|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 8:02:24 GMT -5
Post by cowgirl on May 29, 2007 8:02:24 GMT -5
I'm sure I'm just taking this wrong, so correct me if I am, but from your wording there (with the perhaps' and the use of "we" in the last sentence) you don't know what your own team is? I'm going through the assumptions available to the group. I know who my own team is but y'all have no reason to believe me, so I'm listing the various possibilities (i.e. that capybara and I are crew or pirate) and pointing out that there is no compelling reason to favour one possibility over another.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 9:14:01 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on May 29, 2007 9:14:01 GMT -5
I apologize, but I don't have time to respond individually to everyone. I hope this covers it.
If someone can show me some facts we have on which to base accusations, by all means tell me. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure we have none. Two vanilla crewman have been killed, and going over their posting record won't provide any facts. I was suspicious of capybara because of a gut feeling, not facts. Until we have killed a pirate (barring a slip-up), EVERY accusation/suspicion will be based on instinct. I never said that my opinion was the only possible scenario, only that it's a possible one. More than one person have implied blatantly stated that the pirates would never make the "obvious" move...doesn't anyone see how making statements like this could be dangerous? We've got a lot of experienced players in this game; don't any of you think there's a possibility that the pirates might consider taking the "obvious" move because nobody would believe they did?
I never said my thoughts were the only possible scenario, just that it's a possibility. People keep twisting my words to make it seem like I said "This must be what the pirates did. Vote for capybara, end of story," but I didn't. I've consistently said "here's my opinion, I'm acting on it." I don't know if capybara is a pirate. All I know is that I'm not a pirate and anyone that isn't dead else could be one. We have NOTHING ELSE to go on for now, and until any useful information surfaces I'm going with my gut. If your gut is telling you that I'm a pirate then by all means vote for me, and we can continue our discussions. The more talk the better. We want someone to make a mistake that we can use to our advantage. But please, let's not twist words around to make something out of nothing.
I'm curious of anyone who thinks I'm a pirate--why do you think I'd be taking this course of action? How would it make sense for me to do so?
--FCOD
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 9:17:32 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on May 29, 2007 9:17:32 GMT -5
Nope, I don't think you're contradicting yourself - I think you're using unprovable assumptions, which is something I identified at the beginning as a strategy that can quickly lead to trouble. But I have also stated that I don't think someone's scummy just because I disagree with their strategy. For now I'm assuming you're town (along with everyone else), and figuring out if I want to agree with your analysis or not. For now, all of our assumptions are unprovable. Until a pirate is killed, we won't know anything for sure. Once we get to that point I'll no longer act on my gut feelings. FTR, I don't a pirate vibe from you. Yarr. --FCOD Re-reading through this exchange, I'm kinda getting a pirate vibe from both of you. This conversation (on the whole, not just this quote) seems contrived.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 10:04:11 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 29, 2007 10:04:11 GMT -5
... perhaps we should, as a crew, suggest to Ben (if he exists) a night target. That should be extremely, extremely low priority, though. Although, on reflection, making suggestions to the vigilante didn't do too hot in M2... Interesting suggestion. Can we discuss it? What would be the risks and benefits of such a plan? - Perhaps the player playing Ben might appreciate guidance. - On the other hand, we could very easily be wrong (as we were, as you note, in M2) and direct Ben to kill a crew. - And on another hand, why should Ben listen to us? (Note, that is not a rhetorical question.) - What would it benefit us if (hypothetically) we named a target and that target turned up dead? If it was a pirate, we could be confident that Ben did it - but that would be the case whether we named the target or not, no? Still playing catch up, but another reason to not do this, is that the scum in M2 frequently used this as a method of getting an extra night kill.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 10:16:05 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 29, 2007 10:16:05 GMT -5
