|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jun 8, 2011 13:36:53 GMT -5
Oh, nearly forgot:
Moley, moley, moley, Honest Moley, Moley, moooooooollllllleeeeeeey
What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jun 8, 2011 14:04:16 GMT -5
While we're sort of collectively working out how to proceed, here's a thought, not an entirely nice one, worthy of discussion, I think. At the moment, Archangel and gnarlycharly both have two permanent final votes. This is potentially a significant problem, if either is Town. Consider the following three person hypothetical endgame, at Dawn of some given Day: Archangel (confirmed by hypothetical future MHaye lie detection), Plankton (confirmed by his role), SteveTheScummer (not confirmed). At Dawn, it is obvious to Archangel and Plankton that SteveTheScummer is the last remaining Scum. They both vote for him. He, though outnumbered, sneaks in a vote for Archangel before anyone else can vote. Guess what happens? This same scenario could pose a problem with four players left, too, as one remaining Scum could force a mislynch against even three confirmed Townies by voting quickly. If there are two Scum currently alive, the situation is even grimmer. I don't know how to handle this. Archangel is my second choice for likely Scum, based on a perusal of my notes on the game so far. As I'm reading through the thread, I note 'posts of interest' on my spreadsheet, so that I can come back and review them later. the thing that sticks out regarding Archangel is that I don't have any of her posts marked down as 'interesting'. Not a single one over 5+ Days. Now, what I find 'interesting' may not be the same as any of the rest of you, and I very well may have missed a few posts here and there, but overall Archangel seems to be sailing along generating just enough attention to be considered an 'active participant', but never enough to really be in any danger. I've actually been getting a Townie vibe from her lately, but I can't really say why...and the fact that I don't have any real read on someone after almost 6 Days makes me wonder if that person has been deliberately trying to lay low.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Jun 8, 2011 18:32:49 GMT -5
At the moment, Archangel and gnarlycharly both have two permanent final votes. Gnarly has one extra vote, do we know that it's a final vote? This is potentially a significant problem, if either is Town. Consider the following three person hypothetical endgame, at Dawn of some given Day: Archangel (confirmed by hypothetical future MHaye lie detection), Plankton (confirmed by his role), SteveTheScummer (not confirmed). At Dawn, it is obvious to Archangel and Plankton that SteveTheScummer is the last remaining Scum. They both vote for him. He, though outnumbered, sneaks in a vote for Archangel before anyone else can vote. Guess what happens? In this scenario SteveTheScummer doesn't even have to vote first, his vote gives Archangel 3 votes to Steve's 2. This same scenario could pose a problem with four players left, too, as one remaining Scum could force a mislynch against even three confirmed Townies by voting quickly. Knowing the risk, the confirmed Townies have a better chance of getting one of their three votes down before the scum and, if they don't succeed, there'd still be another race to be the first the following Day. Not a fun way to end a great game. If there are two Scum currently alive, the situation is even grimmer. I don't know how to handle this. Nor do I.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Jun 8, 2011 19:02:14 GMT -5
Oh, nearly forgot: Moley, moley, moley, Honest Moley, Moley, moooooooollllllleeeeeeeyWhat do you think? I think we'd better get the right person before that situation becomes a reality. That's what I think. I doubt there are two scum left and I don't think there's a malicious PFK. The trouble is that there are two, maybe three, credible candidates for the final scum. I hope Septimus and Charlie are at the top of their game tonight if we get this one wrong.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jun 8, 2011 19:10:16 GMT -5
OK, let's play this out. At this point, I need to emphasize, we could be in a very easy situation or a very dangerous one. If both septimus and MHaye are being truthful, then honestly we're most likely going to win, barring a really unexpected surprise.
If one of them is lying, we're in trouble.
If both are lying, we're probably going to lose.
So let's see. Suppose we lynch one of our two remaining claimed vanillas-who-have-not-been-confirmed-by-MHaye (Rysto or Archangel). For purely mechanical reasons, I'd prefer to lynch Archangel, simply because those two extra votes on her are going to hurt us really badly. ToNight, MHaye investigates someone. Let's say it's Rysto.
