|
Post by KidVermicious on Jan 2, 2009 15:03:05 GMT -5
Day Four Minus World d4.32 - Pedescribe opens with a vote for Miteymouse, citing a desire to freeze the wincon. d4.36 - Pedescribe unvotes Miteymouse and votes FCOD, citing vague helpfulness and the Day One slip. d4.38 - Cookies votes Pedescribe, citing general batshittedness (sorry, Ped, you were off the wall there). d4.40 - Pedescribe unvotes FCOD. d4.42 - DBI votes Pedescribe, citing failure to already have blocked Miteymouse. <insert DBI slip here> d4.46 - Pedescribe votes for DBI (appears to be OMGUS, he simulposted with her slip). Now Cookies and Ed note the slip, in 50 and 51 respectively. d4.54 - Chucara votes Pedescribe, citing general weirdness. Notes DBI's slip. d4.55 - FCOD votes DBI, cites lurking, skimming, and slip Pedescribe - 3 votes (Cometothedarkside, DBI, Chucara) DBI - 2 votes (Pedescribe, FCOD) Lots of general discussion here, one post that stuck out to me was Mr Special Eds post 63 - he's more suspicious of Ped than DBI. d4.67 - Hoopy votes DBI, citing previous arguments plus the slip. It's tied up between Ped and DBI here. d4.101 - Mr Special Ed votes DBI, he now thinks it's a genuine slip. d4.102 - Cookies unvotes Pedescribe and votes DBI. d4.107 - Cookies unvotes DBI, too close to threshold. DBI - 4 votes (Pedescribe, FLOD, Hoopy Frood, Mr Special Ed) Pedescribe - 2 votes (DBI, Chucara) d4.124 - Miteymouse votes DBI, and I can't decide if that giggle was demonic or blonde. Little help here, Mitey? d4.125 - Chucara unvotes Ped to hammer DBI, but this is past the deadline. Chucara and Special Eds votes stick out a little, to me. Nothing much else going on here.
|
|
|
Post by KidVermicious on Jan 2, 2009 15:04:11 GMT -5
Also, as long as I'm using my Mason status as cover to float stupid ideas, is there any value in faux-voting up to three other players? Maybe even Borda? We might get a more accurate consensus, if it's worth the trouble. Can we please not make this days voting even more complicated than it is? If you had not claimed mason exactly when you did I would be voting for you right now. I just wanna vote for more than one of ya, thats all.
|
|
|
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 2, 2009 15:15:58 GMT -5
Special Ed post analysis:
For starters:
CURSE YOU IDLE AND YOUR MOVING THE THREADS AROUND SO THAT LINKS FROM QUOTED POSTS NO LONGER POINT TO THE ACTUAL POST!
1.55: Wants to vote molefan for claiming Vanilla. Asks why he shouldn't. In next two posts continues to question molefan for his actions.
1.64: Says he's not attacking molefan, but doesn't understand his tactic. Cites storyteller's point that while molefan's tactics aren't good, they are a null tell as reason why he won't be voting for molefan.
1.66: Smooth's things over with molefan more. Mentions that he wasn't even accusing molefan of being scummy. [Hoopy Note: While maybe this is true in what was actually said during this interchange, he did say that molefan's actions could help scum and did accuse molefan of possibly being a PFK or a Jester.] Considers issue done with.
1.72: Responds to peeker's post in 1.71 where he questions Ed as to what was meant by scums ability to evade first Day lynch that Ed mentioned in 1.62. Explains that he meant that scum have more options at there disposal due to their extra knowledge.
1.120: Votes gizmo. Explains in 1.126 that he meant Mitey, who has gizmo as her avatar. Doesn't change vote to Mitey, though.
1.149: Mentions storyteller's post from 1.114 as being a possible setup to throw suspicion on anyone who found molefan's claim suspicious enough to vote if it leads to a mole/shaggy lynch.
1.232: Explains more his rationale behind the story setup thing. He saw story setting himself up for an "I told you so" should mole/shaggy get lynched since he saw story's scenario of everyone jumping on molefan likely. [Note: No one had even voted moleshaggy yet.]
1.244: Explains to story that the reason he's pressuring shaggy less than mole is not because the change in player changes the suspicion, but he believes Day 1 vanilla claims are so anti-town he'll lynch people for them. Shaggy didn't do the claim, so shaggy shouldn't be punished for the bad play.
