Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on Oct 22, 2011 11:23:43 GMT -5
What is the problem with names in this game? lol It's the trend that I started Glad that you could become a part of it
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on Oct 22, 2011 11:33:11 GMT -5
Unofficial Vote Count for Day 2
Silver Jan (3)-Honest Moley, Colby11, Drain Bead Colby11 (2) - moodymitchy, Silver Jan Mr. Special Ed (1)- JustbeingGinger JustbeingGinger (1)- Sister Coyote Paulwhoisaghost (1)- Deon
Please note- THIS IS AN UNOFFICIAL VOTE TALLY
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Oct 22, 2011 11:58:06 GMT -5
After my reread I am just as suspicious of colby11 as I was yesterDay, several others are on my radar as well and I need to go back and read again, but will have no time today (babysitting Colby's statements about Drain not claiming are just bizarre. His calling her by the wrong name three times in a row after taking heat yesterday for calling someone the wrong name is just, just, inconceivable. vote colby11Paul: trying to compare my calling scathach " sach" to colby11 calling Special Ed Bill is really stretching things. I was not attempting to call her sachertorte, who isn't even in the game, as you seemed to be saying. I was trying to abbreviate her name and got the letters in the wrong order. I have no cultural feeling for the name "scathach" so have a hard time writing it quickly. FWIW I also used to read Drain Bead as Brain Dead.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Oct 22, 2011 12:03:19 GMT -5
Drain, one of the reasons I haven't jumped on Silver Jan for calling on Deni to vote is because she did the exact same thing in the last game we played here. I was convinced both she and Deni were scum that entire game and they were both town. I'm letting it go for now because I can't get a handle on their play style (it seems the same this time as last), they both just seem a little flakey to me (sorry girls .
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Oct 22, 2011 12:26:34 GMT -5
Drain, one of the reasons I haven't jumped on Silver Jan for calling on Deni to vote is because she did the exact same thing in the last game we played here. I was convinced both she and Deni were scum that entire game and they were both town. I'm letting it go for now because I can't get a handle on their play style (it seems the same this time as last), they both just seem a little flakey to me (sorry girls . I can't speak for Deni but I am a little flakey
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Oct 22, 2011 13:29:35 GMT -5
Was the first bit directed at me? Yes. The page wasn't loading properly and cut off behind your post or I'd have quoted it. I apologize for the lack of context. Justification was not the issue ( as you may have read)
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 22, 2011 13:33:42 GMT -5
What was the issue, then?
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Oct 22, 2011 13:42:04 GMT -5
What was the issue, then? almost anyone in that position would claim somethingIt does not mean I'm going to pay the sticker price
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 22, 2011 13:48:17 GMT -5
I don't see that as being a point worthy of much thought. It strikes me as obvious. So, you think Drain is lying and that's based on, what, the timing of her claim? Or do you have more?
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Oct 22, 2011 13:53:35 GMT -5
Wow... not only did you misrepresent or skim over pretty much every thing I said yesterDay, Given that I was trying to summarize the entire day I couldn't give you any more wall space they I did. If you note my bits about your posts are longer than anyone else's. Perhaps someone else can devote an entire WoWs to you alone, I don't have time today. Can you point out where I misrepresented what you wrote? I'm sorry if I came across as mean. Some of your posts just really rubbed me the wrong way and I guess I let that show thru. I will try not to let that happen again. The apologetic tone of this post pinged me. Maybe I'm not used to mafia players being nice unless it's scum trying to look nice to town. I went back for a reread on Sinjin. Her wall of words summarizing(?) the events of Yesterday did not appeal to me much. If I wanted to re-read Yesterday, I know where to find the thread. I didn't see that many enlightening opinions in her wall. It could easily be from a scum posting a lot, trying to look helpful. Sorry about that moody, I didn't consider "uh?" much of a comment nor your essential "ditto" either. I've mentioned the uh? post at least a 1/2 dozen times already. Would you like to expand more on your ditto post? Both Bill and Moody's posts were comments on Colby's error. Did they really need to add, "Care to explain, Colby?" I thought that question to Colby was implied. And you have mentioned them, but you clearly chose to ignore them below. Why? First off it wasn't until Peeks post #28 that anyone mentioned colby's Bill/Ed mistake. The next mention of the slip was Deni's post #54: Ok I can get on board for that, talk about mellow. Did you Immediately after that post #55 is by colby11: [Which is kind of weird because who were the everyone who "was so confused?" Only two people had mentioned it at that point. 2/=everyone] It looks like you are trying a little too hard to make Colby look scummy here, exaggerating your point by saying that 2 people is not everyone, when in fact, it was 4 people.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 22, 2011 13:58:52 GMT -5
