|
Post by CatInASuit on Dec 2, 2011 15:26:15 GMT -5
Rick, that was the sponsors again, they are not happy.
I know they are not happy, I'm not happy, the crew are not happy, the contestants aren't happy. Why should the sponsors be happy?
They are threatening to go elsewhere.
They won't go elsewhere, I mean where are they going to go?
Haven't you heard, Conspiracy is back in town and its getting some real good press.
Well tell them tough, they're tied in to the end of the series and I have better lawyers than they do.
Hi. I'm your host, Rick Rothman and welcome back to Wedlock. After the fun filled extravanganza that was the turkey twizzler twister, we welcome you back to Day 3. Lets see what the latest news is, and I'm hearing that we have a contestant down, bit of a messy scene there, and the scoreboard says...
Looking at the scoreboard Pollux Oil has a cross through his picture with a Blue border showing.
I'm also getting news that one of the other contestants, err, demi, dannii, Ah, Deni psst, who was deni, he kept quiet has also been discovered in a state of dead.
The scoreboard is hastily updated with a cross through deni and a blue border appears.
Pollux Oil was a member of the Blue Team
deni was a member of the Blue Team
Well, there you go folks, two more down - who will survive...Wedlock.
Note: Day 3 will end on Tuesday 6th December at 8pm GMT
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Dec 2, 2011 15:39:47 GMT -5
Well I'm back..subbing in for..erm me :-) Off for a catch up read.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Dec 2, 2011 15:39:49 GMT -5
Boooooooooo.
Go Blue Team!
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Dec 2, 2011 16:12:02 GMT -5
Fell, wuck.
vote: Lightfoot
I agreed with Story's case, didn't like one of her posts yesterday, and see no reason to change my mind now.
|
|
|
Post by Caerie on Dec 2, 2011 17:10:25 GMT -5
OOG//I'm sorry for dwindling out on Day 2. I got swamped with several projects at work and got behind on everything I do for fun. Trying to catch up now.//OOG
Well crap. We managed to get one scum and we're down five Blue Team.
Looking back over the last two Days, I'm thinking sinjin is looking increasingly scummy. On Day 1 she gives a down-to-the-wire last minute vote for Paranoia and then on Day 2 votes for Paranoia again...up until there's a nice safe (and IMO, scummy) switch for a third post in a bandwagon on Archangel. Again, pushing it right up to the wire, as if waiting for a good candidate to get off of Paranoia.
It looks an awful lot like strategic vote shifting, trying to go for a "safe" lynch candidate repeatedly until there's that chance to slide in unnoticed on killing a townie.
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Dec 2, 2011 17:29:43 GMT -5
Okay, so thinking about the double blue kills and all that - I am slightly curious if we are looking at a smaller than average scum team. Anyone else's thoughts on this?
also agreeing with Caerie up there; sinjn hasn't really shown any real interest in pursuing her lynch on me, so I am interested in hearing from her.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on Dec 2, 2011 17:36:55 GMT -5
Damn...
Sorry I was not around for EOD yesterDay, but it would of not mattered. With the death of my friend, it has been hard to stay focused.
I thought I was right about Archangel, guess not.
I did a quick reread from Day 2.
Special Ed could be a bit more clear and enlighten us when you say "but as my role isn't too terribly pro-Town at this point in the game" in Day 2. What exactly is not so pro-town?
Also, Ed after Archangel posted and voted for Sis C you posted stating "I will not vote Archangel, I will not vote Archangel" Is this because you always think she is scummy or are there other reasons?
