|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 11:14:14 GMT -5
Post by Archangel on Aug 11, 2009 11:14:14 GMT -5
Julie, thank you...the problem is that I found that post through a search of the Day 3 thread and as far as I can see the quote option isn't there when I do that. I'll go back to Day 3 and try to find it via the time it was posted, quote it properly and then explain myself.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 11:30:23 GMT -5
Post by Archangel on Aug 11, 2009 11:30:23 GMT -5
No, unless I'm doing something wrong which is entirely possible it will not allow me to quote a locked thread.
This is the part of Cookies' post I have a problem with (it's addressing NAF):
"All this goes back to me having a very hard time trusting you and/or the warning, and even if the warning is at all truthful, even in part, and the Town manages to come to know that somehow and yet still survive with me in it, I will need to be convinced that your motivations for sharing the information were pure and not chaotically malicious. The timing of the information really yanked the rug out of my pro-town play of mitigating the tie-breaker, though it is a wash for yesterday since Jaade also ended up being a vanilla Townie, it still isn't something anyone was willing to do today, which sucks because Stan could be pro-Town with a power that he feels is worth potentially sacrificing a Mason to protect.
As such I'm not inclined to drink from the same cup of wine as you, and I think I'll be leaving my vote on Stan, who I really hope is not a Town power role."
It's not arguing with NAF that makes me suspicious. It's where she complains that his warning (which went unheeded and could have saved us) was less pro-town than her tiebreaker play, goes on to agree with him that I'm terribly suspicious (not quoted above, but it's in the post above where the quotes are so messy), and then votes Stan.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 11:36:28 GMT -5
Post by julie on Aug 11, 2009 11:36:28 GMT -5
How did NAF's warning go unheeded and how could it have saved us? To me, NAF's warning went too heeded and doomed us (though the doom wasn't as doomful as all that).
|
|
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 4
Aug 11, 2009 11:39:46 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Aug 11, 2009 11:39:46 GMT -5
No, unless I'm doing something wrong which is entirely possible it will not allow me to quote a locked thread. [Strictly OOG] Archangel, if you're having problems understanding the way this board works, I'll be glad to help you out by discussing stuff through PMs and the like. Please ask for help. The "Quote" button (look at the top right of this post) isn't available in posts in locked threads, which is why you can't quote DarkCookies' Day 3 post. [/Strictly OOG]
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 11:43:28 GMT -5
Post by special on Aug 11, 2009 11:43:28 GMT -5
Ed: I'd like to hear as much as you are willing/able to provide about your rationale to choose El Capitan for your vote vs the Spinmeister. I think both are lurking in the scummiest fashion. I wanted a vote on record for Captain as well since Spin got most of them so far. If it comes down to it and we get close to lynching someone else, I will consider moving my vote.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 11:45:49 GMT -5
Post by special on Aug 11, 2009 11:45:49 GMT -5
Ed: I'd like to hear as much as you are willing/able to provide about your rationale to choose El Capitan for your vote vs the Spinmeister. This question applies to Pumpjack as well. Did Ed forget to unvote me before voting for Captain Pinkies? Or has Victoria had a bit too much of the sauce? oops Unvote: cookies Vote: Captain pinkie
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 11:47:13 GMT -5
Post by julie on Aug 11, 2009 11:47:13 GMT -5
How did NAF's warning go unheeded and how could it have saved us? To me, NAF's warning went too heeded and doomed us (though the doom wasn't as doomful as all that). To clarify, Town did the best we could given the circumstances. In retrospect, we got Oedipus'd in our attempts to avoid killing someone too obvious, but what ya gonna do? I don't see any evidence that there was more NAF could have done, ore more Town could have done without gaining psychic abilities.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 11:51:06 GMT -5
Post by special on Aug 11, 2009 11:51:06 GMT -5
It's not arguing with NAF that makes me suspicious. It's where she complains that his warning (which went unheeded and could have saved us) was less pro-town than her tiebreaker play, goes on to agree with him that I'm terribly suspicious (not quoted above, but it's in the post above where the quotes are so messy), and then votes Stan. You're saying that Cookies supicion on NAF's warning was 'less pro_town' than her tiebreaker play? So her tiebreaker play is pro-Town? Or they are both anti-Town? Can you be more clear? I think you meant that she's scummy because she didn't trust NAF right off the bat and he turned out to be right? But..then..she couldn't have known that. Also, you think NAF's warning was unheeded. Quite the contrary. NAF's warning was heeded, only it led us to lynch the person we should have avoided. Had we not heeded his warning at all, I think you, HM, or I might have been lynched, and we would have avoided the martyr.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 12:30:36 GMT -5
Post by julie on Aug 11, 2009 12:30:36 GMT -5
I'm going to be at the vet at end of Day, so if someone's got a claim, please hurry!
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 12:40:00 GMT -5
Post by julie on Aug 11, 2009 12:40:00 GMT -5
pumpjack is on the phone with me now saying that he is unable to post. Something is knocking out his browser when he tries. He was in the midst of posting a reply when he tried to add a quote and the whole thing blew up.
