Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Jun 3, 2010 2:31:52 GMT -5
hurricane strenght is dependent on the contingent size of martians currently on the earth. And the number of pirates is directly proportional to global warming. We need more pirates; Pirates vs GWAnd if you need a themesong for the fight against global warming here one: www.macjams.com/song/61348
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Jun 3, 2010 9:58:37 GMT -5
Total, can you please be more specific? Your PM may very well say this, but does it indicate that it is your win condition? Sure My wincon is Win Condition: You win when the Master of the Deck is dead, all members of the House of Chains have been eliminated, and your Primary Clan cannot be prevented from killing all other players before all Primary Members of the clan itself is wiped out.mine wasn't in italics. don't know if that changes things or not but just thought we should be totally open. crap, maybe i am an unknown martian pirate searching for my clan of unknown buccaneers. ooh ooh ed ask this question tomorrow. "are you, or have you ever been, a martian pirate?" followed up the next day with: "is it true that you still wear those stupid puffy shirts on your intergalactic excursions?" off to find that damn tin foil hat that i have stored away somewhere.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 10:33:45 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Jun 3, 2010 10:33:45 GMT -5
peeker, your endless stream of complaints about Ed are pointless unless you suggest a reasonable alternative to how he use his power.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 10:45:00 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jun 3, 2010 10:45:00 GMT -5
Actually they get warm faster, less mass, mC pdT/dt with a bit of variability associated with the smaller surface area exposed to the convective environment. You just don't notice because you drink them faster. Glugg, glugg. My brain aspolode. <font style="font-size: 12px;"> peeker, your endless stream of complaints about Ed are pointless unless you suggest a reasonable alternative to how he use his power. You know, even for the usual peek noise machine, he's being unusually randomly chatty this game, and has generally stayed off-point except to complain before dodging back to the relative security of the non-sequitur. I'm not sure what to make of it at all, although his behavior is only vaguely suspicious to me at this point.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 10:49:51 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 3, 2010 10:49:51 GMT -5
Note to all of you who admin offsite discussion boards for the game. In addition to the author account that we have registered to your sites we would like to add an account called "watcher" so that the people who are following along spoiled can keep up with what is going on.
Feel free to make the watcher account unable to post, if you feel that is necessary, but please approve the account creation and allow it access to view the boards.
Thanks!
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 11:38:49 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jun 3, 2010 11:38:49 GMT -5
peeker, your endless stream of complaints about Ed are pointless unless you suggest a reasonable alternative to how he use his power. c'mon pleo. i always thought this lie detector stuff is a bunch of hooie. my opinion, of course. is it properly punctuated. is it in italics. is it all in cap or only in lower case. is there an extra space somewhere that i really am not going to have the time to microanalyze. ok, i do have the time but choose not to spend a lot of time on spacing. you think ed is what he says he is. no problemo. i just think that this type of role, as it is described, is a wee bit over rated. and your blind faith seems a wee bit odd. if ed is what he says he is why doesn't he just tell us what he's got? but this suggestion of sending him a private pm and letting him decide seemed kind of off. and people supporting that seem to be a little off as well. no offense intended. and i am sure none was received. at least i hope not. ed?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 11:47:10 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jun 3, 2010 11:47:10 GMT -5
Actually they get warm faster, less mass, mC pdT/dt with a bit of variability associated with the smaller surface area exposed to the convective environment. You just don't notice because you drink them faster. Glugg, glugg. My brain aspolode. <font style="font-size: 12px;"> peeker, your endless stream of complaints about Ed are pointless unless you suggest a reasonable alternative to how he use his power. You know, even for the usual peek noise machine, he's being unusually randomly chatty this game, and has generally stayed off-point except to complain before dodging back to the relative security of the non-sequitur. I'm not sure what to make of it at all, although his behavior is only vaguely suspicious to me at this point. 'kay this kind of irks me. so i am unemployed and have a TON more free times these days. and maybe i am the only one. but jeebus the amount of pms are out of this fracking world. i mean normally you get 4 - 8 pages of game thread and a pm or two to attend to. this fucker has an above average amount of game thread pages as well as well as over 300 pms. and shit i've deleted a whole crap load of them. fuck who wouldn't be chatty. whoops, i mean babbly.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 11:50:36 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Jun 3, 2010 11:50:36 GMT -5
