|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 16:00:08 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Dec 17, 2010 16:00:08 GMT -5
crazypunker, Does being a scotsman mean that you will be able to survive a lynch?
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 17:08:03 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Dec 17, 2010 17:08:03 GMT -5
Texcat: usually; if that's his/her PM in full, I'd be inclined to say yes.
Unvote: crazypunker
Dammit, now I need to think and I don't have the time or the brain cells.
(OOG: MRI results are back; no tumor was detected but one of my adrenal glands is larger than normal. So, we're going to wait until April to see what happens. Argh.)
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 17:34:29 GMT -5
Post by harmless little bunny on Dec 17, 2010 17:34:29 GMT -5
Texcat: usually; if that's his/her PM in full, I'd be inclined to say yes. Unvote: crazypunker Dammit, now I need to think and I don't have the time or the brain cells. (OOG: MRI results are back; no tumor was detected but one of my adrenal glands is larger than normal. So, we're going to wait until April to see what happens. Argh.) I hope everything is ok. I'll be keeping you in mind and hoping for the best.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 17:34:57 GMT -5
Post by harmless little bunny on Dec 17, 2010 17:34:57 GMT -5
crazypunker, Does being a scotsman mean that you will be able to survive a lynch? Yes, I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 17:41:39 GMT -5
Post by charr on Dec 17, 2010 17:41:39 GMT -5
my fingers so badly want to type [ b ] [ c o l o r = b l u e ] v o t e s t o r y [ / c o l o r ] [ / b ] . but i won't, for now. i still think you are being deliberately evasive in answering questions about something that you kind of stirred the pot on, fcs. jeebus, c'mon story you bring up a "post restriction". oh no wait a minute it's not a "post restriction". oh shoot it's a "vote restriction". if i go against it i will *have something bad happen to me*. and, btw, trust me because if i gave out information it would be bad for town. fracking hogwash. i'm going for a lurker. better now than in a Day or two. vote charrOkay, I'm not a lurker. I haven't been on for a while, and quite honestly, being new and all, I don't really have much to contribute, but I guess I could observe for a while. I mean, if I voted for someone, which is all I can do assuming I'm not a power role, I wouldn't be able to sum up the reasons, and would just rack up votes against me, so >.>
|
|
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 3
Dec 17, 2010 17:46:24 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Dec 17, 2010 17:46:24 GMT -5
I may as well post this now: It may or may not help anything, but at least the information is out there. If you are telling the truth, I wonder if your role/alignment will be revealed if you live through the lynch. If you are town, then we could confirm you. If scum then we'll just turn around and lynch you again. If you live and you're not revealed, I'll probably want to lynch you again anyway.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 17:53:37 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Dec 17, 2010 17:53:37 GMT -5
Okay, I'm not a lurker. I haven't been on for a while, and quite honestly, being new and all, I don't really have much to contribute, but I guess I could observe for a while. I mean, if I voted for someone, which is all I can do assuming I'm not a power role, I wouldn't be able to sum up the reasons, and would just rack up votes against me, so >.> Charr... It doesn't matter if you're Vanilla or not. It doesn't even matter of you're Town or not, you need to start contributing something. It's been 3 days now. I think that everyone has been more than accommodating of your inexperience up to this point, but you can only play the newbie card for so long...and your time is about up. People are often lynched in this game because of the things that they say. They are also often not lynched because of the things that they say. But if you don't say anything, then there is no way for the rest of the people to judge you. And if we can't make any judgments, then you become a danger, because there's no way for us to know you're not Scum. And frankly, a "dead Townie who wasn't contributing anything in the first place" is preferable to a "maybe Scum plotting against us in secret" What I'm saying is...you don't want to open your mouth because you think it's going to get you lynched. I'm telling you that if you don't open your mouth it's going to get you lynched.
