Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 11:42:50 GMT -5
Post by Natlaw on Apr 30, 2009 11:42:50 GMT -5
I don't see the joy in waiting until tomorrow to lynch Pleo, sacher. I can't believe you're ready to toss a potential vig. away with so little care. You have also neglected the possibility that we have a player who can protect against recruitment. Is that person expendable too? In my opinion if we leave Pleo for tomorrow it's going to be ground hog day all over again. What's the point? If everyone agrees we have to kill him why not just do it today. So you are in favor of lynching Pleonast Today, to cut of the WIFOM and anyone targeting him is too dangerous because they might get tracked? But if we lynch him, a recruitment protector becomes basically vanilla, thus more expendable anyway. I don't see Pleonast as straight-up scum, because I see no benefit to the 'lynch me' claim for them. He could be (recruitable) town and telling the truth, but he could also be PFK with a separate win condition (who may or may not get recruited by another party). So probably (not yet) scum, thus no need to lynch right away. And the other alignments mean it would be at least a semi mislynch, so giving power roles an opportunity to deal with it leaves the lynch available to try to take out scum. My only worry is the fact that he switched from 'I can self-protect' to 'resistant to Night kills' - the former suggests he can take other Night actions. Just speculation, but if he is Dr. Horrible, he might have both a Freeze Ray (protect) and a Death Ray (kill).
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 11:59:51 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Apr 30, 2009 11:59:51 GMT -5
I've given all the information I am comfortable giving. I don't see how revealing my role's name or color will help the Town more than scum. I'm afraid more info will make it easier to recruit me while not helping any anti-recruiter. That's an interesting statement, there, Pleo. Why would you think that the name of your role, or the color, would necessarily help Scum but not necessarily help Town? I can't explain the nature of my problem with above clearly enough, dammit. (Assuming the truth of your claim), you are presupposing that your color will: (1) help the Scum recruit you; and (2) keep any Town roles from helping you. But from my perspective, you have no evidence that this is the case, or, indeed, that exactly the opposite wouldn't be the case.You're right and that's why I won't reveal more. I've only revealed what I am confident is more helpful to the Town than scum.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 12:09:54 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Apr 30, 2009 12:09:54 GMT -5
It looks like I will have time today, so I am going to wade in. I am sorry, I just haven't been able to get enough uninterupted time to do a recap post, so I have read the whole Day a time or two and currently want to
Vote: Paul
for his reaction to Sisters reaction to Pollux's joke vote.
Which struck me as scum looking for a reason to vote. The tone and timing of it seem wrong to me. Maybe there is a touch of metagaming from just having played scum with him on Giraffe boards.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 12:18:47 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Apr 30, 2009 12:18:47 GMT -5
I strongly advocate tabling Pleonast for the rest of the Day. If we spend the entire Day talking about Pleonast, we will have wasted the Day, though tabling for Tomorrow potentially wastes Tomorrow, so it might be a wash. On the other hand deferred waste is better than immediate waste since faeries might do the job for us. Anyway, lynching Pleonast Today seems like a waste to me. I'd much rather toss around the lynch hot-potato to put pressure on scum to reveal thoughts. Lynching Pleonast is too much of a given. Let's at least try to lynch someone else so that we have meaningful data for future use. I agree with the sentiment, but I don't know that it is possible to table Pleo. He has made himself the elephant in the room, and for all the kicking and screaming I have done in past games that we should just move on from a particular player who was dominating early discussion, it has never happened. Best to deal with it now on Day one. At least it gets everyone to take some sort of side. That said, I don't think we should lynch him either. I understand that by Pleo's own admission he might be dangerous to town, but I can't see how he is likely scum right now. Best to decide if he should be lynched toMorrow after we get some more information from the Day and Night.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 12:41:25 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Apr 30, 2009 12:41:25 GMT -5
