Imperial Officers Mafia - Day Two

[Lady K]

On 5/1/2018 at 4:16 PM, Bob said:

Apologies, but voting is now open!

With 15 players remaining, 8 votes are required to lynch. 

 

On 5/1/2018 at 7:44 PM, mostlytechnic said:

I think this is a hugely overlooked reason to have a lynch even on day 1. Yep, we'll probably eliminate a loyal member of the Empire. But in doing so, we reduce the numbers of suspects to debate and split votes over. 

So let's get this started. I will 

Vote: Adm. Ozzel (Actor Builder)

Why? First, just to get things moving. Throwing tons of random votes around again won't help, so I'll start with a heavy poke and see where it goes. If we have several votes on someone, maybe that pressure will lead us somewhere. At the very least, I'm trying to get a piece of sand in this oyster so we can start a pearl forming, or whatever analogy works better in space. I don't even know for sure what an oyster is. Just read about them as a kid I think.

Second, the Admiral has contributed nothing today. One throwaway post of sadness over the loss of a loyal member. On day 1, his post count was in the middle of the road, and he voted on one of the two candidates with the most votes. Sounds like a nice place for a scummo to hang out - in early enough to look like you're trying to lynch someone, but among a group so you don't take the fall alone if/when they flip loyal. 

Third, what did he do yesterday? A hello post, a second "I'm here" post in which he also said he's against a lynch. I think that's an anti-Empire position to take, personally. Third post, wanting to wait for night roles to solve this for us and looking forward to day 2 voting. Then a post just restating things he's already said. Then he votes for someone, even though he said he was anti-lynch! Yes, we are required to vote, but if you're truly anti-lynch, stand your ground and state that your vote is that. Instead, the Admiral actually gave a reason for his vote and seemed to be serious about it. And that was the last we heard from him yesterday.

 

 

 

22 hours ago, KotZ said:

Not defending Ozzel, but I'm slightly against this idea of a no-lynch is anti-empire. We've gone over it so many times over the pros and cons of a day one lynch vs a no lynch. It really depends on luck if someone will be completely inactive and a detriment to the town, or hoping a scum slips up be it either by pushing too hard one way or stating something that could help the town.

I think the rest of your points for him are valid though. As Dellus so kindly put above me (the vote posts), there certainly were joke posts, my own included. But Ozzel did not seem to give a reason for his vote, unless I'm missing something.

Vote: Adm. Ozzel (Actor Builder)

 

22 hours ago, Forresto said:

Bear with me, tech wasn't allowing me to quote frim s separate topic with my smartphon- I mean code cylinder.

Kintobor, page 3, day 1

"Oooh, how scandalous. Nice knowing I'm worth being the first vote. 

I find this first remark incredibly off, and I doubt a newbie officer will be lynched unless they say something ridiculously stupid. I'm of another mind than Ozzel in our current predicament. I believe you should vote and lynch Day 1, as it gives the town something to go on Day 2. Throwing away a Day 1 vote for a no-lynch gives the scum ample opportunity to murder a guaranteed townie AND hide their trail easier amongst the town. Day Two with a coordinated no lynch just gives the scum more time to murder us off. You're also assuming we have a vigilante, and a trigger happy one at that. We don't know if they'll strike on the first night, so why rely on it to progress? Besides, the vigilante might murder a loyal townie by accident, or even worse, we might have a serial killer. There's a lot of "ifs" to this logic, and I don't buy into it.

There's also the statement that Veers brought up. The implication is that you intend to be active tomorrow, but not today. I find that curious to say the least.

For the time being I'm going to Vote: Ozzel (Actor Builder). I'm not wholly convinced of his scumminess, but I'd at least like others to know that I find this behaviour at best suspicious and at worst scummy. I expect this vote to move, but for now it'll stay if only to remind Ozzel that I'm questioning his logic and I want him to stick around.

