|
Post by Silver Jan on May 7, 2013 4:00:38 GMT -5
Sai seems to have taken over the game, another Pizza? I keep changing my mind about his/her alignment. I don't understand this reference, but I sincerely from the bottom of my heart wish that other people would be active. Like, I do everything I can, from specifically questioning people to linking other peoples' posts to generate discussion and half the players still are just flat out inactive. And the posts that I am seeing? Well, as I said in my last post, Swammer's been hell bent on this idea that Cookies claimed not-basic, which just didn't happen. Like, really, it's like we live in different threads. silver, do you have any thoughts on Crys's case on Laurie? Don't get me wrong, I like your activity it's just that I keep changing my mind about you, right now you are on my Town list. I think Crys has a good point there, Lauriern seemed to come in from out of the blue and vote for Cookies after defending me. I like swammerdamis case on cookies too though but I don't think that both cookies and lauriern could be witches. I have read through all cookies posts and the only thing that really caught my eye was that he said that what peeker had posted was a null tell and in his next post he wants pizza to claim. You also wanted peeker to claim so I don't know what to think of that. I also feel that cookies just placed a vote on me because it was an easy vote. I would like to hear more from Lauriern, her "hmmmm" and "hinky" comments have made my skin tingle because she hasn't explained any further. She hasn't even mentioned who made her go "hmmmm". Well there you have my confusion because I don't believe that they could both be scum together, for some reason that just doesn't sit right with me. But now I have another scenario, if lauriern is a witch, she could believe that cookies is a spy, even though cookies denied it, lauriern might not believe him because he is on her junior witch/spy list. I hope this is making sense. So basically what I am trying to say is that they could both be witches but not in the loop yet, i.e. an elder witch and a junior witch.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on May 7, 2013 4:04:39 GMT -5
I am a Basic Villager. The phrase "Basic Villager" occurs in the Subject line of my role PM. The same phrase is repeated, in bold face, early in the body of my role PM. Anyone who is a Basic Villager knows that he/she is a Basic Villager!Anyone who thinks Basic Villagers might not know that they are Basic Villagers has not seen a Basic Villager role PM.... I think it is tough to make a call between whether what Peeker said was a non-basic-townie tell or him not realizing that he was a basic townie because his role came with a power. Q.E.D. Good catch, I knew straight away that I was a basic villager, something to back to on D1.
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 7, 2013 6:19:36 GMT -5
If I was not a Basic Villager, how would I have know this: their are ten "basic villagers". i kind of read that as nillers. so are you suggesting that even "basic villagers" have powers? and this new format sucks. Are you saying you're not a basic villager? If you were, you would know the answer to your own question...... And I agree - these new boards suck I knew Peeker wasn't a Basic Villager. This post was my calling out Peeker and my breadcrumb that I am a Basic Villager. Think about it. How would I know Peeker was not a Basic Villager if I was not one myself?
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 7, 2013 7:39:32 GMT -5
i guess my reread will follow after this. it may be lazy but i don't see any scumminess. it is still my belief that most scum will play in a way that doesn't bring attention to them. so laurie's post seems townie to me. Mahaloth's outrage seems fake. his vote feels opportunistic.
Vote MahalothAnd I got cut again. I'd like to point out that this post votes based on a claim of an opportunistic vote based on a claim of an opportunistic vote based on a claim of an opportunistic vote. That's probably the 2nd best thing to happen this game. i understand what you're saying. it was not only the opportunism but also what felt like feigned outrage. I am a Basic Villager. The phrase "Basic Villager" occurs in the Subject line of my role PM. The same phrase is repeated, in bold face, early in the body of my role PM. Anyone who is a Basic Villager knows that he/she is a Basic Villager!Anyone who thinks Basic Villagers might not know that they are Basic Villagers has not seen a Basic Villager role PM.... I think it is tough to make a call between whether what Peeker said was a non-basic-townie tell or him not realizing that he was a basic townie because his role came with a power. Q.E.D. interesting. i'll reread but as is it looks like a good theory. Unvote MahalothVote ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
|
|
|
Post by texcat on May 7, 2013 7:40:18 GMT -5
Think about it. How would I know Peeker was not a Basic Villager if I was not one myself? LOL. Because, unlike peeker, you read the rules and the sample PMs?? Or is that too much to assume these days?