Now, what happens toNight? septimus should be protecting MHaye no matter what. If both septimus and MHaye are being truthful, this puts the Scum in a quandary - kill septimus (and thus not eliminate any confirmeds), or leave him alive and able to protect MHaye for another Night.
The death of septimus toNight and the death of MHaye toMorrow Night would, oddly enough, simplify things considerably by "confirming" both of those players while also confirming Ma'at and whoever MHaye investigates toNight (so if we wake up two days hence minus MHaye and septimus, plus minus (say) Archangel and guiri, then the final six would be (say) Plankton [confirmed], Ma'at [confirmed], Rysto [confirmed], myself, Moley, and gnarlycharly [almost definitely not Scum]. In such a circumstance, I'd vote Moley and try to convince everyone else to, because he would almost definitely be the last Scum (again, in this hypothetical).
So let's say the Scum instead kill Plankton. MHaye investigates Rysto and clears him. We lynch guiri. Next Night, Scum kill one of the "confirmeds" (Ma'at or Rysto, or I guess gnarlycharly). This leaves a final six of me, Moley, MHaye, gnarlycharly, let's say Rysto, and septimus. However, MHaye will have a result on either septimus or Moley. Let's say MHaye "clears" septimus that Day, we lynch poor Moley, and Moley turns out to be Town. Now it's Night. Scum kill gnarlycharly. Final four: me, Rysto [cleared], MHaye. septimus [cleared]. From my perspective, that will then mean that MHaye can only be a liar, and should be lynched. I'd have to convince the rest of you of this, but so it goes.
How can we improve on this?
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jun 8, 2011 19:11:39 GMT -5
Obviously, the progression above changes considerably should MHaye actually identify Scum.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jun 8, 2011 19:12:22 GMT -5
Don't you agree, moley?
(Given how late in the game it is, I intend to speak to you directly every chance I get, so that you can participate as much as you are willing and able)
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Jun 8, 2011 19:34:56 GMT -5
Don't you agree, moley? (Given how late in the game it is, I intend to speak to you directly every chance I get, so that you can participate as much as you are willing and able) Thank you very much. The death of septimus toNight and the death of MHaye toMorrow Night would, oddly enough, simplify things considerably by "confirming" both of those players while also confirming Ma'at and whoever MHaye investigates toNight (so if we wake up two days hence minus MHaye and septimus, plus minus (say) Archangel and guiri, then the final six would be (say) Plankton [confirmed], Ma'at [confirmed], Rysto [confirmed], myself, Moley, and gnarlycharly [almost definitely not Scum]. In such a circumstance, I'd vote Moley and try to convince everyone else to, because he would almost definitely be the last Scum (again, in this hypothetical). So let's say the Scum instead kill Plankton. MHaye investigates Rysto and clears him. We lynch guiri. Next Night, Scum kill one of the "confirmeds" (Ma'at or Rysto, or I guess gnarlycharly). This leaves a final six of me, Moley, MHaye, gnarlycharly, let's say Rysto, and septimus. However, MHaye will have a result on either septimus or Moley. Let's say MHaye "clears" septimus that Day, we lynch poor Moley, and Moley turns out to be Town. Now it's Night. Scum kill gnarlycharly. Final four: me, Rysto [cleared], MHaye. septimus [cleared]. From my perspective, that will then mean that MHaye can only be a liar, and should be lynched. I'd have to convince the rest of you of this, but so it goes. How can we improve on this? I would have to say, less lynching of the Moley. The Moley is not a fan of this strategy. I think what you're saying is pretty much inevitable, and there's no question that MHaye should be protected. As I see it, that presents the last scum - whoever it is, and assuming there's only one - with a pretty big problem, no matter who it is - even if it's MHaye himself. Again, though, I would MUCH rather none of this was necessary. Let's get it right today. (If possible!)
