Day Two

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

Is this a Guv debate or discussion as to why you maintain suspicion against me for the second Day?

[RoOsh]

dotchan said:

Actually, now that I think about it, Roosh may have been attempting something similar with the post-by-post analysis, so a FoS on Roosh as well.

Wow, I got FOS'ed for giving a Post Analysis. Gee, sorry for trying to spur activity, discussions, and debates, Dotchan. I didn't know FACTS were so suspicious. Don't Forget to FOS Capt. Klutz then for giving a Post-by-Post for Kat as well.

Honestly, that's just terrible. If it was anyone else, I'd yell at them, but you... you always find a new way to FOS me every game, so at this point I look at it as a badge of honor. Because this one is just terrible. I get a FOS for listing out every post that HockeyMonkey has made? To quote my fav. Comic- Mitch Hedberg: "Sorry for the Convenience...."

Maybe instead of FOSing me, you could go analyze some Data for CatinaSuit or Zuma, and share that with the rest of us, huh?
Or do you not like information to be spread through out the town?
Sheesh... FOSed for a post-by-post analysis? I didn't even really analyze WHY she died, I merely listed out every post she made for easy reference. NOTE My quote even from there: "Why she died? Well, I have no idea, but I just wanted to collect all her Posts for easy reference, and since I'm busy the rest of the week, I'm hoping others can do the same for Zuma, Cat, and Kat."

I have a busy schedule this week, so I can't check in except every few hours to post and quickly see what's going on, That's why I wanted people to do these analysis's, so that people like me can quickly read through the posts, and get an idea of each player, and who they interacted with before dying, AND so that it's easier to look up their posts in the future, as it's a handy reference tool. Why you dislike that convenience, I'm not sure, except that it seems you Don't want me to have easy access to Data. Which I dislike.
So BAD, Dotchan! BAD!

Anyways, as stated above and since Pygmy did want votes to be out there, I'll make mine official for now:
Vote Pleonast
Because he is the most suspicious person to me currently, but I reserve the right to change my vote based on new data, and when the others on my FOS list start posting information.
But at least my vote's up there publicly and not just a smudge.

[Pollux Oil]

roosh said:

Atarus- Why are you suspicious of Mhaye again? I read over Hockey's Posts last night, and she mentioned your accusations as seeming sound, but then she never voted for him. And then she ended up dead. So I'd like to hear your ideas further actually.

Basically, the reasoning behind my vote for mhaye was that he produced information about the Governor dilemma around 48 hours after the Governor had already been crowned. That by itself wasn't bad, but all the information he presented against Pleonast's plan was reasons why we shouldn't enact it on Day 1. Considering the Day 1 Governor was already elected, the info was useless. I find trying to appear helpful without actually helping at all is a viable scum tactic, and so that's was my case against mhaye. However, he hasn't really done anything other than that one post, but sometimes one post is enough. *shrug*

Re-reading toDay, I feel like there's something on the tip of my brain. Like the entire Day just feels off for some reason. Is there something in the water?

Something about sinjin's Pleonast vote tinged my scumdar. I honestly cannot say why, though, especially since I do agree with the fact that Pleonast's logic is circular and faulty. I'm defaulting to the "it's just something about the tone" argument, and I hate myself for doing it, but something is just...odd.

Death By Irony...this isn't scummy, but I'd like to point out that I've gotten to the point where I just ignore your FOSes. You hand them out like candy, I think nearly every post you made so far toDay had a FOS in it. And when that happens...it's coming across to me like you find everyone suspicious and that doesn't help. Heh.

I think I'm going to Vote Diomedes for now. His erratic behavior in terms of voting on Day was what originally tweaked me. At one point he switched his vote to zuma without ever really giving a reason, and basically didn't provide any information aside from expressing how much he really wanted to lynch both Pleonast and NAF. Mhaye's on the backburner, and I'll probably change my vote if Dio gets around to letting us know what's in the magic bag. However, I might keep my vote here if the magic bag contents are bitter.

