|
Post by Pleonast on Feb 21, 2008 10:46:02 GMT -5
[ Hockey knew there had been an overlap in pete's kill. So did the two members of the faction that also killed pete. No one else did, so it was extra information that only the Vig and two scum knew. Your thinking the Vig was active during Night 1 points to you having the same information that Hockey did, ergo you are part of the faction that killed pete. This is the best argument I've seen in a while. Until I've reread enough to get a better opinion, I'm willing to Vote (ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)
|
|
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:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Feb 21, 2008 11:40:11 GMT -5
Wikipedia wrote: Top-of-the-page votecount:
3 - CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (Pleonast, nesta, Peasant Smurf) 2 - Kat (atarus, diggitcamara) 1 - Pleonast (Pygmyrugger) 1 - Hal Briston (storyteller0910) 1 - nesta (CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 21, 2008 14:07:02 GMT -5
Well, you're wrong. I have no insight as to what did or did not take place on Night 1, or any other Night. I also find it troubling that I'm being voted for based on a Day 2 WAG that I threw out based on the same death color (and Mod correction) as everyone else had to read. How's that for encouraging discussion in a game that has already had some extremely dead stretches?
If I were a scum who had the one little nibblet of extra info that has been proposed (knowledge of who my faction targeted combined with the death color for that individual, with which a deduction could be made as to whether or not the target was also targeted by someone else, but still no idea if who else targeted who, all I would know is that the Vig targeted someone) what could I possibly gain by throwing out such a WAG, other than a noose around the neck?
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Feb 21, 2008 17:12:57 GMT -5
As of right now, Kat, Hal Briston, and mhaye haven't voted. You may have missed it, but she didn't make the post that brought me to vote for her before the 24-hour deadline. Yeah I did miss that. However I went back and looked at drainbead's post and it still didn't strike me as a post that was out of place enough to warrant a vote within the last 2 hours of the Day. It just seemed too convenient. I'll also just say that I agree with mhaye's interpretation in his post. The fact that we're closing in on the artificial deadline yet again and Kat is one of the three people that still hasn't voted makes me more suspicious of her. The case against Cookies is interesting. I understand how her talk on Day Two could be seen as her having "extra knowledge." Of the last-minute voters for drainbead she had initially voted no lynch but said if a good case was presented she would switch and vote to lynch somebody. Like Kat, she also interpreted drainbead's statement about Smurf as a scumdar ping. In fact, her last defense post has a slight "why do you hate America?" vibe to it. When I went through and read Dio and Hawkeye's posts, two things jumped out at me. 1. Hawkeye was pro: power roles lying. 2. Hawkeye and Dio both were anti no-lynch. As far as I can tell, Hal Briston is the only person alive now that's still pro: power roles lying. Cookies and Pleonast specifically said in their votes for drainbead yesterDay that a lynch/scumdar blip is better than nothing. My vote currently holds on Kat for breaking the no lynch tie within the last two hours and basically starting the last-minute drainbead wagon. Cookies and Hal, however, I could easily switch over to, especially Hal since he didn't vote yesterDay and hasn't voted yet toDay. Pleonast is on the back burner because the things pointing toward his pro-towniness outweigh the things pointing toward his anti-towniness at the moment. Are we still going to execute the artificial deadline toDay, or are we going to ignore it again? Just curious to know if I'll need to switch my vote tomorrow.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 21, 2008 17:33:40 GMT -5
<snip> Are we still going to execute the artificial deadline toDay, or are we going to ignore it again? Just curious to know if I'll need to switch my vote tomorrow. Some of us thought we were following it. don't be a pud.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Feb 21, 2008 17:42:31 GMT -5
I'll be voting a bit later. There's a couple of thoughts I want to chase down; unfortunately I seem to have hit a bout of eyestrain in the last 2-3 hours and may want to turn off soon.
I will vote before I do so.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 21, 2008 19:00:44 GMT -5
Okay, here, I'm doing my "Vote to Get My Suspicions on Record" vote here, before the 24 hour deadline: vote nesta
Why is this? I was looking over the end of Day yesterday, and, yes, nesta did a last minute switch to drain bead, but he also cast a nearly one-off vote for Peasant Smurf in post 219, long after the 24 hour deadline (only other vote on him at that time was Pleo's). The vote was "for the same reasons I found him suspicious Yesterday" which, according to nesta's vote-post of Day One (post #126) was for lurking/fluff posts.
