|
Post by Sister Coyote on Oct 13, 2013 18:38:37 GMT -5
"Well," said the Head, "I will give you my answer. You have no right to expect me to send you back to Kansas unless you do something for me in return. In this country everyone must pay for everything he gets. If you wish me to use my magic power to send you home again you must do something for me first. Help me and I will help you."
"What must I do?" asked the girl.
"Kill the Wicked Witch of the West," answered Oz.
"But I cannot!" exclaimed Dorothy, greatly surprised.
Somebody could.
Idle Thoughts, The Wicked Witch of the West, third-party Archangel/Mad Bomber has been slain.
Day begins now. It will end on Friday, October 18 at 4:00 p.m. Pacific Time.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Oct 13, 2013 19:17:14 GMT -5
interesting. seems scum thought he was a PFK or his protections were too much of a threat. there are other possibilities but i think this is the most likely.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on Oct 13, 2013 21:07:21 GMT -5
There are a lot of possibilities.
Scum could have been blocked and he was a Vig kill? Maybe?
I don't quite get why Scum would have killed him, unless they saw him as a Doc, but as Pleo pointed out (I think) His powers were beneficial if he keeps mediocre vanilla-ish players alive, not big targets.
I need to go back and read, I've been AFK for the last few RL days really sick. I'm finally feeling a little better this evening, although I still feel like my head is foggy.
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on Oct 13, 2013 21:10:25 GMT -5
My gut feeling would be that the scum believed his claim entirely and decided it was too much of a risk to leave him alive. Not much more to read in to it, aside from speculation.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Oct 13, 2013 21:29:29 GMT -5
I'm placing my bet on Idle being a Vig Kill, and the Scum being blocked/target protected/otherwise prevented from killing.
I've got 17¢ on it...who wants a piece of this action?
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Oct 13, 2013 21:46:44 GMT -5
See? THIRD PARTY...not PFK.
Anyway, bye all. If whoever killed me was Town: Congrats, you just killed a neutral protective role who was willing to help town and didn't pose any threat to wincons at all. If they were scum: Congrats, you just killed someone who could have protected every one of you at least once, not knowing who is who and eventually having to for sure anyway.
GO...er...eh, I'll flip a coin.ETA: Fixed typo because I can now...what's going to happen to me? Modkill? A hahaha
|
|
|
Post by Chameleon on Oct 13, 2013 21:58:32 GMT -5
Bye bye Idle I'm not sure why Scum would choose to kill Idle, unless they didn't believe his claim and thought he might be Town or PFK. In re-reading his role PM he really was completely independent - it wouldn't matter which side won as long as everyone alive was protected. It was in his best interest to protect everyone, Scum and Town alike. So, who did Idle protect last night? Someone should have experienced some kinky forehead play.
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on Oct 14, 2013 10:02:17 GMT -5
Bye bye Idle I'm not sure why Scum would choose to kill Idle, unless they didn't believe his claim and thought he might be Town or PFK. In re-reading his role PM he really was completely independent - it wouldn't matter which side won as long as everyone alive was protected. It was in his best interest to protect everyone, Scum and Town alike. So, who did Idle protect last night? Someone should have experienced some kinky forehead play.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Oct 14, 2013 10:22:18 GMT -5
Replying as I read... and yes silverjan I noticed the same thing about swammerdami if I'm vanilla town I'm voting a unknown to save myself very odd That is a poor policy. Scum, who are on a side which lacks numbers, has an incentive to save themselves with a vote. And town power roles do too, since they have something special to their role. But vanilla town hurt their side by voting solely to save themselves. More info is gained from a lynched vanilla townie than from that vanilla townie's self-preservation vote. By all means make cases on others you think could be scum. Those votes may even help prevent your lynch. But to vote someone simply because "I know I'm not scum" helps no one. It puts one's ego to play the game above the welfare of the team. And tactically, if everyone voted to save themself, we'd have a bunch of mostly cancelling votes that muddle the record because the votes don't represent any actual suspicions. At the very least, the list of players voting for swammer is a reasonable