|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 4, 2014 17:49:11 GMT -5
I messed up the formatting in that post. The 2 quotes are from Pleonast, the rest is from me.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Feb 4, 2014 18:21:50 GMT -5
You know what makes me very unhappy with your supposed wincon Pleo? The capital letters are the same as in Patricia's wincon and she was scum. I am going on memory here so I could be wrong but there are no capital letters ie DO NOT, in Towns wincons and there definitely aren't in mine. It's a very good fake PM but fake it is. You'll have to take it up with the moderator because that's exactly how it appears in my pm. Okay,so you need someone to SURVIVE in order to win. That means that those 3 characters cannot be threats to town. Why on earth did you not reveal those names immediately? It's 3 characters who we don't need to lynch. And since thay are character names, they can be revealed without giving anyone away. So you think we can't extract a townie list based on claimed secondary targets. And you also didn't think your own private list of 3 townies was worth mentioning?? I've got nationalities, not names. I'm not going to be revealing them at this point because of the next point. I don't have any knowledge of the alignment of the three nationalities. And I specifically asked the moderator. I'd have claimed on Day One if I knew they were town, or even not scum. But I don't. I expect that one of them is scum, because that's what I'd do if I were designing the game. Otherwise, it's a not-quite-confirmed mason group. I don't want scum to false claim a nationality because theirs appears on my list. I also expect my role is put in the game as a specific counter to the body-stacker team. It'll be a stretch for both them and me to win, but there's nothing I can do to actively oppose them other than try to lynch scum sooner rather than later. Which makes the lack of traction of my case on Jan frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 4, 2014 18:35:56 GMT -5
I've got nationalities, not names. I'm not going to be revealing them at this point because of the next point. I don't have any knowledge of the alignment of the three nationalities. And I specifically asked the moderator. I'd have claimed on Day One if I knew they were town, or even not scum. But I don't. I expect that one of them is scum, because that's what I'd do if I were designing the game. Otherwise, it's a not-quite-confirmed mason group. I don't want scum to false claim a nationality because theirs appears on my list. Seriously? You need "all threats to town eliminated". But you think that one of the players that you need to survive might be scum? How could you possibly think that? And if those nationalities are indeed unique, it's still safe to name them, as scum cannot safely claim one of them.
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Feb 4, 2014 20:32:10 GMT -5
You know what makes me very unhappy with your supposed wincon Pleo? The capital letters are the same as in Patricia's wincon and she was scum. I am going on memory here so I could be wrong but there are no capital letters ie DO NOT, in Towns wincons and there definitely aren't in mine. It's a very good fake PM but fake it is. You'll have to take it up with the moderator because that's exactly how it appears in my pm. Okay,so you need someone to SURVIVE in order to win. That means that those 3 characters cannot be threats to town. Why on earth did you not reveal those names immediately? It's 3 characters who we don't need to lynch. And since thay are character names, they can be revealed without giving anyone away. So you think we can't extract a townie list based on claimed secondary targets. And you also didn't think your own private list of 3 townies was worth mentioning?? I've got nationalities, not names. I'm not going to be revealing them at this point because of the next point. I don't have any knowledge of the alignment of the three nationalities. And I specifically asked the moderator. I'd have claimed on Day One if I knew they were town, or even not scum. But I don't. I expect that one of them is scum, because that's what I'd do if I were designing the game. Otherwise, it's a not-quite-confirmed mason group. I don't want scum to false claim a nationality because theirs appears on my list. I also expect my role is put in the game as a specific counter to the body-stacker team. It'll be a stretch for both them and me to win, but there's nothing I can do to actively oppose them other than try to lynch scum sooner rather than later. Which makes the lack of traction of my case on Jan frustrating. Again, I feel like even if that last bit was true town would still have to continue lynching other townies in order for others to win, even if we narrow down who the last of the scum are. It's not so much you're in direct competition with us as you are in direct competition with others of your alignment and possibly of another alignment. I'd still rather lynch Plankton today.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on Feb 5, 2014 2:12:25 GMT -5
With a secondary Killer team, and a Town Defector I think it is very unlikely we started with as many as 4 Scum. And, since many players have been "soft-cleared," we're rapidly reaching the point where we will want to deliberately misLynch to achieve an optimal result -- almost everyone except Scum winning. The fact that Pleonast's claimed PM closely matches Patricia's fake PM sure makes it seem likely that he and Planks are the last two Scum. Whichever we Lynch toDay, we'll NOT want to Lynch the other toMorrow!
