|
Post by Paranoia on Oct 25, 2011 22:00:03 GMT -5
Dawn broke, and the call came into the precient that two more bodies had been discovered in the vicinity of the now deceased Sam's Stop n' Go. First up, was the man in the dumpster, going by the name of Suburban Plankton. He had died from heavy blunt trauma, apparently having been rammed with a car.
He was quickly identified as the town's favorite hobo, Crazy Dan. It was not long before funeral arangements were made.
Suburban Plankton, Crazy Dan, Vanilla Town, murdered night two.
Curiously, the second body was that of Sinjin who appeared to have been walking away from the dumpster quite calmly before dying, and thinking one of the murderers had potentially bitten off more than they could chew, an investigation and background check was launched.
It would turn out that this was the body of Franklin, a local pizza delivery boy. His record was spotless, and friends and family had not noticed anything off about him lately. His car, however, had traces of Dan's blood in it, and putting two and two together, they deemed him responsible for Crazy Dan's death. He had apparently made an attempt to dispose of the body before dying himself. He could not be linked to any of the other killings, however.
An autopsy showed that he had succumbed to a poison of some sort or the other when he died.
Sinjin, Franklin, Vanilla Townie, died of poison night two.
Player List:
1. Paulwhoisaghost 2. Mr. Special Ed 3. Texcat 4. Inner Stickler 5. Peekercpa 6. Honest Moley 7. Silver Jan 8. Deni 9. moodymitchy 10. Pollux Oil 11. JustBeingGinger 12. Drain Bead 13. Gnarlycharlie 14. LightFoot 15. Deon 16. BillMC
Day 3 ends at 10:00 PM CDT Friday the 28th.
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 25, 2011 22:17:49 GMT -5
We suck.
One Night 1, I got a message sent to me that let me know that someone loved me more than life itself.
I don't know who sent it or what it means.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Oct 25, 2011 22:40:39 GMT -5
And you got a message last Night that we suck??
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 25, 2011 23:33:30 GMT -5
A little vote tally reference for everyone:
Day 1 End:
Scathach (6): Inner Stickler, JustBeingGinger, Pollux Oil, Paulwhoisaghost, Colby11, texcat Colby11 (5): sinjin, Drain Bead, silver jan, Scathach, LightFoot Drain Bead (2): Deni, Honest Moley Paulwhoisaghost (1): Suburban Plankton Deon (1): moodymitchy moodymitch (1): Peekercpa Abstaining (5) : Sister Coyote, Deon, BillMC, Special Ed, zuma
Day 2 End:
Colby (5): moody, Jan, sinjin, lightfoot, Ed Sinjin (5): BillMc, texcat, Colby, Peeker, Deni Ginger(2): Sis, Pollux Jan(2): Moley, Drain Ed(2): Ginger, Suburban Paul(1): Deon not voting(3): Paul, Inner, zuma
----
On Day One, Mr. Moley postulated that there was at least one scum trying to be saved out of colby, scathach, and drainbead since they were the leaders. Two are dead, both town, and one is a claimed town tracker. Care to revisit your thoughts on this, Mr. Moley? I ask this because, well, I'm about to do the same thing.
On Day Two, we go into the end of the Day (28 minutes left) and there is a close vote: Colby (town) has 4 votes. Sinjin (town) has 3 votes. Jan and Ginger (unknown) also have 3 votes. Here's what follows:
Post #222 -> Ed unvotes Ginger and votes Sinjin, tying it up. (14 minutes left -> 4 vs. 4 vs. 3 vs. 2) Post #223 -> Deni tries to vote Ginger, fails (12 minutes left) Post #227 -> Sinjin gives up (9 minutes left) Post #229 -> colby martyrs himself (8 minutes left) Post #231 -> peeker unvotes sinjin (7 minutes left -> 4 vs. 3 vs. 3 vs. 2) Post #232 -> Ed unvotes sinjin, votes colby for martyrdom (6 minutes left -> 5 vs. 3 vs. 2 vs. 2) Post #238 -> Colby unvotes Jan, votes sinjin to save himself (2 minutes left -> 5 vs. 3 vs. 2 vs. 2) Post #239 -> peeker revotes sinjin (2 minutes left -> 5 vs. 4 vs. 2 vs. 2) Post #243 -> Deni votes sinjin (0 minutes left -> 5 vs. 5 vs. 2 vs. 2) Post #252 -> Paul tries to vote sinjin, fails (-5 minutes left)
Now, what can we learn from this last minute kerfuffle? Well, basically.... It's a 4 horse race with 28 minutes left, and by the time 0 minutes comes by, it's a 2 horse race between two (now known) town. The reason 2 horses drop out is due to peeker and Ed. Ed is the first to move, dropping his case on Ginger and voting for sinjin (but still stating he believes Ginger is also scum). This knocks Ginger down to 2 votes, except Deni tries to vote Ginger, however fails at tagging. Ed makes a comment that he'll change his vote back, however this is never revisited.
Why is it never revisited? Because colby martyrs himself. After he does this, both Ed and Deni agree that colby martyring could be a scum ploy. Okay, I'll by that. Shortly thereafter, colby changes his mind and turns his vote back to sinjin.