I'm going to answer this statement with another statement: what information will this line of questioning provide at this point in our investigation that can help the town?"

~~~

I suspect Colonel Dellus, General Veers, and having reviewed day one, now our mustachioed Admiral Ozzel.

Of the three Ozzel has shown himself the least committal to anything and the least productive to the conversation. 

Where is your commitment to lynch today in lieu of your wait and see approach yesterday? 

Our intelligence director is dead. 

Vote: Admiral Ozzel (Actorbuilder)

 

22 hours ago, mediumsnowman said:

I don't like how quickly this bandwagon is forming against Admiral Ozzel. This is definitely reaching into metagame territory, but our dear Admiral has always been somewhat... erratic in his behavior, and it's not necessarily a scum or town tell. But that's not the point - we already have 3 votes in less than an hour. That reeks, absolutely REEKS, of behind-the-scenes collusion. If Ozzel is town, at least one or two of these first few votes are traitors to our glorious Empire. 

I would be much more comfortable delivering Admirals Shelby or Motti to Lord Vader today, both of whom I raised suspicions against yesterday. 

As I said yesterday in response to this post by Admiral Motti: (My apologies for the odd formatting - I haven't been able to quote from old topics since the forum rollover - if anyone can show me how to in PM that would be great, since my old method doesn't work anymore!)

 

"So far we have 10 votes, spread among 9 people. Not uncommon at the start of these quests. 

I'm going to further that, with a 

Vote: Komec (jluck)

because he hasn't voted yet either, and while not the quietest among the group, he's been quieter than I remember him in the past. So this vote is partially a prod and partially legitimately suspicious."

 

My response:

 

"Why would you further that? A vote for Komec does just about nothing at this point, with less than 24 hours left in the day. (Right?) It seems spreading out votes late in the day like this is a deliberate attempt to sow confusion and give yourself plausible deniability for any bandwagons that might form in these waning hours.

Yet, I'm still keeping my Chiss eyes on you, General Veers."

 

It has since come to my attention I referred to General Veers when I meant to refer to Admiral Motti (the grey uniforms all look the same!), but the point still stands, and I still find his blatant vote spreading odd, especially at the end of the day. I would be much more comfortable lynching Motti than Ozzel today.

Vote: Admiral Motti (mostlytechnic)

 

 

22 hours ago, LegoMonorailFan said:

Agreed 100%. Now of course Ozzel being Ozzel doesn't give him a get out of Darth Vaders force choke free card, but I personally don't think his behaviour at the moment gives any inclination towards what side he's on.

As for my personal vote, I still suspicious of Fenton, but Piett may be a more likely lynch candidate. So I'm going to vote.

Vote: Admiral Piett (Sandy)

 

22 hours ago, Khscarymovie4 said:

What I think was off was the fact that right before you voted, you said having 10 different lynch options was unproductive but instead of voting for someone who had a better chance of getting lynched you voted for someone with only one vote. 

Why do you think this is why the Director was killed?

I think there are some interesting points against Ozzel but I feel we should give the lad a chance to explain himself a little before we all start to jump on him. We need a Lynch today, and I want to get more people discussing today and there have been lots who are being quiet. 

Vote Admiral Daala (Rider Raider) 

She has posted one post today which has a weird reason for why our late Director was murdered, then say we need a lynch (which I agree with) but then provides no other thoughts what so ever. As of right now she looks more scummy then Ozzel. 

 

21 hours ago, Sandy said:

I don't like that the votes are steering towards the silent ones. Sure, they make for an easy lynch because few people are against the idea of voting inactive people - and they are less likely to try to defend theirselves either. But that's just rarely where the traitors are hiding. 

You say I'm suspicious and my behaviour is odd, but can you elaborate why that is? From my point of view I've been trying to contribute and be helpful by giving theories and names. Sure I'm opinionated, but we should be focusing on those who try to stay away from conflict and only post stuff like "it could be anyone of us".

On that note, my vote for now goes to

vote: Admiral Motti (mostlytechnic)

He ticks all the boxes: he's active enough but non-commital, does not make a strong impact one way or the other, his vote yesterday only worked towards not getting a lynch AND it was a seemingly innocent choice to vote a person who hasn't voted. 

He's not flying perfectly under the radar since our blue friend picked up on him, but still a valid choice. 

 

 

20 hours ago, fhomess said:

I feel like you're avoiding the question.  Whether that's laziness or deceit, I'm not really sure, but I don't much care for it.  Is there someone today who looks particularly accusatory or do you change your approach on Day 2?

The problem with Ozzel is that he was similarly unhelpful the last time we went through one of these ordeals and drew a lot of flak and suspicion for it.  One might think he would try being a more helpful loyalist this time around, but you never know if he's the type who adapts based on the past.

I think it's extremely unlikely that there are more than one traitor among the three votes for Ozzel.  When I've previously had the need to infiltrate an enemy, my partners and I rarely were able to coordinate our efforts that succinctly as we all came from different star systems.  Personally, I still don't like Admiral Yularen's contributions.  His quick follow on to the vote on Ozzel seems like he was just waiting for someone to provide him with an opinion strong enough to latch on to.

Vote: Admiral Yularen (KotZ)

 

On a side note... if you're going to include a whole bunch of quotes, please provide some analysis or at least an opinion of yours.  We all have the transcripts we can look through ourselves.  Without your own thoughts, you're not really being all that helpful.

 

19 hours ago, Actor Builder said:

Ozzel am late. 

Hello pals. I had a mega project due. I was...building landspeeders...for class.

I would enjoy turning suspicions towards our buddy, Admiral Daala, who has been as equally inactive today as out other buddy, Admiral Ozzel, but has thus far received no flack.

Here's the flack, Daala!

Vote: Admiral Daala (Rider Raider)

 

11 hours ago, Lady K said:

1st post of Day 1

Discussion was already going at this point.  If you find discussion is most useful, why didn't you join in?  

The first vote is cast for our now departed Director.  And the reason given is to start discussion; which in itself is fine, except that she never really joined the discussion she was trying to initiate. 

All of us had been talking randomly, fluff, to get discussion going.  Yet the first vote of the day is started by you to generate discussion which you never joined after the fact and when question on your vote you then quickly unvote someone who ends up dead night 1.  

Then to vote because she has to, which is fine, she votes Adm Piett who had just been voted for by the Director.  But the reason then given for the vote is what I found odd and why I cast my vote for Adm. Daala yesterday.

