|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 6, 2011 13:56:03 GMT -5
I do not think that ACE is scum. I really think it is a newbie that is not sure what to do. why isn't Ace claiming? it's not like she hasn't been told to do so. even as a relative newbie she has seen what a claim is. i don't understand why she isn't making the effort. it makes me feel that she's either scum or 3rd party.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2011 14:15:59 GMT -5
I do not think that ACE is scum. I really think it is a newbie that is not sure what to do. why isn't Ace claiming? it's not like she hasn't been told to do so. even as a relative newbie she has seen what a claim is. i don't understand why she isn't making the effort. it makes me feel that she's either scum or 3rd party. I know how I felt last game, when I was being asked to Claim. I was a mason but I still had to do what I had to do to find the 3rd Mason. I did not want the target on me because with me gone, the 3rd mason could not be found. I was close to being lynched. It is a double edged sword. I do agree to a point that she should claim to save herself. I understand that theory. I don't find her terribly scummy for standing up to the masses. I have not ruled out the fact that she could be 3rd party. The votes was started on her because she would not claim her alignment or I should say refused, well now that she has claimed that everyone wants her role. So she is making some effort just not what everyone wants. To me it is worth it to maybe have her in the game one more Day, rather than someone who is not contributing even one post...
|
|
|
Post by Dirx on May 6, 2011 14:39:29 GMT -5
Ok, did a bit of a readthrough, and I'm ready to
Vote: Meeko
He's posted little, contributing next to nothing. His vote is on the big bandwagon, and for a terrible reason (he thinks Ace is asking Pinkies to claim?).
Sounds to me like he's been trying to stay under the radar, and is placing a rather opportunistic vote.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 6, 2011 14:39:30 GMT -5
I know how I felt last game, when I was being asked to Claim. I was a mason but I still had to do what I had to do to find the 3rd Mason. I did not want the target on me because with me gone, the 3rd mason could not be found. I was close to being lynched. It is a double edged sword. I do agree to a point that she should claim to save herself. I understand that theory. I don't find her terribly scummy for standing up to the masses. I have not ruled out the fact that she could be 3rd party. The votes was started on her because she would not claim her alignment or I should say refused, well now that she has claimed that everyone wants her role. So she is making some effort just not what everyone wants. To me it is worth it to maybe have her in the game one more Day, rather than someone who is not contributing even one post... as i recall you weren't pressured by a lynch. she is the overwhelming lynch leader. i was in the same position and i claimed on Day 1 in our other game. she has to do what she has to do. Ed has been particularly nice about it.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on May 6, 2011 14:40:13 GMT -5
I have to say it, I do not like D01.145. Fluiddruid's vote bears all the hallmarks of a player parking a vote in a safe place. There is (as she says in the very next post) no-one else remotely close to being lynched (iirc, Fluid's vote pushed Ace to 6 votes, and no-one else had more than one vote). There was also a clear implication that there was no arguing against the case - I would interpret "slam dunk," as meaning the case was so obvious that no argument need be made in its favour. To the contrary, there is no evidence that Ace's refusal to post a statement along the lines of "I am Town" had anything behind it except new-player confusion. Vote: Vote Fluiddruid
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 6, 2011 14:53:42 GMT -5
I have to say it, I do not like D01.145. Fluiddruid's vote bears all the hallmarks of a player parking a vote in a safe place. There is (as she says in the very next post) no-one else remotely close to being lynched (iirc, Fluid's vote pushed Ace to 6 votes, and no-one else had more than one vote). There was also a clear implication that there was no arguing against the case - I would interpret "slam dunk," as meaning the case was so obvious that no argument need be made in its favour. To the contrary, there is no evidence that Ace's refusal to post a statement along the lines of "I am Town" had anything behind it except new-player confusion. Vote: Vote Fluiddruid [/color][/quote] what's your take on the votes not going towards Ace? wouldn't you consider them safe as well?
