Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 11, 2011 14:15:12 GMT -5
As far as the vote for Paranoia, it seems that everyone is going after something small (Ace with not claiming their role, and Captain's activity [or lack of])
The second game gave me a lot of insight, and I'm using that insight towards voting for Paranoia at the moment. I am also hoping to prod them into at least talking (if possible, because they could have been silenced)
Question- besides the silencer and Jack of all trades, who all could silence a player?
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 11, 2011 14:17:00 GMT -5
(EDITTED ONLY TO CORRECT THE QUOTE) eeep!! You probably should have just asked the moderator to fix it.... I'm guessing that was a mistake... Well, I guess I'll take the penalty vote, if there is one
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on May 11, 2011 14:17:08 GMT -5
It appears we have atleast 2 that have not posted a thing toDay (other factions MAY be in play?) you appear to be championing Cap We do have a Silencer role, as well as the Jack of All Trades. It could be possible that either one of those who are quiet have been silenced. (EDITTED ONLY TO CORRECT THE QUOTE) You may want to pop on by the rules thread again. We could have a JoAT but what makes you KNOW there is a silencer when none is listed? Oh, and thou shalt not edit. (remember preview is your friend)
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 11, 2011 14:20:14 GMT -5
FROM THE RULES
Rule violation penalties will be on a sliding scale; the first violation by any person will result in a one-day Penalty Vote; second violations, even if by a different person, will result in two two-day Penalty Votes, and all subsequent violations by any persons will result in a Final Vote.
DO NOT edit your posts. Editing of posts will be on the same sliding scale as other rule violations.
END OF RULES
Well, I'll take the penalty... At least it wasn't like Carlo's penalty in Everafter...
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 11, 2011 14:22:12 GMT -5
We do have a Silencer role, as well as the Jack of All Trades. It could be possible that either one of those who are quiet have been silenced. (EDITTED ONLY TO CORRECT THE QUOTE) You may want to pop on by the rules thread again. We could have a JoAT but what makes you KNOW there is a silencer when none is listed? Oh, and thou shalt not edit. (remember preview is your friend) I was assuming there was a Silencer... Ok i'm shutting up so that I don't cause more penalty votes, confusion, or a "Lynch the idiot" mob....
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on May 11, 2011 14:25:59 GMT -5
You're right... There is no sense in pretending, Your eyes give you away. Something inside you is feeling like I do, We've said all there is to say.
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on May 11, 2011 14:26:43 GMT -5
Unvote GnarlyCharlie
Vote FluidDruid
For reasons already stated.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 11, 2011 14:34:19 GMT -5
It appears we have atleast 2 that have not posted a thing toDay (other factions MAY be in play?) you appear to be championing Cap We do have a Silencer role, as well as the Jack of All Trades. It could be possible that either one of those who are quiet have been silenced. (EDITTED ONLY TO CORRECT THE QUOTE) I did not see a silencer role in the list of roles, just the JOAT.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 11, 2011 14:35:51 GMT -5
We do have a Silencer role, as well as the Jack of All Trades. It could be possible that either one of those who are quiet have been silenced. (EDITTED ONLY TO CORRECT THE QUOTE) I did not see a silencer role in the list of roles, just the JOAT. OK never mind this post. I see that Colby was informed there was no silencer.
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on May 11, 2011 14:36:25 GMT -5
We do have a Silencer role, as well as the Jack of All Trades. It could be possible that either one of those who are quiet have been silenced. (EDITTED ONLY TO CORRECT THE QUOTE) I did not see a silencer role in the list of roles, just the JOAT. Holey Moley has been "silenced" in a way but it seems to be part of his role (if he's telling the truth) rather than an action by a silencer.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 11, 2011 14:38:35 GMT -5
3. Fluiddruid appears to have an extra invisible vote. Some think it may be a mod penalty, but I see no indication of that. I agree that there's no indication of the extra vote being a mod penalty but what do you think it is? A secret vote by Fluid herself or by someone else? Would Sister create a 3rd party role that could theoretically win by being lynched on Day 2? That sort of role has to have a non-exclusive wincon or else Sister went to a whole lot of effort for a potentially very short game. And if the claim is false, where did the extra vote come from and why did she make the claim under no pressure? I'm stumped for ideas. @ Honest Moley, in case you need to be addressed, what are your thoughts in general?
