|
Day One
May 23, 2007 20:56:37 GMT -5
Post by auntbeast on May 23, 2007 20:56:37 GMT -5
ArizonaTeach: I found that image on a google search for pirate, I'll find another one, I promise, I'm more of the big dog type anyway. Heh, no, I was just kidding. I was gonna use it again here, but I honestly didn't want to play with the (minor) hassle it takes to upload avatars here. I had done a search for "pirate dogs" myself - which I can't remember why I thought it was a good idea at the time... I think it was on the third page of google images searching for pirate. I have a website and will gladly host any avatars that people wish to use. Just email them to me with your user name and I'll upload 'em as username.jpg so the link would be www.chicksrock.net/username.jpg
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 21:00:17 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on May 23, 2007 21:00:17 GMT -5
I'm pretty suspicious of capybara too. Her erratic posting style has set off my bARRRometerTM. Thus, ++Vote capybara++
--FCOD
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 21:06:44 GMT -5
Post by capybara on May 23, 2007 21:06:44 GMT -5
Actually, I see Idle Thoughts made the same sort of interpretation of an equally unthreatening question Cowgirl made back on page 3, around post #71. You don't seem to like questions much.
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 21:10:22 GMT -5
Post by KatiRoo on May 23, 2007 21:10:22 GMT -5
Wow, my scumdar is ringing. FWIW, my suspicions are still coalescing around Auntbeast - not so much because of her lack of posting, but her "I'm stupid" claim (back on post #186). So - for now - FOS on Auntbeast - but the avatar, where ever it came from - is pretty cool.
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 21:22:48 GMT -5
Post by Caerie on May 23, 2007 21:22:48 GMT -5
I was under the impression that the pirates were told not to discuss strategy until Night. Are you saying you have some other knowledge? First-hand knowledge? My belief is that someone inexperienced, who has not talked about strategy with other pirates might very well ask the wrong questions on the Day board. I was trying to refrain from refering to M2 again, but since the situation has already been brought up, that's what killed the detective -- innocently asking the wrong questions. You also note I'm not the only person to think your question was inappropriate... Just as a correction, it wasn't me asking questions that got the Detective killed in M2. It was the fact that I foolishly went along with someone else's "I've got a great idea!" strategy. That whole Trust/Distrust thing and responding to it made the Vigilante decide I was scum and he declared that the Serial Killer should off me in the night. Because of that experience, though, I am very, very wary about answering fishing questions now and I'd suggest others be as well. Especially our power roles! Better to err on the side of caution there, folks.
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 22:06:49 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 23, 2007 22:06:49 GMT -5
Self-depreciation as a difinitive scum tell? Even in combination with "lurking" I find it to be far from difinitive, imho. It also happens to be a method of breaking the ice and expressing a sense of humor that does not require that humor being at another's expense, i.e. it is a trait that can be found in a significant population of the Dope, and it is they type of personality trait that I think lots of folks might find it difficult to shed for the sake of a game. First, I never said definitive,if it was definitve she would be dead already. One little "look what a fool I am" would barely ping,but three? She didn't break the ice,she fell through it. Well, "definitive" enough that you voted for her. That is as definitive as it gets on Day 1, until you change your vote, if/when you do. Try as I might, I currently read Aunt and Capy as more crew than crafty. Perhaps it is a kindred spirits thing, which I probably shouldn't be paying attention to for objectivity's sake, but hey...I'm human. I myself am more inclined to tell a few jokes than sit stoic and silent. And as illustrated by something NAF said in his early Day 1 post (on the other board I believe), In other games I've played (M1 and currently M3) people have had a tendancy to just suspect me out of the gate for some reason. Screen-name? New-player cluelessness? Posting style? Who knows. MadTheSwine, NAF[b/], Idle are not smelling so fresh to me, on the active poster side of the spectrum. And the folks who aren't participating much don't smell like anything, which isn't good either.
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 22:15:46 GMT -5
Post by Gadarene on May 23, 2007 22:15:46 GMT -5
Yeah, capybara is one of the only people I'm getting a strong crew vibe from. I think she's offered a boatload (heh) of good analysis and solid observations. Hell, it seems like half the time I want to make a post, I find out that she's already said what I've been about to, and usually better. I'd be shocked, frankly, if she turned out to be scum.
Of course, I've said that before. (Although that was in the other direction, to be fair.)
And, having said that, I realize I should probably put up or shut up myself...but, as I mentioned, the trouble is that no one's really pinging for me just yet. Maybe auntbeast, because she was so late to the party...her actions seem a bit more like inexperienced scum skating under the radar than a crewmember finding her feet. But other than that, I don't have much. More rumination is needed.
What time does the day end, Mal?
