|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 12:13:55 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 9, 2010 12:13:55 GMT -5
well unless story lied to me then i could have killed tom (which i totally discount as a possibility). but yaknow i really thought that would be even poorer play. and like i stated earlier, i would have rather killed a scum a and played that way as opposed to being vanilla town for the rest of this game. that's why i can't figure out tom's claim. i mean i believe him to have been/be town because story just doesn't strike me as gastard at all. i also know story's total disdain for "traditional" recruitment so it makes no or little sense. sure, he could have lied to protect himself but that is just bad town policy in general. i know that lynching me will be bad for town because we lose another member but at least if you kill me you will know what i say is true. at that point tom has some serious questions to answer and normal can be held to account for being rather perceptive or having some additional knowledge. not that this additional knowledge is by default scummy.
and i probably have overstepped myself in assuming that kat was a detective. her role was investigative so she could have been a watcher or tracker or some such as well.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 13:23:39 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Jan 9, 2010 13:23:39 GMT -5
peek, once again, I'm not following you at all. What part of Tom's claim to you think he lied about? Story told us that Tom was town. Do you think Tom lied when he said that he couldn't be recruited? Is that supposed to be somehow in confilict with your claim? I'm just not getting it.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 13:41:15 GMT -5
Post by tomscud on Jan 9, 2010 13:41:15 GMT -5
You're making some weird assumptions there, peeker. I believe your claim, actually, but just because your recruitment, and apparently the Goblin's, are by your own volition doesn't mean there isn't also a forced (or "forced to make a choice") recruitment power out there as well.
It's also possible that story gave me a red herring of a power, but what I've told you is the honest truth.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 13:42:20 GMT -5
Post by tomscud on Jan 9, 2010 13:42:20 GMT -5
Also, I'll try to give this and yesterday's threads a proper reread over the weekend and place a vote. Sorry for being away, but I just haven't had the mental energy to play Mafia this week.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 14:23:12 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 9, 2010 14:23:12 GMT -5
peek, once again, I'm not following you at all. What part of Tom's claim to you think he lied about? Story told us that Tom was town. Do you think Tom lied when he said that he couldn't be recruited? Is that supposed to be somehow in confilict with your claim? I'm just not getting it. ok let me try again, friends. i don't believe that recruitment as it is generally applied - i pick you to change sides and that's it exists. that goes against everything that story has ever said about his feelings about recruitment. now maybe what tom is saying is that no matter what his role will never have a CHOICE about switching sides. that i can buy. but an absolute statement of i can't be traditionally "recruited" just flies in the face of our mod. but the way he phrased it was more along the lines of "traditional" recruitment. i also believe there to be more than me (gg would be an example) that have either an active or, in my case, a side choosing (i.e. recruitment) mechanism as a result of an action. hence, the CHOICE part of the game title. i don't know if that answers your question at all. but if not please feel free to ask for clarification. i had a third party lose condition. now i am town and need to at least backfill a bit.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 18:00:07 GMT -5
Post by BillMc on Jan 9, 2010 18:00:07 GMT -5
peek, once again, I'm not following you at all. What part of Tom's claim to you think he lied about? Story told us that Tom was town. Do you think Tom lied when he said that he couldn't be recruited? Is that supposed to be somehow in confilict with your claim? I'm just not getting it. ok let me try again, friends. i don't believe that recruitment as it is generally applied - i pick you to change sides and that's it exists. that goes against everything that story has ever said about his feelings about recruitment. now maybe what tom is saying is that no matter what his role will never have a CHOICE about switching sides. that i can buy. but an absolute statement of i can't be traditionally "recruited" just flies in the face of our mod. but the way he phrased it was more along the lines of "traditional" recruitment. i also believe there to be more than me (gg would be an example) that have either an active or, in my case, a side choosing (i.e. recruitment) mechanism as a result of an action. hence, the CHOICE part of the game title. i don't know if that answers your question at all. but if not please feel free to ask for clarification. i had a third party lose condition. now i am town and need to at least backfill a bit. So you are saying you find Tom suspicious because he has categorically stated that he cannot be recruited, and that you consider that "unfair"?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 18:45:35 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 9, 2010 18:45:35 GMT -5
So you are saying you find Tom suspicious because he has categorically stated that he cannot be recruited, and that you consider that "unfair"? [mr. spock]i am saying that with the knowledge that is available that it would be . . . illogical[/mr.spock]
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 19:38:19 GMT -5
Post by Hawkmod on Jan 9, 2010 19:38:19 GMT -5