|
|
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 Jun 8, 2011 21:22:14 GMT -5
This insomnia biz is really annoying. I spend the whole evening trying to read the game but dozing off instead, and now it's 3am and I can't sleep. Bah humbug. I'm starting a second read, and this caught my eye. Here's part of the PM I sent to Sis C last night (saves me writing up my process of reasoning for choosing to investigate Guiri). It's edited quite a bit for clarity and brevity (yeah, it was actually much longer!) but the important points are in it. Short answer : very probably. Consider; Metallic Squink was a Politician, and Fluiddrud was "a politician - of sorts." Bill was, in fact, a Survivor, not a part-survivor. His chameleon power was for the purpose of aiding him in his attempts to survive. He appeared Town only so long as he was impersonating Alice.
|
|
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 Jun 8, 2011 22:01:26 GMT -5
MHaye, can you indulge me here and please ask Sis C if there's any possibility that the result you got from your lie-detector check could be wrong or tampered with.I have not done this, and do not intend to. We already know the answer. The results gained by my lie-detection power can be "spoofed" by the powers of other players in this game. Therefore they are subject to alteration by other player's powers. This is proven by BillMc's initially being revealed as a Townie, and only reverting to Third Party after his death, when his power ceased operation.
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Jun 8, 2011 23:06:49 GMT -5
Some comments. I hope Honest Moley will comment on my comments. 1. My Internet is still broken. Expect less than my (already poor||) usual participation. 2. I notice discrepancies between Ma'at's and Rysto's posted role PM's. Neither cooperated with my query, each posting less informative PM's than the first time; the timestamp Ma'at gave was certainly wrong. Both therefore seem quite suspicious to me, Ma'at perhaps slightly less so since MHaye thinks he's cleared her. 3. Syster Coyote - why doesn't my vote on Rysto show up in the totals?4. Is not toDay the 2nd Day that Archangel has penalty votes? As shown in rules and as Mod confirms (I think), this should be last day of penalty. 5. I agree that Lynching player with penalty votes is good policy if that player is a logical Lynch candidate anyway. However, as I say, I understand that Archangel's penalty goes away toMorrow. 6. My Protects on earlier Nights may have little interest for Town. I wonder if it is scummy to ask me.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jun 8, 2011 23:51:56 GMT -5
6. My Protects on earlier Nights may have little interest for Town. I wonder if it is scummy to ask me. Well, they have interest for me, and I'm Town. And I'm quite certain it's not Scummy to ask. Which doesn't mean you have to answer, of course...but you might want to think about what you're insinuating.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Jun 9, 2011 0:10:07 GMT -5
MHaye, can you indulge me here and please ask Sis C if there's any possibility that the result you got from your lie-detector check could be wrong or tampered with.I have not done this, and do not intend to. We already know the answer. The results gained by my lie-detection power can be "spoofed" by the powers of other players in this game. Therefore they are subject to alteration by other player's powers. This is proven by BillMc's initially being revealed as a Townie, and only reverting to Third Party after his death, when his power ceased operation. ...And this isn't worth checking out? Seriously, I'm going to look a damn fool if I'm wrong, but a BIGGER fool if I'm right and back down. Because if a player did spoof the result, then plainly that player isn't a scum watcher, strongman, politician or Godfather. Nor is that player a PFK serial killer, survivor or mad bomber, unless my understanding of these roles is WAY off. So far as I can see, we have a group of players, of whom if can be said that EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US has at some point or other been consistently at odds with at least one scum - even the claimed survivor Guiri. There are only three exceptions: GnarlyCharlie (who single-handedly killed one scum at night), Storyteller (who's basically a town duplicate of a scum role), and Ma'at. So let's take a look at Ma'at's role in this. - Ma'at has only been voted for once by confirmed scum the entire game (or rather, Paranoia was) - by Ginger, on Day One. When Ginger voted Paranoia, the latter had no votes on her at all; Ace had seven. And then, as soon as some people seemed a little to eager to follow Ginger's lead and Paranoia picked up two more unexpected votes, Ginger switched her vote off Paranoia and onto me - on blatantly false reasoning that, frankly, looked as though it had been made up on the spot. I even pointed this out at the time. (And