As a metacomment about Antivotes, in a simple case they're very similar to ordinary votes. If it's anti-Town not to place a vote, isn't it anti-Town not to place an anti-vote? With only two candidates, voting Planks and anti-voting Pleo is just the same as a double-vote on Planks.
But other players aren't using the antivote, so it's presumptuous to give mine a double weight.
Unantivote: Pleonast
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 5, 2014 6:44:16 GMT -5
I want to lynch both Suburban Plankton and Pleonast, so no need to investigate them.
Uninvestigate: Pleonast
Investigate: storyteller0910
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Feb 5, 2014 9:50:19 GMT -5
I want to lynch both Suburban Plankton and Pleonast, so no need to investigate them. Uninvestigate: PleonastInvestigate: storyteller0910I would think that story is Town as I said before but an investigation to find out who or what he is might be a good idea if someone needs to know who they need dead. I will wait until tomorrow and then place my vote on the leader.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Feb 5, 2014 10:36:28 GMT -5
I've got nationalities, not names. I'm not going to be revealing them at this point because of the next point. I don't have any knowledge of the alignment of the three nationalities. And I specifically asked the moderator. I'd have claimed on Day One if I knew they were town, or even not scum. But I don't. I expect that one of them is scum, because that's what I'd do if I were designing the game. Otherwise, it's a not-quite-confirmed mason group. I don't want scum to false claim a nationality because theirs appears on my list. Seriously? You need "all threats to town eliminated". But you think that one of the players that you need to survive might be scum? How could you possibly think that? And if those nationalities are indeed unique, it's still safe to name them, as scum cannot safely claim one of them. Please reread my victory condition again. I only need one of the three players alive. Since the moderator told me I have no alignment knowledge about any of those players, I see no reason to assume they're all town. And as for "scum cannot safely claim one of them" that's exactly why I'm keeping them secret for now. I think scum will want to avoid claiming a nationality on my list, so I'm not going to let them know what they are. Again, I feel like even if that last bit was true town would still have to continue lynching other townies in order for others to win, even if we narrow down who the last of the scum are. It's not so much you're in direct competition with us as you are in direct competition with others of your alignment and possibly of another alignment. I'd still rather lynch Plankton today. I think your team is going to be the only one trying to keep scum alive in order to lynch more town. It's rather a big gamble to give up mislynches in the hope that we've correctly identified the last scum. In any case, I'm always going to vote for who I think is scum. The fact that Pleonast's claimed PM closely matches Patricia's fake PM The only apparent similarity is an all-caps "DO NOT"? That's kind of a Day One reason to lynch someone. I'm hoping someone else will come forward to say they have the same format.
|
|
|
Post by Chameleon on Feb 5, 2014 12:29:04 GMT -5
Last Night I investigate Colby. The result: "You have determined that Colby11 is aligned with the mafia." There is an interesting thing from Colby's claim: Note the "...Ozan Lange has been feeding bad information..." This is a bit of colour that is accurate, as I am Ozan Lange So I think it's highly likely that I am a Mad Cop. That can't be a coincidence.... Or you're both Scum and you're collaborating. I'm not saying this is true, but it is a possibility. Hopefully I will be able to post more while I'm trapped at work tonight.
|
|
|
Post by Chameleon on Feb 5, 2014 12:30:43 GMT -5
My "do not" is in small letters, but I agree that it's more of a Day 1 reason to vote for someone. There's a lot of text and colour in this game, much of it in the role PMs, so I think that some discrepancies are innocently possible.
It does however bother me a bit that anyone would think a Town player would need a Scum dead to meet their individual win condition because they need all the Scum to be dead anyway - it's redundant. It is possible they need a non-Town-threatening third party dead though.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Feb 5, 2014 13:34:25 GMT -5
My "do not" is in small letters, but I agree that it's more of a Day 1 reason to vote for someone. There's a lot of text and colour in this game, much of it in the role PMs, so I think that some discrepancies are innocently possible. It does however bother me a bit that anyone would think a Town player would need a Scum dead to meet their individual win condition because they need all the Scum to be dead anyway - it's redundant. It is possible they need a non-Town-threatening third party dead though. Discrepancies are possible of course but my vote was on Pleo before he claimed.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 5, 2014 17:57:41 GMT -5
Seriously? You need "all threats to town eliminated". But you think that one of the players that you need to survive might be scum? How could you possibly think that? And if those nationalities are indeed unique, it's still safe to name them, as scum cannot safely claim one of them. 1. Please reread my victory condition again. I only need one of the three players alive. Since the moderator told me I have no alignment knowledge about any of those players, I see no reason to assume they're all town. 2. And as for "scum cannot safely claim one of them" that's exactly why I'm keeping them secret for now. I think scum will want to avoid claiming a nationality on my list, so I'm not going to let them know what they are. (numbers added) 1. You only need one of them alive. Suppose 1 of them is indeed scum. The other 2 die, and now you are unable to win, as you need that last one both alive and dead. No, that does not sound plausible. 2. You have just said that being on your list does not indicate alignment, so why will scum want to avoid claiming one of the nationalities? Sorry, I don't believe you.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 5, 2014 18:02:38 GMT -5
I've come up with a way for all of us (except scum) to win.
