|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 17, 2011 16:38:33 GMT -5
I'm not forgetting about you either, Texcat. Anything you wish to contribute?
|
|
|
Post by Romanic on Feb 17, 2011 17:09:03 GMT -5
But that is a big deal. The first is a fairly common, unremarkable remark. The latter is commentary without justification, and should be jumped on. You changed BobArrgh's comment from something normal to something scummy, and then voted him for saying something scummy. You have effectively voted him based on your own words, yours and not BobArrgh's. In short, you invented your case out of whole cloth, which is a very scummy thing to do. Alright, whatever. You're entitled to your opinion on this, but you're pushing it when you say that "I invented my case out of whole cloth". The paraphrasing is only a part of my case, and not the meat of it. Are you attacking me on this point because you think it's the weakest part? Again, I reiterate my question that you deliberately avoided forgot to answer: What about the rest of my case? Are you dismissing it because I skipped a few words?
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 17, 2011 20:47:06 GMT -5
The rest of your case falls apart when the paraphrase is revealed to be inaccurate. Part 3, that BobArrgh didn't vote for Maha on Day 1, is irrelevant because in the actual quoted section Bob says that he only became suspicious of Maha on Day 2 anyway. And in Part 1, regarding Bob's vote switching, the vote switch came a full day after his previous vote, a day in which Maha made four substantial posts that were pretty scummy. It's not a stretch to think that Bob changed his vote because Maha started acting really scummy when he was on the defensive.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 17, 2011 20:54:28 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, Pede, do you think Bob is Town or Third Party? Or do you think that Romanic might be bussing him with dubious justification?
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 17, 2011 21:34:50 GMT -5
I am uncertain. Right now, I'm leaning toward Town (though with some scummy behavior on Day 1), but I could also see the scum double-bus play as reasonably possible.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 17, 2011 21:42:21 GMT -5
Ok, then my curiosity is now extended. What do you think of some of the other cases against Bob other than Romanic's? There are a stack to choose from at this point.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Pinkies on Feb 18, 2011 0:14:31 GMT -5
!%^*&$#^%&*$^%*)$#*($ MOD's... I swear I posted yesterday.... But clearly I did not... No excuses.... Got swamped with IRL stuff.. Like work and wee ones my little pony pricess tea party sleep over... Handling that many girls should give me a free and clear pass, at least for the night... I have done a re-read and my gut is telling me to go look at someone more carefully... But my poor brain isn't comprehending this even to make a case.... And I don't want to make a case without a review...
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 18, 2011 4:36:54 GMT -5
Because it's the likeliest possibility? If there's a single nightkill, yeah, I'm going to assume the scum did it, not that a confluence of events prevented the scum kill and another killer killed instead. I'll just point out, you are the only player stating outright that it was a scum kill on Night 2. But there is no reason for you to state this because the general Town cannot know what happened. The only people who do know are likely to be the scum and any SKs/Vigs should they exist. Also why are you so hooked up on Mahaloth, Natlaw and Timmy. Well, at least we know what Timmy's alignment was. Something we should address at some point. Mahaloth claimed, on Day 2, that Natlaw and Timmy were of the same alignment (and thus, that Natlaw was town). Now that we know that Maha was scum, what does that say about Natlaw? Ok then, you have had three different opinions back from your question. What's your opinion?
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 18, 2011 4:45:21 GMT -5
That's it? No one has anything else to say? I think the scum are waiting for Ulla and Ed to get back to them with a good roleclaim. Either that or they are sat back enjoying us lynch a townie. I 'm leaning towards the former. Something for everyone to do: Please put down at least one person they find scummy and why. Doesn't have to be detailed, but getting some thoughts, any thoughts down helps the town.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 18, 2011 4:54:28 GMT -5
I am uncertain. Right now, I'm leaning toward Town (though with some scummy behavior on Day 1), but I could also see the scum double-bus play as reasonably possible. A scum double-bus play; what do you mean? Sacrifice two of their own people to give townie cred to the rest? I went back and checked the vote count. Mahaloth voters: harmless little bunny [3], peeker [163], Suburban Plankton [167], pedescribe [180], romola [182], guiri [184], ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCoconuts [187], bobarrgh [192] Bobarrgh voters: Sister Coyote [12], romanic [30], renata [31], CatInASuit [50], guiri [52], ComeToCamelotWeHaveCoconuts [59] Ok, the only overlap between the voters is guiri and Cookies. Please feel free to comment?
