|
Day Two
Feb 8, 2008 15:33:19 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Feb 8, 2008 15:33:19 GMT -5
How is it that people keep ignoring Pleonast in all of this? This is twice now that someone has taken what I've said and interpreted it only to include Roosh, without taking any note of the fact that Pleonast came off to me as more scummy than Roosh after the whole argument was over. I just cannot see any way to reconcile what both of them have said. Pleonast has ignored direct questions to him to clarify what he asked to the mods to get the "line in the sand" idea. It's his statement that caused storyteller to jump on Roosh in the first place. He then unvoted Roosh after the second roleclaim contained information that directly contradicted something that he claimed the mods had said. To me, Pleonast caused this whole second roleclaim to happen. Semi-thankfully, if Roosh is telling the truth, he had already lost his powers before being forced to re-roleclaim, but I think this was done with the specific intent of forcing Roosh to lose his powers. This is basically what I outlined in my "well, what if Pleonast is the liar" counter-argument. When I read your post the first time, I thought it was more of a "drag out the Roosh problem" post, but on a re-look I suppose it was more even-handed between Pleonast and Roosh. I wish I had something to add, but I'm pretty much just brain-farting. There is very little to go on and it seems like the majority of the town is being quiet. If we use Blade Runner as an example, the quieter the town is the easier it is the scum to hide. As long as the scum never have to say anything means the townies can't pick out scum tells. I also think that the fact that we still have about 5 daysish before the Day ends is making people sluggish. I think if the Day had a closer end date people would be more willing to speak up. Considering right now only 2 people are voting...yeah. In the interest of getting a vote out there and perhaps getting people to talk... Vote Peasant SmurfI'm a bit suspicious of Pleonast, but I want to see what other people's opinions are about whether the Pleonast/Roosh divide means that one of the two HAS to be lying. Smurf, on the other hand, got a lot of flak for "lurking" and not contributing much on Day One. He seems to have gone back into that as the Roosh debate expanded. C'mon Smurf, say something please?
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 8, 2008 17:41:14 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 8, 2008 17:41:14 GMT -5
I'm a bit suspicious of Pleonast, but I want to see what other people's opinions are about whether the Pleonast/Roosh divide means that one of the two HAS to be lying. It is of my professional Opinion that Pleonast is NOT lying and I can totally see how his interpretation of the rules differed from mine. Remember this is not Pleo vs. Roosh's interpretation of the Rules. It comes down to THE MODS and how they regard the claims "Implicitly vs. Explicitly" which sucks (as there's not a concrete area to stand on for claims, and you kinda have to try to think like the Mod). AND if you remember Pleo's interpretation at the end the Day actually WAS the correct one. I just had no idea of that, until AFTER I lost my powers. Hence my post in where I countered him and said I had talked to the Mods as well, well I had. It's just that the Mods refused to acknowledge that I had lost my powers during the Day. So I looked REALLY stupid at Night when I realized that I was wrong. (Even though it was over SUCH a SMALL wording.... That's what hurts, that i was so close and yet so far). I actually feel very good about Pleo right now, and Drainbead that's the 2nd post of yours I've disliked now today (the vote for him and the other post of questioning myself, in which it felt like trying to stir up the pot again). You and Storyteller are the two people I'm most willing to vote for at the end of this Day easily, Storyteller more so currently (and that's where my vote shall stay), but if you're up there, I wouldn't mind seeing you hang either. But I do NOT believe Pleonast is the Play for Today at ALL, because I do not believe this case is as simple as One is telling the truth, and one is lying. If such was the case, then Pleo told the Truth, and I THOUGHT I was telling the Truth with the facts that I had at the Time. That's why my sudden role reversal of him today in suspicion even though yes he voted for me. But I understand his vote perhaps the best of the 3 people who voted for me.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 8, 2008 20:04:49 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 8, 2008 20:04:49 GMT -5
AND if you remember Pleo's interpretation at the end the Day actually WAS the correct one. I just had no idea of that, until AFTER I lost my powers. Hence my post in where I countered him and said I had talked to the Mods as well, well I had. It's just that the Mods refused to acknowledge that I had lost my powers during the Day. So I looked REALLY stupid at Night when I realized that I was wrong. (Even though it was over SUCH a SMALL wording.... That's what hurts, that i was so close and yet so far). Then why, on THIS Day, did you and Pleonast have this exchange? (Pardon me for not being able to do the direct quote--the first paragraph is from Pleonast, the next line is from Roosh) I don't understand the excuse you're using. If we're to believe you, we have to get past the fact that you lied to us up until your second roleclaim toDay. I have never once mentioned Pleonast's interpretation at the end of the Day, because the quote I mentioned above, the one I'm taking such issue with, was made today. If you knew that you could have said "footwear" and not "shoes" since the PM you got from the Mods last Night, how is it that you let "any statement by a player even implying she has a non-Peasant role will invalidate any powers that she may have" slide? Because obviously, according to the PM you allege to have gotten, by the time Pleonast commented about not even being able to imply, you a) knew that was false, and b) had already lost your powers, so there was absolutely no risk in pointing out that Pleonast was lying. unvote PleonastI'm not going to vote you quite yet, Roosh. Something stinks here, and I'm having trouble figuring out where the smell is coming from. Your most recent post, however, did not help your case any with me.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 8, 2008 20:04:57 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 8, 2008 20:04:57 GMT -5
<sigh>
Hey, all, if anyone else feels I need to continue defending my decision to vote for Roosh based on him making a Day One statement that he himself has admitted turned out to be false, I will do so. For the moment, though, I think I've said the same thing twenty times, and a twenty-first is not going to clarify matters any, so I'll be treating Roosh's vote as the OMGUS vote that it is.
