|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2011 17:10:19 GMT -5
Vote Countwith approximately 0 days, 12 hours and 50 minutes until DayEndPlayer (# of votes) (peak number of votes) voters [post in which vote was cast, post in which vote was removed] naturallylazy (4) (4 146) Renata [ 4 62 112], Natlaw [120], Sister Coyote [146] Idle Thoughts (4) (4 148) romanic [76], guiri [115], Red Skeezix [119], Merestil Haye [148] Natlaw (3) (6 98) Red Skeezix [52 119], CatInASuit [59], peekercpa [60], Renata [62 112], Sister Coyote [63 146], guiri [98 115], ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCoconuts [134] Renata (1) (1 28) Idle thoughts [28] Red Skeezix (0) (1 45) Natlaw [45 120]Romola (0) (1 51) Sister Coyote [51 63]Not Voting (4) Romola, sinjin, texcat, naturallylazy With these votes, naturallylazy would be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2011 18:13:05 GMT -5
Vote Countwith approximately 0 days, 11 hours and 46 minutes until DayEndPlayer (# of votes) (peak number of votes) voters [post in which vote was cast, post in which vote was removed] naturallylazy (4) (4 146) Renata [ 4 62 112], Natlaw [120], Sister Coyote [146] Idle Thoughts (4) (4 148) romanic [76], guiri [115], Red Skeezix [119], Merestil Haye [148] Natlaw (3) (6 98) Red Skeezix [52 119], CatInASuit [59], peekercpa [60], Renata [62 112], Sister Coyote [63 146], guiri [98 115], ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCoconuts [134] Renata (1) (1 28) Idle thoughts [28] Red Skeezix (0) (1 45) Natlaw [45 120]Romola (0) (1 51) Sister Coyote [51 63]Not Voting (4) Romola, sinjin, texcat, naturallylazy With these votes, naturallylazy would be lynched.
|
|
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 Mar 5, 2011 18:15:07 GMT -5
I am convinced that Idle Thoughts or Red Skeezix must be lying. Despite the very gebuine sounding pm string, I simply can't see any scum motivation for Red skeezix to pretend he had a fake pm with the same role name. I really think it would be a bit bastard for the mods to do that and I don't think they would make a mistake.
Vote Idle Thoughts
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Mar 5, 2011 18:19:59 GMT -5
I am convinced that Idle Thoughts or Red Skeezix must be lying. Despite the very gebuine sounding pm string, I simply can't see any scum motivation for Red skeezix to pretend he had a fake pm with the same role name. I really think it would be a bit lumberjack* for the mods to do that and I don't think they would make a mistake. That leaves me with the thought that either you [Red] or NatLaw are lying. I can see a scum motivation for doing so, as he had a fair number of votes on him. I can't presently see a scum motivation for you to make this post but that doesn't mean there isn't one. Re-reading Red and Natlaw. /added underline Did you mean to vote Natlaw?
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Mar 5, 2011 18:28:42 GMT -5
I'm quite convinced that Ulla will give you whatever PM you ask for. Making it plausible (other than by properly syntaxed verbiage) is your problem, not hers. Any editorial control of that sort would in fact be going too far for a mod, IMO, and I don't think she would do it.
So, Romola, I think your whole argument is wrongly based. I'm not even going to get into you naming two people, one of whom must be lying, then somehow voting for a third; I have enough reasons to write this off as not a mafia-motivated mistake. (Reasons to think you're probably not scum, that is.) But yikes.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 5, 2011 18:45:11 GMT -5
I don't know that we don't have a Vig and it seems risky to leave clean-up duties for a role that we don't know that we have. I think it is a possibility that the Scum had an extra kill and a town role or third party had a one-off kill to explain our 2-death nights.