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 11, 2011 14:49:04 GMT -5
I did not see a silencer role in the list of roles, just the JOAT. Holey Moley has been "silenced" in a way but it seems to be part of his role (if he's telling the truth) rather than an action by a silencer. True, being silenced unless spoken too, has actions like the silencer but with some freedom.
|
|
|
Post by special on May 11, 2011 15:00:49 GMT -5
3. Fluiddruid appears to have an extra invisible vote. Some think it may be a mod penalty, but I see no indication of that. I agree that there's no indication of the extra vote being a mod penalty but what do you think it is? A secret vote by Fluid herself or by someone else? Would Sister create a 3rd party role that could theoretically win by being lynched on Day 2? That sort of role has to have a non-exclusive wincon or else Sister went to a whole lot of effort for a potentially very short game. And if the claim is false, where did the extra vote come from and why did she make the claim under no pressure? I'm stumped for ideas. @ Honest Moley, in case you need to be addressed, what are your thoughts in general? Yeah, I have no idea either. But I'm not going to assume it is a mod penalty.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on May 11, 2011 15:02:45 GMT -5
It appears we have atleast 2 that have not posted a thing toDay (other factions MAY be in play?) you appear to be championing Cap We do have a Silencer role, as well as the Jack of All Trades. It could be possible that either one of those who are quiet have been silenced. (EDITTED ONLY TO CORRECT THE QUOTE) No editing of posts.
The next vote count will reflect one (1) Penalty Vote for colby11. The next violation of any rule, regardless of the player in violation, will be two (2) Penalty Votes.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on May 11, 2011 15:39:44 GMT -5
Captain Pinkies (6,6)*: Special Ed [4], Suburban Plankton [47,198,209], septimus [88], Meeko [156], LightFoot [161], JustBeingGinger [228] Archangel (3,3): CatInaSuit [26], metallicsquink [37], Captain Pinkies [90] Fluiddruid (3,2): Archangel [30,203,246], gnarlycharlie [227] Paranoia (1,1): colby11 [176] colby11 (1,0): gnarlycharlie (0,1): Archangel [203,246] CatInaSuit (0,1): septimus [60,88] Special Ed (0,1): Suburban Plankton [198,209]
With these votes Captain Pinkies will be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by Dirx on May 11, 2011 16:55:31 GMT -5
I did not see a silencer role in the list of roles, just the JOAT. I think it was Ulla's Batman game where the silencer was basically a roleblocker on steroids. So, "Silencer" doesn't have to be in the role list for the mechanic to be in the game. That said, I will be very cross with our lovely mod if there is full-on silencing in this game. 3. Fluiddruid appears to have an extra invisible vote. Some think it may be a mod penalty, but I see no indication of that. I agree that there's no indication of the extra vote being a mod penalty but what do you think it is? A secret vote by Fluid herself or by someone else? Would Sister create a 3rd party role that could theoretically win by being lynched on Day 2? That sort of role has to have a non-exclusive wincon or else Sister went to a whole lot of effort for a potentially very short game. And if the claim is false, where did the extra vote come from and why did she make the claim under no pressure? I'm stumped for ideas. @ Honest Moley, in case you need to be addressed, what are your thoughts in general? There's the possibility that fluiddruid is simply lying about her role and/or wincon, meaning we can't trust that she's not a pfk (or even scum). No editing of posts.
