|
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 14, 2007 14:39:10 GMT -5
I don't know if I would call it a rush Gad. But I agree, I am not sure what the case against MtS is right now. I know Hal and Pleonast don't like him much at the moment, and Lakai just voted for him on some very...suspect logic.
But his vote for zuma was a strange one.
Don't really know what to think about him yet.
I am wondering why Lakai is being allowed to post less than Auto and not have anyone do anything about it. When he does posts his posts contain almost no information.
Lakai, get in here and tell us where you have been.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 14, 2007 14:42:36 GMT -5
Strange in a potentially good, pro-crew way, though, right?
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 14, 2007 14:44:52 GMT -5
potentially good, yes, also potentially bad.
Like I said, I am not sure what to make of MtS at this juncture, all I know is that the vote was odd. But odd isn't always bad.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 14, 2007 14:46:23 GMT -5
On reflection, sometimes odd is just that...odd. And the vote could mean nothing at all. Though I guess that would place MtS in the crew camp anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Jun 14, 2007 15:07:52 GMT -5
Damnit...I hate when I have my suspicions narrowed down to two people I'm pretty sure are scum, and then one of them goes and votes for the other.
Well, you throw MtS and Lakai against the wall, and I'd wager you'd be looking at at least one pirate, if not two. We all know scum won't hesitate to vote for one another. However, this is giving me enough pause that I'll back off from the issue for the moment.
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Parzival on Jun 14, 2007 15:49:37 GMT -5
Mad The Swine did have an early vote (then an unvote "to avoid speed-lynch") for Idle Thoughts. He switched to zuma after Autolycus voted.
The way I see it, the real Steele would have had to put a vote on Idle, no matter what, or risk getting caught. Considering he may have thought that being 'outed' in that manner wasn't worth it - it might have ended up acceptable to trade Idle Thoughts for a guaranteed scum (zuma). Only once someone else had voted the other way was there even a chance that Steele could point a finger at zuma, and even then that was a risk.
Does this mean I think Mad The Swine really is Steele? No, only that I think it's plausible. If he's a Pirate, the Pirates know it - but I'd be wondering why he jumped up there with Auto - everyone was assuming Auto operated on his own, so it wasn't like he needed support.
But if he's not scum, he's yet one more candidate for Steele. Since Steele needs all the help he can get right now, it makes sense for the ship to have as many targets for the scum to hit as possible.
I'd rather hold off on lynching Mad The Swine at least for one day. I don't like the idea of keeping someone alive just because he might maybe be a power role, but for this night only, it may be better than risking outing Steele and eliminating all doubt from the Pirates (and Dick, especially Dick).
|
|
|
Post by ArizonaTeach on Jun 14, 2007 16:01:50 GMT -5
Mad fought hard - very hard to vindicate Idle on the basis of absolutely nothing other than the fact that zuma was lying about being Steele. He never gave specific reasons, except to say that he didn't trust zuma. Since zuma wasn't a pirate (and a pirate would know that), there's only one reason a character would have to not trust zuma. I'll have to take a closer look at his early votes in Day Four, though.
However, there's one player who bandwagons damn hear everything, and never gives sensible reasons for it.
vote Lakai.
|
|
|
Post by Mad The Swine on Jun 14, 2007 16:10:56 GMT -5
Mad fought hard - very hard to vindicate Idle on the basis of absolutely nothing other than the fact that zuma was lying about being Steele. He never gave specific reasons, except to say that he didn't trust zuma. Since zuma wasn't a pirate (and a pirate would know that), there's only one reason a character would have to not trust zuma. I'll have to take a closer look at his early votes in Day Four, though. However, there's one player who bandwagons damn hear everything, and never gives sensible reasons for it. vote Lakai. I didn't link to my reasons, but I gave them when I originally voted for zuma and ever time after that,again I cant link to them right now as I am in a terrible rush,but they are there if ya wanna look. I will likely be away until Sunday(might be able to check in once on Sat,I will be back in time for Days end, if I read the ending time at 9pm sunday Maltime,which I think is 3pm Sunday EST can someone confirm real quick...I am late and in a big hurry.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 14, 2007 16:21:27 GMT -5
Mad, given the non-zero possibility that you'll end up as the lynchee toDay, do you have anything you want to say in your defense before you leave?
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jun 14, 2007 16:29:01 GMT -5
Post #131 on Day Three From Lakai: (bolding what I want to highlight)
This post has been bothering me for a while, and I just now put my finger on it. When he says the pirates pick their killer at random, he says it with conviction. I did not assume they did it that way. From the rules, I thought they chose who to perform the kill each night.
Low post count, sketchy logic, voting without much explaination, and general refusal to come out of the woodwork no matter how much he has been prodded are the reasons why I am probably going to vote for Lakai toDay. I still have a lot of analysis to do yet, but I will put in on official FOS.
For the record, I am not reaching the conclusion that MadTheSwine is scum. I do think he may be Steele, and if he is, then I don't want to risk killing him toDay. Better to hold off on taking that risk and try to find another scum.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 14, 2007 16:33:19 GMT -5
3pm eastern is right.