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2011 14:56:55 GMT -5
I know how I felt last game, when I was being asked to Claim. I was a mason but I still had to do what I had to do to find the 3rd Mason. I did not want the target on me because with me gone, the 3rd mason could not be found. I was close to being lynched. It is a double edged sword. I do agree to a point that she should claim to save herself. I understand that theory. I don't find her terribly scummy for standing up to the masses. I have not ruled out the fact that she could be 3rd party. The votes was started on her because she would not claim her alignment or I should say refused, well now that she has claimed that everyone wants her role. So she is making some effort just not what everyone wants. To me it is worth it to maybe have her in the game one more Day, rather than someone who is not contributing even one post... as i recall you weren't pressured by a lynch. she is the overwhelming lynch leader. i was in the same position and i claimed on Day 1 in our other game. she has to do what she has to do. Ed has been particularly nice about it. I was up there in votes, if people started to come off of Calvin and on me, I would of been. Trust me I was ready to fully claim in Everafter to save me. Alethea and I already had everything typed out and what to say. It doesn't look like she is going to claim unless she makes it back prior to the end of toDay. We are beating the dead horse, either she claims or she doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 6, 2011 15:08:08 GMT -5
I was up there in votes, if people started to come off of Calvin and on me, I would of been. Trust me I was ready to fully claim in Everafter to save me. Alethea and I already had everything typed out and what to say. It doesn't look like she is going to claim unless she makes it back prior to the end of toDay. We are beating the dead horse, either she claims or she doesn't. it appears so. it is what it is. if you look at your own experience, imagine if you WERE lynch leader. you would have claimed, right? that's why i really don't understand why she isn't if she was Town. with that, i'll take a few Zs so i can be awake for end of Day. 'night all!
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on May 6, 2011 15:08:51 GMT -5
what's your take on the votes not going towards Ace? wouldn't you consider them safe as well? They can be considered safe votes, yes. Someone voting a one-off is not likely to get their candidates lynched unless things change radically. However, there is also a argument (which has been made above) that Townies should vote for whoever they consider most likely to be Mafia. That may well result in someone making an honest one-off vote. So there are both pro-Town and pro-Mafia reasons for making a one-off vote. Consequently, you have to assess the vote in the light of the gamestate. Is it reasonable, all things considered, for a Townsperson to place a one-off vote? I think it is in this situation. We have an extremely poor case on one player which has attracted over one-third of the total eligible votes (8 of 21, excluding Ace herself) and the only other players with more than 1 vote are being voted for for another bad reason. If there was a close race between two candidates, I'd have considered voting for the one I felt more likely to be Mafia, maybe after voting for Fluid first to register suspicion.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on May 6, 2011 15:50:53 GMT -5
You did say that you weren't going to be around, but you said it on Tuesday morning. I figured there was ample time for you to pop back into the thread before you were gone, but perhaps I was mistaken. The joy of timezones - i said it tuesday evening my time. French :-)
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on May 6, 2011 15:57:04 GMT -5
Reading back yeah I'll claim my alignment.
I am town.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on May 6, 2011 16:01:29 GMT -5
Current Vote Count
ace093 (8,8): Special Ed [80], gnarlycharlie [97], storyteller0910 [115], metallicsquink [127], Archangel [144], fluiddruid [145], LightFoot [173], Meeko [250] Paranoia (2,2): JustBeingGinger [237], colby11 [257] Archangel (1,2): Honest Moley [179], CatInaSuit [199] BillMc (1,1): Suburban Plankton [93] Captain Pinkies (1,1): ace093 [227] septimus (1,1): guiri [233] guiri (1,1): septimus [234] Honest Moley (1,1): Rysto [243] Meeko (1,1): Dirx [302] Fluiddruid (1,1): JustBeingGinger [153,160], Merestil Haye [304] colby11 (0,1): CatInaSuit [110,199] CatInaSuit (1,1): colby11 [102,168], septimus [206,234] storyteller0910 (0,1): Archangel [129, 144] Suburban Plankton (0,1): metallicsquink [111,127] gnarlycharlie (0,1): Suburban Plankton [79,93]
With these votes, ace093 will be lynched.
Breakdown: person with votes (number of votes, max number of votes): person voting for [post voted in, post unvoted]
In the event of a tie, the player who was voted for first during the Day (even if that vote has subsequently been removed) will be marked with an asterisk.