If the third party win condition is true then we want to get to an endgame of 3 town and 1 scum, then lynch that last scum. For this to happen we need to be sure of who the scum are.
If we have 2 scum left then I believe they are Suburban Plankton and Pleonast. If there is a third scum then I think that's storyteller. We have 2 roleblockers, so tonight we can completely block the scum. That is, we lynch Suburban Plankton, then tonight Meeko blocks Pleonast and Chameleon blocks storyteller. This should eliminate the Night kill. Indeed, eliminate all future Night kills. This gives time to do my Nightly investigation, to precisely pin down the remaining scum. The daily investigation may also help - I suggest keep investigating storyteller, to see if it eventually reveals alignment
During the Day we can either vote No Lynch (although I'm not sure if that's allowed) or lynch someone who someone needs dead. Or a scum if we do indeed find that there are 2 left.
For the final endgame we need to have Meeko (to keep blocking the last scum) and 2 others. I don't know who the other 2 will be, but they will NOT be:
me (Colby's target) Silver Jan (Swammerdami's target) Paranoia or Chameleon (the third parties must be dead, to guard against them actually being win stealers)
I think that looks pretty solid. Anyway, we can re-evaluate after we see what happens toNight.
FruitAndGarbage, are we allowed to vote for No Lynch?
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Feb 5, 2014 20:16:27 GMT -5
I really don't mind being lynched. We're not win stealers, but as long as the numbers are right I simply don't care.
|
|
|
Post by FruitAndGarbage on Feb 5, 2014 22:11:28 GMT -5
FruitAndGarbage, are we allowed to vote for No Lynch? Yes. Deliberately causing a tie has much the same effect.
Votes: Suburban Plankton [3]: Swammerdami (15), Paranoia (16), Captain Klutz (51) Pleonast [3]: Storyteller0910 (37), Silver Jan (48), Colby11 (55), Swammerdami (-56) Colby11 [1]: Swammerdami (5), Chameleon (8) Captain Klutz [1]: Meeko (29) Silver Jan [1]: Pleonast (32) Paranoia [0]: Captain Klutz (1)
Investigations: Swammerdami [2]: Chameleon (8), Colby11 (55) Pleonast [1]: Captain Klutz (51), Swammerdami (56) Meeko [1]: Captain Klutz (28), Pleonast (32) Storyteller0910 [1]: Captain Klutz (65) Suburban Plankton [0]: Swammerdami (5)
With these votes, no player will be lynched and Swammerdami will be investigated. Day 4 ends in 24 hours.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Feb 6, 2014 0:46:00 GMT -5
I've come up with a way for all of us (except scum) to win. If the third party win condition is true then we want to get to an endgame of 3 town and 1 scum, then lynch that last scum. For this to happen we need to be sure of who the scum are. If we have 2 scum left then I believe they are Suburban Plankton and Pleonast. If there is a third scum then I think that's storyteller. We have 2 roleblockers, so tonight we can completely block the scum. That is, we lynch Suburban Plankton, then tonight Meeko blocks Pleonast and Chameleon blocks storyteller. This should eliminate the Night kill. Indeed, eliminate all future Night kills. This gives time to do my Nightly investigation, to precisely pin down the remaining scum. The daily investigation may also help - I suggest keep investigating storyteller, to see if it eventually reveals alignment During the Day we can either vote No Lynch (although I'm not sure if that's allowed) or lynch someone who someone needs dead. Or a scum if we do indeed find that there are 2 left. For the final endgame we need to have Meeko (to keep blocking the last scum) and 2 others. I don't know who the other 2 will be, but they will NOT be: me (Colby's target) Silver Jan (Swammerdami's target) Paranoia or Chameleon (the third parties must be dead, to guard against them actually being win stealers) I think that looks pretty solid. Anyway, we can re-evaluate after we see what happens toNight. FruitAndGarbage, are we allowed to vote for No Lynch?I'm not sure why you want a No Lynch today because your plan can still work if we lynch a scum toDay. My personal preference is to lynch Pleo (for obvious reasons) and investigate Suburban Plankton. I agree that we have to keep one scum alive so that everyone can reach their personal extra wincon.
|
|
|
Post by Chameleon on Feb 6, 2014 1:24:18 GMT -5
I have no problem with your plan Klutz - but remember we (supposedly) have a third roleblocker. If they know who Meeko or I am blocking then they can block us and the player we were blocking can perform the night kill.