Now, like I said when I voted db, if there'd been a consensus to vote Peasant for those reasons, I'd've backed it, but there wasn't even as much of a consensus as there was for db (one vote at the time of nestas' vote versus four votes at the time of mine).
In addition, nesta had been an extremely strong proponent of story's plan. If he didn't want a No-Lynch (which it sounds in his Day Two vote for Peasant that he didn't), why not vote for the player with the most votes at the time? His comment on Day One about the plan (post 97) was "In short: unless we are convinced someone isn't scum we might as well go with the plurality and lynch the best candidate." He did switch to db later, so it wasn't that he was convinced she wasn't scum (in fact, he admitted at the switch that she'd pinged his scumdar a couple of times--but at the time of the Peasant vote, his alternatives seemed to be Peasant or No-Lynch).
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Feb 21, 2008 20:24:36 GMT -5
I've read the posts of a couple of players, and got nothing that I didn't already have - to whit, vague, unformed suspicions with no backing. In such cases, I think a no name, no pack drill policy is best.
Most of my suspicions centre around the Drainbead bandwagon; it really built up quickly, and that worries me.
As I said above, Kat's vote was the one that worried me most.
Vote Kat.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 21, 2008 20:50:39 GMT -5
You shouldn't vote for me. I am but a simple lost circus performer peasant.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Feb 21, 2008 21:16:02 GMT -5
As far as I can tell, Hal Briston is the only person alive now that's still pro: power roles lying. Hey, way to twist things. I'm not "pro: power roles lying" -- I'm just not "anti: power roles lying". It's a tool, nothing more. If it screws up scum -- which it can do -- then terrific. The obsession some people have with pointing out every statement that isn't "lynch all liars" is starting to reek just a bit... Let it go already.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Feb 21, 2008 21:18:28 GMT -5
As far as I can tell, Hal Briston is the only person alive now that's still pro: power roles lying. Out of curiosity, who were the others on your list of people who fell into that category?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 21, 2008 21:21:26 GMT -5
If I'm not another living exception to your rule on that matter, atarus, I don't know why.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 21, 2008 21:39:45 GMT -5
Okay, I'm fessing up: I screwed up that Princess Bride quote. It should be poor lost circus performer, not simple. *smacks self*
I'm still not scum. I just apparently suck. I'm gonna go beat up some footwear.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Feb 21, 2008 22:29:40 GMT -5
Hey, way to twist things. I'm not "pro: power roles lying" -- I'm just not "anti: power roles lying". It's a tool, nothing more. If it screws up scum -- which it can do -- then terrific. The obsession some people have with pointing out every statement that isn't "lynch all liars" is starting to reek just a bit... Let it go already. Okay, so you're "not anti power roles lying." That's fine, however you want to phrase it. But the fact is, one of the two known scum that are dead was also "not anti power roles lying." In fact, Hawkeye defended what Roosh did pretty hardcore. You and a dead scum share the same general thought process on a hot topic issue. I'm not "obsessed" with this, but it is something I picked up on and wanted to point out. Out of curiosity, who were the others on your list of people who fell into that category? I don't have a list. When I read Hawkeye's posts, several of his posts on Day Two were defending a townie's right to lie. My brain recalled you as a prominent person that also shared that sentiment. Maybe there are other people that also shared the sentiment. In fact, I think Cookies was pointing that out in her post. But my only clear memory was of your posts about it. I apologize if I unfairly singled you out when there were others. The point is though, I went back and looked at two dead scum's posts, and found things that I thought were important and then tried to apply them to people still in the game to try and nail a scum to the wall. I'm trying to put forward some new ideas and possible ways to find scum since a lot of people have been saying it's hard to apply the old ideas and ways of finding scum in this game. If you disagree with how I'm applying the patterns I've found, great. Tell me I'm wrong, I'm glad to try and fix my application and get my scumdar working better. We're all here for the same purpose: Lynch scum. Except if you're scum. Well, I guess scum still are okay with lynching scum in this game....eh you get my point.