place to start forming some opinions. Why are you telling others to form opinions and not giving some yourself? vote fruitandgarbage for saying, not doing. And also for their Day One vote on Idle. Jan says she thinks she cannot change anything - yet if she really wanted to save swammer she could have voted for fruit, pleo or patricia. This looks like a weak move to try and gain some town cred - the vote on plankton seems throw away - she would have needed two more people to vote plankton for him to be lynched and her argument for that was "SP really looks scummy at the moment". silverjan was already voting for fruit, so they couldn't have done that. While your argument is sound, I'm not sure advocating a player is not lynched necessarily means they'd want to lynch just anyone else as an alternative. I'm not sure why Scum would choose to kill Idle, unless they didn't believe his claim and thought he might be Town or PFK. In re-reading his role PM he really was completely independent - it wouldn't matter which side won as long as everyone alive was protected. It was in his best interest to protect everyone, Scum and Town alike. So, who did Idle protect last night? Someone should have experienced some kinky forehead play. That'd be me. Message from the moderator this Morning, "Just before you wake, you feel the press of lips against your forehead.". Given the results of the Night, I think it's most likely that scum tried to kill me, failed because of Idle's protection, while a non-scum killer got Idle. I'm not a big fan of trying to parse the Night kills, but in this case I think the evidence is strong. And, it gives some insight into the targeting thoughts of scum, which may be useful later. And Idle, you did a great job as a pro-town protector (managing to out-guess scum), but a lousy job with your given role. It's been a long time since I've survived to end game. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I'm going to carry over another vote from Day One: vote patricia for their safe vote on swammer.
|
|
|
Post by Chameleon on Oct 14, 2013 10:35:22 GMT -5
I'm placing my bet on Idle being a Vig Kill, and the Scum being blocked/target protected/otherwise prevented from killing. I've got 17¢ on it...who wants a piece of this action? I think this is certainly a possibility to consider. It could also be Scum simply wanting to eliminate a protector right away to prevent him from interfering in their preferred kill (to apply the Occam's Razor theory). I'll put 18¢ on this one
|
|
|
Post by Chameleon on Oct 14, 2013 10:47:24 GMT -5
Clearly I have to spend some time re-learning the posting technicalities - I'm not sure why that previous post is double-spaced. And why is the plain old smiley a jumping bunny-thing? He's cute and all, just not what I was expecting.
I just want to clarify that I'm not trying to contradict my puzzlement over why Scum would kill Idle - that still stands. I just wanted to make the point that amongst all the possibilities as to why Idle was killed that a Scum kill is the simplest explanation and we shouldn't disregard that altogether.
|
|
|
Post by Chameleon on Oct 14, 2013 11:02:34 GMT -5
So, who did Idle protect last night? Someone should have experienced some kinky forehead play. That'd be me. Message from the moderator this Morning, "Just before you wake, you feel the press of lips against your forehead.". Given the results of the Night, I think it's most likely that scum tried to kill me, failed because of Idle's protection, while a non-scum killer got Idle. I'm not a big fan of trying to parse the Night kills, but in this case I think the evidence is strong. And, it gives some insight into the targeting thoughts of scum, which may be useful later. And Idle, you did a great job as a pro-town protector (managing to out-guess scum), but a lousy job with your given role. It's been a long time since I've survived to end game. I will assume there's no point in lying about this since it can be so easily countered. Counters anyone? Idle either felt there was something special about you or that Scum would target you. I will have to go back to see if I can find what it was that made him believe that. Is there anything else besides the protection that makes you think you were targeted? If Idle made a mistake (or whatever - he really had no allegiance) and you're actually Scum or PFK then claiming with such certainty that Scum must have been trying to kill you is pretty convenient, no? I will however give you the benefit of the doubt for now, partially because I still feel Idle was a bit of an odd choice for a Scum kill (but still the simplest explanation). If this is double spaced when it posts I have no idea why.