[mr. spock]i am saying that with the knowledge that is available that it would be . . . illogical[/mr.spock] Why do you even care if Tom Scum is lying? He's town and we know he is town. If he is lying he is doing it to trick scum. Why would we want such a lie exposed?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 20:06:20 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 9, 2010 20:06:20 GMT -5
[mr. spock]i am saying that with the knowledge that is available that it would be . . . illogical[/mr.spock] Why do you even care if Tom Scum is lying? He's town and we know he is town. If he is lying he is doing it to trick scum. Why would we want such a lie exposed? whatever, dude. he was confirmed as town at the beginning of Day 1. after story's post i think all bets should be considered carefully based on the nature of this game and the posts of the folks that make them. i still think his statements about recruitment are incongruent with all that i know about our mod. if you think differently then feel free to state your opinion. and frankly these bi daily peek you're fool of shit posts in the abscence of some other ennuciated possibility are getting a tad bit tiresome. and really are not at all helpful. matter of fact they could be considered scummy (shitty play). hey, you might be town but someone suggested that we ought to lynch scummy play. i think that's what i'll do. oh wait. i already fucking have suggested that.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 22:01:39 GMT -5
Post by Hawkmod on Jan 9, 2010 22:01:39 GMT -5
whatever, dude. he was confirmed as town at the beginning of Day 1. after story's post i think all bets should be considered carefully based on the nature of this game and the posts of the folks that make them. i still think his statements about recruitment are incongruent with all that i know about our mod. if you think differently then feel free to state your opinion. and frankly these bi daily peek you're fool of shit posts in the abscence of some other ennuciated possibility are getting a tad bit tiresome. and really are not at all helpful. matter of fact they could be considered scummy (shitty play). hey, you might be town but someone suggested that we ought to lynch scummy play. i think that's what i'll do. oh wait. i already fucking have suggested that. Tom Scud started Day 1 as confirmed town. Presumably he spent all of Day 1 as town as anything else would have been bastardy. So when he claimed to be unrecruitable he did so as a townie. Was he lying? I couldn't care less. If he lied he believed it was in the best interest of the town do so. Exposing such a lie would only benefit the scum. Tom Scud was confirmed town. You are not. You understand there is a difference there right?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 22:15:53 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 9, 2010 22:15:53 GMT -5
whatever, dude. he was confirmed as town at the beginning of Day 1. after story's post i think all bets should be considered carefully based on the nature of this game and the posts of the folks that make them. i still think his statements about recruitment are incongruent with all that i know about our mod. if you think differently then feel free to state your opinion. and frankly these bi daily peek you're fool of shit posts in the abscence of some other ennuciated possibility are getting a tad bit tiresome. and really are not at all helpful. matter of fact they could be considered scummy (shitty play). hey, you might be town but someone suggested that we ought to lynch scummy play. i think that's what i'll do. oh wait. i already fucking have suggested that. Tom Scud started Day 1 as confirmed town. Presumably he spent all of Day 1 as town as anything else would have been bastardy. So when he claimed to be unrecruitable he did so as a townie. Was he lying? I couldn't care less. If he lied he believed it was in the best interest of the town do so. Exposing such a lie would only benefit the scum. Tom Scud was confirmed town. You are not. You understand there is a difference there right? shoot yes i understand. and a confirmed town can do what they will to a great extent. shoot, pede likes to screw around with this very fact. the only thing that i am trying to get across is that recruitment as we understand it is a very low probability knowing our mod. so for tom to say what he did means that he is motivated by something other than game reality. shit, is he town trying to confuse scum. or is he used to be town and now not and trying to confuse remaining town. i seriously have no clue. i just know that my pm fits with the theme of the game and our mod's absolute abhorance for any "tag you are it" type of activity. and i don't have any reason to suspect that tom is other than he is other than the fact that his statement makes no fucking sense in light of the realities of this set up and our mod. [tigger]hellooooooo, is anyone home[/tigger]. but what i don't fucking get one bit in a game where choice is part of the fucking title is how you would let anyone skate just because of a Day one post by our mod.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 9, 2010 22:16:58 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 9, 2010 22:16:58 GMT -5
fuck, how the hell. i swear it looked normal on preview. i mean at what point does it get this freaking large?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 10, 2010 10:29:42 GMT -5
Post by tomscud on Jan 10, 2010 10:29:42 GMT -5
Well, damn. I've reread the posts of our current vote leaders, and most of the people who voted luv and peeker yesterday, and damn if I can find much solid there. The only thing that really sticks up as scummy (aside from peeker's play) is drain bead's "I made a deliberately weak vote to draw out the scum". And yeah, she's claimed, and everyone has SOMETHING to claim; I'm still going to
vote Drain Bead
For lack of anything better to hang a vote on.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 10, 2010 18:54:03 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 10, 2010 18:54:03 GMT -5
i am going to make this post and then you can toss me.