Paranoia and I win whether we're dead or not, so essentially our own deaths can further our win condition.
I am not so certain that Pleo and Plankton are our 2 remaining Scum. I'm probably just full of myself, but I still prefer my Colby theory. I also think it's pretty likely we have another killer out there besides Scum (apart from Paranoia, who's kills are done with).
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 6, 2014 3:28:03 GMT -5
I'm not sure why you want a No Lynch today because your plan can still work if we lynch a scum toDay. My personal preference is to lynch Pleo (for obvious reasons) and investigate Suburban Plankton. I agree that we have to keep one scum alive so that everyone can reach their personal extra wincon. I don't want a no lynch toDay. The no lynch is on future Days: if we find we hve indeed stopped the scum kill then we can take our time and investigate a bunch of people to ascertain all the scum. Although it's probably not necessary to no lynch, as there will be some safe people to lynch. ToDay I'm happy to lynch either Suburban Plankton or Pleonast. But I would like to investigate storyteller, as that is our best chance of getting useful information (he has already been investigated once, so that improves our chances of getting some juicier information).
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 6, 2014 3:37:39 GMT -5
1. I have no problem with your plan Klutz - but remember we (supposedly) have a third roleblocker. If they know who Meeko or I am blocking then they can block us and the player we were blocking can perform the night kill. Paranoia and I win whether we're dead or not, so essentially our own deaths can further our win condition. 2. I am not so certain that Pleo and Plankton are our 2 remaining Scum. I'm probably just full of myself, but I still prefer my Colby theory. I also think it's pretty likely we have another killer out there besides Scum (apart from Paranoia, who's kills are done with). (numbers added) The third roleblocker is scum. If we block scum then we block their roleblocker, as well as their kill. So if we get it right then scum are helpless. 2. I investigated Colby as mafia. Since I believe I am a Mad Cop, that exonerates him. Note also that Colby is in fact a Doctor (confirmed by gnarlycharlie). A scum doctor is a very unusual role. Not impossible, but rare. If you are still nervous about Colby, then he can be one of the people who does not make it to the final 4. If there is killer other than scum then that killer is Town, and I would expect them to come forward to say that they killed someone. If there is an unclaimed kill toNight, despite blocking the people I have suggested, then that means we haven't found all the scum. We will then need to re-evaluate.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 6, 2014 3:47:14 GMT -5
swammerdami is still in the lead for an investigation. I really think storyteller is a far better choice, as explained in Reply #77 above. Please consider moving your investigation vote.
I'll help by throwing out a Anti-investigate: swammerdami
One more thing: I am in the process of changing ISPs. The change is due to happen tomorrow, which is also when the Day ends. It's possible (or even likely) that I will not be around at Day end.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on Feb 6, 2014 4:30:27 GMT -5
I think Captain Klutz has the right idea. It may not even be absolutely necessary to prevent Night Kills -- we want most of us to be dead anyway -- to achieve our optimal outcome. My concerns are (1) Is it possible that the starting Scum team was not size 3 exactly? (2) Are we really sure who the Scum are? We don't want to misLynch or No_Lynch our way to Scum victory. The first step is to Lynch most likeliest Scum. I'm still going with Planks. One thing is clear (to me )Since I've already revealed my alignment (Town), Name (Thomas Martens), nationality (Belgian), and target (the Icelandic Miss Jan), there's nothing to be gained from Investigating me. Uninvestigate: PleonastInvestigate: storyteller0910Anti-investigate: Swammerdami
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 6, 2014 5:19:17 GMT -5
