|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 18:21:27 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 13, 2009 18:21:27 GMT -5
I'm open to suggestions, but I am going to end up choosing the person I think would be best for town. Totally understood. That's why I tried to make sure that you and everyone else knows that it is ultimately your choice on what to do. Night for these games are typically drinking and fluff stuff. However, in this set up we have a chance to strategize at night. I think that is valuable for town. Your role does present a slight conundrum - I think even you would admit. I was just thinking out loud that this might encourage a more substantive discussion.
|
|
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:
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 18:33:03 GMT -5
Post by Parzival on Feb 13, 2009 18:33:03 GMT -5
Sorry, chucara (& Aubby). I did think you were scum.
To paulwhoisaghost (assuming for the moment that your role is dangerous) : There's a difference between whether your death would benefit the town and whether you being lynched would benefit the town. It's rarely in the town's interest to lynch anti-town roles. We need to lynch scum, most importantly because what goes on when one scum is lynched is likely to lead to other scum. They're the only ones who are likely to get worried about such an occurence, which leads to hopefully revealing behavior from the one group that has more information than the rest of us about the lynch candidates. For that purpose, of course, it's really only necessary for scum to be close to being lynched as long as they die at some point, but we do kind of need scum dead to win, the sooner the better.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 18:41:21 GMT -5
Post by tdpatriots12 on Feb 13, 2009 18:41:21 GMT -5
Given that he was tied for second and I voted him #1, I would be in support of paulwhoisaghost using his power on shaggy.
Not exactly an Earth-shattering statement, I know.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 19:28:29 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 13, 2009 19:28:29 GMT -5
Sorry, chucara (& Aubby). I did think you were scum. To paulwhoisaghost (assuming for the moment that your role is dangerous) : There's a difference between whether your death would benefit the town and whether you being lynched would benefit the town. It's rarely in the town's interest to lynch anti-town roles. We need to lynch scum, most importantly because what goes on when one scum is lynched is likely to lead to other scum. And because being a smart ass is kind of what I do. Personally the lynch of ed didn't do dick for me. That's a personal observation.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:18:22 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 20:18:22 GMT -5
PAULWHOISAGHOST can you please change your sig? **changed**
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:30:35 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 20:30:35 GMT -5
Sorry, chucara (& Aubby). I did think you were scum. To paulwhoisaghost (assuming for the moment that your role is dangerous) : There's a difference between whether your death would benefit the town and whether you being lynched would benefit the town. Call me paranoid, but this sounds a lot like a threat to me. It's rarely in the town's interest to lynch anti-town roles. How is it rarely in the town's interest? Wouldn't anti-town roles usually be held by scum or PFK? Isn't that the point, to lynch everyone who isn't town? Now I was never saying that I should lynched before a possible scum. But at the time that I resigned to my death, there was no one under suspicion. I didn't think that Chucara or Shaggy were Scum, so I still feel like the better move for town would have been to take out the liability role rather than to lynch someone based on sketchy voting. Especially when that sketchy voting was during the most confusing part of this game so far. From the read backs it seems like no one suspected Ed. I personally think that is because the other two Masons didn't respond to the situation in a manner that would not only be helpful to town, but that would keep them from looking scummy. There wasn't much they could do. They were concentrating on how best to solve the problem, meanwhile Ed is concentrating on how to look at Town as possible. Voting Chucara was a mistake and I shouldn't be here tonight to possibly kill another innocent town. And I can't help but feel that anyone who disagrees is either Scum or a PFK.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:33:29 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 20:33:29 GMT -5
NETA: The last sentence in my paragraph should read: They were concentrating on how best to solve the problem, meanwhile Ed was concentrating on how to look as Town as possible.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:36:13 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Feb 13, 2009 20:36:13 GMT -5
I think your confusion comes from him meaning anti-town as in a town role that's of neutral or negative usefulness to the town, rather than a role that's against the town.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:43:59 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 20:43:59 GMT -5
I see. I still feel that given the choice between a town with an anti-town role and a case against someone based solely on sketchy voting, I would vote the anti-town everytime.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:45:24 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 20:45:24 GMT -5
Oh and did you not think my sig was humorous?
