|
Post by Archangel on May 4, 2011 12:16:28 GMT -5
I feel his vote on Ace is disingenious. If she is scum she will have scum buddies telling her that not claiming town in this situation would make her look scummy. This is a third vote on a growing bandwagon for a statement that I believe is attributable to her being a new player. Why would scum push a bandwagon now? It's Day 1. Odds are, we're going to hit Town, and there's no real imminent threat of a lynch to anyone besides Ace. Plus, of course, you're assuming here that 1) day communication is happening and 2) that Ace consulted with anyone else. Sometimes a newbie is going to make newbie plays and I can see how, to a new player, it wouldn't seem like a big deal to lightly push back with a "hmm, I don't know, doesn't seem like a good idea, I won't for now" kind of post. Besides which, I read what Ace wrote. While I won't argue that Ace's lack of experience likely has a lot to do with what was posted, why would Ace decide to buck the trend of claims if a Townie? In my experience, newbie Town players are inclined to look agreeable, particularly early on, as the path of least resistance. I'm wagering Ace thought it would be easier to decline now (and hope for some agreement) than to not respond and be called to task for it later. And, you're right about scum not needing to PUSH a bandwagon on Day One, but I was referring to jumping on a growing one, which is a different story. However, I'm no longer especially suspicious of Storyteller at this time because his questioning of me seemed genuine.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on May 4, 2011 12:33:44 GMT -5
~~snip~~ In neither case is there anything that our hypothetical lie-detector can draw from their 'statements'. ace has given us nothing to evaluate, and Bill has given us something which cannot be evaluated at this time . I find Bill's statement more suspicious than ace's non-statement because it looks like he's saying "My alignment is Town", but he's really not. Whereas ace is coming right out and saying "I'm not telling". ~~snip~~. underlining mine I thought about it the first time I read it and now it bugs me. Since the rules have no instructions for Day actions ( but Night actions are addressed) I ass/u/me that there are none. So NO-ONE’s statements can be evaluated at this time
|
|
|
Post by septimus on May 4, 2011 13:43:38 GMT -5
Question about mechanics: "Non-participants will get one Final Vote per day of non-participation"
What is the definition of "non-participant"? (Anyone who doesn't vote? Anyone with fewer than X posts during the day?)
We don't know how Lie Detection, if it exists, would work, but there is worry that "I am Town and wear green polka-dot socks." would thwart the Lie Detector. No one has accused me, but I wrote something like "I am Town. I wear green polka-dot socks." I will post again, with a single sentence, so there can be no ambiguity.
Would it provoke useful discussion to talk about revealing our secret names? I'm not afraid to do a partial claim now: I am a playing card. My suit is spades, hearts or diamonds.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 4, 2011 13:43:54 GMT -5
Yeah, I can't argue with a slam dunk. vote AceWhy would scum push a bandwagon now? It's Day 1. Odds are, we're going to hit Town, and there's no real imminent threat of a lynch to anyone besides Ace. <snip> These two posts seem contradictory to me. How can ace be a "slam dunk" if the odds are that she is town? Is a "slam dunk" an easy vote that you don't have to justify? This is very contradictory and you are basically stating that it is standard practice to lynch a TOWN on the first day and that is acceptable. In regards to ACE's not coming out and claiming an alignment, it might be a newbie mistake. Not to bring up past games, but she was lynched for displaying her "towniness"too much in the first game and for jumping on the bandwagon and voting majority on the second game. This is not a excuse for her I am just stating facts. The thing I find suspicious is the fact that she has not come back on the boards and argued her point. For now my vote is such, it might changed depending on ACE's actions. vote Fluiddruid
|
|
|
Post by septimus on May 4, 2011 13:44:20 GMT -5
I am Town.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on May 4, 2011 13:50:22 GMT -5
What is the definition of "non-participant"? (Anyone who doesn't vote? Anyone with fewer than X posts during the day?) Non-participation = zero posts to the Day thread during the five-day Day period.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on May 4, 2011 14:10:16 GMT -5
Would it provoke useful discussion to talk about revealing our secret names? I'm not afraid to do a partial claim now: I am a playing card. My suit is spades, hearts or diamonds. To answer your question, no. We'll wind up having the same discussion we always have concerning that topic. I'd like to spare the newcomers from having to go through that. Is there a point to your partial claim? Other than the fact that the information you have so altruistically revealed is almost certainly of absolutely no consequence whatsoever?