1.372: Asks if scum and masons talk on separate boards here as opposed to facebook where they all talk via PMs
1.374: After I respond explaining that the typical behavior is for individual boards, mentions that he thought FCOD might not have gotten an individual PM if he was a mason or scum.
1.378: After Kat mentions that scum and masons still get individual PM's mentions how on face book there's just one introductory message for all
1.381/382: Doesn't like Lynch-the-lurker because it's too open to manipulation by scum since they'll change their posting style. [Though as was pointed out by KidV and I, of course scum will change their style, and that's not a bad thing. It creates more data points to trap them with.]
1.397: Expands upon above point by saying that using certain guidelines to analyze posts won't accomplish much more than having everyone post within those guidelines and thus create very little useful information.
1.402: Says that he feels pressuring the lurker is too much energy just to get some extra grist for the mill. But doesn't mind others doing it as long as he's not the one spending the effort.
1.443: Rehashes previous points. Mentions he finds it interesting that shaggy has such issues with posting in this forum. Like others he finds it puzzling, but not enough for a vote.
1.472: Mentions how total and shaggy are pinging his scumdar, although, he doesn't really clarify why, other than total seems to be trying to distract. Says he would vote total now if he had to.
(To be continued in a bit. I have to go....)
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Jan 2, 2009 15:31:37 GMT -5
d4.81 - Totallost votes Zeriel, in what amounts to a pure OMGUS vote... her cite is Zeriels vote for her, see above. I'm very sorry if it looks like a OMGUS-vote (because if I felt like making one of those I think I would have picked Sinjin or Santo). I voted for Zeriel because I felt (and still feel) he tried to make me stop talking. And if Town is scared of making comments or even just put forward new ideas... we will lose the game. I can understand if he didn't agree with me - but placing a vote for me discussing the WC is to me very anti-town. And for Town to risk a vote for every idea put forward IS pro-scum! This is a part of my reason to vote him again toDay (but as I put in the post where I voted for him only a part). I re-read Zeriel on Day 1 and I think he's trying to protect DBI.
|
|
Chucara
Borogrove
Idleboard's Elite Coder Club
2009 Winner of Best Person in the Universe
Posts: 287
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Chucara on Jan 2, 2009 16:09:26 GMT -5
I agree with sinjin. It's something of an "if" we can even make this single vote plan work, so let's not complicate things further. Also, I think it is easier to analyze single votes than multiple.
|
|
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 Jan 2, 2009 16:45:08 GMT -5
I'm trying to catch up, I'm only on page 2. Busy week/weekend... If I don't have time to catch up this weekend, I'll catch up on Monday at work. Sorry guys.
|
|
|
Post by KidVermicious on Jan 2, 2009 17:29:09 GMT -5
I found this interesting, in light of the Facebook kerfluffle D4...
Mr Special Ed said:
Almost Human responded in post 413:
|
|
Chucara
Borogrove
Idleboard's Elite Coder Club
2009 Winner of Best Person in the Universe
Posts: 287
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Chucara on Jan 2, 2009 18:47:12 GMT -5
KidV: I'm not sure which point you're trying to make about the Special Ed/Almost Human quotes.
In regards to day 4, I'll gladly admit that I thought pedescribe was a better candidate.. I was wrong. I didn't hammer him to gain cred, I hammered him to end the day as nothing was going on and it wasn't going to change the results. (Plus there were almost no time left anyway)
|
|
|
Post by KidVermicious on Jan 2, 2009 19:02:19 GMT -5
Oh, god, I'm not looking forward to this. Here we go...
d1.8 - Peeker votes Story. d1.17 - Molefan (now Shaggy) claims. d1.37 - FCOD slips d1.63 - Molefan/Shaggy votes Special Ed, citing percieved inquisition. d1.65 - Molefan/Shaggy unvotes Special Ed. d1.67 - Peeker unvotes Story. d1.113 - Molefan/Shaggy declares his intent to sub out. d1.181 - NAF votes Mr Special Ed, citing his pursuit of Molefan/Shaggy and Storyteller. d1.205 - Misterblockey votes Mr Special Ed. d1.231 - Totallost votes Miteymouse for lurking. d1.233 - Chucara votes Miteymouse for lurking.