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 7, 2013 7:57:14 GMT -5
Think about it. How would I know Peeker was not a Basic Villager if I was not one myself? LOL. Because, unlike peeker, you read the rules and the sample PMs?? Or is that too much to assume these days? Nope. It was b/c I read my PM which said I was a Basic Villager and I was confused that I had a power as a "Basic Villager" - went back and read the rules and realized all Basic Villagers have a power of some sort. If Peeker had gotten a Basic Villager PM, he would have *known* Basic Villager didn't mean niller villager b/c his PM would have indicated his power.
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 7, 2013 7:57:27 GMT -5
Think about it. How would I know Peeker was not a Basic Villager if I was not one myself? LOL. Because, unlike peeker, you read the rules and the sample PMs?? Or is that too much to assume these days? Nope. It was b/c I read my PM which said I was a Basic Villager and I was confused that I had a power as a "Basic Villager" - went back and read the rules and realized all Basic Villagers have a power of some sort. If Peeker had gotten a Basic Villager PM, he would have *known* Basic Villager didn't mean niller villager b/c his PM would have indicated his power.
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 7, 2013 7:57:42 GMT -5
Think about it. How would I know Peeker was not a Basic Villager if I was not one myself? LOL. Because, unlike peeker, you read the rules and the sample PMs?? Or is that too much to assume these days? Nope. It was b/c I read my PM which said I was a Basic Villager and I was confused that I had a power as a "Basic Villager" - went back and read the rules and realized all Basic Villagers have a power of some sort. If Peeker had gotten a Basic Villager PM, he would have *known* Basic Villager didn't mean niller villager b/c his PM would have indicated his power.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on May 7, 2013 7:58:05 GMT -5
I have been out for a few hours with my brain going around in circles and I will
Vote ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
This just seems a bit more logical than my convoluted theory, which I am not totally dismissing but either way I feel happy with a Cookies lynch.
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 7, 2013 7:59:03 GMT -5
Ugh! Sorry for the triple post - this is why I rarely check in on and *never* post from my tablet
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on May 7, 2013 7:59:48 GMT -5
I'm claiming because of two reasons A- the Witches will keep me alive because I am not one of the powers that can hurt them badly, like the Bishop. Let a player live that isn't a threat to you, other than their vote, and go after players who can really throw your game B- Peek's reveal gives us at least a starting point with vote patterns. It has nailed scum in the past. Wait, revealing the identities of dead players does not hurt them badly? Huh, I guess I would have thought it kind of did. Perhaps I'm not thinking of the word "badly" correctly. I would have thought that the witches kind of want the deaths to remain mysterious.
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 7, 2013 8:08:01 GMT -5
LOL. Because, unlike peeker, you read the rules and the sample PMs?? Or is that too much to assume these days? Nope. It was b/c I read my PM which said I was a Basic Villager and I was confused that I had a power as a "Basic Villager" - went back and read the rules and realized all Basic Villagers have a power of some sort. If Peeker had gotten a Basic Villager PM, he would have *known* Basic Villager didn't mean niller villager b/c his PM would have indicated his power. and Texcat, you questioning this makes me wonder if you are not "Basic" as well. All you Basic Villagers out there should understand *exactly* what I am saying.
|
|
|
Post by scáthach on May 7, 2013 8:18:41 GMT -5
Arg, sorry you guys, I knew I'd be away this weekend, but I forgot it was a long weekend and thought I'd have yesterday to catch up.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on May 7, 2013 8:53:58 GMT -5
LOL. Because, unlike peeker, you read the rules and the sample PMs?? Or is that too much to assume these days? Nope. It was b/c I read my PM which said I was a Basic Villager and I was confused that I had a power as a "Basic Villager" - went back and read the rules and realized all Basic Villagers have a power of some sort. If Peeker had gotten a Basic Villager PM, he would have *known* Basic Villager didn't mean niller villager b/c his PM would have indicated his power. You asked how would you know that peeker was not a basic villager if you were not one yourself. My point was that anyone who read the rules would know.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 7, 2013 9:59:32 GMT -5
Ughs.