|
|
|
Post by fluiddruid on May 4, 2011 14:12:19 GMT -5
These two posts seem contradictory to me. How can ace be a "slam dunk" if the odds are that she is town? Is a "slam dunk" an easy vote that you don't have to justify? This is very contradictory and you are basically stating that it is standard practice to lynch a TOWN on the first day and that is acceptable. Uh, what? That's not what I said. I didn't say that we should TRY to lynch town. I just think that going after people who vote because of initiating a bandwagon is very likely to be wrong - there is no reason for a scum player to try to bandwagon on day 1, because there's no gain. Chances are, despite our best efforts, we're hitting town -- numerically, and because so little info is available. It's not desirable, but it's the mechanics of the game. I've seen, time and time again, people will go after the people who lay the votes on the first serious vote candidate. I've done it myself, even. Get about 3 votes on someone on Day One, and all of a sudden we're lynching someone because of their vote. Overwhelmingly, these people turn out to be Town and yet we do it over and over again. At best it is illfounded vote reasoning, at worst it discourages town players from placing votes out of fear of reprisal. I honestly see no contradiction and no way you can interpret what I said the way that you did. My vote is for Ace, who I believe to be Scum. I disputed voting for Story on the grounds that voting for Ace was a scum bandwagon, because -- as I explained -- there's no motivation. I don't understand what you're trying to say that I said, but I suggest you re-read my post.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on May 4, 2011 14:21:38 GMT -5
~~snip~~ In neither case is there anything that our hypothetical lie-detector can draw from their 'statements'. ace has given us nothing to evaluate, and Bill has given us something which cannot be evaluated at this time . I find Bill's statement more suspicious than ace's non-statement because it looks like he's saying "My alignment is Town", but he's really not. Whereas ace is coming right out and saying "I'm not telling". ~~snip~~. underlining mine I thought about it the first time I read it and now it bugs me. Since the rules have no instructions for Day actions ( but Night actions are addressed) I ass/u/me that there are none. So NO-ONE’s statements can be evaluated at this time I believe your assumption is correct, and that lie-detection, if it exists, would be a Night action. In that case you are also correct that nobody's statements could be evaluated at the present time. In my first post on the subject I made a distinction between Bill's statement (which can not under any conceivable circumstances be evaluated before Friday) and gnarlycharlie's statement (which cannot under any conceivable circumstances be evaluated ever). My point was that those two statements might have appeared at first glance appeared to say "I am Town", but actually they said nothing of the sort. In fact, they said nothing at all. Which is exactly the same as what ace has said. Now, if Bill does not post at all today and tomorrow, one might conclude that his statement "My alignment is Town and I'll be away wed+thu" will become equivalent to "My alignment is Town" and can then be evaluated for truth. Or, Bill could come back and make a simple statement and there will be no room for interpretation. The same can be said of ace. I'm just happy to have a different topic of conversation for Day 1 for a change
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on May 4, 2011 14:38:53 GMT -5
As a matter of fact ace as far as anyone knows is the ONLY player*who is telling the truth at this time
(*not including themselves)
I find that humourous and just had to type it
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 4, 2011 14:45:00 GMT -5
This is very contradictory and you are basically stating that it is standard practice to lynch a TOWN on the first day and that is acceptable. Uh, what? That's not what I said. I didn't say that we should TRY to lynch town. I just think that going after people who vote because of initiating a bandwagon is very likely to be wrong - there is no reason for a scum player to try to bandwagon on day 1, because there's no gain. Chances are, despite our best efforts, we're hitting town -- numerically, and because so little info is available. It's not desirable, but it's the mechanics of the game. I've seen, time and time again, people will go after the people who lay the votes on the first serious vote candidate. I've done it myself, even. Get about 3 votes on someone on Day One, and all of a sudden we're lynching someone because of their vote. Overwhelmingly, these people turn out to be Town and yet we do it over and over again. At best it is illfounded vote reasoning, at worst it discourages town players from placing votes out of fear of reprisal. I honestly see no contradiction and no way you can interpret what I said the way that you did. My vote is for Ace, who I believe to be Scum. I disputed voting for Story on the grounds that voting for Ace was a scum bandwagon, because -- as I explained -- there's no motivation. I don't understand what you're trying to say that I said, but I suggest you re-read my post. It is just that in some of your posts you imply that ACE is scum (Slam Dunk) and then in some of your posts, you state that numbers show that we lynch a townie on day one and because it is part of the mechanics it is somewhat acceptable. I have read the post where you state why you think ACE is scum for not going with the "crowds" I understand what you are stating now. You are not necessarily talking about the person being voted for but the people that place their votes there. I have as well been suspicious and placed my vote on someone that voted for town on the first day and in fact voted for them because the fact they voted early on the first day without having any valid reasons. That was my first game I ever played and I have learned since... Therefore: UNvote Fluiddruid