I think Captain Klutz has the right idea. It may not even be absolutely necessary to prevent Night Kills -- we want most of us to be dead anyway -- to achieve our optimal outcome. My concerns are (1) Is it possible that the starting Scum team was not size 3 exactly? (2) Are we really sure who the Scum are? We don't want to misLynch or No_Lynch our way to Scum victory. If we want to fine tune the endgame, so that we can all win, then we need to stop the scum kills. Specifically, I need to do some Cop investigations to confirm the scum. Then we can safely get down to a final 4. If I am killed, or one of our role blockers is killed, then we lose control. We will then need to lynch the most likely scum, which will lead to a premature finish. The starting scum team would be either 3 or 4. In my post #72 above I list who I think the final 2 (or 3) scum are. Certainly if we do in fact stop toNight's scum block and scum kill then we will be sitting pretty. Again, we can take stock after we see toNight's outcome.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Feb 6, 2014 5:47:51 GMT -5
I am curious as to why people want to investigate story? Please enlighten me. I would like to lynch either Pleo or SP and investigate the other.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Feb 6, 2014 7:11:26 GMT -5
I am curious as to why people want to investigate story? Please enlighten me. I would like to lynch either Pleo or SP and investigate the other. Ideally, we need to learn players' alignments. Other stuff may be useful (for example, if we find a role blocker, that's golden). However, failing that, we need to learn alignment. We don't know if alignment can be revealed by the daily investigation. Our best chance of finding out is by investigating storyteller - since we have already investigated him, we have a better chance of getting the more valuable info this time. Yes, I still regard storyteller as an unknown and plausibly scum - notice that he still hasn't responded to my question about his target in post #51, nearly 2 days ago. I do have more thoughts on this matter, but I am awaiting storyteller's response.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Feb 6, 2014 9:16:44 GMT -5
I am curious as to why people want to investigate story? Please enlighten me. I would like to lynch either Pleo or SP and investigate the other. Ideally, we need to learn players' alignments. Other stuff may be useful (for example, if we find a role blocker, that's golden). However, failing that, we need to learn alignment. We don't know if alignment can be revealed by the daily investigation. Our best chance of finding out is by investigating storyteller - since we have already investigated him, we have a better chance of getting the more valuable info this time. Yes, I still regard storyteller as an unknown and plausibly scum - notice that he still hasn't responded to my question about his target in post #51, nearly 2 days ago. I do have more thoughts on this matter, but I am awaiting storyteller's response. Fair enough, I just have a bit of a Townie feel for him because of BillMc needing him dead but I can go along with that. Investigate storyteller
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2014 9:34:41 GMT -5
Ideally, we need to learn players' alignments. Other stuff may be useful (for example, if we find a role blocker, that's golden). However, failing that, we need to learn alignment. We don't know if alignment can be revealed by the daily investigation. Our best chance of finding out is by investigating storyteller - since we have already investigated him, we have a better chance of getting the more valuable info this time. Yes, I still regard storyteller as an unknown and plausibly scum - notice that he still hasn't responded to my question about his target in post #51, nearly 2 days ago. I do have more thoughts on this matter, but I am awaiting storyteller's response. Fair enough, I just have a bit of a Townie feel for him because of BillMc needing him dead but I can go along with that. Investigate storytellerHeh, sorry, my response is boring. I missed the question. :-) Here's my role PM, power redacted, everything else included (I'm italicizing the whole thing to deliniate it from the rest of my post; it's obviously not italicized in the original version): Your name is Huppert Breiner. You are West German, although you generally just think of yourself as German. That's how you grew up thinking, and even the war and the tension that followed it didn't break you of the habit. It did give you a few things that did stick with you, though, things like the ability to [DO SOMETHING RELATED TO MY POWER]. That served you well in the years during and after the war. It practically guided your career path.
Of course, that career path is what got you stuck here with communists trying to kill you, so maybe it's not such a blessing. Still, you've got a job to do. On top of just surviving and making sure the Soviets don't topple the summit, you've received directives from up top. The message was damaged in sending though, so the only information about your target that you have is that his name is Thomas Martens.