[Tragic]

I'd say that I would have to FoS on Pleo simply because there was so much lacking in the system he presented earlier. It raised my eyebrows the second I read it. And maybe that wasn't the intention or maybe it was just sloppiness but if you're going to post marks against others in the game you've got to present proper reasons why. Because the rest of us don't share your gut instinct. I'm not yet going to vote him over a potential screw up but I'm watching you.. (+) Please be more thorough if you're going to present any type of analysis.

[Captain Klutz]

Some people I'm suspicious of


Pleonast
for his odd method of determining his Day 2 vote, which is based on a faulty premise and is flawed in the execution. Okay, it's still only Day 2, but it's not really much different to simply picking some low post-count players at random. Although I'm thinking this is more "poor idea" than scummy.

Zeriel
I'm still a bit concerned about his grammar slip on Day 1

Diomedes
He was a bit all over the place on Day 1, and I didn't like his comment in Day 1.402 where he said that one of NAF and Pleo has to be lying.

Death By Irony
Day 1.266 made a silly vote for zuma "for giving me a headache". This vote was later removed, but reinstated in 1.492 with no justification.


I'm close to voting for Diomedes, but I'll wait until he reveals the contents of his magic bag.

In the meantime, vote Death By Irony

[Drain Bead]

I don't really have a strong feeling, but my strong feelings have gotten me absolutely nowhere so far this game.

Vote Diomedes. The potential exists for that vote to be lifted once the contents of the magic bag are revealed, but right now I'm voting for him for all the reasons I stated in my last post. It's one thing to lurk, and then quite another to participate and then duck into the shadows once you start to get too much attention.

[storyteller0910]

PAGE FOUR VOTE COUNT

Pleonast (4) - Santo Rugger, diggitcamara, sinjin, Roosh
Diomedes (2) - drainbead, atarus
Death by Irony (1) - Captain Klutz
kassia (1) - NAF1138
mhaye (1) - Pleonast

Nine votes have been cast. The Day will end in approximately 56 hours, at 5:00PM EST on Thursday, November 29.

[Pleonast]

cometothedarkside said:

I'd also like your thoughts on whether or not you think the contents of your claim and Pleo's claim are in any way mutually exclusive, and if so, to what degree?

Pleo: Same question to you regarding NAF.

I answered this on Day One.

pleonast said:

NAF's role claim seems believable to me because it reassures me that my role is more useful than I first thought. Because my bomb is certain to destroy its target. I didn't mention that in my role claim, because I didn't think it remarkable information.

But with this new information, my role is probably a supplement to an actual Vig role, if it can't be certain of killing its target. The slowness and one-off-ness of my bomb makes more sense in terms of game balance. My original view was that my role wasn't much more useful than a vanilla colonist, but it's looking now that a one-off, certain Night-kill might actually be very useful.

I'm not sure why some players think NAF and my role claims are somehow contradictory.

Since a couple players have asked to see reasoning behind my +/- scores, I'll go into more detail. I didn't originally because I didn't want to be accused of continuing old, fruitless arguments.

I reread the Day One posts of the six players on my short list. I list the points I feel are important and give a +/- score based on how suspicious I feel each point is. So, yes, this is entirely subjective (it's not like we have much solid information to go on yet), but I don't see how it's "circular logic".

kassia, 10 posts

• 49: Claims newbie status. (0) Neither suspicious nor not, but worth mentioning.
• 90: Votes randomly for Governor. (+1) Unaccountable votes don't help the Colony determine why someone voted.
• 296: Accuses me of preventing the development of alternatives, yet has no ideas herself. (+1) If she had broached an idea that was lost in clutter, she'd have a point. This seems more like a command to shut up.
• 306: Complains about that too much baggage and knowledge from previous games is making it hard for her. (-1) Too many players are bringing up past alignments and supposed scum tells. Each game needs to start from a blank slate.
• 440: Willing to vote for me even if I'm telling the truth because she doesn't think the role is useful. (+1) We're looking to electrocute Replicants, not Colonists with powers we don't like.

