|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 19, 2011 20:53:05 GMT -5
I haven't seen a listener role that could target a specific player before but I'm not so convinced that Bob's claimed role is all that powerful. If he gets results from a target, it proves that the target has off-board communication, that's all. Could be a mason, could be scum, but unless the random snippet is something like 'let's kill Bob tonight', there's no way of knowing. Similarly, if there is no result, that doesn't clear the target. Targetting Captain Pinkies and getting no results says nothing at all, I've seen Captain get lynched and not knowing anything about it because he simply wasn't around. <snipped> I thought from the beginning that Mahaloth's claimed role may be unfeasibly powerful. However, I did think it made sense to keep him alive to claim results and have them scrutinised. Unfortunately, the claimed investigation results leave us none the wiser as to whether he's telling the truth or not. Also, Paranoia's confirmed role as an investigator casts additonal doubt on Maha's claim. No, it's not impossible that Town may have two investigative roles, but we also have to consider, if you are truthful, why Scum would have role blocked yourself, as a Watcher, rather than an investigator. I would be happy with a Mahaloth lynch toDay. the above is a "snippet" (sorry but i couldn't resist) from romola yesterDay. and i left in both the stuff that bothers as well as the stuff that seemingly explains away the bother. i guess i have one question for romola. you were ready to lynch maha yesterDay because his claimed role was too powerful. now i fully understand the mason/non talker argument but his role still seems uber town cool what with a dead detective and a claimed watcher (which is kind of like 1 and half investigative roles). if bob is telling the truth that would make two and a quarter, at least. so i kind of come down to the same point that i did yesterDay. one of the two is scum and the other is likely town. at this point i am inclined to believe bunny. now if sin or pinkies wants to get in here and call b.s. on bob that would be kind of helpful. ;D
|
|
Romola
Mome Rath
One of them saw two words of the joke and spent several weeks in hospital.
Posts: 107
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Romola on Feb 19, 2011 20:59:19 GMT -5
Sis, I'm seeing where you disagreed with the other cases against Bob, but not where you agreed. Could you indulge me?
|
|
Romola
Mome Rath
One of them saw two words of the joke and spent several weeks in hospital.
Posts: 107
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Romola on Feb 19, 2011 21:06:55 GMT -5
I haven't seen a listener role that could target a specific player before but I'm not so convinced that Bob's claimed role is all that powerful. If he gets results from a target, it proves that the target has off-board communication, that's all. Could be a mason, could be scum, but unless the random snippet is something like 'let's kill Bob tonight', there's no way of knowing. Similarly, if there is no result, that doesn't clear the target. Targetting Captain Pinkies and getting no results says nothing at all, I've seen Captain get lynched and not knowing anything about it because he simply wasn't around. <snipped> I thought from the beginning that Mahaloth's claimed role may be unfeasibly powerful. However, I did think it made sense to keep him alive to claim results and have them scrutinised. Unfortunately, the claimed investigation results leave us none the wiser as to whether he's telling the truth or not. Also, Paranoia's confirmed role as an investigator casts additonal doubt on Maha's claim. No, it's not impossible that Town may have two investigative roles, but we also have to consider, if you are truthful, why Scum would have role blocked yourself, as a Watcher, rather than an investigator. I would be happy with a Mahaloth lynch toDay. the above is a "snippet" (sorry but i couldn't resist) from romola yesterDay. and i left in both the stuff that bothers as well as the stuff that seemingly explains away the bother. i guess i have one question for romola. you were ready to lynch maha yesterDay because his claimed role was too powerful. now i fully understand the mason/non talker argument but his role still seems uber town cool what with a dead detective and a claimed watcher (which is kind of like 1 and half investigative roles). if bob is telling the truth that would make two and a quarter, at least. so i kind of come down to the same point that i did yesterDay. one of the two is scum and the other is likely town. at this point i am inclined to believe bunny. now if sin or pinkies wants to get in here and call b.s. on bob that would be kind of helpful. ;D I'm by no means buying Bob's claim on face value, but I'm not seeing the claimed listener role as equivalent to an investigative one, for the reasons i gave . C'mon, what info would you expect to get from listening to pinkies?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 19, 2011 21:34:14 GMT -5
C'mon, what info would you expect to get from listening to pinkies? <snipped> and this would be one of the reasons i am voting for bob.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Feb 19, 2011 21:34:38 GMT -5
Before I go back through the Day and answer your question, Romola -- which I might not do, I haven't decided yet -- why so interested in my opinions?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 19, 2011 21:36:28 GMT -5
