Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 17:58:55 GMT -5
Post by Death By Irony on Feb 4, 2008 17:58:55 GMT -5
Night passed, more violently for some than others. CatInASuit, having drowned his sorrows with the sake imported from the distant land of Japan (which actually did send emissaries to China around this time), was too drunk to realize that the mass of terra cotta soldiers blocking his path were not a product of his imagination, and didn't even have time to scream as their spears skewered him through. piratepete was not drunk, but he wishes he were as he hurries home looking over his shoulder all the way. Trembling, he barricades all of the doors and windows before lighting a candle with a trembling hand to verify the note stuck in his pocket. "The Black Spot!" He breathed, terror seizing him once again. "Alas! I've been found!" He was thusly so absorbed in studying the mark of death placed on him that he didn't notice the wire being slipped around his throat, nor did he pay any notice to the rush of wings eminating from his cage. Ancient China somewhat lacking in parrots, he'd bought himself a nice, harmless sparrow, but as sharp wire cut into his windpipe the former pirate realized that what was now pecking at him was neither nice nor harmless. NAF1138 strutted down the street, humming a merry tune. He had played his role perfectly, and with his own hands pushed the execution cart. "Even the Mandate of Heaven is on my side!" He said to himself as he heard the rumble of Dramatic Thunder accompanying his footsteps. It was only when he rounded the corner that he realized--too late--that the rumbling was from a mass of enormous barbarians* dressed in blue and white. "Where the heck is New York?" He wondered, hearing the cheers of the barbarians as they knocked him over, not even noticing as they crushed him beneath their revelry. The bodies were found in reverse order. NAF1138's body lay in the street for all to see, his torso riddled with cleat marks. Piratepete's bloody remains were found in his home, dead from a wire applied to the neck with slightly more force than necessary resulting in decapitation; his pet bird was also missing, and in its place were several large foul-looking creatures who dined quite merrily on his entrails. CatInASuit could not be found anywhere, until somebody took a nibble out of the smoking hot dim sum that was placed in ornamental baskets in the center of the town square and realized that the inside was not made of pork. CatInASuit, Peasant, was made into delicious dumpling stuffing. piratepete, Peasant, was garrotted with a wire and attacked by vicious trained birds. NAF1138, Sun Jian (Wu Faction) Peasant, was trampled by stampeding Giants. With 16 alive, it takes 9 to lynch.
The Day will end on 11:59 pm EST February 13 or when a player has passed the number of votes it takes to lynch.* The Chinese, being the wonderfully Sinocentric peoples that they were, considered themselves the only civilized peoples in the world. Everybody else was therefore some kind of barbarian.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 18:19:28 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 4, 2008 18:19:28 GMT -5
Good news is, we got a scum. Bad news is, my leading candidate for scum is now dead, and was not scum. So I start from square one.
I'm beginning to wonder if we should be trusting the non-roleclaim offered by Roosh. Being more specific, dear Mandates, does a cryptic roleclaim such as the one he offered really not violate the rules against roleclaiming? And if it does not, is there a way that the real role's player could similarly claim without losing his or her powers?
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 18:23:46 GMT -5
Post by Death By Irony on Feb 4, 2008 18:23:46 GMT -5
Being more specific, dear Mandates, does a cryptic roleclaim such as the one he offered really not violate the rules against roleclaiming? And if it does not, is there a way that the real role's player could similarly claim without losing his or her powers? "This information is given to all power roles, and the roles can share this information is they so wish, as long as they do not quote the PMs from either mod. (And yes, quoting quote boxes from their own PMs count as quoting the mod.)"
Incidentally, Otherworld Bank Notes are available for purchase in the Town Square in case anyone wishes to send money to the souls waiting to be judged. Nothing like a little bribery to help the afterlife bureaucracy go round."