Alright, well time to get some votes up right? I'll voteKid Vermicious. because as silly as the votes on the Pollux Joke vote issue is, his reason for not voting strikes me as sillier. I think Pleo is right, in a self-fulfilling sort of way. Now that he's claimed the way he has, we need to lynch him. The question is whether to do it sooner or later. I think I'm in favor of sooner, but keeping in mind the risk of a hammer I'll withhold voting for now. He doesn't want to vote because of the risk of a Hammer. With 3 votes pretty much cast the entire game, this... strikes me as a bit odd. Just basically feels like he's pro-pleonast dying, but not willing to make the commitment yet until more votes and opinions are in. That "testing-the-waters" bit just... doesn't sit well with me. So you'll get my vote for now, Kid V. If I find someone scummier, I always reserve the right to remove it. ~~~~~~~ My Thoughts on Pleo: 1) There is no guarantee in anything. There is no guarantee that a vig killing Pleonast will be exposed. But there is no guarantee that he won't be exposed either. Risk versus reward. Risk, a Vig might get exposed by trying to kill Pleonast. Reward, we don't waste a lynch on Pleonast. Personally, I don't think the risk is all that big. Either way, it's up to the Vig. But if we lynch Pleonast Today, the Vig doesn't get the opportunity. This is how I feel. If we sit around terrified of "scum watchers" then what's the point of any proTown power role doing something? The Vig shouldn't kill, he might hit the cop! Oh noes! It's one of those risks you have to take. I haven't seen a Scum watcher in a game, though it's been pointed out that they've been used recently. So fair enough. However, I don't see the problem with the risk/reward. If the Vig kill Pleonast, well then, pleo isn't really who he said he was and problem solved. If the Vig doesn't kill Pleonast, then we at least could see that in the morning when we have a living Pleonast alive, and there's someone out there that can possibly attest to this (they shouldn't come right out and say what they did, but it certainly will help pleo's credibility). Those are two very positive things. Now if there's a watcher who either IS Pleo or targets Pleo, well then, they now know the name of the Vig. If within the next Night the Vig is killed off, we then can at least start deducing what's going on, and again- more information is provided to us. Now if PLEO is the Scum Watcher- well, if he gets vigged, no biggie. He's dead. But if he's a scum watcher with immunity to NK's... that's starting to stack the deck a little bit more.... Also, with Pleo's recent responses and all- he's playing his cards awfully close to his hand, which is fine by me. I can get behind that strategy... if I were in his shoes. But I'm not. So therefore, I'm still suspicious of him- namely in the fact that he feels his very NAME could give away potential information to recruiters.... That doesn't allay my fears that he's just a lying scum at all. Because in MY book, I'm more likely to see expendable scum trying this move out than random players. A player comes out wanting to die? Who's going to lynch that guy? Very few people, and I'm not one to try it either. If there was a Scottsman/StrongMan scum I'd see this as a great ploy- he builds massive credibility by "surviving" a NK, or he gets lynched, but it wastes the town's lynch for that Day, and nothing is accomplished. That's MY fear rather than "watcher" scum. So I'm in favor of seeing how Pleo fares, giving him a Night, and then I'd be more in favor of considering lynching him toMorrow when we have more inout on the board, and have more information to make a decision.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 12:48:40 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Apr 30, 2009 12:48:40 GMT -5
Vote Count:
Sister Coyote (2) - zlw, Paul Roosh (1) - Pollux Pollux (1) - Sister Coyote Paul (1) - NAF1138 KidV (1) - Roosh
--FCOD
|
|
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:
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 12:49:06 GMT -5
Post by Total Ullz on Apr 30, 2009 12:49:06 GMT -5
