|
Post by Paranoia on May 26, 2013 23:31:39 GMT -5
Day Five
Oh no someone has mutilated gnarlycharlie. He is quite dead now go find who did this.
Gnarlycharlie has been killed!
1. Idle 2. Wombat99 3. BillMC 4. mahaloth 5. dizzymrslizzy 6. sario 7. Pleonast 8. Texcat 9. Colby11 10. JustBeingGinger 11. PolluxOil 12. Guiri 13. Cookies 14. Swammerdami 15. Hal Briston
With 15 alive, it takes 8 to lynch. Day 5 will end in around 120 hours, at 12:01 AM on June 1st.
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 26, 2013 23:46:46 GMT -5
Lauren was the Town Innkeeper
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 27, 2013 1:32:03 GMT -5
YesterDay we needed 9 votes to Lynch but only 11 Players were even active enough to vote. ToDay we need 8 votes to Lynch and only 9 of those active Players are still alive. It seems that the Judge will be deciding most or even all of our Lynches. (Perhaps that wouldn't be too bad, if the Judge played Townishly and Lynched one of the candidates with most votes.) Questions for the Mods:
1. What happens to the Lynch if Judge is dead?
2. Village will have little chance of victory if the Judge is a Witch. It would be sadistic to let us continue in that case.
I ask that the game be conceded to the Witches if Judge is a Witch.
Some interesting deductions can be made if we assume the Judge is a Witch. But I'm afraid such deductions are pointless -- we hardly have a chance in that case. Therefore I will assume that the Judge is a Villager. So let me start by saying... What the f**k??? With three candidates to choose from you ignore all three and Kill the Towniest Townie in the whole Town! Please note that, even if you thought LaurieRN was Witch, killing (for the reveal) someone who received votes would give meaning to the vote record. Killing LaurieRN doesn't even have that use. I don't know how we should spend toDay. Lecture the Judge and try again to Lynch an inactive Player? Frankly, I do think the Judge is a Witch. Assuming that either Investigator or Inquisitor is a Witch, Witches might want to Kill LaurieRN so she couldn't draw inferences from our Investigation targets. Since I am a Villager, this points directly at the Inquisitor whose name I will reveal in due course. If Judge is a Witch he might have avoided Killing Cookies or Wombat because both of them are Witches. (I do realize the same argument could be applied to make me look Witchy.) I'll place a tentative vote Vote: Wombat... but I'm inclined to believe Judge is Witch, and plead with the Mods to just end the Game and put us out of our misery.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on May 27, 2013 3:39:33 GMT -5
deadline vote swammerdami
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 27, 2013 3:59:25 GMT -5
grrr!!!!!!!!
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 27, 2013 9:10:30 GMT -5
Maybe the Judge had a case in Lauren?
Or they could be scum... Killing someone like that doesn't make much sense, to be honest.
But I will renew my vote from yesterday- Vote: Swam
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 27, 2013 9:36:34 GMT -5
Kill BillMc on Day 3. If he's Town, lynch everyone he thinks is Scum. If he's scum, well, at least you got Bill. - Special Ed Uhhh ... isn't it against regulations for dead Players to discuss strategy in the game thread?
