Mr Dwarfinton, I would see who is the most active and intelligent.
Deathsword: Jumping on after careful examination of posts, determining who deserves your vote. Not HURR DURR ME TOO.
Deathsword, going on the offensive a bit. Please, tell me the reason.
I have no idea what you're getting at here so it's time for me to stress one of my most frequent points in Beginner's Mafias:
The importance of communicating effectively.
You need to be able to communicate effectively. If you don't communicate effectively, then nobody knows what the hell you're talking about and then they won't listen to you, which is a travesty because your points on a particular target might be good or even dead fucking on. So you need to be able to state your points and questions as clearly as possible so that there's no ambiguity to what you mean and nobody has to wonder what you're talking about.
Conciseness is also a desirable quality. Forum mafia already sucks up a ton of time, so if you communicate clearly
and concisely, then you reduce the time it takes to play the game and overall increases how convincing you are. Because who is easier to read? The person who makes a well thought, but horridly tangled and jumbled mess of needless rambling, or the person who says
exactly what he means in as few sentences as possible?
Consider spacing out your paragraphs, quoting relevant portions of players' quotes that you're responding to, and using the preview button in order to improve clarity.
So, why should I believe you ain't scum, boy?
Nope, nothing was sarcasm, and no, I'm not angry, I'm just probey. Throwing votes around to put pressure on is what you do, eh?
So, the pressure's on. I never accused you, I simply asked you to persuade me.
I approve of probing targets to try and get information out of them, but I disapprove of placing the burden of innocence on your target. If you're scum, you can arbitrarily hold your vote on a player for as long as you want as he continually 'fails' to defend himself. That's too easy. If that were the case then it would take literally no effort to justify any vote.
Rather, it's up to you to provide convincing evidence that your target is scum. This is more difficult, but you've provided evidence of scumminess instead of lack of towniness, which is more direct and thereby more convincing. It also makes life more difficult for scum, since they actually have to put in effort to look like they're town. This increases the chance they might slip up and reveal themselves, which is always a good thing.
Because I forgot to include it in my last post:
Unvote
FluffyBinLaden
Why go for the blue when you could go for the red?
You suspect him, so what's holding you back from turning your suspicions into a vote?
ICs:Does a vote against an attacker within a post pointing out a flaw in said attacker's accusations classify as an OMGUS?
An OMGUS in its most technical definition is when you vote a player
solely because they voted you.
If you have good reasons for your vote, then it's not an OMGUS regardless of whether a player voted you first. It will still get called an OMGUS, of course, but nobody really gives a shit about that.
OMGUSes are only really a concern if they happen in their strictest sense, in which case you're probably dealing with an incredibly inexperienced player who doesn't know what he's doing and in that case it doesn't really tell you much anyway.