Regarding Pleonast: Given the new information provided by Roosh, I can definitely see compatibility between his statements and Roosh's (revised) statements. I no longer see any particular reason that either of them has to be lying. Pleonast is pretty clearly either scum or a power role. If he's scum, he was prescient enough to anticipate the likely mod ruling on this subject, which - as he's a pretty sharp guy - is absolutely not out of the question. However, I see no genuine reason to vote for him at this time.
Which leaves... what? Not much. The Great Roosh drama dominated the beginning part of this Day, and there has been virtually no game happening since that drama ended. The clues, if they are to be found, will be found in Day One. Back to the koldanar wagon, to see if anything that happened subsequent to last analysis of that wagon that might be scum-motivated.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 8, 2008 20:07:33 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 8, 2008 20:07:33 GMT -5
I don't understand the excuse you're using. If we're to believe you, we have to get past the fact that you lied to us up until your second roleclaim toDay. Unfortunately, drain, I think it's very possible that he did. Roosh has made it clear that he does not believe that townies need be honest if they see a benefit in lying, and while I don't agree with this opinion, I think we're going to have to deal with the fact that it is his opinion, and he's going to act accordingly whether he's pro-town or scum.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 8, 2008 20:25:48 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Feb 8, 2008 20:25:48 GMT -5
While my reread is progressing only slowly, I'd like to make one point.
If Roosh had not made his claim, it's quite likely that I'd have voted for him by now, because he lied. I voted Hal Yesterday for advocating Villagers lie. The only reason I didn't vote Roosh Today is that I hadn't finished my last reread before he came clean. I wanted to make sure Story had fairly characterised Roosh's claims.
Unfortunately I am going to have to go off to the land of Nod soon, you'll just have to wait for the results of my deliberations.
|
|
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 8, 2008 21:16:01 GMT -5
Post by Death By Irony on Feb 8, 2008 21:16:01 GMT -5
Wikipedia wrote:Emperor Xian of Han (Traditional 漢獻帝, Simplified 汉献帝, Pinyin Hà n Xià n dì, Wade-Giles Han Hsien-ti; 181-234, reigned 189-220) was the last emperor of the Chinese Han Dynasty. He was forced to abdicate in favor of Cao Pi and was given the title of Duke of Shanyang ("Shanyang gong").
Emperor Xian was the son of Emperor Ling and was the brother of Emperor Liu Bian (who later became known as Prince of Hongnong). He was placed on the throne in 189 after Dong Zhuo removed his brother from the throne. This act was seen as a sign to all the other lords that Dǒng was in full control of the empire. However, after Dong Zhuo was assassinated in 192, Emperor Xian became first a puppet and then was stranded in Luoyang with the warlords formally acknowledging him but giving him no aid. Eventually, Emperor Xian came under the control of Cao Cao in 196, and Cao used Emperor Xià n as a titular ruler effectively, issuing edicts beneficial to him in Emperor Xian's name, greatly helping him in his quest to reunify the empire, which appeared inevitable until Cao's defeat by Sun Quan at the Battle of Red Cliffs, leading to Sun and Liu Bei's entrenchment in their territories. In 220, the Han dynasty was finally overthrown by Cao Cao's son Cao Pi, ending more than 400 years of Han dynastic rule and ushering in the era of the Three Kingdoms. Top-of-the-page votecount: 1 - storyteller0910 (Roosh) 1 - Peasant Smurf (atarus)
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 8, 2008 23:00:11 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 8, 2008 23:00:11 GMT -5
Unfortunately, drain, I think it's very possible that he did. Roosh has made it clear that he does not believe that townies need be honest if they see a benefit in lying, and while I don't agree with this opinion, I think we're going to have to deal with the fact that it is his opinion, and he's going to act accordingly whether he's pro-town or scum. Actually yeah. That almost sums it up kinda well. Though I'd have an addendum. Rather than saying "Townies," I'd say POWER ROLES. As I believe normal Townies shouldn't really try to lie or use deceit if possible actually. Regular townies pulling these crazy stunts aren't really all that helpful, and I agree slightly with you on that part Story, it'd be problematic and tougher to find scum if EVERYONE lied. However, I am of the mind that Power Roles know more than a normal Townie (since well they know their own roles in addition to that of a normal generic townie), and SHOULD use whatever means possible to help further the Town's Cause. By any means necessary. So to sum up: Townies lying. Not so cool. I'd rather avoid that (even as a player myself, I'd rather not lie if i'm just a generic Townie) Power Roles lying. That's fine in my book: Any Means Necessary. I don't understand the excuse you're using. If we're to believe you, we have to get past the fact that you lied to us up until your second roleclaim toDay. Yes. You call it lying, I call it deceiving Scum into thinking I still have my abilities. I didn't want to HAVE to role claim, and even though I KNEW that Pleonast's stance was correct, I didn't want to reveal that I had LOST my powers. So I hoped we'd just move on, because again, I saw my role as Pretty confirmable, lying actions or not. So yeah. I tried to keep up the pretense of having my powers, because Pleonast was right and I figured any ACTUAL other power roles would realize that I was up a creek without any paddles and just leave me alone then at least. But it didn't quite work out.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 9, 2008 8:21:34 GMT -5
