|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 8, 2007 12:42:48 GMT -5
So the Easter Bunny could be some sort of Inverse-Investigator? Thanks for clarifying, yet again. That whole episode seems to have been interpreted every way but correctly, and not just by me.
|
|
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 Oct 8, 2007 12:49:49 GMT -5
So, some people are concerned that I'm not voting. And they're correct to be. However, once you go back and actually read some of my posts, and take into account what you know of my philosophy, you should find your concern reduced. Philosophy first. I do not subscribe to the “vote early, vote often” style of play. I refuse, point blank, to fling votes around casually. In particular, I have a great dislike of the random vote. This means that, unless I have solid evidence of scumhood, I hold off voting until close to the end of the Day. This philosophy can prove problematic in this style of game where achieving the lynch threshold (in this game an absolute majority) is a Rubicon. It did in fact bite me on Day 2. I was beginning a draft of a post at around about the time Pygmy Rugger hammered the last nail in Ui's coffin. My last post that Day was post D2.746. In that I made quite clear that I was not going to vote for the person that was called to the noose. My belief is that the lynch of Ui was driven partly by genuine dislike of his approach and partly because certain people have a vested interest in keeping alive the idea that role name and alignment correlate, if the name is recognisable. I think even the most ardent defenders of the proposition that role name and alignment must correlate had given up defending the idea that scum had made-up names.) I believe that Ui was right that that name and alignment do not correlate. The only reason I did not join his Roosh crusade Yesterday was that I saw no pointers that suggested Roosh was guilty beyond Ui's judgment. Maybe i should have done, just so I couldn't be called out Today. As for Day 1, I didn't vote because during that Day I decided that in this game, if I was sure that the person called to the noose was not Alliance aligned, I would not vote for them. And I point-blank refused here in post D1.841NS to vote for zuma.chan two minutes before the deadline for that reason. I did consider changing my mind in the four minutes between 822 and 841; I decided to stick to my guns. I formulated my principles and set them out in Day 2 here The relevant bit is near the bottom. The way I see Days that go to the end of the line, there are three basic possibilities. - That you think one or all lynchable candidates are scum. Then you will vote for one of them.
- That you think one or more lynchable candidates might be scum. In such cases, vote to lynch one of them.
- That you think none of the lynchable candidates are scum. In this case, you need to assess whether the need for more or better quality information outweighs the death of someone you really believe is town.
Personally it would take a lot of very convincing argument to persuade me that the death of a townie was ever worth it. Maybe if their death would certainly expose one of two competing claims as scum. Of course I reserve the right to act as I see fit if there is evidence that I'm being steered by scum. If you don't like that? Tough. I now have rl concerns to attend to – mostly preparing for my trip to Holland tomorrow. I'll digest the roleclaims when I've dealt with them.
|
|
|
Post by Zeriel on Oct 8, 2007 12:59:05 GMT -5
I'm looking at it, and frankly I was thinking the exact same things storyteller and atarus did.
Therefore I'm going to vote drain bead based on the following points: 1) Everyone knows what Diomedes has supposedly been up to, which means that "roleblocker" is a very easy hiding place for a scum right now. Which explains the "Cookies blocked!" slip--claiming you blocked Cookies on a night there were fewer kills than "normal" is a hell of a "well, that kinda indicates she's scum, right right?", and what're the odds she's any kind of power role? 2) Everyone who has roleclaimed, so far as memory serves, has claimed an ability that is either off-kilter or not 100% guaranteed--EXCEPT for drain bead. 3) Cookies has been acting one heck of a lot less scummy than DB has in general.