|
|
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:
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:48:57 GMT -5
Post by Parzival on Feb 13, 2009 20:48:57 GMT -5
Well, I was talking about you or at least a similar situation. If you want to claim scum/PFK, go ahead. To expand on it, I meant "roles that have anti-town powers/elements but are town/neutral-aligned" (Disclaimer: you're not confirmed, so this is generic statement). Again it's not that the town doesn't want non-helpful roles around, but that they should prefer to be lynching (and trying to lynch) scum.
peeker, I really did have a line in there about Ed but I must have cut it out whie editing. Scum whose scummitude is common knowledge don't help the town when they get lynched aside from them being dead, since there's no hidden knowledge. Looking for these sorts of clues are our best counter to daytalking scum.
|
|
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:
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:51:17 GMT -5
Post by Parzival on Feb 13, 2009 20:51:17 GMT -5
Too many negatives. The town doesn't want potentially non-helpful roles around. It's not in the town's interest to lynch them ahead of scum, most of the time.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:54:32 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 20:54:32 GMT -5
Well, I was talking about you or at least a similar situation. If you want to claim scum/PFK, go ahead. When did I claim Scum/PFK? Don't twist my words to shed suspicion on me. I have claimed my role, and if you really want to go down this road and get a bandwagon started Parzival, then go ahead. I just hope everyone remembers it was you that started it when I turn out to be another town on town victim.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 20:57:05 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 20:57:05 GMT -5
Too many negatives. The town doesn't want potentially non-helpful roles around. It's not in the town's interest to lynch them ahead of scum, most of the time. I understand that. I was simply stating that the case against both Chucara and Shaggy was weak at best. And the I don't feel they outweighed the risk of not only mislynching someone, but then possibly losing a town tonight if I target the wrong person.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 21:51:00 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 13, 2009 21:51:00 GMT -5
Voting Chucara was a mistake and I shouldn't be here tonight to possibly kill another innocent town. And I can't help but feel that anyone who disagrees is either Scum or a PFK. <Snipped> Huh? So you shouldn't be here to kill another innocent but if someone disagrees they are scum or PFK. Did I just totally mis-parse this? Slowly backs away.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 22:00:55 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 13, 2009 22:00:55 GMT -5
Well, I was talking about you or at least a similar situation. If you want to claim scum/PFK, go ahead. To expand on it, I meant "roles that have anti-town powers/elements but are town/neutral-aligned" (Disclaimer: you're not confirmed, so this is generic statement). Again it's not that the town doesn't want non-helpful roles around, but that they should prefer to be lynching (and trying to lynch) scum. peeker, I really did have a line in there about Ed but I must have cut it out whie editing. Scum whose scummitude is common knowledge don't help the town when they get lynched aside from them being dead, since there's no hidden knowledge. Looking for these sorts of clues are our best counter to daytalking scum. Fair enough. I just don't have the same lattitude that apparently a lot of you folks have. I play on a Blackberry so this compose then edit then post is not something I can do. This is not a wah wah post because what I post is what I post and I have to be held to task for it if necessary. It just sounded funky, is all. But since I understand how most of you play this game, I understand. And this "play this game" is directed towards the actual keystroke mechanics and nothing else. Cause some of you folks are just baffling to me.
|
|
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:
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 22:02:34 GMT -5
Post by Parzival on Feb 13, 2009 22:02:34 GMT -5
When did I claim Scum/PFK? Don't twist my words to shed suspicion on me. I have claimed my role, and if you really want to go down this road and get a bandwagon started Parzival, then go ahead. I just hope everyone remembers it was you that started it when I turn out to be another town on town victim. Okay, I need a drink. After what happened today this statement makes no sense to me And the Scum/PFK thing was a joke (based on the possible interpretation of 'anti-town' that I didn't intend). Besides, it's not just you. There's an open invitation to any scum/PFK who want to claim that alignment.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 22:03:52 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 13, 2009 22:03:52 GMT -5
Oh and did you not think my sig was humorous? Not really.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 22:14:22 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 13, 2009 22:14:22 GMT -5
And parz you can have my margrita because the last interchange makes me feel like the micro dots might be kicking back in after a couple of decades. And I never performed well on acid when I was alcohol hammered.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 22:28:55 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 22:28:55 GMT -5
