|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 28, 2012 16:48:53 GMT -5
You're voting for a player not based on scumminess, but more on Meta-Gamey reasons. Which I think comes from frustration maybe (as that's what I felt when I read Idle's crap defense). But it doesn't really go either way towards proving scumminess or towniness I think. It seems like a weak justification vote, cookies, and a slightly opportunistic one. To be fair, I can kind of see where Cookies is coming from. Nobody with a Nightkill is going to try and kill Idle now that he's claimed what he has, so he's here for the long haul. That means he needs to give us information if he's Town, because he's going to go well into the late game with his powers. However, the majority of his posting is more centralized around "woe is me, you all are going to be suspicious of me so you might as well lynch me, I don't care." And that's kind of a drag to keep around, if he's going to be a primary town component. Our problem is right now all our "untouchables" are people who are low volume posters: Nanook and mahaloth aren't very post-heavy on the best of days. Idle says he's town but doesn't contribute much to be helpful. Peeker and Ulla are usually more outspoken but they've disappeared completely toDay. These people need to give us more information because they aren't going to be lynch targets just by the inherent nature of their claims and the game. I'm not sure we should lynch Idle just because we haven't really come up with anything better, though. Right now I'm waffling between Sister Coyote and Meeko. The problem is the majority of questions I have are for Dirx, not for Sis Coyote, and she can't tell me what he was thinking. Suburban's on my radar due to his voting behavior, but his overall actions and the way he posts have been more townie than scummy to me: it's just his votes that raise my eyebrow. Bill I'm always suspicious of, but I can't quite put my finger on why in particular this game. I'll vote soon enough, I'm just having trouble deciding who is the scummiest looking.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Mar 28, 2012 17:13:54 GMT -5
To be fair, yours was slightly more smudgey than mine. You added me putting the device on myself as "a nice way to not have a voting history" before any evidence of me not voting had occurred. (And so far I have voted every Day despite the device.) As for SBrown, I wouldn't consider me pointing out she has the largest number which could mean she chose that for herself for a reason as a smudge. However if you want to take it that way feel free. I'll concede that point. It was a theory which you have disproved. Looking at the number of deaths, and the potential deaths that Pleo could have caused, I'd agree with you that it would be a bloodbath if the devices actually kill. So they are probably non-lethal and probably from a mad-bomber type player. I don't think LightFoot is the best choice to hang, but I'm not convinced of her innocence enough not to put down a self-preserving vote her way. If Idle wants out so bad and isn't going to be putting forth much effort other than re-iterating that he doesn't want to play anymore, I'm willing to give him his wish Vote Idle. I find this a slightly strange vote. Cookies say it is not self-preserving, but has now created a four way tie. Given Cookies playstyle in this game, I get the distinct feeling she isn't too worried about being lynched. That said, each time I re-read Idle's posts they just reek of scummitude, but given ATPG's flip, I'm not so sure. To be fair, I can kind of see where Cookies is coming from. Nobody with a Nightkill is going to try and kill Idle now that he's claimed what he has, so he's here for the long haul. That means he needs to give us information if he's Town, because he's going to go well into the late game with his powers. However, the majority of his posting is more centralized around "woe is me, you all are going to be suspicious of me so you might as well lynch me, I don't care." And that's kind of a drag to keep around, if he's going to be a primary town component. I think you've kinda articulated what's niggling me - Idle's claim (if true) keeps the scum, texcat and the other killer at bay; and the town from lynching him - while he continues his woe is me performance. He's not providing information, or being remotely constructive. I need to have another re-read in the morning before voting.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 17:20:05 GMT -5
My reason for voting him is not metagame. Where are you getting that from? He's the one who keeps pulling in the metagame stuff into the game, which is part of the reason why I'm willing to throw a vote his way. What he is, regardless of whether or not he's being manipulative, is analytical dead weight. I'm not as confident in spying problems with his role PM after that didn't lead to scum with Drainbead, but there's that too.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 28, 2012 17:26:24 GMT -5
Pollux, I presume you've decided against trying to set off your device Today?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 17:26:25 GMT -5
I find this a slightly strange vote. Cookies say it is not self-preserving, but has now created a four way tie. Given Cookies playstyle in this game, I get the distinct feeling she isn't too worried about being lynched. Where do I say that it is not self-preserving? I'm prefectly willing to claim my vote for Idle as both a self-preserving vote and a vote that will hopefully prompt some more posts from the rest of the field. And I very much don't want to be lynched, but what sucks about this sudden lack of participation on behalf of half of the darn game is that it is asinine for 2 or 3 votes to be enough to pressure a claim. Do I have to explain why?