|
|
|
Post by septimus on May 4, 2011 14:45:12 GMT -5
We're three days into the Day and I see no lynch case I'm ready to support. In prior games, someone (e.g. Pleonast) essentially volunteered to be Lynched Day 1, but Pleonast isn't even in this game. So I thought it might be good to try to provoke some kind of discussion. We'll wind up having the same discussion we always have concerning that topic. I'd like to spare the newcomers from having to go through that. Is there a point to your partial claim? Other than the fact that the information you have so altruistically revealed is almost certainly of absolutely no consequence whatsoever? Even if I agreed the information has no consequence, others might not, and discussion might lead to a scum slip or smudge. But you've probably squashed that chance now! What discussion, if any, would you recommend instead?
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on May 4, 2011 15:24:01 GMT -5
We're three days into the Day and I see no lynch case I'm ready to support. In prior games, someone (e.g. Pleonast) essentially volunteered to be Lynched Day 1, but Pleonast isn't even in this game. So I thought it might be good to try to provoke some kind of discussion. We'll wind up having the same discussion we always have concerning that topic. I'd like to spare the newcomers from having to go through that. Is there a point to your partial claim? Other than the fact that the information you have so altruistically revealed is almost certainly of absolutely no consequence whatsoever? Even if I agreed the information has no consequence, others might not, and discussion might lead to a scum slip or smudge. But you've probably squashed that chance now! What discussion, if any, would you recommend instead? You asked if it would provoke useful discussion. I gave my opinion on the matter. I'm certainly not stopping you, or anyone else, from talking about any subject you like. I wish I had that kind of power over people...
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 4, 2011 15:49:22 GMT -5
Ok then. Let's begin.
First thing, Sis C has agreed to lift my post restriction for the first round temporarily, on account of nobody's showing any interest in why on earth a usually over-active player hasn't said a word since Night Zero. And this occurred to nobody?
I have mod permission to quote part of my role PM, so here it is.
Thoughts so far:
1) The "Lie Detector" role should be permanently banished from all mafia games on this board. Mere mention of it should cause vote penalties and plagues of locusts.
However, since nearly everyone else has done it:
2) My alignment is TOWN. I am not aligned with the scum, nor am I a third-party or PFK.
Think that's specific enough.
I get a total of three (3) posts that I'm allowed to do on Day One without being directly addressed or incurring mod wrath. This is the first of them. For the sake of what little remains of my sanity, anybody making the effort to speak to me, or at least mention my name occasionally when talking about different topics, would be much appreciated.
As for the votes so far - I have very little opinion on Ace, who is the lynch leader at the time of posting. I haven't noticed anything that anybody has done that glares "scum" so far and I'm not ready to bandwagon for the sake of bandwagonning. It's the usual day one conundrum - too much time, too little info. In my first two town games here, we somehow managed to catch scum on the first day. Hopefully something similar will happen here, but I can't as yet suggest any practical way to make it happen. I'll get back to you when I have something.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on May 4, 2011 16:00:44 GMT -5
Ok then. Let's begin. First thing, Sis C has agreed to lift my post restriction for the first round temporarily, on account of nobody's showing any interest in why on earth a usually over-active player hasn't said a word since Night Zero. And this occurred to nobody? I have mod permission to quote part of my role PM, so here it is. I don't think I've ever played with you, so your silence didn't exactly speak volumes to me... and as for having "mod permission to quote part of my role PM", - You may post your role PM or any correspondence with the Mod.
It seems to me that we all have mod permission to quote part (or, indeed, all) of our PM. As to your claimed role: it seems unlikely that you would fake such a role, but it's also completely impossible to confirm, I believe.