Honestly, at this point, I don't see any reason to lynch Cookies. I see plenty of little inconsistencies that make DB a nice juicy target.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 8, 2007 13:05:15 GMT -5
Except, in our current case, by her comments and allusions so far, Cookies has already claimed a pro-Crew power role, and one with information unavailable to the rest of the Crew. She hasn't given us a name or a power yet, but she clearly intends to state that she has one. I submit that this is the worst possible state to be in. If she's telling the truth, then the scum already know it. They know that she almost surely has a power role, and at least some kind of useful information, just from the hints she's dropped so far. The benefit of staying unclaimed - hiding her identity as a power role from the scum - has already been lost. They can target her if they see fit. Snipped some. I get what you're saying but I think it's bad or dangerous to assume what the scum will do. And I still disagree with claiming right now. Yeah, I know the scum will know if she's lying or not but if she really IS Town, at least we have that on our side. Scum, they're left in the dark and never know if she'll be protected or investigated or whatever depending on who is who and what is in this game. Scum is left in the dark too. But with a claim, they know how the land lies. Two things about this quote. 1. Like I said above, roles depend. I'm very, very pro-lynch. But I'd rather have a no-lynch than a lynch of a possible very important role. IF what she's got is a role like this, then yes, I fully agree with waiting as long as possible. Again read my post above (that I made late last night) to see why. Yes. I think the second is likely also. And I suppose the first is...but my suspicions and observations and vibes have been telling me since Day One that it's most likely not. *shrugs* Why must we believe this? For all we know she could be: A. Lying about that or B. Dio is lying. She still could be lying...or, what I'm thinking more and more it is, that Dio is either scum or a scum aligned role. Anyway, time for my current suspicious all laid out. I'm guessing in this game there's probably at least four scum. There COULD even be five...but I'm thinking there's probably about four and maybe one scum aligned role. As in, a role that is NOT scum in itself but that helps them (like Sneaky Sam or Dick Deadeye was). If I had to put together the four most suspicious people to me, three come easy. Drain Bead Hockey Monkey AtarusThe fourth (and possibly fifth) scum would just be guessing to me, but there are a few players who might fit the bill. At least to me. CIAS, Captain Klutz, and maybe even Dio among them. However if there is a scum-aligned role, I'd have to give the prize, so far, to Dio, which would leave, from my suspicious list, either CIAS or Captain Klutz as the fourth (and fifth respectively possibly).
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 8, 2007 13:15:27 GMT -5
It would appear that either drainbead is lying, or Cookies is. I can't see how their claims are compatible. Unless someone else blocked drainbead, but players whose abilities have been blocked have heretofore had indication of this when it happens, and drainbead did not mention being blocked when she blocked Cookies. It seems fairly likely that one of them is scum. I don't know which. Thoughts? I still feel and think DB is the most suspicious player. I have since Night One. And I didn't even see Cookies roleclaim before I thought that (just read the whole role-claim post now). I certainly feel and think that Cookies claim and info is a heckofa lot more convincing then DBs, so my vote stays on her.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 8, 2007 13:18:17 GMT -5
Did you miss a page, Idle? I appreciate your indirect defense of my wanting to hold-off on claiming, but at this point it is just filling me with more potential kick-myself-regret if by not sticking to that position I've gotten myself killed.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 8, 2007 13:20:07 GMT -5
Well, storyteller wins the Diomedes vote prize, by a wide margin. Coming in second was Roosh's case put forward to lynch mhaye's non-voting ass. story's case for drain not blocking me on subsequent nights to night one/zero/0.5 only would fail if both drain and I were scum together. Because I'm not scum, I'm going to put drain on my permanent non-scum list... or putting him on the infinitely-crafty-scum-who-ought-to-win just by her cojones of not blocking me as the obvious scum-block role. I mean, hell, if I'd come back with fuzzy screens again and again, the scum could very easily do away with me without wasting their time night-killing me. story's analysis convinces me that either drain is (and therefore I am) scum, or Cookies is scum. So I'll roll with it. vote:Darth CookiesHere is what I think. Drain Bead and Hockey are probably scum. You are probably scum aligned. You said Hockey was sleeping last Night, when really, she was probably doing the murder. Your "she was sleeping" post therefore tips them off that, while you're not scum, you're a scum-helper. And now you're voting for Cookies, who's claim is not only very convincing but verifiable in a way.