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 28, 2012 17:32:09 GMT -5
This was posted way back on Day 3, Post 77: do not fuck with pollux or gad. at least at this point. ullz should be safe unless for a touch as well. Did we ever find out what it was about Pollux that seems to have prompted peeker to make this statement? I had this in my notes and was going to ask peeker about it, but sine he's gone AWOL I figured i'd throw it open to the masses...
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 17:34:18 GMT -5
To clarify, #152 was for Sbrown
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 17:37:32 GMT -5
Pollux, I presume you've decided against trying to set off your device Today? I believe he has stated that Plan A is to reach 0 on Day 5.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 28, 2012 17:43:57 GMT -5
The good news: only 2 people want to lynch me toDay
The bad news: that might be all it takes…..
Re thinking
peeker told us he sent a message to gad that said peeker was mod confirmed Town
He also told us that his message could only be sent to Town ( therefore confirming gad )
He later told us that he was incorrect telling us that he could only send to Town. (I need to find that post)
What’s the timing with these comments and both players lack of posts?
if no one wrecks any cars or has surgery this afternoon, I will be in to research this myself after work
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 28, 2012 17:52:21 GMT -5
Perhaps we can figure this backwards.
We have devices that are apparently triggering on Votes and Unvotes.
The vote, so I'm told, is the most important weapon that town has. [Yes, there is an argument here, that I'm center stage in, Noted.]
So what does it mean, that our votes are pressured? Is there recourse from town, or are the devices recourse BECAUSE of town [that is, the make up of town, and their powers.]
Then, what does that mean, with the number of claims we have had already?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 17:55:12 GMT -5
I don't really understand your post, Meeko. But from what I think I understand about it, it seems to leave out the possibility that the devices could mean nothing or are merely the color for a PFK trying to win their own game within the game.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 28, 2012 18:01:57 GMT -5
Perhaps we can figure this backwards. We have devices that are apparently triggering on Votes and Unvotes. The vote, so I'm told, is the most important weapon that town has. [Yes, there is an argument here, that I'm center stage in, Noted.] So what does it mean, that our votes are pressured? Is there recourse from town, or are the devices recourse BECAUSE of town [that is, the make up of town, and their powers.] Then, what does that mean, with the number of claims we have had already? backwards or sideways, I'm not quite sure what you are driving here?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 18:07:46 GMT -5
It seems like a weak justification vote, cookies, and a slightly opportunistic one. You've also not just done this for the first time with that- you've been rather non-chalant about letting Pollux die off.... No. No. No. No. I've never voted for Pollux, and I've never advocated that anyone vote for him or try to kill him. I support his proposal to see what happens with his device if it counts down to 0. Do you know that doing so will kill him? Because I don't.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 28, 2012 18:12:29 GMT -5
Perhaps we can figure this backwards. We have devices that are apparently triggering on Votes and Unvotes. The vote, so I'm told, is the most important weapon that town has. [Yes, there is an argument here, that I'm center stage in, Noted.] So what does it mean, that our votes are pressured? Is there recourse from town, or are the devices recourse BECAUSE of town [that is, the make up of town, and their powers.] Then, what does that mean, with the number of claims we have had already? Your first statement here is false, or at the very least not proven. We have a device that is apparently triggered by votes (the one on Pollux). We have no idea what triggers the other devices. there has been speculation that SBrOwn's device might be triggered by unvotes, or vote/unvote actions, but there is no evidence this is actually the case. And since Hal's device has not changed, we have no idea what triggers it.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 28, 2012 18:13:50 GMT -5
On the plus side, Meeko...you appear to have gained back a Karma point
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Mar 28, 2012 18:19:21 GMT -5
This isn't the first time Cookies has been accused of being nonchalant or laissez-faire about people dying in-game. You're voting for a player not based on scumminess, but more on Meta-Gamey reasons. Which I think comes from frustration maybe (as that's what I felt when I read Idle's crap defense). But it doesn't really go either way towards proving scumminess or towniness I think. It seems like a weak justification vote, cookies, and a slightly opportunistic one. You've also not just done this for the first time with that- you've been rather non-chalant about letting Pollux die off.... And I feel like I want to place a vote sooner than later- and right now, I'm more suspicious of your behavior, than Idles, or Lightfoot. Also, you really made me suspicious when you called myself and Pollux out as being one of the more Townie players toDay. It made me almost want to trust you more toDay, but I don't know how you could have been so sure of that feeling- and I wonder if maybe you were doing it to gain my trust a little bit- and so I got more paranoid by it if that makes sense. Sort of a reverse smudge if you will. I mean I know I'm a Townie, but why should YOU feel so confident of it, ya know? And you did the same thing with Pollux Oil, before he even role claimed as well. I've never voted for Pollux, and I've never advocated that anyone vote for him or try to kill him. I support his proposal to see what happens with his device if it counts down to 0. Do you know that doing so will kill him? Because I don't. First off, I don't think SBrOwn was saying you'd voted Pollux, just that you are relatively unconcerned with what happens if his device "goes off" (reaches Zero, whatevs.) Though I have to admit I'm looking a bit :skeptical: at SBrOwn, too, because none of us know what the devices do. Idle is an easy target. cometothedarksidewehavecookiesWe are at the point in the game where participation inevitably seems to suffer. (I am making a face at myself because it just took me three tries to actually code that vote correctly. "color=vote" and "color=color" don't work, just in case anyone was wondering.)
