|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jan 19, 2014 12:29:47 GMT -5
my bad. i enjoy voting Texcat. force of habit. ;-)
Unvote: Texcat [uote]Chameleon[/b][/color]
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jan 19, 2014 12:30:58 GMT -5
let's do that again. Vote: Chameleon
|
|
|
Post by FruitAndGarbage on Jan 19, 2014 14:30:03 GMT -5
In response to texcat, my preferred colors are:
Blue for votes and investigations
Red for unvotes and uninvestigations
Green for antivotes and anti-investigations
Orange for unantivotes and unanti-investigations
But none of that is really necessary; as long as all of the above are in some color, I'll figure out what you mean. I try not to be too picky of a parser as a mod (which is why I'm assuming Chameleon meant to uninvestigate Silver Jan rather than anti-investigate her). I'm not a robot, why act like one? Which brings us to:
Votes: Paranoia [1]: Swammerdami (16), gnarlycharlie (25) Storyteller0910 [1]: texcat (17) gnarlycharlie [1]: Paranoia (24) Chameleon [1]: gnarlycharlie (30) texcat [0]: gnarlycharlie (26)
Investigations: Meeko [7]: Captain Klutz (9), Meeko (-11), Silver Jan (12), Swammerdami (16), texcat (17), patricia (18), dizzymrslizzy (20), Paranoia (24), Chameleon (29) Captain Klutz [1]: Meeko (11) Paranoia [1]: gnarlycharlie (25) Silver Jan [0]: Chameleon (13)
With these votes, no player will be lynched and Meeko will be investigated. Day two ends in 80 hours on January 22nd.
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on Jan 19, 2014 16:22:36 GMT -5
Investigate Meeko
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jan 19, 2014 19:05:11 GMT -5
Color worked bold not so much lol Mod to you have preferred colors of Investigate and uninvestigated? First Gnarly quoted Chameleon and votes me, then the mod answers the question that Patricia asked, but quotes me as having asked it.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on Jan 19, 2014 19:22:23 GMT -5
No one has more than one Lynch vote; we need to develop some sort of case on someone! Story was first to reveal his subsidiary win condition; I think it's almost impossible that he's Scum -- how would he know to make such a claim? Anti-vote Storyteller0910If we can't think of anyone else to Lynch, there's always Meeko! However to Lynch him we'd want to reverse the huge Investigate-Meeko momentum or else waste an Investigation. I'll push toward that: Uninvestigate MeekoAnti-investigate MeekoInvestigate Paranoia
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Jan 19, 2014 19:53:48 GMT -5
No one has more than one Lynch vote; we need to develop some sort of case on someone! Story was first to reveal his subsidiary win condition; I think it's almost impossible that he's Scum -- how would he know to make such a claim? Anti-vote Storyteller0910If we can't think of anyone else to Lynch, there's always Meeko! However to Lynch him we'd want to reverse the huge Investigate-Meeko momentum or else waste an Investigation. I'll push toward that: Uninvestigate MeekoAnti-investigate MeekoInvestigate ParanoiaI'd prefer Gnarly today and keep the investigation on meeko, but I *guess* if we end up swinging that way I wouldn't mind lynching Meeko? I unno. I just don't like his insistence on treating Guiri's day one vote 'seriously' and then making the excuse that he hadn't seen anything better to vote on and made no attempts at poking/proding for better vote spots. Millage may vary but I feel like that's a good place to start if we assume there's scum on Guiri's wagon, which is p. likely I think.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jan 19, 2014 22:23:32 GMT -5
No one has more than one Lynch vote; we need to develop some sort of case on someone! Story was first to reveal his subsidiary win condition; I think it's almost impossible that he's Scum -- how would he know to make such a claim? Anti-vote Storyteller0910If we can't think of anyone else to Lynch, there's always Meeko! However to Lynch him we'd want to reverse the huge Investigate-Meeko momentum or else waste an Investigation. I'll push toward that: Uninvestigate MeekoAnti-investigate MeekoInvestigate ParanoiaBoth your vote and your investigate are now on Para? That doesn't seem right. I still don't like story's disappearing act and his non-vote. I don't see us turning the meeko investigation around. Unvote: storyteller Vote: gnarlycharlie I am not Chameleon and I am not Patricia. I think scum gnarly doesn't care which townie he starts a bandwagon on.
|
|
|
Post by FruitAndGarbage on Jan 19, 2014 23:28:28 GMT -5
Turns out your role is secretly Nexus, and it even works on things other than night powers. Like, votes, and who said what. Even after I'd already written this reply and was tallying votals, I still nearly put you down as patricia on gnarlycharlie's line.