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Oct 8, 2007 13:23:33 GMT -5
I don't know about anybody else, but you are waaaaaaay off on me.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Oct 8, 2007 13:26:34 GMT -5
And people wonder why I asked for the roleclaims early I think the dual roleclaim has been beneficial for the town as I the two claims do conflict and not in a beneficial way. So I guess that one of them is scum. In terms of "Mingo" and "Fanty", I can see several situations where both are scum and this would be a setup to gain credibility for the other one when they come forward. In terms of role, I would say that drainbead's would have more impact on the town, the only reason that Cookies is might be listened to is that it counters some of drainbead's claim. Put it this way, if we lynch one now and they are town, tomorrow is going to be very short. I would rather a Cookies lynch than drainbead lynch as I still think she is scummier. But I am happy for one of them to be lynched today.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Oct 8, 2007 13:29:09 GMT -5
And now you're voting for Cookies, who's claim is not only very convincing but verifiable in a way. OK Idle Thoughts why don't you tell the rest of us, how exactly you are going to verify Cookies claim aside from lynching or revealing an investigatory role.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 8, 2007 13:35:31 GMT -5
Did you miss a page, Idle? I appreciate your indirect defense of my wanting to hold-off on claiming, but at this point it is just filling me with more potential kick-myself-regret if by not sticking to that position I've gotten myself killed. Yeah, sorry about that. I reply on a post by post basis USUALLY (from what I've seen Blaster Master does this too). The only exception is when it's near Day's end and I check to make sure it's not ended before I submit a post. I don't think you did right or wrong. You came out when you felt it was right. Me, I woulda waited longer and would have suggested you do too, but it doesn't matter because either way, I believed you (claimed or unclaimed).
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 8, 2007 13:46:55 GMT -5
And now you're voting for Cookies, who's claim is not only very convincing but verifiable in a way. OK Idle Thoughts why don't you tell the rest of us, how exactly you are going to verify Cookies claim aside from lynching or revealing an investigatory role. FWIW (not much in Cat's eyes, but oh well) I have an idea to that effect. It involves Dio, but it is risky, makes a lot of assumptions, and could very easily blow up in the town's face. It also might bend the rules to the point of breaking, so it would require some Mod consultation. I won't use the Gimli quote again, but I'm tempted to.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 8, 2007 13:48:07 GMT -5
And people wonder why I asked for the roleclaims early Hey, I already thought DB was suspicious. I didn't need any claim. The only things that claim does is: 1. Open up another role to scum to know 2. Keep my vote on DB, which is where it was staying anyway. It's two for one, if you think Cookies is the most suspicious AND we get no Mingo "I'm good!" claim, so color me confused why you're willing to give one for one. A. If Cookies is scum and Mingo is scum (and I'm going to assume s/he is unless someone ever comes forward and says "I'm Mingo, and I'm good" because barring no other powers, a scum for a Town at this point would be good) and DB is Town, then killing off DB will get two scum. Cookies and then Mingo whenever they're found. B. If Cookies is scum and Mingo is Town and DB is Town, then, like I say above, Mingo needs to come forward. If not, I'll be assuming Mingo is scum (see above). So you see, barring a claim from whoever Mingo is, it's safe to conclude that Mingo, indeed, is scum. In the case of A. lynching DB is the best choice. But there's another (It being Mingo as scum as per the paragraph above): C. If Cookies is Town and Mingo is scum and DB is scum, then of COURSE it would still be better to lynch DBAnd D. Cookies being Town, Mingo scum and DB Town is impossible unless there are two blockers (which I, peronsally, doubt). So what's your logic there, in that post? When you lay it out, as I just did, it's clear that DB is the better lynching choice. Edit Note: Fixed Coding (Idle PM me if I put the tags in the wrong place)
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 8, 2007 13:50:40 GMT -5
And now you're voting for Cookies, who's claim is not only very convincing but verifiable in a way. OK Idle Thoughts why don't you tell the rest of us, how exactly you are going to verify Cookies claim aside from lynching or revealing an investigatory role. Easy, when Mingo is found, either by a lynch or Cookies at Night, and it's shown that s/he is scum, that verifies it.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 8, 2007 13:53:11 GMT -5
Arrgghhh. Could a passing mod please put a beginning quote tag in my post in number 252?
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Oct 8, 2007 14:02:56 GMT -5
Hmmm.... I'm torn, but not quite. Basically, my question is: IS THERE ANYWAY that both of these claims could be compatible together? IE: Is there a scenario where both could end up being town and we shoot ourselves in the foot doubly?
If not, then we've got a Case of 50-50 scum or 100%. Either one. And I'll take those odds anyday over 1/n.