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 18, 2011 8:21:48 GMT -5
Random data point from a brief runthrough on Sis Coyote. Starts with Bobarrgh saying this: Anyway, if I'm going to be lynched, then so be it. I've always felt that "... a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." Thus, since several of you have made up your mind about me, there's not much I am going to be able to say to make you change your minds. I don't have anyone I can ask about what my next step should be. I've know there's a lot of discussion about whether or not a person should claim on Day 1, etc., etc. I feel that no matter what I do, it will be seen as a null-tell. I'm not sure I am supposed to reveal my role at the moment, so I am not going to, simply because I don't want to make the wrong move with respect to hurting the other Townies. Which Sister Coyote used as the main plank of her vote reasoning on Day 2 like so. There are a handful of things about this that bother me. The "I can't change anyone's mind" argument -- of course you can, and as Town it's kind of your job to go about hunting scum even if your neck is on the line. The statement "I don't have anyone I can ask about what my next step should be" really bothers me; it's not Scummy on its face, but...I don't know. I'm having trouble articulating what it is about this particular statement that's pinging me so damn hard. Finally -- am I the only one seeing a Magic Bag in that final statement? That he doesn't want to give away his role because it might hurt Town if he did -- that somehow coming out with a role claim would be worse than dying? So, looking back as to why Bobarrgh didn't claim, I find this. I'll go with the rest and believe your made a mistake nor were very clear with you statements and Unvote: bobarggh [/color] That puts KidV in the lead so I (imo) that means you don't have to claim. Please note different between an unprovoked claim like BillMc did and the later claim because the player were in the lead for the lynch close to Dusk. The latter is expected at least on this board. But only you know your role so only you can reason when it's best to claim before your lynched or not.[/quote] This kind of thing is pinging me and I cannot put my finger on why. Natlaw, why did you not just unvote Bobarrgh, but also tell him that he doesn't have to claim?
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 18, 2011 8:28:59 GMT -5
Although, something is twigging me about your play, i can't put a face to a name as it was, so i don't feel comfortable voting you. Instead, I'm gonna vote naturally lazy. I feel like she's laying low. vote naturallylazySo, Redskeezix, why did vote naturallylazy instead of Hockey Monkey or even Captain Pinkies who didn't even join us?
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 18, 2011 9:08:46 GMT -5
Ok, then my curiosity is now extended. What do you think of some of the other cases against Bob other than Romanic's? There are a stack to choose from at this point. Basically, the one that involves The Typo. Looking back at Day 1, ISTM that the typo was not a typo, and thus Bob's claim that it was is a lie. Now, I could see a townie lying about that, just because they don't want to get votes. But obviously lying is always suspicious. However, I don't think he acted very suspicious on Day 2, and I think that Romanic is also lying to make sure that Bob is lynched. Because it's the likeliest possibility? If there's a single nightkill, yeah, I'm going to assume the scum did it, not that a confluence of events prevented the scum kill and another killer killed instead. I'll just point out, you are the only player stating outright that it was a scum kill on Night 2. But there is no reason for you to state this because the general Town cannot know what happened. The only people who do know are likely to be the scum and any SKs/Vigs should they exist. If you want to delve into technicalities, I did not actually say that, nor did anyone else question it. I assumed it, just like everyone else (except for you, apparently) assumed it. I don't actually know if the scum killed SubPlank, but it is a reasonable assumption because the scum get a nightkill, and SubPlank was nightkilled. And yes, I am assuming that the scum have a nightkill. Do you have a problem with that, too? I mean, as long as we're conflating assumptions with outright statements. Hell, I could turn this line of questioning right back on you. Why are you so doubtful that SubPlank was killed by the scum, when it's the likeliest possibility? Do you know that he wasn't, hmm? [oog]Sorry about the snark.[/oog] Also why are you so hooked up on Mahaloth, Natlaw and Timmy. I'm not. Something we should address at some point. Mahaloth claimed, on Day 2, that Natlaw and Timmy were of the same alignment (and thus, that Natlaw was town). Now that we know that Maha was scum, what does that say about Natlaw? Ok then, you have had three different opinions back from your question. What's your opinion? I don't understand what this means.