I'm curious of anyone who thinks I'm a pirate--why do you think I'd be taking this course of action? How would it make sense for me to do so? --FCOD Well it sounds to me like you made a mistake and are trying really hard to justify it after the fact. And your justifications don't make any sense. The fact that you are posting the same way you did in M2 when in a similar situation isn't really helping. Frankly, I am expecting you to role claim beat cop any second.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 10:17:12 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on May 29, 2007 10:17:12 GMT -5
... perhaps we should, as a crew, suggest to Ben (if he exists) a night target. That should be extremely, extremely low priority, though. Although, on reflection, making suggestions to the vigilante didn't do too hot in M2... Interesting suggestion. Can we discuss it? What would be the risks and benefits of such a plan? - Perhaps the player playing Ben might appreciate guidance. - On the other hand, we could very easily be wrong (as we were, as you note, in M2) and direct Ben to kill a crew. - And on another hand, why should Ben listen to us? (Note, that is not a rhetorical question.) - What would it benefit us if (hypothetically) we named a target and that target turned up dead? If it was a pirate, we could be confident that Ben did it - but that would be the case whether we named the target or not, no? I'm still reading through, but having been the Vigilante myself, I want to put some input here. The main reason for having the town vote for the vigilante kills in M2 was to verify my role claim; that is, IF the town selected scum, and that scum showed up dead, it meant that I was definitely not scum. It also allowed the kill to be treated as a secondary lynch. OTOH, it makes playing that role difficult, because until a pirate is found, there is no certainty that that person is telling the truth. One aspect that I found difficult was when the town eked out a vote with which I did not agree, and I was essentially forced to kill someone that I was quite sure was pro-town, or go against it, and kill someone I was quite sure was scum, only to draw suspicion back to myself. In this case, however, I think it might be useful, because the role is unknown at this point, which means he won't be incriminated if he chooses to or not to follow our advice. Further, if is activated, and he DOES follow our advice, the target can be watched, and he will have at least one person who knows who he is for sure.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 10:44:33 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 29, 2007 10:44:33 GMT -5
I just want to say again, I think that giving the Vig type character a suggestions isn't a great idea. MAYBE as long as we are allowing this person to use their own mind to make the final call it can work. But the scum in M2 took down a couple of people fairly effectivly by using BM as their weapon.
We need to stop giving the scum tools to help them win.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 10:53:32 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on May 29, 2007 10:53:32 GMT -5
Well it sounds to me like you made a mistake and are trying really hard to justify it after the fact. And your justifications don't make any sense. The fact that you are posting the same way you did in M2 when in a similar situation isn't really helping. Frankly, I am expecting you to role claim beat cop any second. What mistake would that be? I've been consistent with my opinion since the beginning of the game. Please tell me what I've said that doesn't make sense. Also, I didn't claim beat cop in M2...I think it was Aguecheek. At least, he talked about doing so on the Mafia board. I didn't follow the game very closely after I was killed, so I don't know if he actually did it. But obviously you don't remember things correctly, and that scares me because you're forming opinions based upon shaky recollections. --FCOD
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 10:59:09 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 29, 2007 10:59:09 GMT -5
Finally got through all the Day 2 posts. Have to say the discussion about who killed fluiddruid aren't especially useful. We have exactly the "wine in front of me" scenario. Once we've killed a pirate, then we can go back and evaluate why/who killed 'druid.
Likewise, the suspicion/votes for Flying Cow of Doom are mostly "I don't agree with your strategy, so you must be scum" variety. Try finding some more convincing reasons to vote for him.
It's early in the Day, so it's hard to make an informed choice on who to vote for yet. But I like to keep the pressure on somebody. so I'll vote ++Vote ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies++ based on my reasoning from Day 1:
1. Skeptical of early both early votes and FOS's. Kind of unavoidable if we're going to play this game, but he wanted to stay out of it. Easy way to stay out of the limelight. 2. Defending Auntbeast and capybara. I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable defending anyone on this point, no knowing who's on my side. And not only defending them, but then goes on to FOS the accusers. 3. Voting for Autolycus because there's "no other appealing alternative". Strikes me as jumping on a wagon.