Now here is where things get interesting. You see, after Ed switches his vote to sinjin, peeker unvotes. At this point, it's still conceivably a four horse race. While we're at 4-4-3-2, both Deni and Ed have expressed interest in voting Ginger. Peeker unvotes, making it 4-3-3-2, but now he's a free agent. He can swoop in to add a vote anywhere. Say, if Ed and Deni switch their votes back to Ginger, make it 4-4-3-2 and a closer race?
But then colby does his martyr thing, colby takes the vote lead due to Ed's switch. Colby then switches to sinjin, it's now 5-3-2-2. Peeker can re-add his vote to sinjin now, which he does, and he makes it 5-4-2-2, effectively knocking Ginger and Jan out of the running for a last minute switch.
The odd part about this is...why does Deni vote sinjin at the last minute? This is what doesn't make sense to me. Also, we've got the after-party play by Paul who comes in and votes sinjin. Is this a credible ploy by a smart scum? Voting "after the fact" because he knows colby and sinjin are both town, and when colby turns up town he can go "hey! I would have voted sinjin!" for credit? Except sinjin turns up poisoned?
I dunno, something wonky is going on here. I'm thinking Ginger is scum, peeker is a scum buddy, and he unvoted to be in a position to either help or bus Ginger depending on how the last minute wind blew. However, my initial suspicions of Ginger remain, and the case falls apart if Ginger turns up town.
Vote: JustBeingGinger
Yup.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Oct 26, 2011 1:14:38 GMT -5
hi all! subbing in for zuma. catching up now.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Oct 26, 2011 2:38:33 GMT -5
I would like to say thank you to you all for your wishes even though you made me cry. What a wonderful family to belong to I would like to re-iterate what Ed said, we suck! 5 Town dead and not one scum uncovered. I want to go and read up on Ginger before I place a vote.
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 26, 2011 6:40:14 GMT -5
And you got a message last Night that we suck?? No, I came to that conclusion all by myself
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Oct 26, 2011 7:11:30 GMT -5
@ Pollux: well, my first instinct was that Scathach's lynch was a scum setup (right about that one) and that Colby's lynch wagon started too early and was unopposed for too long (apparently I was right about that one too, just wish I'd held my ground on Day Two.)
As for DrainBead, my thoughts there haven't changed because the facts haven't. IF the scum were trying to keep one of their own off the block with Scathach's bandwagon then DrainBead is still the most likely candidate - hell, right now she's the ONLY candidate. Of course, we're still not in a position to actually do anything about it, unless she's somehow been confirmed by an investigator role. Nothing she did on Day Two "pinged" me, but that may be because I've been viewing her in the role of probable town tracker. Preconceptions breed more preconceptions.
The lynch is still the town's best weapon, and DB is unlynchable, still. This bugs me a great deal. Not because I think she's scum but because I feel as though I'm relying on a role that I'm not even certain exists. What are we supposed to do here?
If we think you're some kind of scum, or just not on our team, we kill you off and see what happens. Not an option with DrainBead - the town can't lynch her, and a vig (even assuming we have one) couldn't target her either.
|
|
|
Post by Drain Bead on Oct 26, 2011 7:50:05 GMT -5
I was not blocked.
I will tell you that the two people I investigated did nothing. It's entirely possible I'm 2-for-2 on hitting Vanilla Town. I'm amazed at the amount of dead Vanillas so far--I figured in a game where Town had a Tracker, we'd have more power roles, since a Tracker is kind of a second-tier power role, after Cop, Doc, and possibly Vig (still a chance there's a non-compulsory one out there). I'm almost certain there's a Doc--I'd imagine Scum took a shot at me N1, hoping that there was enough general disbelief in my claim that a Doc would not protect me. I also have to assume that the Scum has no Roleblocker, otherwise I wouldn't be getting results.
Moley, eventually the Scum will be forced to solve your problem for you. As the pool that they can hide in grows smaller, they can't risk that I could uncover one of them. I expect to be nightkilled at some point in the near future. I think the fact that I haven't been points to the idea that it was attempted on N1 and failed due to a Doc Block, so the Scum is now Doc hunting out of fear that I'll still be protected if they go after me again.