Before I get into it, at the end of this game we HAVE to do something about the newbie situation. To say it paints this board in a bad light is an understatement. It's people being bullying jerks, plain and simple. Dunno how to prevent this happening over and over again, but it's absolutely ruining this board and throwing a massive negative over what are otherwise some very good games. You seem to be the only person making a big deal about it. I personally think that new players get the gist of what's going on here. We don't hate new people, we love having new members and expanding our community. But we're also playing a mafia game and somebody shouldn't get a pass just because they're new if they're acting scummy. I stand by my feelings that scathach was acting suspicious, and I'm sorry she got lynched and was townie. My bad. Come back next game and I'm sure somebody else will get lynched first! Post #153 PolluxOil states there are several scenarios already provided that explain why Colby wrote Bill instead of Ed. [Where are these scenarios, the only one I saw was that Colby was talking to others about Bill somewhere else? Colby never posted one either.] From what I remember: -Colby meant to post on the scum board to Bill and instead posted here -Colby had Bill on the brain because he was his scum buddy, but wasn't necessarily meaning to post on the scum board -Colby meant to post on the scum board to others about Bill, and instead posted here I mean, it all basically boils down to the same thing, but when I posted it that's what I was referring to in terms of several scenarios. ----- The Silver Jan/Deni relationship really confuses me. I get the two of you know each other, and from a knowing-you're-both-town perspective due to being scum last game, I'm pretty certain it's not an aligment tell. However. Silver Jan points out that she poked Deni about voting because when she doesn't vote she's usually scum, right? And the last vote last game basically hinged on her voting for guiri, and she never voted. But she was town. So..uh...something to think about. In other news. Vote: JustBeingGinger The vote off the bat today at Ed rubs me the wrong way. Specifically: The only thing you contributed to the game, was after I mentioned you and then you called me scummy. Ed get poked, he returned and spent time dissecting Ginger's playstyle. Ginger becomes upset that the poke resulted in Ed becoming suspicious of her, and retaliates with a vote against him. More defensiveness. Combining that with Ed's dissections and my suspiciousness about Ginger's earlier defensiveness yesterDay, I'll go ahead and put my vote down. As a footnote, three people get a pass for me for being weird with their posts: peeker, Ed, and Roosh. For all three of them, weirdness while posting is a null tell because they're always freakin' off the wall.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 22, 2011 14:05:02 GMT -5
I went back for a reread on Sinjin. Her wall of words summarizing(?) the events of Yesterday did not appeal to me much. If I wanted to re-read Yesterday, I know where to find the thread. I didn't see that many enlightening opinions in her wall. It could easily be from a scum posting a lot, trying to look helpful. Curse you! You've ruined everything! No but seriously, I had noticed that too, but was keeping it close to my vest because I wanted to see if sinjin did another summary on Day 3. It's one tactic I've applied (successfully) as scum before: summarizing what happened on previous Days with walls of words makes it look like you're active without having to actually put too many opinions out of your own. Plus, when you (as a scum) summarize, it allows you to slightly skew the data in a direction that helps you. Especially if people are lazy and don't actually want to reread and instead go to your post for the summary. <----Lazy, uses summaries.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Oct 22, 2011 14:11:57 GMT -5
I don't see that as being a point worthy of much thought. It strikes me as obvious. So, you think Drain is lying and that's based on, what, the timing of her claim? Or do you have more? YOU were questioning what I said at the time....... I responded... trust no one ker duh....... do you have a vote you want to toss in with what ever you are not quite saying?
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 22, 2011 14:14:13 GMT -5
2 points regarding sinjin, and my opinion may be biased due to fond memories of the Malazan game as well as the fact that she's agreed with me on Ginger's scumminess.