ToDay will end in approximately 4 hours
|
|
|
Post by Rysto on May 6, 2011 16:09:19 GMT -5
Eh? Have you EVER played a game where the scum didn't have the ability to talk shop during the day phase? I have played in many, many such games. One that sticks out in particular in my mind was Cecil Pond, where our inability to Day talk cost us the lynch of a newbie scum. [oog]After Malazan I find it rather ironic that you would say this to me. [/oog] I didn't address it because it's not relevant to my argument. I do not particularly feel that the Ace bandwagon is a good one. My interest was in what your argument revealed about your own thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 6, 2011 16:12:18 GMT -5
I can respond to any post, as long as someone's talking to / about me in it. I wanted to get my post restriction out in the open as soon as possible so that people know exactly what I'm working with here. I don't see any point in hiding it. If there's a long debate about a particular person, for example, I don't want to not be able to get my point across because my name wouldn't be naturally mentioned otherwise. Then I will repeat my question from earlier, which I do not believe you have answered. @ HonestMoley: Why didn't you wait until tomorrow when, as you suggest, the fact that you had not picked up a final vote and had not posted would have been obvious? Because if I waited until tomorrow, it's quite possible I wouldn't have been able to talk at all, since my "three free posts" expire at the end of Day One. Nobody mentioned my name at all for the first three (real-life) days here. Who's to say that situation wouldn't repeat itself on Day Two? It's not a penalty I'm worried about, it's not being able to talk. Having my post restriction out in the open guarantees that people at least know what I'm up against. You could say I could wait until Day 2 (or Day 3, or Day 4, or whatever). What if I've noticed something significant to a close lynch, but I can't speak and nobody knows why? I have to say it, I do not like D01.145. Fluiddruid's vote bears all the hallmarks of a player parking a vote in a safe place. There is (as she says in the very next post) no-one else remotely close to being lynched (iirc, Fluid's vote pushed Ace to 6 votes, and no-one else had more than one vote). There was also a clear implication that there was no arguing against the case - I would interpret "slam dunk," as meaning the case was so obvious that no argument need be made in its favour. To the contrary, there is no evidence that Ace's refusal to post a statement along the lines of "I am Town" had anything behind it except new-player confusion. Vote: Vote Fluiddruid [/color][/quote] Ok mhaye, I'll bite. At the very least this seems more suspicious than Ace not posting her alignment. For the moment I can't come up with anything better, so Vote: Fluiddruid. I wish there were more people here right now. My reason being that on the previous two Town games I played where we lynched scum on Day One, there were at least two strong vote-getters in the running at this point. (In "Arkham Knights" there were three.) If Ace's bandwagon didn't already stink to high heaven for reasons already given, the fact that nobody else seems to have gathered any serious suspicion does strongly suggest that something's off. If we assume at least four or five scum, maybe more, then what are they doing while one of their own is being lynched?
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on May 6, 2011 16:28:06 GMT -5
I just don't see the case on Ace, she seems to be a newbie floundering. It's case and point why we don't get much new blood.
Pinkies is being Pinkies - hopefully we can find a sub for him if he isn;t going to participate -- I also agree that the one penalty vote isn't sufficient motivation.
Plankton's vote on me seems opportunistic, but not scummy.
Dirx and MHaye make valid arguments for alternative candidates, but at this time, it's unlikely to make any difference.
I find Moley's restriction and it's lifting somewhat suspicious. I agree with CIAS that he could have proved his restriction by not gaining a penalty vote.
Vote: moley
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on May 6, 2011 16:43:03 GMT -5
<snip> I wish there were more people here right now. My reason being that on the previous two Town games I played where we lynched scum on Day One, there were at least two strong vote-getters in the running at this point. (In "Arkham Knights" there were three.) If Ace's bandwagon didn't already stink to high heaven for reasons already given, the fact that nobody else seems to have gathered any serious suspicion does strongly suggest that something's off. If we assume at least four or five scum, maybe more, then what are they doing while one of their own is being lynched? What would you expect the scum to be doing? Also, I'm not seeing a vote from you in the last vote count. Did I miss it?
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2011 17:00:31 GMT -5
Reading back yeah I'll claim my alignment. I am town. Unvote Paranoia Vote Honest MoleyI am voting Moley because I see that there was no need for a restriction to be lifted if Moley was not at risk of being lynched. I would like to think that a MOD would not just lift a restriction that they put in place. Maybe with us stating his name it triggers something, like the ability to do a NK or it places a bomb on the head of the person that said his name. Just throwing things out. Either way I do not like the claim.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on May 6, 2011 17:04:06 GMT -5
We MIGHT have a MadBomber. I need to look something up
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on May 6, 2011 17:09:02 GMT -5
I agree that Moley's claim was unwarranted. It sounds like he just wanted to play and was feeling left out that no one had mentioned his name yet. I really don't see why that would cause the mod to allow what basically amounts to a change in his role just because he is impatient.