Sorry for the confusion!
Votes: gnarlycharlie [2]: Paranoia (24), texcat (37) Paranoia [1]: Swammerdami (16), gnarlycharlie (25) Chameleon [1]: gnarlycharlie (30) texcat [0]: gnarlycharlie (26) storyteller0910 [-1]: texcat (17), Swammerdami (-35)
Investigations: Meeko [6]: Captain Klutz (9), Meeko (-11), Silver Jan (12), Swammerdami (16), texcat (17), patricia (18), dizzymrslizzy (20), Paranoia (24), Chameleon (29), Mahaloth (33), Swammerdami (-35) Paranoia [2]: gnarlycharlie (25), Swammerdami (35) Captain Klutz [1]: Meeko (11) Silver Jan [0]: Chameleon (13)
With these votes, gnarlycharlie will be lynched and Meeko will be investigated. Day two ends in 71 hours on January 22nd.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jan 19, 2014 23:39:54 GMT -5
No one has more than one Lynch vote; we need to develop some sort of case on someone! Story was first to reveal his subsidiary win condition; I think it's almost impossible that he's Scum -- how would he know to make such a claim? Anti-vote Storyteller0910If we can't think of anyone else to Lynch, there's always Meeko! However to Lynch him we'd want to reverse the huge Investigate-Meeko momentum or else waste an Investigation. I'll push toward that: Uninvestigate MeekoAnti-investigate MeekoInvestigate ParanoiaBoth your vote and your investigate are now on Para? That doesn't seem right. I still don't like story's disappearing act and his non-vote. I don't see us turning the meeko investigation around. Unvote: storyteller Vote: gnarlycharlie  I am not Chameleon and I am not Patricia.  I think scum gnarly doesn't care which townie he starts a bandwagon on. that's just silly. i didn't mistake you for Patricia. the mod did. you're making it bigger than it is. seems like it's you who wants to lynch anyone.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jan 19, 2014 23:46:02 GMT -5
the more i think about it the more i don't like it your reasoning. i realized that you used the word bandwagon when Chameleon and you had no other votes when i voted. you again are making it bigger than it actually is.
Unvote: Chameleon Vote: Texcat
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on Jan 20, 2014 1:44:24 GMT -5
I wish we had multiple Lynch votes in this game! Three Players haven't posted at all Day 2: Bill, Pleonast, Story. I'll vote all y'all as a prod. Only four of 16 Players even have a Lynch vote in place. Low participation is anti-Town and anti-Game. My only "case" against Paranoia was low participation, but with two posts and votes, his participation is now better than most, and vibes are Townish. Unvote: Paranoiagnarlycharlie is more active than his usual this game. Maybe that's a Scum tell for him, but it's a bad reason to vote him. I sense no Scum, but that's normal for me; I try to sense insincere votes, but that's hard when few are even voting. I might join a bandwagon of TexCat or Meeko (neither seems Townie, though for different reasons), but for now I'll just vote no one.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Jan 20, 2014 4:21:51 GMT -5
I can definitely go along with a vote for Texcat, her over reaction to gnarly's mistake vote for her (it did look to me as if gnarly had made a genuine error), her vote for story was strange because I do agree that he couldn't have known about the extra wincons that some Town players have if he was scum.
Vote: Texcat
I also think that Meeko could be scum and I would be voting for him except that it would waste an investigation and that investigation could help me make up my mind.
I am on the fence with Chameleon, leaning scum at the moment but I have changed my mind a few times about her already so I would like to wait a bit longer and see what she does.