I don't trust Ed, as should be clear from my earlier interactions with him. In fact that's why I want him to use his power. He made a claim, now he has to live up to it. He has to give us something. (And Ed, you can't hold out on us too long.) But you, peeker, seem to prefer that Ed not use his power at all. Or that we completely discredit it before it's tested. Why? If Ed is lying, then let him make his lies, and then we lynch him. but this suggestion of sending him a private pm and letting him decide seemed kind of off. and people supporting that seem to be a little off as well. no offense intended. and i am sure none was received. at least i hope not. Who's supporting that? Name names.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 12:07:47 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jun 3, 2010 12:07:47 GMT -5
I don't trust Ed, as should be clear from my earlier interactions with him. In fact that's why I want him to use his power. He made a claim, now he has to live up to it. He has to give us something. (And Ed, you can't hold out on us too long.) But you, peeker, seem to prefer that Ed not use his power at all. Or that we completely discredit it before it's tested. Why? If Ed is lying, then let him make his lies, and then we lynch him. but this suggestion of sending him a private pm and letting him decide seemed kind of off. and people supporting that seem to be a little off as well. no offense intended. and i am sure none was received. at least i hope not. Who's supporting that? Name names. i think everyone should use their powers as they see fit. i think i was ed who suggested that we send him pms so that he could independently verify the veracity of what we said. yeh, its D2.69 (don't go there ulla) yeh, so there's a name for you pleo. the person you are placing so much faith in. is it just me or did that not seem to be odd bodkins?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 12:21:26 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Jun 3, 2010 12:21:26 GMT -5
I don't trust Ed, as should be clear from my earlier interactions with him. In fact that's why I want him to use his power. He made a claim, now he has to live up to it. He has to give us something. (And Ed, you can't hold out on us too long.) But you, peeker, seem to prefer that Ed not use his power at all. Or that we completely discredit it before it's tested. Why? If Ed is lying, then let him make his lies, and then we lynch him. Who's supporting that? Name names. i think everyone should use their powers as they see fit. i think i was ed who suggested that we send him pms so that he could independently verify the veracity of what we said. yeh, its D2.69 (don't go there ulla) yeh, so there's a name for you pleo. the person you are placing so much faith in. is it just me or did that not seem to be odd bodkins? Did you miss the part where I said "I don't trust Ed"? You even quoted it yourself. If you really think "everyone should use their powers as they see fit", then why have you been incessantly complaining about how he's using it? You said "people supporting that". Do you really use "people" to mean one person? Why are you misrepresenting my clearly stated opinion and backpedaling on what you previously said? I hope you're more convincing in your private channels because you're looking very unreliable here.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 12:21:30 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jun 3, 2010 12:21:30 GMT -5
i just think that this type of role, as it is described, is a wee bit over rated. and your blind faith seems a wee bit odd. You are assuming his faith is blind; what makes you so sure? What if his faith has only partial blinders on, enough to know that Ed is telling the truth about his power, if not his allegiances (wow, that word looks wrong no matter how I spell it)?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 12:21:50 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jun 3, 2010 12:21:50 GMT -5
Sorry, that should be "if unsure about his allegiances"
And that word still looks wrong.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 13:10:06 GMT -5
Post by moodymitchy on Jun 3, 2010 13:10:06 GMT -5
I'm happy to give SPECIAL ED as many statements or answers as might be requested of me.
What I do wonder though it that if we don't get publication of his results... are we not then being led down a blind alley unless we may be a member of a Clan with him.
I mean most of us are voting to lynch MALAHOTH Today on what might appear to be gossip or hearsay from others but, as for now it's survival of the fittest then we're all happy with that.