I like Pollux Oil's case on Ginger above. Going to go back and look at her more closely before placing a vote.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Oct 26, 2011 8:27:47 GMT -5
OK, so maybe my participation won't be any better Today... Jan, you and your husband will be in our prayers; hang in there And last, but not least, Go Town! no, seriously...go...like, run away very fast...it's your best shot at this point
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on Oct 26, 2011 8:58:01 GMT -5
I was not blocked. I will tell you that the two people I investigated did nothing. It's entirely possible I'm 2-for-2 on hitting Vanilla Town. I'm amazed at the amount of dead Vanillas so far--I figured in a game where Town had a Tracker, we'd have more power roles, since a Tracker is kind of a second-tier power role, after Cop, Doc, and possibly Vig (still a chance there's a non-compulsory one out there). I'm almost certain there's a Doc--I'd imagine Scum took a shot at me N1, hoping that there was enough general disbelief in my claim that a Doc would not protect me. I also have to assume that the Scum has no Roleblocker, otherwise I wouldn't be getting results. Moley, eventually the Scum will be forced to solve your problem for you. As the pool that they can hide in grows smaller, they can't risk that I could uncover one of them. I expect to be nightkilled at some point in the near future. I think the fact that I haven't been points to the idea that it was attempted on N1 and failed due to a Doc Block, so the Scum is now Doc hunting out of fear that I'll still be protected if they go after me again. I like Pollux Oil's case on Ginger above. Going to go back and look at her more closely before placing a vote. What exactly is Pollux's case on me above? He talking about vote switching, which I was not a part of. Pollux is suspicious of me for the following reasons: 1. I defended Colby by stating that I didn't think that the slip was a scum tell, and Colby flipped Town. Then I questioned Colby about his knowledge of peeker's game play. He answered the question and I accepted the answer. 2. I defended myself and stated why I thought it was not a scum tell. 3. My vote on Scat, which keep in mind Pollux voted on Scat as well for pretty much the same thing although he didn't like the newbie card that he said she was playing. 4. My voting for Ed which he says is a OMGUS vote and it was not. If you would read my post it basically stated that I voted for him because he did not place a vote at the end of the Day, but yet was posting at the end of the day and was questioning me. I don't care if he or anyone else finds me suspicious. What I find even more suspicious now is this: So if your game play was not scummy by remaining neutral in Day 1 and not placing a vote, yet at the end of Day 2 that is all you did was manipulate the vote. So, according to you manipulating the vote at the end of a day is a scum tell, does that mean you are scum?
|
|
|
Post by moodymitchy on Oct 26, 2011 11:04:03 GMT -5
Vote Drain Bead
Can't see why we can't vote her can't see why Honest Moley feels that she's untouchable...
Though I do agree with Drain Beads point to me yestreDay about not wishing to reveal the visitee because that could possibly reveal a power...
I would like to know toDay who they tracked Night 1 and Night 2...
IF they didn't do anything then it points to them being Vanilla such not much of a loss if we lynch one to prove the claim ... Hell we've lost 5 already...
But it'll be interesting to see what names they come up with.
And IF SCUM took a shot at them and the Doc protected... how do we explain the reveal of the demise of Sister Coyote who was according to the colour
"severely bludgeoned the night before her death"
What might have caused that ?
Plus the "assuming" SCUM are without a role blocker... so you get your results...
IF you really are what you are... I think SCUM would block someone else in the hope that it's the COP or the DOC.....
Mr Special Ed were you given no indication as to who sent the message to you...
Finally for now... why hasn't anyone question Sinjins death by poisoning ? I didn't see anything in their posts that might have hinted towards it but I will go back and have a look..
For a group of supposed TOWN there seems to be an awful lot of squabbling going on and not a lot of questions being asked.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Oct 26, 2011 11:51:58 GMT -5
Though I do agree with Drain Beads point to me yestreDay about not wishing to reveal the visitee because that could possibly reveal a power... I would like to know toDay who they tracked Night 1 and Night 2... IF they didn't do anything then it points to them being Vanilla such not much of a loss if we lynch one to prove the claim ... Hell we've lost 5 already... But it'll be interesting to see what names they come up with. Drain has told already us that the 2 people she tracked didn't do anything. So that points to them being vanilla. Certainly still possible for them to be vanilla scum, though. What the heck do you think that town will gain by learning the two names at this point? Don't you think scum will learn more than we will? We have been lucky so far to have only lost vanillas, but if we start helping the scum to narrow the pool, I suspect that our power roles will start dieing pretty quickly. Is that what you're after moody? Drain does not appear to be in any danger; I don't see any possible reason for her to give the names up now.
|
|
|
Post by moodymitchy on Oct 26, 2011 12:09:23 GMT -5
But IF Drain Bead was watched both Nights.... they've already narrowed the pool down for SCUM as they will already know who was visited...
IF they are SCUM then they've either got to guess correctly two vanilla out of the remaining TOWN or they give themselves away...
My case isn't cast iron far from it but with the actions that we've seen so far how many powers do you think might be in this game ?
No that's not fishing it's just saying that IF we take what colby11 said as what he felt the numbers were...
There's 5 SCUM... we've lost 5 Vanilla TOWN so that leaves what 10 TOWN left... do you really think there's that many powers in there ?
My methods may be well off or unconventional and they may not even work but by pressing people sometimes you get a reaction.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Oct 26, 2011 12:26:38 GMT -5
Taking your (or Colby's numbers), you're saying that instead of leaving a pool of 10 for the scum to hunt in, you'd rather take in down to 8? Why?? Even if Drain told us the names, WE don't know whether the 2 names are vanilla town or vanilla scum, so I don't see how much good it does us. And it certainly will help the scum.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Oct 26, 2011 12:45:55 GMT -5
Moody has a point about asking questions. I went back to look over Sinjin's death reveal, and this shot out at me:
That looks as though Sinjin was actually responsible for Plankton's death. But if Sinjin is vanilla town, how is that even possible? Best answer I've come up with is a third-party assassin-turned-vanilla townie, like Bill in "Wonderland". Sucks for her if so - she had apparently completed whatever task she needed to turn her into a townie, and then someone came along and killed her. As a theory it has problems - Plankton ("Crazy Dan") seems like an odd target (Bill's target in "Wonderland" was Alice herself). I also hate that idea that someone decided to kill her, by complete coincidence, on the very night that she killed Plankton and presumably became town. But it's the best I can come up with right now.