I agree that gnarly has been posting a bit more than usual but there could be RL reasons for that, I am not actually getting a scum feel for him at the moment, which makes a change. His reactions to votes aren't his scummy type of reaction but he could be fooling me.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Jan 20, 2014 8:05:19 GMT -5
I agree with Gnarly that a NK is probably the best a miller can hope for, but I did not see anything that SisC said that would have drawn such a NK. If she claimed a power role, or magic bag of some sort, I didn't see it. She had a bit of a magic bag: on Night 1 she said "Without getting into detail, I can confirm that names, nationalities, and roles are important." So she had more, but was silenced.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Jan 20, 2014 8:09:55 GMT -5
I can definitely go along with a vote for Texcat, her over reaction to gnarly's mistake vote for her (it did look to me as if gnarly had made a genuine error), her vote for story was strange because I do agree that he couldn't have known about the extra wincons that some Town players have if he was scum. That's assuming that only town players have extra wincons, which is a pretty big assumption. Only one player has stated that they needed Sister Coyote dead in order to have a chance of winning. No-one else has also claimed this, so I am suspecting that the targets are unique. 8 players have stated that they have an extra win condition. If only townies have such a condition, then that's a rather game-breakingly large number of townies. Similarly, if only townies are targets, then that's also a large bunch of townies. So I think that this whole business of needing another player dead is totally random. That is, those with the extra condition are random and their target is also random. So it is likely that some scum are gunning for another player (who could be town or scum) and town may also be gunning for town or scum. In this case it is not really an extra condition, as town need scum dead anyway, but the player does not know that. This means that the nature of someone's target tells you nothing about that player. Overall it's a bit gastardly, as players are given an extra condition that they have very little control over.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on Jan 20, 2014 8:44:17 GMT -5
I can definitely go along with a vote for Texcat, her over reaction to gnarly's mistake vote for her (it did look to me as if gnarly had made a genuine error), her vote for story was strange because I do agree that he couldn't have known about the extra wincons that some Town players have if he was scum. Vote: TexcatI also think that Meeko could be scum and I would be voting for him except that it would waste an investigation and that investigation could help me make up my mind. I am on the fence with Chameleon, leaning scum at the moment but I have changed my mind a few times about her already so I would like to wait a bit longer and see what she does. I agree that gnarly has been posting a bit more than usual but there could be RL reasons for that, I am not actually getting a scum feel for him at the moment, which makes a change. His reactions to votes aren't his scummy type of reaction but he could be fooling me. Jan, I think the moons and the stars have collided. I agree with every single word you just posted here. I was reading this and was like um is Jan in my head?!? The only difference is I'm kind of leaning Town on Chameleon. Meeko is hiding something big time. What is it that he doesn't want us to know. As a Town player, I have no issues at all if the group wants to confirm me, unless he knows someone is hunting for him, or is scum. So I'd like the investigation on Meeko to go on. Texcat is floundering with the whole thing. I'm hoping the mod messing up flip out was a joke, I can see where the annoyance about gnarly's misvote on her, but she's blown it way way way out of proportion and that's why she's getting flax. And actually I'm going to join that pile because it looks like the best case right now, and I am leaning towards Town on Gnarly also. Vote: Texcat
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jan 20, 2014 8:53:57 GMT -5
Let's see:
1. texcat's vote on me is exceptionally lazy. The idea that not voting, in one particular case, is something that Scum do more often than Town is something that I think is not borne out by experience. Would I be less likely Scum had I thrown out a one-off vote at the 11th hour? Or voted for guiri, who turned out to be Town? Nah. There wasn't a lot of content yesterDay and there was no one for whom I felt moved to vote.
As to this (bold-facing mine):
I find this bothersome on multiple levels. First, it's unfair; I didn't exactly fill the world with posts during Day One but my ultimate post count was exactly one less than texcat's own, so I'm not sure "disappearing act" is a fair accusation (this is my first post of Day Two, but I've said in the past that I will be relatively low activity on weekends). I have other issues related to the specific wording of this accusation, but I'd like to hear a response from texcat first.