I would at some point like to see the results of these "virtual" polygraph tests... but like I say am happy to comply with them at the moment.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 14:15:39 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Jun 3, 2010 14:15:39 GMT -5
i think everyone should use their powers as they see fit. i think i was ed who suggested that we send him pms so that he could independently verify the veracity of what we said. yeh, its D2.69 (don't go there ulla) yeh, so there's a name for you pleo. the person you are placing so much faith in. is it just me or did that not seem to be odd bodkins? Did you miss the part where I said "I don't trust Ed"? You even quoted it yourself. If you really think "everyone should use their powers as they see fit", then why have you been incessantly complaining about how he's using it? You said "people supporting that". Do you really use "people" to mean one person? Why are you misrepresenting my clearly stated opinion and backpedaling on what you previously said? I hope you're more convincing in your private channels because you're looking very unreliable here. into the breach said the 93. what i was reading from you is that ed gets some sort of jail freebie card. i understand that all of us are probably equal in the suspicion eyes. but the tenor seemed to suggest that we should trust ed until such time that it becomes apparant that we can't trust him sorry, folks. i play this like old school russia. you are guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until proven guilty. you got a problem with that approach? so ed wanting to do whatever ed is up to want us to send pms for him to unilaterally decide their truthfullness. you really have no problem with that? just kind of curious. and i am not back pedalling an inch in that assessment.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 15:01:17 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Jun 3, 2010 15:01:17 GMT -5
Did you miss the part where I said "I don't trust Ed"? You even quoted it yourself. If you really think "everyone should use their powers as they see fit", then why have you been incessantly complaining about how he's using it? You said "people supporting that". Do you really use "people" to mean one person? Why are you misrepresenting my clearly stated opinion and backpedaling on what you previously said? I hope you're more convincing in your private channels because you're looking very unreliable here. into the breach said the 93. what i was reading from you is that ed gets some sort of jail freebie card. i understand that all of us are probably equal in the suspicion eyes. but the tenor seemed to suggest that we should trust ed until such time that it becomes apparant that we can't trust him sorry, folks. i play this like old school russia. you are guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until proven guilty. you got a problem with that approach? so ed wanting to do whatever ed is up to want us to send pms for him to unilaterally decide their truthfullness. you really have no problem with that? just kind of curious. I do have a problem with Ed working on on private messages, which is why I have not given any support for it. In fact, I don't think anyone except Ed has shown support for it, which it makes it strange why you keep harping on it. I want Ed to use his power, so that if he's lying we can lynch him easily. You've been discouraging him from using his power (except when you said he can use his power however he wants), which kind of makes it hard to catch him in a lie. Or gain useful info if he's not lying. No one that I can tell is trusting Ed. Why do you keep thinking that we are?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 15:11:44 GMT -5
Post by Holy Moley! on Jun 3, 2010 15:11:44 GMT -5
Peeker - this is a Kafka-esque game. "Guilt" and "Innocence" may not be so easily defined.
Mitch - regarding the "reasons" for voting Malahoth, speak for yourself! Mine have nothing to do with the rumours surrounding him. I'm voting for him for three reasons specifically: 1) Suspicious based on the quote I pasted into my voting post. 2) Clan loyalty. 3) Timing - this is a good opportunity to get someone gone who I want gone.
Also, I'd hardly say that Ed is having a free ride so far. He was damn near lynched yesterday. I have personally been watching him very closely indeed. (Talking of which, Ed, do you realise that that underwear adds at least ten pounds? Just sayin'.)
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 15:30:54 GMT -5
Post by The Authors on Jun 3, 2010 15:30:54 GMT -5
Vote count time?
Mahaloth (10) : DarkCookies 093, Total Lost 099, Honest Moley 106, Drain bead 112, Pleonast 127, Moody Mitchy 138, peekercpa 139, BillMc 140, sinjin 168, Mister Blockey 178 DarkCookies (1) : Mahaloth 115 Special Ed (1) : Zeriel 153 Storyteller (1) : SisterCoyote 058 BillMc 061 Captain Pinkies (0) : Moody Mitchy 128
Not voting (9) Captain Pinkies, Fisheroo, Guiri, nphase, Oredigger, Special Ed, Storyteller, timmyfellinthewell, zuma
3½ hours until Dusk.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 16:06:29 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 3, 2010 16:06:29 GMT -5
Peeker - this is a Kafka-esque game. "Guilt" and "Innocence" may not be so easily defined. This may well be the coolest thing anyone has said about any game I have had a hand in.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 16:44:08 GMT -5
Post by special on Jun 3, 2010 16:44:08 GMT -5
Yes, I did allow people to send me PMs instead of publcly posting what they wanted truth tested.
There is a simple reason for that.
1. Everyone seems to take it on faith that the Chains want to kill those of us who are non-Chains. 1a. This may be true. 1b. This may not be true. (if for example, the Chains need each other dead instead of us. Maybe I'm too hung up on the 'eliminated' vs 'dead' issue.) 2. If it is not true, then a Chain might have PM'd me their win condition and allowed me to test it to see if it was true. 2b. They might not have anted to admit to Chainhood publicly. 2c. This might have been in their best interests to get that fact out into the public. 3. Wouldn't that have been some useful information to have?
Alas, no one PM'd me a win condition any different from any that I have seen. So, I'd have to assume that the Chain win condition isn't outside of what everyone seems to be assuming.
But it was worth a shot.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jun 3, 2010 19:05:12 GMT -5
Post by The Authors on Jun 3, 2010 19:05:12 GMT -5
Day 2 is over. Night 2 will be along shortly.
|
|