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 22:18:27 GMT -5
Post by Gadarene on May 23, 2007 22:18:27 GMT -5
Although I have to say...
ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies:
...This strikes me as a bit preemptively overdefensive.
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 22:21:38 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 23, 2007 22:21:38 GMT -5
[pirate history geek on][game off] If any of the other women playing are looking for an avatar, and don't mind risking suspicion based on choosing a pirate, look up Anne Bonny and Mary Read. The menfolk might be interested in their third partner in mayhem, Calico Jack. [/game on][/pirate history geek off]
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 22:24:12 GMT -5
Post by Lakai on May 23, 2007 22:24:12 GMT -5
She said your assumption was that she was looking for something. If it was what she thinks you are assuming then it was not what she wanted to do. The only reason she said all three points were valid was to show that anything to think of her statements is valid at this point. So you examined this well enough to be comfortable voting, and yet (a) didn't realize that cowgirl was addressing Idle Thoughts and not me, and (b) came to the conclusion that cowgirl wasn't asking for discussion, despite the fact that this post was a follow-up to: Also I have another question (although I think it's what got me targetted last time): can we discuss the power roles a little? I find that very odd. First off, you are right that she was addressing Idle Thoughts. Second, I am not disputing if she asked for a discussion. I'm disputing your interpretation of the type of discussion she was asking for. You say: "Cowgirl, I can only distinguish your role by what you post. While, given nothing else, all of these cases are equally valid, the sort of discussion you're asking for, namely, how to interpret other poster's writings in light of the power roles they might hold, is exactly the sort of discussion we need not to have." Now I do not see her asking for a discussion on this point. I see her asking for a discussion on how power roles should play the game. I see her saying that other people might make the assumption that she is asking for help about interpreting other people's writings. However, these are not the things that you accused her of. My vote for you still stands.
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 22:43:53 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 23, 2007 22:43:53 GMT -5
Well, "definitive" enough that you voted for her. That is as definitive as it gets on Day 1, until you change your vote, if/when you do. Try as I might, I currently read Aunt and Capy as more crew than crafty. Perhaps it is a kindred spirits thing, which I probably shouldn't be paying attention to for objectivity's sake, but hey...I'm human. I myself am more inclined to tell a few jokes than sit stoic and silent. And as illustrated by something NAF said in his early Day 1 post (on the other board I believe), In other games I've played (M1 and currently M3) people have had a tendancy to just suspect me out of the gate for some reason. Screen-name? New-player cluelessness? Posting style? Who knows. MadTheSwine, NAF[b/], Idle are not smelling so fresh to me, on the active poster side of the spectrum. And the folks who aren't participating much don't smell like anything, which isn't good either.
Once again I would like to say, that my initial post about capybara was really meant to say that I thought it was very likely that she is town. But you have to admit her responce to the percived slight was a bit...much? I still would say she is likely town and do buy the explanation that my suggesting that she didn't know what she was doing (which btw isn't what I meant to suggest, but I can see how it reads that way) is what set her off. But still, that was a scummy reply and it should be noted. As for AuntBeast, she actually said that she "didn't have the sense god gave little green apples" That behavior doesn't strike you as protesting too much? I don't buy that she is as dumb as all that, and if she isn't why is she acting like she is? The only people who have a reason to lie are scum. AuntBeast isn't lieing exactly, but combine that with her other behavior, and she smells of scum. Neither is enough to get me to switch my vote from BM though. So that should say something too.
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 22:45:31 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 23, 2007 22:45:31 GMT -5
crap, I need to start taking advantage of the spell check function.
Sorry for my crap spelling.
|
|
|
Day One
May 23, 2007 22:52:59 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 23, 2007 22:52:59 GMT -5
Although I have to say... ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies:...This strikes me as a bit preemptively overdefensive. Preemptively overdefensive? There's a first time to be suspected for everything, I suppose.
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 1:59:24 GMT -5
Post by Kyrie Eleison on May 24, 2007 1:59:24 GMT -5
Time for a new tack, I think.
Unvote: cowgirl
I'll review tomorrow.
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 5:43:23 GMT -5
Post by zuma on May 24, 2007 5:43:23 GMT -5
First, sorry again for my late arrival. It's been a hectic last few days.
I've read through the thread so far, and after all the back and forth about random votes (I see both sides, but I'm generally for them early on), NAF, Pleonast, and CaerieD strike me as town just based on their desire to properly strategize and ferret out the truth.
AZTeach has been pinging my scumdar quite frequently, with his aversion to early voting, his views on aggressive players (I and others, and just about everyone involved in the day 2 fiasco in mafia II were aggressive and town), and what I think was his silly attack on Capybara (theorizing what a pirate would do = pirate) all just give me the gut feeling he's not on our side here.