However, I am of the mind that Power Roles know more than a normal Townie (since well they know their own roles in addition to that of a normal generic townie), and SHOULD use whatever means possible to help further the Town's Cause. By any means necessary. ...and of course, if your personal judgment on what helps further the Town's Cause is faulty in any given interest, I guess the rest of us are just well and truly screwed, is that about right? We'll have to trust in your great and august judgment, because you're not going to give the rest of us any say in what is good for us? So here's where we stand. Nothing Roosh says, has said, or will say can be trusted even a little bit, whether he is town or scum. This is not an optimal state of affairs but it must be assumed from here on out, as we analyze behavior and future information. And that's basically the last I have to say about this; given the second sentence of this paragraph, further conversation on the subject is bound to be fruitless. Orphan quote tag fixed courtesy of the Mandate of Heaven. See, we're not totally evil.
|
|
|
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 9, 2008 9:37:37 GMT -5
even though I KNEW that Pleonast's stance was correct And here's where I have a problem with all this. If what you said in your second roleclaim is true, Pleonast is not correct. He says you can't explicity or implicitly claim, you say you could have implicitly claimed had you simply done it well enough. I can't reconcile these two statements, and I'm not understanding how you are able to.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 12:18:42 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 9, 2008 12:18:42 GMT -5
He says you can't explicity or implicitly claim. This is the MOD's Correct interpretation. I am saying I ALMOST apparently didn't implicitly claim. If I had said footwear instead of Shoes, apparently that would not be implicitly claiming. But because i said shoes, I implicitly claimed. Fair enough? (And note, Storyteller, at least now you know I will not be lying anymore, as I've simply been reduced to a normal townie. There is no need for me to Lie). -And this is just MY opinion. No need to get into hysterics "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!" just because I happen to believe in this. You've caught the problem, contained it, and it's just a single player (who probably will be gone tonight). So I doubt you've lost much other than a confirmed role that you had to force out of the shadows.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 12:21:40 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 9, 2008 12:21:40 GMT -5
I'd like to hear more from: diggitcamara 8 atarus 6 Pleonast 4 hockeymonkey 4 mhaye 3 Diomedes 2 Kat 2 nesta 2 Hal Briston 2
It's been a good amount of Time since I've talked, AND it's going to be nearly a week since the Day started in a few days, I'd like to hope that everyone should be able to get into the double digits of posting (as this has been a longer Day than in previous mafia games).
Or did Day 1 do nothing for anyone?
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 13:59:19 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Feb 9, 2008 13:59:19 GMT -5
I'd like to hear more from: diggitcamara 8 atarus 6 Pleonast 4 hockeymonkey 4 mhaye 3 Diomedes 2 Kat 2 nesta 2 Hal Briston 2 It's been a good amount of Time since I've talked, AND it's going to be nearly a week since the Day started in a few days, I'd like to hope that everyone should be able to get into the double digits of posting (as this has been a longer Day than in previous mafia games). Or did Day 1 do nothing for anyone? ... where are you getting those numbers? (or, alternatively, what are they supposed to mean?)
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 14:06:36 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Feb 9, 2008 14:06:36 GMT -5
I rather suspect that they're the number of posts each of these posters has made in this thread. (You are now shown to have nine posts, including this one).
I'll get to ten posts if I get to ten posts. I'm not going to post fluff just to up my postcount to an arbitrary minimum someone else has decided on. If and when I have something to say, I will post it. Otherwise I will keep silent. Because fluff posts with no content are looked on as a scum tell.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 15:16:23 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 9, 2008 15:16:23 GMT -5
Oy vey. I fear we are descending into some not-so-good territory with how things have been going. As I said previously, agree with drain that the statements made by Roosh and Pleo have not been satisfactorily reconciled for me, but at this point there just isn't enough information, not enough post histories, or vote histories to do much with that particular hole right now. I am not confident enough to vote for either of them just based on that mismatch alone. At the same time, I am even less confident about finding anyone scummy for finding either of them scummy. The few posts I've traded with atarus are not even close to my threshold of poking at possible leads, either.