My vote from yesterday.

She replied to my questioning of her reason for voting which I felt was off. Yes dead loyal Imperial Officers  can be wrong, but in my past service on other ships traitors have been caught and it turned out those loyal have been killed for a reason.  I don't discount any loyal death and look for what they may have stumbled on.  

Also, why did you feel that Dellus vote was a ridiculous push to lynch Motti?  This statement also seems off to me.

Her first comment of the Day 2 comes well after the day had started and conversation was already going; and also after voting was open.

How is this helpful to finding the traitors amongst us and obtaining a lynch today?  

I agree with this.

Ok, so you have votes against you that you don't even try to address and then you just vote Adm Daala without reason? 

And your being far more active than Ozzel?  What are you doing to help?  And do you feel we need a lynch today vs not one on day 1?

Something seemed off to me yesterday and has become more so today.  Adm. Daala has mentioned the importance of discussion, yet fails to actually join in.  She is showing up just enough to agree or make an off hand comment and then doesn't bother to say more.  This is flying under the radar and needs to be addressed.

Vote:  Admiral Daala (Rider Raider) 

Lord Vader insists we succeed today.  While Ozzel is currently on my suspicion list, Adm Daala is at the top. 

Thoughts?

 

7 hours ago, Peanuts said:

 

This is a very defensive statement, it seems to me like you reply to almost every quote with some variation of "Show me where I said x". Even when you find Captain Needa "suspicious", it's really just a defense to his criticism of you voting for Admiral Daala.

I don't see the bandwagon, it's just three votes. I also don't see how three votes would come from behind-the-scenes collusion, it would be odd for the scum to try and start a bandwagon like that. Especially because I still think the scum wouldn't mind us not lynching today. By the way, I actually wouldn't be comfortable with lynching Shelby without some better arguments.

I agree very much that only the scum profits from either extreme, but I personally doubt they would try to force a bandwagon early on Day Two.

You are not even going to address the votes against you? Interesting.

Some of these accusations feel like you try hard to make Admiral Daala's statements sound suspicious, even the ones where Daala doesn't really say anything. Like, of course everyone is killed for a reason, but on night one their reasons for killing us are almost as bad as our reasons for voting on Day One. And Dellus did indeed vote for Motti, for reasons I still don't comprehend. Why does that statement sound so off to you?

I find you fairly suspicious at this point, and looking at Day One, you were also just riding along the middle of the road.

 

These are some really 'safe' opinions: I don't like lynching active people, I want to hear from passive people before voting. Just enough that you can say you voiced your opinions, but not enough that anyone might take offense with it.

This is all very descriptive. Yes, at that point it was likely we wouldn't have a lynch. We all saw that. And again you just want to hear from quiet people before voting; has this ever actually helped in any situation like that? Has ever a quiet person spoken up and contributed something incredibly helpful late on Day One? Usually the contributers contribute and the quiet ones are at best marginally helpful if they suddenly speak up late in the day.

And you voted for Daala, fair enough.

I find you suspicious, so I will

vote: Captain Jellico (Lady K)

Here are the votes so far:

 Ozzel (Actor Builder):  mostlytechnic, KotZ, Forresto

Admiral Motti (mostlytechnic):  mediumsnowman, Sandy

Admiral Piett (Sandy):  LegoMonorailFan

Admiral Daala (Rider Raider):  Khscarymovie4, Actor Builder, Lady K

Admiral Yularen (KotZ):  fhomess

Captain Jellico (Lady K):  Peanuts

Non Voting:  Rider Raider, Tariq j, LegoRacer1 jluck

This is starting to look like Day 1

We need a lynch.  While I find Adm Daala more suspicious than Ozzel, these are the top two choices.  Adm Motti has two votes and the rest have one vote.  And four haven't cast an initial vote yet.  Eight votes are needed for a lynch and we are about 28hrs into voting.

Thoughts?  We need to work together to out the traitors to present them to Lord Vader.

 

 

 

 

[mediumsnowman]

Assuming Jellico’s vote count is correct and we have less than 24 hours left, in the interest of securing a lynch and not repeating Day 1, I’ll

Unvote: Admiral Motti (MT)

Vote: Admira Daala (Rider Raider)

in the hope that we’ll have something to go off of tomorrow, and I find the case against Daala more compelling than the case against Ozzel.

Is this bandwagoning? Maybe. I don’t feel strongly about Daala, but spinning our wheels for the second day in a row would give the traitors a huge advantage and put us in a very bad position goin forward.

[Forresto]

I will review the evidence before deciding on a change of vote. Maybe Daala is scummy. All I know is we need a lynch today 100% but I want a reason to vote for someone other then just following popular decision. 

I do however find it very curious this sudden change of admonition of a band wagon only to band wagon someone else.

Ozzel gave a good real world reason for his lack of participation certainly, however at a certain point when does that stop becoming a testament to innocence?

All I'm saying is I don't see Daala as any different then Ozzel in terms of trying to be participatory but really not. The biggest problem is that doesn't speak to their innocence or their scumminess since they don't speak enough for us to gauge their allegience.

A night action takes a single PM over the course of a few days. I think even the least active person is capable of that. .

(Uni student here I understand the struggle, I'm not trying to be mean Actorbuilder sorry  I love playing mafia with/against you. ) 

[KotZ]

32 minutes ago, Forresto said:

I do however find it very curious this sudden change of admonition of a band wagon only to band wagon someone else.

Ozzel gave a good real world reason for his lack of participation certainly, however at a certain point when does that stop becoming a testament to innocence?

All I'm saying is I don't see Daala as any different then Ozzel in terms of trying to be participatory but really not. The biggest problem is that doesn't speak to their innocence or their scumminess since they don't speak enough for us to gauge their allegience.

Your first sentence strikes me the same. How fast was I and you called bandwagoners, just by virtue of us being online at the same time? For Ozzel giving his evidence, sure, I suppose it explains it, but as you said when does it stop? I think the town will pull through and we'll get a lynch. On Ozzel or Daala, I'm not sure.  Hopefully the town power roles are gathering some better evidence.

[mediumsnowman]

33 minutes ago, Forresto said:

I do however find it very curious this sudden change of admonition of a band wagon only to band wagon someone else.

I agree it doesn’t look great on my part, if my vote is what you are referring to. The difference, I think, is the time and frequency of votes that formed the main wagons for today. As you addressed, Ozzel certainly has reason for reduced participation that Daala has yet to provide, but that doesn’t give him a “get-out-of-jail” free card, per se. 