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Feb 21, 2008 22:42:38 GMT -5
Why is this? I was looking over the end of Day yesterday, and, yes, nesta did a last minute switch to drain bead, but he also cast a nearly one-off vote for Peasant Smurf in post 219, long after the 24 hour deadline (only other vote on him at that time was Pleo's). The vote was "for the same reasons I found him suspicious Yesterday" which, according to nesta's vote-post of Day One (post #126) was for lurking/fluff posts. A few minor things worth pointing out. I suppose my suspicion of Smurf could be classified as for lurking/fluff posts, but I would say it was more about the content of his posts, or more specifically that his posts seemed to be saying something but really were just stating that his opinion was neutral on just about everything. This is subtly different to me than fluff posts, as it seems to be an attempt to appear to be participating while at the same time blending into the background. At the time of my vote for Smurf a no-lynch had 4 votes, drainbead had 3, and Smurf had 1. Only 9 of 16 votes were on the table. I wouldn't classify my vote as a one-off since it put him one away from tieing with drainbead. I cited my Day 1 suspicions because there wasn't much more about him to comment on, and since Smurf was one of the vote leaders during Day 1 I thought everyone already had an idea of my case against him. I was also quite frustrated by the way Day 2 had gone, and my frustration started taking an apathetic turn toward the end of the Day. Now, like I said when I voted db, if there'd been a consensus to vote Peasant for those reasons, I'd've backed it, but there wasn't even as much of a consensus as there was for db (one vote at the time of nestas' vote versus four votes at the time of mine). At the time of your vote it was 4 for drainbead and 3 for Smurf. There really wasn't a consensus for either. In addition, nesta had been an extremely strong proponent of story's plan. If he didn't want a No-Lynch (which it sounds in his Day Two vote for Peasant that he didn't), why not vote for the player with the most votes at the time? His comment on Day One about the plan (post 97) was "In short: unless we are convinced someone isn't scum we might as well go with the plurality and lynch the best candidate." He did switch to db later, so it wasn't that he was convinced she wasn't scum (in fact, he admitted at the switch that she'd pinged his scumdar a couple of times--but at the time of the Peasant vote, his alternatives seemed to be Peasant or No-Lynch). The short of it is I thought Smurf was more likely to be scum than drainbead. Although I endorsed (and still do if we can get our act together) storyteller's early deadline plan, I think it completely broke down Yesterday. We had very few votes on the table on the day before the early deadline, and then a bunch of no-lynch votes during that day. I felt my choices were between no-lynch, drainbead, or Smurf. I voted Smurf thinking that if enough people thought he was scummy enough to lynch, like I did, then great, and if not I was resigned to a no-lynch. When the drainbead wagon continued to gain steam, and Smurf's didn't, my choice was between a no-lynch or to switch my vote. My read was about 50/50 on drainbead being scum, and I figured the 50/50 chance of lynching scum was slightly better than no chance. Obviously in hindsight I wish I hadn't switched my vote, but at the time it seemed like the best call. Now for my suspicious / paranoid take: your vote for me seems to have an ulterior motive. You've been taking a lot of heat Today for your drainbead vote, and it looks like you are trying to diffuse this by saying, "look, other people voted for her too!"
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 21, 2008 23:17:40 GMT -5
Well, I wouldn't be surprised if one or more of the drainbead voters were scum. In your case, though, it was note the vote itself, but the switch from you contemplating Smurf or No-Lynch to a vote for drainbead. You don't seem to have been considering db as a possiblity, and then she'd "pinged your scumdar" but there were no details as to which posts of hers had done so.
If you're still on, can you say what had been pinging for you?
I'll be back in an hour or so, in case I need to say something before the 23-hour deadline.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 21, 2008 23:18:28 GMT -5
Er...24-hour deadline, even.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 22, 2008 0:01:31 GMT -5
Okay, it hasn't been an hour yet, but I'm going to bed in 30 minutes or so, and have decided that I need to unvote nesta vote Cookies because if I'm counting right, that breaks a tie and puts Cookies in the lead.
And yes, I'm voting exclusively to break the tie because I am 100% sure that I'm pro-Town, and less than 100% sure that Cookies is Town.
I will be back right before I go to bed, in case anything needs a response between now and then. If you want to ask me to say anything more, I'll post then, and also try to post before I leave for work in the morning.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 22, 2008 0:02:50 GMT -5
NETA: If anyone feels inclined to vote for me for my action above, I'm asking that you post your intention without voting, and I'll respond to it.