- CONFIDENTIAL -
As a member of the town, you win when all threats to the town are eliminated. However, you must also ensure that Thomas Martens is killed before the game ends: if the town is victorious but Thomas Martens is alive at the game's end, you do not win. You can win whether you are alive or dead so long as the town wins and your target is eliminated. Klutz, it's not at all clear to me why you are suspicious of me, nor indeed why you have chosen any of the three players you have decided are Scum. I am always a bit skeptical of folks who think they have the game solved and propose action plans on the basis of the solving, and this case is no different. I am disinclined to follow your lead without better reasoning (especially since I know you're wrong about me!). For myself, I'd like to resume my vote analysis from yesterDay. In the meanwhile, Pleonast's reading of his own win condition makes little sense... though it makes splendid sense if he is either Scum or a neutral third party. Forcing Scum to keep some particular non-Scum (or even some particular fellow Scum) alive would be a nice balancing tool to give the Scum something tricky to accomplish as so many of the Townies have been given. My vote remains unless and until analysis of yesterDay's vote changes it.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2014 9:38:22 GMT -5
I would prefer to say nothing about my power, except that I have not used it; it will be useful only under the most unusual conditions and not at all if the Scum know what it is.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Feb 6, 2014 9:52:03 GMT -5
I would prefer to say nothing about my power, except that I have not used it; it will be useful only under the most unusual conditions and not at all if the Scum know what it is. Who would you like to investigate? I am just worried that Day ends without my vote down again but while I am here I am willing to change it.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2014 10:12:44 GMT -5
When we left off (on Page 3 of Day Three), I had voted for Pleonast for (it seemed to me) jumping too quickly and readily to the conclusion that Klutz’s results had been interfered with. At this point, there were no votes at all for the Day’s eventual lynchee, patricia. What happened then?
It is Silver Jan who first votes for patricia [71]. She changes her vote from Pleonast to do so. For reasons I can’t quite articulate, if Pleonast does turn out to be Scum I think it’s fairly unlikely that Silver Jan is, as well – what Scum changes their vote from one team-mate to another near to the deadline? dizzymrslizzy (Town) makes the second vote for patricia [80].
Klutz, like Silver Jan before him, votes for patricia after first unvoting Pleonast [83]. I don’t agree with a lot of Klutz’s conclusions about the game, but at the moment I am having a hard time believing he’s not Town. If he’s lying, then either Town has no investigator or our real investigator has been silent so far. We’re now far along enough in the game where I think a real investigator would counterclaim Klutz rather than let us all follow him down bad paths. So I am tentatively assuming Klutz as Town for the purposes of this analysis while remaining open-minded overall.
Swammerdami adds vote four [84], suggesting that patricia’s role PM differs from his own and that she might have modified a Scum PM.
At the top of page 4 (for some reason I don’t see reply numbers on page 4!), Plankton offers a sort of weakly-worded defense of patricia. “Defense” isn’t even really the right word… he just seems to be casting vague doubt on lizzy (whose own claim conflicted somewhat with patricia’s) but not really encouraging or discouraging a patricia lynch. This looks scummier than anything I’ve seen so far – patricia’s in trouble, Plankton knows it, he doesn’t want to get too actively involved but wants to introduce some level of doubt while staying out of the voting fray - and I’m probably changing my vote to Plankton as a result. But let’s finish.
Now Pleonast adds a vote for patricia on the grounds that her claimed use of her power seems to have been a lie. This is a reasonable vote, and puts patricia at 5 votes, the leader by a comfortable margin. And then, then, then…
swammerdami, shortly thereafter (all actions bleached):
Has no one else noticed this? “The charges against patricia are really weak?” From the person who placed the fourth vote on patricia not even one page earlier, helping to make her the strong lynch leader?!?!?! Swammer’s “gambit” creates a logjam, only resolved when Pleonast unvotes Meeko in order to put patricia in the lead. This is definitely a pro-Town move, unless Meeko is Scum. And THEN, shortly thereafter, Swammer votes for patricia again, about an hour before the deadline.
I don’t understand anything about what Swammer does here.
Conclusions, and vote, to follow.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2014 10:22:54 GMT -5
OK. First of all, the Scummiest Thing I Saw in Day ThreeTM was swammerdami's weird tap dance on the subject of patricia (first placing a fourth vote on her and making her the lynch leader, then claiming the case against her was weak, then re-voting her once her death had become a foregone conclusion). I am hesitant to vote for swammer because he is my personal target. But this sequence is very, VERY reflective of likely Scum behavior. At some point (maybe toNight), we're going to have to discuss the working premise that someone who is a personal target is likely Town - I was initially supportive of this premise but now it appears that enough players have personal targets that it would be game breaking for every target to be Town or Neutral.
Swammer's not getting lynched toDay regardless, but I thought this should be on the table.
Pleonast's record was mixed on Day Three. His voting was pretty pro-Town (or at least anti-Scum), and the things that made me suspicious of him involved readings of roles and situations that seemed implausible to me, but could, theoretically, be a result of skimming or just different thought processes.
On balance, I will unvote Pleonast
I will also vote Suburban Plankton
Mostly for his diffident semi-defense of patricia coupled with his seemingly careful absence from the vote record surrounding her (as described above), but also for a bunch of early-game stuff that raised my eyebrown in the first place.
|
|