When did I claim Scum/PFK? Don't twist my words to shed suspicion on me. I have claimed my role, and if you really want to go down this road and get a bandwagon started Parzival, then go ahead. I just hope everyone remembers it was you that started it when I turn out to be another town on town victim. Okay, I need a drink. After what happened today this statement makes no sense to me And the Scum/PFK thing was a joke (based on the possible interpretation of 'anti-town' that I didn't intend). Besides, it's not just you. There's an open invitation to any scum/PFK who want to claim that alignment. Oh well in that case. Have one on me. How about... a Whiskey Sour? I guess I need to lighten up a little... been a rough couple of days at work
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 22:49:46 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 13, 2009 22:49:46 GMT -5
Voting Chucara was a mistake and I shouldn't be here tonight to possibly kill another innocent town. And I can't help but feel that anyone who disagrees is either Scum or a PFK. <Snipped> Huh? So you shouldn't be here to kill another innocent but if someone disagrees they are scum or PFK. Did I just totally mis-parse this? Slowly backs away. What I meant was that I would be suspicious of anyone who thinks that Chucara being lynched instead of me was a good thing.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 23:08:02 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 13, 2009 23:08:02 GMT -5
<Snipped> Huh? So you shouldn't be here to kill another innocent but if someone disagrees they are scum or PFK. Did I just totally mis-parse this? Slowly backs away. What I meant was that I would be suspicious of anyone who thinks that Chucara being lynched instead of me was a good thing. Chucara was a town power role. So I seriously doubt that there will be a lot of folks saying that her/his lynch was a good thing. However, if there are some of you out there that see this is positive, can we get a show of hands. [Fluffon]chucara - third leg or no? Seriously, in So. TX an a is a feminine diminitive. If it's masculine it's an o. It's kind of like our sex challenged mod. A cow gets fucked, while a bull does the fucking. Ok. I get it now. There is nothing at all wrong with that FCOD.[Fluffoff]
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 13, 2009 23:17:02 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 13, 2009 23:17:02 GMT -5
Oh, and it goes without saying that fcod is doing a great job. I've just never given him grief ever. And since this seems to be bordering on familiarity here we go.
Mhaye, Mhaye, baby.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 14, 2009 2:44:11 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 14, 2009 2:44:11 GMT -5
Sheesh. Here we are at t minus eighteen hours. Or there about. It still seems likes silence must be the key to longevity. Seriously, are the few of us just going to beat the flap out of each other and call it a day?
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 14, 2009 4:28:54 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 14, 2009 4:28:54 GMT -5
Sheesh. Here we are at t minus eighteen hours. Or there about. It still seems likes silence must be the key to longevity. Seriously, are the few of us just going to beat the flap out of each other and call it a day? Apparentally. Woot (in a small and sad voice)
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 14, 2009 8:46:25 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 14, 2009 8:46:25 GMT -5
For what my 2 cents are worth paul I would say use your power on whom ever you feel is most scummy. If you want me, then go ahead but it will be a wasted kill. I am not SCUM but if the town feels it best to kill me, then go ahead. I certainly have no problem dying if it help's us all win in the end.
Which is why just to comment on last day. So because I found a suspicious post and voted, kat you felt that was to poor of reasoning to vote, so you voted me. So should then I just random.org a vote? or better yet blindly bandwagon vote? Is it not in the town's best interest to vote based on whom you find suspicious and why? such as I did. Remember it was not just the one post, I did say it was also the other post's that netlaw posted for why he voted and I did as well. But hey if you really want to find anything you can to lynch me over then go right ahead. I am just saying voting for a guy because he finds someone else suspicious, now that seems suspicious to me. Just cause some one makes joke's or is the way they normally are, is not justification to me, to shake off there post's and give them aa free ride. I think that jokes and sarcastic responces are sometimes the best way to catch the scum. For example on a game on FB that is how I caught onto a certain player for being scum. She and a fellow scum made a giving lesson's on being bad joke. That I found suspicious that they would be saying to each other they are bad and going to teach each other lesson's on being bad. It was done as a joke but it still revealed to me and I was right about them being scum. So waving off joke's and stuff as the way people "normally" play I think can lead to wrong conclusions, and give people a free ride for basing it on the way they played past games. I can assure you all it will be a miss lynch, but if that is what you all want, whom am I to stand in the way of the will of you all.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 14, 2009 9:47:03 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 14, 2009 9:47:03 GMT -5
I just have to say that this may be the durndest game I have participated in. I don't understand any of the color. There are a couple of folks that are rather new to me and their posting styles are not anything that I am accustomed to. Add the fact that we managed to kill off the Masons in two freaking days with the last one going down in a meth rush has really made me twirl.