I'll switch to someone else, once more people have spoken.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 11:05:46 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on May 29, 2007 11:05:46 GMT -5
Does anyone have a link to the rules?
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 11:08:01 GMT -5
Post by Kyrie Eleison on May 29, 2007 11:08:01 GMT -5
I had a thought over the weekend regarding fluiddruid's death, but I hesitated to share it because I think it might lead to ugliness. Nonetheless, I'll put it on the table:
Suppose you had played in previous games with fluiddruid as scum, and now found yourself scum again, but this time fluid is town (er, crew). If you wanted to be able to employ tactics from the previous game, she would pose a problem, as she would already be intimately familiar with them. You might also be worried that she'd be able to identify how you are likely to act when playing a bad guy. In short, you'd have a pretty good reason to get rid of her as soon as possible.
This gets ugly because it brings considerations from an in-progress game into this one, where a large number of players overlap, so, for that reason, I'd love if it if someone could tear apart the idea and show that it doesn't have any merit.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 11:11:18 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on May 29, 2007 11:11:18 GMT -5
I had a thought over the weekend regarding fluiddruid's death, but I hesitated to share it because I think it might lead to ugliness. Nonetheless, I'll put it on the table: Suppose you had played in previous games with fluiddruid as scum, and now found yourself scum again, but this time fluid is town (er, crew). If you wanted to be able to employ tactics from the previous game, she would pose a problem, as she would already be intimately familiar with them. You might also be worried that she'd be able to identify how you are likely to act when playing a bad guy. In short, you'd have a pretty good reason to get rid of her as soon as possible. This gets ugly because it brings considerations from an in-progress game into this one, where a large number of players overlap, so, for that reason, I'd love if it if someone could tear apart the idea and show that it doesn't have any merit. Yeah, I'd like to be able to tear apart the idea, but it's every bit as plausible as any of the other hundreds of reasons why fluiddruid might have been killed. This is why I think we should avoid spending too much effort thinking about the motives behind last night's killing; the death can be twisted into evidence against anyone, if you posit the right motivation.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 11:16:25 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 29, 2007 11:16:25 GMT -5
Oh, I wanted to comment on directing the Vig kills.
In Mafia2, we did that to confirm the Vig's role. We didn't have much choice, the Town couldn't let a Mafia false claim in order to stay alive. I suppose you could argue we just should've killed the claimer. But directing his kills let us verify his claim and essentially gave the Town a second lynch. Of course, the Town lynch isn't an especially precise tool, since the Mafia can subvert it. A directly Vig kill is as useful as a Town lynch--only as good as the Town's players let it be.
For this game, I see nothing wrong with the Town giving suggestions to our night-killer. But only suggestions. There's no reason for the him to follow orders, unless role verification is required.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 11:18:57 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 29, 2007 11:18:57 GMT -5
Does anyone have a link to the rules? Try the Info Forum.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 11:28:59 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on May 29, 2007 11:28:59 GMT -5
quote] Also, I didn't claim beat cop in M2...I think it was Aguecheek. At least, he talked about doing so on the Mafia board. No, this is true. You role claimed Miller, not beat cop. I think it's interesting that you chose not to include this information in your response to NAF, here - it seems a bit like you're trying awfully hard to discredit NAF. It's a bit as if he mentioned that you were wearing a red sweater, and you jumped up quickly to note that you were not wearing a red sweater, leaving aside the fact that you were wearing a red sweatshirt. My memory of the last game is still pretty fresh, and while I still can't decide whether or not it's good form to bring this up at this stage, I am struck by how closely your moves in this game so far match your moves in M2. To wit: In M2, you did three things that I pointed out to the town as justification for my "suspicion" of you (which was fake then, but real now): - You expressed suspicion of a player from a previous game (sturmhauke), at one point voting for him because he was still alive after the first night. - You voted for a player who was inexperienced and asking a lot of questions about how to play, after others had already expressed the opinion that the player in question (chrisk) was asking questions he shouldn't have been asking. - You voted for Autolycus, essentially for being Autolycus. In this game: - You made a point of posting about a player from a previous game ( me), and directed suspicion at me (although admittedly you didn't vote for me). - You voted for a player who was inexperienced and asking a lot of questions about how to play, after others had already expressed the opinion that the player in question ( capybara) was asking questions she shouldn't have been asking. - You voted for Autolycus, essentially for being Autolycus. This Day, you've been what I consider sketchy since your very first post. For the moment, I'd like to +++vote FlyingCowofDoom+++