In support of this theory, from the rules thread:
I notice it doesn't say "no rules that change YOUR OWN alignment". Just "other's" alignment. I suspect - at least I hope - that we'll find out more when the roles start appearing. Did I mention that I really, really, really suck at role analysis?
*
In other news, I've been over Paul's posts. (This was a fun time for me. I think I knew how much fun it would be when "Jesus Peek... do you love the smell of your own piss or something?" was his first post.) Things that stood out for me (I'm not even going to TRY and use quote tags otherwise I'll be here all damn afternoon):
"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."
I thought at the time that if Colby flipped town, this would be a powerful point in Paul's favour. Well, he did, and it is. That's real analysis and observant enough that it doesn't look like scum "buddying" to me.
Next is the argument with Scathach, which I won't go into in any detail. (I've already commented on some of Paul's part of it anyway, and we know Scat was a townie.) I don't think Paul's reasoning holds up, but nor do I think it's necessarily indicative of scum. Reminds me of those times when this happens:
Townie A: I think townie B is scum. Townie B: I know I'm not scum, therefore Townie A's reasoning is flawed. Maybe he's scum. Townie A: Townie B OMGUS'd me, he is clearly scum. I'll look for more evidence against him. Townie B: Townie A clearly has it out for me, he's coming up with evidence that doesn't even make sense. I have to find more evidence to show the others that Townie A is actually scum.
Etc, etc, etc... my point is that this looks like an argument between two suspicious, frustrated townies. Even Paul seems to get this later on:
"So essentially you think I'm scummy because I think you're scummy... It could be a playstyle clash... if so, I'm sorry... I'm like a dog with a bone... once I have it in my head that's someone is scummy I have a hard time seeing non-scummy reasons for their actions on my own."
The looks to me like a townie who's suspecting he might have been supporting the wrong lynch, not like scum backpedalling.
It's also particularly interesting that even though he disagreed with Sinjin, and actually insulted her at one point, I don't feel that he "smudged" her in gameplay terms.
I thought Paul was likely town before last night, but Colby's flip has made me a lot more confident than I was.
I'll try and get a few other people done ASAP. Plankton's dead but I feel as though I've been ignoring Lightfoot. I've also not looked into Peeker, Deon, Bill or Deni very much yet.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Oct 26, 2011 12:59:27 GMT -5
Taking your (or Colby's numbers), you're saying that instead of leaving a pool of 10 for the scum to hunt in, you'd rather take in down to 8? Why?? Even if Drain told us the names, WE don't know whether the 2 names are vanilla town or vanilla scum, so I don't see how much good it does us. And it certainly will help the scum. And you're BOTH ignoring the fact that there may be multiple factions, third-parties, or people "playing for keeps" (third-parties with their own win conditions that clash with those of the townies). Five scum plus one or two PFKs plus a third-party or two isn't unrealistic in a game of this size. We may be in a position where seven or eight people - half the players in the game right now - are NOT town. That's pretty frightening. Bottom line is I think we have to lynch scum this round. I'm not even sure if a PFK lynch will improve our position, if the summary above is anywhere close to being accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 26, 2011 14:32:31 GMT -5
A little vote tally reference for everyone: Day 1 End: Scathach (6): Inner Stickler, JustBeingGinger, Pollux Oil, Paulwhoisaghost, Colby11, texcat Colby11 (5): sinjin, Drain Bead, silver jan, Scathach, LightFoot Drain Bead (2): Deni, Honest Moley Paulwhoisaghost (1): Suburban PlanktonDeon (1): moodymitchy moodymitch (1): Peekercpa Abstaining (5) : Sister Coyote, Deon, BillMC, Special Ed, zuma Day 2 End: Colby (5): moody, Jan, sinjin, lightfoot, Ed Sinjin (5): BillMc, texcat, Colby, Peeker, Deni Ginger(2): Sis, Pollux Jan(2): Moley, Drain Ed(2): Ginger, SuburbanPaul(1): Deon not voting(3): Paul, Inner, zuma ---- On Day One, Mr. Moley postulated that there was at least one scum trying to be saved out of colby, scathach, and drainbead since they were the leaders. Two are dead, both town, and one is a claimed town tracker. Care to revisit your thoughts on this, Mr. Moley? I ask this because, well, I'm about to do the same thing. On Day Two, we go into the end of the Day (28 minutes left) and there is a close vote: Colby (town) has 4 votes. Sinjin (town) has 3 votes. Jan and Ginger (unknown) also have 3 votes. Here's what follows: Post #222 -> Ed unvotes Ginger and votes Sinjin, tying it up. (14 minutes left -> 4 vs. 4 vs. 3 vs. 2) Post #223 -> Deni tries to vote Ginger, fails (12 minutes left) Post #227 -> Sinjin gives up (9 minutes left) Post #229 -> colby martyrs himself (8 minutes left) Post #231 -> peeker unvotes sinjin (7 minutes left -> 4 vs. 3 vs. 3 vs. 2) Post #232 -> Ed unvotes sinjin, votes