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 28, 2012 18:23:53 GMT -5
Perhaps we can figure this backwards. We have devices that are apparently triggering on Votes and Unvotes. The vote, so I'm told, is the most important weapon that town has. [Yes, there is an argument here, that I'm center stage in, Noted.] So what does it mean, that our votes are pressured? Is there recourse from town, or are the devices recourse BECAUSE of town [that is, the make up of town, and their powers.] Then, what does that mean, with the number of claims we have had already? backwards or sideways, I'm not quite sure what you are driving here? Then simply re-read mine without the "perhaps we can work this backwards"
I think there is a connection between those supporting claiming early, and those attaching devices. If you were Pro-claiming, I would think that you are more probably than not, a device installer.
With that being said, I found this from Total. www.idlemafia.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=dds&thread=1885&page=4#88178This is Day 1, reply 106 .... Early Game. Total is pro-claiming.
Total also stated :: We all agree that Town needs information and so on. To me, this seems to ......excuse her position on claiming. It pings. Did I miss an earlier Pro-claim stance by ANY player, that is still alive? I need to think about this some more, especially if my Unvotes trigger devices.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 28, 2012 18:25:55 GMT -5
On the plus side, Meeko...you appear to have gained back a Karma point I was at 6 earlier.... I was at 5 the last time I made a comment. Now I am at 4.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 18:30:54 GMT -5
Coyote, that a weakest of weaksauce, hypocrital, unsubstantiated, bullshit vote of the highest caliber.
"Idle is an easy target."
That's all you have to say to justify a vote for me? No further thoughts on him, or me for that matter?
"It seems like a weak justification vote, Cookies, and a slightly opportunistic one. You've also not just done this for the first time with that- you've been rather non-chalant about letting Pollux die off..."
Sure sounds like she's under some sort of impression that I've made a (weak, opportunistic) vote against Pullox, or a weak, opportunistic play for him to die from where I'm sitting. And if she wasn't under such an impression, the I don't know what she was trying to say.
And lastly, voting to lynch or put claiming pressure on one of the few people who are posting and engaged in the game who have managed to keep whatever business they may or may not have to themselves and out of the braintrust of forces aligned against the Town is going to do wonders to prevent the game from suffering from more lack of participation.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 18:36:22 GMT -5
This isn't the first time Cookies has been accused of being nonchalant or laissez-faire about people dying in-game. In case this was supposed to be justification for your vote, what does it even mean and how does it make me scummy?