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 18:28:27 GMT -5
Post by Hawkmod on Feb 4, 2008 18:28:27 GMT -5
Well that didn't go as badly as it could of. I really thought NAF was town too. My scumdar is all screwed up. I'm not sure how much info we can get from these deaths. I would guess the assassin stayed quiet rather then multiple people having the same target. I'm a bit surprised Piratepete was killed, but I guess scum wanted to avoid duplicating targets. It is probably too early to have much info on who NAF's partner was. The one thing I would like to point out is that both Pirate Pete and Koldanar were new players who did suspicious things, but turned out to be town. I think rookies are making rookie mistakes and we are reading too much into it.
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 18:44:56 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Feb 4, 2008 18:44:56 GMT -5
Well that didn't go as badly as it could of. I really thought NAF was town too. My scumdar is all screwed up. I'm not sure how much info we can get from these deaths. I would guess the assassin stayed quiet rather then multiple people having the same target. I'm a bit surprised Piratepete was killed, but I guess scum wanted to avoid duplicating targets. It is probably too early to have much info on who NAF's partner was. The one thing I would like to point out is that both Pirate Pete and Koldanar were new players who did suspicious things, but turned out to be town. I think rookies are making rookie mistakes and we are reading too much into it. bolding by me This post is raising my hackles. I can't parse the connection you are making between piratepete's death and the scum not wanting to duplicate targets. Bolded text changed to underline for clarity. You owe me one soul.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 19:00:19 GMT -5
Post by Hawkmod on Feb 4, 2008 19:00:19 GMT -5
Sorry, that came across as a disjointed mess. What I meant is, I don't really think scum would care if they killed town or scum. They need to kill both. Their main concern would thus be not overlapping with other scum in order to maximize death. Since Piratepete was a prime lynching target, scum would be unlikely to kill him, since the town might do their dirty work for them. I believe one scum group thought that if they kill Piratepete, they would avoid overlap with other scum groups. Make sense?
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 19:04:16 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Feb 4, 2008 19:04:16 GMT -5
Good news is, we got a scum. Bad news is, my leading candidate for scum is now dead, and was not scum. So I start from square one. I'm beginning to wonder if we should be trusting the non-roleclaim offered by Roosh. Being more specific, dear Mandates, does a cryptic roleclaim such as the one he offered really not violate the rules against roleclaiming? And if it does not, is there a way that the real role's player could similarly claim without losing his or her powers? I know usually slips like the one I bolded aren't regarded very highly. But... "we"?? Are you the mother or the daughter of one of the factions? Underline, people. Underlines are your friends. Bold doesn't show up in some of the browsers too well.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 19:19:46 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 4, 2008 19:19:46 GMT -5
There's nothing like the taste of vindication...and cannibalism?...to put a spring in your step in the morning.
I don't know how much information we can hope to wring from these deaths, but I'm damn sure going to try to wring whatever I can out of them.
Hypothetical observations off the top of my head:
The color could indicate that NAF was Vig-killed, while Cat and Pete suffered death at the hands of only two of the three factions? Certainly not very compelling with a sample size of only one Night of Death, but it was what popped into my head upon reading the dawn post.
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 19:30:34 GMT -5
Post by Death By Irony on Feb 4, 2008 19:30:34 GMT -5
A voice booms from the heavens:
"Oops. Got my notes mixed up there.
NAF1138 was but a meager peasant.
Sorry about that.
Will be updating the roster momentarily."
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 19:33:05 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 4, 2008 19:33:05 GMT -5
You better be sorry! Sheesh, I almost had a heart attack when I thought about how I had screwed thinking I was vanilla. I never live if I am town. BAH! Go town.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 19:33:25 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Feb 4, 2008 19:33:25 GMT -5
There's nothing like the taste of vindication...and cannibalism?...to put a spring in your step in the morning. I don't know how much information we can hope to wring from these deaths, but I'm damn sure going to try to wring whatever I can out of them. Hypothetical observations off the top of my head: The color could indicate that NAF was Vig-killed, while Cat and Pete suffered death at the hands of only two of the three factions? Certainly not very compelling with a sample size of only one Night of Death, but it was what popped into my head upon reading the dawn post. To be honest, it seemed more likely for me that one of the factions cross-killed (and, thus, killed NAF), the other two factions killed a peasant each and the Vigilante sat his/her Night out. Why would you think Cat or Pete were "double"-killed? And, for that matter, what would make you think NAF was "re-educated" by Mao Tse Tung?