colby for martyrdom (6 minutes left -> 5 vs. 3 vs. 2 vs. 2) Post #238 -> Colby unvotes Jan, votes sinjin to save himself (2 minutes left -> 5 vs. 3 vs. 2 vs. 2) Post #239 -> peeker revotes sinjin (2 minutes left -> 5 vs. 4 vs. 2 vs. 2) Post #243 -> Deni votes sinjin (0 minutes left -> 5 vs. 5 vs. 2 vs. 2) Post #252 -> Paul tries to vote sinjin, fails (-5 minutes left) Now, what can we learn from this last minute kerfuffle? Well, basically.... It's a 4 horse race with 28 minutes left, and by the time 0 minutes comes by, it's a 2 horse race between two (now known) town. The reason 2 horses drop out is due to peeker and Ed. Ed is the first to move, dropping his case on Ginger and voting for sinjin (but still stating he believes Ginger is also scum). This knocks Ginger down to 2 votes, except Deni tries to vote Ginger, however fails at tagging. Ed makes a comment that he'll change his vote back, however this is never revisited. Why is it never revisited? Because colby martyrs himself. After he does this, both Ed and Deni agree that colby martyring could be a scum ploy. Okay, I'll by that. Shortly thereafter, colby changes his mind and turns his vote back to sinjin. Now here is where things get interesting. You see, after Ed switches his vote to sinjin, peeker unvotes. At this point, it's still conceivably a four horse race. While we're at 4-4-3-2, both Deni and Ed have expressed interest in voting Ginger. Peeker unvotes, making it 4-3-3-2, but now he's a free agent. He can swoop in to add a vote anywhere. Say, if Ed and Deni switch their votes back to Ginger, make it 4-4-3-2 and a closer race? But then colby does his martyr thing, colby takes the vote lead due to Ed's switch. Colby then switches to sinjin, it's now 5-3-2-2. Peeker can re-add his vote to sinjin now, which he does, and he makes it 5-4-2-2, effectively knocking Ginger and Jan out of the running for a last minute switch. The odd part about this is...why does Deni vote sinjin at the last minute? This is what doesn't make sense to me. Also, we've got the after-party play by Paul who comes in and votes sinjin. Is this a credible ploy by a smart scum? Voting "after the fact" because he knows colby and sinjin are both town, and when colby turns up town he can go "hey! I would have voted sinjin!" for credit? Except sinjin turns up poisoned? I dunno, something wonky is going on here. I'm thinking Ginger is scum, peeker is a scum buddy, and he unvoted to be in a position to either help or bus Ginger depending on how the last minute wind blew. However, my initial suspicions of Ginger remain, and the case falls apart if Ginger turns up town. [col or=blue] Vote: JustBeingGinger [/color] Yup.[/quote] I can only really comment on my part of this. I thought I ws gonna have reliable internet at the hotel I'm staying in for this work trip I'm on. I don't... it craps out every other minute... so I have to copy everything before I post it in case I lose connectivity and have to try sending it again. My vote for Sinjin would have made it in before the deadline, but I couldn't get it to post... by the time it went through it was after the deadline... hence my follow up post of "shit!". I thought Sinjin was the most likely to be scum out of everyone on the block. Granted, my opinion was probably skewed by our kerfuffle and her giving up at the end of the Day. (I believe townies should have a never say die attitude and not be worried about how bad it sucks that they are gonna die... townies win as a team... not alone... dying weakens your team, but it doesn't mean you lose. Defeatist attitudes and just rolling over because you are frustrated that you are going to die don't really fit into the picture IMO.) Anyway... My participation has been lacking in all 3 games I am in because of this shitty internet situation... I get back home on Friday and will be able to better participate then. Sorry that I can't promise better than that, but right now I am having to rejoin the network and reload the page about 10 times just to read... and posting is worse than that.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 26, 2011 14:39:35 GMT -5
@ Pollux: well, my first instinct was that Scathach's lynch was a scum setup (right about that one) and that Colby's lynch wagon started too early and was unopposed for too long (apparently I was right about that one too, just wish I'd held my ground on Day Two.) As for DrainBead, my thoughts there haven't changed because the facts haven't. IF the scum were trying to keep one of their own off the block with Scathach's bandwagon then DrainBead is still the most likely candidate - hell, right now she's the ONLY candidate. Of course, we're still not in a position to actually do anything about it, unless she's somehow been confirmed by an investigator role. Nothing she did on Day Two "pinged" me, but that may be because I've been viewing her in the role of probable town tracker. Preconceptions breed more preconceptions. The lynch is still the town's best weapon, and DB is unlynchable, still. This bugs me a great deal. Not because I think she's scum but because I feel as though I'm relying on a role that I'm not even certain exists. What are we supposed to do here? If we