Total +2.

diggitcamara, 6 posts

• 24: Disagreement with me about effectiveness of my Governor plan. (0) Honest disagreement is not an indication of alignment.
• 31: Disagreement with me about time available for deciding electrocution. (+1) Manifestly false statements. Read the Basic Rules: we'd have all of the regular time of Day N, all of Night N, and the bonus 24 hours of Day N+1 to choose the electrocutee for Day N+1. Yes, we'd get some information in the middle of the time, but that wouldn't mean our discussions were worhtless (look how much carry-over we're getting on Day Two from Day One).
• 96: Votes Rugger for Governor because of alignments in previous games (or, if he's kidding, no discernible reason). (+1) An unaccountable vote which makes it difficult for us to determine his alignment.
• 384: Votes for me because he doesn't believe my role claim. (0) A good reason to vote for someone, but doesn't really explain why he doesn't believe the claim.

Total +2.

Captain Klutz, 10 posts

• 204: Suspicious of zeriel and myself because of how we refer to Colonists. (+1) His suspicion boils down to a I don't like their grammar style. Not a useful way to determine alignment.
• 245: Critique of NAF's voting tactic. (-1) Good in-depth analysis. The Colony needs more posts like this.
• 247: Brings up possibility of pro-Colonist Replicants based on reading of color text. (-1) Color text is important and we can't ignore it.
• 377: Votes for zeriel because of grammar suspicions. (0) Not a great reason to vote for someone, but it's accountable.

Total -1.

mhaye, 16 posts

• 9: Dislikes my Governor plan. (0) Honest disagreement.
• 130: Supports Rugger's push for me to be Governor. Dislikes NAF's voting tactic. (+1) Rugger's vote for me as Governor was a ploy and support for it doesn't looks suspicious.
• 285: Shows misunderstanding of my Governor tactic (point iii). Shows misunderstanding of NAF's voting tactic (doesn't advocate wide use). (+2) His (iii) is manifestly false: we'd have all of the Night plus the bonus 24 hours to absorb the results of the electrocution. Attacks NAF's tactic based on how it'd work if many players used it, even though NAF explicitly stated he didn't advocate anyone else use it.
• 316: Votes zeriel for grammar and advocates electrocuting Cat if zeriel turns out scum. (+1) A classic let's you and him fight setup. Linking one player's alignment to another's is very suspicious.
• 340: Understands my Governor vote. (-1) Asking for clarification, and then reevaluating his opinion based on the clarification shows a willingness to approach the game unbiased.

Total +3.

Hal Briston, 1 post

• 101: Calls NAF's voting tactic scummy because it's more likely to kill a Colonist. Votes for NAF. (0) Not great reasoning, but he's accountable.

Total 0.

atarus, 14 posts

• 15: Doesn't like my Governor tactic. Predicts long-lasting argument that helps scum. (-1) Expresses honest disagreement and then predicts how scum could use it to their advantage. Proves to be prescient.
• 27: Modifies my Governor tactic to remove WIFOM without costing time. (-1) Takes an idea he doesn't like and improves it instead of throwing suspicion around.
• 151: Votes Rugger for Governor because of alignments in past games. (+1) Past alignment has no bearing on current alignment.
• 228: Warns about "Bad Idea Trap". (-1) Again, prescience.
• 231: Slightly suspicious of me because I first expressed my anti-Governor opinions before the game started. (+1) Bringing in what happened before the game has no impact on a player's current alignment.
• Votes mhaye because of his arguments against me. (0) A valid vote. I should probable score it more unsuspicious, but I may be biased.
• 439: Defends me with reasoning. (-1) Colonists should use reasoning.
• 461, 471: Speaks against over-zealous lynch-mob against verbal players. (-1) Going after verbal players is a great way to discourage posts.
• 511: Suspicious of those suggesting recruitment is a possibility. (-1) The mod might spring surprises, but breaking a flatly stated rule would be game-breaking.

Total -4.

[NAF1138]

cometothedarkside said:

NAF - so 2 of my original 3 problems with your list are still outstanding.