C) There is little reason to believe that targeting Pleonast will expose a power role. I think it is quite clear that Protective and Investigative roles have no business targeting Pleonast during Night One (or any Night for that matter). Pleonast is dead meat. It is just a matter of when. Protecting him will only delay his death and possibly force us to lynch instead of waking up to find Pleonast conveniently dead. Investigating him is useless too since we're going to kill him anyway regardless of the investigation result. So who exactly are you concerned about that will be exposed by targeting Pleonast this Night? The only role I see targeting Pleonast is a Vigilante. And if the Vigilante gets exposed to the scum, I don't think it matters too much. Worst case is we wake up with a dead Vig on Day Three and we then have evidence of a scum watcher. We will have lost our Vigilante, but there are worse things to have happen. Vigilante's are not that important anyway. They can be downright dangerous. And a dead Vigilante means a not-dead something else. The benefit of course is we get Pleonast killed during the night and don't waste a lynch and don't have a big information void. and bolding is mine. "Worst case is we wake up with a dead Vig on Day Three and we then have evidence of a scum watcher." Or scum got lucky and got the vig, it was a remorseful vig getting it wrong the Night before... I'm sure you didn't mean "evidence" as in 100 % sure - but just wanted to point it out. As for Pleo - I'm all for leaving him be for now, stop talking only about him and for the vig to take a shot toNight.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 12:51:40 GMT -5
Post by Almost Human on Apr 30, 2009 12:51:40 GMT -5
<font style="font-size: 12px;"> <font style="font-size: 12px;"> <font style="font-size: 12px;"> I'd like to hear from the people that are saying let him live toDay we will deal with him later on why we should. My thoughts on this are : A: Does the game mechanics have a method to keep him town. A1:With a method for a conformable town to confirm him? B: If he is this Jester thing. C: Going back to my previous post, why would anyone attempt any night action on him in the event it exposes their power role.D: I'd rather lynch him toDay if nothing else comes up, he may be a townie right now but toMorrow he could be scum so Minority Report style bitches. And that is all I have on this, but willing to let someone explain why it is best for him to live and why it is better to take out a random or lurker than Pleonast. (bolding mine) You know if power roles worry about being exposed all the time then there's no value to having them anyway. I realise the only game you've played so far had a watcher in it so perhaps that's colouring your perceptions, but the whole point in having a power is to use it with obvious exceptions such as a non compulsory vig, town roleblocker etc. If vigging pleo saves us a lynch then I'm all for it but whoever the vig is (if there is one) should make up their own mind based on whatever knowledge they have that the rest of us don't. Hmm - just in case I didn't make the above clear, I'm not advocating random folk start jumping up and down and declaring their roles - I'm just saying they should use them in the best interests of town without worrying about their own skin.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 13:20:29 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 30, 2009 13:20:29 GMT -5
It's only Thursday. Day doesn't end till next Tuesday so we've got plenty of time to scumhunt. I completely misread this as "...plenty of time to scumbit." And could not for the life of me figure out what you were talking about. That's good. Otherwise, I might have to vote for you. And I think your last line is particularly important; Town needs to find and defeat Scum. It doesn't matter if the last players are Town power roles or Vanilla Town - as long as Town wins, we all win. I don't understand players who think that they have to protect their own hides in favor of acting in the best interests of Town.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 13:26:20 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Apr 30, 2009 13:26:20 GMT -5
Why do you think that was a joke vote, paul? Why do I think it was a joke vote? Hmmm.... Vote Roosh Because I feel like it. I'm trying to work up the urge to care about Pleonast's claim. Working...working....working...failing. Nope, don't care. Big ol' glass of FWiFoM. Because no one in there right minds would consider the bolded part of that post (bolding by me) to be a serious reason to vote someone. The whole post seemed serious enough to me. Admittedly, I don't know PSS, maybe this sort of terse vote-only with worthless commentary is standard operating procedure for him. The two sentences in that part of your post contradict each other. His post seemed serious, (Really?) but he didn't include any commentary of worth?