I'm happy with my vote on ace for toDay, though. She has had plenty of opportunity to come in and claim. We have no restrictions on posting our PM's so it would have been quite easy for her to do so, assuming she has a town PM.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 6, 2011 18:37:20 GMT -5
I agree that Moley's claim was unwarranted. It sounds like he just wanted to play and was feeling left out that no one had mentioned his name yet. I really don't see why that would cause the mod to allow what basically amounts to a change in his role just because he is impatient. I'm happy with my vote on ace for toDay, though. She has had plenty of opportunity to come in and claim. We have no restrictions on posting our PM's so it would have been quite easy for her to do so, assuming she has a town PM. Wait... I've only just got the point of this. So... 1) I claim to the mod that my post restriction is unfair on Day One because nobody's mentioned me. 2) She agrees, and lifts it for Day One only. 3) I claim all this publicly. So here's what's happened since: - Nobody so far has disputed any of the facts of what I've said. Nobody except Ginger has suggested I've lied about the post restriction. CIAS and BillMC, if I'm reading their points correctly, are more suspicious about Sis C. lifting my post restriction than my claiming it in the first place - they're saying that by staying silent I could've proved my restriction; although I notice neither of them has given any reason why I'd want to do this, especially when the cost is not posting or contributing anything for an entire game-Day. - Nobody (except Ginger, see below) has even suggested that I don't have the post restriction, or would have any reason to lie about having one. - Nobody (again excepting Ginger) has posted any reason why I would lie about this. - Nobody has produced any reason why Sis. C would refuse to temporarily lift my post restriction when I haven't been able to post a single thing because of it in the first three days of the game, and it looks seriously likely that I might not be able to post anything for the rest of the day. You don't think that a mod would consider it unfair that a player hasn't been able to post anything for over half a game-Day? And yet I've picked up two votes on faulty reasoning based entirely on this point. One from Ginger: Ok, let's take this bit by bit. Someone saying my name triggers something. Like the ability to do a night-kill (night-kill them?) So obviously the best way for me to accomplish this is NOT to talk to that person and ask them questions, etc, in the hope that they'll say "Well Moley, here's my answer..." Nope, the best way, by your logic, is to fake a bizarre post restriction that prevents me from talking for three straight days and therefore asking anybody any questions that would require them to respond to me by name.And as for the "Place a bomb on their head" idea, I don't know if you're familiar with the rules governing mad bombers, but basically they go something like this: if more than half of the players in the game are "controlled" by the bomber, the bomber wins and the game ends, regardless of the alignment of those players. So by that justification I could realistically win this game already by day two. Finally, I have to ask, how seriously do you rate either of those possibilities, both of which have serious negative consequences for anybody who says my name, when you say it twice in one post, disregarding the vote. And this from BillMC: So I'm supposed to "prove" my restriction by staying silent the entire day? And if I'm silent the whole day, how exactly am I supposed to claim that restriction? Or more importantly, contribute anything at all meaningful to the game (which by the way is exactly what I was complaining about to Sis C when she temporarily lifted my posting restriction)? On the chance that I'm lynched in the next couple of hours, I'd like everyone to remember those last two votes. Especially Bill's, since Ginger's reasoning seems more careless and ill-thought-out; but Bill's comes off as well-considered but still false, which to my mind is more scummy.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on May 6, 2011 18:47:31 GMT -5
<snip> - Nobody has produced any reason why Sis. C would refuse to temporarily lift my post restriction when I haven't been able to post a single thing because of it in the first three days of the game, and it looks seriously likely that I might not be able to post anything for the rest of the day. You don't think that a mod would consider it unfair that a player hasn't been able to post anything for over half a game-Day? <snip> SisterCoyote created the role so I'm sure she knew exactly what could happen. Do you not think that eventually you would have been called out (as the other lurkers/non-participants have been)? As others have pointed out, if you had not posted a single thing toDay and not generated a penalty vote, I'm sure someone would have asked you what was up. I don't know yet if this makes you scummy or just someone who likes to complain about his given role which is why I'm not voting for you toDay. And you do realize that your posting restriction will still be in effect for the rest of this game. What if no one talks to you toMorrow? Also, why have you not voted? There are only 15 minutes left.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 6, 2011 18:58:03 GMT -5