yeah, I'm still kicking myself for not running with it.) - On day two, Ma'at had little more to do than appear at the end and post an inconsequential vote on a suspicious-looking townie. On day three, though, with Meeko having three town votes plus Ginger's and Lightfoot having two votes also, Ma'at placed a vote on Archangel. That's two developing scum wagons, yet Ma'at encourages Archangel's. Now Angel's alignment is technically unknown, but given how hard the scum were trying to get her lynched - Squink in particular - I know which way I'm leaning. - On day four, Ma'at is the second one to vote Squink, AFTER MHaye has called her out for lying. And on day five, the lynch is between Ma'at and Ginger, when Ginger conveniently makes a mistake with a PM and admits that she's scum... with a power that allows her to fool the cop (who's been dead for the past three days!) Thereby very likely saving Ma'at from being lynched! Now let's take a look at some of Ma'at's posts regarding the confirmed scum. * From Day 2: "I’m suspicious of ArchAngel’s 3rd party comments – she has a mental block on them, always forgets about them being in games, and yet the previous game she just modded (everafter) had a 3rd party. So, seems odd to me (I think Ginger made a similar comment, if I remember correctly)" * From early on Day 3, addressed at Meeko (remembering that Ma'at actually voted Archangel): "how in the world is saying who you would like to vote for if you had the opportunity of "limited value" and "restraining"? You seem to be evasive and not sure why that would be the case." * Later on on that same day - and I'm bound to say that I actually agreed with Ma'at here, however this was because I had (or thought I had) definite evidence that showed that Meeko probably wasn't scum: "Lastly, I think your vote on Meeko is weak. I’m not sure what I think about meeko, but voting for someone for low-participation, when they’ve stated it’s because they are busy with work, seems like a cop out. And the Colby comment on the end of his PM doesn’t seem *that* suspicious to me." * Her Archangel vote: "This Day is tough. I just really don’t have a strong feeling about anyone (although, my strong feelings are often wrong, so who knows, maybe that’s a good thing). My argument for voting Archangel is that she placed a vote on Meeko without giving any reason, other than she didn’t like the “bandwagon” (a bandwagon of 2) building on Bill. Meeko pointed this out to her, and she still has not been back to give any reasoning. And this was after stating early toDay that she is suspicious of Dirx for some D2 stuff. So, she had some suspicions about Dirx, then votes Meeko because she’s worried about Bill. Doesn’t really add up to me, and she hasn’t been back since (and Bill appears to be under no threat of getting lynched now, so she could conceivably place her vote now for the person she finds most scummy) Meeko would be my next strongest candidate, but for some reason his play style today reminds me a little of yesterday, so I’m hesitant to add a vote there." * Later: "So, is this when those not voting for Meeko hope he comes out with a claim? Meeko?" * When I ask her to vote for Lightfoot: If I thought Lightfoot was scummy, would be more than happy to vote for her, but I'm not comfortable making a last minute (or last hour) vote change for someone that I'm not all that sure about, especially when it seems a little late in the day to try to get people to start switching votes to someone that hasn't garnered much suspicion. * Towards the end of the day (at which point the scum have basically given up on Meeko): "I find Meeko not being around at end of day to try to defend himself a little odd. I know we all get busy, but not even a peep? I find Bill's complete (almost cocky?) confidence in his vote of Meeko odd as well…. I'm right, or you can kill me - really? Does this strike anyone else as odd?" * First post on Squink, posted after MHaye calls her a liar: "So much for my long post I was composing weighing the pros and cons of voting Squink vs Archangel. Looks as though I will likely be voting Squink once M Haye has finshed his tea.... " * And on a rather different note: One small point if Archangel might be third-party that Ma'at brings up: "While it may seem small, I do think it’s significant. In everyone else’s role, the number is capitalized (Seven of Hearts, Ten of Hearts, etc), but Archangel says she is “the three of Hearts”. And this after Gnarley implied he was the three (by saying he thought Archangel would be the eight). So…..?" * So Ma'at is strongly against both Archangel (again, scum scapegoat) and BillMC, but vacillates on Lightfoot and Meeko, and barely says anything about Squink? Or Ginger, except once very early on when they're in agreement? * Somebody tell me where I'm going wrong here, because I don't see it. There are three possible alternatives that don't rely upon a convoluted deception by a claimed