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 13:26:59 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Apr 30, 2009 13:26:59 GMT -5
Sorry to FCOD for not bleaching.... its a bad habit and I'll try to remember.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 13:29:13 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 30, 2009 13:29:13 GMT -5
His post seemed to be serious in tone. One can post in such a way as to be serious in tone but lacking in content.
anyway. I'm still suspicious, but for the time being I'm going to
Unvote
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 13:32:49 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Apr 30, 2009 13:32:49 GMT -5
It looks like I will have time today, so I am going to wade in. I am sorry, I just haven't been able to get enough uninterupted time to do a recap post, so I have read the whole Day a time or two and currently want to Vote: Paul [/col] for his reaction to Sisters reaction to Pollux's joke vote. Which struck me as scum looking for a reason to vote. The tone and timing of it seem wrong to me. Maybe there is a touch of metagaming from just having played scum with him on Giraffe boards. >< Ouch... backing up your vote on me for my vote on Sis for her vote on Pollux with a metagame smudge... wasn't expecting that. And the same argument that you used for voting me could be used against you for voting me. Just thought I would point it out.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 13:41:57 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Apr 30, 2009 13:41:57 GMT -5
On Pleo.... I'm for passing him up toDay and letting the Night occur and seeing what's what in the morning. No point in rushing ourselves into making a poorly informed decision on this situation. The more info we get before hand the better.
I will say though, that targeting pleo for anything does have an added risk if a scum watcher exists. I played the role in a previous game, and the point of the role is not to watch someone you think is a power role, but to watch someone you think will be targeted by a power role. So yes, normally there is a risk associated with using your powers.... but in this case it's been made obvious who the power would be used on, so that risk is much greater.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 14:20:51 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Apr 30, 2009 14:20:51 GMT -5
Have all of you guys advocating we wait on Pleo so the town vig can take him out forgotten this little tidbit from his coming out of the closet post? I can self-protect myself from Night kills.Yay! At least I'm likely to survive Night One. But my self protection is not 100%. Obviously, I'm not going to disclose the mechanism that determines if it is successful or not. So we wake up tomorrow and he's still alive. What are the lessons learned?
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 14:22:38 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Apr 30, 2009 14:22:38 GMT -5
Pleo, can you choose not to self-protect? Or is it an automatic thing?
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 14:56:29 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Apr 30, 2009 14:56:29 GMT -5
I cannot choose to not self protect.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 15:04:19 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Apr 30, 2009 15:04:19 GMT -5
Why or why am I having flashbacks to the Blade-Runner game?
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 15:09:30 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Apr 30, 2009 15:09:30 GMT -5
*blinks* I'd love to say that my vote was a strategically placed attempt to get people to react to something other than Pleonast's statement. Really, I was just bored and felt like voting for somebody. *shrug* It was just a joke vote. Don't kill me please! Not in the face! (Since there are a lot of new people/people I haven't played with before, Roosh and I were roommates in college, thus why I randomly decided to vote him for no reason.) Also, in the Star Wars mafia game on Facebook, I tried my usual approach of logic and general mafia theory to try and out scum and failed miserably. Meanwhile, a bunch of people went "Hmm, I have a tingly sensation in my nether regions. THAT PERSON IS SCUM." And they were right. So I'm going to trust my nether regions more this game. And they're getting all tingly. Unvote RooshVote sachertorteFor: I strongly advocate tabling Pleonast for the rest of the Day. If we spend the entire Day talking about Pleonast, we will have wasted the Day, though tabling for Tomorrow potentially wastes Tomorrow, so it might be a wash. On the other hand deferred waste is better than immediate waste since faeries might do the job for us. Why table discussion on Pleonast so quickly, when it's the most game-oriented thing we have to discuss? Especially since it's Day One when there's normally very little to discuss? There aren't any special rules or new game mechanics that we know of. Sure, he's given us basically the vaguest possible information he could, but what else are we going to talk about? I mean, I guess there's the Sister Coyote voting for me for a joke vote, then paul voting for Sister Coyote voting for me for a joke vote, then NAF voting for paul voting for Sister Coyote voting for me for a joke vote... My gut tells me this doesn't make sense. "STOP! Let's not talk about game stuff, let's talk about ponies!"
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 15:38:32 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Apr 30, 2009 15:38:32 GMT -5
Do you people even read the entirety of my posts or only half? I end my post with this:
"I move that we table the Pleonast issue until Tomorrow. At the very least I'd like to get everyone on record regarding Today versus Tomorrow. Then, hopefully, we will move onto other things. I'll try to foster a new discussion later today."