2. Meeko's aggressive desire to not be investigated is one of those things that would make me vote to lynch any other player. In this case, though, there's a simpler solution:
Investigate Meeko
3. @Silver Jan: Your post here -
Has me confused. Why is this bad news? If Sister C was both Town and your target, and she is now dead, then if you pull out a Town win then you clinch a win for both you and for her (postmortem). Are you surprised that your individual target was Town and not Scum? I'm not sure a win condition requiring the death of someone you already needed dead to win would have made much sense. I'm sure all of us with individual targets have Townies as targets (or perhaps third parties). I also think there's probably a chance that one or more Scum players have Scum win + death of a fellow Scum as a win condition, which will greatly influence the way we look at behavior.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Jan 20, 2014 9:38:41 GMT -5
Story, I did say that I was surprised and I shouldn't have been. I don't like having to have other Townies die in order for me to win.
Captain Klutz, I agree that it's a pretty big assumption to make that only Town has an extra wincon but I cannot see a scum Story coming out and saying he had an extra wincon, that would be a very dangerous thing to do. I know scum will and do do anything but scum aren't usually stupid.
Lol @ Dizzy, I don't have a scum read on you in this game. This is a first for both of us.
|
|
|
Post by patricia on Jan 20, 2014 9:44:11 GMT -5
mistakes happen all the time - Yesterday towards the end of the day someone posted my name on a list of players without a vote down. So I checked to make sure my vote had been counted by the mod (which it was) and went on. Different people react to things in different ways but TexCat seems to be over the top with this simple error of who asked the mod about colors for posts. But is this a reason to vote her? Maybe, I don't have a strong scum vibe on anyone yet. I too would also like to poke the non active players so maybe a vote on one of them? I happy to learn more about Meeko with a Investigation first as he always pings me so no vote on him as of yet
For now I'm going to make a placeholder vote on Vote: GnarlyCharlie simply for placing both a vote and a investigation on Paranoia which is a waste.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jan 20, 2014 12:15:48 GMT -5
Let's see: 1. texcat's vote on me is exceptionally lazy. The idea that not voting, in one particular case, is something that Scum do more often than Town is something that I think is not borne out by experience. Would I be less likely Scum had I thrown out a one-off vote at the 11th hour? Or voted for guiri, who turned out to be Town? Nah. There wasn't a lot of content yesterDay and there was no one for whom I felt moved to vote. As to this (bold-facing mine): I find this bothersome on multiple levels. First, it's unfair; I didn't exactly fill the world with posts during Day One but my ultimate post count was exactly one less than texcat's own, so I'm not sure "disappearing act" is a fair accusation (this is my first post of Day Two, but I've said in the past that I will be relatively low activity on weekends). I have other issues related to the specific wording of this accusation, but I'd like to hear a response from texcat first. I was following through on what I said Yesterday about the non-voters. Obviously your mileage varies, but I find that Scum love not voting, not having to put themselves on record, especially if it looks like a townie is going to be lynched without their vote. So, yes, I do think that you would less likely be Scum if you had thrown out a one-off vote at the 11th hour, or voted for guiri. The main tool Town has in finding scum is the voting record. I did not remember that you were not around on the weekends, although you did have all day Friday to post. "Disappearing act" was perhaps a poor word choice, based on the fact that you were around Yesterday, posting but not voting, and then "disappeared" and were not around Today. I will continue to pressure everyone to vote, whether you find that to be "exceptionally lazy" on my part, or not. I find it both anti-town and scummy not to manage to get a vote down.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jan 20, 2014 12:24:23 GMT -5
mistakes happen all the time - Yesterday towards the end of the day someone posted my name on a list of players without a vote down. So I checked to make sure my vote had been counted by the mod (which it was) and went on. Different people react to things in different ways but TexCat seems to be over the top with this simple error of who asked the mod about colors for posts. But is this a reason to vote her? Maybe, I don't have a strong scum vibe on anyone yet. I too would also like to poke the non active players so maybe a vote on one of them? I happy to learn more about Meeko with a Investigation first as he always pings me so no vote on him as of yet For now I'm going to make a placeholder vote on Vote: GnarlyCharlie simply for placing both a vote and a investigation on Paranoia which is a waste. Yes, obviously mistakes happen all the time. It was Swammer that had both a vote and investigation on Paranoia. But I note that he has removed his vote now, in case you missed that as well.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Jan 20, 2014 14:12:46 GMT -5
