|
Post by storyteller0910 on Mar 28, 2011 9:43:30 GMT -5
OK, caught up. That didn't take long. Observations:
1. Ed's meta-game vote for Pinkies is definitively not the way I'd like to play this game. That said, if Ed were Scum, would he actually start the game in this way, with a big public meta-game vote with absolutely no hope of getting picked up and turned into anything and that was likely to turn attention his way? Plus if Ed is Scum and Pinkies is Town, Ed's vote - for the reasons he gives - would feel kind of unsporting and, frankly, mean. Conclusion: Ed gets pro-Town Scooby points from me.
2. Pinkies name claim is weird. Everybody: that fact that you have information does not, in and of itself, mean you need to share it. Gah! Again, though, I'm not sure I can see underlying Scum motivation - just an excess of enthusiasm, which I think could signify Town or Scum.
3. I have absolutely no comment on the subject of Scooby Snacks. I'd encourage everyone to do the same unless you have information that is of more value to the Town than the Scum.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Mar 28, 2011 10:15:47 GMT -5
What do you think of peeker's contention that Ed's attack on Pinkies reminds him of the Ed and Meeko show from Conspiracy 3? (For those who didn't play that game, they attacked each other incessantly until both were killed.) Both were scum in that instance, Storyteller, and he's done it before; you don't address that possibility directly. I think I know what I believe about it, but would like you to answer first.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 28, 2011 10:20:25 GMT -5
OK, caught up. That didn't take long. Observations: 1. Ed's meta-game vote for Pinkies is definitively not the way I'd like to play this game. That said, if Ed were Scum, would he actually start the game in this way, with a big public meta-game vote with absolutely no hope of getting picked up and turned into anything and that was likely to turn attention his way? Plus if Ed is Scum and Pinkies is Town, Ed's vote - for the reasons he gives - would feel kind of unsporting and, frankly, mean. Conclusion: Ed gets pro-Town Scooby points from me. "if Ed were Scum, would he actually start the game in this way"? Absolutely he would, if he felt it might gain him an advantage. And from your post, it appears it has. vote Mr. Special Edfor going after Pinkies in a completely meta-game fashion...also fo singling Pinkies out at a point when half the players either hadn't posted at all, or had posted nothing more than "confirming that I received my PM".
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Mar 28, 2011 10:23:29 GMT -5
I think this game should start with a presumption that Romanic and Guiri are scummy scum, and make them prove their innocence. Ha! Isn't it a common strategy to distrust everyone at the start of the game? [ lost a quote in here as usual; something about and why haven't romanic and guiri claimed, hmm?] What would that prove? Aren't unforced D1 claims null-tells? I also cannot quite credit that you took all of that seriously. But to respond seriously anyway: I generally start games with everyone more or less neutral. They then move up or down in my estimation based on what they do. I am suggesting -- mostly as a joke but there's a grain of truth there -- that I should probably treat you and Romanic as presumed scum and expect you to do enough each day to convince me you're innocent, rather than allow you to skate by indefinitely near neutral. You're both good enough town players that that shouldn't be too much of a hardship. The claim thing was entirely a joke.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Mar 28, 2011 10:35:05 GMT -5
You know, at this point, I would not answer questions over if you need scooby snacks for any special purpose. Also, no idea what the snacks are for. Just posting as I go to note that you have suggested that no one answer a question and then answered it. Why would you do this, if you thought it was a bad idea? This is not entirely a correct characterization. Septimus asked if anyone wanted to talk about having a particular use for Scooby snacks; Paranoia said don't talk about that, then said he himself doesn't know what they do at all. In other words, he implicitly denied having any use for them, which is the opposite of what he warned against talking about. That said, the post still bugs me, mostly for the FOS at Septimus for fishing. Scum so very rarely openly request the town to give up information like that. It's not at all a good indicator for finding scum, probably closer to the opposite, if anything. so vote: Paranoia[/color] for what I believe is a badly-reasoned FOS.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 28, 2011 10:38:17 GMT -5
Well, you just voted for him. That's synonymous with "calling for his lynch." He brought up that I called for his lynch in every game we've played together. Obviously I was encouraging his lynch in this game. I was referring to his dismissing my accusation with the "He always does this" refrain, which remains unsupported.
|
|
|
Post by julie on Mar 28, 2011 10:42:03 GMT -5
It's early for a vote count, but I wanted to show what the Vote count and Snack count would look like.
There are a little over 4 days until the end of Day 1.