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 19:40:58 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 4, 2008 19:40:58 GMT -5
<snip>And if it does not, is there a way that the real role's player could similarly claim without losing his or her powers? [/color][/quote] All somebody would have to do would be say Roosh is lying.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 19:54:02 GMT -5
Post by Hawkmod on Feb 4, 2008 19:54:02 GMT -5
Okay. Apparently we did have about as bad a night as we could of expected.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 20:02:27 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 4, 2008 20:02:27 GMT -5
Well, so much for the vindication. The floating dumpling giveth, and the floating dumpling taketh away... The public way in which NAF was dispatched vs the more private presentations of carnage for Pete and Cat was really the only thing that stood out to me. I suppose NAF's (mis)alignment may have influenced me a bit too. I wondered if my misdirected attention in NAF's direction may have helped a Vig sniff him out. That's what I get for thinking with my ego.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 20:18:19 GMT -5
Post by Hawkmod on Feb 4, 2008 20:18:19 GMT -5
Good news is, we got a scum. Bad news is, my leading candidate for scum is now dead, and was not scum. So I start from square one. I'm beginning to wonder if we should be trusting the non-roleclaim offered by Roosh. Being more specific, dear Mandates, does a cryptic roleclaim such as the one he offered really not violate the rules against roleclaiming? And if it does not, is there a way that the real role's player could similarly claim without losing his or her powers?FOS Drainbead. I can only see two types of people this would be an issue for. Either power roles who would want to know what they can and cannot say, or scum wanting to know when they can take out power roles (or perhaps pretend to have them). Since power roles, according to Heaven, already know the answer to the question, Drainbead has just jumped to the top of my scum list.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 20:23:16 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Feb 4, 2008 20:23:16 GMT -5
Well, so much for the vindication. The floating dumpling giveth, and the floating dumpling taketh away... The public way in which NAF was dispatched vs the more private presentations of carnage for Pete and Cat was really the only thing that stood out to me. I suppose NAF's (mis)alignment may have influenced me a bit too. I wondered if my misdirected attention in NAF's direction may have helped a Vig sniff him out. That's what I get for thinking with my ego. Got you. The thing is that the Booming Voice of Heavens (tm) pretty much told us that any and all color (unless it were a "brutally murdered" one) was provided by the killer(s) them/her/himsel/f/selves. I thought maybe you detected some kind of merger in NAF's kill. I kinda started metagaming myself when I saw that NAF had been killed by Giants' fans rioting. But, when I checked the Night time thread, I saw that the Booming Voice of Heaven's (tm) herself had made that comment...
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 21:22:31 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Feb 4, 2008 21:22:31 GMT -5
Well, so much for the vindication. The floating dumpling giveth, and the floating dumpling taketh away... The public way in which NAF was dispatched vs the more private presentations of carnage for Pete and Cat was really the only thing that stood out to me. I suppose NAF's (mis)alignment may have influenced me a bit too. I wondered if my misdirected attention in NAF's direction may have helped a Vig sniff him out. That's what I get for thinking with my ego. Got you. The thing is that the Booming Voice of Heavens (tm) pretty much told us that any and all color (unless it were a "brutally murdered" one) was provided by the killer(s) them/her/himsel/f/selves. I thought maybe you detected some kind of merger in NAF's kill. I kinda started metagaming myself when I saw that NAF had been killed by Giants' fans rioting. But, when I checked the Night time thread, I saw that the Booming Voice of Heaven's (tm) herself had made that comment... Quoth the Mandate: CatInASuit, Peasant, was made into delicious dumpling stuffing. piratepete, Peasant, was garrotted with a wire and attacked by vicious trained birds. NAF1138, Peasant, was trampled by stampeding Giants. Note I underlined the "and" in piratepete's method of death. The Mandate asked the killers to give the color. If there was a double target, piratepete was probably the one. Only the killers would know for sure, depending on what they sent to the Mandate. Either two groups sent differing methods (garrotte/vicious birds) or one group sent both. If he was double targeted, I'm a bit disappointed that the Vig didn't sit the night out.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 21:43:13 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Feb 4, 2008 21:43:13 GMT -5
