RIP SalvaPot
As some of you may have gathered about my role, it is not the Switcher or Swapper role, though it may be affected by it, and it is a passive power in which I do not have to send a command to the game runner during the night, as CornBurrito may have inadvertently discovered. I hinted as such in my previous post no. 632 and 1350. I will now say no more on the matter since I believe it is not quite the right approach to clear suspicion.
Instead, may I suggest that despite my role or, for lack of better words, vibes, I believe it is important that each player clear him/herself out of suspicions on the basis of logic, persuasion and contributions.
Let us pursue this line of thought and I would like to submit myself into scrutiny as an example, let us pick top three points of assessment for me:
If I look at goshujinsama as a player, he is someone who has
- Low post counts
- Reiterated that he is a new player at least three times to date
- Picked on safe votes on Day 1 (inactive players)
Now, expanding on these, I am led towards the following paths of thought
- Flying under the radar this is a valid approach for Despair to adopt. They are not quite as anxious as Hope to participate and generate discussions or volunteer information. I believe in the previous games, the Mafia were the ones that Town was not very sure of, and they were able to survive until the later part of the game simply by contributing at the moderate to low level.
- Another potential ruse. Claiming new to the game gives the player somewhat a leeway to make mistakes which may generate distraction or confusion. Claiming new several times reinforces the message and bolsters the illusion.
- Safe votes do not supply any information for Hope because they are universally logical.
I hope this illustrates how I prefer to address each player. Power role or not, Hope should benefit from each player as a contributing member and despite having so-called power, I propose that I, nor anyone else, should NOT be exempt from scrutiny nor from being nominated as an exiting member. At the end of the day, Hope should keep only those that are consistently contributing to advance Hopes victory.
Let us now allow myself a space to address the scrutiny I have raised against myself. Please bear in mind that this exercise is in no way comprehensive and there may be a number of other items that I have not addressed here. Remember that what a player has said is as much of interest as what he/she has NOT said.
With that, I proffer the following defence:
- Though my post counts are in the low side, I endeavour to contribute with meaningful comments and analysis. I believe I was the first one that proffered a full listing of each players read in this game. This indicates my desire as a player to communicate to each of you how I see you. Communication is a powerful tool that we have and I believe I added value in this front.
- I will refrain from repeating this redundant information of my newness in the future. Though it is the truth, it is no use to Hope. I am as much as a valid target for lynching as the next player and we are now in Day 3, my newness should not give rise to special treatment any further.
- Day 1s votes are difficult to pick since we have almost zero information to base our votes on. Day 2 has been a duel situation so I have yet to demonstrate how I would use my votes in a meaningful manner. I will endeavour to use my voting power better, but I do urge Hope to be wary of those who go after safe targets.
Tangentially speaking, please note that since my Day 1s vote did not rest on Hagi, I can always claim that I washed my hands clean off that bandwagon, and if I ever claim this, please know that this is a suspect behaviour in my book.
Note that I would consider that defence to be a little lacklustre. I was unable to say much with regards to item 2 and 3, if not only to implore Hope to look on and assess future performance.
With that out of the way, I welcome any further questioning on my play and stances. Again, I must say, this may yet be a strategy to clear ones own name moving forward. It is easy for us to vote simply on the basis on illusion that has been created for us by the player. It is equally easy for us to vote for a player based on how much we like or dislike the particular player. There is a lot to parse through and at the end of the day, we have to remember that a good Hope player would be someone who would put Hopes victory above their own survival.
May I suggest that each of us attempt something like the above exercise in our assessment of each other? I was inspired by AbsolutBro myself and I find it an interesting exercise. There is no need for the posting of such analysis onto the thread, should you prefer to play things closer to your chest for the time being. But, I believe this is a beneficial tool to use.
And as a closing, and to demonstrate that I would like to use my voting powers to better use
Vote: CzarTim
There are a few reasons for this vote, but for one, I would like to see him mount a thorough defence of his value to Hope. He is the highest post count player in the game, though I cannot recall any particular post in which he offered thoughtful players readings or meaty analysis on gameplay. He is also frequently seen buddying up to Crab to chide or lord over the other players in the game. Furthermore, he did not receive a single vote in Day 1 and I believe he has been cruising relatively smoothly. I am using my vote to apply some pressure onto CzarTim. It may be a little overdue.