i swear you folks disappoint.
ok, maybe i talk or post too much but whatever.
this is the place where i think the best on line mafia is played. i mean girafffe and the dope have their place but still i think of this as the big leagues. if you have the stones to play here then you have decided to step up. it's for the most part bare knuckled and can get pretty intense. and the players here are tough, i mean brutal tough. but yaknow, guys/gals we still have to intereact. i can sit on big stack and fold forever looking for bullets but shit that is so wsop. and i know that i am town but fuck this shit. for christ's sake we have been grunting for a while, again. can we poo or get off the pot. this game is not about an individual but about your team. for ffs if you get killed and it advances your position who the fuck cares. do you think the pawns in spassky v fisher gave a shit. i mean the ones that died for fisher were like we rock. so if some of the non town element feels reluctant to make a vote let me go ahead and hammer again. or fucking lynch me. this post every 6 or so hours does not a game to me make.
shit, you guys are the elite. let's fucking show some balls and respect for our mod.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 10, 2010 19:01:25 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 10, 2010 19:01:25 GMT -5
and the first fucker who says you are rushing us, wah wah wah. kill them immediately
and yeh, this time it was supposed to be as big as the board would allow.
[MODERATOR'S NOTE: Oversize text shrunk. Peeker, stop overcompensating for your pitiful home college football team]
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 10, 2010 19:06:00 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jan 10, 2010 19:06:00 GMT -5
some of the m's look kind of like cathedrals.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 9:22:59 GMT -5
Post by BillMc on Jan 11, 2010 9:22:59 GMT -5
Well I gotta agree with Peeker, this is moving at glacial pace, looks like it might be next Christmas before enough folk show up to have a discussion and progress the Day.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 9:33:19 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Jan 11, 2010 9:33:19 GMT -5
As I said, I don't think it's fair to institute a deadline in the middle of an ongoing Day. We will certainly have a straight-up deadline attached to Day Three, though - probably seven days, possibly fewer. It was an interesting experiment, the no-deadline Day thing, but I think the results are pretty clear.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 9:34:54 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Jan 11, 2010 9:34:54 GMT -5
VOTE COUNT (1.11) - 9:30 AM EST
peekercpa - 3 (Special Ed - #50, BillMc - #52, drainbead - #64) texcat - 2 (Inner Stickler - #28, redskeezix - #52) hawkmod - 2 (peekercpa - #83, Sister Coyote - #89) Special Ed - 1 (texcat - #4) drain bead - 1 (tomscud - #132)
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 10:08:00 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 11, 2010 10:08:00 GMT -5
As I said, I don't think it's fair to institute a deadline in the middle of an ongoing Day. We will certainly have a straight-up deadline attached to Day Three, though - probably seven days, possibly fewer. It was an interesting experiment, the no-deadline Day thing, but I think the results are pretty clear. Deadline only? Or a hammer and a deadline?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 10:10:42 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Jan 11, 2010 10:10:42 GMT -5
As I said, I don't think it's fair to institute a deadline in the middle of an ongoing Day. We will certainly have a straight-up deadline attached to Day Three, though - probably seven days, possibly fewer. It was an interesting experiment, the no-deadline Day thing, but I think the results are pretty clear. Deadline only? Or a hammer and a deadline? I think there will be both. Day ends at predefined threshold, or at seven real-life days, whichever comes first.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 11:28:39 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 11, 2010 11:28:39 GMT -5
I'm seeing two different versions of "recruitment" floating around. Tom said he "...cannot be recruited." This does seem to imply a certain amount of traditional recruitment. But. Peek has claimed he started the game unaligned, and between Peek's claim and what Luv told us about the GG being able to choose after he died implies there may be other unaligneds who have to select one side or the other in order to win the game. Also, MHaye claimed to be akin to the GG (but not the Goblin) in rebuffing Luv's claim, though he claimed to have already made the choice to be pro-registration (either through his role PM, or perhaps as a way of staking a side? I dunno). I don't see why Tom would lie. If he is lying, well, Obvious Townie or not, I think my feelings on Town lying to Town are pretty clear. I'm not sure what to make of any of what I just wrote above, but I thought it should be thrown out there.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 11:38:46 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Jan 11, 2010 11:38:46 GMT -5
There are probably several flavors of recruitment. This is meta as all hell, but I do not think that story would create an Obvious Townie and then make him recruitable.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 11:40:00 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Jan 11, 2010 11:40:00 GMT -5