If he makes it in time he says he will explain his vote.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 12:46:13 GMT -5
Post by Archangel on Aug 11, 2009 12:46:13 GMT -5
bbbbbbbb It's not arguing with NAF that makes me suspicious. It's where she complains that his warning (which went unheeded and could have saved us) was less pro-town than her tiebreaker play, goes on to agree with him that I'm terribly suspicious (not quoted above, but it's in the post above where the quotes are so messy), and then votes Stan. You're saying that Cookies supicion on NAF's warning was 'less pro_town' than her tiebreaker play? So her tiebreaker play is pro-Town? Or they are both anti-Town? Can you be more clear? I think you meant that she's scummy because she didn't trust NAF right off the bat and he turned out to be right? But..then..she couldn't have known that. Also, you think NAF's warning was unheeded. Quite the contrary. NAF's warning was heeded, only it led us to lynch the person we should have avoided. Had we not heeded his warning at all, I think you, HM, or I might have been lynched, and we would have avoided the martyr. Sorry to be unclear. Cookies implies in that post that NAF's warning was less pro-town than her tiebreaker ploy. I was paraphrasing her, not personally judging one or the other to be anti-town. It's the use of "pro-town" that's bothering me. If he's pro-town, then she thought he was town, in which case his warning would have pro-town motivations. The bloodshed with Stan was bad, but I'm not sure you, me or HM being lynched would have been better (I'm saying this from the point of view that I largely believe the claims of both you and HM now). Your watching ability can be very helpful, I have the only protection ability left that we know of and HM, if she is town, will be a key weapon for us in endgame.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 12:46:44 GMT -5
Post by Archangel on Aug 11, 2009 12:46:44 GMT -5
Oh, and sorry for the bbbbbbbbbbbbbb's, I still have a sticky keyboard.
MHaye, thank you for the explanation on the quoting.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 12:58:34 GMT -5
Post by special on Aug 11, 2009 12:58:34 GMT -5
Sorry to be unclear. Cookies implies in that post that NAF's warning was less pro-town than her tiebreaker ploy. I was paraphrasing her, not personally judging one or the other to be anti-town. It's the use of "pro-town" that's bothering me. If he's pro-town, then she thought he was town, in which case his warning would have pro-town motivations. There's a difference between bing pro-Town and acting pro-Town. Not sure this is needed for this conversation, but i's something to remain aware of.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 13:00:04 GMT -5
Post by special on Aug 11, 2009 13:00:04 GMT -5
Oh, and sorry for the bbbbbbbbbbbbbb's, I still have a sticky keyboard. MHaye, thank you for the explanation on the quoting. you have the oddest keyboards. sometimes you're missing a key vowel, now you're entering extra letters. I wonder if that's a Scum tell......... ;D
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 13:23:14 GMT -5
Post by pumpjack on Aug 11, 2009 13:23:14 GMT -5
Not sure what the problem is/was. When I cleared the cookies I could post but when I try to add Captain Pinkies reply #48 to my quote list my navigator locks-up and I have to clear the cookies again.
Anyway... My vote for Captain Pinkies
While I have no problem with the target of his vote he cast in Day 3, I do have a problem with his method of waiting to the last minutes and voting to be on record as voting. Otherwise, he has only posted to say "hello" and in response to others voting for him. (Pleo in Day 2 and Special Ed in Day 4)
As I share his suspicion of Special Ed, I added my vote to further prod him into a deeper investigation. Soon after my vote, many people voted for Spintari and took away any fear he may have had about being lynched. We haven't yet heard back from him.
That strikes me as scummy. He seems to only be interested in hiding in the shadows to save his own skin and not help the town with his insight.
So while my initial vote was more like "Prod the Lurker", my vote stands on Captain Pinkies to lynch a potential hiding scum.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 13:39:14 GMT -5
Post by pumpjack on Aug 11, 2009 13:39:14 GMT -5
I, also, wanted to add that I think lurkers are best taken care of by the Vig. It puts them on alert and doesn't let scum hide, and doesn't take away from the town's more deliberative hunt for scum.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 13:44:47 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Aug 11, 2009 13:44:47 GMT -5
Hindsight is 20-20 with respect to NAF, but I was quite vocal from the beginning about not liking the mysterious nature/source of his information. What I believe I was smelling was the fact that he was a lying Townie. I challenged his delivery of the intelligence right away, and continued to not trust it right on up until the point that he died.
Judging NAF's decision to lie is not something that should be done until the game is over, but suspecting me because I could smell it is a flimsy.
My motivations for the tie-breaker proposal are not to get anyone to trust me, but to protect our clandestine power roles, and the timing of NAF's information eroded that play. I will be looking very closely at those who took that opportunity to cast suspicion on me.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 13:47:33 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Aug 11, 2009 13:47:33 GMT -5
I, also, wanted to add that I think lurkers are best taken care of by the Vig. It puts them on alert and doesn't let scum hide, and doesn't take away from the town's more deliberative hunt for scum. But the alleged Vig keeps getting allegedly jailed. I appreciate the rationale of your vote for Pinkies, but I'm looking for a contrast between voting for one lurker as opposed to the other. See my previous post about feeling better about all of us congregating on the same lurker to lynch, though at this point it is admittedly too late for me not to think that you might switch just to tell me what I want to hear.
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 13:55:54 GMT -5
Post by Captain Pinkies on Aug 11, 2009 13:55:54 GMT -5
Sorry I have been offline.. I had a friend come into town with his daughter so I have been offline.. All I can say I am a wasted lynch because I am "the most important member of "town", well except for everyone else" I am vanilla... I can understand the desire to take me out and wiil not try and save myself as my purpose...
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 13:56:36 GMT -5
Post by Captain Pinkies on Aug 11, 2009 13:56:36 GMT -5
is to die for town!!
|
|
|
Day 4
Aug 11, 2009 13:59:05 GMT -5
Post by Captain Pinkies on Aug 11, 2009 13:59:05 GMT -5
ohh my search on ed came back as me believing he is town... that is the reason I did not post a case...
|
|
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 4
Aug 11, 2009 14:01:09 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Aug 11, 2009 14:01:09 GMT -5
It's time for the one-hour-remaining Vote Count. Six votes. Two votes. One vote. In the event of a tie, Spintari, who reached six votes first, will be lynched. - Victoria, Late First Lady of Quantom
|
|