oh and romola if you are not buying bob's claim at "face value" what part are you not buying. has he added stuff, redacted stuff, made the whole durn thing up or something else.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 19, 2011 21:43:32 GMT -5
Vote Countwith approximately 1 day, 7 hours and 16 minutes until DayEndPlayer (# of votes) (peak number of votes) voters [post in which vote was cast, post in which vote was removed] Bobarrgh (11) (11 113) Sister Coyote [12], Romanic [30], Renata [31], CatInASuit [50], guiri [52], ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCoconuts [59], pedescribe [83], Red Skeezix [101], Hockey Monkey [102], peekercpa [104], Merestil Haye [113] Captain Pinkies (1) (1 0) Romanic (0) (1 42) pedescribe [42 83]Not Voting (8) Captain Pinkies, Romola, sinjin, bobarrgh, texcat, naturallylazy, harmless little bunny, Natlaw With these votes, Bobarrgh would be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by harmless little bunny on Feb 19, 2011 23:31:50 GMT -5
unfortunately I won't be getting to do a full analysis of the day because I don't have time, but I'm glad to see one of my top suspects since Day 1 is leading the votes. A vote at this point doesn't matter much, but I'll vote bob anyways for what he said on Day 1 about how Mahaloth changed his vote and since I didn't change mine I was scummy.
plus a lot of other reasons that have already been said and I don't have time to re list them.
|
|
Romola
Mome Rath
One of them saw two words of the joke and spent several weeks in hospital.
Posts: 107
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Romola on Feb 20, 2011 4:51:41 GMT -5
Before I go back through the Day and answer your question, Romola -- which I might not do, I haven't decided yet -- why so interested in my opinions? It was just that things had moved on a lot with Bob since you made your vote and the only comments that you had made about the situation had seemed more in Bob's favour than against him.
|
|
Romola
Mome Rath
One of them saw two words of the joke and spent several weeks in hospital.
Posts: 107
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Romola on Feb 20, 2011 4:54:51 GMT -5
C'mon, what info would you expect to get from listening to pinkies? <snipped> and this would be one of the reasons i am voting for bob. But would Bob havevknown that about Pinkies? Even with a better choice of target, I don't think the role is that powerful. The timing of it worries me but I'm not really seeing the rest of the case against Bob.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 20, 2011 7:41:09 GMT -5
But would Bob havevknown that about Pinkies? Even with a better choice of target, I don't think the role is that powerful. The timing of it worries me but I'm not really seeing the rest of the case against Bob. well he should have know about pinkies since he didn't post at all during Day 2, hence the penalty vote. now certainly if bob listens to pinkes that Night and comes back with something then that would sure as heck be bad for pinkies. but to select him and to some extent sin as your targets just seems odd. i mean with both of them ( pinkies moreso than sin) not hearing anything at Night really doesn't mean squat. whereas if you were to listen to say me, ed, sis, bill or even you (i am including the last two because while not necessarily high volume are folks that are active and participatory) and a whole host of others getting silence at Night is going to imply something. and while i am loathe to second guess power roles at some point you just have to go hmmmm. it would be like if we had three cross confirmed masons and one of them gets NK'ed and flips mason. then a Day or so later a claimed detective comes back with "i investigated one of the remaining masons and golly gee, what do you know they came back town". that would definitely be a wtf moment. and i will give this to bob. he is relatively new to our small band of pschopaths (and i hope he keeps coming back because he cracks me up and seems to have a knack - read the who poem sometime. i mean a rookie to come up with that was sheer genius) so he probably doesn't have the history that the rest of us have with pinkies. but even without that knowledge i would think a newbie, maybe more so than anyone else, would be playing this role pretty conservative. hitting the high volume posters and seeing if you get one. plus everyone needs to get their lynch cherry cracked at some point.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 20, 2011 7:57:55 GMT -5
and one final point that i kind of already made and it may merely be my experience and not others. the tenor of conversation on mason boards is typically a way bunch different on their boards than on a scum board (having been both more times than i can count). now a lot depends on the "snippet" that is revealed but if it has any meat to it then i think those of us who have been around the block would be able to accurately predict whether it was mason or scum. and i think pede may have been the one who first mentioned it but having the mods decide what is a "snippet" and what part of a post should be included in said "snippet" gives the mods a lot of influence on the outcome of this claimed power. i think that mod influenced decisions or random events have become to be looked askance at by the majority of this crew. the game should be decided by what happens in this thread not by random.org, a dice throw or a mod decision.