1. Apologizing when someone calls you names is a pretty common thing, and I think a null tell. 2. To say the summary has a lack of opinions is false. That summary was chock full of opinions that were quite obvious. To have texcat missed it and Pollux both make that error seems quite odd.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 22, 2011 14:46:53 GMT -5
sinjin... calling you a bitch was out of line... I'm sorry I took your post personal and responded in a personal fashion.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 22, 2011 15:04:00 GMT -5
2 points regarding sinjin, and my opinion may be biased due to fond memories of the Malazan game as well as the fact that she's agreed with me on Ginger's scumminess. 1. Apologizing when someone calls you names is a pretty common thing, and I think a null tell. 2. To say the summary has a lack of opinions is false. That summary was chock full of opinions that were quite obvious. To have texcat missed it and Pollux both make that error seems quite odd. Not an error, at least on my part. Yes, there were opinions, but they were skewed opinions, which is what I would have looked out for in later summaries. I.E. summarizing some of Paul's posts with "blah blah blah." That's why I was going to wait and see how it was approached on Day 3. The idea of a summary is just something I mentally flag but don't usually comment on until there are a few other data points.
|
|
|
Post by moodymitchy on Oct 22, 2011 15:05:01 GMT -5
As already 2 people have responded to Paulwhoisaghost regarding his comments about how easy it could be to make a slip regarding names...
He used the mis spelling of a shortening of a players name and also someone abbreviating down to initials and getting them the wrong way round... as examples which I think have both been explained to a fair enough standard by those concerned ....
BUT in another example you used the point that your Gran sometimes called you Jason... Now I could be wrong but at least Jason starts with the same letter as your real name does.... so it could be seen as innocent enough... Hell we don't even know if she has another grandson of that name...
Bill doesn't even start with the same letter as Ed
I'm not saying it wasn't an honest error, it's not why I'm voting colby11 toDay. I have already explained my reasoning for my vote.
I just thought it was worth pointing out that in your defence of him, you "gran" example seems a little flimsy to me... but could well have been meant with the best intentions
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Oct 22, 2011 15:34:20 GMT -5
Not an error, at least on my part. Yes, there were opinions, but they were skewed opinions, which is what I would have looked out for in later summaries. I.E. summarizing some of Paul's posts with "blah blah blah." That's why I was going to wait and see how it was approached on Day 3. The idea of a summary is just something I mentally flag but don't usually comment on until there are a few other data points. FWIW I was doing the summary for myself and just decided to post the whole thing when I was done after cleaning it up a bit. He has not. You have said that I posted skewed opinions particularly in the case of Paul but you gave no examples except that I posted "blah, blah, blah" which happened to be followed by a paragraph of content in each case. I have already asked Paul to point out where I misconstrued what he said. I ask the same as you; you made an accusation but gave no examples. Finally the blah, blah, blah was due to the length and densigy of some of Paul's posts. In at least one he basically writes the same thing twice several paragraphs apart. I urge you to go back, read, and summarize those posts and show me how I've given skewed opinions.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Oct 22, 2011 15:38:57 GMT -5
@texcat; I originally wrote a post calling Paul a dildo but decided not to post it. Wrong choice, huh?
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Oct 22, 2011 16:11:44 GMT -5
**wiping coke off the monitor** That was funny.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Oct 22, 2011 16:23:06 GMT -5
Ok then. Woooow. Before I go into what I have to say, let me give you guys three pieces of advice. 1) Don't buy from PC World. 2) Don't buy a Microsoft Sidewinder X6 keyboard. 3) Don't buy a Microsoft Sidewinder X6 keyboard from PC world. Right, glad I got that out of the way. If anybody wants reasons, I got 'em. Oh boy, do I got 'em. Learn from my mistakes, friends. Anyways... My thoughts on today's events: @ Ed: I just went back and had a look at that post of yours that Sinjin mentioned. I'm in a weird place with you because I agree with a lot of what you've said. I too am suspicious of Ginger for her Scat vote and reasoning for it (although will be much less so if Silver Jan is lynched and flips scum, the two don't obviously "fit" as a scum couple). But I still gotta take issue with your logic. Specifically: Post #116 Ed summarizes Ginger's posts and suggests she comes off scummy Good luck getting anyone else to agree. Everyone is busy looking for 'play I don't like' rather than play with potential Scum-motivation Silly me for pointing out Scum-motivated play. Maybe I should have just said that I didn't like it. And yes, Ginger's play today can still be seen as possibly Scum motivated. It's really not that complicated. Of course, as she points out, my play is less popular. I wonder why I would do that...? Of your four points, point one (that Ginger's said Peeker is talking, as you put it - or encouraging