How does that equate to stifling discussion? We can discuss Pleonast all Day and you know what? It will get us nowhere. No matter what Pleonast turns up being, any position on Pleonast can equally be held by Scum or by Town. If Pleonast turns up Town do you think all the discussion about Pleonast will reveal anything? What if he turns up Scum? I don't see any point to it. Pleonast has set himself up for lynching. The only discussion is whether it is Today or Tomorrow. I don't see any way to distinguish between Scum and Town based on those positions. Gah!
Furthermore, does it look like I'm telling people they are bad for talking about Pleonast's claim?
Did you miss the parts where I happily discuss WHY I think saving Pleonast for Tomorrow is best? I also engage with sinjin regarding Pleonast... thus continuing the discussion about what to do with him. I advocate moving on to something else because moving on to something else (someone else) is better than wasting the Day yammering on and on about Pleonast who is going to be dead within a week or two. If that 'someone else' is going to be me, that's fine too. But to say that avoiding the Pleonast discussion is anti-Town is so incredibly wrong. Yes, there is little to talk about on Day One, but if we allow ourselves to fixate on Pleonast then it is all too easy to talk about nothing else and waste the Day.
I'm trying to do the opposite of what Pollux accuses me of. I want to discuss things, I even promise to bring up something to discuss as soon as I can. The crack about ponies mischaracterizes my opinion: "let's talk about something else" is not equivalent to "lets talk about something useless."
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 15:49:50 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 30, 2009 15:49:50 GMT -5
I mean, I guess there's the Sister Coyote voting for me for a joke vote, then paul voting for Sister Coyote voting for me for a joke vote, then NAF voting for paul voting for Sister Coyote voting for me for a joke vote... My gut tells me this doesn't make sense. "STOP! Let's not talk about game stuff, let's talk about ponies!" I didn't think that was what sachertorte was saying at all. Oh, and it wasn't just the joke vote; it was also you coming in and saying "meh" about the topic the rest of us were already talking about. If you'd wanted to change the subject or point your finger elsewhere, that would have been different and I would have probably just filed it away in my mental filing cabinet for later consideration.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 15:58:59 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Apr 30, 2009 15:58:59 GMT -5
Do you people even read the entirety of my posts or only half? I end my post with this: "I move that we table the Pleonast issue until Tomorrow. At the very least I'd like to get everyone on record regarding Today versus Tomorrow. Then, hopefully, we will move onto other things. I'll try to foster a new discussion later today." How does that equate to stifling discussion? We can discuss Pleonast all Day and you know what? It will get us nowhere. No matter what Pleonast turns up being, any position on Pleonast can equally be held by Scum or by Town. If Pleonast turns up Town do you think all the discussion about Pleonast will reveal anything? What if he turns up Scum? I don't see any point to it. Pleonast has set himself up for lynching. The only discussion is whether it is Today or Tomorrow. I don't see any way to distinguish between Scum and Town based on those positions. Gah! Furthermore, does it look like I'm telling people they are bad for talking about Pleonast's claim? Did you miss the parts where I happily discuss WHY I think saving Pleonast for Tomorrow is best? I also engage with sinjin regarding Pleonast... thus continuing the discussion about what to do with him. I advocate moving on to something else because moving on to something else (someone else) is better than wasting the Day yammering on and on about Pleonast who is going to be dead within a week or two. If that 'someone else' is going to be me, that's fine too. But to say that avoiding the Pleonast discussion is anti-Town is so incredibly wrong. Yes, there is little to talk about on Day One, but if we allow ourselves to fixate on Pleonast then it is all too easy to talk about nothing else and waste the Day. I'm trying to do the opposite of what Pollux accuses me of. I want to discuss things, I even promise to bring up something to discuss as soon as I can. The crack about ponies mischaracterizes my opinion: "let's talk about something else" is not equivalent to "lets talk about something useless." If you agree that we have to kill him eventually for all the reasons he's said, and if you believe him when he says he cannot be night killed explain to me why we shouldn't lynch him today? What is gained by leaving him alive for one more day?