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 4, 2011 16:22:08 GMT -5
Ok then. Let's begin. First thing, Sis C has agreed to lift my post restriction for the first round temporarily, on account of nobody's showing any interest in why on earth a usually over-active player hasn't said a word since Night Zero. And this occurred to nobody? I have mod permission to quote part of my role PM, so here it is. Thoughts so far: 1) The "Lie Detector" role should be permanently banished from all mafia games on this board. Mere mention of it should cause vote penalties and plagues of locusts. However, since nearly everyone else has done it: 2) My alignment is TOWN. I am not aligned with the scum, nor am I a third-party or PFK. Think that's specific enough. I get a total of three (3) posts that I'm allowed to do on Day One without being directly addressed or incurring mod wrath. This is the first of them. For the sake of what little remains of my sanity, anybody making the effort to speak to me, or at least mention my name occasionally when talking about different topics, would be much appreciated. As for the votes so far - I have very little opinion on Ace, who is the lynch leader at the time of posting. I haven't noticed anything that anybody has done that glares "scum" so far and I'm not ready to bandwagon for the sake of bandwagonning. It's the usual day one conundrum - too much time, too little info. In my first two town games here, we somehow managed to catch scum on the first day. Hopefully something similar will happen here, but I can't as yet suggest any practical way to make it happen. I'll get back to you when I have something. So you have some sort of a power role, Honest Moley?
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 4, 2011 16:25:15 GMT -5
@ Suburban, according to Moley's claim, if he had not posted toDay, he would not have a final vote at the start of Day 2. That would be confirmation of his post restriction but not alignment.
@ Moley, did you ask for your claimed restriction to be lifted?
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 4, 2011 16:44:03 GMT -5
Snipped I get a total of three (3) posts that I'm allowed to do on Day One without being directly addressed or incurring mod wrath. This is the first of them. For the sake of what little remains of my sanity, anybody making the effort to speak to me, or at least mention my name occasionally when talking about different topics, would be much appreciated. Is this a stipulation for today only or is this standard for every Day?
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 4, 2011 17:00:09 GMT -5
Well, I feel like I am way off base with my vote for Cat in a Suit, so
Unvote: Cat in a Suit
Maybe my choice of words are not the best in the world... which may be why I keep getting NK'ed on Night 1...
But while I was trying to think, I decided to go back and check and see if there was anyone who hasn't posted yet, and I found a few: Captain Pinkies, Rysto, and Merestil Have
Should that be a cause for concern?
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 4, 2011 17:03:20 GMT -5
Checked the "I am going to be gone thread", and Merestil Have was reported to not be able to be on here until the 4th...
So what has happened to Captain Pinkies, and Rysto?
|
|
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 May 4, 2011 17:08:41 GMT -5
Snipped I get a total of three (3) posts that I'm allowed to do on Day One without being directly addressed or incurring mod wrath. This is the first of them. For the sake of what little remains of my sanity, anybody making the effort to speak to me, or at least mention my name occasionally when talking about different topics, would be much appreciated. Is this a stipulation for today only or is this standard for every Day? I think it would be best to assume that Honest Moley is living up to the "Honest" part of his name, at least in regards to the post restriction, and that he needs people to talk to or about him every now and again in order to participate. If he's lying about why he's silent, this will remove the excuse for nonparticipation and thus strip away what he's hiding behind. Moley, I had noticed you'd said nothing up to your first post, but put it down to rl complications; I recall you've had health problems in the past, and thought you might still be under the cosh, as it were. The circumstance that meant I was unable to participate much is now over, as Yattara has gone home. So, remember folks - Grudges Are Bad. Don't go lynching someone just because they turned out to be smooth-tongued lying Mafiates in the last game. (Scowls at Guiri.) ... yes, I know that was the game before last. I didn't play in Scooby Doo mafia. Your point? And I was Mafiate in that game. So? Doesn't mean I'm Mafia this time. The player you lynched for selling you down the river last game might well be on your side this game, and if you're Town you won't know it. Speaking of alignment as we were, here is a message for the possible Lie Detector in our midst. I am Town.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on May 4, 2011 17:20:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 4, 2011 17:35:28 GMT -5
