It makes it easier to see what the vote count would be if all votes are valid (although the extra votes would change it of course). If not it might be better to always make four votes at the same time (especially near the end of the Day) so the effect can be seen in the vote counts.
On preview, Idle “since I now have three votes on me”. No, it’s two valid and three partial ones.
Idle and NAF have both claimed Loyal, with Hacker and Cracker roles respectively, which should make them scum targets if they’re telling the truth. Should either of them be a priority for us to brig/confirm?