Meanwhile, there are entire wings of this game that contain people that I frankly have forgotten are even playing. Come on y'all, this game is getting anemic.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 16:37:15 GMT -5
Post by Boozahol Squid, P.I. on Feb 9, 2008 16:37:15 GMT -5
The problem, my Roosh, is that a large part of the discussion yesterday, and almost the entirety of the the discussion today has been about you. Unfortunately, neither you nor the main participators in that participation ended up coming off as scummy: your claim has held up due to lack of counterclaim, and your pursuers ended up having a pretty decent reason for questioning your statements. The person I'd intended to watch for today for signs of further scumminess woke up dead. atarus tossed a vote down on Smurf for lurking... which normally I think is a decent strategy, but your chart shows that half of the damn Town has been lurking. Heck, I'm lurking, and I never lurk: I just never sign on and find anything particularly calling out for my attentions.
Honestly, I think the quicker we move on from attacking our Former Shoe Defender will be the best. drainbead mentioned in her unvote: Pleo vote that she was going to consider hopping back on the lynch Roosh wagon. So I'll vote drainbead, for beating a dead horse.
vote:drainbead
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 17:03:23 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 9, 2008 17:03:23 GMT -5
Was considering voting Roosh, but didn't. I had one question I wanted an adequate answer for, and as you can see, I finally got one. I only had to ask the question three or four different times before I got it, though. So your "beating a dead horse" is my "never getting a satisfactory answer to a simple question." Not to mention, the horse never got beat, as I didn't actually vote for Roosh, and wouldn't have unless he kept dodging me.
Think about the reasoning for your vote, Diomedes. Are you after me because you legitimately think I'm scum, or because I just happened to be participating more than almost anyone else toDay, and therefore put my ass on the line to get some answers and clarification?
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 17:46:35 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Feb 9, 2008 17:46:35 GMT -5
Was considering voting Roosh, but didn't. I had one question I wanted an adequate answer for, and as you can see, I finally got one. I only had to ask the question three or four different times before I got it, though. So your "beating a dead horse" is my "never getting a satisfactory answer to a simple question." Not to mention, the horse never got beat, as I didn't actually vote for Roosh, and wouldn't have unless he kept dodging me. Think about the reasoning for your vote, Diomedes. Are you after me because you legitimately think I'm scum, or because I just happened to be participating more than almost anyone else toDay, and therefore put my ass on the line to get some answers and clarification? Well, to be sure you kind of dismissed out of hands my questions to yourself. And I have to agree with Diomedes, I truly believed the whole matter between Roosh and storyteller to be settled, when you tried, several times to drag it back into the limelight. When it clearly isn't in the interest of the town to keep a narrow focus on a single issue, involving (at most) three people. So, for scummy-like actions, I'll vote drainbead
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 9, 2008 20:14:29 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 9, 2008 20:14:29 GMT -5
Was considering voting Roosh, but didn't. I had one question I wanted an adequate answer for, and as you can see, I finally got one. I only had to ask the question three or four different times before I got it, though. So your "beating a dead horse" is my "never getting a satisfactory answer to a simple question." Not to mention, the horse never got beat, as I didn't actually vote for Roosh, and wouldn't have unless he kept dodging me. Think about the reasoning for your vote, Diomedes. Are you after me because you legitimately think I'm scum, or because I just happened to be participating more than almost anyone else toDay, and therefore put my ass on the line to get some answers and clarification? Well, to be sure you kind of dismissed out of hands my questions to yourself. And I have to agree with Diomedes, I truly believed the whole matter between Roosh and storyteller to be settled, when you tried, several times to drag it back into the limelight. When it clearly isn't in the interest of the town to keep a narrow focus on a single issue, involving (at most) three people. So, for scummy-like actions, I'll vote drainbead....aaaaand here's another person forgetting that I cared more about Pleonast than storyteller--hell, my whole line of questioning has been focused on what I saw as a pretty firm contradiction between the two. Am I not making myself clear? Also, just because you thought it was finished doesn't mean I did, especially since you were apparently limiting your focus between Roosh and storyteller, and I cared more about Pleonast. And it isn't in the town's interest to remain silent at this point either, which is what everyone else was pretty much doing while this whole three-day discussion was going on. Yet I have votes on me because I actually cared enough to actually play this game, and am therefore the safest person out of the four vocals for other people to start a bandwagon on. Metagame this a bit, diggit. I've been scum in three games in a row before this--it's not difficult to figure out that I'm a bit different now than I was in the previous games. I'm not afraid to die to prove a point here--hell, I can get back on the sub list, which I'm sure we'll be needing shortly--but we really need to lynch scum now, and I'm not it. I happen to be trying very hard to find scum while everyone else is sitting back on their laurels, and it's frustrating as hell (but sadly predictable) that I'm getting heat for playing more aggressively.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 0:14:19 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 10, 2008 0:14:19 GMT -5