|
|
|
Post by FruitAndGarbage on Oct 14, 2013 13:11:07 GMT -5
Last night I received a message that I was getting sleepy. I don't know what this means or what caused it, but if it's some sort of delayed kill or roleblock or something, it's worth it to town to know what the warning sign is. At the very least, the list of players voting for swammer is a reasonable place to start forming some opinions. Why are you telling others to form opinions and not giving some yourself? vote fruitandgarbage for saying, not doing. Probably because I don't have any real suspicions yet beyond "Someone (or more likely someones) on the swammer wagon is scum, it's worth keeping that in mind as the day progresses". I'm not going to draw any solid conclusions about anyone specific based on no more evidence than the lynch of a vanilla town. We don't learn anything by swammer's flip, like I said; all we get is a place to start. That's kind of a silly reason to vote for me, frankly. vote:thelastdays
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on Oct 14, 2013 13:58:52 GMT -5
I have a blank post up there. I was cut off at work and will post that thought later.
|
|
|
Post by Chameleon on Oct 14, 2013 14:14:42 GMT -5
Why are you telling othe rs to form opinions and not giving some yourself? vote fruitandgarbage for saying, not doing. Probably because I don't have any real suspicions yet beyond "Someone (or more likely someones) on the swammer wagon is scum, it's worth keeping that in mind as the day progresses". I'm not going to draw any solid conclusions about anyone specific based on no more evidence than the lynch of a vanilla town. We don't learn anything by swammer's flip, like I said; all we get is a place to start. That's kind of a silly reason to vote for me, frankly. vote:thelastdaysI really don't think it's unreasonable to express the possibility that one or more players who voted for Swammer are Scum. I agree with Fruit that it could be a place to start. Because there was such a bandwagon it could have been a nice comfy place for a quiet Scum or two to slot in their vote. I don't see this as a good reason to vote for Fruit. Am I missing something Pleo? And Fruit, what's your reason for voting TLD? Is it just that they were on the Swammer wagon or is there something more?
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Oct 14, 2013 14:50:25 GMT -5
I will assume there's no point in lying about this since it can be so easily countered. Counters anyone? Idle either felt there was something special about you or that Scum would target you. I will have to go back to see if I can find what it was that made him believe that. Is there anything else besides the protection that makes you think you were targeted? If Idle made a mistake (or whatever - he really had no allegiance) and you're actually Scum or PFK then claiming with such certainty that Scum must have been trying to kill you is pretty convenient, no? I will however give you the benefit of the doubt for now, partially because I still feel Idle was a bit of an odd choice for a Scum kill (but still the simplest explanation). Yes, go back and read. I'm fairly certain both Idle and scum targeted me because of my soft claims: First off, I do have any powers this game. I am not making any other claims (explicit or implicit) at this time. Doh! Yes, I skipped the "not". I do not have any powers this game. I'm not claiming to be vanilla. I'm sure someone will complain about that, but I'll split hairs for now. I make such claims early in games in order to mess with scum. Sometimes I'm completely truthful, sometimes I'm outright lying, sometimes I'm misleading. Scum must decide to ignore me, and risk letting me act unimpeded, or they must do something about me, and risk wasting resources on me. It's really no different than the decisions they must make about every player, but a soft claim can be very distracting to some players and I take advantage of that. In this game, some players have inferred that I'm a mason. Whether or not that is correct, it seems plausible that players may act on it. Besides the Night kiss, which we have no reason to believe Idle was lying about, the fact that the claimed third-party was killed and no one else was is strong evidence that the scum kill failed. Scum have little incentive in the early game to kill a third-party protector who can target each player only once. They'd do much better trying to kill investigators or killers. But a pro-town killer may have targeted Idle, especially if they are a mandatory killer. Why risk killing a town power-role, when a non-town target is available? Killing a third-party still hurts us by advancing scum's victory condition, but the worst-case risk of killing a town investigator is avoided. (Of course, the best-case reward of killing scum is also avoided.) Why are you telling others to form opinions and not giving some yourself? vote fruitandgarbage for saying, not doing. Probably because I don't have any real suspicions yet beyond "Someone (or more likely someones) on the swammer wagon is scum, it's worth keeping that in mind as the day progresses". I'm not going to draw any solid conclusions about anyone specific based on no more evidence than the lynch of a vanilla town. We don't learn anything by swammer's flip, like I said; all we get is a place to start. That's kind of a silly reason to vote for me, frankly. Not silly at all. Every player needs to be taking stances about other players. Your request of others, while not doing the same yourself, looks to me like scum trying to avoid attention. Also, you cut off the second reason for my vote, which is very odd in itself. Can you give us some reasons for your vote? I really don't think it's unreasonable to express the possibility that one or more players who voted for Swammer are Scum. I agree with Fruit that it could be a place to start. Because there was such a bandwagon it could have been a nice comfy place for a quiet Scum or two to slot in their vote. I don't see this as a good reason to vote for Fruit. Am I missing something Pleo? I have no problem with looking for scum in the swammer voters. In fact, one of my votes is on patricia because of their vote on swammer. The problem I have with Fruit is that they said (to paraphrase) "lets look for scum here, you guys go first". That is not something that town looking for scum do. Town actually make cases. You may also be missing that I had two reasons for voting Fruit and they omitted the second when they quoted me.