The next vote count will reflect one (1) Penalty Vote for colby11. The next violation of any rule, regardless of the player in violation, will be two (2) Penalty Votes. *must resist the urge to laugh like Count von Count...*
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on May 11, 2011 18:09:53 GMT -5
OOG-- Sorry for the interruption. I have periodic neurological problems due to a chronic illness. They come and go and apparently they're affecting me now. I'm not saying that you shouldn't vote me because of this-- they're equal opportunity problems, so they can happen when I'm town or scum. Anyway, I'm announcing this because I seem to be having issues this week and I'm not at my best mentally. So if you all want me to sub out I will.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 11, 2011 19:04:29 GMT -5
OOG-- Sorry for the interruption. I have periodic neurological problems due to a chronic illness. They come and go and apparently they're affecting me now. I'm not saying that you shouldn't vote me because of this-- they're equal opportunity problems, so they can happen when I'm town or scum. Anyway, I'm announcing this because I seem to be having issues this week and I'm not at my best mentally. So if you all want me to sub out I will. I would rather you stay. There are times in this game I don't know if I should scratch my watch or wind my ass! ;D
|
|
|
Post by special on May 11, 2011 19:26:06 GMT -5
OOG-- Sorry for the interruption. I have periodic neurological problems due to a chronic illness. They come and go and apparently they're affecting me now. I'm not saying that you shouldn't vote me because of this-- they're equal opportunity problems, so they can happen when I'm town or scum. Anyway, I'm announcing this because I seem to be having issues this week and I'm not at my best mentally. So if you all want me to sub out I will. I would rather you stay. There are times in this game I don't know if I should scratch my watch or wind my ass! ;D there's a visual that will never unburn itself from my memory.
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on May 11, 2011 19:44:37 GMT -5
OOG-- Sorry for the interruption. I have periodic neurological problems due to a chronic illness. They come and go and apparently they're affecting me now. I'm not saying that you shouldn't vote me because of this-- they're equal opportunity problems, so they can happen when I'm town or scum. Anyway, I'm announcing this because I seem to be having issues this week and I'm not at my best mentally. So if you all want me to sub out I will. I would rather you stay. There are times in this game I don't know if I should scratch my watch or wind my ass! ;D OMG. Agreed with Ed. Brilliant visual, Ginger. (How are you? Are things still okay in your world?)
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 11, 2011 20:00:39 GMT -5
I would rather you stay. There are times in this game I don't know if I should scratch my watch or wind my ass! ;D OMG. Agreed with Ed. Brilliant visual, Ginger. (How are you? Are things still okay in your world?) Things are good. Still have a job. They are still laying off but no one knows when and how many... Our Procurement software is coming out with completely updated version that everyone in the DC Government has to be trained, I am the only trainer. So, hopefully I am secured. Thanks for asking! Have you heard from Macys yet?
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 11, 2011 20:26:21 GMT -5
what do you think was her motivation for claiming then? i'm not sure but it's more about playing safe. how do we know that her wincon is not wincon stealing? Well, I'll take the penalty... At least it wasn't like Carlo's penalty in Everafter... that was Braden. ;D OMG. Agreed with Ed. Brilliant visual, Ginger. (How are you? Are things still okay in your world?) Things are good. Still have a job. They are still laying off but no one knows when and how many... Our Procurement software is coming out with completely updated version that everyone in the DC Government has to be trained, I am the only trainer. So, hopefully I am secured. Thanks for asking! Have you heard from Macys yet? i'm glad things are good. wishing you the best.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 11, 2011 21:21:02 GMT -5