First of all
Vote ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
It's the same theory as with Peekers, if you read your PM you would know that a basic villager had powers.
I will have to say I also agree with Texcat, if you read the rules, and/including I posted the entire list of basic/witch/holy list of expansion set of characters and powers during that whole debacle, there is no reason that anyone would be confused, even if you weren't a basic villager. So someone who was confused was 1) Not a basic villager, and 2) Skimming the posts!
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 7, 2013 10:00:40 GMT -5
And my Ughs is because I'm mixed on LaurieRN. I really like her case, and she helped lead the hunt for Peekers, and now Cookies, but at the same time I really didn't like her post last night that she was too busy with a TV show to go back and read.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 7, 2013 10:40:08 GMT -5
We've all seen the example PMs as they're in the rules thread: idlemafia.com/post/106663What that post of mine indicates is early game benefit of the doubt that some people don't pay really close attention to the rules or to role PMs.
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 7, 2013 10:41:39 GMT -5
And my Ughs is because I'm mixed on LaurieRN. I really like her case, and she helped lead the hunt for Peekers, and now Cookies, but at the same time I really didn't like her post last night that she was too busy with a TV show to go back and read. I don't have DVR - I can't watch it at another time. I don't watch much TV - Revolution is one of the few shows I watch and I carve out the time to watch it even if I have work to do. (RL and Mafia work!)
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on May 7, 2013 10:51:50 GMT -5
And my Ughs is because I'm mixed on LaurieRN. I really like her case, and she helped lead the hunt for Peekers, and now Cookies, but at the same time I really didn't like her post last night that she was too busy with a TV show to go back and read. Lauriern has a real life too I suppose, how dare she . I went shopping today with all this spinning in my little brain (so much so that I bought normal ice-cream for diabetic hubby, oops!) so maybe it's good to take a break and not think read posts over and over, that is the way to madness, so to me that isn't a scum tell. I often go to bed at the exciting bits cos it is really late here and I can't actually compute all that is going on (gnarly has the same problem), most of you guys have an hour or so time difference and that helps, you can usually have a RL time conversation, I have to do catch up on a morning. Guiri, I think is on Euro time so he is close to me. Enough rambling, I just wanted to say that I am twixt and tween with Lauriern but hovering towards Town.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 7, 2013 11:02:40 GMT -5
So someone who was confused was 1) Not a basic villager, and 2) Skimming the posts! Or skimming everything. Or not realizing the subtleties of a new setup. If Peeker does end up being a Witch as our claimed Gravedigger suggests, it would just prove my point that people skim and get confused. The last thing a Witch would want to do is say something on Day 1 that left them exposed.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 7, 2013 11:24:03 GMT -5
But Cookies, the point is.
If you are a Basic Villager, you got a PM saying that you were A) a Basic Villager, and B) Here's your character/role.
There's no confusion there. I would make an educated guess that that most if not all of us got a similar PM, that had 2 pieces to it. And I can see where a Holy/Spy/Witch player might be confused and think that a Basic Villager only got the information that they were a Basic "Vanilla" player.