Vote Count:
*Captain Pinkies: 1 (Special Ed, 49)
Special Ed: 1 (Suburban Plankton, 92)
Paranoia: 1 (Renata, 94)
*Current lynch leader
Snack Transfers:
septimus: +1 (peekercpa, 83)
Just the transfers will be noted, not a running total for each player. In other words, if septimus were to transfer a snack away, both transfers would show, but not septimus's net gain or loss.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 28, 2011 10:50:09 GMT -5
OK, caught up. That didn't take long. Observations: 1. Ed's meta-game vote for Pinkies is definitively not the way I'd like to play this game. That said, if Ed were Scum, would he actually start the game in this way, with a big public meta-game vote with absolutely no hope of getting picked up and turned into anything and that was likely to turn attention his way? Plus if Ed is Scum and Pinkies is Town, Ed's vote - for the reasons he gives - would feel kind of unsporting and, frankly, mean. Conclusion: Ed gets pro-Town Scooby points from me. "if Ed were Scum, would he actually start the game in this way"? Absolutely he would, if he felt it might gain him an advantage. And from your post, it appears it has. vote Mr. Special Edfor going after Pinkies in a completely meta-game fashion...also fo singling Pinkies out at a point when half the players either hadn't posted at all, or had posted nothing more than "confirming that I received my PM". Your mixing up your facts. I didn't vote Pinkies for not posting. I singled him out for metagame reasons. Pinkies is the only one with a history of joining games and then not participating. How much everyone else has posted in this game is irrelevant. And to be clear, you're voting for me because someone else thinks I'm Town? And it was my obvious ploy to try to earn Townie cred by voting for Pinkies for metagame reasons, correct? So, had storyteller decided like others that it was entirely a null-tell or might even indicate a fabricated conflict between teammates, I would be in the clear? Was I planning this when I asked in the sign-up thread if Pinkies was sure he was going to play and indicated that he would make a good Vig target on Night 1? Did I somehow anticipate being Scumbuddies with him? Also, you ignore the fact that I actually have metagame reasons and might be attempting to encourage Pinkies to alter his playstyle in order to leave a record of his actions for the game. Or, maybe as others think, it was all planned out like Conspiracy 3, and I was just waiting for Pinkies to use language that insults an entire group of people...in order to earn Town Cred. (Of course, for those in the Know, the Conspiracy 3 meltdown wasn't planned, as would be obvious during the Night 1 Wolf discussion when Meeko voted to use the Wolf kill on me, his teammate.) Of course, the simpler explanation that I was just trying to get Pinkies to either: 1. participate more or 2. Die early
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 28, 2011 10:51:49 GMT -5
Just the transfers will be noted, not a running total for each player. In other words, if septimus were to transfer a snack away, both transfers would show, but not septimus's net gain or loss. Will you be showing actual transfers or attempted transfers? For example, if I have 0 scooby snacks and attempt to give 1 to peeker, what would your total show?
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Mar 28, 2011 11:03:10 GMT -5
That said, if Ed were Scum, would he actually start the game in this way, with a big public meta-game vote with absolutely no hope of getting picked up and turned into anything and that was likely to turn attention his way? Plus if Ed is Scum and Pinkies is Town, Ed's vote - for the reasons he gives - would feel kind of unsporting and, frankly, mean. Conclusion: Ed gets pro-Town Scooby points from me. Scum would totally do that, and I would like to point out that Ed is a more than skilled enough player to nearly convince Town to lynch their cop and then to talk them out of it once again.
|
|
|
Post by julie on Mar 28, 2011 11:05:28 GMT -5
Just the transfers will be noted, not a running total for each player. In other words, if septimus were to transfer a snack away, both transfers would show, but not septimus's net gain or loss. Will you be showing actual transfers or attempted transfers? For example, if I have 0 scooby snacks and attempt to give 1 to peeker, what would your total show?Only actual transfers will show.
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on Mar 28, 2011 11:05:38 GMT -5
and since it will need to be addressed at some point and because scum already have answers to at least some of these questions i will: give one scooby snack to septimushe broached the subject so why the heck not? and just as an addendum. now we have not only blue, red, green and orange but also purple. all the colors of the rainbow. makes my little teletubby heart content. i still think we need to figure out how to use yellow or white if nothing else for the annoyance factorPeeker, do you think that gaining information about what the Scooby Snacks do outweighs the possibility that Septimus is scum and you just gave him something he might use to beat town?
