|
Post by storyteller0910 on Sept 30, 2010 18:05:25 GMT -5
I think we are clear:
The Masons are 100% certain that their watcher was not redirected.
The Masons are not 100% certain that any individual player intended to target Batman versus was redirected to do so.
George, et al - is this summary accurate?
|
|
|
Post by severe delays on Sept 30, 2010 18:05:40 GMT -5
Then you reiterated that The 100% Surety... statement refers to the fact that there exists evidence in this thread which confirms that Batman was the intended target AND was the actual target of whatever power determined who visited him. I'm not going to draw a circle with red arrows around it, but it's there and can be explained at a later date. Now you want people to tell you if they targeted Dexter, because maybe that would show that they were redirected too? It seems like you're back to slightly less than 100% certain now. Would you kindly mind picking one story and sticking to it? I can sort of see what you are saying Stay Puft but I'm having a hard time seeing the mechanics of it. I agree that it could well be that the Mods are 100% truthfully passing information on but that the source of the information is not 100% pro-Town. And that's without even considering the impact of redirectors. It would help if we knew the wording of the message given to the masons. You (or someone else, I forget) pointed out a while back that knowing the absolute source of the information would help. So if it was a note dropped on the ground outside the Masons' Lodge then that's more suspicious because it's "inside" the game. I agree with Curious George that information from "outside" the game such as PMs from the Mods about roles are completely unlikely to be untruthful. Curious George: I had previously thought that you were saying that the information came directly from "outside" the game via a Mod PM or post to your forum. Can you confirm if that is right or did the message seem to be more "inside" the game like a dropped note of unknown provenance? The Corinthian: You've said a couple of times that you are 100% sure of something and recently that evidence from the thread is helping you to reach your conclusions. Unless you have some sort of polygraph hooked up to stress-test our typing rate then how can that be? The possibility (or probability) of redirections all over the place seems very strong. I don't think that asking for denials of visiting Bill McBatman* and then comparing those to your list can be the only thing that can be convincing you. If it is safe to do so then could you please clarify on why you are so certain about what is going on? Because I'm sure as hell confused! *btw Curious George, you seem to have forgotten me also. I said I didn't visit Bill McBatman on Night 2 and as far as I know (what with not playing at the time) my character didn't visit anyone on Night 1 either.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Sept 30, 2010 18:12:23 GMT -5
ok. let me make it clear for the rest of the clan.
batman was our intended target. i am 100 percent sure that the results that we got were related to batman, if we are to believe our mod. i am also 100 percent sure that everything that we have shared is the information that the mod (blockey) gave us. we know, based on information from the mod, if it is to be believed, that ror and story did in fact visit batty as they have said. additionally, zed did not. puffy, gir and total were also there if we are to believe our mod.
additionally i'll toss this out there just to screw with the folks.
we also know that batty did in fact visit buddy. hence our absolute belief in his results.
like i said, it was information overload in the mason house toDay.
we have no clue what folks were doing, but that's how it panned out.
anyone ever seen a royal flush in person?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Sept 30, 2010 18:17:02 GMT -5
I think we are clear: The Masons are 100% certain that their watcher was not redirected. The Masons are not 100% certain that any individual player intended to target Batman versus was redirected to do so. George, et al - is this summary accurate? no words were better spoken. and in case cookies and puffy get piles over it. yes, absolutely.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Sept 30, 2010 18:18:38 GMT -5
yeh, bathory you weren't there either.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 30, 2010 18:20:13 GMT -5
zed did not. puffy, gir and total were also there if we are to believe our mod. SQUEEK. (People are not asking you to disbelieve the mod.) sigh.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Sept 30, 2010 18:33:33 GMT -5
and bathory apparantly blockey was not in a talkative mood.
it was along the lines of:
xxxxx was visited by a, b, c, d and e.
i tell you, it was a full fracking house.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Sept 30, 2010 19:02:51 GMT -5
So... if I may introduce the touchy subject... at what point do we talk about what sorts of folks might be likely to visit a declared Detective?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Sept 30, 2010 19:10:23 GMT -5
So... if I may introduce the touchy subject... at what point do we talk about what sorts of folks might be likely to visit a declared Detective? hee hee story you are so funny and crack me up. we are supposed to continue talking about whether the mods are lying to us or not. fucking whippersnapper.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Sept 30, 2010 19:16:42 GMT -5
So... if I may introduce the touchy subject... at what point do we talk about what sorts of folks might be likely to visit a declared Detective? Not today. That's for sure. Tomorrow would be a GREAT day for it though. Just in case I'm dead and not around to start the conversation.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Sept 30, 2010 19:17:57 GMT -5
Heh.