|
|
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 3
Dec 17, 2010 17:53:46 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Dec 17, 2010 17:53:46 GMT -5
my fingers so badly want to type [ b ] [ c o l o r = b l u e ] v o t e s t o r y [ / c o l o r ] [ / b ] . but i won't, for now. i still think you are being deliberately evasive in answering questions about something that you kind of stirred the pot on, fcs. jeebus, c'mon story you bring up a "post restriction". oh no wait a minute it's not a "post restriction". oh shoot it's a "vote restriction". if i go against it i will *have something bad happen to me*. and, btw, trust me because if i gave out information it would be bad for town. fracking hogwash. i'm going for a lurker. better now than in a Day or two. vote charrOkay, I'm not a lurker. I haven't been on for a while, and quite honestly, being new and all, I don't really have much to contribute, but I guess I could observe for a while. I mean, if I voted for someone, which is all I can do assuming I'm not a power role, I wouldn't be able to sum up the reasons, and would just rack up votes against me, so >.> Charr, I get that you are new, but I would assume you have followed along with a game or two and have the general gist of how the game works or you wouldn't have signed on to play. You have as much to contribute as anyone else playing. It's Day 3, and I can tell you that this isn't going to fly. Are you afraid you will say something stupid? We all have. Afraid you are going to piss someone off? It's just a game. Afraid you are going to slip and say the wrong thing? Uh huh, we've pretty much all done that too. That's the fun of the game. Now get in there and give your opinion on something!
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 18:00:45 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Dec 17, 2010 18:00:45 GMT -5
I may as well post this now: It may or may not help anything, but at least the information is out there. If you are telling the truth, I wonder if your role/alignment will be revealed if you live through the lynch. If you are town, then we could confirm you. If scum then we'll just turn around and lynch you again. If you live and you're not revealed, I'll probably want to lynch you again anyway. I've never played in a game with a Scotsman role...or at least I've never lived long enough for one to be revealed. From those of you with considerably more experience, would it be likely for us to discover crazypunker's alignment if we tried to lynch him? Of course, the answer to that in this game depends on bufftabby...I'm just trying to get a sense of historical perspective.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 18:04:13 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Dec 17, 2010 18:04:13 GMT -5
Depending on Bufftabby, of course, but I've played with (and been) Scotsmen in several games, and in only one of those was the Scot's alignment revealed upon their first "death." (And that was less about the Scotsman than the specific circumstances of that death, if I'm remembering correctly -- someone else in the Heroes game can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).
So, I would say that the odds are against a lynch or Night Kill telling us anything useful about crazypunker's alignment.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 18:49:47 GMT -5
Post by metallicsquink on Dec 17, 2010 18:49:47 GMT -5
Depending on Bufftabby, of course, but I've played with (and been) Scotsmen in several games, and in only one of those was the Scot's alignment revealed upon their first "death." (And that was less about the Scotsman than the specific circumstances of that death, if I'm remembering correctly -- someone else in the Heroes game can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). So, I would say that the odds are against a lynch or Night Kill telling us anything useful about crazypunker's alignment. I agree. Had crazypunker been lynched without him claiming, my guess is we just would have gotten "no one died" from bufftabby.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 18:52:15 GMT -5
Post by metallicsquink on Dec 17, 2010 18:52:15 GMT -5
Okay, I'm not a lurker. I haven't been on for a while, and quite honestly, being new and all, I don't really have much to contribute, but I guess I could observe for a while. I mean, if I voted for someone, which is all I can do assuming I'm not a power role, I wouldn't be able to sum up the reasons, and would just rack up votes against me, so >.> I'm not sure what you mean by "I could observe for a while." Do you mean that you haven't even been reading the game? And everyone has something to contribute. You just have to start somewhere. Read the game, find something you want to know more about and start asking questions. As for reasons to vote someone, read the game and see why others are placing votes. That should give you an idea of what the players think is scummy behavior and you can go from there.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 19:08:42 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Dec 17, 2010 19:08:42 GMT -5
Well, I'm not really sure what to do right now. My suspicions of crazypunker haven't changed. I still think storyteller is acting scummy as hell. And part of me wants to follow peeker's lead and vote for Charr... I'm holding pat for now, but I don't yet consider this my 'final answer'...and with that I'm heading home to start my Christmas Vacation
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 20:28:30 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Dec 17, 2010 20:28:30 GMT -5
Gah, I haven't had a chance to post or catch up much at all.
I did see that crazypunker has a decent case against him, and that he has claimed scotsman.
In the case of claiming scotsman I believe that the accepted play is to lynch the claimant anyway since it won't be a mislynch if he is telling the truth.