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 28, 2011 11:21:36 GMT -5
"if Ed were Scum, would he actually start the game in this way"? Absolutely he would, if he felt it might gain him an advantage. And from your post, it appears it has. vote Mr. Special Edfor going after Pinkies in a completely meta-game fashion...also fo singling Pinkies out at a point when half the players either hadn't posted at all, or had posted nothing more than "confirming that I received my PM". Your mixing up your facts. I didn't vote Pinkies for not posting. I singled him out for metagame reasons. Pinkies is the only one with a history of joining games and then not participating. How much everyone else has posted in this game is irrelevant. And to be clear, you're voting for me because someone else thinks I'm Town? And it was my obvious ploy to try to earn Townie cred by voting for Pinkies for metagame reasons, correct? So, had storyteller decided like others that it was entirely a null-tell or might even indicate a fabricated conflict between teammates, I would be in the clear? Was I planning this when I asked in the sign-up thread if Pinkies was sure he was going to play and indicated that he would make a good Vig target on Night 1? Did I somehow anticipate being Scumbuddies with him? Also, you ignore the fact that I actually have metagame reasons and might be attempting to encourage Pinkies to alter his playstyle in order to leave a record of his actions for the game. Or, maybe as others think, it was all planned out like Conspiracy 3, and I was just waiting for Pinkies to use language that insults an entire group of people...in order to earn Town Cred. (Of course, for those in the Know, the Conspiracy 3 meltdown wasn't planned, as would be obvious during the Night 1 Wolf discussion when Meeko voted to use the Wolf kill on me, his teammate.) Of course, the simpler explanation that I was just trying to get Pinkies to either: 1. participate more or 2. Die early I'm voting you because I think your vote on Pinkies was entirely meta-game based, and it bugs me for that reason. I'm a firm believer that votes should be made based on what is taking place in the current game; it seems like you'd like to see Pinkies lynched because of the way he has played in prior games. For the record, I understand that you say you are simply trying to 'encourage' Pinkies to me more participatory...I'm just not quite sure I believe you at this point... What storyteller, or anyone else, thinks about you has no bearing on my vote.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 28, 2011 11:26:30 GMT -5
Peeker, do you think that gaining information about what the Scooby Snacks do outweighs the possibility that Septimus is scum and you just gave him something he might use to beat town? I'm just assuming that peeker and Septimus are both Masons at this point For the moment, I'm treating the Scooby Snacks as a MacGuffin. We've been told that they have "various purposes", but until we actually have a hint as to what those purposes may be, I don't plan to spend a lot of time and energy worrying about them.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 28, 2011 11:29:03 GMT -5
I'm voting you because I think your vote on Pinkies was entirely meta-game based, and it bugs me for that reason. I'm a firm believer that votes should be made based on what is taking place in the current game; it seems like you'd like to see Pinkies lynched because of the way he has played in prior games. For the record, I understand that you say you are simply trying to 'encourage' Pinkies to me more participatory...I'm just not quite sure I believe you at this point... What storyteller, or anyone else, thinks about you has no bearing on my vote. So, just to be very clear: If Pinkies continues to play (or not play) the way he has in previous games, I would like to get him lynched, yes. I'm sorry that you don't agree with me on that. I have no defense against your case which I think sums up to: Ed made a metagame case to get attention and make people think he was Town. At least people are talking, and that's almost always a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 28, 2011 11:30:03 GMT -5
[quote author=suburbanplankton board=wati thread=1599 post=75856 time=1301329590I'm just assuming that peeker and Septimus are both Masons at this point [/quote] Almost always a good bet with peeker.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 28, 2011 11:36:13 GMT -5
I tend to share Suburban Plankton's thoughts that voting based on prior game play is bad form. SOME of us have no prior contact with these characters and would like the chance to judge each of you in this game.
Do we even have everyone here yet?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 28, 2011 11:44:13 GMT -5
Peeker, do you think that gaining information about what the Scooby Snacks do outweighs the possibility that Septimus is scum and you just gave him something he might use to beat town? yes, i absolutely believe that having knowledge is better than being in the dark. if i knew that septimus was scum and that giving him a scooby snack would be something he could use to beat town then i wouldn't have given him one. instead i would have voted to lynch him instead and shared this knowledge with the group. regardless of what i may or may not be if i could get me a scum at the expense of my game life and also warn town about the dangers of scooby snacks that would be a play i would make. for all i know maybe septimus is scum and scooby snacks are the equivalent of scum rat poison and i just hastened his demise. or maybe he is town and this takes him one step closer to becoming batman. or maybe it makes him crave one of pinkies' drink recipes. or maybe it didn't do squat.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 28, 2011 11:52:23 GMT -5
I have no defense against your case which I think sums up to: Ed made a metagame case to get attention and make people think he was Town. At least people are talking, and that's almost always a good thing. Yeah, that's pretty much my case at this point. Though as you said, we do have people talking, which is good.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 28, 2011 11:53:47 GMT -5
I tend to share Suburban Plankton's thoughts that voting based on prior game play is bad form. SOME of us have no prior contact with these characters and would like the chance to judge each of you in this game. <snipped> this is a good point with a small caveat. i agree that in a perfect world i(we) could wipe the slate clean and start as if nothing had ever transpired. probably easier in theory than in practice, however. but it does color certain folks opinions and conclusions in a different light which i really never really have paid too much attention to. this is a good thing. lightfoot (as an example): gd, that ed is acting scummy because of blah blah blah.peek: oh, ffs he does that every game.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 28, 2011 12:11:39 GMT -5
@ peeker , well met. And it did give me something after 4 pages to respond to.