Are you asking me to address these issues again...or are you just commenting? If you are asking me to readdress the issues, would you mind restating the questions, because I thought I covered all your issues last time.

cometothedarkside said:

Regarding the distribution of killing factions, I just want to be clear about the many different possibilities that I think everyone should carry around until given enough justification for process of elimination, which you should then share with the class. Three killing factions is but one of the possibilities, and none have been ruled out, imho.

Would you be happier if I removed the word faction from the sentence? If not I will be more then happy to put in a one line description that you have written. This goes for anyone. I am keeping this list for the town, not for myself. So if anyone wants to add anything, or reword anything, let me know and I will update my word file.

cometothedarkside said:

I'd also like your thoughts on whether or not you think the contents of your claim and Pleo's claim are in any way mutually exclusive, and if so, to what degree?

I addressed this on Day 1. I voted for Pleo when it was pointed out that his role and mine seem to conflict. But upon reflection they don't really conflict, they just hint at bad design. And since I don't know the whole picture of the design and since Pleo has since made a clarifying remark that turns his claim away from bad design and towards elaboratly complicated design (which seems to be in keeping with how the roles have been developed even if you only use Kat's role as a judge) I feel that a comparison of our claims is a bad basis to vote for Pleo.

I have not seen Pleo do anything that I feel is anti town yet. IF he is scum, we will catch him eventually. He is posting too much for us to not.

My question to the town (and specifically to the people voting for Pleo) is, what has he done that is anti town. Having an idea that the town at large thinks is bad is not scummy. Defending an idea that the town at large thinks is bad is also...NOT scummy. If you disagree you better be able to tell me why, because I can not think of a single pro replicant reason to defend an idea that is going to draw so much attention to you, regardless of how good or bad the idea is.
.
Repeatedly harping on a single player for having an idea that the town at large thinks is bad...that's scummy.

[Merestil Haye]

atarus said:

Basically, the reasoning behind my vote for mhaye was that he produced information about the Governor dilemma around 48 hours after the Governor had already been crowned. That by itself wasn't bad, but all the information he presented against Pleonast's plan was reasons why we shouldn't enact it on Day 1. Considering the Day 1 Governor was already elected, the info was useless. I find trying to appear helpful without actually helping at all is a viable scum tactic, and so that's was my case against mhaye. However, he hasn't really done anything other than that one post, but sometimes one post is enough. *shrug*

My objections don't just apply to Day 1. They apply to any Dawn where we wake to find the Governor killed having previously decided to adopt the plan after all. Remembering that we're allowed to discuss issues at Night, that could happen as soon as Dawn Tomorrow.

They were secondary. I wouldn't have posted them had I not been posting something else anyway, and your battening on to them just makes me a little frustrated. Still, that kind of frustration is part of the game, and in a day or so I'll look back and grin at it, so don't be too worried.

[Santo Rugger]

naf1138 said:

<snip>
My question to the town (and specifically to the people voting for Pleo) is, what has he done that is anti town. Having an idea that the town at large thinks is bad is not scummy. Defending an idea that the town at large thinks is bad is also...NOT scummy.<snip>

- His Guv idea is horrible. He says he's abandoned it. He hasn't. In fact, he's still supporting it on this page. There is very much less time to deal with information garnered from lynches, yet he still says, concerning diggit:

31: Disagreement with me about time available for deciding electrocution. (+1) Manifestly false statements. Read the Basic Rules: we'd have all of the regular time of Day N, all of Night N, and the bonus 24 hours of Day N+1 to choose the electrocutee for Day N+1. Yes, we'd get some information in the middle of the time, but that wouldn't mean our discussions were worhtless (look how much carry-over we're getting on Day Two from Day One).

He's refusing to accept the fact that the only time we really get is the 24 bonus hours of Day N+1, for several reasons. People in consideration might get Night killed (vig or scum). It'd only give us 24 hours to digest information from revealed Morning alignments. While NAF is correct that backing a bad idea is not scummy, per se, IMHO, backing a bad idea on faulty logic, and then saying that those opposing said logic are scummy for pointing it out, even going so far as to accuse them of making "manifestly false" statements.