others to talk, as Ginger did - and that she doesn't agree with the case on Colby) is a null tell unless we can find out what alignment Colby and Peeker are. Point four ( Ginger pokes Ed) is also a null tell, because schoolyard rules apply here. The new guy gets picked on, dirty names are thrown about, and I fully expect to see Lightfoot pulling Sinjin's pigtails at some point. Point three I partially agree on, it looks backpedally - is that even a word? - although as devil's advocate I would say that it could be read that Ginger's just questioning Colby to verify the likelihood of a theory being true. Point two though, I have an issue with. This is what you said: All I read into the comment you quoted is that Ginger didn't agree that a mistype of a name warranted two votes. By Sinjin's own summary, three other people said similar things. You can disagree with a case against somebody without "defending" them, in a way that implies a scum defending another scum. It seems to me that you're doing what I criticised Inner Stickler and Pollux for yesterday, and making assumptions about someone's motiviations that aren't justified by what they actually wrote. That pings me quite a bit. @ DrainBead: I accept that nobody's contradicted your claim yet, and a (hypothetical) cop would probably have investigated you last night (given that you're pretty much unlynchable now unless something drastically changes). I'd say I'm not going to vote you again, but I REALLY hate admitting that I was probably wrong. I will however take issue with a point of mafia theory you brought up: you said all "power roles" should take every step to make sure they're not lynched. Well, I would say this for all townies, power role or not. The greatest weapon town has against scum is almost always the lynch. By allowing this to be wasted on him- or herself, a townie guarantees that we waste one such weapon - and they may be in short supply. Ok, if a townie is inevitably going to be lynched, better it be a vanilla one than a role-player. But thanks to the incomplete knowledge of the townies, that's rarely a decision that the votors have to consciously make. On the subject of Silver Jan: I find it very interesting that she came back and posted, but didn't mention any problems with my case on her. Because I was reading back over yesterday's posts and I did. It regards the bit about where she told Scathach "WE failed to catch scum", despite the fact that she had accused him of being scum himself and was actually voting for him at the time. If you believe someone is scum - and are voting them because of it - then the statement that they both failed in this way makes no sense. Hence, my assumption that she didn't actually believe Scat was scum, and had given herself away as a big fat liar. Here's the flaw: I assumed that when she said "we" to Scathach, she was referring to Scat and herself specifically. Looking back, although I assumed the "we" referred to Scat and Jan, it might very well have meant something else - Jan and the other townies, for example. The most interesting part of this is that I'm the one bringing it up, not Jan herself. This isn't a minor thing either - I brought up the issue of that "we" TWICE in my case against her. As to why Jan didn't bring this up herself when she was online earlier, I see two possible explanations: 1) It never occurred to her, because she, as scum, knew that my initial assumption (that she was referring to herself and Scat, and accidentally gave herself away) was correct. 2) That she is town, but hadn't even read my case against her - which, again, brought up this specific point twice - or at least hadn't bothered to correct me about it. Add that to the problems I had with her play yesterday (in particular the "tactical" vote six hours before the day's end). I'm still leaning strongly towards possibility (1), but I now feel a lot better about my vote than I did yesterday; and I felt pretty good about it then. I STRONGLY think she has to be lynched now. If this lynch is between Jan and Ginger then we have to get rid of Jan. Final point: I still think there is at least one scum between Ginger, Pollux, and Inner, due to their early Scat votes yesterday; but if Jan turns out to be scum, Pollux looks like a front-runner for the position of second scum. If not then it's a slight point in his favour (he was dismissive of the point made against Jan early yesterday). I'm also going to be looking in a good bit more detail about Paul, Lightfoot and Plankton, as I feel I've been neglecting these three. (Always seems to happen with Plankton for some reason. Dunno what it is about that guy that seems to put him naturally off my radar.) Hopefully I'll be able to get some kind of analysis up about them soon, although I doubt it'll make me switch my vote now.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 22, 2011 17:22:35 GMT -5
Well Sinjin... here's one example... I'll do the others tonight when I have more time... I gotta go soon.
Here's your summary....
Here's what i posted... I'm only gonna quote the parts that were my words and not what I quoted...
Yeah it's lengthy... but your blah blah blah seems to encapsulate my entire opinion on Colby's "slip" and the possible scenarios being thrown around about why it happened.
You say that I state Ginger is not defending Colby. You leave out where I say that she is attacking Sach for his vote against Colby. If you had included that part it would have made it clear that I was differentiating between defending a player and attacking another player for their weak vote.