|
|
|
Post by FruitAndGarbage on Oct 14, 2013 16:11:04 GMT -5
Also, you cut off the second reason for my vote, which is very odd in itself. Not particularly; that's a reasonable reason to be voting for me, so I don't really take issue with it. I just don't like the rest of your line of logic, so that's what I was addressing. To wit: The problem I have with Fruit is that they said (to paraphrase) "lets look for scum here, you guys go first". That is not something that town looking for scum do. Town actually make cases. That's... not even a remotely accurate paraphrase of what I said? I think it's worth keeping those people in mind as the game progresses, not that that's all we should be focusing on or indeed that I have any particular insights about them or that I want the conversation definitely steered that way. The entire point of my post basically boiled down to "We didn't learn much from that lynch, but at least we've got this"; what gets me right now is that aside from my admittedly-suspicious vote on Idle, your entire case on me seems to be a (deliberate or accidental, I can't guess without knowing your alignment) twisting of whatever I do or say to support a conclusion you've already come to. Which is not super helpful for town. Can you give us some reasons for your vote? If I was going to at this point in time, I would have.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Oct 14, 2013 18:58:05 GMT -5
Late-afternoon vote count:
FruitAndGarbage (1,1): Pleonast [8] patricia (1,1): Pleonast [8] thelastdays (1,1): FruitAndGarbage [12]
With these votes, FruitAndGarbage will be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on Oct 14, 2013 21:07:37 GMT -5
Bye bye Idle I'm not sure why Scum would choose to kill Idle, unless they didn't believe his claim and thought he might be Town or PFK. In re-reading his role PM he really was completely independent - it wouldn't matter which side won as long as everyone alive was protected. It was in his best interest to protect everyone, Scum and Town alike. So, who did Idle protect last night? Someone should have experienced some kinky forehead play. Ahem, what I was going to say when I said this initially was that the scum would likely kill Idle because they believe his role and think he's too pro-town, especially if he agrees to work with town....which he did.
|
|
|
Post by thelastdays on Oct 15, 2013 8:45:59 GMT -5
Last night I received a message that I was getting sleepy. I don't know what this means or what caused it, but if it's some sort of delayed kill or roleblock or something, it's worth it to town to know what the warning sign is. Why are you telling others to form opinions and not giving some yourself? [b*]vote fruitandgarbage[/b][/font] for saying, not doing.[/quote]Probably because I don't have any real suspicions yet beyond "Someone (or more likely someones) on the swammer wagon is scum, it's worth keeping that in mind as the day progresses". I'm not going to draw any solid conclusions about anyone specific based on no more evidence than the lynch of a vanilla town. We don't learn anything by swammer's flip, like I said; all we get is a place to start. That's kind of a silly reason to vote for me, frankly. [b*] vote:thelastdays[/b][/quote] So you think there's scum on the swammer wagon, then why is your vote only on me? This is a multivote game so why don't you pressure everyone who lynched swammi? And why do you think you're the only one who gets to vote without explaining their reasons? fruitandgarbage
|
|
|
Post by thelastdays on Oct 15, 2013 8:48:08 GMT -5
Somehow messed up the coding there
Unvote All Vote Fruitandgarbage
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Oct 15, 2013 9:30:49 GMT -5
At this point, I'm going to recast my votes from yesterDay.
