|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 11:31:04 GMT -5
Post by scáthach on Oct 18, 2011 11:31:04 GMT -5
Sorry, I left sinjin out of my post above, who also voted Colby.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 11:34:36 GMT -5
Post by scáthach on Oct 18, 2011 11:34:36 GMT -5
All of which should be null tells anyway, but I guess when you're looking to hide a Day 1 vote this would be a good place to do it... there's just so many ways to vote for him... And your last sentence really bugs me. It smells like you trying to make it a point to say "Hey! Look at me! I'm hunting scum!" Which you shouldn't have to advertise if you are actually hunting for scum. These bits are pinging the hell out of me. It's like you're trying to smother discussion by finding any outright statements of suspicion scummy.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 11:42:42 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Oct 18, 2011 11:42:42 GMT -5
I make a distinction between "waffling" which to me is saying something like Vote: paranoia cause I think he's probably scum, but he might not be, or he might be third party, or he might not be, and "flip-flopping" which is changing your vote or position on someone.
Both flip-flopping and waffling could be scum tells, but I think they are different. And I don't think peeker does much waffling, he's always seemed pretty firm in his convictions to me. Of course, his firm convictions are all over the place and hard to follow and tend to change.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 11:59:03 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 18, 2011 11:59:03 GMT -5
You can explain anything away like that! "oh but town could do that too" - sure, but it's a game of looking for scum. I have to look at what actions I think are scum motivated. I'm not saying the case on colby is 100% or anything, but it's as good as I have so far for a Day 1 vote. My mama always taught me never to settle. Seriously, though. "Good enough for a Day 1 vote" is an excuse I hate to see. So because it's Day 1, we're going to just throw everything out the window and settle for something less that we wouldn't settle for on a later Day? Why? We've got six pages of information here, we should be able to vote with conviction. That being said, it seems like the vote has basically turned into colby's slip vs. people who jumped on colby's slip. We have two people (drainy and scatchy) who both initially voted for colby with little reason, then later came back and added their reasoning. The problem with the case on colby is that it leaves a lot up to interpretation. There are several scenarios already provided as to why he said Bill instead of Ed. On top of that, the voters on him tend to disagree on whether he was overreacting or underreacting to the scrutiny of his post. It's just weird to have a case built on him due to two posts and have those two posts be completely differently interpreted by people and yet they both come to the same conclusion. I'm kind of rambling, and I'm going to be gone for the end of the Day, so I'm going to step out, get a shower, come back with a clearer head and vote.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 12:22:48 GMT -5
Post by moodymitchy on Oct 18, 2011 12:22:48 GMT -5
I make a distinction between "waffling" which to me is saying something like Vote: paranoia cause I think he's probably scum, but he might not be, or he might be third party, or he might not be, and "flip-flopping" which is changing your vote or position on someone. Both flip-flopping and waffling could be scum tells, but I think they are different. And I don't think peeker does much waffling, he's always seemed pretty firm in his convictions to me. Of course, his firm convictions are all over the place and hard to follow and tend to change. If this post is directed at me and the discussion (or statement) that I apparently waffle... I agree that peekercpa when talking about game stuff... is pretty direct and assertive in his posts... I was referring more to statements he makes that I feel have nothing to do what so ever with the game but are placed in his posts anyway...