Last night I thought there was something wrong with the +/- system, even though I like it in theory (kind of like Communism). Even though scum may or may not have plenty of + marks, they'd likely have as many, if not more, - marks. Scum try very hard to come up with pro town ideas to gain creed. A very concerted effort is made to look pro town. Although I think the premise of the system is good, unfortunately, it's not as simple as that.

Combining these two thoughts, yet another problem I have is that several points are dinged for simply disagreeing with Pleo's Bad Idea. How does that make sense?

<snip> I can not think of a single pro replicant reason to defend an idea that is going to draw so much attention to you, regardless of how good or bad the idea is.

I can think of two. One is red. The other is white.

[Santo Rugger]

Aww, shit. Fixy fixy linky linky?

[Pleonast]

pygmyrugger said:

Combining these two thoughts, yet another problem I have is that several points are dinged for simply disagreeing with Pleo's Bad Idea.

What are you referring to?

I didn't give scummy scores to diggit, mhaye, or atarus for disliking my tactic. I did give scummy scores to diggit and mhaye for making false statements about my tactic. Whether or not you like my plan, mischaracterizing it while throwing suspicion is a scummy tactic.

And now you are mischaracterizing what I said. Do you think people won't go back and read what I actually wrote?

[Merestil Haye]

Pleo.

At the time I wrote D1.285, I believed that we could not discuss the Game at night. Hence the statement that we had only the first 24 hours of the Day.

Since we can strategise at Night, that part at least of my objection was in error. It does not, however, change my fundamental loathing of the idea.

[kassia]

So let me get this straight -

pleonast said:

I want to make a first cut on who to vote for. I think scum are less likely to vote for Colonists on a Day One vote then Colonists are. Colonists have no real information to go on and so vote essentially randomly.

Replicants may have a bias against voting for Colonists on Day One, since those voting to kill a Colonist are likely to come under suspicion. Voting for another scum is safer. Since we don't have any confirmed scum, I'll cast my first set of suspicion against those who did not vote for a now-confirmed Colonist.

And in post 2.59: I believe that scum are less likely to vote for Colonists on Day One and Colonists more likely.

OK, so let's (for the sake of argument) say I am scum, then on Day One:

1. It is less likely for me to vote for a Colonist.
2. It is safer for me to vote for another scum.
3. I voted for Pleo.

Therefore, IF I am scum, than it is very likely that Pleo is also scum.

So now I have to ask, if Pleo is scum, why would he create a circular argument like this that would inevitably lead back to himself?

Is he scum and trying to point to other players as suspicious but it's back-firing on him?
Is he scum and being extremely prolific with bad ideas and faulty logic in order to distract everyone and just get us all going around in circles?
Or is he exactly what he claims to be, but just creating some really messed up arguments and voting strategies?

As much as I want to vote for Pleo because I just don't like ANYTHING he has to say...I can't do it right now. I just can't imagine a scum being stupid enough to create such an easy trail to follow back to themselves.

And since that eliminates my top choice - I'm going to have to take a look back at things and see if anybody else really stands out.

[Santo Rugger]

Sorry about the formating in advance, I hope this makes sense.

Pleo, I hope people read your posts carefully, specifically the +/- ones, and can point out to me from a third person's perspective how grand and great they are, because I'm simply not seeing it.

pleonast said:

<snip>

kassia<snip>

• 90: Votes randomly for Governor. (+1)

What's wrong with that?

• 296: Accuses me of preventing the development of alternatives, yet has no ideas herself. (+1)

Egocentric

• 440: Willing to vote for me even if I'm telling the truth because she doesn't think the role is useful. (+1)

Total +2.

Egocentric. I've never thought Night killing roles, regardless of alignment, in general, benefit town more than scum.

diggitcamara

• 31: Disagreement with me about time available for deciding electrocution. (+1)

But you're WRONG.