Vote: crazypunker
Again, profound apologies for life getting in the way of mafia. I have my priorities straight, but my health had other ideas.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 20:35:52 GMT -5
Post by bufftabby on Dec 17, 2010 20:35:52 GMT -5
Vote Count
crazypunker (7): hockey monkey [39], billmc [44], sister coyote [77-100], total ullz [127], cookies [130], texcat [138], suburban plankton [142], sister coyote [143-151], naff1138 [163]
storyteller (2): mr ed [91], catinasuit [99], suburban plankton [102-142]
catinasuit (2): guiri [71], cookies [112-130], brewha [131]
paranoia (1): metallic squink [69]
mr ed (1): renata [78]
cometothedarksidewehavecookies (0): crazypunker [38-133]
charr (1): peekercpa [132]
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 20:47:36 GMT -5
Post by charr on Dec 17, 2010 20:47:36 GMT -5
Okay, I'm not a lurker. I haven't been on for a while, and quite honestly, being new and all, I don't really have much to contribute, but I guess I could observe for a while. I mean, if I voted for someone, which is all I can do assuming I'm not a power role, I wouldn't be able to sum up the reasons, and would just rack up votes against me, so >.> Charr... It doesn't matter if you're Vanilla or not. It doesn't even matter of you're Town or not, you need to start contributing something. It's been 3 days now. I think that everyone has been more than accommodating of your inexperience up to this point, but you can only play the newbie card for so long...and your time is about up. People are often lynched in this game because of the things that they say. They are also often not lynched because of the things that they say. But if you don't say anything, then there is no way for the rest of the people to judge you. And if we can't make any judgments, then you become a danger, because there's no way for us to know you're not Scum. And frankly, a "dead Townie who wasn't contributing anything in the first place" is preferable to a "maybe Scum plotting against us in secret" What I'm saying is...you don't want to open your mouth because you think it's going to get you lynched. I'm telling you that if you don't open your mouth it's going to get you lynched. Pfft. Okay, well what should I contribute? I mean, what is there that I really have to say? All my thoughts have been expressed with the comments beforehand.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 20:51:49 GMT -5
Post by charr on Dec 17, 2010 20:51:49 GMT -5
Oh, well, I think that there is a decent case against CrazyPunker , I mean, one lynch would only serve to confirm his identity, and prove that he isn't lying. So there's really no harm, I guess. However, if it doesn't reveal his alignment, at least we know that he really is a Scotsman.
Bah. So yeah. I'll go and join the stack Vote CrazyPunker
|
|
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 3
Dec 17, 2010 21:51:09 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Dec 17, 2010 21:51:09 GMT -5
A step in the right direction at least. Please consider your the time commitment involved if you decide you'd like to play again sometime. You have to read and keep up pretty much every day. Yes, real life intervenes, but you can't just...not be around for a while, then say you have nothing to say. If your thoughts have already been expressed, you say "I agree with this because..." or you can also say "I disagree with this because...". I honestly don't know how to assess you other than if you were scum, I would think your team has been coaching you. But if you haven't been around for a while how could they even do that? Noob town or noob scum? I have no idea, but your actions (the lack of them) are anti-town. I feel more strongly about lynching crazypunker than charr today, but unless we have a very compelling reason to lynch someone else tomorrow, I can't see how we can't lynch charr.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 17, 2010 21:51:35 GMT -5
Post by brewha on Dec 17, 2010 21:51:35 GMT -5
Charr, there's probably been close to 1000 posts before you by now. How about you let us know which of those are the ones with which you agree?
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 1:17:00 GMT -5
Post by harmless little bunny on Dec 18, 2010 1:17:00 GMT -5
It won't reveal my alignment? What's the point then? It seems like a scotsman that doesn't reveal alignment on death would be more harmful than helpful to town. Now you will waste two lynches on me while the scum kill more town.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 1:32:39 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Dec 18, 2010 1:32:39 GMT -5
We test the payload of your claim for one, and we don't mislynch anyone if you aren't lying about the payload of your power. If you survive, it isn't an automatic decision to lynch you again tomorrow. Depending on what happens in the Night, who (if anyone) dies, who (if anyone) is investigated, who (if anyone) shares investigation/tracking results, etc.
You could be a scum strongman, and the consensus may be to lynch you again to find out, but maybe not. Tomorrow will be a different situation with different information.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 2:05:27 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Dec 18, 2010 2:05:27 GMT -5
I misread your post before. Your death will, I expect, reveal your alignment. Your survival of a lynch due to scottsman (or strongman, or other lynch-avoiding mechanism) will, I expect, not reveal your alignment.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 7:25:18 GMT -5
Post by Renata on Dec 18, 2010 7:25:18 GMT -5
unvote[/color] vote: crazypunker[/color]
May as well give my endorsement.
SisterCoyote, what about the claim warrants an unvote?