Gad...stop trying to get MtS to role claim. He isn't in any real palpable danger at the moment and he just told us where we could find he defense.
Seriously WTF man?
You have been in my town camp for a while, but FOS Gad.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 14, 2007 16:42:48 GMT -5
Um...I guess I can see how that can be construed as a prod to role claim, but I thought it was clear from context that if (a) MtS has multiple votes on him now, which he does, and (b) he's going to be gone until very near the end of the Day, which he is, then (c) it might be a good idea for him to say something---anything!---in his defense before he goes. Truth be told, while I know that real-life stuff can't be helped, it kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth for someone to be gone for the next three days when (at least at the moment) they're one of the leading vote-getters on the Day. Especially when they haven't really addressed whatever the case is supposed to be against them (which, again, I'm not particularly clear about with regard to MtS, which is why I was looking forward to seeing what he and his detractors had to say to each others). I think I've been as clear as anyone in my expression of the sentiment that Steele should not speak up unless it's absolutely, last-ditch necessary. So back the hell off.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 14, 2007 16:56:42 GMT -5
Well in about 2 hours I am going to be gone till past the end of the Day (see unavailability thread). So I am not going to get into this now. I may be reading too much into what you are saying.
But, to use your phrase, telling me to "back the hell off" seems a bit pre-emptivly defensive, non?
If not...chill man. It's just a bit of suspicion. The finger was bound to come around to you sooner or later.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 14, 2007 17:02:56 GMT -5
I'm tired. So tired I can't even remember who I accused of being preemptively defensive. That was back on Day One, wasn't it? Was it cowgirl? Anyway, sorry. My intern came in as I was writing the post to MtS, and as a result my wording was admittedly not optimal. But I thought the meaning came across, and I'm hyper-sensitive to not communicating myself well (which is why this is, y'know, such a terrific choice of a game for me). I didn't think it merited a FOS, in any case. But yeah, ask not for whom the bell tolls. My bad on escalating it; I still think you reacted really firmly to stuff that wasn't there.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 14, 2007 17:06:11 GMT -5
And at the risk of opening myself up for even more misinterpretation: NAF, if you're going to be gone past the end of the Day, are you planning on casting a vote before you go?
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 14, 2007 17:11:53 GMT -5
My bad on escalating it; I still think you reacted really firmly to stuff that wasn't there. Well it's not like I voted for you. I am just suspicious of you, and since that is a recent development (since today) I figured it warrented comment. I think commenting on our changing suspicions is a good habbit that we seem to have fallen out of a bit in the last Day or so. More information and all that. (I am using a computer that won't let the popup for the spell check come up, so I apologize in advance for my crappy spelling)
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 14, 2007 17:14:19 GMT -5
And at the risk of opening myself up for even more misinterpretation: NAF, if you're going to be gone past the end of the Day, are you planning on casting a vote before you go? I haven't decided yet. Right now I haven't found anyone I actually want to vote for. I will have my phone with me, so I maybe will get a chance to follow along a little while I am gone on my phone. But coding is a pain in the ass on my phone, so I would need special dispensation from Mal to not have to cast my vote or unvote in a color. I don't want to vote for just anyone though.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Jun 14, 2007 18:30:18 GMT -5
Well, since no one has posted in the last 2 hours I am going to say I will most likely not be casting a vote today.
I think Lakai deserves some looking into, Gad just hit on my scumdar, and I never really stopped being suspicious of tirial but she hasn't really posted enough since Day 2 for anything to come of it.
If y'all think any of these three are worth a look go for it.
Othrewise I will try to post a bit more tonight and maybe a bit while I am out of town, but in all likelyhood I am gone until Tuesday morning.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Jun 14, 2007 21:19:30 GMT -5
I'm voting for Mad because he's currently the most suspicious to me. And I wanted others to consider him. If a case can be made against someone else, I may change my vote.
I'll certainly unvote Mad if there's *ahem* a mad rush of votes on him.
Metagame: almost done with my business trip. I'll be back to a more normal schedule next week. Did you notice the huge drop off in my posts these last Days? Wow.
|
|
|
Post by Lakai on Jun 14, 2007 21:58:45 GMT -5
Mad fought hard - very hard to vindicate Idle on the basis of absolutely nothing other than the fact that zuma was lying about being Steele. He never gave specific reasons, except to say that he didn't trust zuma. Since zuma wasn't a pirate (and a pirate would know that), there's only one reason a character would have to not trust zuma. I'll have to take a closer look at his early votes in Day Four, though. However, there's one player who bandwagons damn hear everything, and never gives sensible reasons for it. vote Lakai. Wow, can you at least try and not misrepresent everything you say about me? I was the first to vote for Hockey Monkey on Day One and Day Two. I voted for Zuma after you laid out your case for him on Day Three, and I was the last one to vote for him on Day Four, so that could be interpreted as a bandwagon voting. On Day Three I voted for Hal with reason of my own, without copying anyone. I'm doing the same Today with MTS. So what if these people already had one vote on them, I can't vote for some who was already voted for? I have to come up with someone new all the time? I had a vote for Kyrie Eleison on Day One, but I unvoted later. So I can't see how band wagoning for just Zuma comes out to band wagoning for "damn near everything." Next you say I never give sensible reasoning for my "bandwagons". This is funny because I voted for Zuma based on what you said about him. Was agreeing with you insensible? Then, in the same post you say I never give sensible reasons, you lay suspicion on MTS for almost the same reason I voted for him.
|
|
|
Post by cowgirl on Jun 14, 2007 22:06:11 GMT -5
Checking in to say I'm here, I'm reading, and I don't know who to vote for. We've gotten relatively little new information from kills in the past few days/nights so we're going over the same stuff over and over.