|
|
|
Post by SBrOwn on Mar 28, 2012 19:36:32 GMT -5
My reason for voting him is not metagame. Where are you getting that from? He's the one who keeps pulling in the metagame stuff into the game, which is part of the reason why I'm willing to throw a vote his way. What he is, regardless of whether or not he's being manipulative, is analytical dead weight. I'm not as confident in spying problems with his role PM after that didn't lead to scum with Drainbead, but there's that too. I meant metagame in the sense that you're voting for him and citing that since he is not being helpful, and WANTS to die, he should die. It's sort of an "obvious target" sort of an issue. Yes, he does have a troubling issue with his claim, and he's positioned himself in an awkward way- but again we do have a potential investigator at night to help with just these particularly tricky scenarios (if they were around... and town... knowing Idle who's claimed an anti-NK sort of an ability... and knowing he's not on the scum's side would be a great addition for a 1:2 or 3 "not scum" confirmed pool trade off). But the fact that you're leaping to the conclusion of "well, he said he doesn't really want to play... I'll put him out of his misery" it's almost as unhelpful as his behavior. If Idle is a frustrated townie vs. a faking scum or PFK player is one thing- but leaping on the chance to take him out "because he's asking for it" without trying to engage him and bring him back to the town's side isn't good strategy I think. The fact that you even admit that you're "throwing a vote away" is troubling, because it's reads as you're not trying to find scum, but you're just taking out your frustrations on Idle's style. And while I feel you (as I pretty much felt like doing that with lightfoot toDay), we're all in this together (if you're Town), and some times the smart thing to do is take a step back and try to re-assess the situation. That's why I had trouble with your Voting, Cookies. It wasn't an opportunistic vote, and one that you admit where you're "throwing it away"... which isn't helpful for the Town. And I very much don't want to be lynched, but what sucks about this sudden lack of participation on behalf of half of the darn game is that it is asinine for 2 or 3 votes to be enough to pressure a claim. Do I have to explain why? I agree with you on this point. It's kind of a bummer with around 20 people alive, that a lynch/pressure could occur with just 2-3 votes. That's not "Scum"'s doing- that's our own damn faults, and I'm glad at least we're talking right now, even if it's just all over the place, but now we've got less than 24 hours to figure all of this out- we need to start this discussion type stuff earlier and earlier- like Sunday/Monday vs. Wednesday/Thursday [And this sort of stuff LF is why I'm against holding back information- because it leads us to complacency- how many people sat back and waited just for the investigator to show up, ya know?). I've never voted for Pollux, and I've never advocated that anyone vote for him or try to kill him. I support his proposal to see what happens with his device if it counts down to 0. Do you know that doing so will kill him? Because I don't. Also, my dislike of this was- you noted he should totally go for detonating his device... which is a giant bomb strapped to his chest. The fact that you didn't stop to consider there could be a malicious outcome or hesitate at all is what worried me about your encouragement. I personally am not willing to take this device so lightly and assume it does nothing or it's totally harmless. When we don't have information, and we're not sure what's going on, it's safe to try to at least always CONSIDER the worst case scenario- that the device could be harmful, kill Pollux, or help the scum in some way. But again, you for such an experienced mafia player didn't stop to consider those thoughts... and that's why I'm suspicious, because I'm wondering if maybe you did, or you knew what the device does, and you're okay with that outcome. That said.... Speaking of opportune Voting: Coyote, that a weakest of weaksauce, hypocrital, unsubstantiated, bullshit vote of the highest caliber. -snip- That's all you have to say to justify a vote for me? No further thoughts on him, or me for that matter? -snip- Sure sounds like she's under some sort of impression that I've made a (weak, opportunistic) vote against Pullox, or a weak, opportunistic play for him to die from where I'm sitting. And if she wasn't under such an impression, the I don't know what she was trying to say. I actually... agree with you here. I feel like SisterCoyote's vote on you was equal to your vote on Idle in terms of justification. Both are focusing on potential "easy" targets (even if I do think you're the scummier of the two targets- and Coyote is agreeing with me).... It is an easy vote to hide with if you were Town. And I full admit, I'm not sure what to make of Sister Dirx. But I'm sticking with my current vote on you, Cookies. But yeah. You are correct in that you had an easy vote placed against you there, and I'm going to have to re-read and think about this going down the road a little bit. (I wish we coulda done this sorta stuff on Monday rather than so late into the voting! Not cool on all of us, guys. Not cool- we gotta do better). This isn't a great excuse. I don't like the whole "Lynch the Loud" defense- because... it's similar to what AskthePizzaGuy was saying. And how I believe Meeks(?) was the one who defending him as not a good lynch- because he was talking and being helpful for the town with his long winded posts/ideas. But in the end... he was still scum. I think Scum can lurk, and I think scum can be loud. Either way- the talking doesn't exactly add/detract from someone's scumminess, because this was the Meek Pizza Defense basically, which ended up being wrong. Helpful wordy blusters or not, it's the content that should be focused on, not the quantity of posting or trying to engage the town with helpful tips or advice. It's the quality- and your actions are what's more scummy, even if you're an excellent provider of discussion, you could still be scum and just hiding in plain sight. So in the end, My vote still stands Cookie currently, but I've gotta give a FoS DirxCoyote and keep her more in mind as well now- because I admit, I haven't looked that hard at her since it's been two diff. players on that role.