Storyteller's point on Drainbead is the only major thing I think in my mind sticking out: That if he was a scum roleblocker, why wouldn't he just ALWAYS block Dio? --But then again, if he was lying about being a roleblocker, problem solved? --Or if Dio was lying about being a Pro-Townie. --Or maybe Dio has been continuously blocked, and just been lying to hope to get not lynched?
As for Cookie's and her point that 3 Investigative roles couldn't exist, I don't see it the same way. Because As Hal pointed out, he wasn't "investigated" he was given info. This could be the ability of certain roles which are allowed to send one PM to a person at night. It's an odd ability, and their name slips me at the moment, but that Person could choose what message to send to another player. But that's not an investigator. And as for your "investigative" abilities- I don't see it as being such. You basically can confirm that we are all not 1 person. So it's not as if you can find all the scum, or such, it's just you can tell us we are all not 1 person. It's sort of like the Psychiatrist and the SK role in asylum, but really really weakened. And again, we don't know if the other guy is after you. Because you could each have the same ability, but just diff. alignments, and what's to say that you're the "good" one? But on this WIFOM, i think that'd be cleared up in a few days, namely in that "Can Mongo (I have the strange urge to refer to the group of you as "Minty") Kill?" Though your job does get easier over time, as bodies pile up. But Quick Clarification? Is Mongo allied with the Scum? Or is he a bad guy on his own (ala the SK)? Because your role/ability could VERY EASILY be a separate win condition for just the two of you. Outside the scope of whether or not the Town or the Scum loses. Ie: You 2 are each playing your own lil' game while we try to find the scum. However, if he is scum, then you would be a great asset to us, in though you cannot investigate often or much for alignments, you can at least tell us who isn't 1 type of scum.
But in my mind currently, if there are no Chances of your two abilities overlapping, I will be voting for the other the next day if we pick the wrong one today: I'll repeat. I BELIEVE ONE OF THE TWO OF YOU at least, is scum. If we lynch the wrong one today... I will be voting for the other tomorrow.
that's why, can anyone show me a case where this would be a BAD idea?
Unvote Hockey Vote Drainbead -Yours is the easier role to make up esp. based on the information provided.
*reading Idle's thoughts on preview, and it makes me more sure of my thoughts.* I like that plan.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 8, 2007 14:05:38 GMT -5
Speak for yourself. I'm already voting for DB, WITHOUT the info. You seem to be suffering from UiVision(tm) against drainbead. I'm more suspicious of drainbead than Cookies for certain, but I'm at least willing to entertain the notions that maybe I'm confused and have the wrong opinion. However, it seems like you're so focused that drainbead is scum that you were willing to forego any other evidence that might help. If Cookies had information that put drainbead's claim into question, you should have been interested to hear it, considering Cookies' information would provide new evidence that might get people other than yourself to vote for drainbead. However, you basically said "well Cookies' information wouldn't change my mind either way, so she should stay quiet." Cookies role-claiming isn't about what's best for you, it's about what's best for her and then the town. And yes, I'm well aware that she asked for opinions on when she should role-claim, and yes, I'm well aware you gave your opinion. But your opinion (and your support for your opinion in later posts) makes it seem like your reasoning for not wanting Cookies to role-claim was more self-centric than town-centric. I was trying to look at it from a town-perspective, you seemed to have been looking at it from a you-perspective, and I think that's where our disagreement lied. I disagree with you. But that's no surprise considering I think DB is the most suspicious player, followed by Hockey and then YOU. Are you implying that you disagree with me because you suspect I'm scum? Or that you suspect any person that has a different opinion than you is scum? Or that because you suspect that I'm scum, it's not surprising that I have a different opinion than you? Or something else? I'm just trying to understand what you mean here so I don't interpret this the wrong way.
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Oct 8, 2007 14:12:39 GMT -5
Upon reread, I noticed that drain bead's role isn't very straightforward... I am Kaylee Frye, Roleblocker. I am aligned with Crew, I win when all Alliance are dead. Once per night I may use my skills to trap a person in their room, blocking their night action. I have a 1/x chance of blocking a Night kill if I block scum, with x being the number of remaining Alliance. In other words, drain bead's role is similar to that of the Alchemist's in the Cult of Sekham. Depending on how the game is balanced, her current chances are somewhere between...oh, say 1/6 to 1/4 (16.7% to 25%). It could be possible that she did block Cookies last night, but her block failed. (The same could be said about any of her other Night actions.) If drain bead is telling the truth, then her abilities become more valuable as the game progresses...but then again (how many hands am I up to now?), she may have gambled on this to keep her alive... As far as Cookies' claim goes, there is a possibility (if she isn't telling the truth) that she could be a Lyncher with Mingo as her target.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 8, 2007 14:36:44 GMT -5
Forget my potentially rule-bending confirmation idea involving Dio. Sketching it out a bit more it is just not plausible/possible/likely enough to bring up.