You summarize most of the rest of my post by boiling down my words to scum would do this, or this, or this, but not this... which isn't what I said... What I said was that I think they would be more likely to do A than B than C and less likely to do X.
Then you end the whole summary with a disparaging remark that seems to belittle my entire post without actually arguing against anything I said or giving an opinion of why I am off base. You do this for pretty much all of my posts that you bothered to summarize... most of which it seems you just over looked or deemed insignificant.
I'll do the rest later...
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 22, 2011 17:23:43 GMT -5
@ texcat; I originally wrote a post calling Paul a dildo but decided not to post it. Wrong choice, huh? I think my wife would have agreed with you... she seems to think I have one purpose in life... at least she thinks I fulfill that purpose well.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 22, 2011 20:31:00 GMT -5
If I were scum, and were going to bus a fellow scum, I would certainly be more decisive about it that a "uh?" <snipped> posting as i catch up. so if it is duplicative then fuck you. actually this would be the exact post that scum bill would make if it were a slip. i mean you can't argue it away without looking extraordinarily defensive so dismissive is the smart play. soryy bill but you are damn slippery and that's the smart play.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 22, 2011 20:33:50 GMT -5
or the scum may have decided not to kill, or something else. <snippd> that is pure stupidity. someone one of these days is going to have to give me a scenario where it makes sense for scum not to kill at Night if they have a choice. i'll give you the something else but why mention it?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 22, 2011 20:37:41 GMT -5
and maybe still a little bitter about it So any reason why you were on the boards at the end of the Day 1 and could not place a vote? You even unvoted peeker after the claim, which your vote on Peeker was the first post of the game and it goes without saying it was weak. The only thing you contributed to the game, was after I mentioned you and then you called me scummy. Vote Special EdOOG - I am moving today and driving all day tomorrow. I will check the boards when I can. ok, this is a pure carp vote. and i know that it is meta to some extent but ed and i have a really weird symbiotic relationship when it comes to this game. so his knee jerk dumb ass vote is kind of par for the course. at least from where i sit. his lack of a real reasoned vote is kind of problematice, i give you that. but after meeting him and going through this last week rl shit does in fact occur.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Oct 22, 2011 20:42:25 GMT -5
or the scum may have decided not to kill, or something else. <snippd> that is pure stupidity. someone one of these days is going to have to give me a scenario where it makes sense for scum not to kill at Night if they have a choice. i'll give you the something else but why mention it? I did make a little post about this earlier with possible answers ( did you miss it?)
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 22, 2011 20:42:53 GMT -5
Who is BD? Maybe you think Lightfoot should be lynched for this "obvious slip". I know both of these examples are little off from the Colby situation yesterDay (Which he seems to be trying to make a repeat of toDay ). I get that he named a player that's in this game, you named one that isn't playing, and Lightfoot just mixed up the letters. The point is, you all just messed up. Although, the consistent repeating of Death Bead is a little over top and makes me think Colby is trying to justify why he called Ed Bill yessterDay... makes me think "Why not just let it go? Trying to further explain it by doing something silly like this just makes him seem scummy." this is fundamental, btw. frackgin typos are not indicative of scum. holy fudge i post from a lap top so i don't have a ten key. sometimes i hit 1 instead of 2. sometimes i post not instead of no. fart it is kind of universal. but a couple of fuck ups in the same post does raise my hackles. i mean freud had a name for it. i think it was called freudian.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 22, 2011 20:45:42 GMT -5
Oh c'mon! I hope all goes well, but really?!? You came on and posted and didn't give us any results? Perhaps BillMc's suggestion that there was a mass block in play... that would explain some part but I do believe that if that had been the case... surely Drain Bead would have mentioned this ? and yaknow this is what makes me nervous about bill. it's almost like he expected something to happen but it didn't. so i can't figure out what he was expecting to happen at this point.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 22, 2011 20:49:30 GMT -5
NETA, and upon further review... you're right Mitch... it's probably a bad idea for DB to post any results that could have a negative impact on Town... I didn't think that one through. aaaiiiiieeeee. really? i mean really? claimed roles should always disclose results. that's called information. farking bad boyz and girlz know what the fuck happened (or at least can surmise) but to leave town in the dark with information deficit is about non ideal. jeebuz i truly do think that paul and i exist in alternate universes.
|
|