Captain Klutz

• 204: Suspicious of zeriel and myself because of how we refer to Colonists. (+1)

Egocentric. I see no problem with this, as I'm suspicious of both of you.

• 377: Votes for zeriel because of grammar suspicions. (0) Total -1.

Why is voting for zeriel okay, but finding him suspicious not?

mhaye

• 9: Dislikes my Governor plan. (0)
  

This should be -1

• 130: Supports Rugger's push for me to be Governor. Dislikes NAF's voting tactic. (+1)
• 285: Shows misunderstanding of my Governor tactic (point iii). Shows misunderstanding of NAF's voting tactic (doesn't advocate wide use). (+2)

I don't really get this???

Finally, concerning supposedly mischaracterizing your posts, if you substitute "Bad Idea" for "Bad Ideas", I think my point still stands.

[Santo Rugger]

cometothedarkside said:

Is this a Guv debate or discussion as to why you maintain suspicion against me for the second Day?

IM(not so)HO, one of my best scum qualities was being able to talk my way out of some slip up, or out of some logic I tried to introduce to the town that somehow backfired or caught up with me. I'm not going to simply drop my suspicion because it's a new Day. I learned that lesson the not-so-hard way.

[Santo Rugger]

kassia said:

<snip>I just can't imagine a scum being stupid enough to create such an easy trail to follow back to themselves.<snip>

So you're saying he's a stupid townie? That's not very nice. He may have some Bad Ideas, but that doesn't make him stupid.

[kassia]

:sigh:

No Governor, I didn't say he is a stupid townie. I said I don't think he is a stupid scum. Two very different statements.

[storyteller0910]

Good grief, Santo, you want me to fix those? Did you have any Sanskrit you needed translated, while I'm at it? Yowza!

OK, here goes.

[Santo Rugger]

kassia said:

:sigh:

No Governor, I didn't say he is a stupid townie. I said I don't think he is a stupid scum. Two very different statements.

I understand that. And, admittedly, I was being a jackass. But, my point is, why do you think that that's something scum would have to be stupid to do, but not the parallel?

storyteller0910 said:

Good grief, Santo, you want me to fix those? Did you have any Sanskrit you needed translated, while I'm at it? Yowza!

OK, here goes.

Thanks!

[kassia]

pygmyrugger said:

kassia said:

:sigh:

No Governor, I didn't say he is a stupid townie. I said I don't think he is a stupid scum. Two very different statements.

I understand that. And, admittedly, I was being a jackass. But, my point is, why do you think that that's something scum would have to be stupid to do, but not the parallel?

umm...because I didn't want to be mean and call him stupid? ;D

What I meant is that I think Pleo is too smart and too good at this game to be scum and then make a mistake that would essentially be a trail of breadcrumbs leading us all right to him.

[Santo Rugger]

kassia said:

umm...because I didn't want to be mean and call him stupid? ;D

What I meant is that I think Pleo is too smart and too good at this game to be scum and then make a mistake that would essentially be a trail of breadcrumbs leading us all right to him.

I'm asking you to address the parallel. Why would a townie make that "mistake".

***
Seperate thought
***

This is another one I've been thinking of since last night. Pleo not considering himself confirmed for the purposes of explaining a point to the masses is one thing. However, using it to come up with a short list, his short list, with a method that nobody else is using, doesn't strike me as necessitating transparency.

[Death By Irony]

roosh said:

Wow, I got FOS'ed for giving a Post Analysis. Gee, sorry for trying to spur activity, discussions, and debates, Dotchan. I didn't know FACTS were so suspicious. Don't Forget to FOS Capt. Klutz then for giving a Post-by-Post for Kat as well.

I did FoS Captain Klutz.

I'm not FoSing you for providing data - the posts were already there for everybody to read. I just thought your post analysis was a backhanded way of asking the "why so-and-so died" question. It was Day One, two of the dead were Vanilla, and Kat the Neuromancer didn't have any investigation results to breadcrumb. Other than their insight, which may or may not be correct, there's not much more to gain there.

(And even if there were breadcrumbs, doesn't anybody remember how poor MadtheSwine got lynched in M5 when the players tried to interpret Hal Briston's tea leaves?)

