Kash: to what extent did you agree with JB's assertion that we should have kept FF around even if he was mafia?
Frankly, because I agreed with how I interpreted the remarks JB posted at the time they were made. Even if FF had turned out to be mafia, he's still a
small fish in a big pond.
What we lost as our opportunity to root out scummy players who are MUCH more dangerous to the town than FF could even hope to be at this point has hurt us more now (even if he wasn't innocent) than had we'd simply tagged FF as a possible suspect at that time, kept tabs on how other people in the game relate to him in the thread and as votes were placed, and gone ahead to look for more serious threats against us.
I believe it was these posts from JB which started the controversy (and I use that term loosely). See text highlighted in blue. I also trimmed these quotes so click the little arrow to see the full text.
I agree with this statement 100%. I was being honest with what I said last game. I don't know if FF is good or scum. But I can't tell from his posting; especially day 1. After a couple days, when I've got a million data points to look at, I'll be willing to take a harder look at him. For now, I'm only pretty sure he's not communicating at this point. I agree that FF is not being helpful, but it's only about 15 hours into the game. If you want to find someone who hasn't been overwhelmingly helpful... throw a rock.
These early day 1 votes for the biggest X factor in the game, while somewhat understandable; disturb me a little. Add to this that if FF is communicating evil... he's bound to do quite a lot of good for the town along the way. :footinmouth:
In that first part, JB essentially says what I just said. FF wasn't worth going after as our highest priority to the exclusion of everything else when it's also evident that other people on mafia team put the town at much greater risk. He also points out that this effort was terribly premature. I agreed with that statement, as well.
In the second portion highlighted, JB made what I considered was another good point. We already know from recent game experience that FF's game play is inconsistent, contradictory, and he posts sometimes in something of a frenzied state without stopping first to think over what he says. For that reason, it's highly probably that his association on the mafia side would have proved to be more of a liability to his own teammates than to the opposing side. He's quite capable of self-destructing on his own and could easily take out or expose a teammate when he goes down. That's one of the reasons why I mentioned earlier that I'd be tempted to kill him off myself if we were both mafia together.
Here's another quote I found from JB about this.
If you like camel lights, you're in luck! If scum investigates him and then hits him, then let them waste their hit on him, and let's keep looking for a scum candidate with less of a chance of helping the town. I'm not saying he's not scum, I'm saying you seem to have a little tunnel vision going on and it bothers me.
I'll make another post and really breakdown how i read his sentence...
I'm not defending him. I'm calling you and pappy out for a) really early votes and b)an insistence that you know what is going on in the mind of FF... which is surely someplace akin to alice in wonderland meets nightmare on elm st.and c) being short sigted.
Call it defending if you want. What I'm really doing is pointing out that we've interpreted his sentence differently. And I think that the evidence you're using for an incredibly strong "first 15 hours of the game" vote. Especially after saying you don't like early votes. I realize that there was some time between the statement and the vote, but that doesn't prove that you haven't planned it to set him up. It's also entirely possible that you're an innocent beset by an instinct to lynch him after last game and finding scumminess in his posts. It's too early to be sure. Look how sure you were about Coler last game. At about this same point in time.
Again, JB repeats the same sentiments: (1) FF wasn't our most serious threat that early on Day 1, and (2) going after him the way it was done and at that time was premature. I fully agree with that. FF was not our highest priority.
I also noted with some interest that other players took essentially the same point of view...
Who knows what FF is? Can anyone really tell by how he is playing? Is a team really going to investigate him or hit him? FF is once again the center of attention. Trying to make sense out of FF or building a case against FF is a joke.
This post from JL was well stated.
So the vote for FF is because he is playing like FF has in every game so far. Gotcha!
As was this post from Ice.
Ice has also provided us with another reason why it might have been prudent for us to overlook FF the very first day.
I see your guys point. FF has posted things that are hard to dismiss as anything but scummy and deserves to be voted off. When he somewhat hinted at being SB I was almost 100% sure he was mafia.
I guess I'm in a sense trying to use FF as a confusion factor against the mafia so they won't know if the comm team knows for sure what FF is. If he is SB the CI could use that to their advantage and hope 2 mafia were the last on the lynch train or hope the mafia hit him because they think he is innocent and lose a player that way.
But I'll play your guys game.
I vote to lynch FF
For that matter, Pappy, I can give you another reason why I believe these views have merit. In that game we played where there were 3 mafia teams, I was communicating innocent (vigilante) with Annie. We investigated you and confirmed you were New York mafia. We could have hit you that night.... we didn't. Why? Because it we believed we might learn more about the roles of other players by keeping you (known scum) alive for one more day. Knowing someone's role for certain or having a reasonable belief someone is scummy can be an advantage in some cases because it allows you to sit back and observe how other players relate to that person in the thread... BEFORE they learn that you're on to them.