No, but seriously.
Because I targeted Batman intentionally (and wasn't redirected, as far as I know). And I am reasonably confident that my action was successful.
Since the action was a one-shot, I think it's probably time to share what I did. I used an item that would ensure that Batman's intended action, whatever it was, would be successful and correctly targeted. This suggests to me that:
(1) There is probably an anti-Town role-blocker, else why give me this ability; and (2) There is almost certainly an anti-Town redirector, else why give me this ability.
I may have additional devices with other powers; then again, I may not. I hope you understand that, for now at least, that's all you get to know about that.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Sept 30, 2010 19:22:53 GMT -5
BOLDING ADDED. I was refering to the power that gave us the information. I'm sorry that you insist on being obtuse. Maybe you should try reading for comprehension.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Sept 30, 2010 19:23:36 GMT -5
I think we are clear: The Masons are 100% certain that their watcher was not redirected. The Masons are not 100% certain that any individual player intended to target Batman versus was redirected to do so. George, et al - is this summary accurate? This Summary is 100% accurate. I feel like i've been saying this the whole time.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Sept 30, 2010 19:23:44 GMT -5
For flying fuck's sake. "Batman was the intended target AND was the actual target of whatever power determined who visited him."repeat: "whatever power determined who visited him."In other words, the power that determined who visited Batman--ie, the mason watcher--intended to and ended up targetting (watching) Batman. "The I can't comment on redirections... statement refers specifically players being redirected to or away from batman."This is referring to the fact that he can't comment on whether or not the other players who targetted Batman (ie, you and the rest of the guest list) were redirected or not. Because he doesn't know that. This is getting aggravating. OK, I can see how I may have misinterpreted the first quote here. I had trouble with the "whatever power determined who visited him" part. I will withdraw my accusations as they regard this point specifically.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Sept 30, 2010 19:24:54 GMT -5
SQUEEK (Either the center of the Nexus, or Nexus-proof ) The latter, I follow. I'm lost on how the former conclusion could be drawn. Chitter... Little Indian Girl: It doesn't seem like people understand what a Nexus does. A nexus doesn't suck all the the actions onto themselves and then redirect it to another player. It is a passive ability that they have no control over. They can be either aware or unaware that they are a nexus.... What occurs is that ANY ACTIONS TARGETING THEM happen to someone else instead. So if Player A is a nexus and he is roleblocked and investigated, then Player B would be roleblocked and Player C would be investigated. OR Player B would be roleblocked AND investigated... depending on how the mod tweaked the power. So in this case, if say.... Dexter were a Nexus: 1. He might not know he is one. 2. Anything targeting him could have been sent to Batman instead. 3. All actions not targeting him would be unaffected. Again... I think we are hearing hooves and seeing stripes.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Sept 30, 2010 19:25:16 GMT -5
Heh. No, but seriously. Because I targeted Batman intentionally (and wasn't redirected, as far as I know). And I am reasonably confident that my action was successful. Since the action was a one-shot, I think it's probably time to share what I did. I used an item that would ensure that Batman's intended action, whatever it was, would be successful and correctly targeted. This suggests to me that: (1) There is probably an anti-Town role-blocker, else why give me this ability; and (2) There is almost certainly an anti-Town redirector, else why give me this ability. I may have additional devices with other powers; then again, I may not. I hope you understand that, for now at least, that's all you get to know about that. This tells us a lot more than you think. If you are being truthful, then thank you.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Sept 30, 2010 19:26:47 GMT -5
Heh. No, but seriously. Because I targeted Batman intentionally (and wasn't redirected, as far as I know). And I am reasonably confident that my action was successful. Since the action was a one-shot, I think it's probably time to share what I did. I used an item that would ensure that Batman's intended action, whatever it was, would be successful and correctly targeted. This suggests to me that: (1) There is probably an anti-Town role-blocker, else why give me this ability; and (2) There is almost certainly an anti-Town redirector, else why give me this ability. I may have additional devices with other powers; then again, I may not. I hope you understand that, for now at least, that's all you get to know about that. This tells us a lot more than you think. If you are being truthful, then thank you. You're welcome. I'll assume that you'll share whatever it is at the appropriate time; try not to all die before you can :-)