Got you. The thing is that the Booming Voice of Heavens (tm) pretty much told us that any and all color (unless it were a "brutally murdered" one) was provided by the killer(s) them/her/himsel/f/selves. I thought maybe you detected some kind of merger in NAF's kill. I kinda started metagaming myself when I saw that NAF had been killed by Giants' fans rioting. But, when I checked the Night time thread, I saw that the Booming Voice of Heaven's (tm) herself had made that comment... Quoth the Mandate: CatInASuit, Peasant, was made into delicious dumpling stuffing. piratepete, Peasant, was garrotted with a wire and attacked by vicious trained birds. NAF1138, Peasant, was trampled by stampeding Giants. Note I underlined the "and" in piratepete's method of death. The Mandate asked the killers to give the color. If there was a double target, piratepete was probably the one. Only the killers would know for sure, depending on what they sent to the Mandate. Either two groups sent differing methods (garrotte/vicious birds) or one group sent both. (snip) OK. Sounds reasonable. However, I asked that question to ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies ( CTTDSWHC). Why are you answering it?
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 21:47:03 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Feb 4, 2008 21:47:03 GMT -5
Okay. Apparently we did have about as bad a night as we could of expected. No, it could have been worse. Four town people could have died. Heh. This sucks. CatinaSuit was another suspect of mine behind koldanar, and I was just beginning to warm up to the case that was being made against piratepete. Now I have to completely go back to the drawing board in terms of figuring out who is a scum. Of course, considering they all turned up peasant maybe I should look at who I think is towniest and vote for them, since it's obviously my scumdar was calibrated on Opposite Day. Also, I think this Night's results is a point in the column of the idea that we can't rely on cross-kills and relying/hoping that scum help us townies out.
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 22:17:17 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Feb 4, 2008 22:17:17 GMT -5
Quoth the Mandate: CatInASuit, Peasant, was made into delicious dumpling stuffing. piratepete, Peasant, was garrotted with a wire and attacked by vicious trained birds. NAF1138, Peasant, was trampled by stampeding Giants. Note I underlined the "and" in piratepete's method of death. The Mandate asked the killers to give the color. If there was a double target, piratepete was probably the one. Only the killers would know for sure, depending on what they sent to the Mandate. Either two groups sent differing methods (garrotte/vicious birds) or one group sent both. (snip) OK. Sounds reasonable. However, I asked that question to ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies ( CTTDSWHC). Why are you answering it? I didn't see that you specifically asked Cookies a question. I was commenting on your comments. Sorry if you wanted an answer from her, but I've reread your post again and I don't see a question posed to anyone.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 22:43:04 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Feb 4, 2008 22:43:04 GMT -5
OK. Sounds reasonable. However, I asked that question to ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies ( CTTDSWHC). Why are you answering it? I didn't see that you specifically asked Cookies a question. I was commenting on your comments. Sorry if you wanted an answer from her, but I've reread your post again and I don't see a question posed to anyone. Usually, when I quote someone, I will ask that question to that person. And in this case, it was something that roused my suspicion (in a metagaming kind of way). I would have understood an answer to said question framed in a way that explained you were answering something not directed at yourself. But your unexpected answer made me raise an eyebrow.
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 23:14:52 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Feb 4, 2008 23:14:52 GMT -5
Sorry, digit. Other than quoting cookies post, I didn't see anything directed toward her, or restricting anyone else from commenting. If you are going to ask a question, put a question mark in there. I mean, really, I was commenting on your comments, not responding to a question you posed to someone else. I'm not sure why it would rouse your suspicions that other people might have opinions, and want to comment on the game.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 4, 2008 23:33:07 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Feb 4, 2008 23:33:07 GMT -5
What a relief to log in and not see a new PM waiting for me.