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on May 27, 2013 12:45:17 GMT -5
I will be happy voting for Swammer or Cookies today.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 27, 2013 14:42:35 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure that is just Gnarly's sig. It has been attached to his posts here for years, because it is funny. I will need to ponder between Wombat and Swammer now that Swammer is voting for Wombat.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on May 27, 2013 18:26:04 GMT -5
With three candidates to choose from you ignore all three and Kill the Towniest Townie in the whole Town! Care to explain this comment? That's certainly not my impression of Lauriern.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 27, 2013 20:09:04 GMT -5
I think my post about the Judge and the need for Lynching inactive Players was pertinent and pro-Town, yet no one has discussed those points. I'll admit that I try to make pro-Town points when I'm Scum, but the points are still pro-Town!Answering some of the questions asked of me: 1. Why do I make a case against Cookies but no longer vote her? (This is one of the main charges in the case against me.) The case against Cookies is based almost entirely on the idea that the phrase "Basic Villager" in her role PM would have been glaring at her and prevented a Day 1 comment she made about Peeker. Is this fully valid? I'm not sure. She's still a prime suspect, but, as I've explained, the priority now must be to Lynch inactive Players.I would be happy to Lynch Wombat, Ginger, Cookies (or even semi-active BillMc) toDay. I'm also suspicious of those voting me. That's not OMGUS -- it's so glaringly obvious to me that I'm Town that those voting me seem very Scummy. 2. With three candidates to choose from you ignore all three and Kill the Towniest Townie in the whole Town! Care to explain this comment? That's certainly not my impression of Lauriern. As far as I recall, no case was made against LaurieRN. Her Lynch by Judge was out-of-the-blue and clearly wrong. Do you disagree with that?Since Players seem to review my comments just for scum-tells rather than content, I'm not surprised you forgot that I'd written "99% certain she is Villager" when the Innkeeper was still anonymous. (Yes, my "Towniest Townie in the whole Town" did depend on my own private knowledge.) She made 1 or 2 posts that seemed to snuggle me slightly -- if that's why she was Lynched I feel somewhat guilty about her death. Sorry, LaurieRN. 3. I've got vast ignorance about the Interwebbies, but did know about .sigs (though I'm not sure if I've ever used one myself). My complaint about Charlie was intended to be humorous. I see Players having fun swapping punchlines and once a week or so I get the courage to try one myself. 99% of the time, my jokes fall flat.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 27, 2013 21:11:04 GMT -5
In a post, I did seem to treat my private knowledge as public. The real point is that had Laurie become a Lynch candidate I'd have posted publicly "She's the 99%-Village Innkeeper I told you about. Lynch me instead since you want to anyway; after I flip Village you'll spare her." Judge's Lynching of a non-candidate was so anti-Town, Pleonast's focus on me rather than the Judge seems bizarre.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 28, 2013 20:39:50 GMT -5
Pleo, I'm a little surprised that you are agreeing with the Judges choice here.
Swammer in his big WOW "proof that he is town" post said that he knew the identity of 2 players. And I think some other roles that know the identity of another player.
Why would you shoot blindly into the pool if you were Town, when there were several decent candidates out there already.
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 28, 2013 21:57:31 GMT -5
Saying that Laurie was the towniest of towns can't be said from all of us who didn't know that Lauren was the Innkeeper.
Now, Pleonast saying that he didn't think that Lauren wasn't exactly town? That isn't necessarily scum behavior. That is suspecting someone, and announcing their opinion. Opinions can be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on May 28, 2013 22:43:24 GMT -5
Care to explain this comment? That's certainly not my impression of Lauriern. As far as I recall, no case was made against LaurieRN. Her Lynch by Judge was out-of-the-blue and clearly wrong. Do you disagree with that?Since Players seem to review my comments just for scum-tells rather than content, I'm not surprised you forgot that I'd written "99% certain she is Villager" when the Innkeeper was still anonymous. (Yes, my "Towniest Townie in the whole Town" did depend on my own private knowledge.) She made 1 or 2 posts that seemed to snuggle me slightly -- if that's why she was Lynched I feel somewhat guilty about her death. Sorry, LaurieRN. I'm reading for scummy motivations. Your labeling of Lauriern as super-Townie seemed very odd to me. I didn't get any especially towny vibe from them. And your comment after the reveal strikes me as some sort of scum gloating. Your Yes, my "Towniest Townie in the whole Town" did depend on my own private knowledge. looks like a scum slip to me. What private knowledge could you have of Lauriern being a Villager except that you're a Witch? Lauriern's lynch was wrong, but I cannot say if it were ill-motivated or not. We'll need to see what the Judge says. In a post, I did seem to treat my private knowledge as public. The real point is that had Laurie become a Lynch candidate I'd have posted publicly "She's the 99%-Village Innkeeper I told you about. Lynch me instead since you want to anyway; after I flip Village you'll spare her." Judge's Lynching of a non-candidate was so anti-Town, Pleonast's focus on me rather than the Judge seems bizarre. And you're again claiming knowledge that Lauriern was a Villager. Please explain. I'm focusing on the obvious Witch: you. Why focus on the Judge when we do not know who it is? We can't lynch them; we can lynch you, and we should. Pleo, I'm a little surprised that you are agreeing with the Judges choice here. Swammer in his big WOW "proof that he is town" post said that he knew the identity of 2 players. And I think some other roles that know the identity of another player. Why would you shoot blindly into the pool if you were Town, when there were several decent candidates out there already. I'm a little surprised you think I agree with the Judge. I hadn't commented about the Judge until this post. We know nothing about why the Judge has targeted anyone. Lynching townies is not a scum tell. I'll focus on players we can hold to account right now. Swammerdami is trying to divert our attention to someone can't we lynch nor do anything else about. Let's make lynch cases on players we can lynch.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 29, 2013 7:22:53 GMT -5
No I'm extrapolating from your comment of:
That you agreed with the Judge's decision.