The case against Daala dates back to posts from yesterday, and unless I missed something, the train against Ozzel sort of came out of nowhere today thanks to the suspiciously concentrated efforts of a few unnamed individuals, who I am still watching very closely, though they seem for the most part to have vanished back into the woodwork.

That’s part of the reason I find the case against Daala more compelling and hesitant to label myself a hypocrite for opposing Ozzel’s lynch and uneasily leaning toward Daala so we have something to go on tomorrow.

[Rider Raider]

Vote: Admiral Piett (Sandy)

I’m not going to join the bandwagon on Ozzle, because the real-life reason that I missed at first justifies his absence IMO. I’m obviously not going to join the people voting for myself, because that would be suicide. Out of the other lynch candidates, I find Piett scummiest. On day 1, he voiced an opinion about lynching the most active players. I found him the scummiest, and voted for him. Today he has only made me even more confident in his scumminess.

On 4/30/2018 at 10:16 PM, Sandy said:

The director and I didn't see eye to eye, but that doesn't mean I wanted to kill her. Most likely the traitors are trying to draw focus on me as an experienced officer. I fear I am next in line if the scum don't manage to convince you to lynch me...

Isard fought the rebels a long time, so I believe her experience led her to her doom. I too am experienced, so my life is on the stake. 

He starts the day off by saying the scum might try to lynch him. Why? He is an experienced player, he knows that disagreeing with someone while they were alive doesn’t mean they killed them. This strikes me as odd.

 

On 5/1/2018 at 11:11 AM, Sandy said:

You can take notes all you want, but I am not to blame for this. 

One thing is clear: yesterday's votes were like shotgun fire, and it must not happen again. I am not anymore wiser today than I was yesterday about the situation, but we must congregate to start making results. I myself am most suspicious of the people who were against a lynch and tried to keep the votes scattered yesterday, such as Jellico and Veers. And Shelby is still under my scrutiny for being non-commital, like this:

If you have a good theory, why not share it with us when you find the time?

I agree with this.

On 5/1/2018 at 2:40 PM, Sandy said:

Exactly. Actions speak louder than words, and even though he questioned other people's productivity, Jellico was just as guilty of steering us away from a lynch.

I really hope people will stick together tonight when the voting starts and lynch one of the wishy-washy middle-of-the-roaders.

Ironic. You seem like a wishy-washy middle-of-the-roader yourself.

13 hours ago, Sandy said:

Do you think a traitor would put such a blatant target on his back? We don't know each other that well, but you're insulting my intelligence. 

It’s not a blatant target, because, like Tarkin said, nobody would expect the scum to do that. 

13 hours ago, Sandy said:

I wanted reactions and to scout out the situation. If someone had been so stupid as to reveal a power role in public, that would've been on them. 

What kind of reactions did you expect to get? Nobody knew anything.

8 hours ago, Sandy said:

Fenton, you're a smart man. I see a glorious career in the Imperial forces ahead of you. 

Jellico has been rubbing me the wrong way the whole time - I said as much - and if the others agree, he is a viable option to lynch.

It doesn't mean I don't stand by my earlier vote, but it doesn't seem to be catching wind.

Here’s what I meant earlier when I said he was a wishy-washy middle of the roader. I think Jellico explains what I mean quite nicely here:

7 hours ago, Lady K said:

Also you say you stand by your earlier vote, yet are willing to change to be if others agree I am a viable lynch option because your vote doesn't seem to be catching wind? 

 

Thoughts?

[Sandy]

7 hours ago, Rider Raider said:

You are taking what I said out of context. Sure analyzing dead townies’ posts is useful, but Piett was suggesting that we lynch active townies so we can analyze what they said, and I think that causes more harm than good, especially on day 1 when no one knows anything.

That's a way to twist my words...  I never said "let's lynch active townies", I said it's more likely that the scum are hiding within the more active participants rather than those who've only posted once or twice. 

 One can speak a lot without really saying anything, too, as we have noticed.

7 hours ago, Lady K said:

Interesting, I politely ask you to explain where what I have said what was suspicious to you earlier and you ignore me and don't both answering and yet you respond to Capt. Fenton's post.  Which he does in fact include where I asked for clarification.  You accuse me of being suspicious yet won't provide the post where I have stated what you have accused me of?

Also you say you stand by your earlier vote, yet are willing to change to be if others agree I am a viable lynch option because your vote doesn't seem to be catching wind?  This smacks of trying to get a bandwagon going and when it fails wanting to jump on one. 

Earlier today before the voting started I named you as one of the people who were non-commital yesterday - vocal, sure, but not really helping to get results. 

I'm looking for a lynch, which kind of requires people to band together, don't you think? Stubbornly sticking to our original votes is exactly what the scum wants us to do.

Unvote: Motti (mostlytechnic)

Vote: Jellico (Lady K)

[Rider Raider]

3 minutes ago, Sandy said:

That's a way to twist my words...  I never said "let's lynch active townies", I said it's more likely that the scum are hiding within the more active participants rather than those who've only posted once or twice. 

That might not be exactly what you said, but aren’t lynching active players and lynching active townies the same thing the vast majority of the time?

[Sandy]

8 minutes ago, Rider Raider said:

On day 1, he voiced an opinion about lynching the most active player.

Again with the word twisting! Prove to me where I ever said we should lynch the one who speaks the most. 

He starts the day off by saying the scum might try to lynch him. Why? He is an experienced player, he knows that disagreeing with someone while they were alive doesn’t mean they killed them. This strikes me as odd.

Why did some people start of the day saying they deeply mourn for the lost officer even though we don't really know each other that well? Because we had to start out by saying something. Lynching is our best weapon, and if we don't begin to take action, we're going to lose to the traitors.

Ironic. You seem like a wishy-washy middle-of-the-roader yourself.

How come? Because I'm willing to change my vote to a more viable lynch option instead of sticking to my first choice that wasn't popular? Didn't I make myself clear on Day 1 when I said I'm pro-lynch?

This insistence that bandwagoning is always evil and nobody should agree with each other but come to their own conclusions is exactly what the scum want.

What kind of reactions did you expect to get? Nobody knew anything.

Who's fishing now? There are experienced and less experienced officers among us. I can already assess that most of us are really capable at playing this game... of life... much thanks to my curveball question.