|
|
|
Post by SBrOwn on Mar 28, 2012 19:36:53 GMT -5
Part 2: something different now ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ We have devices that are apparently triggering on Votes and Unvotes. The vote, so I'm told, is the most important weapon that town has. [Yes, there is an argument here, that I'm center stage in, Noted.] This is my hypothesis, [m]Meeko[/b], I don't know if voting triggers it- it could still be that my vote/unvote causes it to go down by -3 each Day (which is weird, as 52/3= 17.3333) So unless the Device creator is terrible at math or intentionally doing that, I'd never reach 0. But I'm still waiting on Storyteller to see if SP's vote/unvote combo had any effect.
|
|
|
Post by SBrOwn on Mar 28, 2012 19:38:30 GMT -5
This isn't the first time Cookies has been accused of being nonchalant or laissez-faire about people dying in-game. In case this was supposed to be justification for your vote, what does it even mean and how does it make me scummy? I too would like to know more about this- I don't know Cookies past behavior really, and only can use this game's info. But if this is another one of those "null tell" things you guys have for each other... I'd like to know that. But since you're using it to justify a vote for her... Yeah. Can haz moar info plz?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 19:53:29 GMT -5
Idle couldn't possibly have been a frustrated Townie when he decided to up and claim for no reason at all. The conclusion I'm leaping to is that he's dead weight no matter if he is scum or not, and it is based on the content of his posts that you can see for yourself. Do you come to a different conclusion? Pollux seems to have understood my point of view better than others, if you'd care to give his post a read, I'd appreciate it. I'm not thrilled about claiming when the wrong and the scum are behind it, so for all of you who have something to lose if you're wrong, help me help you not be wrong, since I can't do a damn thing to appeal for sanity from the absent.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 20:19:04 GMT -5
The fact that you didn't stop to consider there could be a malicious outcome or hesitate at all is what worried me about your encouragement. I personally am not willing to take this device so lightly and assume it does nothing or it's totally harmless. When we don't have information, and we're not sure what's going on, it's safe to try to at least always CONSIDER the worst case scenario- that the device could be harmful, kill Pollux, or help the scum in some way. But again, you for such an experienced mafia player didn't stop to consider those thoughts... and that's why I'm suspicious, because I'm wondering if maybe you did, or you knew what the device does, and you're okay with that outcome. You've got some revisionist history and confirmation bias problems here, because I do and have considered the possibility that it could blow Pollux up, and even possibly other people. I highly recommend re-reading the posts in which I discuss them, and feel free to bring back anything that you have a problem with. I'm not being lazy. I'm trying to be considering because if I were to review my own posts for contributing evidence that I would never ignore the chance that Pollux's device might harm town, I'd be quoting pretty much every post I've made in this game, and no body wants to read them all again, I'm sure. I'm actually about evenly split between the WAG that Pollux's device will either do nothing, do something non-lethal, or that it will try to kill him. Killing others, causing something to be done to others, or grasping a PFK win are examples of long shot WAGs. If it blows him up or causes harm to Town, depending on the degree of the damage, the insight into the realities of at least one of these devices might be worth the trade. I'm also trusting Pollux not to propose things that he hasn't put some thought an risk assessment into deciding, and if he really is a vanilla Townie, then I'd consider doing the same thing in his shoes, even if there was some chance I could blow up myself or others.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 20:23:34 GMT -5
Lynch the loud is often the bedfellow of lack of participation, and both suck.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 28, 2012 20:30:18 GMT -5
Pollux, I presume you've decided against trying to set off your device Today? Yeah, as Cookies said, I think I'm gonna try it on Day 5, provided I live that long. My reasoning behind it is thus: It seems people with Nightkills are going to stay away from people with devices, in case the devices have some adverse effect upon the death of the person wearing them. So unless we lynch someone wearing a device, people with devices are most likely going to start propagating and perhaps become a majority. There are currently 19 people alive. Assuming a lynch and a pessimistic three more kills at Night, along with a new person getting a device, there will be 15 people alive on Day Five and four people wearing devices. Day Six, assuming the same pessimistic worst-case scenario pattern, would be 11 people alive and five devices, which would put us dangerously close to people with devices having a majority over non-devices. If devices are a mad bomber scenario, usually mad bombers need at