From my POV, Lauriern was Town leaning. She was the first to point out Peeker's slip.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 29, 2013 7:27:43 GMT -5
Okay we have a whole crew who after 2 days haven't checked in at all today....
2. Wombat99 3. BillMC 4. mahaloth 6. sario 8. Texcat 10. JustBeingGinger 11. PolluxOil 12. Guiri 15. Hal Briston
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 29, 2013 7:55:18 GMT -5
Checking in.
Dizzy, are you claiming to be the 3rd I? What reason do you have to believe Scummer is a villager or that Laurie was not a witch innkeeper? Laurie may have pointed out Peeker's slip but she didn't vote him until it was a done deal. Laurie's support of Scummer could just as easily have been witch cuddling as innkeeping.
Personally I'm still not happy with either the cases against scummer or cookies and suspect a witchy judge wants us to continue discussing them for another day rather than look elsewhere... I'd be happy to lynch Idle, Bill, Pollux and, if our only option of reaching hammer is to lynch a lurker, I'd prefer wombat or Hal over Ginger.
Vote Idle
|
|
|
Post by texcat on May 29, 2013 8:29:18 GMT -5
Checking in. Dizzy, are you claiming to be the 3rd I? What reason do you have to believe Scummer is a villager or that Laurie was not a witch innkeeper? Laurie may have pointed out Peeker's slip but she didn't vote him until it was a done deal. Laurie's support of Scummer could just as easily have been witch cuddling as innkeeping. Personally I'm still not happy with either the cases against scummer or cookies and suspect a witchy judge wants us to continue discussing them for another day rather than look elsewhere... I'd be happy to lynch Idle, Bill, Pollux and, if our only option of reaching hammer is to lynch a lurker, I'd prefer wombat or Hal over Ginger. Vote IdleWhat is the case on Idle? And LOLOL at "Scummer". Is that some kind of slip calling Swammer by a scummier name?
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 29, 2013 8:48:14 GMT -5
Checking in. Dizzy, are you claiming to be the 3rd I? What reason do you have to believe Scummer is a villager or that Laurie was not a witch innkeeper? Laurie may have pointed out Peeker's slip but she didn't vote him until it was a done deal. Laurie's support of Scummer could just as easily have been witch cuddling as innkeeping. Personally I'm still not happy with either the cases against scummer or cookies and suspect a witchy judge wants us to continue discussing them for another day rather than look elsewhere... I'd be happy to lynch Idle, Bill, Pollux and, if our only option of reaching hammer is to lynch a lurker, I'd prefer wombat or Hal over Ginger. Vote IdleNo I am not claiming the Inquisitor....I was skeptical as everyone else on Swammer's claim in the beginning, but Laurie flipping Town gives him a little bit of credit. Look back this morning Colby who is believed to be a Town Gravedigger revealed that Laurie was TOWN Innkeeper. And yeah lets here this case on Idle....
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 29, 2013 9:28:06 GMT -5
Texcat, I commented on Idle here: idlemafia.com/post/107201, not much going on there and not much changed since, his latest post, sans vote, just bothers me "I will be happy voting for Swammer or Cookies today.". Dizzy, the question about Laurie related to your opinion of her before the reveal, only if you were the third "I", since you're not...
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 30, 2013 2:27:59 GMT -5
And LOLOL at "Scummer". Is that some kind of slip calling Swammer by a scummier name? Missed this, yeah, more snark than a slip.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 30, 2013 5:55:02 GMT -5
The Judge will be deciding all future Lynches, I think. Voting is just a way of expressing our preferences to him/her. Although I've been changing candidates as often as Hugh Hefner changed playgirls, I'll endorse yet one more case: Unvote
Vote: Idle ThoughtsI don't know if my Vote will make Judge more, or less, likely to Lynch Idle. And LOLOL at "Scummer". Is that some kind of slip calling Swammer by a scummier name? Missed this, yeah, more snark than a slip. ... And to think I've wanted to misspell you as guru
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 30, 2013 11:34:17 GMT -5
I can get behind an Idle lynch. And if enough of us do, we can nullify the Judge.