think you're some kind of scum, or just not on our team, we kill you off and see what happens. Not an option with DrainBead - the town can't lynch her, and a vig (even assuming we have one) couldn't target her either. How do you KNOW that Scathach and Colby were scum setups? Just because we mislynch doesn't mean that it's a scum setup... town gets it wrong all the time. Hell, most scum just sit back and let town do majority of the work. That way when something does go wrong the point fingers at each other and proclaim it was a scum setup and take aim at those they deem responsible for the mislynch. And why do you keep saying the DB is unlynchable... or that a vig couldn't kill them? This whole post seems to me like you are trying to reinforce bad ideas and misconceptions.... trying to make people buy into targeting those who were for a Colby or Scathach lynch and have them buy into treating DB as an untouchable.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 26, 2011 14:51:51 GMT -5
[c olor=Bl ue]Vote Drain Bead [/color][/b] Can't see why we can't vote her can't see why Honest Moley feels that she's untouchable... Though I do agree with Drain Beads point to me yestreDay about not wishing to reveal the visitee because that could possibly reveal a power... I would like to know toDay who they tracked Night 1 and Night 2... IF they didn't do anything then it points to them being Vanilla such not much of a loss if we lynch one to prove the claim ... Hell we've lost 5 already... But it'll be interesting to see what names they come up with. And IF SCUM took a shot at them and the Doc protected... how do we explain the reveal of the demise of Sister Coyote who was according to the colour "severely bludgeoned the night before her death" What might have caused that ? Plus the "assuming" SCUM are without a role blocker... so you get your results... IF you really are what you are... I think SCUM would block someone else in the hope that it's the COP or the DOC..... Mr Special Ed were you given no indication as to who sent the message to you... Finally for now... why hasn't anyone question Sinjins death by poisoning ? I didn't see anything in their posts that might have hinted towards it but I will go back and have a look.. For a group of supposed TOWN there seems to be an awful lot of squabbling going on and not a lot of questions being asked. [/quote] Whoa whoa whoa whoa... hold the phone... No kill on Night 1... makes me think the scum took a shot and hit someone protected... kill on Night 2 tells me the decided their original target was probably protected and they need to go Doc hunting... (Someone else already mentioned this possibility.... I think it was DB) So if the scum are Doc hunting, then revealing who the probably nillers are would only aid in helping them narrow down their target list. I'll agree that DB giving us his target list would allow for the people he targeted to counter claim and prove his results as false... we could bag him as scum at that point.... but doing so would reveal a power role for the scum to target. Besides all of that... you think lynching one of his targets who appeared nilla would be a good idea to prove he's telling the truth? His results don't tell us that his target is nilla.... they just tell us that his target didn't act on the Night he tracked them. He could have tracked a vig who didn't shoot because they felt they didn't have a solid enough grasp on who was scum... suddenly we are mislynching a vig because he didn't fire blindly?
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 26, 2011 14:54:02 GMT -5
But IF Drain Bead was watched both Nights.... they've already narrowed the pool down for SCUM as they will already know who was visited... IF they are SCUM then they've either got to guess correctly two vanilla out of the remaining TOWN or they give themselves away... My case isn't cast iron far from it but with the actions that we've seen so far how many powers do you think might be in this game ? No that's not fishing it's just saying that IF we take what colby11 said as what he felt the numbers were... There's 5 SCUM... we've lost 5 Vanilla TOWN so that leaves what 10 TOWN left... do you really think there's that many powers in there ? My methods may be well off or unconventional and they may not even work but by pressing people sometimes you get a reaction. No... you are getting watcher and tracker mixed up. A watcher would only see who targeted DB... a tracker would be needed to see who DB targeted. It's tweaking me that you've played enough games to know that and yet you seem to be implying you don't.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 26, 2011 14:55:52 GMT -5
Taking your (or Colby's numbers), you're saying that instead of leaving a pool of 10 for the scum to hunt in, you'd rather take in down to 8? Why?? Even if Drain told us the names, WE don't know whether the 2 names are vanilla town or vanilla scum, so I don't see how much good it does us. And it certainly will help the scum. We don't even know they are vanilla... they could be power roles who didn't act. Or that have passive powers that don't require them to act. (i.e. scotsman, nexus, beloved princess, etc...)