If and when I have something to say, I will post it. Otherwise I will keep silent. Because fluff posts with no content are looked on as a scum tell. So You've got nothing to say about Day 1? Or Day 2 anymore? If this is the case with a majority of the Town then we're in trouble. Because fluff posts with no content are looked on as a scum tell. Like this one? J/K. just kidding. But seriously, dudes. This silence sucks. And at this point more days of Silence have gone by than the days I've "wasted" with talking to Story, so that's a null excuse for trying to pin this on moi. My thoughts are the Scum know at this point where they stand: 6:10. One REALLY REALLY good night for them and they're at 6:6. And then after that they can deal with picking off each other. Which is what I'm worried about, because yeah, in previous Games there has been an "If I can't win, at least don't let the Town Win" sort of mentality. And if that's the case, then I can totally see the Scum loving this silence, it cuts down on targets, and it just gets us closer to the Night when they get the power again. Right now no scum has bleed yet, so I don't think they're afraid (since none of them are at 50% even, they're all doing fine)..... This going to be embarrassing if we end up 6:6 toMorrow.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 0:19:39 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Feb 10, 2008 0:19:39 GMT -5
Okay, maybe I'm Bastard-Mod-ier than the currents. I would have ruled "I hate 'footwear', get it?"* as much an implicit claim to be someone other than a peasant as much as "I hate 'shoes', get it?"*. On the other hand, I wouldn't have made it unclear beforehand, so maybe I'm just Bastard-Mod-ily different. *Paraphrases, not exact quotes. Either way, I'm going to table the thought for now, unless/until something else comes up to make me re-think about Roosh. On the other hand, I'm not going to call drainbead for asking for more clarification on the subject, since I can sympathize.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 3:42:21 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 10, 2008 3:42:21 GMT -5
So I read alot of Batman comic books.... And I've been doing some thinkin'. Batman helps solve the Identity Crisis storyline, by asking one question: "Who Benefits the Most from a Crime?"
So with this in mind, I think I'll look at our three victims in the Night: Cais, P-Pete, and NAF.
Easiest one to check out is P-Pete as he has the smallest # of posts (And yes, this means I'm not counting the TragicDenounment posts, since they were so few, and don't really factor in as the Game goes on): 1.176- first post of content, starts out with a quick Vote of GreedySmurf. Cites Nesta's analysis, and Greedy's lack of defense as reasonings.
1.180- almost fluffy- states that he "appreciates" the defense presented by Greedy, but he wanted to have a vote out on the table. Cites he voted for Greedy, since he had the most information presented vs. him. States he's not cut out for mafia.
1.90- Gives his own thoughts on Pleo's No Lynch analysis (I think he comes out saying a No Lynch is a neutral tactic). States he doesn't back the Early deadline Plans, but will vote for a lynch. His summary is this: Therefore I will not specifically back the early deadline plans. I will have a vote on the table come deadline, however. Whether it tends to the majority depends on the evidence in the majority's case's favour.
1.94- Quotes HockeyMonkey , who votes for him stating: You're saying you'd rather a no-lynch occur than vote for the someone you don't deem scummy? This is very anti-town. (which in my opinion, doesn't seem to be what he's saying). Pete then states in his reply: That is what I'm saying. Scummy in a normal game, certainly. But I think the ball-park numbers I've given show that it's a neutral tactic in this setup: town are not significantly disadvantaged by the lack of a lynching.
--I think it's a horrible defense, because he's missing the issue as it differs from what he's saying in his quoted portion earlier. He's indifferent to a No-Lynch. Not that he prefers it (which seems to be Hockey's accusation).
1.213- Votes for Koldanar, unvotes Greedy. Cites drainbead + Roosh's analysis as reasons for voting, also feels that Koldanar's defense wasn't great. Makes a side comment to Dio: about his reply to Hockey, and positively quotes/ agrees? with Hawkeye. He feels that scum are more likely to be a danger to one another during the Night.
1.262- Responds to CAIS & Hawkeye on Denouement's "magic bag". Pulls out the Noob Card as explanation to why he hasn't found any scum tells on his own (having cited others when he's voted). Addresses Roosh- states that I'm nervous when addressing CAIS' points on "forgetting" roles and such. Addresses CAIS- dislikes CAIS suspicions towards Roosh (the word "Tunnel Vision" comes up), wonders why he doesn't rely on the the evasiveness/misquoting done by Me as better reasonings to be suspicious of Me.
1.362- He Unvotes. First he addresses points against him and defends his reasonings: I will gladly admit that both votes I've made so far have been the result of a read-through or two followed by a gut feeling, which contributes to the accusations of opportunism. However, I do not believe that citing others' given analysis as supporting material for a vote equates having no reason of one's own.