This is going to be a quick game if this stays the pattern, 4 dead peasents and not much to show for it.
However, all the deaths thus far being peasents, and with 16 people left we are looking at only 6 vanilla peasents left (and 4 doctors) So even on a purely random vote we have a 37% chance of hitting scum.
The choice for night kills is interesting, CatinaSuit, I can see, wasn't getting any heat, nice safe townie choice. Piratepete is a strange choice, except if he was offed by the Vig. NAF, again a fair enough choice, didn't really factor into voting during the day, fairly safe bet. Conjecture he was double killed? which would then explain Pete's death being at the hands of the Vig. That would wrap things up in a nice parcel, but Mafia rarely presents nicely wrapped parcels, and this relies on colour, which unless stated otherwise is unreliable to place any substance on.
On to the business at hand today, find a scum and cut his head off.
I will not be renewing my vote for Pleo. While I still disagree with his vote for a no lynch, I did a reread of all his posts to date, and nothing else there was saying scum to me. The other two full rereads I did are now pointless, as the targets are now dead. So I have a couple of people in mind that I am going to review their posts and see what I can see.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Feb 5, 2008 0:31:32 GMT -5
I hate being nitpicky, but this IS a good point to ask the Mods about: Is the "And" in piratepete's death due to the MODS, or was that simply inserted by the killer? IE: Will the Mods show double kills by simply applying both to the Victim, or will they only receive one flavored death randomly chosen (since the deaths are all done simultaneously)?I kinda buy into the double kill logic actually. And This is the kind of Night I worried about- the likely hood that at least 3 townies were going to die weighed heavily in my mind as I'm a cynical bastard. And BAD Drainbead! Bad! FOS for you!I already told you how to go about trying to figure out what's best for your own inner enlightenment, the fact that you now raise an issue with it is worrisome to me. Especially after I REALLY liked your analysis of me in Day 1 (on how I play Mafia vs. How I play Town). I'll have to think about you now in greater detail. And sorry NAF, I guess I was wrong. You DID come off as really unnecessarily townie though.... But next time I won't be so quick to judge you.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 5, 2008 4:06:30 GMT -5
Dead on Night 1 again. Why me!! Oh well, at least I made breakfast for everyone. Go town!!
|
|
|
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 5, 2008 7:12:54 GMT -5
Good news is, we got a scum. Bad news is, my leading candidate for scum is now dead, and was not scum. So I start from square one. I'm beginning to wonder if we should be trusting the non-roleclaim offered by Roosh. Being more specific, dear Mandates, does a cryptic roleclaim such as the one he offered really not violate the rules against roleclaiming? And if it does not, is there a way that the real role's player could similarly claim without losing his or her powers? I know usually slips like the one I bolded aren't regarded very highly. But... "we"?? Are you the mother or the daughter of one of the factions? Underline, people. Underlines are your friends. Bold doesn't show up in some of the browsers too well.Nope, just a general "we" referring to the collective group of us. Nice try, though. And I suppose that if the power roles truly know what they can and cannot do to counterclaim a false claim, Roosh is telling the truth. It just confuses me to see how someone can pretty much claim but not violate the rule against claiming. It seems like a toothless rule to me. And from hawkeyeop: Really? You can only see two types of people who might have asked the question I asked? I can see...well, three and a half, I suppose. My concerns are with the application of a rule that doesn't seem like it has much of a point if it can be applied in such a manner. To me, this rule is "You can lose your powers if you claim, but if you claim in such a way that you don't specifically come out and say the actual name or role, but you say it in a way that everyone knows you're not only a power role, but specifically which power role you are, you're fine." Mind you, I have no desire to see Roosh lose his powers, but I also wanted to make sure he wasn't conning us based on a massive loophole in the rules.
|
|
|
Post by diggitcamara on Feb 5, 2008 9:09:25 GMT -5
I know usually slips like the one I bolded aren't regarded very highly. But... "we"?? Are you the mother or the daughter of one of the factions? Underline, people. Underlines are your friends. Bold doesn't show up in some of the browsers too well.Nope, just a general "we" referring to the collective group of us. Nice try, though. (snip) But that's precisely it, isn't it? If you had been referring to the "collective we", it would have been wrong, since "collective we" lynched a peasant. And even before the correction about NAF's peasanthood came, "collective we" simply couldn't claim to have gotten scum.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 5, 2008 9:56:55 GMT -5
Hoo boy.