That said, obviously we have little to go on for day 1, but what little I have leads to:
vote: ArizonaTeach
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 7:17:41 GMT -5
Post by Malacandra on May 24, 2007 7:17:41 GMT -5
Just under 23 hours to go until end of Day (ends 12:00m UK time on Friday. It is now 1:20pm on Thursday. That should help with the timezones).
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 8:24:02 GMT -5
Post by ArizonaTeach on May 24, 2007 8:24:02 GMT -5
First, sorry again for my late arrival. It's been a hectic last few days. I've read through the thread so far, and after all the back and forth about random votes (I see both sides, but I'm generally for them early on), NAF, Pleonast, and CaerieD strike me as town just based on their desire to properly strategize and ferret out the truth. AZTeach has been pinging my scumdar quite frequently, with his aversion to early voting, his views on aggressive players (I and others, and just about everyone involved in the day 2 fiasco in mafia II were aggressive and town), and what I think was his silly attack on Capybara (theorizing what a pirate would do = pirate) all just give me the gut feeling he's not on our side here. That said, obviously we have little to go on for day 1, but what little I have leads to: vote: ArizonaTeachWow, that is just an incredible mischaracterization of everything I've said and done. Especially aggressive players, when I've never even used that term or talked about them, as far as I can recall. On early voting: I said, once again, EARLY, RANDOM VOTES. And I was far from the only person to be wary of those. By the third day or so, yeah, we can get some relative ideas. But votes on day one because you don't like the smell of someone's breath? On capybara: I was the THIRD person to mention that it was a silly question to ask. The THIRD. And I didn't even VOTE for her, other people did. So I'M making a silly attack? Plus, you mischarcterize what she asks - it wasn't theorizing what a pirate would do, it was asking us what we would do if we were pirates! There's a world of diffrence there, with information that would, honestly, only help scum. And like I said, a couple people mentioned it. Why focus on me? And aggressive players? Never mentioned them. Got no problem with them. Getting your wires crossed? I'm sorry, zuma; I honestly don't mind you voting for me, because, whatever, but your reasons are so, so off. I'm talking bordering intentionally misleading. Are you being intentionally misleading, zuma? With that, I must be off to work. See ya'll in about ten hours.
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 8:26:09 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on May 24, 2007 8:26:09 GMT -5
Great googly moogly. This game is going to have more pages than Mafia 2. I've been away from my computer for a few days and have missed a lot, but on a quick read-through I have a couple of impressions. I'm going to read through again, take some notes, and return with more useful discussion in a bit.
In the meanwhile, to the few people - notably auntbeast and IdleThoughts - who have responded to suspicion of them with retalitory suspicion, I think this is an unwise way to proceed. I don't think it's scummy, but I think it plays into their hands. Townies are likely to vote for other townies; only pirates can avoid voting for townies without fail. If the moment anyone votes for you, you respond with, "well, you must be scum," then you'll create an environment where the scum can hide, oddly enough, by throwing off random votes or votes for one another.
More in a bit.
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 8:54:18 GMT -5
Post by fluiddruid on May 24, 2007 8:54:18 GMT -5
I have to say that I'm willing to believe -- for now -- that auntbeast is just a new player trying to overcompensate for being a newbie among perceived experienced players (don't worry, auntbeast, this is only my second game).
Also, in terms of what I would do if I was a pirate tonight: of course, it would depend on who's a pirate and who's not! I confess I would likely want to off storyteller if he was town, as his play was absolutely masterful in MII. Maybe, if I was feeling really evil, I'd use NAF1138 as an alternative as another strong player (I'd feel kinda bad though, as I was the person who nominated him for the axe in MIII on Day One. Sorry NAF). That's just in general terms - ideally, as I said before, you want someone who's going to keep the town-on-town killing rolling, which is highly likely to occur in Day One. Capybara might be a good choice since he seems to be making some public "suspected town" lists, though who knows if those posting that are town or no.
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 8:59:57 GMT -5
Post by fluiddruid on May 24, 2007 8:59:57 GMT -5
In the meanwhile, to the few people - notably auntbeast and IdleThoughts - who have responded to suspicion of them with retalitory suspicion, I think this is an unwise way to proceed. I don't think it's scummy, but I think it plays into their hands. Townies are likely to vote for other townies; only pirates can avoid voting for townies without fail. If the moment anyone votes for you, you respond with, "well, you must be scum," then you'll create an environment where the scum can hide, oddly enough, by throwing off random votes or votes for one another. Agreed. Frankly, I'm far more suspicious of those who are hanging back and trying to avoid hammering themselves down. IMO, scum votes tend to move around less, have fewer FOSs and tend to be later in the day. Of course there are exceptions, but it's the easiest way to avoid notice in the short-term; people, psychologically, have a hard time not suspecting and targeting those who suspect and target them. The only other one on my scumdar is Arizona Teach at this point - I wasn't really convinced of anything, but his defense of himself is suspicious (crying so loud, and so early, about "mischaracterization" is unproductive at best and scummy at worst).