The string of PMs with the mods is a lot of evidence to manufacture, but it could have been manufactured.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 5, 2011 19:32:01 GMT -5
hey, nat in 136 you respond to my request for some mod pm information. thanks.
the first quote, which i assume is from you, is requesting a fake pm from the mods.
the next quote seems to be their response to said request.
any reason you posted their fake role pm rather than your actual role pm?
|
|
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 Mar 5, 2011 19:48:36 GMT -5
I am convinced that Idle Thoughts or Red Skeezix must be lying. Despite the very gebuine sounding pm string, I simply can't see any scum motivation for Red skeezix to pretend he had a fake pm with the same role name. I really think it would be a bit lumberjack* for the mods to do that and I don't think they would make a mistake. That leaves me with the thought that either you [Red] or NatLaw are lying. I can see a scum motivation for doing so, as he had a fair number of votes on him. I can't presently see a scum motivation for you to make this post but that doesn't mean there isn't one. Re-reading Red and Natlaw. /added underline Did you mean to vote Natlaw? Bollocks, yes, I did! UnvoteVote NatLaw
|
|
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 Mar 5, 2011 19:54:58 GMT -5
I'm quite convinced that Ulla will give you whatever PM you ask for. Making it plausible (other than by properly syntaxed verbiage) is your problem, not hers. Any editorial control of that sort would in fact be going too far for a mod, IMO, and I don't think she would do it. So, Romola, I think your whole argument is wrongly based. I'm not even going to get into you naming two people, one of whom must be lying, then somehow voting for a third; I have enough reasons to write this off as not a mafia-motivated mistake. (Reasons to think you're probably not scum, that is.) But yikes. Sorry about that, I clearly hadn't left myself enough time to read properly. I was assuming that Red's request for a fake PM came before NatLaw's claim. If it came after, simply to test whether mods would supply one for an existing role that had already been claimed, that makes it a whole other ballgame. Unvote
|
|
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 Mar 5, 2011 19:58:52 GMT -5
In addition I have an interesting data point. I wished to determine the quality of the fake PMs being constructed by the moderators first hand. (Also, I was in a bugger* mood and could do for a laugh, so I commissioned a false PM, with no intent of using it.) If at some point Natlaw turns up dead, and town, and the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch. Then this will stand as proof that the moderator will generate fake PMs regardless of whether that character is already in the game. Just saying, no reason not to be open about this. Is Renata right in thinking your request for the fake pm came after NatLaw's claim? I wondered why I was the only one getting excited about it.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 5, 2011 20:05:16 GMT -5
yaknow the more i think about it the more nat seems full of it. he seems to infer that some "higher power" controls whether his kill goes through or not. since there can be no way that i can see this "higher power" being anything other than a townie or random it just doesn't make sense (otherwise it's just an extra scum NK depending on target). i think we have heard from most of the folks since nat claimed. and since no one has fessed up to having this veto mechanism i imagine that person is either dead or it is a totally random event (or it's absolute fantasy). well if the person that controls his kill success or failure is dead how the heck would that work? especially since we haven't had a town death since he had a successful Night kill. and as i have already stated the random determination of game outcome is kind of frowned upon these days. plus this whole early deadline/late deadline hooey is for the birds as for as far as i am concerned.
|
|
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 Mar 5, 2011 20:16:53 GMT -5
yaknow the more i think about it the more nat seems full of it. he seems to infer that some "higher power" controls whether his kill goes through or not. since there can be no way that i can see this "higher power" being anything other than a townie or random it just doesn't make sense (otherwise it's just an extra scum NK depending on target). i think we have heard from most of the folks since nat claimed. and since no one has fessed up to having this veto mechanism i imagine that person is either dead or it is a totally random event (or it's absolute fantasy). well if the person that controls his kill success or failure is dead how the heck would that work? especially since we haven't had a town death since he had a successful Night kill. and as i have already stated the random determination of game outcome is kind of frowned upon these days. plus this whole early deadline/late deadline hooey is for the birds as for as far as i am concerned. One of the quoted PM's to the mods names Red Skeezix as NatLaw's suspect as the 'controlling power' Red and Nat have been going at each other through toDay's thread. Are they both scum and doing distraction tactics? Or is one on the other's case? Either way, there seems to be some weird shit between them. Natlaw, Why did you mention Red Skeezix as a possible controlling power in your PM to the mods?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 5, 2011 20:33:27 GMT -5
i think it was because of red's choice of avatar for this game. now THAT'S some serious meta.