Vote: patricia for her vote on swammerdami.
Vote: Colby11 for his unexplained (to my satisfaction, at least) foreknowledge of Pleonast's role.
Also
Vote: FruitAndGarbage
His overNight statement was devoid of any actual content; of course the previous Day's lynchee is "a reasonable place" to look for Scum. There was no reason to point that out, other than to say "look everyone, I'm helping!". Then he distances himself from that statement, saying he doesn't "have any real suspicions yet", but votes for someone on 'the list' anyway...though he gives us no reason for his vote, even when directly questioned about it.
|
|
|
Post by patricia on Oct 15, 2013 10:32:38 GMT -5
After his comments last night I was interested in what The last Day may have been up to last night so for now I will vote
Vote: The Last Days
if you think scum killed Idle as I do you should vote the same
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Oct 15, 2013 10:40:55 GMT -5
Good Morning Vote Count:
FruitAndGarbage (3,3): Pleonast [8]; thelastdays [20]; Suburban Plankton [21]
patricia (2,2): Pleonast [8]; Suburban Plankton [21] thelastdays (1,1): FruitAndGarbage [12]; patricia [22]
Colby11 (1,1): Suburban Plankton [21]
With these votes, FruitAndGarbage will be lynched.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Oct 15, 2013 10:47:37 GMT -5
Last night I received a message that I was getting sleepy. I don't know what this means or what caused it, but if it's some sort of delayed kill or roleblock or something, it's worth it to town to know what the warning sign is. Why are you telling others to form opinions and not giving some yourself? vote fruitandgarbage for saying, not doing. Probably because I don't have any real suspicions yet beyond "Someone (or more likely someones) on the swammer wagon is scum, it's worth keeping that in mind as the day progresses". I'm not going to draw any solid conclusions about anyone specific based on no more evidence than the lynch of a vanilla town. We don't learn anything by swammer's flip, like I said; all we get is a place to start. That's kind of a silly reason to vote for me, frankly. []vote:thelastdays[/font][/b][/quote] Vote: FruitAndGarbageYou don't have any real suspicians on anyone but you put a vote down without a reason. Your vote on TheLastDays is even worse than Pleo's vote on you and yet you pick him out for it. I think it could have been a Vig that killed Idle, there were a few people that didn't believe his claim and tried to twist what he said.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Oct 15, 2013 10:52:29 GMT -5
After his comments last night I was interested in what The last Day may have been up to last night so for now I will vote Vote: The Last Days if you think scum killed Idle as I do you should vote the same I think scum would have wanted Idle alive because he could also protect them, Idle didn't have any knowledge of who scum were.
|
|
|
Post by patricia on Oct 15, 2013 10:55:44 GMT -5
After his comments last night I was interested in what The last Day may have been up to last night so for now I will vote Vote: The Last Days if you think scum killed Idle as I do you should vote the same I think scum would have wanted Idle alive because he could also protect them, Idle didn't have any knowledge of who scum were. yes that is possible that why I waited a little while today before posting
|
|
|
Post by thelastdays on Oct 15, 2013 11:05:00 GMT -5
And who should I vote if I think scum didn't kill idle? You, Patricia?
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Oct 15, 2013 11:32:26 GMT -5
After his comments last night I was interested in what The last Day may have been up to last night so for now I will vote Vote: The Last Days if you think scum killed Idle as I do you should vote the same Can you explain more? Which comments in particular? How do you get from scum killed Idle to voting for Last? While I'm voting you for your swammer vote YesterDay, I'm very open to you making a good case here.
|
|
|
Post by patricia on Oct 15, 2013 11:33:07 GMT -5
And who should I vote if I think scum didn't kill idle? You, Patricia? Sure, but I didn't kill anyone last night
|
|