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:06:53 GMT -5
Post by cowgirl on May 24, 2007 9:06:53 GMT -5
auntbeast does seem a bit sketchy for her lurking and over-defensiveness. However, I can totally relate to the defensiveness, because this game is really hard and it's quite easy for newbies to feel totally outclassed. The bad part about sharing your strategy is that you are sharing it with everyone. And any strategy, once it's widely shared becomes a double-edged sword: scurvy dogs can and will adapt their strategies to yours. I agree that it is bad, but we really do need to share strategies. I wouldn't call it a "bad part" as much as something we need to be cautious about. Another note of caution is that strategy-sharing (and the inevitable resultant agreements and disagreements) can create the illusion of factions where none appear. (Exhibit: days 1 and 2 of M2, where factions were apparent everywhere and none turned out to be real). As an example, it's this kind of thing that makes me nervous (from Cookies; I'm not much good at quoting yet) I don't think "I disagree with your reasoning" is sufficient to FOS someone. panamajack: I agree with this.
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:15:50 GMT -5
Post by cowgirl on May 24, 2007 9:15:50 GMT -5
Hey, fluiddruid, your vote is still on me. Do you have any response to what I said in response to your vote?
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:22:28 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 24, 2007 9:22:28 GMT -5
I don't think "I disagree with your reasoning" is sufficient to FOS someone. What else is there to base a vote on during Day 1?
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:23:14 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 24, 2007 9:23:14 GMT -5
Or a FOS? Actually, especially a FOS?
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:32:34 GMT -5
Post by cowgirl on May 24, 2007 9:32:34 GMT -5
I don't think "I disagree with your reasoning" is sufficient to FOS someone. What else is there to base a vote on during Day 1? I didn't mean to call you out, I was more using it as an example of reasoning we shouldn't rely too heavily on. I agree that on Day 1, anything goes - we don't have anything at all to go on! But as days progress, we must remember not to rely on day 1 decisions (or worse - apparent factions) which are based on such things. I'd consider it to be equivalent to a random vote (which is true of almost any day 1 vote).
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:49:24 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 24, 2007 9:49:24 GMT -5
I'm here, I'm here. Pleonast, how could you! I've been trying to get caught up in game III back at the dope, but I'll be back later tonight. See, everyone, poking with a stick works! Hope it didn't leave a mark, zuma. --Unvote zuma--Pleonast started out with a whole lot of noise, random votes that accomplished nothing. Since then I haven't seen much good aside from backing off of that. Yay! My very first vote! I'll cherish this moment forever... Ok, that was long enough. You accuse me of "noise"? Please, I expected to be accused of something stronger, like stupid strategy. I posted my strategy. My random votes were to help jump start discussion. Once that was accomplished, I switched to voting for people for actual reasons, which I even posted. You know, given that the Crew is going to gang-plank someone, that seems like a reasonable strategy. Which you're even employing against me. So, really, why are you voting for me, panamajack? Let's see, who to vote for now. There's a few people who I'm suspicious of, based on what they're saying, but I'd prefer to hold back on voting for them at the moment. It's too easy to confuse scum with clumsy Crew this early in the game. Instead, I'll keep using the poking stick: ++Vote Autolycus++Where are you, Auto? You could be Crew who hasn't had a chance to climb onboard, but waiting until late in the Day to post is a scummy trait. Please account for yourself.
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:51:27 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 24, 2007 9:51:27 GMT -5
Weird, my quote of panamajack got munged somehow. Since I can't edit it myself, maybe Malacandra will fix it up, if it seems confusing?
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:52:37 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 24, 2007 9:52:37 GMT -5
(I'd feel kinda bad though, as I was the person who nominated him for the axe in MIII on Day One. Sorry NAF) [game off]I knew it! Was it because I pegged you as scum right away?[self centered questions off]
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 9:59:37 GMT -5
Post by KatiRoo on May 24, 2007 9:59:37 GMT -5
Hey folks - just an observation --
We don't have townies and Mafia/werewolves
We have crew and pirates (and specials)
|
|
|
Day One
May 24, 2007 10:02:06 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 24, 2007 10:02:06 GMT -5
You know, my vote for BM really was a poke him with a stick vote at first...but not showing up at all for 3 days is really out of character for him. I don't know if he isn't interested or can't access these boards easily or if he is trying to stay under the radar now that he made his presence known, but my vote is staying with him.
He either needs to be subbed out or voted off because at this point he isn't playing the game and the day is almost over.
Oh and CAN WE GET ANOTHER VOTE COUNT MAL?
|
|