|
Post by guiri on Jan 6, 2011 15:21:54 GMT -5
@ Sister Coyote, your poem and later clarification referred to light and darkness. Did the moderator refer to darkness in your results for both Ed and Peeker or was that poetic license? What about Story? Were the words "light" or "dark" capitalized?
As we are "Light" and scum are "Dark" and given your claim that while you watched Bill the Night he was killed you saw nothing but darkness, what's the point of a watcher who can't see? Unless it was NAF who killed Bill and therefore, if your claim is true, I'm wondering if you are somehow the equivalent of our alignment cop and a watcher rolled into one...
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Jan 6, 2011 15:29:07 GMT -5
There's some water under the bridge since this post, so let me summarize what I think you're saying: I shall now out myself: A watcher I be, Though my results are pathetic as a tiny flea: On the first Night, I thought it would be best to keep my eye on Ed; even if Scum he was not, He is often one of the very early dead. But while looking for light, and studying Ed; I saw nothing but the darkness instead. Actually Night Zero based on your later post. You watched Ed, saw only darkness. Night One and Night Two -- you missed the deadline on Night One and repeated on Night Two. Result: Story was snoring away. Reasoning for choosing Storyteller? You saw a visitor, and you guess it was due to NAF's godfatherness you got no result. Same result as Ed on Night Zero. Definitely not anything nasty related to Ed, then (the darkness). Who did Metallic Squink say she roleblocked night zero? And who last night? Ed's comment from the Forbidden Thread, also.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Jan 6, 2011 15:35:01 GMT -5
@ Sister Coyote, your poem and later clarification referred to light and darkness. Did the moderator refer to darkness in your results for both Ed and Peeker or was that poetic license? What about Story? Were the words "light" or "dark" capitalized? As we are "Light" and scum are "Dark" and given your claim that while you watched Bill the Night he was killed you saw nothing but darkness, what's the point of a watcher who can't see? Unless it was NAF who killed Bill and therefore, if your claim is true, I'm wondering if you are somehow the equivalent of our alignment cop and a watcher rolled into one... If you're referring to darkness as an indicator she was watching a mafia, she saw that with both Ed and peeker (and not with Story). Peeker is a mason.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jan 6, 2011 15:38:07 GMT -5
Night 3, I blocked Ed and last Night, I blocked Renata.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Jan 6, 2011 15:53:02 GMT -5
If you're referring to darkness as an indicator she was watching a mafia, she saw that with both Ed and peeker (and not with Story). Peeker is a mason. I realize that and that's why I've asked for clarification on whether the words used are sister's or the Mod's. Maybe it'll be clear when she posts her role PM but, if she's claiming truthfully, I currently see no reason why a watcher would not have seen who killed Bill and so am trying to make some sense of her role.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Jan 6, 2011 16:29:08 GMT -5
I'm pleased you're enjoying the conversation. Let's continue. There *is* additional information on him that was not available the first time he was lynched -- namely, he was not lying (or not entirely anyway) about his role. But that's irrelevant. The votes against crazypunker mostly came before he claimed, and had nothing to do with any suspicion of him lying about his role. Thus the fact that he was telling the truth about his role is meaningless. Nothing has changed about the reasons he was lynched in the first place; if those things make him suspicious as a non-scotsman, they should also make him suspicious as a scotsman. I could make the argument that the Mafia would not have an Investigator; would you both to give such an argument any sway at all? The argument that the Mafia would not have a Scotsman is a bad argument, and is blatantly contradicted by multiple examples in past games including many that I myself created and moderated. Am I to be blamed for disregarding an argument that is patently, provably, and historically false? Not for that. As I've noted, I actually agree with your line of reasoning regarding this specific case. I'd be voting crazypunker right now if I hadn't become more suspicious of you. But as part of your argument you drag in the complete nonsense that someone who survives a lynch (without role reveal) should almost by definition be re-lynched at the first opportunity. That's