Sorry for the poor participation to this point. I won't be able to do an active conversation at the moment, but I will point out things I find suspicious or interesting. Meeko does not want to be Investigated. I wonder why. I can think of two reasons. 1) Meeko has a Miller-like role (like being West German, since Bill said they are a traitor), or 2) Meeko is scum. Since we've already lynched a Miller, I think it's less likely we'll have a second. This is strong evidence that Meeko is scum, unless there is another innocent reason they're avoiding the investigation. vote Meeko for trying too hard to avoid being investigated. I don't like the fact that I needed a Townie to die for me to win, up until toDay I was fairly convinced it would be a scum that I needed dead. What is your victory condition? If you're town you already need to have all the scum dead. Why would you think your extra condition would also require a scum to be dead? That'd be rather redundant. I think you're not town, although not necessarily scum. unvote Meeko because of old-fashioned rules. vote Silver Jan for mixed up victory conditions. Story was first to reveal his subsidiary win condition; I think it's almost impossible that he's Scum -- how would he know to make such a claim? Wait a moment! swammer is assuming that scum don't have a secondary victory condition. How did they know that? Did I miss a reveal somewhere? This sure looks like a scum slip to me. unvote Silver Jan because of old-fashioned rules. vote swammerdami for extra knowledge about scum victory conditions.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 20, 2014 14:43:38 GMT -5
No one has more than one Lynch vote; we need to develop some sort of case on someone! Story was first to reveal his subsidiary win condition; I think it's almost impossible that he's Scum -- how would he know to make such a claim? Anti-vote Storyteller0910If we can't think of anyone else to Lynch, there's always Meeko! However to Lynch him we'd want to reverse the huge Investigate-Meeko momentum or else waste an Investigation. I'll push toward that: Uninvestigate MeekoAnti-investigate MeekoInvestigate ParanoiaSo, your case against Meeko is "If we can't think of anyone else to Lynch, there's always Meeko!". That's certainly persuasive. Of course, you don't actually vote for Meeko; you simply "push toward" it. I wish we had multiple Lynch votes in this game! Three Players haven't posted at all Day 2: Bill, Pleonast, Story. I'll vote all y'all as a prod. Only four of 16 Players even have a Lynch vote in place. Low participation is anti-Town and anti-Game. My only "case" against Paranoia was low participation, but with two posts and votes, his participation is now better than most, and vibes are Townish. Unvote: Paranoiagnarlycharlie is more active than his usual this game. Maybe that's a Scum tell for him, but it's a bad reason to vote him. I sense no Scum, but that's normal for me; I try to sense insincere votes, but that's hard when few are even voting. I might join a bandwagon of TexCat or Meeko (neither seems Townie, though for different reasons), but for now I'll just vote no one. Here you berate a number of players for not having a lynch vote in place....and then proceed to remove your own lynch vote in the very next breath. <vote>swammerdami</vote>
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Jan 20, 2014 14:44:10 GMT -5
I did not remember that you were not around on the weekends, although you did have all day Friday to post. "Disappearing act" was perhaps a poor word choice, based on the fact that you were around Yesterday, posting but not voting, and then "disappeared" and were not around Today. I will continue to pressure everyone to vote, whether you find that to be "exceptionally lazy" on my part, or not. I find it both anti-town and scummy not to manage to get a vote down. 1. I didn't mean to offend with my choice of language. I firmly disagree with your premise - I think Scum are generally more likely to be sure they have a vote down than not, though this is by no means universal. I think using participation in and of itself - particularly when it's only one Day's worth of a record - as an indicator of anything at all is not likely to be accurate. 2. I have perhaps been insufficiently blunt. Was your choice of wording meaningful in any way beyond what you've said here? A simple yes or no would suffice as an answer for the time being.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 20, 2014 14:45:14 GMT -5
The 'vote' button doesn't seem to like me this morning, so I guess I need to do it the old-fashioned way:
vote swammerdami
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 20, 2014 14:57:02 GMT -5
And just for sake of completeness
Investigate Meeko
simply because he's so keen to not be investigated.
