This little Pokie doesn't like cement. It's not my style.

I abstain for the time being, also.

@darwinian, on Apr 22 2008, 10:31 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War, Game 22:

Templar98921: if you had been paying attention to what I wrote yesterday, you would note that I was suggesting that abstaining was a bad strategy. However, I do recognize that it has become tradition around here. So, I didn't fault you much for it. I don't really suspect you -- I still think that Lt._Anonymous is suspicious for jumping on the 1Eevee1 bandwagon yesterday, and lemonyscapegoat and 1Eevee1 strike me as suspicious for jumping on the JacaByte bandwagon. If you would be willing to move your vote to any of those players, I would be happy to remove my vote from you and change it to one of these.

xander

I did pay attention, and I realize that you think abstaining is a bad strategy. But what else am I to do? I didn't agree with any of the running bandwagons, and had no reason to start a new one. My problem was with your reasons for voting Lt._Anonymous. I believe that a lack of decent evidence on Lt._Anonymous has led to his unfair blame, as 1Eevee1 and JacaByte were also unfairly blamed, but EKHawkmans reasons were rubbish, and the anti-Jacabyte reasons were nearly imponderable. You, however, gave reasons that I believe were a clever ruse, as the look nice and read well, but make little sense to me. I understand your feelings, and if you give me reasons I can see to suspect Lt._Anonymous, 1Eevee1 and lemonyscapegoat more than you (I can see your reasoning and agree, but only to an extent) then I shall gladly change my vote.

LNSU, you are also under suspicion. Be warned.

The vote stays.

After watching xander's measured response to my own vote against him, I'm willing to trust him...for now.

Templar98921

@ekhawkman, on Apr 22 2008, 05:05 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War, Game 22:

I don't think you can blame eevee for jumping on that bandwagon Darwinian. He was the target of one and if he can get votes to a different person then why shouldn't he. He was just trying to save his hide.

Oi! My mistake. You are correct. I need to pay more attention to my vote tallies when I post. To recap, those that bandwagoned on the first day are darth_vader, Lt._Anonymous (who then changed his vote), and lemonyscapegoat.

xander

LNSU is quite correct, I too have been lurky (even more so than him) but I had a big piece of coursework that needed finishing and haven't had much time. Templar98921 seems to be acting suspicously so I'll vote for him for now.
Edit:speloing

This post has been edited by egroeg : 22 April 2008 - 10:42 AM

Changed my mind, still haven't decide who to vote for

Ok, made a decision retracted because he hasn't made a post yet. If retracted does vote my vote will change

This post has been edited by Hypochondriac : 22 April 2008 - 05:36 PM

The round's almost 2/3 over. Just thought you might like to know.

This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 22 April 2008 - 11:33 AM

Taking another look at egroeg, he does seem suspicious purely because he has been, as he puts it, lurky. However, I am sticking to my vote for Templar due to his questioning of Darwinian and other bizarre non-reasons to vote for people.
That said, I am keeping my eye on Darwinian. As Gutless said, he is definitely smart, and if he's a cop we're in trouble because of his intelligence and craftiness. So far he hasn't done anything worthy of suspicion. However, I am keeping my eye on him.

@hypochondriac, on Apr 22 2008, 05:08 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War, Game 22:

Changed my mind, still haven't decide who to vote for

Ok, made a decision egroeg because he hasn't made a post yet. If egroeg does vote my vote will change

erm according to the boards you wrote that post 30 minutes after mine so I don't know why you're saying I had not posted yet.

I think if I could vote, I'd vote for Templar98921. Since I don't actually get a vote, I don't have to justify it, but I will say that the other people have very good points.

Hmm I'm not really sure where to go wit this one. For the hell of it, I vote retracted. Just can't seem to shake this feeling in my gut. This is subject to change a' course. If I can be frank boss, we're in a pretty bad situation, not many I see that're too suspicious. Got some ideas maybe, but nothing much.

This post has been edited by lemonyscapegoat : 22 April 2008 - 05:43 PM

Ok since we are in a jam here and we need to find who are the cops I would like for us to do one thing. If you are a loyal member of the mafia raise your hands and stop breathing. Only cops breathe. Also I think I am going to go for Retracted cause he is extremely crafty and almost too smart. On that note :inhales:

This post has been edited by EKHawkman : 22 April 2008 - 05:13 PM

@templar98921, on Apr 22 2008, 04:33 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War, Game 22:

...

LNSU, you are also under suspicion. Be warned.

...

Unfortunately , I will change my vote to Templar98921 in self-defence. I was hoping to watch the templar/darwinian argument last a few more rounds.

Edit: You brought this on yourself templar.

This post has been edited by LNSU : 22 April 2008 - 04:39 PM

I've warned some people off from certain votes I know to be in error. Needless to say, I'm making note of those still voting for true mafia members.

@egroeg, on Apr 22 2008, 02:05 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War, Game 22:

erm according to the boards you wrote that post 30 minutes after mine so I don't know why you're saying I had not posted yet.

Oops will retract my vote.

Hey boss! If I die can I take over the ghost bar and serve cocktails and vodka? I would enjoy that highly.

You mean The Bar At The Bottom Of The Lake? Sure!

Oh so thats what its called now. It will be like a Legend of Zelda thing with crazy people fish. Well assuming we are dumping into Lake Hylia.

heh heh, you'll be sleepin with the Zoras.

Okay, I missed a little bit... why did 3 votes get retracted, and more importantly, who were those votes for before they got retracted? I'd appreciate it if people could just openly say who they were voting for instead of replacing the name with "retracted".