|
|
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 Mar 5, 2011 20:38:59 GMT -5
Oh, oh, i can have one for my own!!!!! Look!!!!Still, an answer from Nat would be good.
|
|
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 Mar 5, 2011 21:14:45 GMT -5
Damn, it's nearly 2am. Day ends in 9 hours and I don't know if I'm being led down the garden path here. I am focussed on NatLaw and Red Skeezix, but it's hard to tell which one of them is scum or if they both are. Of course it's possible that it's neither, but I am sure something is off in that interaction. I have had to decide which way to jump.
I don't know why Red would ask for a fake PM that he had no intention of using, or why it was important to prove the point that mods would write one for a role that existed in the game. I'm posting with the assumption that the fake PM was requested after Natlaw's claim. I only know that Red was on Natlaw's case a lot, and vice versa, and he chose to ask for a fake pm in that name rather than a name that had already been killed (which would have proved the same point, surely?) Why ask for it if not to test (or pretend to test) that particular claim?
Vote Red Skeezix
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2011 22:13:34 GMT -5
Vote Countwith approximately 0 days, 7 hours and 46 minutes until DayEndPlayer (# of votes) (peak number of votes) voters [post in which vote was cast, post in which vote was removed] Idle Thoughts (4) (5 152) romanic [76], guiri [115], Red Skeezix [119], Merestil Haye [148], romola [152 157]naturallylazy (4) (4 146) Renata [ 4 62 112], Natlaw [120], Sister Coyote [146] Natlaw (3) (6 98) Red Skeezix [52 119], CatInASuit [59], peekercpa [60], Renata [62 112], Sister Coyote [63 146], guiri [98 115], ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCoconuts [134], romola [157, 158]Renata (1) (1 28) Idle thoughts [28] Red Skeezix (1) (1 45) Natlaw [45 120], romola [164] Romola (0) (1 51) Sister Coyote [51 63]Not Voting (3) sinjin, texcat, naturallylazy With these votes, Idle Thoughts would be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Mar 5, 2011 22:58:48 GMT -5
Ed, is the vote count on Naturallylazy correct?
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2011 23:16:11 GMT -5
Ed, is the vote count on Naturallylazy correct? Yes, she has 1 penalty vote for not posting during Day 3.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Mar 6, 2011 1:40:12 GMT -5
Damn, it's nearly 2am. Day ends in 9 hours and I don't know if I'm being led down the garden path here. I am focussed on NatLaw and Red Skeezix, but it's hard to tell which one of them is scum or if they both are. Of course it's possible that it's neither, but I am sure something is off in that interaction. I have had to decide which way to jump. I don't know why Red would ask for a fake PM that he had no intention of using, or why it was important to prove the point that mods would write one for a role that existed in the game. I'm posting with the assumption that the fake PM was requested after Natlaw's claim. I only know that Red was on Natlaw's case a lot, and vice versa, and he chose to ask for a fake pm in that name rather than a name that had already been killed (which would have proved the same point, surely?) Why ask for it if not to test (or pretend to test) that particular claim? Vote Red SkeezixThis is not a case, sorry! But your continued desire to not place a vote to break a potential tie is telling. I know who will be getting the stink eye tomorrow. Also, regarding your first question: The posts are time stamped, perhaps you should figure it out for yourself.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Mar 6, 2011 1:42:19 GMT -5
I don't know that we don't have a Vig and it seems risky to leave clean-up duties for a role that we don't know that we have. I think it is a possibility that the Scum had an extra kill and a town role or third party had a one-off kill to explain our 2-death nights. The string of PMs with the mods is a lot of evidence to manufacture, but it could have been manufactured. Really Cookies, you think those kills on the two death nights are likely from a non town source? Yeah, i do believe that you are quite full of shit.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Mar 6, 2011 1:44:35 GMT -5
Also, romola, please do explain how posting a pm which I claim to be a fake from the moderators = me being scum. Please, please do.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Natlaw on Mar 6, 2011 4:09:30 GMT -5