Mr Special Ed - 2 votes (NAF, misterblockey) Miteymouse - 2 votes (Totallost, Chucara)
d1.279 - NAF unvotes Mr Special Ed. d1.344 - Totallost unvotes Mightymouse. d1.364 - Chucara unvotes Mitemouse. d1.375 - Santo votes for Chucara, citing possible PIS over the FCOD slip. d1.384 - Peeker votes KidV, citing Kids' percieved anti-fluffness. d1.386 - Zeriel votes Mr Special Ed, citing the Eds' smudge of Story. d1.398 - DBI votes Peeker, citing her gut. d1.403 - NAF votes Chucara, piggybacking Santo. d1.410 - Almost Human votes Chucara, citing a whole buncha stuff. d1.420 - Sinjin votes Totallost, citing "shotgun smudging".
Chucara - 3 votes (Santo Rugger, NAF, Almost Human) Mr Special Ed - 2 votes (Misterblockey, Zeriel) KidV - 1 vote (Peekercpa) Peekercpa (DBI) mmouse - 1 vote (KidV) Total Lost - 1 vote (Sinjin)
d1.451 - Bufftabby votes Shaggy. Or crapmonkeys. Or something. d1.480 - Peeker unvotes KidV and votes Totallost. d1.488 - Cookies votes Mr Special Ed, citing his interaction with Molefan and Story d1.490 - Chucara votes Hoopy for lurking. d1.496 - Chucara unvotes Hoopy. d1.502 - Mr Special Ed votes Shaggy, no reason. d1.514 - Storyteller votes Miteymouse for waffling. d1.515 - Chucara votes Shaggy for vote-pushing. d1.517 - FCOD votes DBI for lurking. d1.520 - Shaggy votes Chucara, basically OMGUS. d1.521 - Totallost votes Misterblockey. Cites failure to justify previous vote.
Idle posts a votecount: Chucara - 4 votes (Santo Rugger, NAF, Almost Human, shaggy) Mr Special Ed - 3 votes (misterblockey, zeriel, Cookies) shaggy - 3 votes (bufftabby, Mr Special Ed, Chucara) Total Lost - 2 votes (sinjin, Peekercpa) Peekercpa (DBI) mmouse - 1 vote (KidV) miteymouse - 1 vote (Storyteller) Misterblockey - 1 vote (Total Lost)
This votecount is wrong - DBI has one vote, by FCOD. I don't know what else might be missing.
d1.537 - Nanook votes Pedescribe, for obfuscatory statements, or something. d1.538 - Pedescribe votes Nanook, for contradictory statements, or something.
Idle corrects his votecount: Chucara - 4 votes (Santo Rugger, NAF, Almost Human, shaggy) Mr Special Ed - 3 votes (misterblockey, zeriel, Cookies) shaggy - 3 votes (bufftabby, Mr Special Ed, Chucara) Total Lost - 2 votes (sinjin, Peekercpa) Peekercpa (DBI) mmouse - 1 vote (KidV) miteymouse - 1 vote (Storyteller) Misterblockey - 1 vote (Total Lost) Pedescribe - 1 vote (Nanook) Nanook - 1 vote (Pedescribe) DBI - 1 vote (Flyingblankofdoom)
d1.543 - NAF unvotes Chucara d1.560 - Kat votes mmouse9799 for lurking. d1.561 - Hoopy votes Misterblockey for not retracting a vote after issues resolved. d1.566 - Chucara unvotes Shaggy. d1.567 - Almost Human unvotes Chucara. d1.576 - Bufftabby unvotes Shaggy, votes Misterblockey, pretty much piggybacks Hoopy. Note - I think this is Bufftabbys first use of the word debacle. d1.599 - Misterblockey unvotes Mr Special Ed, and votes Mmouse9799 for lurking. d1.603 - Misterblockey unvotes Mmouse9799 and votes for Miteymouse. d1.604 - Totallost unvotes Misterblockey. d1.608 - Misterblockey unvotes Miteymouse, and is confuzzled. d1.610 - Bufftabby unvotes Misterblockey and votes Storyteller, for the debacle-debacle. d1.617 - Misterblockey votes mmouse9799, and means it this time. d1.623 - Hoopy unvotes Misterblockey and votes mmouse9799. d1.629 - Storyteller unvotes mmouse9799 and votes Bufftabby, in a basically OMGUS vote, citing the "mountain out of a mole(fan)-hill" comment.
Thats the end of page 21, and I have to go home. Nothing has happened yet, this is just barely getting to the good stuff.
Feh.
|
|
|
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 2, 2009 22:50:35 GMT -5
...Continuing...