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 11:31:02 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 29, 2007 11:31:02 GMT -5
Well it sounds to me like you made a mistake and are trying really hard to justify it after the fact. And your justifications don't make any sense. The fact that you are posting the same way you did in M2 when in a similar situation isn't really helping. Frankly, I am expecting you to role claim beat cop any second. What mistake would that be? I've been consistent with my opinion since the beginning of the game. Please tell me what I've said that doesn't make sense. Also, I didn't claim beat cop in M2...I think it was Aguecheek. At least, he talked about doing so on the Mafia board. I didn't follow the game very closely after I was killed, so I don't know if he actually did it. But obviously you don't remember things correctly, and that scares me because you're forming opinions based upon shaky recollections. --FCOD Ok, so the beat cop thing was a joke and wasn't meant to be taken literally. I should have used a smilie or something. I am, I suppose, a bit predisposed to find you scummy, but I am a bit predisposed to find storyteller scummy too and I am not having this problem with him. Here is my thing. I call you out for being scummy because you don't post enough on day one. And honestly you didn't post a lot on day on Day 1, and I still think your reasoning for not posting is weak. Then Gad puts together his list of townie tells. Which says that townies play a bit more aggressively and post a lot. Suddenly Day 2 roles around and you are posting a lot and aggressively going after cappy (although I will admit you went after her before) based on the fact that Fluid was the night kill choice. Now you were scum. I think you know that this is a horrible plan for the scum, if anything they are going to go out of their way to pick someone who cast no suspicion on them at all. So the bit that doesn't make sense is your post about cappy that I (and apparently Storyteller) quoted, because I can't believe that the scum would actually be that stupid. Then your justification of said post, that it was the scum pulling and exceptionally brilliant double bluff felt like backpedaling to me, and was very WIFOM. Then cowgirl and you have an exchange where first you seem to be questioning her status, and then say that you don't think she is scum. (I believe you actually said "I don't get a pirate vibe from you, Yarr.) And maybe this is weak but, this is exactly what Storyteller said he would do to gain the trust of people who were starting to twig him as scum. As for the mistake you made, I was referring to pushing to hard too fast for Cappy's lynch on flimsy evidence. Everything you have posted since then seems designed to spin that initial post away from what it's original intention clearly (to me) was, an attempt to lynch cappy. I admit, none of this is particularly strong on it's own. But taken together it makes you the scummiest person on this ship. Sorry, but that's just how I feel. Now if everyone else looks at you and says "NAF, your nuts" I will back down and look for someone else, because as I said, I seem to be more predisposed to find you scummy than most. And you can't be the only pirate on the ship. But for now, my vote stays with you.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 11:49:43 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 29, 2007 11:49:43 GMT -5
BTW, I know it is still early in the day but there are a few votes out there.
MAL CAN WE GET A VOTE COUNT?
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 12:04:40 GMT -5
Post by Gadarene on May 29, 2007 12:04:40 GMT -5
Heh. I just came in here to ask for a vote count. Damn you, NAF!! *shakes fist*
(Work's intermittently very busy today, so I don't have much time to post, but I've been following the discussion.)
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 12:32:04 GMT -5
Post by Mad The Swine on May 29, 2007 12:32:04 GMT -5
Back from my weekend,will catch up later today.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 12:40:02 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on May 29, 2007 12:40:02 GMT -5
Okay, finally caught up and I'll be brief:
1) I agree with what seems to be the general thought, that we have a "wine in front of me" scenario with regard to who killed fluiddruid. The bottom line, as others have said, is that we HAVE to assume the pirates are as smart as any of us, and will very likely result in smarter moves because they get to strategize openly with eachother at night... two-heads being better than one and all that. IOW, it should be noted, but we shouldn't use it as a major part of evidence to convict or exonerate anyone at this point.