just wrong, any number of things could make the situation change in any given case. You are making the situation out to be more black and white than it is. Like I've said, it feels manipulative. Argh, now you have me wavering again. I freaking hate meta-game arguments. The thing that's getting me, Story, and I'm sure you know this, is that the motive for you to go after crazypunker and HockeyMonkey if you are scum and them not is so blindingly apparent. They are, by all your arguments, automatic, obvious, mandatory lynches. If they are also mislynches? Then you're trying to "this is just what must be done, can't be helped" the town into a losing situation. And there were three or four points in that post of yours where the particulars of what you argued and what you omitted made me feel that that's exactly what you are trying to do. Yes, if you had worded it differently I quite possibly would not be on your case right now. But you didn't, and I am. Right. You stand behind a reworded version that weakens your original case but has the benefit of being less obviously manipulative of the data. Again I'm not going to defend Hockey Monkey. Your position on wanting to lynch her is not my true issue. It's all in how you presented it.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 6, 2011 16:30:26 GMT -5
@ Sister Coyote, your poem and later clarification referred to light and darkness. Did the moderator refer to darkness in your results for both Ed and Peeker or was that poetic license? What about Story? Were the words "light" or "dark" capitalized? <font style="font-size: 12px;"> If you're referring to darkness as an indicator she was watching a mafia, she saw that with both Ed and peeker (and not with Story). Peeker is a mason. I realize that and that's why I've asked for clarification on whether the words used are sister's or the Mod's. Maybe it'll be clear when she posts her role PM but, if she's claiming truthfully, I currently see no reason why a watcher would not have seen who killed Bill and so am trying to make some sense of her role. facepalm I swear I saw a "not" in the rules post about quoting from PMs. As to why Story -- he'd been drawing a lot of heat. I find it interesting that Ed's and Peeks results were identical, but I don't know if that means anything. And your interpretations are correct, O mulish one.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 6, 2011 16:31:15 GMT -5
Ed's comment from the Forbidden Thread, also. What are you doing in the Forbidden Thread?
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 6, 2011 16:33:58 GMT -5
Oh, and one other PM, because I asked for clarification about "in verse":
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 6, 2011 17:10:24 GMT -5
Ed's comment from the Forbidden Thread, also. What are you doing in the Forbidden Thread? raping virgins
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 6, 2011 17:12:28 GMT -5
What are you doing in the Forbidden Thread? raping virgins oh, I thought that was directed at me, so I answered what I was doing. In any case. where are the rest of your PMs, the ones that say you have to post in verse, etc?
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 6, 2011 17:14:33 GMT -5
and I do feel bad about wandering into the Forbidden thread.
I feel especially bad because the idea expressed there had not occurred to me independently.
I'd like to think it would have eventually, as it's at the core of my suspicion of storyteller as well.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 6, 2011 17:15:50 GMT -5
In any case. where are the rest of your PMs, the ones that say you have to post in verse, etc? Are you skimming, Ed? (I'm not going to use the quote function this time on account of wanting Ed to SEE what I'm posting). I. The Magician -- Sister Coyote You are a poet, blind before but blind no longer, sitting amongst the Immortals, arranging your verses outside of time. You see your very best at Night, and so only then can you observe the nature of your fellow travelers. You shall watch a traveler of your choosing to see what external forces shape that person as they slumber. Upon Daybreak, The Muses will allow you to reveal these forces in verse. You are The Magician by nature, and a watcher by destiny. You are of The Light, and will achieve glory when the all threats to The Light have been vanquished.(Bolding mine, and slightly different than the original. And when I was getting ready to post my results, I asked to confirm that I had to write in verse (as half my results were in verse and half were not), and I received what I posted in Reply 68 or two posts above the one where you asked me about "the rest" of my PMs. They're all there.