1.472: Once again reiterates his suspicions of shaggy. Although, still doesn't say why other than shaggy's "reaching out at everyone and attacking them" and his "spreading confusion". Also mentions Almost Human pinging him but can't really say why. [The smudging without votes continues.]
1.501: After all the smudging, finally votes shaggy. Still doesn't make much of a case.
1.671: Wonders about total lost's subjective use of her post numbers analysis on who's lurking and who isn't. Accuses her of handpicking only certain lurkers and not others.
1.672: Responds to DBI's (scum) statement about nothing really happening other than the mole/shaggy thing with a mention that lot's of substantial things have occurred this day, and how this is coming from someone who gave molefan the most grief about his claim.
1.673: Unvotes shaggy. No reason given.
1.675: Mentions shaggy jumping from one bandwagon to another.
1.731: Says he's not convinced that the tabby thing has found scum, but says he's "much more comfortable voting for someone acting slightly scummy". [So all the other people you've accused of acting slightly scummy no longer make you comfortable voting for them?] Mentions how story still scares him. Joins bufftabby wagon, saying he thinks this lynch will give us some good information.
1.758: Kind of surprised story considered him an easy lynch. Accepts it due to having 3 votes for a while. Ponders him being the only one seeing story's setups of future moves in his posts. Says that he supposes the behavior has nothing scummy about it [after hinting earlier that it might be scummy]; mentions that could even be town-like, but it scares him.
1.755/756: After reviewing day, says he doesn't see definite scum action from bufftabby. Feels story is just looking for a victim with first attacking him and now attacking bufftabby. Says he doesn't think storyteller is particularly scum but sees him as pressing buttons to see what can pop up. Mentions that he doesn't particularly trust him though. Unvotes bufftabby.
End of Day 1. No vote at day end. On Day 4, when Cookies and I asked for people to list their previous votes, he couldn't remember who he had voted for on Day 1, but did remember voting for bufftabby at some point. Thought he might have ended his day voting for Idle, when actually that was Day 2. More on that in the Day 2 analysis.
Right now he's looking very smudgy. Seems to be throwing smudges all around, particularly towards storyteller, and contradicting himself a decent amount.
|
|
|
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 2, 2009 23:20:07 GMT -5
Night 1:
N1.59: Mentions his berry turned to useless dust. Null tell, since bufftabby asked for the berries after the last post he made for that day. And there was no reason up until that point to mention he had one, really.
N1.62: Says his mention of the berry was probably stupid, because now scum won't look at him if there are other items to be found, maybe even those which help scum.
N1.64/65: After zeriel says in 63 that "they know now" he says "my point exactly". Not getting Zeriel's point that they wouldn't have known had he not said that "they now know".
N1.72/75/78/80: Mentions his berry info was received via PM and how it worked and how he received another PM telling him it was dust now.
N1.93: In response to my mention how he wasn't even around when bufftabby asked for the berries, he mentions that he's not even sure he would have spoken up because the berries might have been useful to the scum.
N1.126: Mentions how he half expects multiple deaths in night one indicating possibly a second scum group--one Donkey Kong based and the other Bowser based, maybe--or a Serial Killer, in which case he'll be very suspiscious of mmouse, the self proclaimed PFK.
So nothing really new here. 126 seems a bit odd, but could just be speculation. The meat of this cycle is in the Day.
|
|
|
Post by Zeriel on Jan 3, 2009 0:13:34 GMT -5
I'm very sorry if it looks like a OMGUS-vote (because if I felt like making one of those I think I would have picked Sinjin or Santo). I voted for Zeriel because I felt (and still feel) he tried to make me stop talking. And if Town is scared of making comments or even just put forward new ideas... we will lose the game. I can understand if he didn't agree with me - but placing a vote for me discussing the WC is to me very anti-town. And for Town to risk a vote for every idea put forward IS pro-scum! This is a part of my reason to vote him again toDay (but as I put in the post where I voted for him only a part). I re-read Zeriel on Day 1 and I think he's trying to protect DBI. I am normally one to say that stifling discussion is inherently anti-town. One of the few damn things I can imagine as more scummy is suggesting we consider suiciding (that is, killing at most 1-2 most-likely to be townies in lynches unless we have unforeseen magic daykill power) in response to a win condition that had been in effect for only that one day and had previous to that changed every day and is currently claimed to change every day. Basically, there's a difference between "stifling discussion" and "calling you out on a really really bad idea that even a moment's thought would have told you was unwise".