I will be posting in detail tomorrow (at work), as my new spreadsheet is coming nicely. However, since several people have problems with the circumstances of my last vote, and since the majority of people seem to be following story's plan or its successors, I don't want my somewhat-hasty vote influencing the lead of the vote-count more than it must.
1.384: He states: Oh. Fine, in that case I'll leave the majority of my talking for dawn. Becoming the Nr.2 suspect in short order makes one very careful to check one's sources in any case. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And then he pretty much dies during Night 1.
Why did he die? Who benefits the Most?
Heading into Night 1, he was the #2 vote getter in fact he had 5 votes against him: piratepete (5) : Hockey Monkey, koldanar, CatInASuit, nesta, storyteller0910
Two of the people voting for him ended up being Town. But still the next Day, he could be staring at a potential 3 votes from the start. Hockeymonkey is the vote I dislike from the start, but I should read over Nesta's & Storyteller's votes as well. I haven't seen them, and probably will not tonight. But still, 3 big votes for him the next Day. This could mean he could have been an easy Vig Target (If the Vig kills the 2nd most suspicious person by votes, then this would be the case).
However, If the Vig didn't kill last night, and all 3 scum were successful, that means he was killed by Scum. But WHY?
Who Benefits the Most? - FACT: He voted for Greedy, and he voted for Koldanar. - FACT: He wasn't a Supporter of the No-Lynch, however he wasn't in favor of either Plan (even though in the end he did go along with Storyteller's 24 hour plan). His position was that he considered the No Lynch to be neutral. -Pete didn't accuse anyone at ALL. He only really agreed with other people's reasonings for voting and would cite them when he voted. This could be seen as "Me-too" voting by a Vig, and a reason for kill, but LOTS of people did this, and I'm ruling out the Vig kill still. --So it's not like Greedy would be worried about Pete being alive or anything. The guy never accused him directly. Nor did he accuse Koldanar. -Pete had Postive interactions with Hawkeye and Nesta it seemed. But Nesta would vote for him at the end, so i guess it wasn't mutual. But still. The guy didn't really stand out much.
But i think i know why Pete was killed. As it would be the reason that I would kill him most certainly at least if I was scum- He promised further analysis on Day 2. That right there is a death wish in my opinion. Storyteller says live each Day as if its your last. But Pete at the end of the Day states that he's got some analysis to do, and He'll post it on Day 2. When I was scum in BR, that's the FIRST thing I'd look for, and when I saw it I killed any player that made such a comment (i believe it was Kassia). So if such is the case, it could be a big reason for the death of our Pirate friend....
What's that mean for who's the Killer? I have no idea actually. I mean, it could be anyone that realized that. I personally know that Drainbead was my scum buddy and knew this tactic personally and so would sinjin & Kassia as it screwed them over. And Kassia I think had a roomate or so who plays here. They may know of the tactic, but that's me being egotistical, because though anyone who's read my Scum notes from that game would know it- Anyone with common sense could come up with the idea. So meta-gaming the WHO is kinda dumb.
So Who benefits the Most from Pirate Pete dying? -It hurts the Vig, and the Town, as it denies them his thoughts and analysis. So there's a reason for the Vig not to kill him even. -But who's it help: All Scum. Period. Scum want to cut down information (much like this silence), so killing off a player that states he'll post information the NEXT day is a very smart move. :sigh:
So where's that leave us? Not sure. I mean, I dislike Hockeymonkey's interpretation of his initial statements when she votes for him. But i'll need to read over it again tomorrow. As well as look at why the others voted for him. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Could Someone else PLEASE do an post by post analysis of CAIS and someone do NAF? It should have been done by now, but I'm surprised that no one else has really wanted to talk.... And since I'm not going to assign tasks to people, I'd rather someone just show initiative and pick a subject and analyze them. And ask yourself then who benefits the most with them dead? Just give your thoughts, ask some questions, anything....