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Feb 22, 2008 0:45:52 GMT -5
You don't seem to have been considering db as a possiblity, and then she'd "pinged your scumdar" but there were no details as to which posts of hers had done so. If you're still on, can you say what had been pinging for you? Looking back at my notes, the ones I had flagged: 1.20: she pointed out she was abstaining from a random vote, and wanted to see how the first few pages went. 2.1: she cast doubt on Roosh's claim, asking the mods for clarification if Roosh had broken the rules with his roleclaim. This seemed to me like fishing for if Roosh was really who he claimed to be and if he still had his powers, or possibly how scum might go about role-claiming. 2.47: she seemed frustrated that a power-role might be able to work around the no-claim rules, and scum are often frustrated when a rule they thought was in their favor doesn't quite work that way. 2.147: switches to Pleonast as a suspect, when before she had been casting doubt on Roosh. Those are the posts I had flagged as "scummy" in my notes for drainbead. Obviously they were wrong. It was more of a gut-read that made me switch my vote to her, though, since I had read back through her posts a few days before the deadline but had ended up not convinced one way or the other. Her clarification to Roosh that Smurf had been "simmering" was a null-tell for me. He had been in the spotlight since Day 1 when I called him out for not committing to a position, and drainbead pointing this out. I could see a reason for drainbead to point it out whether scum or town since she was on the block at the time. Going back though her posts that seemed scummy at the time has me a little embarrassed since she turned out to be town, but there you are.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 22, 2008 0:52:02 GMT -5
Fair enough. I've already unvoted for you. Got any comment on my last few posts?
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Feb 22, 2008 8:07:25 GMT -5
Going to work now. Back in about 9 hours.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 22, 2008 10:26:53 GMT -5
<snip> And yes, I'm voting exclusively to break the tie because I am 100% sure that I'm pro-Town, and less than 100% sure that Cookies is Town.<snip> It's in her interest to say and do the same thing. This argument is not at all convincing to me.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 22, 2008 11:50:19 GMT -5
It isn't convincing to me either, and I'm not going to just sit back and let a handful drag me to the gallows without a fight.
unvote nesta vote Kat
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Feb 22, 2008 13:07:30 GMT -5
When you're facing the gallows, voting for someone else in danger is a basically a null tell, even if you don't think they're scum. So neither Kat nor DarkCookies appear more scummy to me because of these votes.
However, I make it that three quarters of us are now voting for one or other of the candidates with just under 12 hours to go.
Oh wise Mandate of Heaven, can you verify that for us please?
(Just so everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet.)
I did some rough calculations last night. My figures don't account for the possibility of scum groups "double-teaming" but suggest a chance in the 40-45% range of two kills Tonight. (I'm assuming that the increased chance of one kill is offset by the decreased chance of three so the figure is in the right ballpark).
With the number of variables involved, I don't think I can do a projection beyond the current Day/Night cycle so don't ask me how long we've got. Not long is my best guess.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 22, 2008 13:18:07 GMT -5
*sigh* I don't like either of the candidates for a lynch Today, either... what to do, what to do?
|
|
|
Post by sachertorte on Feb 22, 2008 13:28:26 GMT -5
Oh wise Mandate of Heaven, can you verify that for us please? Is that a cryptic call for a vote count? If it isn't, all you're getting is a vote count anyway. 4 - Cookies (nesta, Peasant Smurf, Pleonast, Kat) 1 - Hal Briston (storyteller0910) 4 - Kat (atarus, diggitcamara, mhaye, Cookies) 1 - Pleonast (Santo Rugger)
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 22, 2008 13:31:30 GMT -5
Ok, I've decided to:
Vote for Kat
because I have a feeling Cookies is a Peasant, and because at least 4 other people agree Kat allowed the vote shift yesterday to lean drainbead.
|
|
|
Post by sachertorte on Feb 22, 2008 13:42:28 GMT -5
Ahem. Please unvote first.
|
|
|
Post by sachertorte on Feb 22, 2008 13:46:52 GMT -5
Now that the SDMB board game is over, I would like to ask everyone playing this game to refrain from referring to any ongoing games. I don't want to even see posts that indicate that another on-going games exists or that you're playing in a different game. There is no need, so lets all proceed on the side of extreme caution rather than risk any unpleasantness.
|
|