now having said all that i certainly don't put it past either ed or ulla to thumb their nose at convention meanwhile laughing maniacally the whole time. especially if it results in an ass showing by either the group or specific individuals.
|
|
Romola
Mome Rath
One of them saw two words of the joke and spent several weeks in hospital.
Posts: 107
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Romola on Feb 20, 2011 7:59:52 GMT -5
A) On Day 1 (#358), he [ Suburban] said he thought that sinjin's reasoning for her vote on me felt "off". I didn't pursue any line-of-questioning on sinjin yesterDay because I could sense her frustration and stress over her husband's departure. I really didn't want to pile on sinjin. That is probably a very naive attitude on my part, and I probably won't be making that mistake again.I'm not sure how to interpret this but it reads like Bob wanted to ask Suburban about the latter's suspicions of sinjin on Day 2 but didn't want to question or pile on to sinjin as she was having RL issues. I don't see how this comment can be reconciled with his claimed investigation of her on Night 1: On Day 1, I listened to sinjin, based on Burby's statement that something felt "off" about her vote.[...]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./snip & underline /oog Hope your MIL gets well soon, safe trip I'd missed this from earlier, or skimmed it and not took on board properly that Bob seemed to be giving two different reasons for backing off Sinjin. I agree, Peeker and Guiri, the claimed targets make no sense, the timing of the claim is suspect and Bob seems to have forgotten that he had 'cleared' Sinjin when he posted the bit about backing off her because of her r/l stuff. Ok, I'm convinced. Vote BobAargh Hope MIL is ok, Bob, best wishes.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Feb 20, 2011 8:03:51 GMT -5
and romola i never saw your answer to my question about what you saw about bob's claim that caused you not to buy it at "face value".
because coming through the peek filter it reads to me like "i kind of believe bob and i kind of don't but i am still not going to vote him although i think he is full of it to some extent".
|
|
Romola
Mome Rath
One of them saw two words of the joke and spent several weeks in hospital.
Posts: 107
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Romola on Feb 20, 2011 10:38:18 GMT -5
and romola i never saw your answer to my question about what you saw about bob's claim that caused you not to buy it at "face value". because coming through the peek filter it reads to me like "i kind of believe bob and i kind of don't but i am still not going to vote him although i think he is full of it to some extent". It was the timing that I didn't like, rather than finding the stated role unbelievable. I dithered as long as I did because I wasn't convinced by most of the other cases against him. It was the investigation choices that swung it, and that post about wanting to question Sinjin despite having already apparently investigated her does seem like a major slip.
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Feb 20, 2011 14:35:39 GMT -5
Yes, I gave two reasons why I backed off of sinjin. When I gave the first reason, I was not ready to expose myself or my role. I was pinged by sinjin on Day 1 and wanted to get a better read on her, so I made her my target on Night 1. When I got the response I did and then didn't get an answer to my follow-up question, I interpreted the silence from the mods as meaning that they couldn't give me an answer without unfairly exposing information.