In this state of mind I'm worried about scum-driven bandwagons. Right now there aren't any prevailing winds, and it's going to be easy to swing crew against crew on flimsy evidence.
Vote count:
Mad The Swine 2 (Pleonast, Lakai) Lakai 1 (ArizonaTeach)
|
|
|
Post by Lakai on Jun 14, 2007 22:10:50 GMT -5
How is my logic worst than:
and
Pirates do get to pick who they vote for, but since there are few reasons to pick one pirate over another, it is pretty much a random choice.
|
|
|
Post by ArizonaTeach on Jun 15, 2007 1:03:21 GMT -5
Wow, can you at least try and not misrepresent everything you say about me? Sure. Of course, nothing I said was untrue. Day 3, post #74: (which, incidentally, comes after post #13 in which you disagree with MAD's vote for zumaDay 3, post #143:Voting for someone because they made a lame vote for someone else is only cool when you do it? Day 1, post #140:Voting for someone because you didn't like the reasons he voted for another player is only cool when you do it? "good post, vote zuma" isn't what I'd call giving evidence. Try again. I'm not suspicious of Mad at all at the moment. In fact, what I said in that there post is my specific reason for not voting for him. And looking back at the other posts, I noticed on Day One a serious "got your back" defense between cowgirl and Lakai. One that was picked up on and questioned, to some degree, by Mad. I find that very, very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 15, 2007 9:18:27 GMT -5
Wow, this thread has lost momentum.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Blaster Master on Jun 15, 2007 9:58:48 GMT -5
Wow, this thread has lost momentum. Well, the largest part of that, I think is that two of the main suspects aren't here (between MtS and NAF). I'm suspicious of cowgirl... and she isn't here either. I'm not sure what to think about Lakai, and he doesn't post much as it is. Hmm...
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jun 15, 2007 10:03:17 GMT -5
Pirates do get to pick who they vote for, but since there are few reasons to pick one pirate over another, it is pretty much a random choice. If you will note Lakai, that when I voted for Auntbeast the first time, that was way on Day One, when there wasn't a whole lot of info to base a vote on. That was my reason: she seemed like an inexperience pirate. Please also note that as the game has progressed, I have contributed some fairly high content posts with data and analysis. You, on the other hand, not so much. Now how do you know how the pirates pick their killer?
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jun 15, 2007 10:38:31 GMT -5
Wow, this thread has lost momentum. I'll say.
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Jun 15, 2007 11:50:10 GMT -5
Ok, I've never felt comfortable about MtS, but after re-reading Day 4 I'm much more behind him than I've felt before. I think he took a risky stand, and only after being with us all about Idle for a while--if you read through the Day, he was not jumping in without thinking (unlike Auto who gave zero rationale for anything). He had reasons and I respect his reticence on what seemed to most to be a clear situation-- his sin was continuing to exercise caution while we were sharpening pitchforks and finding torches (not-a-bandwagoneer I, I can empathize with his following a hunch). I think if there was any mistake he made there it was thinking that Auto had some sort of pro-town role.
I WOULD like some clarification that that when MtS comes back in-- what exactly did he think Auto might know that we all didn't? What suspicions were you not voicing?
I think MtS is the easy target right now, so I'm going to resist joining up. I need to take a bit of time to work out who I think is a better candidate. Knowing that I am another of the easy candidates today perhaps makes me sympathetic to Mad and it makes me wonder if pirates are swinging things a bit.
I think this might have to do with the sense of a loss of momentum. We've had a clear path (if misguided) for the last Day or so and now things are uncertain again, but I think the pirates might try to take advantage of our sense of progress and get everyone to eagerly jump on a poorly-thought-out project. And I think the crew in large part is resisting-- everyone might be a bit busy (I know I am) and waiting for someone to come up with a better idea since none of the current theories are as compelling as what we've been working on for the last few days.
We do have a couple of days. Everyone try to find a bit of time early weekend to read through things and come up with some not-so-easy or obvious ideas. The easy and obvious ones are the ones that can be manipulated best out of sheer crew sloth.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 15, 2007 12:27:37 GMT -5
Can we have a vote count, Mal, such as it is?
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Jun 15, 2007 13:34:14 GMT -5
Looks to me like it's still:
Mad The Swine -- 2 (Pleonast, Lakai) Lakai -- 1 (ArizonaTeach)
|
|