4 minutes ago, Rider Raider said:

That might not be exactly what you said, but aren’t lynching active players and lynching active townies the same thing the vast majority of the time?

With that logic you can never lynch anyone, since most of us are townies and the odds are against us. 

We have to take risks here, and in my experience the traitors are often those you wouldn't expect: they contribute, they agree, they disagree but not vehemently, they go with the flow but tamper things here and there to go by unnoticed. 

I've never seen a case where all the scum just sit and say nothing.

[fhomess]

As I stated earlier, I'm not comfortable with lynching Daala at this point, and I don't find the argument against Ozzel particularly compelling.  I just don't have a strong read on him at all.  I think the cases against Admiral Piett and Captain Jellico are more founded.

I will throw my hat in the ring against Jellico.  There is something that strikes me as particularly defensive in many of his contributions that I find to be at odds with his typical behavior.  So among the leading candidates, he is the one that is scummiest to me.

Unvote: Admiral Yularen (KotZ) 

Vote: Captain Jellico (Lady K)

Admiral Yularen... I'm not going to putt he effort into a particularly robust accusation against you at this moment as I simply don't have the time for it.  I stated some concerns yesterday about feeling like you could be contributing more substantially than you were, demonstrating that you actually care about the outcomes of our votes.  Today, I didn't get the impression from your vote today that you would've voted that way if another vote had not already been cast.  It seemed a vote of convenience.  Others do not seem as concerned about you at this point so I guess you're off the hook for today.  Hopefully, you will start to demonstrate your value to the Empire more visibly.

[Actor Builder]

Ozzel am unfortunately still awake.

I'd like to maintain my pressure on Daala by pointing out how little she did yesterday as well. I was active in expressing and exchanging thoughts on why I believe a day one lynch is bad (I think an important discussion to have for at least some part of Day 1). Daala was of the same thought, but did nothing day one except vote for the now deceased Isard, quickly unvote Isard, then vote for Sandy (Who's words Daala is now actively misconstruing).

The way I see it, the only accurate thing Daala has said was that dead townies can still be wrong. But that's not profound. Everything else she's added has been deliberately contrarian to something she's "mistakenly" misinterpreted. This feels like confusion-mongering with the intent of leading us down pedantic rabbit holes instead of to scum. 

[Tariq j]

9 hours ago, Lady K said:

 

If you really feel that I am a stronger lynch case for today then give other thoughts as to why.   I didn't call out others for not voting; I called out others to talk before I cast a vote.  If you would have preferred me to have named names then I could have; I just choose not to. 

The point I was trying to make was, at that point you hadn't given any thoughts on the current discussion (other than the whole Vulcan thing) and then came on saying you'd like to hear from other players. 

"With the various topics of discussion ranging from Vulcans? to what mechanics could be in play to whether or not we should lynch, I would have to say that we seem to be all over the place and not really focused.

As for day 1 suspicions of my own, hard to say, since everyone is all over the place.  No one really stands out at this time.  Get rid of the most quiet? That could result in the loss of a PR or someone who really has nothing to say Day 1.  Get rid of the most talkative?  Then we run the risk of all the officers going quiet.  And the others are all in the middle ground accusing and finger pointing.  

No I have not cast an initial vote; I will but at this point it looks like we are terribly divided and probability is in a no lynch"

Another example from Day One, you talk about wanting a Day One lynch and a clear focal point for discussion, yet you don't seem to have a clear viewpoint on who you want to vote for, you jump around not actually making a decision. 

The problem with a No lynch on Day One, is we're left in a situation where we either lynch a quiet/inactive townie or an Officer who we think is scum. I still don't fully get the case on Daala, I mean understand she's been inactive, but my gut feeling points to Jellico more. Someone who I was also suspicious of yesterday. I remember in a previous Holofilm, it was said that Day One was building our fire and Night one was lighting it, but there was no fire, and that's why in the position we are now. 

Vote: Lady K (Captain Jellico)

 

[Actor Builder]

Ozzel am changing

I did not mean to put the word pedantic where I put it in my last sentence which I spoke. It was not a good word choice and I forgot to edit it out. Please ignore it with your smart noggins.

[Trekkie99]

Ok, so a couple of things. The three members in this room that are the highest on the chopping block are Daala, Jellico, and Ozzel.

Daala? I think she's still on a learning curve. Personally I don't think she's said enough to give me something to go on, but her recent posts show a higher level of commitment.

Jellico? I actually fail to see what makes him such an appealing lynch choice. "Defensive"? Is that all you have to go on?

Ozzel? Ozzel is Ozzel. That's not a get out of jail free card, but he's explained his absence, and he also informed us of the fact that he would be absent. In my eyes, he's no more guilty than most of the members here.

Of the three, who would I vote for if it would insure a lynch for today? Probably Ozzel. Not because I think he's scum, but because if we want a lynch, and these are the only three choices everyone keeps leaning towards, Ozzel is the best choice.

Why? Because Daala won't give us much to work with tomorrow, and Jellico is (in my eyes) innocent and a important member to have among us if we want to take down the traitors.

Ozzel is a helpful member too, but if we must lynch one of these three, he'll give us the most info without causing a serious blow to the town.

But that doesn't mean that I still don't stand by my vote for Piett. Here's a question. What makes Jellico a more appealing lynch than Piett?

[Khscarymovie4]

Well it seems it either Jellico or Daala today. I mentioned in my last post how I would be ok with a lynch on either. Daala has contributed little and only now does she make an accusation and vote. Jellico has been acting weird by contradicting himself and acting all defensive. I think Daala is a little more scummy but we need a lynch and if I change my vote we will be closer to one then we are right now. 

Unvote: Admiral Daala (Rider Raider) 

Vote: Captain Jellico (Lady K) 

[jluck]

9 hours ago, Sandy said:

That's a way to twist my words...  I never said "let's lynch active townies", I said it's more likely that the scum are hiding within the more active participants rather than those who've only posted once or twice. 

 One can speak a lot without really saying anything, too, as we have noticed.

Earlier today before the voting started I named you as one of the people who were non-commital yesterday - vocal, sure, but not really helping to get results. 

I'm looking for a lynch, which kind of requires people to band together, don't you think? Stubbornly sticking to our original votes is exactly what the scum wants us to do.