I am not sure how this plays out but you really have to give it up for pede and fcod for setting up something so entertaining.
I am going to show my Texas right now. It's kind of like British humor. I don't get half of it but since everyone else in the room is laughing I might as well join along.
|
|
|
Night 3
Feb 14, 2009 11:31:07 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Feb 14, 2009 11:31:07 GMT -5
I see. I still feel that given the choice between a town with an anti-town role and a case against someone based solely on sketchy voting, I would vote the anti-town everytime. But scummy actions in voting is a strong scum tell. We got rugger in SMB because he blatantly saved Dotchan/DBI from lynch Day 1. When dotchan got lynched later, and was revealed as godfather, it basically outed him. So much so that he actually claimed scum to strike a deal with Chucara, the outed serial killer near the end of the Day with a vote mechanic that made it nigh impossible to switch to Rugger from Special Ed. (Who was a legitimate survivor role.) Aubby's actions if intentional had no pro-town motivation. In retrospect, they were a series of mistakes that compounded upon each other. And mistakes that aren't genuine slips are null tells. But her actions also had strong pro-scum intent. And she tried to rationalize what she did, rather than just saying she screwed up. And then she gave Ed only an hour to answer a question before using that as reason to vote for him when she didn't vote for him earlier. And she voted him second place when she didn't find him scummy earlier. It's not that she changed her mind that looked scummy, it's the justifications she gave for why she did it that looked scummy.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Night 3
Feb 14, 2009 11:50:28 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Feb 14, 2009 11:50:28 GMT -5
Which is why just to comment on last day. So because I found a suspicious post and voted, kat you felt that was to poor of reasoning to vote, so you voted me. So should then I just random.org a vote? or better yet blindly bandwagon vote? Is it not in the town's best interest to vote based on whom you find suspicious and why? such as I did. Remember it was not just the one post, I did say it was also the other post's that netlaw posted for why he voted and I did as well. But hey if you really want to find anything you can to lynch me over then go right ahead. I am just saying voting for a guy because he finds someone else suspicious, now that seems suspicious to me. Just cause some one makes joke's or is the way they normally are, is not justification to me, to shake off there post's and give them aa free ride. I think that jokes and sarcastic responces are sometimes the best way to catch the scum. For example on a game on FB that is how I caught onto a certain player for being scum. She and a fellow scum made a giving lesson's on being bad joke. That I found suspicious that they would be saying to each other they are bad and going to teach each other lesson's on being bad. It was done as a joke but it still revealed to me and I was right about them being scum. So waving off joke's and stuff as the way people "normally" play I think can lead to wrong conclusions, and give people a free ride for basing it on the way they played past games. I can assure you all it will be a miss lynch, but if that is what you all want, whom am I to stand in the way of the will of you all. And you know what? If you had left it as just "what natlaw said", I probably wouldn't have thought anything of it. But using that particular post looks like you thought "Oh, I need to add a separate justification so people won't accuse me of just following natlaw" (which, yeah, it's definitely a possibility), so went looking for anything that looked like it would fill the need. And, like I said, if it had been just that comment and nothing else, it could possibly have been a mispost meant for the scumboard (it's happened at least twice, and by otherwise-well-playing scum). You originally explained your suspicion of it as being happy over the mason kerfluffle. Again: if it had been just that comment and nothing else, it could possibly have been a mispost meant for the scumboard. Nothing except for blockey being extremely stoopid could explain him deliberately posting that comment for that reason on this[/b] board, which he would have had to do since the rest of the post was obviously meant to be posted here. If you clarify that you were accusing him of that, I'll retroactively withdraw the vote*. On the other hand, if it was truly meant as a joke over the success of that word catching on, there's nothing scummy about that joke. So what if you caught other scum joking about being scum, that doesn't mean that all jokes are scummy. On the other hand, if you can explain why joking about the word kerfluffle in particular is scummy, I'll retroactively withdraw the vote*. Or, if you truly believe that all jokes are scummy, I'll retroactively withdraw the vote*, until I see you not voting other joking people. Or, briefly, I didn't vote because I disagreed with you, I voted because I thought you were deliberately misunderstanding and twisting blockey's comment. If you can come up with a reason (other than blockey being stoopid) for him to post something so stupid, I'll reconsider. *Well, I don't think I can really do that, but I'll do it in spirit.
|
|