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Jan 3, 2009 7:12:23 GMT -5
I am normally one to say that stifling discussion is inherently anti-town. One of the few damn things I can imagine as more scummy is suggesting we consider suiciding (that is, killing at most 1-2 most-likely to be townies in lynches unless we have unforeseen magic daykill power) in response to a win condition that had been in effect for only that one day and had previous to that changed every day and is currently claimed to change every day. Basically, there's a difference between "stifling discussion" and "calling you out on a really really bad idea that even a moment's thought would have told you was unwise". Bolding is mine. I don't believe I said we should lynch Town. What I did say was: Is that like making a boner? Anyway - scum seems to only kill town at Night. So I will assume (alert: I'm going to form an opinion based on ideas, information and a bit of intuition... and not perfect knowlegde): The WC for scum doesn't change then same way it does for Town. I can therefore only assume that the Town-WC on this Day is pro-scum. Now pro-scum could also be pro-town - but really - I can't see anyway it could be pro-town to kill town (unless you get a shitty WC ) So I'm thinking: Could this WC change be phony? (not likely) Can we play the game guessing what the WC for us will be at endgame (if we were to assume that it might be kill all scum...?) (I removed the fluff-part) The point I was trying to make (but I must have failed - because no one seems to see it) was: a) looks like the scum don't have a change in the WC like town OR if they get the same change: the fact that they only kill town must mean that scum plays this game LIKE they have a standard WC (= kill town) b)I can't see anyway it could be pro-town to kill town c) therefore I think we need to play the game without looking at the current win condition and try to play with the WC we would expect at endgame - and that should be kill all scum
|
|
|
Post by Almost Human on Jan 3, 2009 8:36:24 GMT -5
Sorry I haven't posted in a while - I'm suffering from man 'flu atm and my brain's too fuzzed up to think coherently.
After rereading the Minus World Day I'm a lot less sure about Mister Ed. On the first read he just sounded scummy to me but on rereading I can't really put my finger on why. I'll take another look when I'm feeling better - not just at him but at everyone.
I do think DBI's "my scum" slip was intentional though. Rysto pointed out it was typical for scum to ask a question they already knew the answer to. As DBI obviously did know the answer to that question, I'd have expected her to word it correctly. After all if she wanted to say something to earn her townie points surely she'd have been a bit more careful. Maybe i'm giving her too much credit but I do think it was intentional.
All the claims and two confirmed town! Well that's going to make deciding who to vote for a lot easier. I know we can't be 100% sure it's all truthful but I tend to think it is.
As for Mr Ed's semi (claim), I'm not sure what to make of that. While I've no doubt he's a Big Bertha (did you know that's the name of a German howitzer with a very large gun?) I'm on the fence about everything else.
As for the weird new voting method - I think I understand it. I don't like it much mind you. I'll make my yellow vote by the end of the weekend anyway.
|
|
Chucara
Borogrove
Idleboard's Elite Coder Club
2009 Winner of Best Person in the Universe
Posts: 287
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Chucara on Jan 3, 2009 9:14:23 GMT -5
I've been rereading Mr. Special Ed, and the following strikes me as extremely odd: Idle, I am correct in assuming that Scum got 2 kills last Night? They didn't have to decide before the split, did they? And that means at least one of the people here have Night kill abilities. As far as I can see, I only see one night kill on night 3. If that is the case, I'll change my vote to Ed. I might still anyway
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 3, 2009 9:43:44 GMT -5
I've been rereading Mr. Special Ed, and the following strikes me as extremely odd: Idle, I am correct in assuming that Scum got 2 kills last Night? They didn't have to decide before the split, did they? And that means at least one of the people here have Night kill abilities. As far as I can see, I only see one night kill on night 3. If that is the case, I'll change my vote to Ed. I might still anyway Why is that odd? That was during the split. I was asking Idle if the Scum got 2 kills, one in each world. We'd been informed of story's demise....I mistakenly thought he was in the minus world with us. I think that was the 3rd post on the Minus World's Day 4. I thought maybe we got told of our death and the Mushroom Kingdom got told of theirs. It seemed odd to me that we would know who was dead there and nothing else going on there. Idle cleared it up for me. I realize everyone is picking me apart, I really have no earth shattering, vote-changing defense. I've posted a lot. I've posted ideas and thoughts. Some not so good. I've changed my mind a lot. I've