OK, here goes. I've been thinking about this for 48 hours now, puzzling and re-reading and trying to make the pieces fit, and I've reached a conclusion and I was really hoping I'd be alive to share it. I am, so here it is:
I think Roosh is lying. I think he is therefore very likely to be scum. I think we should lynch him toDay, barring spectacularly unexpected developments. And this is why:
On Day One, at #290, Pleonast expresses concerns about Roosh's claim; when I ask him about it, Pleo replies at #297:
OK. Couple of possibilities here. One is that Pleo is lying, and has never discussed this with the mods. One is that Pleo is telling the truth, in which case Roosh is either lying or has lost his powers. Moving along. At #336, in a pretty geyser-ish post, Roosh responds to Pleo thusly:
Strip away the sidesteps and evasive language and the intent of this is evident: Roosh is claiming to have discussed the matter with the mods and (ostensibly) received clearance for his claim.
Thus, at this point, Pleo and Roosh are both claiming to have made an inquiry of the gods, and received different answers. I can thus think of no conclusion other than that either Pleo or Roosh is lying. (Well, I guess the mods could be giving different answers to different people, but that would be nonsensical).
One is lying. Which one? We can't know. Except... it's sort of as drainbead has been saying. Does it really make sense that the game would be designed with a rule so easily manipulated or sidestepped? Are we really to believe that Roosh "outwitted" the mods, and they just said, "Oh, well, Roosh figured us out, guess we'll have to let him do it?"
Well, no. And once I started looking at Roosh's posts from that standpoint, other things started jumping out at me. Like this (from #336, related to how other players could claim):
He's encouraging other power roles, if a claim is needed, to do what he's done. If he's lying, and he's scum, why wouldn't he do this? Anyone who tries to follow his blueprint will lose their powers, and be revealed as a target.
See, the one possibility I had been reserving as as possibility in my head was that Roosh is telling the truth about his role, but didn't check with mods before he made his claim, and has lost his powers. In such a case, he might not want to reveal the power loss in order to keep the scum guessing.
But the above passage eliminates that possibility. If Roosh lost his powers as a result of his claim, he would never encourage other power roles to do what he did. So it comes down to either Roosh is lying, or Pleonast is. One of their claims is much more believable.
Vote Roosh
This vote is highly unlikely to change toDay. If I am right, and Roosh is lying, I strongly urge the true weak Doctor to say nothing that might result in a loss of powers or in exposure.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 10:31:40 GMT -5
Post by Hawkmod on Feb 5, 2008 10:31:40 GMT -5
Story,
I think you are dismissing another possibility, one in which I think is most likely. Roosh knew he would lose his powers, but doesn't want to admit it. He wants to keep the scum thinking that he and other power roles can "claim without claiming" to better protect themselves against night kills. I read your highlighted passage as not encouraging other power roles to claim, just telling them how to claim if they must. I could be misreading Roosh, but that’s what I’m going on. For now, I will not vote Roosh without a counter claim.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 10:35:35 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 5, 2008 10:35:35 GMT -5
Story, I think you are dismissing another possibility, one in which I think is most likely. Roosh knew he would lose his powers, but doesn't want to admit it. He wants to keep the scum thinking that he and other power roles can "claim without claiming" to better protect themselves against night kills. Then why did he explicitly claim to have talked with the Mod? If he's lying to the town but he's pro-town, then he's screwing us over collectively. He's created a massive disconnect between himself and Pleonast: one of them is clearly lying. Do you disagree with this statement? And if lying is not grounds for lynching, then what is?Why would he tell them to claim in this way? What advantage is there to this method of claiming, if it results in power loss anyway?
|
|