Unvote: Motti (mostlytechnic)

Vote: Jellico (Lady K)

 

7 hours ago, fhomess said:

As I stated earlier, I'm not comfortable with lynching Daala at this point, and I don't find the argument against Ozzel particularly compelling.  I just don't have a strong read on him at all.  I think the cases against Admiral Piett and Captain Jellico are more founded.

I will throw my hat in the ring against Jellico.  There is something that strikes me as particularly defensive in many of his contributions that I find to be at odds with his typical behavior.  So among the leading candidates, he is the one that is scummiest to me.

Unvote: Admiral Yularen (KotZ) 

Vote: Captain Jellico (Lady K)

Admiral Yularen... I'm not going to putt he effort into a particularly robust accusation against you at this moment as I simply don't have the time for it.  I stated some concerns yesterday about feeling like you could be contributing more substantially than you were, demonstrating that you actually care about the outcomes of our votes.  Today, I didn't get the impression from your vote today that you would've voted that way if another vote had not already been cast.  It seemed a vote of convenience.  Others do not seem as concerned about you at this point so I guess you're off the hook for today.  Hopefully, you will start to demonstrate your value to the Empire more visibly.

 

7 hours ago, Tariq j said:

The point I was trying to make was, at that point you hadn't given any thoughts on the current discussion (other than the whole Vulcan thing) and then came on saying you'd like to hear from other players. 

"With the various topics of discussion ranging from Vulcans? to what mechanics could be in play to whether or not we should lynch, I would have to say that we seem to be all over the place and not really focused.

As for day 1 suspicions of my own, hard to say, since everyone is all over the place.  No one really stands out at this time.  Get rid of the most quiet? That could result in the loss of a PR or someone who really has nothing to say Day 1.  Get rid of the most talkative?  Then we run the risk of all the officers going quiet.  And the others are all in the middle ground accusing and finger pointing.  

No I have not cast an initial vote; I will but at this point it looks like we are terribly divided and probability is in a no lynch"

Another example from Day One, you talk about wanting a Day One lynch and a clear focal point for discussion, yet you don't seem to have a clear viewpoint on who you want to vote for, you jump around not actually making a decision. 

The problem with a No lynch on Day One, is we're left in a situation where we either lynch a quiet/inactive townie or an Officer who we think is scum. I still don't fully get the case on Daala, I mean understand she's been inactive, but my gut feeling points to Jellico more. Someone who I was also suspicious of yesterday. I remember in a previous Holofilm, it was said that Day One was building our fire and Night one was lighting it, but there was no fire, and that's why in the position we are now. 

Vote: Lady K (Captain Jellico)

 

So it appears we have a late momentum shift. How much time do we have left to complete this? 

31 minutes ago, Khscarymovie4 said:

Well it seems it either Jellico or Daala today. I mentioned in my last post how I would be ok with a lynch on either. Daala has contributed little and only now does she make an accusation and vote. Jellico has been acting weird by contradicting himself and acting all defensive. I think Daala is a little more scummy but we need a lynch and if I change my vote we will be closer to one then we are right now. 

Unvote: Admiral Daala (Rider Raider) 

Vote: Captain Jellico (Lady K) 

It seems like your trying to play all sides. In this post alone you say you'd be ok with a lynch of Jellico, Daala, and Jellico. So basically, no matter how the lynch turns out you can say "I was with the town!"

[Lady K]

10 hours ago, mediumsnowman said:

Assuming Jellico’s vote count is correct and we have less than 24 hours left, in the interest of securing a lynch and not repeating Day 1, I’ll

Unvote: Admiral Motti (MT)

Vote: Admira Daala (Rider Raider)

in the hope that we’ll have something to go off of tomorrow, and I find the case against Daala more compelling than the case against Ozzel.

Is this bandwagoning? Maybe. I don’t feel strongly about Daala, but spinning our wheels for the second day in a row would give the traitors a huge advantage and put us in a very bad position goin forward.

 

9 hours ago, Rider Raider said:

Vote: Admiral Piett (Sandy)

I’m not going to join the bandwagon on Ozzle, because the real-life reason that I missed at first justifies his absence IMO. I’m obviously not going to join the people voting for myself, because that would be suicide. Out of the other lynch candidates, I find Piett scummiest. On day 1, he voiced an opinion about lynching the most active players. I found him the scummiest, and voted for him. Today he has only made me even more confident in his scumminess.

He starts the day off by saying the scum might try to lynch him. Why? He is an experienced player, he knows that disagreeing with someone while they were alive doesn’t mean they killed them. This strikes me as odd.

 

I agree with this.

Ironic. You seem like a wishy-washy middle-of-the-roader yourself.

It’s not a blatant target, because, like Tarkin said, nobody would expect the scum to do that. 

What kind of reactions did you expect to get? Nobody knew anything.

Here’s what I meant earlier when I said he was a wishy-washy middle of the roader. I think Jellico explains what I mean quite nicely here:

 

Thoughts?

 

9 hours ago, Sandy said:

That's a way to twist my words...  I never said "let's lynch active townies", I said it's more likely that the scum are hiding within the more active participants rather than those who've only posted once or twice. 

 One can speak a lot without really saying anything, too, as we have noticed.

Earlier today before the voting started I named you as one of the people who were non-commital yesterday - vocal, sure, but not really helping to get results. 

I'm looking for a lynch, which kind of requires people to band together, don't you think? Stubbornly sticking to our original votes is exactly what the scum wants us to do.

Unvote: Motti (mostlytechnic)

Vote: Jellico (Lady K)

 

7 hours ago, fhomess said:

As I stated earlier, I'm not comfortable with lynching Daala at this point, and I don't find the argument against Ozzel particularly compelling.  I just don't have a strong read on him at all.  I think the cases against Admiral Piett and Captain Jellico are more founded.

I will throw my hat in the ring against Jellico.  There is something that strikes me as particularly defensive in many of his contributions that I find to be at odds with his typical behavior.  So among the leading candidates, he is the one that is scummiest to me.

Unvote: Admiral Yularen (KotZ) 

Vote: Captain Jellico (Lady K)

Admiral Yularen... I'm not going to putt he effort into a particularly robust accusation against you at this moment as I simply don't have the time for it.  I stated some concerns yesterday about feeling like you could be contributing more substantially than you were, demonstrating that you actually care about the outcomes of our votes.  Today, I didn't get the impression from your vote today that you would've voted that way if another vote had not already been cast.  It seemed a vote of convenience.  Others do not seem as concerned about you at this point so I guess you're off the hook for today.  Hopefully, you will start to demonstrate your value to the Empire more visibly.

 