also been very vocal about some things. I've also been very wrong as often as I've been right. But I assure you, (for what that's worth, nothing, I know) that these are the mistakes of a town player with little information. I suppose, if you want, I can go through each of my posts and try to defend my reasoning. But I've already stated my basic thinking each Day. Try not to take each post separately, together, they should sort of form what I was thinking. I know it's not entirely consistent. But then, what town person has had a completely consistent approach? I guess the only consistent thing I've done is get irritated with all the claiming (OK, really just the unnecessary claiming) going on. So, I can go through whatever issues everyone still has toMorrow. Now, with all that said, while I feel my lynch will put us closer to lynch or lose. I've changed my mind on something. I suggested earlier that you don't lynch me because I am invincible today, and it would be a waste. Now, maybe it's not such a bad idea. Yes, we'll lose the chance at getting a Scum today, but at least it might help to semi-confirm me as Town when I don't die. And from what I understand of Idle's 'clarifying' messages to me. I am not like a Scotsman toDay. ToDay I am invincible. So even if I'm lynched, targeted for a Nightkill, targeted by both a Vig and a SK, I'll still live. ToMorrow, I'm less certain about. Either I'll have Scotsman like abilities or I'll have the protection of a bodyguard of some sort, or something else I haven't been told of. I just know that I'm more resistant to death in the air. So, go ahead and lynch me toDay, then maybe we can put this behind us toMorrow and find more Scum before it's too late.
|
|
Chucara
Borogrove
Idleboard's Elite Coder Club
2009 Winner of Best Person in the Universe
Posts: 287
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Chucara on Jan 3, 2009 11:48:24 GMT -5
The thing is, Ed.. You said LAST night, not tonight.. That might be a townie slip, but you've got to admit it just doesn't fly right.
I don't even know what to make of the claim of invulnerability in water. So far the people that have been pinging me are:
Special Ed - even more so right now that in the rest of the game. Especially that "two kills last night" and even moreso his defence of it. Misterblockey - The damn thing about it is that I can't for the love of glod really put a finger on what it is, but he just seems to be flying low. Nanook - For claiming doc at a time where I just can't see any reason to do so.
When all comes to all, if you're lying, we'll have a dead scum. If you're telling the truth, we'll have a mislynch, but that is not as bad as another dead townie.
I can't vote nanook as I think it would be stupid to lynch the doc if he is telling the truth. (Remember Idle in Marvel). I still don't understand the reasoning behind the claim.
I can't honestly justify the Misterblockey vote with anything other than a gut feeling. And seeing as my gut feeling is more often wrong than right, I'll
faux-unvote Misterblockey, faux-vote Special Ed.
This leaves the vote count at:
Mr. Special Ed (2) - Nanook, Hoopy Frood, Chucara Zeriel (1) - Totallost
With me being the infamous third vote.
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 3, 2009 12:40:43 GMT -5
The thing is, Ed.. You said LAST night, not tonight.. That might be a townie slip, but you've got to admit it just doesn't fly right. I said Last Night because it was the start of Day 4. I was asking about what happened in Night 3....on Day 4, Night 3 would have been last night. If I had said "toNight" like you suggest, that would mean Night 4, which hadn't happened yet. My mistake was assuming that there was a Night kill in the Minus World AND in the Mushroom Kingdom while we were separated on Night 3. If your reason for voting me is that my grammar was correct, it seems like your stretching it a bit. When all comes to all, if you're lying, we'll have a dead scum. If you're telling the truth, we'll have a mislynch, but that is not as bad as another dead townie. I agree, which is why I'm thinking trying to lynch me might not be as bad an idea after all, though, I think we are getting close to the point where we need to get Scum. This leaves the vote count at:]
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Jan 3, 2009 12:47:13 GMT -5
When all comes to all, if you're lying, we'll have a dead scum. If you're telling the truth, we'll have a mislynch, but that is not as bad as another dead townie. What? What about Ed might be scum and telling the truth? If he is then we might have a no lynch (and why would Ed think that could be a semi-confirmation of him being Town???) and the scum would be able to vote for him toDay - and if he don't die in a lynch underwater it would lead Town to a no-lynch (very pro-scum). Then Ed could come back toMorrow and say "look I was telling the truth". If we later find out he indeed IS scum - all the scum voting for him toDay could claim voting for a scum is something "scum would never do". I think it would be better to lynch someone else toDay and wait with Ed till we in the air/on the ground again.