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 6, 2011 17:19:55 GMT -5
In any case. where are the rest of your PMs, the ones that say you have to post in verse, etc? Are you skimming, Ed? (I'm not going to use the quote function this time on account of wanting Ed to SEE what I'm posting). I. The Magician -- Sister Coyote You are a poet, blind before but blind no longer, sitting amongst the Immortals, arranging your verses outside of time. You see your very best at Night, and so only then can you observe the nature of your fellow travelers. You shall watch a traveler of your choosing to see what external forces shape that person as they slumber. Upon Daybreak, The Muses will allow you to reveal these forces in verse. You are The Magician by nature, and a watcher by destiny. You are of The Light, and will achieve glory when the all threats to The Light have been vanquished.(Bolding mine, and slightly different than the original. And when I was getting ready to post my results, I asked to confirm that I had to write in verse (as half my results were in verse and half were not), and I received what I posted in Reply 68 or two posts above the one where you asked me about "the rest" of my PMs. They're all there. yeah, OK, I missed them. That's what hapens when you post in little breaks while making dinner.
|
|
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 Jan 6, 2011 17:40:52 GMT -5
This changes things a bit...
The answer: Watching all Night Waiting for Player X Looking for lights See nothing instead
Seems (if the claim can be trusted and so on) to be the standard responds. The Night of BillMc's dead it changed. BillMc was killed and there wasn't a result - so something must have happened...
What I'm having a hard time understanding is why the reply on the Night of Story was different. I don't seem to recall Squink saying she blocked Sister Coyote. So what's up with the: You wonder what stories might be told by watching storyteller's room toNight, but all you hear is gentle snoring.
Why would Story be snoring all Night and Sister Coyote not looking for "lights" when seeing him?
@sister Coyote - could you ask the Mod about this. If you haven't already. And while you spending time with her - would you be so kind as to ask if the "verse" thing is a post restriction or not?
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Jan 6, 2011 18:14:15 GMT -5
As to why Story -- he'd been drawing a lot of heat. I need to ask about this. Bill and Peeker claimed as masons on Day 2 after MHaye showed up dead at Dawn. Why did you choose to watch Story over either of the almost confirmed Town players? What did you hope to see by selecting to watch over a player who'd drawn a lot of heat? A cop? A vig?
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 6, 2011 18:46:48 GMT -5
A PFK, maybe.
I try very hard not to let meatspace affect my game, but to be perfectly honest during Day/Night Two and Three I was dealing with A LOT of Health & Family shit (and I did post about the health stuff at the time). Because I only have two functioning brain cells at the best of times and they were both occupied, it flat didn't cross my mind to watch one of the Masons until Night Four.
Ulla: I can ask. I don't know that I'll get a response, but I can ask.
Also, with regard to the posting restriction thing: I hadn't thought about my only being allowed to post my results "in verse" as being a restriction. A requirement, but since I can say anything as long as I say it in verse -- which isn't much of a struggle for me but the quality isn't guaranteed -- it didn't cross my mind to read it as "a restriction."
With that said, I'm now starting to wonder how Buff was defining "restriction" in the rules thread -- whether she simply meant that we could post anything we want during the Day threads up to and including our role PMs or other communication with the mods, even if we might have specific "quirks" that were appropriate to our roles.
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 6, 2011 18:56:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 6, 2011 19:09:43 GMT -5
Right. "You may post whatever you like." but that doesn't in any way indicate that I can't be required to post whatever I like in a Petrarchan, Shakespearean, or Spenserian sonnet.