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Feb 18, 2011 9:17:20 GMT -5
I am being bussed, but I'm not sure who the ringleader is, either SisCoyote or guiri.
Late on Day 1 I said I did not want to reveal my role because I didn't want my revelation to hurt Town. I don't think I should remain silent any more.
I am the Town Eavesdropper:
On Day 1, I listened to sinjin, based on Burby's statement that something felt "off" about her vote. I got back the following response:
I sent a follow-up PM to Ulla and Ed asking if that meant that she had access to another board but had not posted during the Night or if she does not have access to another board. I did not receive a response to that PM. I chose to interpret all the silence as meaning that sinjin does not have access to another board, which is why I backed off from her on Day 2.
On Night 2, I listened to Captain Pinkies and got this response:
Make of that what you will.
Now that I am exposed, I would really appreciate any kind of protection I might get toNight. I don't intend on advertising who I am going to listen to toNight, because I don't want to illuminate the target on my back with neon paint.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 18, 2011 9:27:59 GMT -5
If you want to delve into technicalities, I did not actually say that, nor did anyone else question it. I assumed it, just like everyone else (except for you, apparently) assumed it. I don't actually know if the scum killed SubPlank, but it is a reasonable assumption because the scum get a nightkill, and SubPlank was nightkilled. And yes, I am assuming that the scum have a nightkill. Do you have a problem with that, too? I mean, as long as we're conflating assumptions with outright statements. Hell, I could turn this line of questioning right back on you. Why are you so doubtful that SubPlank was killed by the scum, when it's the likeliest possibility? Do you know that he wasn't, hmm? [oog]Sorry about the snark.[/oog] No worries about the snark. Yes, you are the only person who said it. Dangargh. Either the scum got lucky, or we have a scum investigator. Neither possibility bodes well... Also, I didn't say SubPlank was killed by the scum and I have no idea who was killed by whom each Night. What I am beginning to think is that you do. I don't understand what this means. It means answer your own question please. Something we should address at some point. Mahaloth claimed, on Day 2, that Natlaw and Timmy were of the same alignment (and thus, that Natlaw was town). Now that we know that Maha was scum, what does that say about Natlaw?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 18, 2011 9:32:05 GMT -5
I'll just point out, you are the only player stating outright that it was a scum kill on Night 2. But there is no reason for you to state this because the general Town cannot know what happened. The only people who do know are likely to be the scum and any SKs/Vigs should they exist. Also why are you so hooked up on Mahaloth, Natlaw and Timmy. <snipped> this is by no means intended as a defense of pede but rather meant to kind of poke at cias. sure i don't know for sure what happened but i will naturally make some assumptions and draw conclusions. it's the validity of the assumptions that should be looked at. i mean back in the day i used to drink a LOT. sometimes to the point of praying to the porcelain goddess. now could that have been because i happened to pick up a twenty four hour bug everytime i drank a half gallon of vodka or could it have been a result of the alcohol consumption. i mean one assumption is a little more reasonable. assuming that scum killed at Night doesn't seem to be a stretch. and i too was a little interested in the maha/timmy/natlaw triumverate. to some extent that was the straw that broke the camel's back on the maha vote. i mean it just seemed too convenient that maha got a read on a deader. was it because scum killed timmy to set maha up or did he just capitalize on a death flip? i am not even sure that it matters although it might have implications for natlaw.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 18, 2011 9:34:38 GMT -5
I am being bussed, but I'm not sure who the ringleader is, either SisCoyote or guiri. <snipped> cool a confession implicating two other scum.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 18, 2011 9:36:44 GMT -5
I am the Town Eavesdropper: <snipped> fuck. jeebus bob get the fucking terminology down a little better, for fuck's sake.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 18, 2011 9:36:53 GMT -5