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

I don't really have an issue with Pleo's personal voting equations. I don't have a problem with NAF's list of "facts", aside from how some of the items were originally classified as "fact", but in light of the subsequent clarifications I don't see any leads to chase there either. I also don't necessarily buy into the theory that the claims of Pleo and NAF are necessarily mutually exclusive. And for as much grief as I've been giving Santo, his suspicion of me and our differing views on the Gov role do not warrant more than observation at this point.

At this point, those who I've been engaged with the most seem reasonably brainstormy, defensive, hostile, wary and paranoid. Like we're all circling the available information, trying to find a angle to get a good grip, while hissing and posturing at each other.

That gut reaction might change, but it is how I'm reading that area of the playing field right now.

To assuage those eager for me to vote, I could throw out a vote for Dio right now and be happy with it, but I'm going to hold my vote for a bit longer.

Interesting things that Dio has posted (in chronological order):

There's no reason whatsoever to be governor: if you're a townie, you're essentially putting a gigantic bull's eye on your chest for the mafia to night-kill you (as they'll want to eventually replace you). If you're mafia, eventually the town will raise askance as to why you're not being killed. And, of course, there's the whole logical back and forth that that will entail, with the mafia perhaps letting a citizen hold the governorship in order to induce a town-lynch.

On the other hand, Governor lets an otherwise vanilla townie have something to do in the game other than toss his votes around willy-nilly.

As has already been stated, a pro-Colony power role who could be protected or self-protect while somehow managing not to gain suspicion (either by pinging scumdars or simply staying alive) could be a boon for town. Unlikely, yes, but possible and not something to be dismissed out of hand. He does eventually go on to change his tune, but this first reaction to the Gov role is worth noting, imho.

I also don't think that vanilla Colonists are by default disposable or that their votes are tossed around any differently than anyone else's votes. Vanillas can be less-painful to lose than power roles, but skill level is the great equalizer.

On preview: Yeah. so if I'm wrong, and you're the pro-town role, I'm sorry. Both roles seem pretty outlandish from where I'm sitting.

This is a brand new closed game and no deaths had yet occurred when he made this statement. Healthy skepticism? Maybe...but it seems a bit too much on the dismissive side to me.

Ditto on that, Pygmy.

"Me too" smears are not my favorite things, especially when I'm the object of them.

I don't think my analyses will make or break the game. But I don't want them influencing scum night actions or discussions, on the off hand that I'm spot-on. I'm not a big fan of night-discussion, I think.

This is the first game I've played where strategizing at Night is kosher. At the most basic of WIFOM levels, considering that Night discussion has historically been scum territory, discouraging the use of Night discussion would be low-hanging fruit for scum to try for. At the Bastard-Mod WIFOM level, story added "Night discussion for all" for a reason. I think it is more likely for story to have done this for pro-town balancing, or just to fuck with everyone's heads. I doubt that he added the rule for pro-scum balancing. This all boils down to my perception being that it is an opportunity to be (carefully) taken advantage of, as opposed to being willfully ignored out of fear. And as I said previously, Night discussion is digested (and could potentially impact) not just the scum, but the decisions and analyses of Colonists/powers as well.

Which brings us to his not-so-insta-vote that he has yet to share/explain. Considering the possibility that something could indeed happen overNight (aside from Night kills) that would greatly impact things, we're again back to the willful ignorance bit. Formulating insta-votes in such a matter could very well be anti-town, depending on the outcomes of the Night. Saying that you're formulating an insta-vote, strikes me as being an excuse to ignore the Nights without accountability. Dio's not delivering on his promised insta-vote, or how/why things may have changed due to Night deaths, is the suspicious icing in the cake.

[Pleonast]

Uh, where is everyone? The following seven players have two or fewer posts toDay: atarus, Captain Klutz, Diomedes, Hal Briston, Yattara, zeriel, zuma v2. While we still have two days left, rushed thinking and votes is not a good way to choosing who to electrocute.

mhaye said:

At the time I wrote D1.285, I believed that we could not discuss the Game at night. Hence the statement that we had only the first 24 hours of the Day.
Since we can strategise at Night, that part at least of my objection was in error. It does not, however, change my fundamental loathing of the idea.