6 hours ago, Tariq j said:

The point I was trying to make was, at that point you hadn't given any thoughts on the current discussion (other than the whole Vulcan thing) and then came on saying you'd like to hear from other players. 

"With the various topics of discussion ranging from Vulcans? to what mechanics could be in play to whether or not we should lynch, I would have to say that we seem to be all over the place and not really focused.

As for day 1 suspicions of my own, hard to say, since everyone is all over the place.  No one really stands out at this time.  Get rid of the most quiet? That could result in the loss of a PR or someone who really has nothing to say Day 1.  Get rid of the most talkative?  Then we run the risk of all the officers going quiet.  And the others are all in the middle ground accusing and finger pointing.  

No I have not cast an initial vote; I will but at this point it looks like we are terribly divided and probability is in a no lynch"

Another example from Day One, you talk about wanting a Day One lynch and a clear focal point for discussion, yet you don't seem to have a clear viewpoint on who you want to vote for, you jump around not actually making a decision. 

The problem with a No lynch on Day One, is we're left in a situation where we either lynch a quiet/inactive townie or an Officer who we think is scum. I still don't fully get the case on Daala, I mean understand she's been inactive, but my gut feeling points to Jellico more. Someone who I was also suspicious of yesterday. I remember in a previous Holofilm, it was said that Day One was building our fire and Night one was lighting it, but there was no fire, and that's why in the position we are now. 

Vote: Lady K (Captain Jellico)

 

 

8 minutes ago, Khscarymovie4 said:

Well it seems it either Jellico or Daala today. I mentioned in my last post how I would be ok with a lynch on either. Daala has contributed little and only now does she make an accusation and vote. Jellico has been acting weird by contradicting himself and acting all defensive. I think Daala is a little more scummy but we need a lynch and if I change my vote we will be closer to one then we are right now. 

Unvote: Admiral Daala (Rider Raider) 

Vote: Captain Jellico (Lady K) 

 

28 minutes ago, LegoMonorailFan said:

Ok, so a couple of things. The three members in this room that are the highest on the chopping block are Daala, Jellico, and Ozzel.

Daala? I think she's still on a learning curve. Personally I don't think she's said enough to give me something to go on, but her recent posts show a higher level of commitment.

Jellico? I actually fail to see what makes him such an appealing lynch choice. "Defensive"? Is that all you have to go on?

Ozzel? Ozzel is Ozzel. That's not a get out of jail free card, but he's explained his absence, and he also informed us of the fact that he would be absent. In my eyes, he's no more guilty than most of the members here.

Of the three, who would I vote for if it would insure a lynch for today? Probably Ozzel. Not because I think he's scum, but because if we want a lynch, and these are the only three choices everyone keeps leaning towards, Ozzel is the best choice.

Why? Because Daala won't give us much to work with tomorrow, and Jellico is (in my eyes) innocent and a important member to have among us if we want to take down the traitors.

Ozzel is a helpful member too, but if we must lynch one of these three, he'll give us the most info without causing a serious blow to the town.

But that doesn't mean that I still don't stand by my vote for Piett. Here's a question. What makes Jellico a more appealing lynch than Piett?

I would like to add some thoughts to this as Tarkin has brought up some good points.  

Ozzel:  is behaving similar to how some of us have seen when we have crewed with him before on various missions.  He did state that he would be attending Imperial Officer Promotion University classes like many of us are, myself included.  To achieve a better position in the Officers Corp we have to advance through studies, however we still have meetings to attend to as we are currently together to find the traitors.

Daala:  while I still find some things suspicious and she isn't exactly being helpful to the situation, this could be attributed to still being newer to our crew than most here.  One thing she brought up that has been bugging me since day 1 is Adm Pietts behavior.  

Piett:  while I do agree that there have some active traitors on past crews I have served on; I have seen situations where both traitors have lead the loyals to their graves and where they have sat back so quiet and coasted through daily meeting after meeting till the end when their whole team were revealed.  

However, his back and forth statements and refusal to respond to my questions and then to turn around and demand of someone else to prove where he said what is hypocritical.  This point in itself now makes him the most scummy looking to me. I would also like to add that as soon as the first vote came off Adm. Motti he removed his vote very quickly to jump to the bandwagon on me with only echoing of others thoughts. 

Jellico:  ok so for myself, I have politely (and non defensively) asked for others to clarify where and why they think I said something I did not.  And yet most have cast votes for me because other have found me defensive? Please, explain how asking others to show where I said what I did is defensive.  

As for me I wil change my vote to Adm. Piett who makes a far better choice for todays lynch.  I still plan to keep an eye on Ozzel and Daala.

Unvote:  Admiral Daala (Rider Raider)

Vote:  Admiral Piett (Sandy)

Adm Piett, care to be more specific and respond now?  

So here is the update on the votes:

Ozzel (Actor Builder):  mostlytechnic, KotZ, Forresto

Admiral Motti (mostlytechnic):  mediumsnowman, Sandy

Admiral Piett (Sandy):  LegoMonorailFan, Rider Radar, Lady K

Admiral Daala (Rider Raider):  Khscarymovie4, Actor Builder, Lady K, mediumsnowman

Admiral Yularen (KotZ):  fhomess

Captain Jellico (Lady K):  Peanuts, Sandy, fhomess, Lady K, Khscarymovie4

Non Voting:  Rider Raider, Tariq j, LegoRacer1 jluck

Ok so I am not voting for myself.

Here is the correct update:

Ozzel (Actor Builder):  mostlytechnic, KotZ, Forresto

Admiral Motti (mostlytechnic):  mediumsnowman, Sandy

Admiral Piett (Sandy):  LegoMonorailFan, Rider Radar, Lady K

Admiral Daala (Rider Raider):  Khscarymovie4, Actor Builder, Lady K, mediumsnowman

Admiral Yularen (KotZ):  fhomess

Captain Jellico (Lady K):  Peanuts, Sandy, fhomess, Tariq J, Khscarymovie4

Non Voting:  Rider Raider, Tariq j, LegoRacer1 jluck

[Trekkie99]

4 1/2 hours remain in the day. Those who haven't voted better get their votes in soon, and those who wish to potentially change their vote to insure a lynch should take action.

[jluck]

4 minutes ago, LegoMonorailFan said:

4 1/2 hours remain in the day. Those who haven't voted better get their votes in soon, and those who wish to potentially change their vote to insure a lynch should take action.