I also agree with the case on Lightfoot and her "Deon Post". It does seem like a case that was built to justify a lynch vote.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Dec 2, 2011 19:12:47 GMT -5
<font style="font-size: 12px;">OOG//I'm sorry for dwindling out on Day 2. I got swamped with several projects at work and got behind on everything I do for fun. Trying to catch up now.//OOG Well crap. We managed to get one scum and we're down five Blue Team. Looking back over the last two Days, I'm thinking sinjin is looking increasingly scummy. On Day 1 she gives a down-to-the-wire last minute vote for Paranoia and then on Day 2 votes for Paranoia again...up until there's a nice safe (and IMO, scummy) switch for a third post in a bandwagon on Archangel. Again, pushing it right up to the wire, as if waiting for a good candidate to get off of Paranoia. It looks an awful lot like strategic vote shifting, trying to go for a "safe" lynch candidate repeatedly until there's that chance to slide in unnoticed on killing a townie. <font style="font-size: 12px;">Okay, so thinking about the double blue kills and all that - I am slightly curious if we are looking at a smaller than average scum team. Anyone else's thoughts on this? also agreeing with Caerie up there; sinjn hasn't really shown any real interest in pursuing her lynch on me, so I am interested in hearing from her.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Dec 2, 2011 19:27:12 GMT -5
Just sha me now, that didn't work out the way I wanted it too. But now it's time for dinner and then after dinner play. For now I will just say:
Bah! and be back tomorrow to comment on the above quoted posts.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Dec 2, 2011 19:43:02 GMT -5
Balderdash SisC week votes D1 ( no real case made) but D1’s are like that true enough Me-too-ish votes D2 ( on a case I debunked) does anyone read all my posts? Pops in first thing D3 and votes me again. ( alludes to something I posted that she “didn’t like” yesterday) care to elaborate?? Now JustBeingGinger states This is about my Day ONE vote to which ( when she changed her vote from Deon to Archangel ) A couple of reasons. 1. She really has not contributed that much to the game. Asked a couple of MOD questions. 2. I don't care for her vote on Deon, it seemed like she saw the case I made on him and thought it was a easy place to put her vote. At least Lightfoot had a look at Deon and his other posts and then placed her vote and came to her own conclusion. So in short, Archangel's vote just seemed more of a bandwagon vote. Stated my D1 vote was “OK” … until now D3? and you may notice that the players that JBG voted for both Days we now know was Town. JBGinger how is my wrong vote D1 any different than yours, WHEN WE VOTED THE SAME PERSON initially?
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Dec 2, 2011 20:51:05 GMT -5
What was that from? I can't remember.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on Dec 2, 2011 21:38:24 GMT -5
Balderdash SisC week votes D1 ( no real case made) but D1’s are like that true enough Me-too-ish votes D2 ( on a case I debunked) does anyone read all my posts? Pops in first thing D3 and votes me again. ( alludes to something I posted that she “didn’t like” yesterday) care to elaborate?? Now JustBeingGinger states This is about my Day ONE vote to which ( when she changed her vote from Deon to Archangel ) A couple of reasons. 1. She really has not contributed that much to the game. Asked a couple of MOD questions. 2. I don't care for her vote on Deon, it seemed like she saw the case I made on him and thought it was a easy place to put her vote. At least Lightfoot had a look at Deon and his other posts and then placed her vote and came to her own conclusion. So in short, Archangel's vote just seemed more of a bandwagon vote. Stated my D1 vote was “OK” … until now D3? and you may notice that the players that JBG voted for both Days we now know was Town. JBGinger how is my wrong vote D1 any different than yours, WHEN WE VOTED THE SAME PERSON initially? It is not that you voted for Deon, it is the method in which you used to vote or build your case. I first thought, oh she went back and read into what I had found with his post and looked at his other posts. Then in thinking about it, if you were scum, the best way to justify your vote is to build your case on him. In typing that I guess you can also say that about town... There are so many times where I try to say would scum do it or would a townie do it. I guess in this case it could be both. I don't know...
|
|
|
Post by special on Dec 2, 2011 21:52:51 GMT -5
Special Ed could be a bit more clear and enlighten us when you say "but as my role isn't too terribly pro-Town at this point in the game" in Day 2. What exactly is not so pro-town? Also, Ed after Archangel posted and voted for Sis C you posted stating "I will not vote Archangel, I will not vote Archangel" Is this because you always think she is scummy or are there other reasons? I could be more enlightening, but I won't at this point. Yes, I always think she's Scummy, but this time she really probably is.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Dec 2, 2011 21:55:17 GMT -5
Noooooo, I'm pretty sure she's dead. And Blue Team.
|
|
|
Post by special on Dec 2, 2011 22:11:28 GMT -5
Noooooo, I'm pretty sure she's dead. And Blue Team. oh, yeah, good point
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Dec 2, 2011 23:28:41 GMT -5
Balderdash SisC week votes D1 ( no real case made) but D1’s are like that true enough Me-too-ish votes D2 ( on a case I debunked) does anyone read all my posts? Pops in first thing D3 and votes me again. ( alludes to something I posted that she “didn’t like” yesterday) care to elaborate?? Now JustBeingGinger states This is about my Day ONE vote to which ( when she changed her vote from Deon to Archangel ) Stated my D1 vote was “OK” … until now D3? and you may notice that the players that JBG voted for both Days we now know was Town. JBGinger how is my wrong vote D1 any different than yours, WHEN WE VOTED THE SAME PERSON initially? It is not that you voted for Deon, it is the method in which you used to vote or build your case. I first thought, oh she went back and read into what I had found with his post and looked at his other posts. Then in thinking about it, if you were scum, the best way to justify your vote is to build your case on him. In typing that I guess you can also say that about town... There are so many times where I try to say would scum do it or would a townie do it. I guess in this case it could be both. I don't know... I was composing my post before I ever read your post/vote. I presented to all the sum total of Deon's posts and voted my conclusion ( giving others to either see what I thought I saw Or not) ONE of my points was one of yours. Like I said yesterDay. hopefully I'm collared to a Scum if this dog keeps hunting
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on Dec 3, 2011 2:44:51 GMT -5
Still considering voting for Special Ed, but also wondering the answers to the same questions that Ginger brought up.