To clarify for Roosh: My twin intuition has told me that Mingo has been acting oddly because he was brainwashed by the Alliance. That and the different responses that I will receive after my targeting someone to find out if they are or are not Mingo is all I know.
Based on my recollection of NAF's clarification, "the Alliance"= scum. Now my PM did not explicitly say that Mingo had been converted over to the Alliance, but that seems like hair-splitting to me. Then again, anything seems to be possible in this set up, including the possibility that he is neither scum nor Town.
Whedon-verse-color wise, based on what happened to River's being lobotomized/drugged/brainwashed by the Alliance, she was definitely not converted. She came out as "good" but with generally arbitrary periods of being dangerous to anyone who was around her, even her Brother (though when she injured him, she seemed to be aware of who he was enough not to cause permanent injury). If Mingo is or is not "scum" or some other anti-town entity, the color could indicate an Avatar-like power maybe?
Regardless, I can't see how it could be anything but good for the Town for me to find him and kill him, since the mods gave me such a fate and aligned me with the Crew.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 8, 2007 14:38:07 GMT -5
Speak for yourself. I'm already voting for DB, WITHOUT the info. You seem to be suffering from UiVision(tm) against drainbead. I'm more suspicious of drainbead than Cookies for certain, but I'm at least willing to entertain the notions that maybe I'm confused and have the wrong opinion. However, it seems like you're so focused that drainbead is scum that you were willing to forego any other evidence that might help. I'm not suffering from any kind of vision. I've seen all the posts, seen the things I think of and see as scummy, and from Day One, have seen DB do a lot of things that I find suspicious. I'm not discounting that Cookies MAY ACTUALLY be scum also. It's certainly possible, but I don't see what bearing that has on my vote. I'm voting for the person I think is the most suspicious and most likely to be scum based on my observances, insights, feelings, thoughts, the like. Even if I didn't believe either of them, I'd still be voting for DB. I've seen both cases...and both's posts throughout three Days now. I've therefore come to the conclusion that the best person to vote for is DB. Dunno why you think that's any kind of tunnelvision. I didn't just say that. I also said (and HAVE said since Day One), that I think REAL role claiming is bad for Town because then all we have is everyone roleclaiming eventually and scum being able to pick Town off in whatever order works out best. Because THEY will know something that true Town doesn't. Who is lying and who is telling the truth..OR...who is really what they say they are but scummy anyway and who is who they are but REALLY good. And I've said that it is of my opinion that it wasn't best for Town when one has only six or seven votes against them and the number needed is twelve. Why not just claim when there's five votes against you then? What about four? Heck, two! Six or seven is about half or more than half of the votes needed right now. If you're urging someone to CLAIM at that point, then yeah, I'm going to think you really want to know that role badly..and then I'm going to start wondering why. I don't know how you can think that when I have continually said what I said above. That I DO NOT FEEL ANYONE SHOULD CLAIM GIVEN A RELATIVELY HALF NUMBER OF VOTES, WHICH IS WHAT SHE HAD. Do you wish me to quote all the times I've said this from Day One? No, No, Yes, respectively.
|
|
|
Post by The Real FCOD on Oct 8, 2007 14:47:56 GMT -5
It seems to me that one of drainbead and Cookies is lying. Right now, I believe Cookies' claim more than drainbead's, if for no other reason than I don't see how Cookies' could have made that shit up. Yes, I did think Cookies was scummy, but in light of these claims I find drainbead more scummy.
Unvote Cookies
Vote drainbead
--FCOD
|
|
|
Post by The Real FCOD on Oct 8, 2007 14:48:17 GMT -5
It seems to me that one of drainbead and Cookies is lying. Right now, I believe Cookies' claim more than drainbead's, if for no other reason than I don't see how Cookies' could have made that shit up. Yes, I did think Cookies was scummy, but in light of these claims I find drainbead more scummy.