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 7:39:15 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Dec 18, 2010 7:39:15 GMT -5
I don't really know what to say about Charr, other than I hope he starts actually playing or he's probably going to get lynched for half-assedly playing, and that will suck if he's Town.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 8:07:05 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Dec 18, 2010 8:07:05 GMT -5
hmm... basically the same reasons I am voting cookies. Have you played with both CIAS and Cookies? The reason I ask is because I'm starting to wonder if Cookies always plays this way. You've already said that this is "off" for CIAS. I've played with both before. I've focused some attention on CIAS simply because he caught my attention early in the game. I have not been pinged by Cookies in any significant way to warrant detailed analysis of her playstyle in this game. However, I will point out, Rysto's explanation occured after I finished posting on Day 1. So to say I ignored it is a misrepresentation. I may have not phrased my comment correctly: ( CIAS ignored Rysto's response in which he shows that he clearly meant "town power role" in the context of the exchange with crazypunker, [ CIAS] does not post again until Night 1) Rysto replied to you within 30 minutes of your post and within 30 hours of Day end. You did not respond before the end of the Day and you did not refer to his post in Day 2, effectively ignoring it. Not to mention he is going to look at three of us and conveniently ignores the fact that peekercpa also voted for him. What's different, oh wait, he's a claimed mason. It looks like cherry picking someone to vote for. This is a misrepresentation, I agree with Story's take on it: That's crap. Everybody take a look at this quote, when I'm dead, whenever, whatever. The paragraph above is crap. Shall we count the "whys?" Yes, let's: 1. First of all, I didn't say I was suspicious of the people I was suspicous of because they voted for me (well, Ed was for that reason). I became suspicious of CatinaSuit well before he voted for me and Stickler has never voted for me at all. Cat, above, is trying to make it look like I'm just going after people who voted for me. Not true. 2. Second, the whole "conveniently ignores the fact that peeker voted for me too" is disingenuous garbage. Of course I'm not going to spend a bunch of time researching peeker. He's a Mason! Acting like not doing that is some nefarious act is just pushing it way too hard. 3. Most importantly, the characterization of my plans as "cherry picking" is completely unfair. What I've done is identified three players that have pinged me for their behavior in this game. Now I'd like to narrow the field by looking at each more closely, and see which (if any) warrants a vote (or, in this case, an aggressive push to get OTHERS to vote, since I can't do it myself). If this is cherry picking, then how could one play this game without cherry picking? Detailed post histories on every player? How's that coming along?
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 8:13:49 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Dec 18, 2010 8:13:49 GMT -5
/snips In the case of claiming scotsman I believe that the accepted play is to lynch the claimant anyway since it won't be a mislynch if he is telling the truth. I'll go and join the stack May as well give my endorsement. Just so I understand here, are you guys voting crazypunker merely to test his claim of scotsman or do you think he's a lying, scheming, murdering, evil scum who's false claimed scotsman? I thought this was a game of mafia...
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 8:26:26 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Dec 18, 2010 8:26:26 GMT -5
Scotsman would make sense as a scum claim to try to ward off a lynch. A thought that, while perhaps paranoid, has only been underscored by what he's said since claiming, at least for me.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 8:28:35 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Dec 18, 2010 8:28:35 GMT -5
But is the standard play is to lynch a claimed scotsman, what sort of ploy do you think a scummy crazypunker has in mind?
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 8:39:42 GMT -5
Post by Renata on Dec 18, 2010 8:39:42 GMT -5
/snips In the case of claiming scotsman I believe that the accepted play is to lynch the claimant anyway since it won't be a mislynch if he is telling the truth. May as well give my endorsement. Just so I understand here, are you guys voting crazypunker merely to test his claim of scotsman or do you think he's a lying, scheming, murdering, evil scum who's false claimed scotsman? I thought this was a game of mafia... I think he's likely scum. See my previous comment on liking Bill's case. The claim is (and IMO should be) irrelevant. Though I note that you've offered a false dilemma. He could be scotsman *and* mafia.
|
|
|
Day 3
Dec 18, 2010 8:46:52 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Dec 18, 2010 8:46:52 GMT -5
I think he's likely scum. OK, Bill made the case very early in the Day but you still voted Special afterwards. See my previous comment on liking Bill's case. The claim is (and IMO should be) irrelevant. Though I note that you've offered a false dilemma. He could be scotsman *and* mafia. You're correct.
|
|