Going back to reread, in case I missed something obvious. (I've done that before)
|
|
|
Post by moodymitchy on Dec 3, 2011 7:10:42 GMT -5
Still considering voting for Special Ed, but also wondering the answers to the same questions that Ginger brought up. Going back to reread, in case I missed something obvious. (I've done that before) Why only considering.... ? Why not just go ahead and do it... you might get a reaction... you might get others join in and could perhaps get a read of where they are coming from... I just think it's a little pointless openly stating that your considering voting someone without actually doing it...
|
|
|
Post by Drain Bead on Dec 3, 2011 8:25:04 GMT -5
Vote: Inner Stickler
Same reasons as before, with the addition of the weird one-off vote from yesterDay.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Dec 3, 2011 11:09:23 GMT -5
After reading through, I think I need to apologise to the blue team for my absence as I do have information regarding the collars.
I have a gadget - yes, they do exist.
Each night, the gadget allows me to scan someone and determine information about the collar transmitter and the collar explosive: - Transmitter States: Enabled/Disabled/Duplicated. - Explosive States: Enabled/Disabled.
So this suggests to me that there are several powers or other gadgets in play that can: - enable/disable the transmitter - enable/disable the explosive - duplicate a transmitter
The gadget does not have a "disconnected/separated" result - so I would presume that there is no power/gadget to disconnect/separate.
I can pass the gadget to someone else upon my death.
Now we do not have any information as to the initial state of the collars or the explosive. Are we all rigged to blow by default or do they need to be enabled and armed?
Colby was first to mention gadget's in D1#77, and then follows up in D2#5 commenting that collars behaved exactly as we thought -- and a scum wouldn't do that comment with respect to targets.
Guiri also mentioned gadgets, and is confirmed blue/dead.
Sinjin's weak case on paranoia pings me, especially when paranoia become the lynch leader she switched her vote from him to archangel, making her the lynch leader.
|
|
|
Post by Caerie on Dec 3, 2011 12:05:58 GMT -5
Aw geez. If you're telling the truth, BillMc, I don't think this soon was a good time to show your hand. You're giving a lot of information away and if any of it is true you may have just given the scum a huge upper hand by essentially offering up a power role for attack. You might also be scum trying to sow confusion, though I'm trying to figure out why you'd do that, since that isn't a role that would lend itself to much scum manipulation. Back to sinjin, the weak case against Paranoia and the switch to a forming bandwagon on Archangel really doesn't look good, especially coupled with a general lack of arguing for her votes. Just look at the post justifying a switch to Archangel: Vote Sister CoyoteThis post, to me, appears to be an attempt to sound like you're saying something significant without actually saying something significant, and the vote on Lightfoot appears to be a jump on a growing bandwagon. Arrrrghhhhh, I hate, hate, hate this post by this player. This is Archangels only post toDay. This is the sum total of her game posts yesterDay: Given the timing of her vote on Deonyesterday as pointed out by Pollux , her complete lack of any substance at all and this drive by vote; unvote Paranoiavote ArchangelDoesn't really seem particularly well justified, considering she'd been going after the same person two Days in a row up until this post.