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 3, 2009 12:55:04 GMT -5
The thing is, Ed.. You said LAST night, not tonight.. That might be a townie slip, but you've got to admit it just doesn't fly right. I said Last Night because it was the start of Day 4. I was asking about what happened in Night 3....on Day 4, Night 3 would have been last night. If I had said "toNight" like you suggest, that would mean Night 4, which hadn't happened yet. My mistake was assuming that there was a Night kill in the Minus World AND in the Mushroom Kingdom while we were separated on Night 3. If your reason for voting me is that my grammar was correct, it seems like your stretching it a bit. When all comes to all, if you're lying, we'll have a dead scum. If you're telling the truth, we'll have a mislynch, but that is not as bad as another dead townie. I agree, which is why I'm thinking trying to lynch me might not be as bad an idea after all, though, I think we are getting close to the point where we need to get Scum. This leaves the vote count at:]NETA: That last little part at the bottom o my last message was just stuff left over from the post I was quoting. I didn't notice it was still there. I'd just had to be called on having a meaningless sentence fragment in my post.
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 3, 2009 12:58:06 GMT -5
When all comes to all, if you're lying, we'll have a dead scum. If you're telling the truth, we'll have a mislynch, but that is not as bad as another dead townie. What? What about Ed might be scum and telling the truth? If he is then we might have a no lynch (and why would Ed think that could be a semi-confirmation of him being Town???) and the scum would be able to vote for him toDay - and if he don't die in a lynch underwater it would lead Town to a no-lynch (very pro-scum). Then Ed could come back toMorrow and say "look I was telling the truth". If we later find out he indeed IS scum - all the scum voting for him toDay could claim voting for a scum is something "scum would never do". I think it would be better to lynch someone else toDay and wait with Ed till we in the air/on the ground again. true, the semi-confirmation would be of my power, and not of my alignment. I suppose I could be a Scum or even PFK still, but you would know I wasn't lying about my character and power, I suppose.
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Jan 3, 2009 13:06:02 GMT -5
What? What about Ed might be scum and telling the truth? If he is then we might have a no lynch (and why would Ed think that could be a semi-confirmation of him being Town???) and the scum would be able to vote for him toDay - and if he don't die in a lynch underwater it would lead Town to a no-lynch (very pro-scum). Then Ed could come back toMorrow and say "look I was telling the truth". If we later find out he indeed IS scum - all the scum voting for him toDay could claim voting for a scum is something "scum would never do". I think it would be better to lynch someone else toDay and wait with Ed till we in the air/on the ground again. true, the semi-confirmation would be of my power, and not of my alignment. I suppose I could be a Scum or even PFK still, but you would know I wasn't lying about my character and power, I suppose. But I could have that information another Day as well (the difference being you would die - so I do understand why you feel it might be a big difference ) I just don't see that a trade for that info (you can't die underwater) would be worth a no-lynch for Town... we don't even know if we'll have another Day under water (and even if we did how could we use the fact that you can't be lynched???). I can't see why we shouldn't go look for someone else and then lynch you in a Day where we could assume you were lynch-able. (I know the WiFoM is that you might be a PFK with a WC that makes it important that you're never lynched while under water - but I still don't think it worth a no-lynch at the moment).
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 3, 2009 13:17:34 GMT -5
true, the semi-confirmation would be of my power, and not of my alignment. I suppose I could be a Scum or even PFK still, but you would know I wasn't lying about my character and power, I suppose. But I could have that information another Day as well (the difference being you would die - so I do understand why you feel it might be a big difference ) I just don't see that a trade for that info (you can't die underwater) would be worth a no-lynch for Town... we don't even know if we'll have another Day under water (and even if we did how could we use the fact that you can't be lynched???). I can't see why we shouldn't go look for someone else and then lynch you in a Day where we could assume you were lynch-able. (I know the WiFoM is that you might be a PFK with a WC that makes it important that you're never lynched while under water - but I still don't think it worth a no-lynch at the moment). I think I'm in complete agreement with you, total. I agree it's bad to lynch me toDay because we should be trying to get Scum. I don't see the point in trying to confirm me via a non-lynch. I think it would be better to try to find Scum. But it could be worse, and I'm not about to go through each of my posts and try to pick them apart grammatically or try to focus on some of the silly things I've done or thoughts I've had that were wrong. It will completely distract us from finding Scum. I don't mid the general, here's your posts, what were you thinking questions. I've already stated my general thoughts as the Days and Nights have gone on, but I'm willing to repeat them if necessary. I doubt we'll have another Day underwater. I think my role is just a toss-away. Something Idle thought would be cool for my character. I'm sure it plays into the game somehow. I mean, I'm a fish with big nasty teeth as far as I can see. I suppose I'd be powerful underwater. As to the air part, I have no idea and Idle didn't elaborate for me.