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 12:39:59 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 18, 2011 12:39:59 GMT -5
Wow... So Colby get's a vote for not reacting enough... and another vote for overreacting... Well Colby, I guess no matter what you do people are gonna want to jump on that wagon. My point here is that the votes against Colby started off as "OOOOOHHH Look at that tasty slip! He's obviously scum who has been talking to Bill on another board!" But Bill came in and seems just as confused as the rest of us were... Then they went to "I bet he meant to post that on the other board all together..." The problem I see with that deduction is the fact that Paranoia has already told us that private discussions will be held through Quicktopics. It be pretty stupid and pretty hard to have to follow links to another site and then still post here. So now the votes he are getting are all "It's not what he posted, it's how he reacted to the votes he got for what he posted..." and he's getting voted for both possible reactions. All of which should be null tells anyway, but I guess when you're looking to hide a Day 1 vote this would be a good place to do it... there's just so many ways to vote for him... This post is just complete mischaracterisation. You're taking the actions of several posters, combining it into one and then trying to draw conclusions from it? 1. Silver Jan votes Colby for a possible slip 2. I vote for Colby for his reaction to being called on the slip 3. DrainBead votes Colby for his reaction to being called on the slip You're trying to imply that there was lots of switching around and changing reasons, but there wasn't. There was three different players. No... I wasn't trying to imply there was a lot a of switching around and changing reasons... I was implying that all of the reasons are poor... and that the later votes are worse than the early votes.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 12:45:14 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Oct 18, 2011 12:45:14 GMT -5
I make a distinction between "waffling" which to me is saying something like Vote: paranoia cause I think he's probably scum, but he might not be, or he might be third party, or he might not be, and "flip-flopping" which is changing your vote or position on someone. Both flip-flopping and waffling could be scum tells, but I think they are different. And I don't think peeker does much waffling, he's always seemed pretty firm in his convictions to me. Of course, his firm convictions are all over the place and hard to follow and tend to change. If this post is directed at me and the discussion (or statement) that I apparently waffle... I agree that peekercpa when talking about game stuff... is pretty direct and assertive in his posts... I was referring more to statements he makes that I feel have nothing to do what so ever with the game but are placed in his posts anyway... Yeah, I was just making sure I understood and wasn't getting lost in the terminology.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 12:50:00 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 18, 2011 12:50:00 GMT -5
You can explain anything away like that! "oh but town could do that too" - sure, but it's a game of looking for scum. I have to look at what actions I think are scum motivated. I'm not saying the case on colby is 100% or anything, but it's as good as I have so far for a Day 1 vote. I'm not sure why you're so involved in trying to save Colby either. If you're so convinced he's not scum then try make a case against someone else, not just vote me because I'm voting for him. If colby does flip scum, you're next on my list. The more I think about it, the more this post bugs me. It comes across as hyper-defensive and very OMGUS. It implies "Well, I don't see you making any better cases for me to vote for!" On the other hand, Ginger has definitely been slightly defensive of colby and Billgate. Nergh. Screw it, going with what my gut instinct told me from the beginning. Vote: Scathach Fair warning: I'm going on a little road trip, so I won't be around for Day's end should things get messy. Just an FYI.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:15:39 GMT -5
Post by Silver Jan on Oct 18, 2011 13:15:39 GMT -5
[quote author=paulwhoisaghost bplayers.
[/quote]
No... I wasn't trying to imply there was a lot a of switching around and changing reasons... I was implying that all of the reasons are poor... and that the later votes are worse than the early votes. [/quote]
I hear what you are saying although I don't totally agree with you. Where on earth did the "Bill" come from, if Bill had posted before Colby's post then I would just have assumed it was a mistake, in fact the first time I read Colby's post I just thought, "oh, he means Ed" and thought nothing more about it. After I re-read it, I started to wonder more about it and that is why I voted for Colby. It seems to me as if it's more than an oops.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:19:53 GMT -5
Post by Silver Jan on Oct 18, 2011 13:19:53 GMT -5
When is EOD and can we have a vote count please. I have to take my husband to the hospital tomorrow so I don't want to stay up too late, we have to be there at the crack of dawn
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:21:01 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 18, 2011 13:21:01 GMT -5
All of which should be null tells anyway, but I guess when you're looking to hide a Day 1 vote this would be a good place to do it... there's just so many ways to vote for him... And your last sentence really bugs me. It smells like you trying to make it a point to say "Hey! Look at me! I'm hunting scum!" Which you shouldn't have to advertise if you are actually hunting for scum. These bits are pinging the hell out of me. It's like you're trying to smother discussion by finding any outright statements of suspicion scummy. I'm not trying to smother discussion... I made one post that got 3 different responses from you... I'd say that generated some discussion. I'd also say that it seems you are reacting fairly dramatically to my not finding merit in your vote and thinking it fairly scummy. My point with the last part that you quoted is that you should be able to state your suspicions and make a case for why your suspicions are valid without flat out telling someone that they are on your list. What you did was barely post a reason, and the reason you gave was flimsy at best, that you find Ginger suspicious and then said she is on your list. It reads to me like you are trying to make it a point to give the appearance that you are trying, without actually trying. It's alos possible that you are positioning yourself against Ginger so that if you slip scum she looks town, and if she flips scum you look town. Scum posturing... but pretty apparent scum posturing... if you're both scum that is. So I'm left with 1. Your vote on Colby sucks and was placed at a time that scum would jump on the bandwagon and bus Colby. It's a weak case that I don't agree with and can't see warranting a vote even if I did agree with it. And at least one of your fellow voters believes the opposite of your case but his vote is in the same place. The case against Colby is feeble... but you jumped on it because you either saw an easy place to vote, or you are scum with him and think that if he is going down anyway you should bus him and grab some TC. 2. Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I don't think the lady part is right, but other wise I think Shakespeare hit the nail on the head. I made a single post on why I think the case against Colby sucks. This gets my opinion out there and gives data no matter how he flips and even more data when I flip. But that one post garnered three different posts from you alone... each of them finding a different way to try and smudge me or proclaim my actions as scummy.... none of which really builds a case against me... or adresses my opinion (one of them did seem as though you misintrepreted it.... but I think that was you twisting it around to make me seem scummy)... 3. You telling Ginger she's on your list without really building a case against her seems very ingenuine. It could be you setting her up for a mislynch and you are bussing Colby (If you and colby are both scum). It could be you posturing and positioning yourself against her with typicle scum on scum public squabling so that if either of you flips it gives the appearance that the other is town. (If you and Ginger are scum and Colby is town) Or it could be that you are town and have no idea what alignment Colby is, but you are lazy and can't be bothered with finding a better reason to vote than the case against colby, and when you are criticized for it you react by slinging suspicion. I can't see this last one being true... I thought Drain Bead's vote was the weakest.... still do... but I also think your vote is weak... and the above points are enough that I think you are a better lynch than DB Today. Unvote: Unvote DrainBead Vote: Vote Scathach
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:23:06 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 18, 2011 13:23:06 GMT -5
When is EOD and can we have a vote count please. I have to take my husband to the hospital tomorrow so I don't want to stay up too late, we have to be there at the crack of dawn It's tomorrow at 10PM... EDT I believe... I asked this a page or so back...
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:23:46 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 18, 2011 13:23:46 GMT -5
NETA... crap today is Tuesday... it's tonight at 10 PM EDT.... I think that leaves us... 6-7 hours?
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:32:20 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Oct 18, 2011 13:32:20 GMT -5
There are several scenarios already provided as to why he said Bill instead of Ed. Can you flesh out these scenarios for me? The reason why I voted colby was that I couldn't wrap my mind around how he could confuse Mr. Special Ed and BillMc. Especially given that there was only one post made in the game before him, by Ed, not counting the opening color. Names not close, avatars not close. I don't get it. Thanks
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:33:55 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Oct 18, 2011 13:33:55 GMT -5
Annnnnd I missed a bunch of posts while I was off being distracted. Going back to catch up.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:37:52 GMT -5
Post by scáthach on Oct 18, 2011 13:37:52 GMT -5
Eesh - I dunno, everything I say is just being interpreted as scummy at this stage.
I voted Colby because of his second post. I thought it was overly dramatic and almost defeatist for a simple name mistake.
I find JustBeingGinger scummy because she's either snuggling a town Colby for cred if he flips town or trying to save a scum buddy.
I can only vote for the people I find suspicious. Granted I'm defensive, but how is that not a natural reaction?
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:38:43 GMT -5
Post by Deni on Oct 18, 2011 13:38:43 GMT -5
Unofficial Vote Count
Colby (4) - Silver (56), Scathach (59), sinjin (111), DrainBead (118) Scathach (4) - Inner stickler (122), JBG (137). Pollux (157), Paulsiag(160) peeker (1) - Special Ed (1) sinjin(36)(111) Deon (1) - moodymitchy (87) sinjin (1) - Suburban Plankton (90) Pollux Oil (1) - Honest Moley (97 moodymitchy (1) - peeker (112) DrainBead (1) - Colby (129), Paulwiag (133)(160) guiri - honest moley (16)(97)
Abstaining (7) - texcat, Sister Coyote, Deni, zuma, lightfoot, deon, billmc
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:41:28 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Oct 18, 2011 13:41:28 GMT -5
I should have a bit more time to post today. I need to expand a bit on my drive-by vote. The slip was suspicious, but Colby's reaction to it was what put it over the edge. It basically boiled down to "Aw, shucks, I'm dumb" and seemed more like an admission of guilt. A Town player in that situation would have tried to explain what he was thinking when he made the slip. I expect more of a defense from someone who isn't guilty. I have exactly the opposite opinion regarding colby's reaction. One of the biggest mistakes people make when telling lies is providing too much information. If colby had gone into detail to explain why he was thinking about Bill, and how he wasn't paying attention, so he did this, typed that, and thought the other thing... that I would find very suspicious. But "God I'm dumb" has a ring of innocence to it. I'm inclined to believe him for now, though I won't discount the possibility that he's just a very accomplished liar. As to who to lynch Today, I'm not sure yet. I haven't been able to give this game a lot of attention thus far, so I'm not qualified to comment on a lot of what's gone on in the last 24 hours or so. I'm going to try to catch up quickly so I can make a meaningful contribution before it's too late in the Day.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 13:52:26 GMT -5
Post by deon on Oct 18, 2011 13:52:26 GMT -5
@ peeker if this is a nicer you, when do i get to experience the meaner you?