Which, thank mod, I only have to write in verse. A particular verse form would have been horrifically restrictive.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jan 6, 2011 19:27:05 GMT -5
I most likely won't be back until tomorrow (not toMorrow) morning some time.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jan 6, 2011 21:52:35 GMT -5
For starters, a belated Happy new Year all. Sorry to see you go SP and I wonder what Inner stickler was up to. That it is quiet is never a good thing for town. It is also worrying that charr is no longer a member. So, looking back over the game, I thought I would take a look at NAF1138 and see if anything was of use. Early Day 1, there is a fair amount upfront on roleclaims and information vs numbers. Late Day 1/Early Day 2 is a case against paranoia. Day 2 He picks up on storyteller's comment about shoes. Questions to charr about his EOD1 vote. His leaves his vote against paranoia though. Day 3: he votes for crazypunker after his claim citing that the case against him was decent and its a testable role. So after that, I would put paranoia more towards the non-scum category. What I am trying to figure out are his thoughts on charr, storyteller and crazypunker. He spent time questioning charr about his EOD1 vote and his theory there was a vote buyer. Then again, there was his comment on Day 2, that he would place money on charr not flipping scum. He was quick to follow up with storyteller about the post restriction, and said all signposts point to storyteller being a foolish townie. crazypunker he seemed happier to lynch but whether that was to confirm his role (although not necessarily his side) or remove an obstacle, we don't know. I'm going to think some more. I appreciate the effort to review NAF's posts; I need all the help I can get. I thought I remembered another post and went back to look and found on page 1 on day 3: There is a lot of information that has come out since the last time I checked the thread, and I feel like there are connections to be made...but I have a wicked head cold and everything is just out of my reach. I think looking at Maha's lynch will be very instructive. We can probably confirm, or semi confirm, a couple of people based on that (sort of what SP said in the post above). I am going to start trying to draw up a list...or something. See if I can't start seeing some connections. Any reason to omit this post, CIAS? It seems odd to me now that we know NAF was also scum. Was he paving the way to build town cred for a fellow scum based on the Mahaloth lynch? And if so whom? I don't think he ever followed up on this post. The voters on Mahaloth were me, Sister(D1&2), Guiri(D1&2), Blockey, and BillMc (and MHaye D1). The other possibilities are the people who attacked Mahaloth on night zero for his help out roles remark. Those from memory were Ed and Pleo. (Or were there others?)
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jan 6, 2011 23:18:54 GMT -5
Would it be possible to get an official status on Charr, since he appears to no longer be a member here? The rules did not mention the possibilities of mod-kills or subs. Do we assume then that there will be neither?
|
|
|
Post by bufftabby on Jan 6, 2011 23:55:28 GMT -5
There will be neither.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jan 7, 2011 0:50:50 GMT -5
I have to say that I agree with the rather meta-game assessment about Sister's verses seeming to fly in the face of a reasonable interpretation of the rules. This perspective is further underscored by my personal experience of disliking most post restrictions and desire to avoid games that have them, wherein luring me into a game with such a disclaimer only to heartlessly betray my trust...is not something that I think bufftabby would do.
This leaves me in a quandary because having that reaction leaves me a bit more ambivalent about lynching Story.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jan 7, 2011 0:51:24 GMT -5
There should be some sarcastic smiley in there around the 'heartlessle betray' part.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jan 7, 2011 0:54:19 GMT -5
Perhaps I'm a bit gunshy about dead-weight players after the Dark Knights game, but
Vote: Charr
I just want to be extra sure before potentially lynching two claimed power roles.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jan 7, 2011 0:54:41 GMT -5
grr
Vote: Charr
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Jan 7, 2011 2:07:34 GMT -5
Is it me, or did the amount of meatchunks lazing about increase somewhere around day four? I mean - we get some people in to wagon on someone - say Crazypunker or Inner but right now it feels like the threads have slowed to a craw.
Day 3 was slower than day 2, but that was nothing compared to the snails pace that day 4 crawled along at. Now we're in day five and there's barely a page 3.
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Jan 7, 2011 2:11:27 GMT -5
Night 3, I blocked Ed and last Night, I blocked Renata. Why are you still blocking randomly? I mean - there's a lot of pain coming down on the likes of Storyteller, CAIS, Charr, and Crazypunker. And you're still blocking randomly. Why? I thought we discussed this like... days ago that randomly blocking, especially this late in the game is bad, and ya'know. Anti-town. Can you stop doing stuff that has potential to hurt your own claimed win condition plskthx.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jan 7, 2011 3:38:47 GMT -5
I agree that there have been some rather compelling candidates for blocking.
|
|