any reason you posted their fake role pm rather than your actual role pm? I didn't want to reveal the "greater power" part because if it is a player he would already know that. I don't think (if it is a player) he would know who the grenade was, so that was why I posted the fake PM as astandard vigilante. I don't know if it is a player what would happen if he dies. The "especially since no town died since last kill" reasoning makes no sense. If it is a player that means he's was still alive last Night and "no deaths since then" are completely irrelevant. Natlaw, Why did you mention Red Skeezix as a possible controlling power in your PM to the mods? Why do the people questioning my PM not even bother to read the post I claimed in? I suspected Skeezix to be it based on his avatar but since he voted for me I doubt it (but he could have written of my fake PM as a coincidence) and I used the fake claim to let him (or some other player) know that I'm the grenade. i think it was because of red's choice of avatar for this game. now THAT'S some serious meta. What? It's responding to a possible breadcrumb - he changed his avatar to the grenade during Day One - it's part of the game, not meta in my eyes. I've changed my avatar to match my claim before, though usually at the point I claimed.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 6, 2011 4:10:21 GMT -5
Stop putting words in my mouth, Red.
My point all along is that a) I suspect Natlaw b) while there was an argument from people who also suspected him that it might be better to leave him for the Vig, I don't _know_ that there is a Vig...that is one possibility. I do not feel comfortable leaving anyone that I think is scummy for a vig that we may not have to clean up.
Which do you have the most problem with? That I suspect Natlaw or that I'm not convinced for sure that we have a Vig? A town player with a one-shot kill can also be called a Vig, but if they've already spent their charge on one of the 2nd night kills we've seen already, they don't have another round in the chamber to use on Natlaw.
So, again, I'm not willing to gamble on the possibility that we have a Vig, or that we have a Vig who is still able to kill. That perspective would not change if it was someone else other than Natlaw receiving my vote.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 6, 2011 4:13:44 GMT -5
Huh. I guess was as specific as I thought I had been.
It is right there in the post that you quote.
One of those things is not like the other, and I'm not the one full of shit.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Natlaw on Mar 6, 2011 4:26:47 GMT -5
Also, romola, please do explain how posting a pm which I claim to be a fake from the moderators = me being scum. Please, please do. The way I see it: If you're scum: 1) you prepare a fake claim by breadcrumbing it by changing your avatar. 2) you have a fake claim ready with a nice "don't lynch me or someone will die!" message 3) when town me actually claims grenade you decide to thow out the fake claim as fake claim because it is useless for you as scum now. Your fake PM doesn't include a timestamp and since you speak in past tense in that post it seems to imply to me you got the PM before my real claim. I don't think I would do 3) if I was scum and did 1+2 though. If your town you just changed your avatar because you like the image and you asked for the fake PM after my real claim. This is your Day One post on the subject: I don't know if i'm actually in favor of the scums having any advantages at all. But I do see the advantage in knowing that they will have fake claims, it will save us one usually fruitless discussion about whether a mass name claim will give us any useful information. Furthermore, i don't see the moderator giving fake claims on demand as being substantially different than having them pre written before the game starts, i mean when you're on the scum team you generally just take the claims and then tailor them to what you need when it's claim time anyways. At least that's what I do when I'm scum. What did you think Day One when I posted the fake PM? Why didn't you ask then for a fake PM to check how far the mods would go like I did? Similar for romola: you doubt the mods would provide a fake PM for a role name that is already in use. Why not check that by asking for a fake PM from the mods? I guess you meant also the exception that if you ask for a fake PM for your own role name you still get it (which explains the one of Red/Nat must be lying view).