Power: Each Night you may choose a player to listen to. If the player has access to off-board communications you will be offered a snippet of what they have said that very same Night. If they have access to a off-board but didn't post that Night you will get no result. This power makes absolutely no sense whatsoever: you will be offered a snippet of what they have said that very same NightI mean what the hell, specifically, is a snippet. 10 words, 30 characters, an entire post?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 18, 2011 9:41:27 GMT -5
heh heh. snuck one in.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Feb 18, 2011 9:43:28 GMT -5
Bob, do you know what bussing is?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 18, 2011 9:50:12 GMT -5
This power makes absolutely no sense whatsoever: you will be offered a snippet of what they have said that very same NightI mean what the hell, specifically, is a snippet. 10 words, 30 characters, an entire post? metagame observation warning and also picking on cias some more since it has been a while. in one of tabby's games on giraffe there was a role/mechanism much like this one. and i forget the details exactly but the end result was that someone got a portion of the scum discussion pm'ed to them or posted in the main thread or some such nonsense. now they didn't get who said it, which seems uber powerful but i can see ulla tweaking something like that. the problem is that this functions as a full blown cop for all intents and purposes.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 18, 2011 9:55:22 GMT -5
Bob, do you know what bussing is? part of your team turning against you must feel like betrayal. ;D
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 18, 2011 9:56:41 GMT -5
If you want to delve into technicalities, I did not actually say that, nor did anyone else question it. I assumed it, just like everyone else (except for you, apparently) assumed it. I don't actually know if the scum killed SubPlank, but it is a reasonable assumption because the scum get a nightkill, and SubPlank was nightkilled. And yes, I am assuming that the scum have a nightkill. Do you have a problem with that, too? I mean, as long as we're conflating assumptions with outright statements. Hell, I could turn this line of questioning right back on you. Why are you so doubtful that SubPlank was killed by the scum, when it's the likeliest possibility? Do you know that he wasn't, hmm? [oog]Sorry about the snark.[/oog] No worries about the snark. Yes, you are the only person who said it. Also, I didn't say SubPlank was killed by the scum and I have no idea who was killed by whom each Night. What I am beginning to think is that you do. Nope, I don't. I am assuming that the likeliest possibility is true because it makes speculation easier, and speculation is both fun and helpful. It means answer your own question please. Something we should address at some point. Mahaloth claimed, on Day 2, that Natlaw and Timmy were of the same alignment (and thus, that Natlaw was town). Now that we know that Maha was scum, what does that say about Natlaw? I don't know the answer. If I knew the answer I wouldn't ask the question, I'd just say what the implications of Maha's claim were. I speculate that there isn't enough information to suss out the implications, but I wanted to see if anyone had any ideas. As it happens, no one did, so I didn't bother pursuing it farther. I am being bussed, but I'm not sure who the ringleader is, either SisCoyote or guiri. Late on Day 1 I said I did not want to reveal my role because I didn't want my revelation to hurt Town. I don't think I should remain silent any more. I am the Town Eavesdropper: On Day 1, I listened to sinjin, based on Burby's statement that something felt "off" about her vote. I got back the following response: I sent a follow-up PM to Ulla and Ed asking if that meant that she had access to another board but had not posted during the Night or if she does not have access to another board. I did not receive a response to that PM. I chose to interpret all the silence as meaning that sinjin does not have access to another board, which is why I backed off from her on Day 2. On Night 2, I listened to Captain Pinkies and got this response: Make of that what you will. Now that I am exposed, I would really appreciate any kind of protection I might get toNight. I don't intend on advertising who I am going to listen to toNight, because I don't want to illuminate the target on my back with neon paint. Power: Each Night you may choose a player to listen to. If the player has access to off-board communications you will be offered a snippet of what they have said that very same Night. If they have access to a off-board but didn't post that Night you will get no result. This power makes absolutely no sense whatsoever: you will be offered a snippet of what they have said that very same NightI mean what the hell, specifically, is a snippet. 