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Jan 3, 2009 13:22:31 GMT -5
I think I'm in complete agreement with you, total. I agree it's bad to lynch me toDay because we should be trying to get Scum. I don't see the point in trying to confirm me via a non-lynch. I think it would be better to try to find Scum. But it could be worse, and I'm not about to go through each of my posts and try to pick them apart grammatically or try to focus on some of the silly things I've done or thoughts I've had that were wrong. It will completely distract us from finding Scum. Then I think the best thing for you to do is to go and hunt scum. You could start by making a faux-vote...
|
|
|
Post by special on Jan 3, 2009 13:39:07 GMT -5
I think I'm in complete agreement with you, total. I agree it's bad to lynch me toDay because we should be trying to get Scum. I don't see the point in trying to confirm me via a non-lynch. I think it would be better to try to find Scum. But it could be worse, and I'm not about to go through each of my posts and try to pick them apart grammatically or try to focus on some of the silly things I've done or thoughts I've had that were wrong. It will completely distract us from finding Scum. Then I think the best thing for you to do is to go and hunt scum. You could start by making a faux-vote... Yes, ma'am. I will do some re-reading Sunday, and try to come up with some ideas by then. Today, I'm going to watch some football. [fluff] Maybe I'll start looking in the bathroom [/fluff]
|
|
Chucara
Borogrove
Idleboard's Elite Coder Club
2009 Winner of Best Person in the Universe
Posts: 287
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Chucara on Jan 3, 2009 13:40:55 GMT -5
Totallost: I don't think not actually killing our target is the same as a no lynch*, but I do see your point. Then again, it might just be scum buying another day towards lylo. It is just too conveinient.
*no-lynch to me is voting no lynch.. i.e. getting no dead scum and no info either.
|
|
Chucara
Borogrove
Idleboard's Elite Coder Club
2009 Winner of Best Person in the Universe
Posts: 287
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Chucara on Jan 3, 2009 14:07:50 GMT -5
Ahh.. wait.. Now I think I understand the mistake, Ed.
I might be inclined to letting him live another day if we can find a better target. As totallost says, him not dying doesn't really confirm his alignment anyway. I don't how common it is for scum to have people that can't be lynched, but then again, I can't really see it as a pro-town ability either.
Meh. The Special Ed case isn't going to change more than this, I think it might be a good idea to drag other people into the spotlight a little. Off the top of my head, the only question I can think to ask is to Nanook: Do you mind posting your role PM?
I think I understand the reasons behind your claim now that I've reread.. In few words: you claimed because you think scum already knew it. Then I guess it will be WIFOM between you and scum. That drops my suspicion of you by quite a bit.. Only problem is.. I don't really have any fantastic candidates right now.
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Jan 3, 2009 14:08:48 GMT -5
Totallost: I don't think not actually killing our target is the same as a no lynch*, but I do see your point. Then again, it might just be scum buying another day towards lylo. It is just too conveinient. *no-lynch to me is voting no lynch.. i.e. getting no dead scum and no info either. But if he is telling the truth (and if he's scum then the rest of the scum will know this) he'll be a very SAFE target for scum to place a vote. That's why I'm not very happy with us voting for him toDay - let's leave him for now and go look elsewhere. Then we can kill him off later in the game...
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Jan 3, 2009 16:21:50 GMT -5
KidV: I'm not sure which point you're trying to make about the Special Ed/Almost Human quotes. In regards to day 4, I'll gladly admit that I thought pedescribe was a better candidate.. I was wrong. I didn't hammer him to gain cred, I hammered him to end the day as nothing was going on and it wasn't going to change the results. (Plus there were almost no time left anyway) Are you trying to say (in the underlined part) that you hammered pedescribe? How so? I got spinied, early this morning.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Gir! on Jan 3, 2009 16:27:39 GMT -5
Explanation of question: Because the person you actually hammered that Day is female, but you speak of "hammering him".
|
|