Ya, it's crunch time now. Personally, based off what I've seen so far I'm most suspicious of KH, but voting for him today is useless. In fact, at this point all votes really need to be on Actor Builder, Sandy, or Lady K. It's too late IMO to get momentum elsewhere. I've not been super engaged (trying to log on enough to help) but I'm going to try to make a solid vote in a moment, I'm recapping each case now.

[Sandy]

17 minutes ago, Lady K said:

However, his back and forth statements and refusal to respond to my questions and then to turn around and demand of someone else to prove where he said what is hypocritical.  

What back and forth statements? I've been very coherent in my actions in my eyes, trying to find a lynch option that reeks the most. 

And how can you say I'm ignoring you when you have gained my full attention?  Many people - me included - have quoted your sayings from yesterday and today, and I don't have time feel the need to repeat them. I didn't come to this conclusion on my own, it was your actions that have gained you all these votes.

With so many votes turning on me after I voted Jellico it seems we might be on the right track, too.

[Lady K]

Just now, Sandy said:

What back and forth statements? I've been very coherent in my actions in my eyes, trying to find a lynch option that reeks the most. 

And how can you say I'm ignoring you when you have gained my full attention?  Many people - me included - have quoted your sayings from yesterday and today, and I don't have time feel the need to repeat them. I didn't come to this conclusion on my own, it was your actions that have gained you all these votes.

With so many votes turning on me after I voted Jellico it seems we might be on the right track, too.

Simple, in your words above your actions have been trying to find a lynch option, if I understand you correctly this sounds like you want a lynch more than the correct lynch.  This type of thought makes bandwagons quickly and puts loyal officers at risk while the traitors sit back and join said bandwagon.  What I pointed out was that you are jumping on what others are claiming while refusing to back up you points against me with the actual quote from me; because you don't have time?  Might you be one of those active traitors you claim you looking for?

 

Could we have a proper vote update and time left update please?  

[mostlytechnic]

10 hours ago, mediumsnowman said:

The case against Daala dates back to posts from yesterday, and unless I missed something, the train against Ozzel sort of came out of nowhere today thanks to the suspiciously concentrated efforts of a few unnamed individuals, who I am still watching very closely, though they seem for the most part to have vanished back into the woodwork.

What I find suspicious is how I made an actual case with some evidence, everyone ignored it (including the other two who voted with me!) and there's this sudden swing over to Jellico. I still find Ozzel the most suspicious among us. And what REALLY looks bad to me is how both Yularen and Shelby have kept their votes on Ozzel. Maybe I'm reading too much into things, but it makes me feel like Ozzel and one of them (at least) are scummos. They now feel safe that Ozzel isn't getting lynched today, so they're keeping votes here so they can point to them later if he is lynched/killed later and turns up traitor. And they can jump over to another bandwagon last minute "to get a lynch" 

10 hours ago, Sandy said:

I'm looking for a lynch, which kind of requires people to band together, don't you think? Stubbornly sticking to our original votes is exactly what the scum wants us to do.

Unvote: Motti (mostlytechnic)

Vote: Jellico (Lady K)

And this reeks to me - at the time, there was what, one vote on Jellico and 3 on at least 2 other people? So to "get a lynch" you threw your hat at someone - at the time - not a serious candidate without much basis for your vote? 

[Trekkie99]

4 minutes ago, Sandy said:

I didn't come to this conclusion on my own, it was your actions that have gained you all these votes.

May I ask of you to say what those actions were? 

 "Defensive"?

Are there any other suspicious actions Jellico has exhibited that you've noticed but that have escaped me and possibly others?

[Sandy]

2 minutes ago, mostlytechnic said:

 And this reeks to me - at the time, there was what, one vote on Jellico and 3 on at least 2 other people? So to "get a lynch" you threw your hat at someone - at the time - not a serious candidate without much basis for your vote? 

It was not without basis, there was plenty of time left at that point and I would rather vote for someone I feel strongly about rather than just anybody.

You're accusing me of doing things you're doing yourself!

[jluck]

On 5/1/2018 at 12:26 AM, Actor Builder said:

Ozzel am grief-struck!

Isard was a good good worker. Why, oh why, must traitors exist at all?

I should let you guys know, these next two weeks I'm in the midst of finals at university, so I may not be as active as I would like. 

 

 

 

On 5/2/2018 at 2:48 AM, Actor Builder said:

Ozzel am late. 

Hello pals. I had a mega project due. I was...building landspeeders...for class.

I would enjoy turning suspicions towards our buddy, Admiral Daala, who has been as equally inactive today as out other buddy, Admiral Ozzel, but has thus far received no flack.

Here's the flack, Daala!

Vote: Admiral Daala (Rider Raider)

 

16 hours ago, Actor Builder said:

Ozzel am Truthful. Daala am Liar.

My first post of today was literally me apologizing because I was afraid I might not be as active as I would like.

This is the first time I've had the chance to even get online today, and it may also be the last. 

Sleeping is a far less noble endeavor than academic studies. My vote stays. You are riding on the idea others have set that Ozzel is bad, and crafting poor reasons (Based on lies) why anyone should lynch me over you. I don't think much of you right now, Daala. 

 

8 hours ago, Actor Builder said:

Ozzel am unfortunately still awake.

I'd like to maintain my pressure on Daala by pointing out how little she did yesterday as well. I was active in expressing and exchanging thoughts on why I believe a day one lynch is bad (I think an important discussion to have for at least some part of Day 1). Daala was of the same thought, but did nothing day one except vote for the now deceased Isard, quickly unvote Isard, then vote for Sandy (Who's words Daala is now actively misconstruing).

The way I see it, the only accurate thing Daala has said was that dead townies can still be wrong. But that's not profound. Everything else she's added has been deliberately contrarian to something she's "mistakenly" misinterpreted. This feels like confusion-mongering with the intent of leading us down pedantic rabbit holes instead of to scum. 

 

7 hours ago, Actor Builder said:

Ozzel am changing

I did not mean to put the word pedantic where I put it in my last sentence which I spoke. It was not a good word choice and I forgot to edit it out. Please ignore it with your smart noggins.

I feel like I've missed so much of the day and I'm really trying to catch up, but it's given me a big picture perspective. As I read this stuff from Ozzel, I'm...really not impressed.

4 of the 5 posts had little substance and were mostly just excuses. I completely appreciate a busy schedule and prioritizing life, but if you're going to post at least make it worthwhile while you're here. Only the 4th post contains effort but it basically just reads "Why aren't you looking at them? They are doing the same thing as me!" Not really a viable defense.

 Vote: Ozzel (Actor Builder)