10 words, 30 characters, an entire post? I am inclined to agree with CIAS. The power that BobArrgh claimed is one that's often discussed but never used, because it has a few crippling flaws. Firstly, it is swingy as fuck. An eavesdropper could get absolutely nothing or catch 2 or 3 scum at once, and it depends not on the eavesdropper himself but on the way the scum (who, of course, have no reason to think their words are being overheard) act. Secondly, it gives the moderator too much power over the game. Yes, technically speaking the moderators choose a "random snippet", but it's not like the moderators are going to roll dice to decide which words are included, so basically the moderators get to decide how useful the eavesdropper is Night to Night, after the game has started. Thirdly, it's unfair. The scum/mason (and yes, I am assuming, CIAS, that the scum (and masons, if there are any) have offboard discussion places) boards are supposed to be a safe haven, in which they can plan in secret. It's unfair, then, to turn around and give a townie access to them. And if the moderator tells them there might be an eavesdropper, the scum don't plan anything and the game is just a lot less fun. It'd be like if a moderator decided that a role got power based on fluff posted in the Night thread, or something stupid like that. Unvote: Rominic But I've still got my eye on you. Vote: BobArrgh
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 18, 2011 10:01:25 GMT -5
It'd be like if a moderator decided that a role got power based on fluff posted in the Night thread, or something stupid like that. <snipped> actually if it was given to scum and i was part of the scum team and it involved drinking at Night i could be down with that.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 18, 2011 10:06:22 GMT -5
The game is quiet, I want answers and conversation. peekerpoker, if you are going to poke, use a stick please. pedescribe, no problems with the assumptions about external boards.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 18, 2011 10:07:34 GMT -5
neta: and if just so happened to involve a scum mason then double uberlicious.
p.s. at least you got rid of both those honkers in the same game.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 18, 2011 11:11:08 GMT -5
neta: and if just so happened to involve a scum mason then double uberlicious. p.s. at least you got rid of both those honkers in the same game. Right, right. What I am saying is that since I made those mistakes*, Ed would be sure not to make a similar one in his own game. *SSBM, hosted on this board. The scum team was embarrassingly overpowered (though they also played well).
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Feb 18, 2011 11:42:37 GMT -5
Bob, do you know what bussing is? I thought bussing was another term for starting the wagon train on someone.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Natlaw on Feb 18, 2011 13:00:52 GMT -5
So, looking back as to why Bobarrgh didn't claim, I find this. I don't have anyone I can ask about what my next step should be. I've know there's a lot of discussion about whether or not a person should claim on Day 1, etc., etc. I feel that no matter what I do, it will be seen as a scull-tell. I'll go with the rest and believe your made a mistake nor were very clear with you statements and Unvote: bobarggh [/color] That puts KidV in the lead so I (imo) that means you don't have to claim. Please note different between an unprovoked claim like BillMc did and the later claim because the player were in the lead for the lynch close to Dusk. The latter is expected at least on this board. But only you know your role so only you can reason when it's best to claim before your lynched or not.[/quote] This kind of thing is pinging me and I cannot put my finger on why. Natlaw, why did you not just unvote Bobarrgh, but also tell him that he doesn't have to claim?[/quote] I've put back in the part of the post by bob I was responsing to that you removed. He was asking about it (well, thinking out loud about how he had nobody to ask) and I answered him since it a) was me who prompted his question and b) he did not seem to see the difference between an unprovoked claim and one because you're about to be lynched. I didn't think he needed to claim at that point compared to where he asked the question because people were unvoting him and my vote change remove him from the lead. I was reviewing between voting KidV or timmy then iirc. But if the situation changed whether to claim or not would be his decision.
|
|