least half of the people alive "bombed" to win, which would be terribly bad for town if put in that situation on Day Six, basically lynch the bomber or lose. If I activate the device and nothing happens, we gain information that the bombs are not lethal and we should definitely focus on eliminating the bomber. If I activate the device and I blow up, well, there will be one less person with a device on them so a mad bomber win condition is further away. If I activate the device and something else weird happens, well, we'll find that out when it happens. The reason I'd rather wait until Day 5 is I feel like I'm contributing to conversation and would rather not leave Town just yet when participation is at a low. But I don't want to put it off too long because the longer that takes, the closer we get to a possible mad bomber win condition, IF that is what the devices are about. Idle is an easy target. cometothedarksidewehavecookiesWe are at the point in the game where participation inevitably seems to suffer. An opportunistic vote that uses an opportunistic vote as a reasoning for the vote? Is this Voteception? (Do we have to go deeper?) No, this is enough for me to slide towards Sis Coyote over Meeko. I didn't particularly like her last minute vote on charlie yesterDay, and this vote on Cookies really bugs me especially since she says "participation is going to suffer anyway" as an excuse after she votes. I don't like it at all. Vote: Sister Coyote
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 28, 2012 20:35:59 GMT -5
I'm also trusting Pollux not to propose things that he hasn't put some thought an risk assessment into deciding, and if he really is a vanilla Townie, then I'd consider doing the same thing in his shoes, even if there was some chance I could blow up myself or others. I'm as much of a "Push the Big Red Button" guy as Hal is, I just like to think about possible outcomes and ask other people's opinions before I push it. I feel I have nothing to lose and everything to gain upon figuring out what exactly these devices do, considering I don't do anything else at Night.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 28, 2012 20:55:45 GMT -5
@ pollux a sound summary on the device front You nailed something that was sniggling me too…………….. Dirx had a few things that “ got me hairs up” but I left them alone after SisC subbed in. I will admit I often try to lynch SisC for various reasons and this time there are a few • Is playing catch up after subbing in- BTDT but she knew she was on the sub list Day One so should have been a bit more caught up ( when I subbed in as Scum one game I had to re-evaluate everything I had read from a different perspective so it took me a while to really catch up- if that makes sense?) • Felt like a follow someone else vote on gnarly Charlie = it had no real effect so safe there…. • Late-ish vote on cookies and seems to have forgotten the case on charlie only mentioned him once today I’ve not deserted my case on charlie but the more I read the more suspect SisC looks
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2012 21:06:20 GMT -5
I'm not being lazy. I'm trying to be considering... considering=considerate I'm willing to switch to Sister C as well, we'll see how this does or doesn't contribute to the other device research. Unvote Idle[/colo] Sister C
If this is the Charlie vote you're referring too, I agree that of all things said in the game, this perhaps oddly worded post of Charlie's is not nearly as odd as this an other attempts to frame it as a cross post:
So this: town could have a watcher too. could work both ways. it seems a Pleo lynch is happening. i doubt anyone is doing to say something stupid to paint a target on their back. do we see each other again on D2? is the post of Charlie's that is drawing a lot of heat. Oddly enough, it isn't the last line of that which bothers me. It's the second. Unfortunately, I can see either a Town Charlie meaning to post this to the Day thread or a Scum Charlie strategizing with his fellows in the entire post. Charlie's subsequent obsessive objection to lightfoot's link tends to make me lean more Scum misposting than Town. vote: gnarlycharlie
Then there's this one:
Though why Silver Jan is still willing to assume that anyone who is evil in the canon is going to be Town in the game continues to baffle me. Jan isn't the only one. Chronos said the same thing.
This portion of this post I also found interesting. Particularly in this game, I have found a lot of my posts have been around trying to talk potential Townies out of being, for lack of a better word, stupid. And that is particularly true of my Day 2 tirades against assuming that canon alignment translates to game alignment.
Now too her credit as a sub, Sister C was probably still catching up on a lot of reading at this point, otherwise perhaps she'd know that I was keenly aware of Chronos' affection for the assumption that I disliked so much. What I think is interesting about this post, considering that we know that both Jan and Chronos were town, a scummy Sister C might have thought she could fan the flames of town-on-town violence by trying to encourage bad ideas = scumitude. Confirmation bias perhaps, but I consider it worth mentioning.
More soon. I need to do another search with a higher number of results.
|
|