@paul when will we get the good reasons you seem to have to lynch sumone?
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 14:03:08 GMT -5
Post by Silver Jan on Oct 18, 2011 14:03:08 GMT -5
Deni please vote, you always look scummy when you don't vote.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 14:04:25 GMT -5
Post by scáthach on Oct 18, 2011 14:04:25 GMT -5
Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I don't think the lady part is right, but other wise I think Shakespeare hit the nail on the head. I made a single post on why I think the case against Colby sucks. This gets my opinion out there and gives data no matter how he flips and even more data when I flip. But that one post garnered three different posts from you alone... each of them finding a different way to try and smudge me or proclaim my actions as scummy.... none of which really builds a case against me... or adresses my opinion (one of them did seem as though you misintrepreted it.... but I think that was you twisting it around to make me seem scummy)... In fairness it was really 2 posts, the middle one was just correcting a mistake I made in the first. And it was 2 posts because I wanted to respond to two different sections of your post and it was easier to do it that way than copy paste quote tags. You keep going on and on about it being 3 posts as if that makes the slightest difference one way or another. Why on earth should it? Honestly, I know this is going to make me lynch leader, but that's the way the wind is blowing anyway and I'd like to get this on the record unvote Colby vote Paulwhoisaghost
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 14:11:21 GMT -5
Post by moodymitchy on Oct 18, 2011 14:11:21 GMT -5
Deni please vote, you always look scummy when you don't vote. Why Deni in particular... why not any of the other 6 people that haven't placed a vote yet ?
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 14:47:32 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Oct 18, 2011 14:47:32 GMT -5
Having reread the last few pages of posts: I'm not happy with the bandwagon on scathach. Yes, he made a weak vote. But three other people made the same weak vote; way too much is being read into the specific verbiage he used, which is kind of surprising since the people who didn't like the way scathach phrased his post don't seem to have a problem with colby's slip that started the whole ball rolling. I particularly don't like Paul's vote on scathach. Paul himself stated that the later votes on colby are worse than the early votes, citing that as part of the reason he originally voted for Drain Bead. But once scathach started picking up votes, that opinion seemed to change. His 3 points against scathach ( Post 160) boil down to 1. Your vote sucked (so did everybody else's, as Paul had already pointed out) 2. You overreacted to my posts (I see two whole posts from scathach that are in response to Paul...not quite the gross overexaggeration he makes out) 3. You tell Ginger she's 'on your list' without making a case against her (except that's not quite what scathach actually said) It looks to me like Paul is looking to find someone other than colby to lynch Today, and when an opportunity finally presented itself he was all too happy to go along with it. I don't know if he's trying to save a Scumbuddy, or if he's just trying to buy cred because he knows colby is Town, but it seems like he's quite happy for 'not colby' to be lynched. unvote sinjin vote paulwhoisaghost
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 14:57:09 GMT -5
Post by moodymitchy on Oct 18, 2011 14:57:09 GMT -5
@ Suburban Plankton
So why not place a vote on colby11 and perhaps seal their fate?
Or do you know that colby11 is TOWN ?
I just feel that you've made a late vote change that, whilst possibly stating your thoughts which could be looked back upon at a later date... Won't make any difference to the outcome of the lynch but, does perhaps hold more water than your case on sinjin
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 15:00:15 GMT -5
Post by Paranoia on Oct 18, 2011 15:00:15 GMT -5
Current Vote Tally:
Scathach (4): Inner Stickler, JustBeingGinger, Pollux Oil, Paulwhoisaghost
Colby11 (3): Silver Jan, sinjin, Drain Bead
Paulwhoisaghost (2): scathach, Suburban Plankton
Drain Bead (1): colby11
Peekercepa (1): Mr. Special Ed
Deon (1): moodymitchy
Pollux Oil (1): Honest Moley
moodymitch (1): Peekercpa
Abstaining (7) : Texcat, Sister Coyote, Deni, Drain Bead, LightFoot, Deon, BillMC
With these votes, Scathach would be lynched at deadline.