<snip> - Nobody has produced any reason why Sis. C would refuse to temporarily lift my post restriction when I haven't been able to post a single thing because of it in the first three days of the game, and it looks seriously likely that I might not be able to post anything for the rest of the day. You don't think that a mod would consider it unfair that a player hasn't been able to post anything for over half a game-Day? <snip> SisterCoyote created the role so I'm sure she knew exactly what could happen. Do you not think that eventually you would have been called out (as the other lurkers/non-participants have been)? As others have pointed out, if you had not posted a single thing toDay and not generated a penalty vote, I'm sure someone would have asked you what was up. I don't know yet if this makes you scummy or just someone who likes to complain about his given role which is why I'm not voting for you toDay. And you do realize that your posting restriction will still be in effect for the rest of this game. What if no one talks to you toMorrow? Also, why have you not voted? There are only 15 minutes left. I have voted. Check my post at 10:12PM.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2011 18:59:55 GMT -5
<snip> Also, why have you not voted? There are only 15 minutes left. The Day still has an hour to go. It ends 6:00PM Pacific time. I am on Eastern Standard Time and it is 8:00PM so it ends 9:00PM my time.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 6, 2011 19:15:06 GMT -5
<snip> - Nobody has produced any reason why Sis. C would refuse to temporarily lift my post restriction when I haven't been able to post a single thing because of it in the first three days of the game, and it looks seriously likely that I might not be able to post anything for the rest of the day. You don't think that a mod would consider it unfair that a player hasn't been able to post anything for over half a game-Day? <snip> SisterCoyote created the role so I'm sure she knew exactly what could happen. Do you not think that eventually you would have been called out (as the other lurkers/non-participants have been)? As others have pointed out, if you had not posted a single thing toDay and not generated a penalty vote, I'm sure someone would have asked you what was up. Ok... I'm going to say this slowly, calmly and clearly in my head. Then I'm going to post it in giant writing so everyone can take a moment to see where I'm coming from here. WHY WOULD I WANT TO "PROVE" A POST RESTRICTION TO ANYBODY? I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU CONSIDER IS "PROVED" AND WHAT ISN'T! I CAME TO PLAY A GAME AND HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO SO FOR THE FIRST THREE DAYS! I COMPLAINED TO THE MOD THAT THIS WAS UNFAIR AND SHE AGREED! I DON'T WANT TO STAY QUIET FOR AN ENTIRE DAY SO SOMEONE COULD "ASK ME WHAT WAS UP!"
DO YOU GET THAT?
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 6, 2011 19:29:36 GMT -5
Actually, upon reflection... I've taken my frustrations out on BillMC, Ginger, and Squink. But they didn't start this ridiculous kerfuffle. I can respond to any post, as long as someone's talking to / about me in it. I wanted to get my post restriction out in the open as soon as possible so that people know exactly what I'm working with here. I don't see any point in hiding it. If there's a long debate about a particular person, for example, I don't want to not be able to get my point across because my name wouldn't be naturally mentioned otherwise. Then I will repeat my question from earlier, which I do not believe you have answered. @ HonestMoley: Why didn't you wait until tomorrow when, as you suggest, the fact that you had not picked up a final vote and had not posted would have been obvious? Actually come to think of it, I did answer that question, to my own satisfaction if not to yours. But even if I hadn't, it was a really dumb question. I'm not going to sacrifice a real-time week of play to "prove" something that I don't need to prove to anybody. It's bad enough not being able to post for three days. Couple that with the fact that it's a "leading" question; it makes the assumption that I would be willing to sacrifice an entire game-Day just to prove a post restriction (and one that I wouldn't even have had a chance to claim until that point anyway). It feels like it was designed to incite suspicion more than debate. I remember getting a weird vibe from one of your posts earlier which I also went into in an earlier post... I'm going to Unvote: Whoever The Hell I'm Voting For Right Now, and Vote: CatInASuit.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on May 6, 2011 19:37:42 GMT -5
@ Honest Moley: I'm not going to quote your little tantrum post but my response is that yelling isn't necessary. As for "proving your post restriction", it wasn't that anyone wanted you to prove anything. The point was that you could have just waited to see what happens, i.e., played your role and explain (which is not the same as "prove") when the time came. It seems to me that you just don't like your role. As important as it is for town to talk, your claim has become a topic of discussion on its own rather than just allowed you to play.
I do see your vote now. I missed that earlier.
So the other question I had that you haven't answered yet is what is it that you expect the scum to be doing at this point.
@ Ginger: I thought around 3 my time, Sister said there were 4 hours left. I really wish she would just get on central time since it's the correct time zone.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 6, 2011 19:41:35 GMT -5
I'm going to Unvote: Whoever The Hell I'm Voting For Right Now, and Vote: CatInASuit.for the record it was FluidDruid (313).
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on May 6, 2011 19:43:16 GMT -5
I probably did. Mod has math issues.
There are approximately 15 minutes left toDay.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Pinkies on May 6, 2011 19:44:31 GMT -5
ummm just arrived..... my bad... I don't check the board everyday....
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on May 6, 2011 19:44:33 GMT -5
Dammit! That's when Fringe starts. I'll have to check back after that, then.
|
|