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Sept 30, 2010 19:28:39 GMT -5
1. He might not know he is one. 2. Anything targeting him could have been sent to Batman instead. 3. All actions not targeting him would be unaffected. This is possible, of course, but it requires that (at least) three people, independently, decided to target Dexter for whatever reason. That seems... spectacularly coincidental.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Sept 30, 2010 19:41:15 GMT -5
<snip> the masons are 100 percent sure that their results are not the result of a redirection. does that help? Not one bit. Nobody has ever argued that the Masons were redirected. The argument is now, and always has been. that I, and perhaps a number of others, were redirected. That point has been made crystal clear, on more than one occasion, by more than one person. In case you somehow missed all of those posts, here's one where I think i make that point pretty clear (relevant section in purple): <snipped> not buying it a bit puffy. in both of the examples that you give that is a mechanic of the role. a gf investigates as town and a miller investigates as scum. what you are trying to propose, as near as i can tell is that information from the mods could be a lie. so that potentially batty is being messed with by the mods by having his investigations come back with bad results. shit if we were to carry it out to the nth degree how in the hell do you know that you are a compulsive vig. i mean you haven't killed anyone. did the mods lie to you when they gave you your role? i know in this case that there is a mason board that has been set up. the other folks that are on that board seem to be playing to the part that has been given us. we receive information from the mod. now is it all a lie? i assume that is the argument that you are making. and i know that we have had sopilistic discussions before but sheesh (not you and me, just in general). and as near as i can tell your vote for buddy was based on information that batty relayed to the thread based on information that he got from the LYING MODERATORS. how is that different? OK...I'll try again, and I'll use small words so that you'll be sure to understand. So far, so good. I'm saying that information from the mods can be 'a lie' as in the examples I give of the GF and the Miller. This is where you go completely off the rails. I never said anything about Batman being messed with. what I said was that 'you' are being messed with. Because what you are seeing is the end result of my actions, not the intended result. I'm saying I was redirected, and that's why you saw me 'visit' Batman.
I don't think Batman himself was messed with. I don't think Zedd was messed with (I think his power allows him to investigate 'from afar', so that he doesn't have to 'visit' his target). I think that my action, which was directed at dexter, was redirected to Batman, and because you were watching Batman, you saw the end result of that redirection. It seems quite simple to me. Is anyone else having problems with my logic here? FTR, I don't know that I was redirected, because I have to this point received no response of any kind from the Mods regarding either of my Night actions. I have taken MHaye up on his offer and asked for clarification to see if there should have been some communication to me last Night, but I haven't received a response yet. Just in case you missed it again, I wrote "I'm saying I was redirected, and that's why you saw me 'visit' Batman."I never said "The Masons were redirected". NOBODY ever said the Masons were redirected. The fact that you are now 'confirming' this is frankly laughable.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Sept 30, 2010 19:42:42 GMT -5
I stopped short of breaking out Gimp and making a diagram, but that is still an option... Chitter! Little Indian Girl: Please do!
|
|
|
Post by Dirx on Sept 30, 2010 19:43:07 GMT -5
So... if I may introduce the touchy subject... at what point do we talk about what sorts of folks might be likely to visit a declared Detective? Well, I wrote up a lengthy analysis post as a reply to this, under the assumption that certain conclusions that can be drawn from Today's information should be glaringly obvious to scum if they're not all drooling morons, but if the masons would prefer we leave such discussion alone for now, that's fine.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Sept 30, 2010 19:43:33 GMT -5
:: Looks to the contingent still wearing party hats, blowing noise makers, and looking hung over ::
Are we done discussing the party?
At the risk of keeping the conversation going, what was the point of it?
What solid action can we take from it, and how do we know that action isn't made in quicksand.
::: Puts hand to forehead as a visor, searching the horizion :::
To say I'm lost on a good day in this game might be fair.
But, I think you guys have talked into the same circle a few circuits now. I would bet you guys are just as lost as me, but at least I don't have the blisters to show for it.