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on Dec 3, 2011 12:09:00 GMT -5
After reading through, I think I need to apologise to the blue team for my absence as I do have information regarding the collars. I have a gadget - yes, they do exist. Each night, the gadget allows me to scan someone and determine information about the collar transmitter and the collar explosive: - Transmitter States: Enabled/Disabled/Duplicated. - Explosive States: Enabled/Disabled. So this suggests to me that there are several powers or other gadgets in play that can: - enable/disable the transmitter - enable/disable the explosive - duplicate a transmitter The gadget does not have a "disconnected/separated" result - so I would presume that there is no power/gadget to disconnect/separate. I can pass the gadget to someone else upon my death. Now we do not have any information as to the initial state of the collars or the explosive. Are we all rigged to blow by default or do they need to be enabled and armed? Colby was first to mention gadget's in D1#77, and then follows up in D2#5 commenting that collars behaved exactly as we thought -- and a scum wouldn't do that comment with respect to targets. Guiri also mentioned gadgets, and is confirmed blue/dead. Sinjin's weak case on paranoia pings me, especially when paranoia become the lynch leader she switched her vote from him to archangel, making her the lynch leader. Quite interesting that there might be a power that can disable the collars. I am assuming right now that there is a power that can do that. As to gadgets, I was referring to the Night 0 color where it states this: Since we were talking about the fact that the collars were linked (as mentioned in the Night 0 color), I also made an assumption that there would be gadgets.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Dec 3, 2011 12:09:26 GMT -5
After reading through, I think I need to apologise to the blue team for my absence as I do have information regarding the collars. I have a gadget - yes, they do exist. Each night, the gadget allows me to scan someone and determine information about the collar transmitter and the collar explosive: - Transmitter States: Enabled/Disabled/Duplicated. - Explosive States: Enabled/Disabled. So this suggests to me that there are several powers or other gadgets in play that can: - enable/disable the transmitter - enable/disable the explosive - duplicate a transmitter The gadget does not have a "disconnected/separated" result - so I would presume that there is no power/gadget to disconnect/separate. I can pass the gadget to someone else upon my death. Now we do not have any information as to the initial state of the collars or the explosive. Are we all rigged to blow by default or do they need to be enabled and armed? Colby was first to mention gadget's in D1#77, and then follows up in D2#5 commenting that collars behaved exactly as we thought -- and a scum wouldn't do that comment with respect to targets. Guiri also mentioned gadgets, and is confirmed blue/dead. Sinjin's weak case on paranoia pings me, especially when paranoia become the lynch leader she switched her vote from him to archangel, making her the lynch leader. I assume that you have scanned each Night? Have your results led you to any conclusions? I'm daft this morning, how can this help?
|
|
|
Post by moodymitchy on Dec 3, 2011 12:15:14 GMT -5
BillMc could also be telling the truth about his PM regarding it having a power to investigate the state of a gadget... but I feel that this could be more of a use to SCUM rather than TOWN.
SCUM already know who the Blue team are.... IF it's a SCUM power then they could use it to check the condition of their own collars ..
Or they could check condition of a TOWN collar and perhaps then perform a NK on a TOWN player without fear of taking one of their own out too...
My main problem with all of this is that BillMc is far too clever a player to have not thought of this himself.... or is he ?
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on Dec 3, 2011 12:17:37 GMT -5
Still considering voting for Special Ed, but also wondering the answers to the same questions that Ginger brought up. Going back to reread, in case I missed something obvious. (I've done that before) Why only considering.... ? Why not just go ahead and do it... you might get a reaction... you might get others join in and could perhaps get a read of where they are coming from... I just think it's a little pointless openly stating that your considering voting someone without actually doing it... Case in point, I didn't read all of Day 3 and didn't see Special Ed's response to Ginger's post.
|
|
|
Post by Caerie on Dec 3, 2011 12:30:47 GMT -5
BillMc could also be telling the truth about his PM regarding it having a power to investigate the state of a gadget... but I feel that this could be more of a use to SCUM rather than TOWN. SCUM already know who the Blue team are.... IF it's a SCUM power then they could use it to check the condition of their own collars .. Or they could check condition of a TOWN collar and perhaps then perform a NK on a TOWN player without fear of taking one of their own out too... My main problem with all of this is that BillMc is far too clever a player to have not thought of this himself.... or is he ? Hm. Good point. I'm having a hard time seeing what good it would do for the Blue Team anyway. If he investigates and finds someone's collar deactivated...what does that mean to a townie? At best it would reveal that there was another gadget to deactivate collars. For scum, it might help them track down that gadget.
|
|
|
Post by moodymitchy on Dec 3, 2011 12:57:54 GMT -5
Why only considering.... ? Why not just go ahead and do it... you might get a reaction... you might get others join in and could perhaps get a read of where they are coming from... I just think it's a little pointless openly stating that your considering voting someone without actually doing it... Case in point, I didn't read all of Day 3 and didn't see Special Ed's response to Ginger's post. So you post without catching up on what has gone on ? Most people state they are posting as they catch up... and surely you did bother to finish reading all of what had been written on Day 3 before you went off and did something else.... You could have then put a response to Mr Special Ed's response to Gingers post... Or am I reading this totally wrong ? At Lightfoot as I understand it... BillMc has only been active in the game since the start of Day 3... It was stated by the MOD that he wouldn't be around at the start of the game... so I don't think he would have even put in a PM for an actiion on Night 1.... Though he could well have done for Night 2
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Dec 3, 2011 13:01:03 GMT -5
I'm curious why Bill was posting in the unspoiled thread?
I didn't go in to see what he said
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Dec 3, 2011 15:08:42 GMT -5
Vote Lightfootshe was next on my list after Archangel.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Dec 3, 2011 15:39:00 GMT -5
Vote Lightfootshe was next on my list after Archangel. And that was a correct choice , wasn't it? by all means don't elaborate on your reasoning
|
|