3. Fluiddruid appears to have an extra invisible vote. Some think it may be a mod penalty, but I see no indication of that. I agree that there's no indication of the extra vote being a mod penalty but what do you think it is? A secret vote by Fluid herself or by someone else? Would Sister create a 3rd party role that could theoretically win by being lynched on Day 2? That sort of role has to have a non-exclusive wincon or else Sister went to a whole lot of effort for a potentially very short game. And if the claim is false, where did the extra vote come from and why did she make the claim under no pressure? I'm stumped for ideas. @ Honest Moley, in case you need to be addressed, what are your thoughts in general? Sorry guys, I'm still here. No Guiri, there were enough people talking to me, I just haven't had enough time to really go through things. Here's my thoughts now that I have. On Pinkles: He needs to be more explicit; this isn't the same scenario as Ace not claiming, Pinkles has expressly said he's got a voting restriction but not explained what it is. That said, I don't see any reason to lynch him now. ("Now" in major quotation marks.) Without mod-confirmation of otherwise, I would assume the scum can day-talk. (And honestly, if they can't, the game is gastardly anyway.) I don't see why he would make such a pointless lie about a vote restriction as scum - I don't see that he needed to claim. I incline to his restriction being genuine, which doesn't mean that he is. I don't think at this point that it's lynching evidence. On Archangel: She was one of the most prolific posters on day one. She had what appeared to be a genuine change of heart regarding Ace. This is usually the sign of a townie, or scum who's under pressure. Since Archangel wasn't under pressure at the time, I take it as a mild town tell. On the negative side, Angel's saying that Story and I were probably town, though, could be construed as "buddying" with those who suspected her. I'm unsure of Archangel but for now I see her as unsafe town. On Fluid: I have nothing to say about her claim. She missed her claimed night-action so it can't be evaluated yet. I don't see any other reason to lynch her at this point, nor do I see any definite reason to doubt her statement that she's non-malicious PFK. I'd rather go after scum than a cooperative third party; I've played games in the past where the balance strongly favours town that cooperate with third parties rather than wasting lynches on them I've been going through the posts of a few people - specifically BillMC, GnarlyCharlie, Archangel, CIAS and Meeko, so far. With the exception of CIAS and Angel, none of them has been hugely prolific, and I find it difficult to get a "read" on them. I don't see any blatant scumtells, lies, contradictions, etc. Not so with the sixth person I examined. 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. vote Fluiddruid First of all, as you later admitted, this was some flawed paraphrasing of Fluid. Secondly, you think that Ace's action is likely to be that of newbie town, even citing games where Ace has "shown her towniness" too much and jumped on a bandwagon as scum (which is obviously contrary to Ace's play in this game), yet you find it suspicious that she hasn't argued her point? Really? I would have assumed (and in fact did assume) that she couldn't make it online, given her lack of posts before that point; but even beyond that, what exactly was she supposed to argue? Ace had said exactly why she didn't claim town when other people did. Thirdly, there's your comment on my post restriction, which I've gone into. It's obviously ill-thought-out. More obviously though, if you really believe that mentioning somebody's name could be dangerous - which is bizarre enough in itself; how are people supposed to discuss me or vote me if so? - then I wouldn't expect you, in pointing this out, to mention their name yourself twice in the same post. That says to me that you don't really believe what you're suggesting is plausible. Finally there's your vote on Pinkles: Trying to catch up on the events of the Day here. Vote Captain PinkiesIt appears that he is holding back information that could be helpful to TOWN. So until he reveals his PM with the forced vote and or claims. This will be my vote. I don't believe in the concept of a "threat vote" - if you use your vote like this, you run a MAJOR risk of lynching uncooperative town instead of cooperative scum. (Just ask Ace.) You vote who you think is scum, which isn't what you are claiming here. At least other people who have voted Pinkles have outright stated their suspicion of him as scum. But even beyond that, I hate on principle the practice of voting someone just to force them to speak. That's not what a vote is for. If you're town then this is an appalling reason to vote for somebody. If you're scum, and Pinkles isn't, then it makes perfect sense that you'd unconsciously phrase the vote as a threat rather than a suspicion; you wouldn't actually be suspicious of him at all, you'd know for certain that he wasn't scum. For all these reasons, vote: JustBeingGinger.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on May 11, 2011 22:39:29 GMT -5
End of my day I origionally voted Cap to test a theory. I am not solid on the vote (but I do agree a bit with those who are)
Unvote: Captain Pinkies
|
|
|
Post by Captain Pinkies on May 12, 2011 3:11:52 GMT -5
<== passes the tiger-eye hookah to the left
<== a round of Absolut Foreplay
Ingredients to use: 1 part Sprite 1 part Absolut Ruby Red Vodka 1 part X-rated liqueur Hpnotiq liqueur Directions: Fill glass with Ice, add a 4 count of Absolut Ruby Red and a 4 count of X-rated liqueur which is similar to Hpnotiq, but its Pink. Fill the rest of the glass with Sprite.
why should I claim?