Unvote Cookies
Vote drainbead
--FCOD
|
|
|
Post by The Real FCOD on Oct 8, 2007 14:49:03 GMT -5
Double-post...weird.
--FCOD
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Oct 8, 2007 15:06:28 GMT -5
OK Idle Thoughts why don't you tell the rest of us, how exactly you are going to verify Cookies claim aside from lynching or revealing an investigatory role. Easy, when Mingo is found, either by a lynch or Cookies at Night, and it's shown that s/he is scum, that verifies it. Now, this is a real problem for me. It pretty much states that Cookies is town and that Mingo is scum. No hint that it might be the other way around. It almost reeks of perfect knowledge if we hadn't been discussing it. In terms of lynching, I am happy to go with drainbead, with the proviso that if drainbead is shown to be town, Cookies gets lynched tomorrow. (Paranoia kicks in and suggests they are both town through Bastard Mod tm action) unvote Cookies vote drainbead
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 8, 2007 15:10:35 GMT -5
I don't know how you can think that when I have continually said what I said above. That I DO NOT FEEL ANYONE SHOULD CLAIM GIVEN A RELATIVELY HALF NUMBER OF VOTES, WHICH IS WHAT SHE HAD. Do you wish me to quote all the times I've said this from Day One? No not really. I get it now. No more argument from me, I understand where you're coming from. However, I'd just like to make sure you understand where I'm coming from. I saw Cookies claiming and giving us information that could alter our perception of drainbead's claim as the same as asking Mingo to come forward and claim if they're town and can change our perception of Cookies' claim (which, you've said you're in support of). I wasn't taking into account how many lynch votes she had (again, as you're not saying Mingo should wait until they're on the lynching block before claiming anything and possibly refuting Cookies' points). I was treating Cookies' situation as more of a counter-claim than an individual role-claim. I hope that helps you understand my reasoning. And thank you for the clarification. --- Now, I'm going to state something that naggled the back of my mind, and this is entirely meta-gaming and I don't like to do it, but I think it's something the town should consider and nobody else has brought up yet. Cookies has stated that if she locates Mingo during her night investigations, Mingo dies. Cookies then later stated that Night 1, she found out I was not-Mingo. But what if she had found Mingo Night 1? That means Mingo would have died immediately on Day 1. Except NAFKat stated that only non-killing roles got to do their thing on Night 1. Now Cookies obviously only has a 1/27 chance of finding Mingo, and so the chances of her connecting on Night 1 were very slim......but would she still get to look anyway? Just something to think about.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 8, 2007 15:44:22 GMT -5
I should have addressed this in my claim. My apologies. I at first assumed that I would not be able to use my role on Night 1, but the Mods conversed and said that the chances were slim enough that my first attempt would be so lucky that they would allow me to try, and if I got lucky, the death would've occurred on Dusk of Day 1, to give the walking dead the chance to at least play through one Day.
|
|
|
Post by Drain Bead on Oct 8, 2007 16:26:18 GMT -5
Seems like backtracking to me, Cookies, but then again I am 99% sure you're scum because of your claim. But hey, if I die Today, you die Tomorrow.
BTW (and this question is for anyone, although I reserve the right to disregard you if I think you're scum), any suggestions on who I should block Tonight, if I live through the Day? I can only assume that Diomedes will be watching me, so I might as well give transparency to my actions.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 8, 2007 17:29:50 GMT -5
Whether it was in my claim post or after the fact, the rules stipulate that I can't quote the Mod's PMs anyway. So you either believe me or you don't.
|
|
|
Post by dnooman on Oct 8, 2007 17:35:32 GMT -5
Vote count por favor?
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Oct 8, 2007 17:43:32 GMT -5
Ask and ye shall recieve: 8- drainbead (Captain Spaceman Blam, Idle Thoughts, Cookies, atarus, Yattara/zeriel, Roosh, FCoD, CiaS) 5- ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (Captain Klutz, drainbead, Pygmy, Hal Briston, Diomedes) 1- mhaye (hockeymonkey) 14 out of 23 votes cast with 23 alive it takes 12 to lynch
|
|