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on Mar 28, 2011 12:15:24 GMT -5
Ed, have you lost your mind? Did the kids finally get to you? What are you babbling about? Can you be more specific? Do I have to be? You placed a vote on someone based on another game. That is really weird.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 28, 2011 12:24:33 GMT -5
Do I have to be? You placed a vote on someone based on another game. That is really weird. dangerous territory for you maha. very very dangerous.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Mar 28, 2011 12:33:25 GMT -5
wow! there's a lot to digest here. it's a bit difficult to follow. i must say that i was a little apprehensive about playing with veterans. i expected insightful posts which there are. i did not expect sniping and to my mind illogical voting. well, i'm in deep in it now.
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on Mar 28, 2011 12:46:19 GMT -5
Am I the only person who thinks Cap might have name-claimed because he has to find someone? Which in itself is neither an indication of being town or scum. But I don't think he did it randomly for no purpose at all with one vote on him.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 28, 2011 13:36:59 GMT -5
Can you be more specific? Do I have to be? You placed a vote on someone based on another game. That is really weird. So, prodding someone to encourage participation is a bad thing? Or is it realizing that someone has a habit of signing up for games and then not participating that is the bad thing? At what point do we try to get Captain Pinkies to either participate or not sign up?
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Mar 28, 2011 13:53:53 GMT -5
Of course, the simpler explanation that I was just trying to get Pinkies to either: 1. participate more or 2. Die early An easy or safe day 1 lynch?
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Mar 28, 2011 13:59:17 GMT -5
yaknow these are are good questions, kind of. i would add: does everyone have them? how many do folks have? are they limited to a certain alignment? the name implies that they would be wanted by scooby (who i assume will be in this game) but is that necessarily true? do they power someone up? if so is this power an additional action or increased effectiveness of an allready possessed action (this would include voting)? are they consumable (i.e. they get used and then go away)? or does something happen when someone gets all/a majority/some number of snacks? are they a total red herring meant for us to go down the bunny hole by mods who seem to be increasingly measuring the success of their games by making the group engage in a whole bunch of botty* showing and by the degree that they accomplish a collective chain yank? Well from the rules.. Players will start the game with an allotment of Scooby Snacks. Scooby Snacks have various purposes and if players wish to give them to another player, the Snacks will be traded openly in the game threads by posting in bold purple. For example Give 2 Snacks to Julie. A tally of publicly traded Snacks so far in the Day will be reported with each official vote count (e.g. "Julie: +2 Snacks), though players are welcome to keep their own tallies. Each Day, players will be notified by the moderator via PM if new Snacks have been added to their accounts overNight. The supply of Snacks may end without warning. It would seem to imply that everyone has some snacks, or is capable of having snacks. Julie stated that everyone received a role msg and a scooby snacks msg. Obviously one or more players have a use for the snacks. Since exchanges are made in public, snacks that folk receive at night must be by some other method -- and that the supply of snacks may end. This may imply that through action or inaction, the supply will stop - or maybe the hotel chef is making them (since the opening color said the hotel made the best scooby snacks)
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 28, 2011 14:09:28 GMT -5
Of course, the simpler explanation that I was just trying to get Pinkies to either: 1. participate more or 2. Die early An easy or safe day 1 lynch? If he participates more because of the vote, then it's a pro-Town vote. If he still fails to participate, then I'd honestly rather have a Vigilante shoot him. I doubt he'd get lynched anyway on Day 1. I put him on notice that his previous behavior (or lack thereof) won't go unnoticed. Does anyone really have a problem with that?
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Mar 28, 2011 14:53:25 GMT -5
If it continues to serve in lieu of anything to do specifically with this game (as it arguably does thus far), then yes. Otherwise ... *shrug*.
|
|