In my mind, it was the exact same thing that had happened when, in the Dr. Seuss game, I sent a PM to the mod (SisCoyote), pointing out that there was an issue with the vote count, and somebody's vote had not been counted correctly. I didn't get an answer then, either, because if SisCoyote had answered me, then it would have unfairly exposed information about why giraffe's vote was not counting.
Thus, the sum total of my experience with not getting an answer back from the mods is that silence means they don't want to even acknowledge the question since it would expose information. It may have been confirmation bias, but it led me to think that sinjin didn't have access to a different board.
On to Captain Pinkies. His behavior looks a lot like Mlerose's behavior from the Dr. Seuss game. He comes in only occasionally, posts something that is pretty much just fluff, and then backs away. He said he doesn't get fully engaged in a game until Day 3 or so.
At the time, I could have investigated harmless, who had claimed Town Watcher on Day 1. However, once Mahaloth was lynched and flipped as Scum, I figured harmless's claim was true, since Mahaloth's turned out to be false. I thought it was somewhat redundant to listen to someone who had already claimed a Town power role, so I targeted someone who I thought looked just like someone else who had turned out to be scum in another game.
Could I have chosen better targets? Of course I could have. That's why hindsight is always 20/20. At the time, I chose my targets with the best knowledge and gut feelings I had.
|
|
Romola
Mome Rath
One of them saw two words of the joke and spent several weeks in hospital.
Posts: 107
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Romola on Feb 20, 2011 14:44:41 GMT -5
Yes, I gave two reasons why I backed off of sinjin. When I gave the first reason, I was not ready to expose myself or my role.... But what prompted you to give any reason for backing off sinjin, let alone making up a reason to do so? Nobody had asked you about backing off sinjin as far as I can see, you brought it up as one of your '2 questions for burby which have to remain unanswered'. I think you had forgotten about this post when you made your claim, the explanation makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Feb 20, 2011 15:04:26 GMT -5
No, I had not forgotten it. I still want some other information on sinjin so I can raise the confidence I have on my read of her.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 20, 2011 15:09:44 GMT -5
Vote Countwith approximately 0 days, 13 hours and 51 minutes until DayEndPlayer (# of votes) (peak number of votes) voters [post in which vote was cast, post in which vote was removed] Bobarrgh (13) (13 132) Sister Coyote [12], Romanic [30], Renata [31], CatInASuit [50], guiri [52], ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCoconuts [59], pedescribe [83], Red Skeezix [101], Hockey Monkey [102], peekercpa [104], Merestil Haye [113], harmless little bunny [127], Romola [132] Captain Pinkies (1) (1 0) Romanic (0) (1 42) pedescribe [42 83]Not Voting (6) Captain Pinkies, sinjin, bobarrgh, texcat, naturallylazy, Natlaw With these votes, Bobarrgh would be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Feb 20, 2011 16:13:27 GMT -5
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.
Did you even read the role pm you were given? The question you supposedly asked Ulla and Ed is clearly addressed there, bolded by me. If there are masons in the game, and I don't know if there are, this would be a nice little scum power role.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Feb 20, 2011 16:25:22 GMT -5
Well that was weird. Don't know what happened with the size. Do you all want me to post that again?
The bolded part from the pm was:
Given this bit of the pm there is absolutely no reason to give me any kind of a buy especially after I said I was having RL issues and wouldn't be posting much.
vote bobarrgh
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Feb 20, 2011 16:38:25 GMT -5
I've done a review of DarkCoconut's posts Today. I find my suspicion abating, although not removed.
First of all, I should not have labelled her Day 2 vote for Mahaloth an OMGUS vote - she was suspicious of Mahaloth on Day 1. I'd still say that she voted for Mahaloth after he voted for her though, because (as I mentioned earlier) I view Days as semi-autonomous as far as votes go, unless votes carry over from Day to Day.
DarkCookies' vote on Texcat does have some grounds over and above "you vote for me so you must be non-Town!" (That being the true OMGUS-vote.)
The other two grounds I had Yesterday have not really changed. However, with no new grounds for suspicion, and one of the previous grounds abated, I don't see myself moving my vote in DarkCoconut's direction Today.