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 26, 2011 14:57:03 GMT -5
I was not blocked. I will tell you that the two people I investigated did nothing. It's entirely possible I'm 2-for-2 on hitting Vanilla Town. I'm amazed at the amount of dead Vanillas so far--I figured in a game where Town had a Tracker, we'd have more power roles, since a Tracker is kind of a second-tier power role, after Cop, Doc, and possibly Vig (still a chance there's a non-compulsory one out there). I'm almost certain there's a Doc--I'd imagine Scum took a shot at me N1, hoping that there was enough general disbelief in my claim that a Doc would not protect me. I also have to assume that the Scum has no Roleblocker, otherwise I wouldn't be getting results. Moley, eventually the Scum will be forced to solve your problem for you. As the pool that they can hide in grows smaller, they can't risk that I could uncover one of them. I expect to be nightkilled at some point in the near future. I think the fact that I haven't been points to the idea that it was attempted on N1 and failed due to a Doc Block, so the Scum is now Doc hunting out of fear that I'll still be protected if they go after me again. I like Pollux Oil's case on Ginger above. Going to go back and look at her more closely before placing a vote. What exactly is Pollux's case on me above? He talking about vote switching, which I was not a part of. Pollux is suspicious of me for the following reasons: 1. I defended Colby by stating that I didn't think that the slip was a scum tell, and Colby flipped Town. Then I questioned Colby about his knowledge of peeker's game play. He answered the question and I accepted the answer. 2. I defended myself and stated why I thought it was not a scum tell. 3. My vote on Scat, which keep in mind Pollux voted on Scat as well for pretty much the same thing although he didn't like the newbie card that he said she was playing. 4. My voting for Ed which he says is a OMGUS vote and it was not. If you would read my post it basically stated that I voted for him because he did not place a vote at the end of the Day, but yet was posting at the end of the day and was questioning me. I don't care if he or anyone else finds me suspicious. What I find even more suspicious now is this: So if your game play was not scummy by remaining neutral in Day 1 and not placing a vote, yet at the end of Day 2 that is all you did was manipulate the vote. So, according to you manipulating the vote at the end of a day is a scum tell, does that mean you are scum? Wrong wrong wrong. If I were Scum what did I have to gain by not voting during Day 1? No one has come up with anything aside from the fact that they didn't like how I was playing. By being present and not giving any player a 2 vote advantage, I made it more tempting for Scum to try to swing the vote (assuming a leader were Scum) At the end of Day 2, I voted. I didn't try the same tactic. Having had my tactic outed, it probably wasn't going to be very useful. Scum should have been aware that I was present nad likely to be looking for the same thing. I apologize if this still doesn't make sense to you. I'm not sure how else I can explain it. But it does bring up a question. In either instance, can you assign a Scum motivation to my actions? If you need a reference for how to do so, look at my previous case against you. Don't just point out that it's possible. Try to get in to how you think I was furthering my cause.
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 26, 2011 14:59:01 GMT -5
Mr Special Ed were you given no indication as to who sent the message to you... I have no idea from whom the message came.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Oct 26, 2011 15:05:50 GMT -5
@ Pollux: well, my first instinct was that Scathach's lynch was a scum setup (right about that one) and that Colby's lynch wagon started too early and was unopposed for too long (apparently I was right about that one too, just wish I'd held my ground on Day Two.) As for DrainBead, my thoughts there haven't changed because the facts haven't. IF the scum were trying to keep one of their own off the block with Scathach's bandwagon then DrainBead is still the most likely candidate - hell, right now she's the ONLY candidate. Of course, we're still not in a position to actually do anything about it, unless she's somehow been confirmed by an investigator role. Nothing she did on Day Two "pinged" me, but that may be because I've been viewing her in the role of probable town tracker. Preconceptions breed more preconceptions. The lynch is still the town's best weapon, and DB is unlynchable, still. This bugs me a great deal. Not because I think she's scum but because I feel as though I'm relying on a role that I'm not even certain exists. What are we supposed to do here? If we think you're some kind of scum, or just not on our team, we kill you off and see what happens. Not an option with DrainBead - the town can't lynch her, and a vig (even assuming we have one) couldn't target her either. How do you KNOW that Scathach and Colby were scum setups? Just because we mislynch doesn't mean that it's a scum setup... town gets it wrong all the time. Hell, most scum just sit back and let town do majority of the work. That way when something does go wrong the point fingers at each other and proclaim it was a scum setup and take aim at those they deem responsible for the mislynch. And why do you keep saying the DB is unlynchable... or that a vig couldn't kill them? This whole post seems to me like you are trying to reinforce bad ideas and misconceptions.... trying to make people buy into targeting those who were for a Colby or Scathach lynch and have them buy into treating DB as an untouchable. First as regards to this: Reading it back, I made an editing mistake there. I wrote it initially as saying something like this: that I thought there was no case on Scat and Colby (right about that one) and that I thought Colby's wagon was unopposed for too long for Scat's to be opposing it (apparently I was right about that one too). It seemed a clumsy way of putting it so I edited it with the bit about Scat's lynch. Forgot to add "I THINK I was right about that one." As for DrainBead - I agree that she's lynchable if there's a legitimate case against her (and I voted for her on Day One, remember?) And I'm not trying to foster the opinion that she can't be lynched under any circumstances - far from it. I was effectively a scum DOC in the "Smasher Mansion" game, I know how you can make a scummy role appear innocent. I don't know what to do about this; all I do know is I'm not lynching an unCC'd tracker on the evidence that we've got. Get back to me on this one when we have more evidence either for or against DrainBead, and I'll tell you what to do.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on Oct 26, 2011 15:16:30 GMT -5