2) As I said before the day ended yesterday, I felt like the evidence against capybara was weak even though I was the one who started the wagon (here's looking at YOU FCoD for claiming otherwise). I'm not convinced that she's definitely pro-town, as I'm unsure of what last night's scenario means. I'll remain slightly suspicious of her, but because I feel like I have better leads today, I'm not inclined to persue her lynch at this point.
3) As others have pointed out, I find FCoD to be very suspicious for reasons others have laid out, plus the one I mentioned in point 2. He's definitely being aggresive, but it seems disingenuous, but I'm not sure enough to put my vote there yet. Instead, I'll keep a close eye on him, and throw a big ol' FOS on FCoD at him instead.
4) I'm also suspicious of MHaye. He was pinging my suspiciometer yesterday, but without a smoking gun. Today he has a slip, which he admittedly corrected, but I'm not so easily willing to forgive it as everyone else is. Don't forget that nesta was caught in M2 and Lemur was caught in M3 for similar mistakes. Knowing, as Gadarene laid out, that a "correcting" post would make it look more crew, rather than ignoring it, is it a ploy to look like a sloppy crewman? If he IS crew, why is he looking so closely at his posts for such a tell anyway? Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into his motivations, but combined with my somewhat mild suspicion of him yesterday, and that post in particular, I'm going to go ahead and Vote MHaye, until either FCoD gives a better smoking gun, or someone else grows considerably.
I'm also feeling a little fishy about NAF and HockeyMonkey, but I can't substatiate either of those suspicions at this time.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 12:40:45 GMT -5
Post by cowgirl on May 29, 2007 12:40:45 GMT -5
My vote count, please correct as necessary:
FCOD - 2 (storyteller, NAF) Cookies - 1 (Pleonast) hockeymonkey - 1 (Lakai) ArizonaTeach - 1 (zuma) capybara - 1 (FCOD)
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 12:42:51 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on May 29, 2007 12:42:51 GMT -5
My vote count, please correct as necessary: FCOD - 2 (storyteller, NAF) Cookies - 1 (Pleonast) hockeymonkey - 1 (Lakai) ArizonaTeach - 1 (zuma) capybara - 1 (FCOD) Hey! You missed my vote for MHaye. Nevermind that you couldn't have possibly known because I posted it only seconds before this.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 12:49:53 GMT -5
Post by Malacandra on May 29, 2007 12:49:53 GMT -5
My vote count, please correct as necessary: FCOD - 2 (storyteller, NAF) Cookies - 1 (Pleonast) hockeymonkey - 1 (Lakai) ArizonaTeach - 1 (zuma) capybara - 1 (FCOD) Thanks. I've just logged on for five minutes before going out, haven't time to count right now.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 12:50:01 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 29, 2007 12:50:01 GMT -5
4) I'm also suspicious of MHaye. He was pinging my suspiciometer yesterday, but without a smoking gun. Today he has a slip, which he admittedly corrected, but I'm not so easily willing to forgive it as everyone else is. Don't forget that nesta was caught in M2 and Lemur was caught in M3 for similar mistakes. Knowing, as Gadarene laid out, that a "correcting" post would make it look more crew, rather than ignoring it, is it a ploy to look like a sloppy crewman? If he IS crew, why is he looking so closely at his posts for such a tell anyway? Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into his motivations, but combined with my somewhat mild suspicion of him yesterday, and that post in particular, I'm going to go ahead and Vote MHaye, until either FCoD gives a better smoking gun, or someone else grows considerably. Color removed. Wow, MHaye was frankly off my radar, but that is interesting. Especially when you consider Nesta and Lemur. FOS on MHaye. I need to go back and look at you again.