power role, and all of them appear to me to be ridiculously weak: - Archangel is set up as a possible "scapegoat" from Day One. Metallic Squink throws everything into getting Archangel lynched, with the intention of making Archangel look really good if she survives. Sacrificing one scum to save another, in other words. - Lightfoot and Rysto are scum together and set up a two-day-long feud just to make each other look good if one of them were to be lynched - neither of them being in any real danger of such at the time; or - Guiri is actually scum, and was the second person to vote Meeko after BillMC. And I don't know why he would do this. If the scum agree to bus Meeko that early, why didn't they all bus Meeko? Or at least most of them... look at the difference between Guiri's reactions and Squink's, and tell me that those two are cooperating, because I just do not see it. * Every other power role has acted like town (with the possible exception of Storyteller, but there's other reasons why he can't be scum); every other power role has helped to catch scum. Septimus has targeted - and been targeted by - Squink, and we know there's a doc role in the game. I can't see Septimus as scum acting as a scum doc would. (I should know.) Gnarly killed Lightfoot when he didn't need to; I fingered both Squink and Ginger, and tried to lynch Lightfoot late on Day 3. MHaye is the un-CC'd lie-detector, and the scum already have a confirmed investigator - why would they need two, let alone one that confirms cases on scum? I know that I was adamant that BillMC's lie-detector reading was correct, and now I'm saying the exact opposite about Ma'at, and this feels like I'm trying to have my cake and eat it (so to speak). But BillMC's role made sense to me. It doesn't make sense, though, that I think there's a last scum in the game, and I can't see who else it could be but Ma'at, but Ma'at's been ruled out of contention by a role action that even MHaye doesn't seem certain couldn't have been tampered with. And Ginger might have got herself lynched in order to keep the one scum who could fool the lie detector, alive... Ok. I'm still voting Rysto. I don't think we have a choice here but to lynch Rysto. If he turns out to be town, which I'm feverishly hoping he won't, then our next course of action should be simple. I'd ask Guiri to post the words "I am not scum" in a sentence, and hope that if there is a lie-detector result changing power, that it only applies to the results from the person who actually uses the power. (Sorry, Guiri, you've been asked to jump through more hoops than a dog in a circus act.) If Rysto is town and the result comes back "true"... then I don't know what we do. Can we lynch somebody who's been confirmed as either town or non-malicious third-party by an investigator?
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jun 9, 2011 0:12:37 GMT -5
At the moment, Archangel and gnarlycharly both have two permanent final votes. Gnarly has one extra vote, do we know that it's a final vote? for the record, i don't have a permanent final vote. it and losing my vote are the consequences when i use a killing power. i ONLY lose my vote when using an investigative power. if i do not use any power, i regain my vote and lose the extra vote on me. 1. the Day i lost my vote but had no vote on me, i investigated Squink. if she wasn't lynched that Day, i would have vigged her instead of Lightfoot. 2. when i took out Lightfoot, i both got a vote and lost my vote for the first time. 3. when i took out CIAS, it happened again. Some comments. I hope Honest Moley will comment on my comments. 1. My Internet is still broken. Expect less than my (already poor||) usual participation. 2. I notice discrepancies between Ma'at's and Rysto's posted role PM's. Neither cooperated with my query, each posting less informative PM's than the first time; the timestamp Ma'at gave was certainly wrong. Both therefore seem quite suspicious to me, Ma'at perhaps slightly less so since MHaye thinks he's cleared her. 3. Syster Coyote - why doesn't my vote on Rysto show up in the totals?4. Is not toDay the 2nd Day that Archangel has penalty votes? As shown in rules and as Mod confirms (I think), this should be last day of penalty. 5. I agree that Lynching player with penalty votes is good policy if that player is a logical Lynch candidate anyway. However, as I say, I understand that Archangel's penalty goes away toMorrow. 6. My Protects on earlier Nights may have little interest for Town. I wonder if it is scummy to ask me. 1. you might find that posting in green will get SisC's attention more. 2. a discrepancy in Ma'at's PM may be caused by her subbing in for Paranoia. however, i understand the need for caution. 3. if Archangel's votes are permanent, i'm not sure either what to do. i do think however that Town will win before it comes to that. 4. you can discuss who you protected or not though i guess every bit of info helps.