I don't know about anyone but myself, but in any game I've played, I've read my Role PM a number of times to make sure I know exactly what is expected of me for my own personal role. A lot of the past few games, I've even PMed the Mod to make sure I understood what was going on in my PM. So I just have a VERY hard time believing that someone would have skimmed over their PM and started playing right off the bat.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 7, 2013 11:25:07 GMT -5
And my Ughs is because I'm mixed on LaurieRN. I really like her case, and she helped lead the hunt for Peekers, and now Cookies, but at the same time I really didn't like her post last night that she was too busy with a TV show to go back and read. I don't have DVR - I can't watch it at another time. I don't watch much TV - Revolution is one of the few shows I watch and I carve out the time to watch it even if I have work to do. (RL and Mafia work!) Hey I'll give you that it's at least a good show IDK hun, something just strikes me odd in that post though, although I do have a town lean on you.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 7, 2013 11:29:18 GMT -5
Am I right that we only have a half hour left of today?
|
|
|
Post by scáthach on May 7, 2013 11:41:44 GMT -5
I think so (and due to timezone difficulties I've been in work for the last four hours of it too).
What's the current vote count?
The three main candidates appear to be Silver Jan, Cookies and LaurieRn. Of the three I favour LaurieRn to vote but I don't want to be the hammer on a Day when I've only been around for about 50 mins.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 7, 2013 11:44:21 GMT -5
We've all seen the example PMs as they're in the rules thread: idlemafia.com/post/106663What that post of mine indicates is early game benefit of the doubt that some people don't pay really close attention to the rules or to role PMs. You seem to have completely missed the point. It has nothing to do with reading the rules or reading example PMs. You did not receive a Basic Villager PM. Period. That's all my initial argument was about. It's your follow-ups since then, especially the very latest which only dodge and obfuscate, that point to your being Witch.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on May 7, 2013 11:44:45 GMT -5
Current votes and 11 needed to lynch and less than half hour: SilverJan(4+2) Pleo[p1], Cookies[p1], Sai[p1], Guiri[p2], SilverJan[p2-p3], Sario[p2]*, Texcat[p3]*, Swammer[p3-p4] Cookies(7) Laurie[p4], Mahaloth[p4], crys[p4], Swammer[p4], Gnarly[p5], SilverJan[p5], Dizzy[p5] Wombat(1) Pollux[p3] Mahaloth(0) Gnarly[p4-p5] Swammer(0) Texcat[p3-p3] *deadline
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 7, 2013 12:03:48 GMT -5
Unvote SilverJan Vote Cookies
Probably a little late for a claim but it's similar odds to yesterDay and a better chance of a lynch than SilverJan. Ginger would be my next choice.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 7, 2013 12:05:40 GMT -5
Dizzy, that's all fine and dandy and your opinion. Do you really want to lynch me because I allowed on Day 1 for the possibility that people can be lazy, prone to ADD, or might get confused by a new ruleset? Because that is the sentiment behind the single sentence that is apparently causing various people to vote for me right now.
BTW, I'm Basic, Assasin.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 7, 2013 12:11:52 GMT -5
We've all seen the example PMs as they're in the rules thread: idlemafia.com/post/106663What that post of mine indicates is early game benefit of the doubt that some people don't pay really close attention to the rules or to role PMs. You seem to have completely missed the point. It has nothing to do with reading the rules or reading example PMs. You did not receive a Basic Villager PM. Period. That's all my initial argument was about. It's your follow-ups since then, especially the very latest which only dodge and obfuscate, that point to your being Witch. Your initial argument was wrong, and is based on an assumption that I don't happen to share with you: that there is no way that the recipient of a Basic Villager PM could possibly get confused. How am I dodging or obfuscating?
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on May 7, 2013 12:23:59 GMT -5
First of all - I hate proboards 5; apart from the horrid layout there is something in the code that sets of the corporate watchdog and I get barred from accessing it from the works laptop.
Second of all - I hate proboards 5; did I mention that?
I've only had time to skim today, but I have to agree with the points that there is no way that someone who is a basic villager would not know they are one - the bolding and the pretty basic villager card is hard to miss; so on the basis of that
Vote: vote Cookies
|
|