|
|
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 Two
May 29, 2007 12:50:49 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on May 29, 2007 12:50:49 GMT -5
4) I'm also suspicious of MHaye. He was pinging my suspiciometer yesterday, but without a smoking gun. Today he has a slip, which he admittedly corrected, but I'm not so easily willing to forgive it as everyone else is. Don't forget that nesta was caught in M2 and Lemur was caught in M3 for similar mistakes. Knowing, as Gadarene laid out, that a "correcting" post would make it look more crew, rather than ignoring it, is it a ploy to look like a sloppy crewman? If he IS crew, why is he looking so closely at his posts for such a tell anyway? Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into his motivations, but combined with my somewhat mild suspicion of him yesterday, and that post in particular, I'm going to go ahead and Vote MHaye, until either FCoD gives a better smoking gun, or someone else grows considerably. (Bleached to avoid double-counting). Apply Murphy's Law to proofreading. When is the worst possible time to find a mistake in a piece of writing? Now you know why I posted the correction. And you know? That works whether I'm town, or Captain Flint himself. (I'm town. Just so's you know.) Time to get some tea and read the thread for pointers.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 12:58:17 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on May 29, 2007 12:58:17 GMT -5
Oh, another point I forgot to mention. Another reason I'm loathe to put too much analysis into why fluiddruid was killed is because it was the first night. That is, knowing we don't have strong leads, taking out strong players early, regardless of at whom they pointed FOSs, will result in the least amount of information for the crew, and the least amount of traceable suspicion back to the pirates. That is, the pirates would have been dumb to go after someone they didn't think was a good and/or experienced player because they have the potential of providing better analysis. Second, an experienced player, that is known to have played scum well, seems to be the best target because they'll have insight into their own thought process that even a mod with perfect information may not have. This results in a VERY short list consisting of only fluiddruid and Storyteller. Further, figuring that Storyteller was more likely to be protected or watched based on the town discussion (assuming equal chance of anyone being a power role, because there were few tells yesterday), in retrospect, it's little surprise that fluiddruid was targetted.
Essentially, my point is that even when we DO get a pirate and or at least more information, there may not be any motivation behind fluiddruid's death at all with regard to framing or shifting blame. In fact, I'm going to have to look back and see who is deliberately trying to raise a lot of discussion about it, because I think it may be an attempt by the pirates to look helpful, while deliberately obfuscating the facts because ANY conclusions drawn from her death could very well be a wild goose chase.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 13:04:28 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on May 29, 2007 13:04:28 GMT -5
Well, I don't think I can make my position any clearer. You both have some good points, although they are circumstantial. I admit that I should have mentioned I claimed Miller in M2, but my point was that NAF was not remembering things correctly (which would be true if he wasn't making a joke) and we should be careful about making judgements based on unclear memories. M2 was my first time playing this game, ever. I jumped on bandwagons constantly, and didn't really play that well. Voting for sturmhauke and chrisk were bandwagon votes. So was Autolycus, for that matter, but let's not forget I wasn't the only one. In this game, I was the first to vote for capybara, on admittedly weak reasons (as was everyone's first vote). I switched to Autolycus because I thought it was suspicious that he wasn't posting, and switched back after I realized it was a bad decision. Sure, the situations were similar, but the contexts are different. Pointing out that you're good at this game is not the same thing as accusing you of being a pirate. I tried to make it clear that I wasn't suspicious of you. I guess I should have kept my mouth shut. NAF, I think I agree with you that you've had it out for me . I didn't understand you were trying to make a joke with the line about the beat cop, so I retract my attempt to discredit you. If my explanation for not posting much on Day One is not sufficient for you, I'm sorry, but I don't another one. I had nothing to say at the time. Today I have developed my opinion further, and I've also been FoS'ed more than once so I have been responding. I don't see how what I've done is agressive. Perhaps I've been agressively defending myself, but I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I