The masses are bloodthirsty. Remember that previous Soulless (or was it Tainted?) game, we both voted No Lynch but everyone else would rather vote off someone at random. Personally, I no longer see any point in that option since the probability that everyone vote No Lynch is unlikely, if not impossible. Therefore, it is rather impossible to save someone from getting lynched. Feel free to vote No Lynch, but by doing so you're just passing your turn and rejecting any responsibility in slaying an innocent.

Hope I make sense

Yes we should, always, without question. Through action, information is gained. Through daydreaming, we not only learn nothing, we have no chance of slaying a Tainted, and we allow the Tainted to slay a second before we have a chance to weed them out, and we learn nearly nothing ourselves.

This said, the lynch should not be random. Those voting for the death of another should have a reason for their actions.

Also, NEVER make the final vote to lynch another before that person has a chance to 'claim' - to say who they really are, to dispell the shadows about them. I will say this now so there is no confusion like the last time evil threatened our lands (TW game 2): If you make the final vote to slay someone without giving them a chance to speak on their behalf, you are clearly Tainted. If such occurs and we have a Vigilante, the Vigilante should kill the one who made that final vote during the night. Otherwise, that person should be lynched the following day. The only excuse for this mistake is ignorance, and after this post, I hope that excuse is no more.

I don't think we need Shamarah, Tenqual, or Syl's vote to decide then. We're lynching someone.

Who, though...

Generally, yes, lynching is better than not. Especially on the first day. We have no information wherease that is something the scum/mafia always has more of. The scum/mafia are usually more than happy to let us go without lynching someone, because they, unlike us (unless we have a vigilante ) can strike us down at night without, generally, revealing very much information at all.

Of course there are situations where lynching for the sake of lynching is silly, but I am not experienced enough to roll those situations out off the top of my head. I'll have a think about it, do some reading and get back to you if I have some time.

For now, though, I find it interesting that Shorlen still will not give a good reason for speaking that way. As I said, if he were not restricted, all he would have to do is post as normal and not as if in character.

So, what reasons can you all think of as to why he would be restricted.

The would-you-like-eggs-with-that-sausage vote count

FoS (FoS don't count as votes)
3 on Shorlen (Quidgyboo, Etanru, Jasper)


Votes
1 on Jasper: (Tsaephai)
1 on Etanru: (Navaryn)
1 on Navaryn: (Etanru)


Not Yet Voting: Elryn, Eyod, Jasper, Laneth, Shamarah, Shorlen, Sylverfyre, Tenqual

Dead: Iridiel

11 alive, 6 to lynch

Co-mod powers activate! I'm going to bed.

I speak as I speak, for it is the manner of my speach. I see no reason to speak in the dirty vernacular of the streets.

I don't think Shorlen is Tainted. Post restrictions quickly draw attention to you and, as far as I can remember, post restrictions were only set to non-Tainted roles (Tsuki and Captain Vlath come to mind).

Maybe he's from Hallifax. Poor man.

ok, i UNVOTE: JASPER now since jasper has posted and that was only ment to get them to talk.

If that was aimed at me, I resent that remark.

The "Eggs? Nil, no!" vote count

FoS
3 on Shorlen (Quidgyboo, Etanru, Jasper)


Votes
1 on Etanru: (Navaryn)
1 on Navaryn: (Etanru)


Not Yet Voting: Elryn, Eyod, Jasper, Laneth, Shamarah, Shorlen, Sylverfyre, Tenqual, Tsaephai

Dead: Iridiel

11 alive, 6 to lynch

--------------

A post restriction may theoretically be given to anyone, regardless of affiliation. Also, a player may have reasons for speaking a certain way other than an official post restriction.

If you see someone speaking or acting what you think is oddly, take into consideration why that might be so. Yes, they could be tainted. Yes, they could be post-restricted. They could also be ... what?

This has been a message from your evi-- friendly co-mod.

Trying to annoy me .

From experience, I have learned that I do not need to try for that effect.

Aww you don't annoy me Shorlen, we just seem to think eachother are evil each time we play TW together.

I was going to vote for Shorlen, but then this post showed up. Maybe he's some kind of nobility character with a permanent post restriction (ie. he has to talk like that for the entire game)?

Aye, probably right. Though his words towards the Queen were rather suspicious.

Is there anyone who hasn't spoken up yet?

I agree on the logic of lynching someone for the same reason shorlen does, inaction lets the taint walk all over us while we dont have any information.

As for who to lynch... my suspicions are mixed, I think a bit more deliberation is key. I'm going to FoS Etanru and Navaryn - so quick to lash out at each other, I think theres something suspicious there.

Hmm, I think I might as well cast a preliminary vote as well, since it will be a novel experience to try and 'lynch' someone.

Because I'm scared of picking the wrong person, I'll go with someone who's a little too quiet... hopefully that'll wake them up.

vote: Tenqual

(That's all I have to do, right? )