Ok, that makes your objection more sensible. I withdraw my suspicion on that particular point. That leaves you at the same suspicion score as kassia and diggit. If my vote remains a singleton on you, I will likely move it to one of them before the end of the day.

[Pollux Oil]

Okay, so I just had an epiphany of sorts, and it's 'cause of the following two quotes.

cometothedarkside said:

At this point, those who I've been engaged with the most seem reasonably brainstormy, defensive, hostile, wary and paranoid. Like we're all circling the available information, trying to find a angle to get a good grip, while hissing and posturing at each other.

This expresses that strange feeling of "something in the water" that I referenced in my previous post. It made a light bulb appear over my head and go "yeaaaah, that's what I'm seeing toDay."

pleonast said:

Uh, where is everyone? The following seven players have two or fewer posts toDay: atarus, Captain Klutz, Diomedes, Hal Briston, Yattara, zeriel, zuma v2. While we still have two days left, rushed thinking and votes is not a good way to choosing who to electrocute.

So I thought to myself, why have I only posted two times toDay? The reason is linked with Cookies' post: simply put there isn't any real "new" information for me to post replies to. Everybody is circling and recircling all the same debates and information, and nothing new is being put on the table, really. I can re-read the entire Day so far and just feel like I wasted X amount of time because I didn't process anything new.

And why is that? Pleonast suffocation, that's why! Everybody is Hooked On Pleonast. Or at least, most everybody that is verbose and loquacious. Nearly every other post involves referencing Pleo somehow. Either somebody doesn't like his plan. Or somebody else doesn't like his other plan. Or somebody thinks that people that are suspicious of Pleonast are suspicious. Of course, Pleonast himself posts a lot and gives his opinions and won't back down from his opinions, which is another driving reason.

(I'm exaggerating a little, but most of the big arguments/discussions revolve around Pleo, or at least that's how it sticks in my mind after I'm done doing a read-through.)

Pleonast may or may not be scum. However, I think we as a town should try and look to see who's trying to keep the discussion focused on just Pleonast. If Pleo is town, we're basically wasting a full Day on discussing him...and just him. And when we go back and analyze toDay in the future, we'll have mostly Pleocentric information to analyze.

[storyteller0910]

Well, as no one has voted since the last one, a new vote count would be superfluous at this point. Day ends in 48 hours and 15 minutes. Off to rehearsal!

[Santo Rugger]

cometothedarkside said:

<snip>I could throw out a vote for Dio right now and be happy with it, but I'm going to hold my vote for a bit longer.<snip>

Underlining mine.

Why?

[episodeofblonde]

atarus said:

(I'm exaggerating a little, but most of the big arguments/discussions revolve around Pleo, or at least that's how it sticks in my mind after I'm done doing a read-through.)

Pleonast may or may not be scum. However, I think we as a town should try and look to see who's trying to keep the discussion focused on just Pleonast. If Pleo is town, we're basically wasting a full Day on discussing him...and just him. And when we go back and analyze toDay in the future, we'll have mostly Pleocentric information to analyze.

I agree with this. I took my vote off Pleo yesterday after he claimed, and though I am not totally convinced by the claim, I find persuasive the fact that if he is scum he has sure provided us with a lot of material to deal with. I don't want to vote for Pleo now, as I don't feel the situation has really changed since yesterday, though I do wish Pleo would not continue to hope that his Bad Idea(s) could live again. I do think his power could be easily used in an anti-town way and I support his being kept in everyone's sights. But it is odd that most all discussion of suspicious behaviour has involved Pleo somehow or other.

If Dio does not appear to reveal his magic bag, and unless something else strange happens, I will probably be voting for him tomorrow. His sudden silence is very suspicious. I am also suspicious of everyone who has not posted very much at all, especially over two Days.