Also, MHaye claimed to be akin to the GG (but not the Goblin) in rebuffing Luv's claim, though he claimed to have already made the choice to be pro-registration (either through his role PM, or perhaps as a way of staking a side? I dunno). That's a confusion. I may or may not have been clear. I was casting doubt on luvbwfc's claim because (a) my character has been injected with nanites to control their actions, just as luvbwfc claims that GG was injected with nanites to control his (ie the GG's) actions, and that he (luvbwfc) was the GG's controller and could exercise control of the GGs action through nanites, whereas my control is broken. It no longer works. Also, I have no option to change sides, at least not according to my PM. And, if I get the chance, I would cheerfully implant nanites into those fascist bastards in SHIELD and force them to disembowel themselves and gorge themselves on their own entrails. Raw.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 11:49:51 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 11, 2010 11:49:51 GMT -5
Also, MHaye claimed to be akin to the GG (but not the Goblin) in rebuffing Luv's claim, though he claimed to have already made the choice to be pro-registration (either through his role PM, or perhaps as a way of staking a side? I dunno). That's a confusion. I may or may not have been clear. I was casting doubt on luvbwfc's claim because (a) my character has been injected with nanites to control their actions, just as luvbwfc claims that GG was injected with nanites to control his (ie the GG's) actions, and that he (luvbwfc) was the GG's controller and could exercise control of the GGs action through nanites, whereas my control is broken. It no longer works. Also, I have no option to change sides, at least not according to my PM. Thank you for the clarification. Well. Isn't that a charming thought.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 13:49:38 GMT -5
Post by Natlaw on Jan 11, 2010 13:49:38 GMT -5
Sorry for the low participation. I think the low hammer-threshold doesn't help too much though, although that might be a role power (and I think setting it low in that case would be an anti-town move). Since MHaye mentioned it again, I did a quick search on nanites which gives: Just color, etc, but I guess pins his half-claim down a bit more.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 14:08:27 GMT -5
Post by Natlaw on Jan 11, 2010 14:08:27 GMT -5
As I said earlier, I think peeker's behavior fits his claim although still had some odds moves Today while supposedly completely town (can't claim because it would benefit scum, claiming anyway; calling Tom Scud recruitablility in question; threatening to hammer himself). peeker can answer texcat's question: how did scum benefit from the recruitment information of your claim?
On a reread of Today a thing that stood out to me was that BillMc and special ed were quite sure peeker seemed to a 3rd party killer. I think it stands out to me since peeker seemed more scummy to me than PFK (his hammering to drew a lot of attention, presumably released the Green Goblin from being town, when a PFK when want to stay out of the picture and keep thing balanced when both siding are worn down).
I'll keep my FoS on peeker for now, but I'll be voting
Vote: texcat
I noticed her Yesterday for not bringing much to the discussion, last Night peeker pinged her but she seemed to have forgotten that the next morning and the odd 'I'll wait for someone to make a case without revealing they investigated' Today.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 16:25:14 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 11, 2010 16:25:14 GMT -5
peeker can answer texcat's question: how did scum benefit from the recruitment information of your claim? Yes, please, peek, answer this question, because I'm not seeing it, either. I see one possibility for what you were thinking, but the truth of the matter is that even that doesn't make any sense. I will admit there's some oddness going on with texcat, but I'm not ready to vote her. I'm also not sure I agree that she hasn't brought much to the discussion: she's asked a lot of questions and defended herself. Just because no one's answering her questions doesn't mean they aren't contributing to the discussion. Yes, she's a low post-count poster, but there are others with fewer posts. That said, though, I will admit to being bothered by a few things she's done. I don't like the fact that she's essentially said she's waiting to follow someone else's lead on who to vote for (assuming they're an investigator and can make a compelling case, of course -- does the compelling case somehow confirm the person's an investigator? Because I made a damn compelling case as Scum on non-Scum in Blockey's Halloween Mini...), and the complaint that no one has made such a case, all while having and leaving an admittedly weak vote on Ed. Unvote: Hawkmod Vote: texcat But peek, I really would like to know how you think your PM was going to help not-Town.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 16:25:37 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 11, 2010 16:25:37 GMT -5
(Obviously, I changed my mind about voting...)
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 11, 2010 18:40:02 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 11, 2010 18:40:02 GMT -5
/me throws random things at peeker.
|
|