@ Colby, in #77 you said: *pops back up* Well, this is much more quiet than the other games that I've played... and I won my first game yesterday!! Now to make it 2 in a row! At the time of this post CIAS had suggested claiming alignment and 13 players had responded. You made no mention of the claim but commented on the general level of participation. Your next post was #101: Because I didn't do this yet, I am 100% not scum or third party... (aka I'm Town) Time to go reread and figure out what I have missed Why didn't you make the claim when you posted earlier? You gave the impression that you were reading along. Unvote Storyteller on the grounds that he seems to have been genuinely trying to catch me in a scum slip, which is pro-town /snip and bleach @ Archangel, there's a theory that players who make accusations of PIS are scum. The theory held up quite well for a number of games but not in the last game here. So, while it's no longer a strong scum tell, it's far from the Town tell you paint it. Ace hasn't posted since her refusal to claim. When I read her post I thought she understood that she needed to claim her role, not just make a statement for the lie detector. I hope the pokes are successful in getting her back here to explain herself.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on May 4, 2011 17:47:38 GMT -5
ace093 “nudged” to join us
D1:23 checking in, had trouble getting here
D1:25 hoping to survive longer in the game
D1:47
D1:50
D1:71
Since then no comments I’m not sure if she understood what she was being asked to claim (at that time) but it has been explained and she has not been here since My gut is she is SCUM or A THIRD Party Role
Vote: ace093
like everything it is subject to change
|
|
|
Post by Rysto on May 4, 2011 17:59:25 GMT -5
So you have some sort of a power role, Honest Moley? There is absolutely no reason for Moley to answer that at this point in the game.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 4, 2011 18:28:13 GMT -5
Is this a stipulation for today only or is this standard for every Day? I think it would be best to assume that Honest Moley is living up to the "Honest" part of his name, at least in regards to the post restriction, and that he needs people to talk to or about him every now and again in order to participate. If he's lying about why he's silent, this will remove the excuse for nonparticipation and thus strip away what he's hiding behind. I was simply asking this if this was the MODS rule for today only or is this what MOLEY is restricted to on a daily basis after we mention his/hers (not sure as I type this if you are female or male) name.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on May 4, 2011 18:42:23 GMT -5
Current Vote Count
ace093 (7,7): Special Ed [80], gnarlycharlie [97], storyteller0910 [115], metallicsquink [127], Archangel [144], fluiddruid [145], LightFoot [173] BillMc (1,1): Suburban Plankton [93] colby11 (1,1): CatInaSuit [110] CatInaSuit (1,1): colby11 [102,168] Fluiddruid (0,1): JustBeingGinger [153,160] storyteller0910 (0,1): Archangel [129, 144] Suburban Plankton (0,1): metallicsquink [111,127] gnarlycharlie (0,1): Suburban Plankton [79,93]
With these votes, ace093 will be lynched.
Breakdown: person with votes (number of votes, max number of votes): person voting for [post voted in, post unvoted]
In the event of a tie, the player who was voted for first during the Day (even if that vote has subsequently been removed) will be marked with an asterisk.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 4, 2011 18:51:59 GMT -5
Snipped I get a total of three (3) posts that I'm allowed to do on Day One without being directly addressed or incurring mod wrath. This is the first of them. For the sake of what little remains of my sanity, anybody making the effort to speak to me, or at least mention my name occasionally when talking about different topics, would be much appreciated. Is this a stipulation for today only or is this standard for every Day? Unfortunately this is standard for every day. To answer the other questions posed: 1) Sister Coyote granted me one day's exemption from my post restriction, but for three posts only. On day two, and subsequently, I can't speak unless spoken to (or more specifically, unless someone says my name). 2) I am living up to my "honest" name, so far. 3) Plainly I'm not vanilla, so yes, I have a role. I don't know whether we can assume there's any vanilla players in this game, any more than we can assume there's a "lie detector" role. My role name is a specific character from Lewis Carroll's books, and unless there's some sort of an equivalent of Super Mario Mafia's vanilla town "Koopa Troopers", I would expect a lot of named characters. There's a great many to choose from. Some idle speculation here, purely based on knowledge of the books and not on any game-specific knowledge: the Red Queen is an obvious candidate for serial killer / scum Godfather? Let's put it this way, I wouldn't be surprised to see a beheading tonight.
|
|
|
Post by special on May 4, 2011 18:55:56 GMT -5
@ Moley
So, Moley, could you please explain to me your ideas on any of the posts in the game so far?
Also, Moley, would you be so kind as to share your ideas on any interesting ideas contained in the first 4000 posts that occur toDay and each subsequent day?