Also with 6 votes I bet there is a SCUM in there....
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on May 12, 2011 3:20:39 GMT -5
3. Fluiddruid appears to have an extra invisible vote. Some think it may be a mod penalty, but I see no indication of that. I agree that there's no indication of the extra vote being a mod penalty but what do you think it is? A secret vote by Fluid herself or by someone else? Would Sister create a 3rd party role that could theoretically win by being lynched on Day 2? That sort of role has to have a non-exclusive wincon or else Sister went to a whole lot of effort for a potentially very short game. And if the claim is false, where did the extra vote come from and why did she make the claim under no pressure? I'm stumped for ideas. Thinking on this: WWFDD. I'm beginning to think that there is no penalty vote on fluiddruid and that the vote came from fluiddruid in an attempt to get lynched early and win the game. Given this board and the usual practice to not only lynch all liars, but also lynch all 3rd parties, fluiddruid has done two things that make people want to lynch her. I can't see the role being win-stealing, especially if the wincon could be meet on Day 2. Given that, I think fluiddruid is a 3rd party, not scum. Frankly, I always think lynching a claimed third party on Day 2 is usually a bad idea. If they are a third party, then they should be unable to win before Day 4 or 5 at least if they are win stealing, perhaps earlier if they are non-exclusive. I would much rather be scum hunting toDay, especially given the slow start we had on Day 1. Day 4/5 - then we should look at lynching fluiddruid. After all at this point, she has to follow along with what she has claimed.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on May 12, 2011 3:32:49 GMT -5
You don't have to role claim, but some proof of being forced to vote this way, like, yanno, PMs from the Mods with timestamps explaining it all, might help your case. Otherwise, you're probably getting lynched.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on May 12, 2011 4:23:55 GMT -5
If there's been a credible reason posted for why a scummy Honest Moley would invent a posting restriction, I've missed it. Thus suspicion about it makes me suspicious. Do you care to comment, Moley? Never answered this one, Septimus... I'm guessing people maybe mistook me for Roosh?
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on May 12, 2011 7:22:01 GMT -5
yes. however Archangel seems to be 'forgetting' a lot so i'm still considering my vote. it's quite odd that so many are claiming without being threatened with a lynching. i don't quite know what to make of it. seems a number of us aren't comfortable with voting shenanigans. for now i'll Vote FluidDruidshe's a self proclaimed 3rd party and it seems she's holding some information back. i'm not comfortable with her role. i'd rather err on the side of caution. The last couple of posts from gnarlycharlie about who to vote for seem to switch from suspecting Archangel to just plain voting for Fluiddruid with no mention of Archangel. Reading through your Day 2 posts it seems like your suspicion changes from one to the other without any particular reason other than you need to get a vote down. gnarlycharlie, if you were considering your vote mentioning Archangel, why haven't you mentioned her since?
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on May 12, 2011 7:24:50 GMT -5
why should I claim? Also with 6 votes I bet there is a SCUM in there.... Vote: Captain Pinkies You should claim because if you don't, you're going to be lynched. You might be lynched even if you do, but I can cold-stone guarantee you will not survive this Day unless you claim. What are you even waiting for? As for your second statement, this is both almost certainly true regardless of your alignment, and totally trivial. Take any subset of six players in this game and at least one of the six is likely to be SCUM. OK, so here's where I start: I view Archangel as likely Town. The tone of her various responses (particularly during Day One) reads Town to me, and in recent games I've had a lot more success identifying Townies than identifying Scum, so what the hell, there it is.
|
|