I'll look at Pedescribe now, then I have to go and write some rpg stuff.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Feb 20, 2011 18:49:30 GMT -5
I've had a quick look at Pedescribe's Day 3 posts. What pinged me about his Day 1 participation was that he seemed to be trying to skate by (I said this back when I voted for him) and his refusal to vote that Day was decidedly anti-Town because it deprived us of data to mine later in the game. His participation Today has been miles better; he has made cases, argued and generally left stuff for us to get or teeth into in future Days. I did note one thing in my pass, though. In D03.083, Pedescribe says this. 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. Assuming that the likeliest possibility is true to the exclusion of other possibilities is the wrong approach. It puts blinkers on Townies, and that is all to the advantage of the Mafia. In the best case it opens you to being led up the garden path, and in the worst case it's justifying pro-Mafia behaviour. Not enough for a vote switch Today though.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 21, 2011 0:20:54 GMT -5
Vote Countwith approximately 0 days, 4 hours and 39 minutes until DayEndPlayer (# of votes) (peak number of votes) voters [post in which vote was cast, post in which vote was removed] Bobarrgh (14) (14 140) Sister Coyote [12], Romanic [30], Renata [31], CatInASuit [50], guiri [52], ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCoconuts [59], pedescribe [83], Red Skeezix [101], Hockey Monkey [102], peekercpa [104], Merestil Haye [113], harmless little bunny [127], Romola [132], sinjin [140] Captain Pinkies (1) (1 0) Romanic (0) (1 42) pedescribe [42 83]Not Voting (5) Captain Pinkies, bobarrgh, texcat, naturallylazy, Natlaw With these votes, Bobarrgh would be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 21, 2011 0:39:29 GMT -5
This is the longest Day evarrrrr.
Best wishes to your Mother In Law, Bob. Sorry we have tossed you out so abruptly and hope you keep playing (assuming no lynch survival hijinks and such).
|
|
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 21, 2011 2:17:24 GMT -5
I've had a quick look at Pedescribe's Day 3 posts. What pinged me about his Day 1 participation was that he seemed to be trying to skate by (I said this back when I voted for him) and his refusal to vote that Day was decidedly anti-Town because it deprived us of data to mine later in the game. Again, as I said earlier: given my circumstances late Day 1, my having voted would have given you exactly as much data to mine as my not voting, since any vote I would have cast would have been based off of the player's name and position in the Player List (i.e. random).
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Natlaw on Feb 21, 2011 2:36:32 GMT -5
Again, as I said earlier: given my circumstances late Day 1, my having voted would have given you exactly as much data to mine as my not voting, since any vote I would have cast would have been based off of the player's name and position in the Player List (i.e. random). But if you're scum you would have extra information about which of the lynches would help your team. And as scum you might not have been comfortable voting a claimed power role (KidV) which might changed the lynch. Since you didn't would we can't use your vote as a clue to your alignment so we'll have to use the non-vote. And I can see both your claimed and scum motivation for not voting in that situation. Speaking of not voting, I supposed I should vote myself. Vote: bobarrgh just catching the bandwagon at this point. Mainly the claim seems unlikely with an investigator dead. Scum might not wanted to fake claim that but with two protective roles also dead the possible roles for a good get-out-of-lynch claim are limited.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Natlaw on Feb 21, 2011 2:50:11 GMT -5
the only implication that i was referring to was whether to believe if you are town. <snip> but i think indirectly he gave you said cred because it makes sense to start off gentle like when pulling that type of claim. that's the implication that i was alluding to. Yes, I was expecting that since you made that conclusion earlier. I didn't mention that because the way you did this was a bit circumpect: -you claim Mahaloth claimed result on does hint at my alignment (in response to pede IIRC, no links gotta go to work) but you don't says who. -after a prob by someone you indicate you lean more to town on me for above reasoning -again you post that Mahaloth result is a hint to my alignment but again you don't says who. -after my prod you gave the same reason again. I don't like both your posts where you hint that my alignment is affected by the claimed investigation result with saying why or which way.
|
|