A couple other 'housekeeping items':
I don't think that Sister Coyote was a Scum-turned-Town. Her reveal quite clearly stated that she was a Miller; that description accounts for the "she was Russian, but defected to America" color. Contrast that with guiri's reveal, which clearly identifies him as a 'Defector', and tells us in no uncertain terms that he would have turned Scum if the conditions had been right.
I don't think that texcat's overreaction to the 'mistaken identity' issues points to her being Scum. Rather, I think that if she was Scum she would have been more 'cool' about it so as not to draw additional attention to herself.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on Jan 20, 2014 15:19:57 GMT -5
Wait a moment! swammer is assuming that scum don't have a secondary victory condition. How did they know that? Did I miss a reveal somewhere? This sure looks like a scum slip to me. I think it's likely that Scum do not have the extra win conditions, but that's not the only reason I soft-cleared Story. If he were Scum with such a condition, he wouldn't be at all sure that some Townies also had such a condition. Even if he guessed as much, the nature of the condition might be different, and he might be exposed eventually when asked to explain. (In hindsight I should have given this fuller explanation before, rather than a cryptic single sentence.)
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Jan 20, 2014 15:24:33 GMT -5
Apologies for my lack of participation - my laptop harddisk died in the middle of my business road trip - not in the same place long enough for a local office to reimage/recover the data. So I've now been 9 days without the laptop, just on the blackberry and maxed the mailbox quota and data quota, so kinda blocked off from corporate land - and reduced to using free wifi. Strangely relaxing to be disconnected. Will be back in the saddle in the next 48hrs...
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on Jan 20, 2014 15:27:12 GMT -5
That's certainly persuasive. Of course, you don't actually vote for Meeko; you simply "push toward" it. I don't want to Lynch the same Player we Investigate. That's why I "push" toward moving the Investigation target so that we can then vote Meeko. I suggested Meeko as a Lynch target despite that Meeko may just be being Meeko, because I had no strong suspicions of anyone else. And that's also the reason I had no Lynch vote in place. But your post misrepresents me (e.g. "berate" for a joke) and even if you thought your criticism were fair, you offer no Scum motive for my behavior. I think you're grasping. Vote: Suburban Plankton
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Jan 20, 2014 15:41:55 GMT -5
Wait a moment! swammer is assuming that scum don't have a secondary victory condition. How did they know that? Did I miss a reveal somewhere? This sure looks like a scum slip to me. I think it's likely that Scum do not have the extra win conditions, but that's not the only reason I soft-cleared Story. If he were Scum with such a condition, he wouldn't be at all sure that some Townies also had such a condition. Even if he guessed as much, the nature of the condition might be different, and he might be exposed eventually when asked to explain. (In hindsight I should have given this fuller explanation before, rather than a cryptic single sentence.) Okay, your fuller explanation reassures me somewhat. I do not think it's plausible that scum do not have an extra victory condition; in fact I think it's quite likely that they do have an extra kill condition. That fits very nicely with the standard scum victory conditions. So instead of having to eliminate X number of town, each scum also has to an eliminate one other player. I'm also tempted to think that all the scum have the extra victory condition and some town have been given one as well for cover. Not actionable at this point though, because we don't have good info on who actually has the secondary condition. I'm not expecting the claims to be complete or accurate. But I agree that scum are less likely to have made the first reveal about the secondary victory condition, although I disagree with your reasoning. Anyway, unvote swammerdami for their better explanation of assumptions about story's vote. vote Silver Jan for their mixed-up victory conditions. My read is that they are non-town rather than scum, but without more information, I'm going to assume anyone not town needs to be lynched.
|
|