If you guys did somehow find your way out of the forest here, it doesn't help the non-party goers.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Sept 30, 2010 19:45:48 GMT -5
So... if I may introduce the touchy subject... at what point do we talk about what sorts of folks might be likely to visit a declared Detective? hee hee story you are so funny and crack me up. we are supposed to continue talking about whether the mods are lying to us or not. fucking whippersnapper. You are the only person who's talking about whether the Mods are lying to you or not. Nobody else has ever suggested the Mods might be lying except for you.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Sept 30, 2010 19:46:14 GMT -5
*btw Curious George, you seem to have forgotten me also. I said I didn't visit Bill McBatman on Night 2 and as far as I know (what with not playing at the time) my character didn't visit anyone on Night 1 either. I can confirm this is the case.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Sept 30, 2010 19:48:57 GMT -5
I think Maniac is off my hook with that claim (heehee, Maniac on a hook, I amuse myself) -- I had been playing around with the idea that perhaps Batman was not interfered with as deliberate strategy (godfather or miller-related, most likely), but his claim explains Batman's successful result rather more simply. Especially given that so many people were present, which makes it more likely that not all of them were benevolent. Good good, now I will have a nice dinner.
Columbo, thanks for the deconstruction of that one sentence.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Sept 30, 2010 19:52:55 GMT -5
ok, i will try one more fucking time. the information came directly from blockey. capiche. OK, that seems clear. Then I'll tell you this. You should take another close read at the results of your investigation, at your Role PMs, at all of the information describing your role in this game and how it functions. Because one of the following two statements is true: - You have misunderstood something which causes you to put more trust in this information than you should.
- Mister Blockey is lying to your face.
. Really, no one ever suggested that the mod's were lying? ever? ever ever ever?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 30, 2010 19:53:56 GMT -5
A chronological sample of our Masons' behavior upon unveiling their magic bag today. I think this is a good read and recommend it to everyone. This portion, early on, does not read to me now (and did not read to me at the time) as anything other than a shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later-full-court-press with a minute margin of possible analytical error on the part of the masons being vaguely alluded to. You both came out of the gate wanting Zedicus and Fluffer-withouth-the-nutter dead, and demanding that whatever could be done to reach that goal be done. It stunk then, it has stunk all day, and it still stinks. If you are all town, you have no one but yourselves to blame as to how your information and your potential motivations are being received by many people in this game. I actually agree that skimming is not indicative one way or the other. I've certainly had my fair share of stupid questions that had been answered a post or two earlier. I was attempting to razz him. Next time I will include a smiley. Don't bother. I'm fairly convinced that Zedd is 100% Scum. Then lynch me and apologize later. No idea why you are fairly convinced. I gladly offer myself up to investigation by anyone who has the power to do so. No need. There's a perfectly good candidate already. And besides, I suspect that an investigation would tell us almost nothing about you. Also, why are you claiming to have investigated a claimed cop? If he's scum he's either got to confirm players everyday, get a different scum lynched, or claim to have been roleblocked. Otherwise scum would be gunning for him once they neutralized any one trying to protect him. So your target is bunk. Your "counter" claim is bunk. And besides, if you wanted to know if he was lying or not, why didn't you role investigate him? Why determine if he's a threat or not? If it didn't come back detective, then we could have lynched him for lying, right? I think the answer to these questions lies in the fact that you are not telling the truth, and therefore are scum. Furthermore: Not a threat to town? That's the easiest for scum to fake, you don't have to worry about saying a harmless 3rd party is town on accident. I just don't believe any of it. Alright. In the interest of semi full disclosure, and after discussing it with my masonic brethren. there are some things which have come to light. One of the masons got pm'd this morning that someone had left conclusive evidence on the ground of who exactly visited Batman last night. Zedd's not on that list but Stay Puft is. Main reason for bringing this up, just in case there is a run on masons tonight we don't want to lose data. Raj, would you please dispose of one of them at your earliest convenience? Let's turn this around a little for the sake of debate and getting some information on the table. Why are you so adamant that Zedd is scum and what makes you say that an investigation would tell us almost nothing about him? What are you basing this on? This is probably a simulpost to my post #82. So I assume you haven't seen the evidence that I know that Zedd is lying. I think he's a likely GF if scum have one, the unprovoked claim (which was touted as a counterclaim, but in reality wasn't) + his eagerness to be investigated. just get your foot out of my ass and take a