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 10:26:14 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Feb 10, 2008 10:26:14 GMT -5
If and when I have something to say, I will post it. Otherwise I will keep silent. Because fluff posts with no content are looked on as a scum tell. So You've got nothing to say about Day 1? Or Day 2 anymore? If this is the case with a majority of the Town then we're in trouble. Because fluff posts with no content are looked on as a scum tell. Like this one? J/K. just kidding. No. Your post came across to me as "You will achieve a certain minimum number of posts." Now that's all well and good if I have something to say, or if I am decisively engaged in a battle. But if I am not, and have nothing to say, then the posts I make will be just fluff, that will have to be filtered out by everyone in order to be able to perceive the actual content of the thread. Consequently, fluff posts are anti-town. I'll get to 10 posts if I get to 10 posts. There is no game rule that says I must make a minimum number of posts in a day - if there were then I would obey it. There isn't though; instead we have Mod Judgement (TM) - that is if the Voice of Heaven considers that a player is not participating that player gets summoned by a Booming Voice (probably in email) to post or be subbed. It's not for you - or any other player - to decide what is and isn't an acceptable minimum participation level. Unless, of course, you adopt a Lynch Lurker strategy. But there's still no rules against it. I've said nothing about who's fault it is. Is it anyone's? I did comment on your evasion - I said I was going to review and vote if a vote was justified. Before i finished the review, you 'fessed up and the debate was over. At that point there was no more point in me posting on it, because I had nothing new to add. I'll be very surprised if we end up at 6:6. Very surprised. The actual result of last night was not the most likely; the most likely was losing one Goon. However, that's now water under the bridge. As the number of players fall, the chances of multiple factions hitting the same target, or a faction hitting a target they are protected from, increases. That's not to say it can't happen, and there's some sense in preparing for the worst case. But it's unlikely. Now I'm out this evening (assuming I can get in contact with the friend who gives me a lift home, to verify he's going tonight). So I'm not going to get anything done until tomorrow evening. (I have to prioritise jobhunting tomorrow.) Right now, I'm stuck. I'll be looking over someone's posts when I get in tonight, and see where I go from there.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 12:35:10 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Feb 10, 2008 12:35:10 GMT -5
Sorry, folks, I was sick again. I'm not sure the best way to proceed. My inclination is to reread those who were Night-killed and see if there's a reason they were killed. It is of my professional Opinion that Pleonast is NOT lying and I can totally see how his interpretation of the rules differed from mine. Remember this is not Pleo vs. Roosh's interpretation of the Rules. It comes down to THE MODS and how they regard the claims "Implicitly vs. Explicitly" which sucks (as there's not a concrete area to stand on for claims, and you kinda have to try to think like the Mod). AND if you remember Pleo's interpretation at the end the Day actually WAS the correct one. I just had no idea of that, until AFTER I lost my powers. Hence my post in where I countered him and said I had talked to the Mods as well, well I had. It's just that the Mods refused to acknowledge that I had lost my powers during the Day. So I looked REALLY stupid at Night when I realized that I was wrong. (Even though it was over SUCH a SMALL wording.... That's what hurts, that i was so close and yet so far). I actually feel very good about Pleo right now, and Drainbead that's the 2nd post of yours I've disliked now today (the vote for him and the other post of questioning myself, in which it felt like trying to stir up the pot again). This post sums things up well. There's no benefit to discuss this issue any more.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 13:19:49 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 10, 2008 13:19:49 GMT -5
Well, since Roosh asked and I'm around...I generally despise doing these (too much copying and pasting), but I'll go over CIAS. I probably won't copy and paste much, but I'll leave page numbers for each post so that you can go back and check my work if you want.
In his first post (page 2), he mentions that his posting activity will be less than usual, and brings up a few issues--a vote for the modified lynch plan, a thought about not lynching anyone who claims unless there's a counterclaim, encouraging the Vig to do as they please, and expressing a dislike for no-lynch.
We don't see him again until page 4, in which he posts another quick idea list. He brings up the fact that scum will meta-game to find town power roles. He again encourages the Vig to do as they please. He then mentions that the scum will probably cross-kill a lot, and might even forego night kills in order to set up lynches against other scum groups.
On page 5, we get a few meaty posts. Way too long to summarize, because he does a breakdown of pretty much every poster in the game. One interesting point I see is that he notes that there will probably be more defense posts from scum because of the smaller scum groups. His end scum list is denouement and Roosh, with a vote for Roosh. Also points out Pleonast and Hal Briston as possible co-conspirators for those two.
Nothing until Page 8, where he points out story, NAF (who we now know as town) and piratepete (ditto) for minor scum tells. He also hammers Roosh quite a bit for the Night 0 vote and retraction, saying the only way he would know Pleonast's role is if he's scum. Then he goes on to have a back-and-forth with storyteller. He says it's not enough to vote or FOS, but it's suspicious.
On Page 9, he argues with Roosh again, attempting to point out an inconsistency regarding the basis for the joke vote. He hammers again on Roosh as scum with Pleonast as partner. Also points out that Roosh is acting exactly like he acted when he defended himself in Blade Runner. Points out that Pleonast was the third vote on Roosh. Accurately predicts he might die overnight and again mentions that story is suspicious, and that denouepete is suspect #2.
Page 10. Is the first response after Roosh's initial claim, asks for clarification from the mods as to whether or not Roosh would have lost his powers over it. After the response, unvotes Roosh.
Page 11. Looks at other people because he doesn't like the argument against koldanar. Votes piratepete, as suspect #2. Has a minor back-and-forth again with storyteller.
Page 12. More back-and-forth with storyteller. Then says that koldanar and Peasant Smurf are worth taking a look at again in Day 2. Suggests looking at Hal Briston if piratepete is scum.
And that's it. I have three ideas, two slightly farfetched, as to why CIAS might have bitten it overnight.