What exactly is Pollux's case on me above? He talking about vote switching, which I was not a part of. Pollux is suspicious of me for the following reasons: 1. I defended Colby by stating that I didn't think that the slip was a scum tell, and Colby flipped Town. Then I questioned Colby about his knowledge of peeker's game play. He answered the question and I accepted the answer. 2. I defended myself and stated why I thought it was not a scum tell. 3. My vote on Scat, which keep in mind Pollux voted on Scat as well for pretty much the same thing although he didn't like the newbie card that he said she was playing. 4. My voting for Ed which he says is a OMGUS vote and it was not. If you would read my post it basically stated that I voted for him because he did not place a vote at the end of the Day, but yet was posting at the end of the day and was questioning me. I don't care if he or anyone else finds me suspicious. What I find even more suspicious now is this: So if your game play was not scummy by remaining neutral in Day 1 and not placing a vote, yet at the end of Day 2 that is all you did was manipulate the vote. So, according to you manipulating the vote at the end of a day is a scum tell, does that mean you are scum? Wrong wrong wrong. If I were Scum what did I have to gain by not voting during Day 1? No one has come up with anything aside from the fact that they didn't like how I was playing. By being present and not giving any player a 2 vote advantage, I made it more tempting for Scum to try to swing the vote (assuming a leader were Scum) At the end of Day 2, I voted. I didn't try the same tactic. Having had my tactic outed, it probably wasn't going to be very useful. Scum should have been aware that I was present nad likely to be looking for the same thing. I apologize if this still doesn't make sense to you. I'm not sure how else I can explain it. But it does bring up a question. In either instance, can you assign a Scum motivation to my actions? If you need a reference for how to do so, look at my previous case against you. Don't just point out that it's possible. Try to get in to how you think I was furthering my cause. I always try to look at it from both sides, that is why I got accused of defending Colby when I stated that I didn't think it was a scum slip. So Day 1 not voting, I can see where you say that there is no scum motivation for that, but maybe that is what you want me to believe, kind of like WIFOM. Someone just posted "that at the end of the day, scum just sit back and let town mis-lynch" which is typically what happens. I don't want to beat a dead horse. Since I don't know what alignment you are, I will not beat this dead horse anymore. I was re-reading Day 1 and I don't like the statement that Pollux made in maybe post #100. He stated that in 6 pages of posts on Day 1 we should be able to vote with conviction. If you are Town , you never have conviction on who you vote for. It is almost always a suspicious vote cause you never know.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Moley! on Oct 26, 2011 15:48:19 GMT -5
Although I've had issues with Ginger, I don't want to vote her because she doesn't seem to "fit" with some of my other suspects. Hard to see her being scum with either Ed or Pollux, for example, unless they're doing some very convincing bussing. And I've decided to give Jan a rest. I'm not really satisfied with ANY of the other Colby votors from yesterday, with the possible exception of Paul (for reasons given above). And my suspicions about the Scathach wagon haven't changed. Looking back over yesterday's votes though, this one stood out to me: 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. 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? 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. This is pretty much the first time I've noticed Tex, and she pings me here. Being bothered by the "apologetic tone" comes across to me like Pollux and Ginger saying "I guess" bothered them about Scathach. In both cases I don't see it as a tell either way. The second paragraph bothers me as well. It just feels "smudgey", especially as the last sentence is phrased. "It could easily be from a scum posting a lot". Could? You can't at least say that you think it is? Point three that Tex makes feels like weaksauce. I don't think Sinjin was commenting on Moody's specific point there, as much as his tendency to ask questions with monosyllables. So on the basis of this, vote: Texcat.
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 26, 2011 16:36:02 GMT -5
I always try to look at it from both sides, that is why I got accused of defending Colby when I stated that I didn't think it was a scum slip. So Day 1 not voting, I can see where you say that there is no scum motivation for that, but maybe that is what you want me to believe, kind of like WIFOM. Someone just posted "that at the end of the day, scum just sit back and let town mis-lynch" which is typically what happens. I don't want to beat a dead horse. Since I don't know what alignment you are, I will not beat this dead horse anymore. I was re-reading Day 1 and I don't like the statement that Pollux made in maybe post #100. He stated that in 6 pages of posts on Day 1 we should be able to vote with conviction. If you are Town , you never have conviction on who you vote for. It is almost always a suspicious vote cause you never know. Let me summarize: 1. You're open minded 2. What you meant when you found me even more suspicious than yesterDay when you voted me is that it's possible I'm Scum. The case boils down to maybe I didn't vote so I could argue "why would Scum do that?" [That hardly looks more suspicious] 3. Hey! Look over there!
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 26, 2011 17:34:58 GMT -5
I'm not really satisfied with ANY of the other Colby votors from yesterday, with the possible exception of Paul (for reasons given above). And my suspicions about the Scathach wagon haven't changed. What? I was never voting for Colby... I was against a Colby lynch.... you lost me here...
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 26, 2011 17:37:12 GMT -5
So.... Mitch is right... and no one is asking questions about things that have been semi-revealed but we know very little about.
Sinjin was poisoned.... has anyone else received any kind of notice that would make them think it is possible they have been poisoned?
Ed received a message on Night 1.... Did anyone receive one last Night?
|
|