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Jun 9, 2011 4:47:00 GMT -5
My Internet is now working again. It's my brain that's defective, and has been through most of the game. 1. you might find that posting in green will get SisC's attention more. 2. a discrepancy in Ma'at's PM may be caused by her subbing in for Paranoia. however, i understand the need for caution. 3. if Archangel's votes are permanent, i'm not sure either what to do. i do think however that Town will win before it comes to that. 4. you can discuss who you protected or not though i guess every bit of info helps. Sister Coyote: My vote on Rysto does not show in the recent totals; is that correct?I managed to forget about Ma'at subbing in, which would indeed explain the timestamp and perhaps even the other very minor discrepancy (a blue comma suggesting Ma'at's Vanilla PM was not cut-and-pasted from template). Rechecking, this is the third Day that Archangel has had a penalty, so my understanding that the penalty only lasts 2 Days was mistaken. But now I'm also confused about the other half of my "syllogism": if she is, after all (and counter to my guess), likely Scum, maybe the argument is not to bother Lynching her now, since she'll be so easy to kill in the endgame. (Sorry, Miss Angel, for speaking so cavalierly of your death.) I was reluctant to disclose my earlier Protectees for fear it would help Scum guess my future thinking. But that hardly applies anymore. I will certainly Protect MHaye toNight; Scum will probably kill me; I will then have no further chance to provide this info; so ... On Nights 1,2,3,4,5 I protected respectively Bill, Bill, septimus, MHaye, MHaye. When there were no deaths on Night 1, I sent a MP to the Moderator bragging about my great performance as a first-time Power. Since then we've learned that Colby prevented all Kills that Night, and that Bill had Scotsman powers anyway. toMorrow when I'm spoiled and reading the Scum thread I expect to learn he wasn't even their target.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Jun 9, 2011 7:16:17 GMT -5
OK, let's play this out. At this point, I need to emphasize, we could be in a very easy situation or a very dangerous one. If both septimus and MHaye are being truthful, then honestly we're most likely going to win, barring a really unexpected surprise. If one of them is lying, we're in trouble. If both are lying, we're probably going to lose. So let's see. Suppose we lynch one of our two remaining claimed vanillas-who-have-not-been-confirmed-by-MHaye (Rysto or Archangel). For purely mechanical reasons, I'd prefer to lynch Archangel, simply because those two extra votes on her are going to hurt us really badly. ToNight, MHaye investigates someone. Let's say it's Rysto. Actually, I've narrowed this down in my own to two possibilities now. Here's why. On Day 3, BillMC voted Meeko straight off the bat. In two quick posts, one after the other, Guiri and Archangel then voted Meeko also. Note that this was pretty soon after the start of the day. Now look at Squink's actions during that time period - shortly after post 108, which is when the second Meeko vote ( Guiri's) came in. It's her indecisiveness on what to do here that made me mark her down as scum on Night 3. It seems, to me, as though she's genuinely confused as to whether to distance herself from Meeko or support him by voting Archangel. BUT - and here's the main thrust of my argument - if she and Guiri were scum, she wouldn't be confused. Unless there was no day-talking allowed, or Guiri had simply sprung that vote on the scum without a word of warning, I don't see why Squink would have reacted like she did just then. Even if she didn't know, a scum-on-scum vote is hardly the same as two town-on-scum votes, in quick succession, when you're on the opposing bandwagon! At the very least, assuming the scum can day-talk, she could have waited to ask Guiri what was going on, instead of feeling the need to react (in what, looking back, was pretty obviously an incriminating manner) then and there. And if Squink and Archangel were scum together, Squink - who's suspected Archangel literally since Day One, or claimed to - would still know exactly what to do - she's already on the Archangel bandwagon, after all, this should be a piece of cake for her. Yet she's confused, vacillates, and gives herself away pretty badly. Oh, and one big piece of evidence in Ma'at's favour that I missed before: When Ma'at voted Ginger, it's true that I was already saying that one of them needed to go. But the only person actually voting Ginger at that time, or who'd expressed any kind of agreement with me, was BillMC - who was himself under a lot of pressure from Storyteller. (Come to think of it, if it wasn't for Story's role, he'd look pretty bad himself during this little exchange.) Immediately after Ginger posted her thing about her PM being changed, Ma'at put her vote on Ginger - and it was only the second vote. I can see Ginger sacrificing herself to save Ma'at, but unless they'd agreed the night before that she'd do it if they both came under suspicion, I don't see how she did it so quickly. It took another three votes for Ginger to cave and admit that she was the Godfather. So to my nasty suspicious mind that doesn't trust role-actions, this is the biggest piece of evidence in Ma'at's favour. So if you eliminate Guiri and Squink as being scum together, Archangel and Squink as being scum together, and Ma'at and Ginger as being scum together, what's left? At this point I think Rysto seriously needs to go.