Deadline is at 10:00 pm CDT, which is in 7 hours!
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 15:08:14 GMT -5
Post by Deni on Oct 18, 2011 15:08:14 GMT -5
Deni please vote, you always look scummy when you don't vote. Why Deni in particular... why not any of the other 6 people that haven't placed a vote yet ? fishing... smudging... I don't know... FWIW, when I do miss a deadline it has been 50/50 on which side I am on. I am home with no plans today so I won't be missing this one. These new votes on paulwiag are interesting... I had picked up on this as well and wanted to say that I agree wholeheartedly with this I particularly don't like Paul's vote on scathach. Paul himself stated that the later votes on colby are worse than the early votes, citing that as part of the reason he originally voted for Drain Bead. But once scathach started picking up votes, that opinion seemed to change. Interesting how he is stated that the later votes that are the most suspicious (which can be true) but votes for the earlier votes. I am not liking your voting change paulwiag.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 15:08:37 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 18, 2011 15:08:37 GMT -5
Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I don't think the lady part is right, but other wise I think Shakespeare hit the nail on the head. I made a single post on why I think the case against Colby sucks. This gets my opinion out there and gives data no matter how he flips and even more data when I flip. But that one post garnered three different posts from you alone... each of them finding a different way to try and smudge me or proclaim my actions as scummy.... none of which really builds a case against me... or adresses my opinion (one of them did seem as though you misintrepreted it.... but I think that was you twisting it around to make me seem scummy)... In fairness it was really 2 posts, the middle one was just correcting a mistake I made in the first. And it was 2 posts because I wanted to respond to two different sections of your post and it was easier to do it that way than copy paste quote tags. You keep going on and on about it being 3 posts as if that makes the slightest difference one way or another. Why on earth should it? Honestly, I know this is going to make me lynch leader, but that's the way the wind is blowing anyway and I'd like to get this on the record unvote Colby vote PaulwhoisaghostGet what on record? That you voted for me after I tied you up for lynch leader? With no real case other than OMGUS? Seriously, so far the only thing you have done in this game is vote for Colby with poor reasoning, and then cast suspicion on anyone who criticizes you for it. You gave no further reasoning for telling Ginger she made your list, and you aren't giving any reasoning for voting for me other than the fact that I voted for you and I think you're scummy.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 15:13:31 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Oct 18, 2011 15:13:31 GMT -5
@ Suburban PlanktonSo why not place a vote on colby11 and perhaps seal their fate? Or do you know that colby11 is TOWN ? I just feel that you've made a late vote change that, whilst possibly stating your thoughts which could be looked back upon at a later date... Won't make any difference to the outcome of the lynch but, does perhaps hold more water than your case on sinjinWhy in the world would I place a vote on colby at this point? I already stated that I'm leaning toward believing that he made an innocent slip in Post #2, so I have no reason to vote for him now. I don't like the cases on either of the front-runners, so I am voting for the person who I think is most likely to be Scum. And how are you so certain that my vote change won't make any difference to the outcome? We still have 7 people who have yet to vote, so I'd say things are still up in the air just a bit.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 15:13:32 GMT -5
Post by Deni on Oct 18, 2011 15:13:32 GMT -5
I also want to go on record to say that if paulwiag and colby were scumbuddies I can't imagine for one minute that paulwiag would try to save a drowning scumbuddy. It just doesn't seem right.
|
|
|
Day One
Oct 18, 2011 15:20:26 GMT -5
Post by Deni on Oct 18, 2011 15:20:26 GMT -5
In fairness it was really 2 posts, the middle one was just correcting a mistake I made in the first. And it was 2 posts because I wanted to respond to two different sections of your post and it was easier to do it that way than copy paste quote tags. You keep going on and on about it being 3 posts as if that makes the slightest difference one way or another. Why on earth should it? Honestly, I know this is going to make me lynch leader, but that's the way the wind is blowing anyway and I'd like to get this on the record unvote Colby vote PaulwhoisaghostGet what on record? ~~snipped~~ I believe this was scathach's way of saying "I'm Town" and when I am lynched everyone will know who the real scum is. Interestingly enough this is the first post that I was pinged by scathach.
|
|