shot. Oh fer crying out loud. Took me ages to type that out on this molasses computer! However, second redundant post is secondarily redundant so nm. So Zedd is lying, that seems pretty clear. Now why would Stay Puft kill one of the claimed cops before there was time to prove or disprove their role? I'm feeling obliged to think SK. Which sort of leaves me thinking that it might be best to leave Buddy Christ til toMorrow. We know what he is and can disregard an investigation until we lynch him toMorrow. I think Stay Puft as an SK is more dangerous to Town than Buddy Christ is at present. Here's the deal though. We've got a claimed town roleblocker (Columbo) He could shut down Stay Puft for the evening. If Jesus is a Corrupter and it is what I think it is (makes people look like millers or is a recruiter (did blockey say no recruiting, I don't recall?)) then that is a very very powerful role, and should be expunged post haste. It also means that if scum has a roleblocker or if the jailer is theirs, then they have to weigh the option of our possible vig shooting into their ranks. That means our probable doctor and probable cop will have no problem producing more enlightening results for tomorrow. All in all, I'm in favor of the Jesus Lynch. What is your general assessment of the reliability of your information? Also, are you certain that the information refers to Night 2 and not Night 1 it was definitely Night 2. What is your general assessment of the reliability of your information? Also, are you certain that the information refers to Night 2 and not Night 1 The true reliability of the information can probably only be ascertained by putting some people in the ground. However, the information specifically refers to Night 2. And contains a shibboleth that leads me to believe that it was composed by the moderator. Or, just possibly, the information out Masons have is not legitimate. Which is why I asked for more details. So far, all we know is that " that someone had left conclusive evidence on the ground". Ummm...how do we know who left it? How do we know the evidence is reliable? "Conclusive" does not necessarily imply "truthful". well if you can't trust the mods on the information that you received from them this is totally gastard. not what i signed up for. don't think so. you and zed are scum. if you would have come back with something along the lines of well i targeted so and so but i ended up on blah, maybe. marginally. but you definitely tried to kill batman last Night. not very cool.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Sept 30, 2010 19:55:19 GMT -5
:: Looks to the contingent still wearing party hats, blowing noise makers, and looking hung over :: Are we done discussing the party? At the risk of keeping the conversation going, what was the point of it? What solid action can we take from it, and how do we know that action isn't made in quicksand. ::: Puts hand to forehead as a visor, searching the horizion ::: To say I'm lost on a good day in this game might be fair. But, I think you guys have talked into the same circle a few circuits now. I would bet you guys are just as lost as me, but at least I don't have the blisters to show for it. If you guys did somehow find your way out of the forest here, it doesn't help the non-party goers. You mean the party that was supposedly held in Batman's room last night? I think maybe it was a costume party, kind of like this one, because nobody is really sure who was there and who wasn't. Some people say they were there, but apparently nobody else saw them. Some of us weren't invited, but apparently walked into the room by accident. The Masons say that someone delivered a videotape of the proceedings to them, but they aren't letting anyone else watch it. When you boil it all down, there's not much evidence a 'party' took place at all. The only thing we know for sure are that the Masons are a bunch of voyeurs...
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Sept 30, 2010 19:59:52 GMT -5
1. He might not know he is one. 2. Anything targeting him could have been sent to Batman instead. 3. All actions not targeting him would be unaffected. This is possible, of course, but it requires that (at least) three people, independently, decided to target Dexter for whatever reason. That seems... spectacularly coincidental. Chitter.... Little Indian Girl: "Spectacularly coincidental"? Consider the alternative... that 3 people all target Batman and lie about it when the masons have revealed they know who did and did not target Batman? That's not likely... they'll all end up dead. 3 people were redirected from their targets onto Batman.... meaning there exists 3 anti-town redirectors? also unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Sept 30, 2010 20:00:17 GMT -5
OK, that seems clear. Then I'll tell you this. You should take another close read at the results of your investigation, at your Role PMs, at all of the information describing your role in this game and how it functions. Because one of the following two statements is true: - You have misunderstood something which causes you to put more trust in this information than you should.
- Mister Blockey is lying to your face.
. Really, no one ever suggested that the mod's were lying? ever? ever ever ever? Oh, please. You know damn well I was implying that 'Choice A' was true. Either George was mistaken, or the Mods were lying. And since we know the latter is false (for all the very correct reasons that George argued all Day long), then the former must be true. I know that is what I meant. You know that is what I meant. Don't try to argue otherwise now.
|
|