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on Jun 9, 2011 8:17:08 GMT -5
While we're sort of collectively working out how to proceed, here's a thought, not an entirely nice one, worthy of discussion, I think. At the moment, Archangel and gnarlycharly both have two permanent final votes. This is potentially a significant problem, if either is Town. Consider the following three person hypothetical endgame, at Dawn of some given Day: Archangel (confirmed by hypothetical future MHaye lie detection), Plankton (confirmed by his role), SteveTheScummer (not confirmed). At Dawn, it is obvious to Archangel and Plankton that SteveTheScummer is the last remaining Scum. They both vote for him. He, though outnumbered, sneaks in a vote for Archangel before anyone else can vote. Guess what happens? This same scenario could pose a problem with four players left, too, as one remaining Scum could force a mislynch against even three confirmed Townies by voting quickly. If there are two Scum currently alive, the situation is even grimmer. I don't know how to handle this. Archangel is my second choice for likely Scum, based on a perusal of my notes on the game so far. As I'm reading through the thread, I note 'posts of interest' on my spreadsheet, so that I can come back and review them later. the thing that sticks out regarding Archangel is that I don't have any of her posts marked down as 'interesting'. Not a single one over 5+ Days. Now, what I find 'interesting' may not be the same as any of the rest of you, and I very well may have missed a few posts here and there, but overall Archangel seems to be sailing along generating just enough attention to be considered an 'active participant', but never enough to really be in any danger. I've actually been getting a Townie vibe from her lately, but I can't really say why...and the fact that I don't have any real read on someone after almost 6 Days makes me wonder if that person has been deliberately trying to lay low. SP, I'm not deliberately laying low. I started a new job that's taking up half my time and have to fit my prior clients into the other half of my time, so my Mafia time is severely curtailed. I remind you that I drew two penalty votes on myself by posting after my vote had been bought, and that there is a dead scum politician. I can be scatter-brained, but do you not think that if I were scum I would remember my vote had been bought? I will be voting either Rysto or Guiri. I agree with Honest Moley about his pair-ups of possible scum. I don't think Ma'at is scum, I think she has a play style that includes some "scum tells" (and I sympathize with that). Honest Moley, why do you want Rysto first and Guiri second?
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on Jun 9, 2011 8:20:41 GMT -5
(Honest Moley, that was a random question so you could respond. I do understand your argument about Guiri and Metallic Squink.
I'm just leaning towards we know Guiri is not town, so he should be out of the way and then we can make our way through the vanillas.
Breaking it into two posts so you can respond twice.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jun 9, 2011 8:52:50 GMT -5
I remind you that I drew two penalty votes on myself by posting after my vote had been bought, and that there is a dead scum politician. I can be scatter-brained, but do you not think that if I were scum I would remember my vote had been bought? That's a good point. Not so much that you wouldn't have remembered or whatever, but that your vote was bought and you evidently received a (mod-administered) penalty for violating the purchase. I suppose a Scum politician could have bought your vote in the hopes of earning you cred at exactly this moment, but as you say, I somehow doubt you'd have taken the penalty in that situation. Moley, you make a very good case for voting Rysto. I am inclined to lynch Rysto and guiri in one order or another, barring unexpected developments. This would mean that MHaye should really be choosing among Archangel, septimus, Moley, myself, and (I guess) gnarlycharly toNight. Vote: Rysto
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jun 9, 2011 9:08:19 GMT -5
Moley, indeed makes some good points.