have not once tried to get others to vote for capy. I simply stated my opinions as a possibilty and voted according to my feeling. Is voting for someone now considered to be aggressively pushing for their lynch? I was under the impression that early votes for a player might push them to talk more and increase the amount of information in the game. I already said I didn't want the day to end early and I'd retract my vote if a bandwagon formed. I'm not pushing anyone to do anything, I'm just voting the way I think is best. Storyteller and NAF, you are both starting to make me nervous. I can't ignore the feeling that you both have it out for me, especially since in my opinion the basis on which you're accusing me is flimsy. Blaster Master, you hadn't even posted anything relevant in the thread when I voted for capy. I voted for her on May 23 at 10:00pm EDT; your first relevant post was during the afternoon of May 24. I'm not accusing you of being misleading, just correcting an error. [Afterthought: I just realized you might be referring to the Google thread, which I did not look through. If so, I still voted for capy on my own accord, having not paid much attention to the Google thread.] --FCOD
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 13:09:28 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on May 29, 2007 13:09:28 GMT -5
4) I'm also suspicious of MHaye. He was pinging my suspiciometer yesterday, but without a smoking gun. Today he has a slip, which he admittedly corrected, but I'm not so easily willing to forgive it as everyone else is. Don't forget that nesta was caught in M2 and Lemur was caught in M3 for similar mistakes. Knowing, as Gadarene laid out, that a "correcting" post would make it look more crew, rather than ignoring it, is it a ploy to look like a sloppy crewman? If he IS crew, why is he looking so closely at his posts for such a tell anyway? Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into his motivations, but combined with my somewhat mild suspicion of him yesterday, and that post in particular, I'm going to go ahead and Vote MHaye, until either FCoD gives a better smoking gun, or someone else grows considerably. (Bleached to avoid double-counting). Apply Murphy's Law to proofreading. When is the worst possible time to find a mistake in a piece of writing? Now you know why I posted the correction. And you know? That works whether I'm town, or Captain Flint himself. (I'm town. Just so's you know.) Time to get some tea and read the thread for pointers. I understand that that kind of mistake is also likely to be made by a crewman. However, in my estimation, I think it's more likely to be made by scum. That means that, combined with my mild suspicion yesterday, you're still only around 55-60% likely to be scum in my mind, but considering that that's at least twice as likely as anyone else (depending on the number of pirates out there, which I haven't crunched any numbers on to try and hazard a guess at). Thus, a vote for you, in my estimation at this point, provides the best chance of hitting a pirate, even if it still isn't very good. Regardless, I don't expect the vote to necessarily "stick" and get you lynched, with all the attention FCoD is garnering, but I'm hoping it will at least draw a more critical eye on you from others. Time permitting, I will go through your old posts again and re-evaluate in that light.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 13:19:22 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on May 29, 2007 13:19:22 GMT -5
Blaster Master, you hadn't even posted anything relevant in the thread when I voted for capy. I voted for her on May 23 at 10:00pm EDT; your first relevant post was during the afternoon of May 24. I'm not accusing you of being misleading, just correcting an error. [Afterthought: I just realized you might be referring to the Google thread, which I did not look through. If so, I still voted for capy on my own accord, having not paid much attention to the Google thread.] Okay, my apologies, you had voted and unvoted for capybara prior to my vote for her. I was going by the final vote, in which were were third to jump back on after mine and fluiddruid's. Still, it is at least a little misleading to claim to be the first to vote for her after unvoting, voting for Autolycus, and then voting back when you see that it's finally taking... it seems a little bandwagony to me.
|
|
|
Day Two
May 29, 2007 13:19:23 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 29, 2007 13:19:23 GMT -5
FCoD, wow. I really thought that if I turned up the pressure you would crack but...well you have made me doubt my judgment of you as scum.
Frankly it was this part here:
That did it. There is just an air of desperation/resignation in that passage that I have only seen in townie posts. I suppose it is the "townie tone" that Gad reffered to in Day One.
I am going to back off a bit. I am NOT letting you off the hook for your scummy behavior, but I will unvote FCoD.
|
|