Katie/Batma n: 1 (Pengu)
you posted plenty of times after this vote count was posted. convenient to say you assumed it didn't count. (let me know if this is a cultural difference but where i'm from, a vote counts for the slot and not the player themselves)
I will say this is a bit different since there's so many new players in this game, even ones who were already members here. As far as the older players though, so far they've all been as active as I'd expect them to be in a normal game, and none in particular have set off any bells so far. Even defensiveness from some of the players comes off as pretty legit since I've seen it in past games when they were the same and proved to be innocent.
This is going to be one of those times where I'll have to comb through the thread and really see if anything in particular sticks out. But on a general peruse, so far nothing seems out of the ordinary.
i went through and this is really the most relevant thing you had to say about the state of the game. you remained extremely neutral throughout the course of the day. I find this suspicious as well.
Also remember guys according to rule four you can simply nit vote so you guys trying to vote random to save your no lynch dont need to
True, but choosing to just not vote, especially in a game that requires a minimum of 2 posts per day to ensure that you're a part of it, is incredibly suspicious. It'd be one thing if you accidentally missed a day, but when you're required to post to ensure activity, it just comes off as odd that you wouldn't vote just to avoid using your "No Lynch" vote.
So, since you assumed your vote didn't count, why were you content to let your vote slip off Katie while saying that not voting is incredibly suspicious?
Apologies for not getting to this earlier. I was stepping back a bit since I've already suffered a lot of foot-in-mouth syndrome with my posts, so I wanted to hang back for a bit and gather myself before posting again.
To your first point: This is literally the first Wintreath game we've had with replacements. I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but we're lucky if we even get 20 interested players normally, let alone 30 plus so far 4 replacements.
That being the case, I'm used to the votes being for the player since it's normally only
been the player and not a replacement for said player.
Being as I'm more used to hosting the games rather than playing them, I've learned to normally be more neutral in games since I'm used to knowing everyone's roles and going between good and bad PMs while keeping that knowledge to myself. Ask anyone, it's actually not out of character for me to be neutral and usually unopinionated about people. They usually have to say something that really catches my eye to get me to sway towards them, such as Red Mones' laughing bits after talking Funnier being killed (which he's since then clarified).
To your last point: I actually don't have a reasoning for that, though I was thinking more about people who post and start bandwagons only to conveniently not vote on said bandwagoj themselves. Admittedly, I didn't really convey that in my post, so I see why that'd come off as a bit questionable and contradictory on my part that I was assuming my vote would turn into a no vote.