as i said earlier it's either Rysto or guiri. i'll be pragmatic and side with the majority of votes. it also helps that my gut says i should:
Vote Rysto
Vote Hammer
my vote will not count but it may for the hammer if we reach the required number.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Jun 9, 2011 9:28:43 GMT -5
( Honest Moley, that was a random question so you could respond. I do understand your argument about Guiri and Metallic Squink. I'm just leaning towards we know Guiri is not town, so he should be out of the way and then we can make our way through the vanillas. Breaking it into two posts so you can respond twice. Only because I don't see any other malicious PFKs in the game, unless GnarlyCharlie is one - and I've already gone through the arguments why this is unlikely to be the case. And considering the differing reactions by Squink and Guiri to the Meeko bandwagon, and what I posted above, I strongly think that these two weren't working together. In which case, all you're left with is Guiri as a non-malicious PFK - which is exactly what he's claimed. There's no need to lynch him.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jun 9, 2011 10:05:52 GMT -5
Current vote count:
Rysto (4,4) Honest Moley [22,38], septimus [50], suburban plankton [56], Honest Moley [58], storyteller [78], gnarlycharlie [79] Archangel (2,0) gnarlycharlie (1,1) septimus [12,50] Moley (1,0) Guiri (0,1) Honest Moley [52,58] Storyteller (0,1) Archangel [30,42]
With these votes, Rysto will be lynched. septimus' missing vote was mod error. ToDay will end in approximately one day and ten hours.
Hammer (2): guiri [11], gnarlycharlie [79]
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Jun 9, 2011 10:30:16 GMT -5
Vote RystoI agree that he's the best candidate. As for his PM, I suppose either he and Ginger hadn't thought to, or didn't see a need to, compare before posting. In which case, all you're left with is Guiri as a non-malicious PFK - which is exactly what he's claimed. There's no need to lynch him. Not PFK, just 3rd party. I understand that I'm not a welcome member to this party but would like a shot of winning the game along with Town. If we're still here toNight and MHaye still suspects me or wishes to clear me of any further suspicion, I offer the following statements for him to choose from: I am not scum. My wincon is: "You win with the winning team if you are alive at endgame." I am a third-party survivor. I want to win this game along with Town.
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on Jun 9, 2011 11:37:05 GMT -5
All right.
Guiri's a tricky one so he makes me nervous, but
Vote Rysto
Vote Hammer
|
|
|
Post by Archangel on Jun 9, 2011 11:37:44 GMT -5
Sigh.
Vote Hammer
|
|
|
Post by Ma'at on Jun 9, 2011 11:45:44 GMT -5
I’ll have to try to re-read D3 and see where Squink incriminates herself and in the process indirectly exonerates Archangel before I can really understand Moley’s argument, but for now, I will allow that to make up my mind between the two of them, since I don’t really feel more strongly about one than the other.
Vote Rysto
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jun 9, 2011 12:06:13 GMT -5
I am, by the way, reluctant to vote for the hammer simply because I'd rather avoid having any significant portion of the next Day occur on a weekend; my ability to participate on weekends is extremely limited.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jun 9, 2011 12:07:57 GMT -5
Ah, but what the hell. It's 1:00 already, which means if I join the hammer chorus the Day will only be shortened by about eight hours.
vote Hammer
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Jun 9, 2011 12:28:38 GMT -5
Vote Hammer
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Jun 9, 2011 12:45:47 GMT -5
Current vote count: Rysto (4,4) Honest Moley [22,38], septimus [50], suburban plankton [56], Honest Moley [58], storyteller [78], gnarlycharlie [79] Archangel (2,0) gnarlycharlie (1,1) septimus [12,50]Moley (1,0) Guiri (0,1) Honest Moley [52,58]Storyteller (0,1) Archangel [30,42]With these votes, Rysto will be lynched. septimus' missing vote was mod error. ToDay will end in approximately one day and ten hours.Hammer (2): guiri [11], gnarlycharlie [79] Hmm, there seems to be quite a bit of confusion as to what colour "vote hammer" should be written in. Let's make sure it's covered, shall we? Vote: Hammer.
|
|