Also, Moley, if you have a novel idea now or at any point in the future of this game, would you please reply to me with your thoughts?
Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 4, 2011 19:56:11 GMT -5
@ Moley So, Moley, could you please explain to me your ideas on any of the posts in the game so far? Why thank you kindly, and I'll be glad to. If you don't mind, I'll leave the rest of your questions for later on. ;D Would it provoke useful discussion to talk about revealing our secret names? I'm not afraid to do a partial claim now: I am a playing card. My suit is spades, hearts or diamonds. To answer your question, no. We'll wind up having the same discussion we always have concerning that topic. I'd like to spare the newcomers from having to go through that. Is there a point to your partial claim? Other than the fact that the information you have so altruistically revealed is almost certainly of absolutely no consequence whatsoever? Plankton, I for one am not assuming it's of no consequence - straight away I think it might be a signal to the other playing cards, for example - although for what purpose and what it says about their alignment is something I can only guess at right now. My question though is why you are so certain it's of no consequence? There are so many characters in the Wonderland universe--major, minor, and not-in-the-books/adaptations-but-still-hypothetically-possible--that I wouldn't know where to start in guessing what characters are in the game. And even then, any mod should be able to give any role to any character (Alice as a serial killer? The Jabberwocky as the Town Doc? Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee on opposite factions? Hells yes, easy as pie). It's just not worth trying to guess what is what; instead I just try to analyze any claims and see if they make sense from a gameplay point of view. The thought of Alice as a serial killer makes me laugh - massacring the vanilla playing cards -- kinda reminds me of JC Serial Killer in the Bastard Mafia game on Giraffe. Talking of the whole playing card question, can I confirm, BillMC, if the statement about "vanilla playing cards" is idle speculation (like my "red queen" statement)? There seems to be a distinct theme running through the early posts about those playing cards, and I'm curious. Snipped. PS- this is mainly a stir the pot vote, and because there isn't alot of discussion, probably something that scum might do... so I might want to try to target them instead. Uh oh, looks like someone has been spending too much time drinking in coffee down at their local IHOP, The International House of Peeker."stir the pot" they say. Yeah, that phrase pings. a distinct Peeker aroma to that brew, but not enough for me to vote. Private joke? What's my old partner-in-crime got to do with this? And forgive me if I'm missing something re computer programming language. Would a lie detector be able to evaluate Cat's statement "$Alignment=Town" as a statement indicating Cat's alignment is town? (There's no pronoun there.) Skimming is a scum tell Try #D1.104I know this is humour, but this post does feel ever so slightly weird. Why not just post the link? I know it's a joke, but is it also a warning to someone you think is innocent but is looking suspicious? Or a warning to someone you know is guilty but don't want to be caught out? Or am I going into this far too much? However, I'm no longer especially suspicious of Storyteller at this time because his questioning of me seemed genuine. When I'm scum, the first thing I do when a power player questions me is to try and buddy up with them. If anybody's a power player, Storyteller is (I still have fond memories of "Arkham Knights"). So this pings my scumdar a bit. On Colby - I'm not sure about this one. I feel like he's trying to come across as genuine but at the same time he's obviously experienced at this. I hate the "no edit" rule as well, by the way. On Ace - (S)he's sticking out a bit for newbie scum, which is not how I would necessarily expect her to play. I incline right now to the theory that she's newbie town. My reasoning here is that if Ace turns out to be scum, she's refused to post her alignment because she's worried it's not safe to do so. It follows logically that she must have no reason to think it's safe to post "I am town". BUT - here's the potential lightning bolt here - if Ace is scum, and she'd seen another scum post "I am town", she'd have EVERY reason to think it safe to post. Meaning, if Ace is scum, it practically exonerates everyone who posted for the "lie detector" before her of being scum on the same team as Ace herself.Note that I DON'T believe this is the case - in fact, I think that if Ace was scum, and uncertan enough to not want to join the "I am town" lie-detector wagon, she wouldn't have outright refused to post it in full view of all the town, she just wouldn't have posted anything at all until she had advice from the other scum. So to me this is a point in her favour, rather than the reverse. Doesn't mean that she isn't PFK, but it does suggest she isn't scum. I've really only seen one thing so far that's pinged my scumdar slightly, and on the basis of it I'm going to Vote: Archangel. This may change, but it's the best I got right now.
|
|