Just out of curiosity though, for the Idle voters, is there a reason you don't want to vote for Wombat?
Vote Idle
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 30, 2013 11:57:42 GMT -5
If the only way to hammer is to lynch a non-participant, I'll happily vote wombat or Hal. Ginger was also on my radar but Sai's support of the case weakened my suspicion. I don't think we'll learn much by lynching a non-participant, but as we near halftime and with the judge's record, there's a benefit to removing non-voters.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 30, 2013 12:01:26 GMT -5
I'd much rather vote Wombat than Idle. Idle is at least showing up. We at this point need to lynch lurkers if they cannot be replaced by the Mod otherwise the Judge will rule the roost here.
I do not support an Idle Lynch at all.
I think at this point the Oracle should out themselves if they are town and announce who the players that can kill at halftime are. I think we need to be aware of the massive carnage coming in a day and a half.
Vote: Wombat
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 30, 2013 12:37:37 GMT -5
I agree that Idle is actually showing up. I'm willing to switch to Wombat if it will help bypass the Judge.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 30, 2013 13:06:05 GMT -5
Dizzy, wombat, is not a lurker, she's a no-show, a non-participant, she's probably unaware that the game ever started, why lynch her over a real lurker such as Idle, Bill, Sario, Pollux, or mahaloth who are barely keeping an appearance of participation, or even Hal or Ginger who dropped out? Is it really the judge you're concerned about, even if we've a decent chance of lynching a witch? With 15 players alive, if we mislynch toDay, we start D6 with 13 players of which 5 are witches, almost a majority but possibly in control of the vote due to non-voters, no matter what the judge is.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 30, 2013 13:29:37 GMT -5
Study the numbers and see that, given the large number of inactive and semi-active players, we're unlikely to get a majority toDay -- this situation will worsen every time an active player is Lynched.
If the Judge is a Witch, the game is probably pointless and it is sadistic for Mods not to call it off. If other players agree with that, I hope they chime in.
BTW, my Create Post screen just froze -- not even allowing mouse-roll copy -- and I had to type this a 2nd time. If we were allowed multiple votes I would
Vote: New Proboards Software
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on May 30, 2013 15:45:47 GMT -5
Dizzy, wombat, is not a lurker, she's a no-show, a non-participant, she's probably unaware that the game ever started, why lynch her over a real lurker such as Idle, Bill, Sario, Pollux, or mahaloth who are barely keeping an appearance of participation, or even Hal or Ginger who dropped out? Is it really the judge you're concerned about, even if we've a decent chance of lynching a witch? With 15 players alive, if we mislynch toDay, we start D6 with 13 players of which 5 are witches, almost a majority but possibly in control of the vote due to non-voters, no matter what the judge is. Yes, my first priority as I've said over and over again is lynching witches. I am not willing to lynch random PLAYING but lurking players, especially those who are not witches. I'd be willing to look again at Pleo, and his D1 claim. I've been keeping track of the Expansion players, trying to figure out where Pleo lays. Of all of the expansion players left, the roles while according to the Mod can be town or witch seem like they would benefit the witch team. I have a strong hunch that Pleo may be a witch based just on looking at the roles remaining in the expansion set. Here's the list of expansion players remaining: Showdown Expansion 13 Bishop At Halftime, you will be shown all living Coven members. 17 Innkeeper Each night, meet with the Inquisitor and Investigator. 18 Entertainer At Halftime, you may select three other targets. If they are on different sides, the odd-man-out is killed. If not, you are killed. 19 Nun At the start of the game, you will be shown the Bishop's identity. 20 Zealot At Halftime, you will be shown all living Holy Villagers. 21 Summoner At Halftime, you may kill exactly three targets. The Angels may save one. The Demons may save one. 23 Oracle At the start of the game, you will be shown the identity of all characters that kill at Halftime. 24 Wizard During any day after Halftime, you may reveal this card and guess a target's character. If correct, they are killed. If incorrect, you are killed. Comments- The Innkeeper can be confirmed by Swammer (if you believe him) Zealot - Why would Town need to know the Holy Villagers Summoner- Again, I don't think it sounds like a Town role Oracle- Could be Town or Witch IMO. I wish they would chime in. Wizard- Another, I don't think is Town player. And then the 2 Holy Cards, which I don't think Pleo is among. So that leaves 4 possible roles, and 3 of which I feel are possibly Witch roles.
|
|