1. Farfetched idea #1: Scum thought he was Mao, based on the early posts hammering that the Vig should do what he wants to. If that's the case, it's hard to say who exactly was responsible for it. 2. Farfetched idea #2: Roosh and Pleonast are really scum partners, as CIAS was hammering most of Day One. Roosh, especially, knows how tenacious CIAS is when he gets an idea in his head. They killed him overnight and then manufactured toDay's fight to try to get one of them townie cred and lose the other one, so that other scum couldn't nightkill him and the townies wouldn't lynch him. 3. When someone's last post of the Day says "I want to revisit something tomorrow" and they die, it's important to pay attention to what that something is. In this case, it was Peasant Smurf, who was getting a lot of heat yesterDay but seems to have been sort of lost in the Roosh Whoosh.
vote Peasant Smurf
|
|
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 10, 2008 13:46:59 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Feb 10, 2008 13:46:59 GMT -5
Roosh, I'm not going to quote your whole post to make my point, but you said you don't like my interpretation of a statement made by piratepete...that piratepete himself confirmed was the correct interpretation. So I'm not sure what your beef would be here. I thought it was a scummy stance, so I voted based on that.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 14:22:34 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 10, 2008 14:22:34 GMT -5
Here ya go Hockey: I just thought it was a poor defense by PiratePete, and one that really shouldn't have started, because I don't think he realized what he was getting into. As your interpretation of what he said differed from what he said, even if he then goes along to agree with YOUR interpretation. And i'll quote it for ya: 1.90- Gives his own thoughts on Pleo's No Lynch analysis (I think he comes out saying a No Lynch is a neutral tactic). States he doesn't back the Early deadline Plans, but will vote for a lynch. His summary is this: Therefore I will not specifically back the early deadline plans. I will have a vote on the table come deadline, however. Whether it tends to the majority depends on the evidence in the majority's case's favour. -PP1.94- Quotes HockeyMonkey , who votes for him stating: You're saying you'd rather a no-lynch occur than vote for the someone you don't deem scummy? This is very anti-town.- HM (which in my opinion, doesn't seem to be what he's saying). Pete then states in his reply: That is what I'm saying. Scummy in a normal game, certainly. But I think the ball-park numbers I've given show that it's a neutral tactic in this setup: town are not significantly disadvantaged by the lack of a lynching.- PP--I think it's a horrible defense, because he's missing the issue as it differs from what he's saying in his quoted portion earlier. He's indifferent to a No-Lynch. Not that he prefers it (which seems to be Hockey's accusation).
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 21:39:38 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Feb 10, 2008 21:39:38 GMT -5
Apologies for my absence (again) folks I got absolutely hammered at work the last couple of days of last week, and then had a full weekend. I've had a super quick readthrough just now, because I'm still pretty under the pump at work, which is probably going to restrict my activity the next couple of days still. From what I see doesn't look like we've moved too far past analysing the Roosh/Story set too so I haven't missed much. I see Atarus(?) has given me a little poke The only thing I have to add at this point, is before I got super busy, I had started a readthrough and note taking, which to date I had done on Day 1 for Pleo & Kat. Why them? why not? gotta start somewhere right? I will try and post a full transcript of my notes tonight, NOTE - this is not a magic bag post - I have no rabbit to pull out from my analysis. I just don't have time right now. In the interim, I will say neither of them strike me as super scummy, certainly not enough to jump up and down screaming right now before I can post the 'transcript'. The only thing is Pleo's vote for a no-lynch which has been covered already, and which side of the fence you're on as to whether you think he lied about the Mod's clarification over Roosh.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 23:22:01 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Feb 10, 2008 23:22:01 GMT -5
This game seems deader than dead. Just on this page alone is three days worth of posts.
I remember the days when a game would have about three or four pages a day. True, there was the weekend, but it seems even before that, this game was very slow moving.
BOOO HISSSS. I want stuff to read. *sniff*
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 10, 2008 23:34:32 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Feb 10, 2008 23:34:32 GMT -5
I'mma have to change my vote to Idle Thoughts because he's only contributing fluff to the thread and not helping out with discusison. Just kidding. ;D So Smurf's finally shown up and promises analyses. Since my vote was just a poke I'll remove my vote, contingent on the fact that he actually puts his analyses up soon. Unvote SmurfHowever, I have somebody else I need to poke...and that is: Vote Hal BristonI know Hal's priorities are elsewhere (and rightfully so!) but I'd like to see a little bit of discussion and/or opinion out of him. Note: I'm going to be in Boston from tomorrow until next Tuesday. I'll have internet and I should be able to check in regularly but it's just a heads-up for everybody. As for doing a NAF read-through, I don't really have the time right now but all I seem to remember from Day One was that he got some attention early on for his meta-gaming approach and got into an argument with Roosh about his wording and the fact that he was misattributing and misinterpreting things. Cookies was the only one to have a vote on him by the faux-end of the Day. Now unless I'm mistaken we only have about 48 hours before our normal deadline. I really hope some people can chime in about something or anything before then, as having only three votes on the table at this point is sort of sad.
|
|