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Natlaw on Mar 6, 2011 4:32:19 GMT -5
i think we have heard from most of the folks since nat claimed. 3. CatInASuit 9. sinjin 14. texcat have not posted since my claim.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 6, 2011 6:06:31 GMT -5
Final Vote Count
Player (# of votes) (peak number of votes) voters [post in which vote was cast, post in which vote was removed]
Idle Thoughts (4) (5 152) romanic [76], guiri [115], Red Skeezix [119], Merestil Haye [148], romola [152 157] naturallylazy (4) (4 146) Renata [4 62 112], Natlaw [120], Sister Coyote [146]
Natlaw (3) (6 98) Red Skeezix [52 119], CatInASuit [59], peekercpa [60], Renata [62 112], Sister Coyote [63 146], guiri [98 115], ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCoconuts [134], romola [157, 158]
Renata (1) (1 28) Idle thoughts [28] Red Skeezix (1) (1 45) Natlaw [45 120], romola [164]
Romola (0) (1 51) Sister Coyote [51 63]
Not Voting (3) sinjin, texcat, naturallylazy
With these votes, Idle Thoughts would be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by Romanic on Mar 14, 2011 19:44:22 GMT -5
Kills so far, per day:
Night 1 : 2 kills (Timmy and Paranoia) Night 2 : 1 kill (Plankton) Night 3 : no kill Night 4 : 2 kills (bunny and Pinkies) Night 5 : 2 kills (Renata and Sinjin) Night 6 : 2 kills (Cookies and texcat)
Natlaw claims the Pinkies kill, while peeker claims Pinkies, Sinjin and texcat.
Natlaw's claimed actions: N1: No kill because he had no good target (D5 #105) N2: Targeted natlazy for failing to vote on D1 & D2, but she didn't die (D5 #105) N3: Targeted Hockey Monkey for low participation (hesitated between her and Capt Pinkies). HM didn't die either (D5 #105) N4: Targeted Pinkies because he would have had 2 final votes (D5 #105). Pinkies died. N5: Targeted natlazy. She didn't die. (D6 #8) N6: Targeted no one to prevent a scum redirection (toDay #11)
peeker's claimed actions: N1: targeted no one N2: targeted no one N3: targeted no one N4: Targeted Pinkies, who died. N5: Targeted Sinjin, for inactivity. She died (toDay #16) N6: Targeted texcat because he felt that texcat contributed less than others (today #16). texcat died.
Things that bugs me:
1) If he's telling the truth, Natlaw's "greater power" doesn't make sense. If someone was validating his kills, we would know about it by now. I also thought that it could be Scum controlled, but they would not have refused the N2, N3, N5 kills because natlazy and Idle are now known to be Town (aka Scums would take a free kill).
If there's no greater power, I can see how this claim could have been an attempt to get the real vig to claim. I mean, stating that his kills didn't work on N2 & N3 isn't hard to do, if you have an alibi (the greater power), but the N4 kill worked - why? Because he wanted the real vigilante to come out?
I can see a Natlaw Scum making this play, with a tally of Natlaw 6, everyone else 1 (or zero). There wasn't much to lose.
2) As guiri wrote, why didn't peeker kill Natlaw after he posted his role PM, and claimed the Pinkies kill for himself? If he was convinced that Natlaw was lying, then he should have killed him immediately.
Natlaw claimed on D5 (#105) so peeker would have vigged Sinjin on Night 5, then texcat on Night 6. These two before Natlaw? Does it make sense?
|
|
|
Post by Romanic on Mar 14, 2011 19:45:45 GMT -5
Gah, I posted on D5?? that post was meant to be D7... sorry
|
|