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 15:59:38 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Apr 30, 2009 15:59:38 GMT -5
His post seemed to be serious in tone. One can post in such a way as to be serious in tone but lacking in content. anyway. I'm still suspicious, but for the time being I'm going to []Unvote[]You're going to hate me for this as it will pretty much look like you can't win. (So it goes, huh?) I wasn't willing to vote for you simply based on my suspicion regarding your statements about Roosh (reminder: I found your willingness to take Roosh's statements at face value unsettlingly void of paranoia), but now that you've taken a stab at Pollux and quickly dissembled, I'm reconsidering. So yes, some people have voted for you for voting for Pollux, but I was not one of them (I actually think your early vote is more pro-Town than not), but now I'm concerned about your unvoting Pollux. I'm particularly irked with the statement that you are still suspicious, yet you are unvoting. If you are still suspicious of Pollux, then why unvote? The main point I have in the "I don't want to vote for Sister Coyote" column is your vocal presence. At least you're saying stuff. Summary: reasons to vote for Sister Coyote - stance on Roosh demonstrates a lack of paranoia - quick unvote of Pollux demonstrates need to please the Town and duck the building heat. - maintaining suspicion on Pollux yet unvoting further shows an action meant to please rather than sticking to ones feelings. reasons not to vote for Sister Coyote - vocal, the main reason Sister Coyote is getting attention is because she actually said something. - early voter, I feel scum are more likely to sit back and push for someone's lynch rather than start one.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 16:26:23 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 30, 2009 16:26:23 GMT -5
You're going to hate me for this as it will pretty much look like you can't win. (So it goes, huh?) I wasn't willing to vote for you simply based on my suspicion regarding your statements about Roosh (reminder: I found your willingness to take Roosh's statements at face value unsettlingly void of paranoia), but now that you've taken a stab at Pollux and quickly dissembled, I'm reconsidering. So yes, some people have voted for you for voting for Pollux, but I was not one of them (I actually think your early vote is more pro-Town than not), but now I'm concerned about your unvoting Pollux. I'm particularly irked with the statement that you are still suspicious, yet you are unvoting. If you are still suspicious of Pollux, then why unvote? This...Is...Mafia! I already knew it was a six of one, half-dozen of the other situation. I unvoted because I need to go back and read the thread and see why other people decided Pollux was joking and I read him as serious, particularly in light of his current comment. My vote may well go back on him, but not until I have a chance, probably this weekend, to really review the thread in-depth (taking notes and the whole nine yards. Right now, I'm reading and absorbing). Unvoting in this situation is a peculiarity of my playstyle, I guess. Also, I have tried to explain this, but I'll try again: I am perfectly cognizant that pro-Town is not the same thing as Town. Scum hide best when they're doing pro-Town things. Therefore, although I did say that RoOsH's action was pro-Town, I did not say that RoOsH his own self was Town. RoOsH is as likely as anyone else to be Scum, but that particular action didn't strike me as scummy. The only proven Town is dead Town, right? At this point, everyone who isn't me is in that nebulous "could be on my side but don't trust 'em" phase we're all in at the beginning. Even pleo. Also, what's really tickling me about all this is that the post on Night Zero that started this accusation of lack of a lack of paranoia on my part was at its base a joke. Which is another part of the reason I'm unvoting until I reconsider; clearly, you took my joking comments as serious. I voted RoOsH for "Making my head hurt." That's a very serious reason <--this is sarcasm. I decided I needed a reason to "unvote" him - even though it was Night and my vote didn't count in the first place - so I provided one, never in a million years thinking anyone would take me seriously about any of it. Damn lack of non-verbal communication in a text medium! Shall I vote RoOsH to convince you I'm paranoid enough? I mean, I don't think it's going to do any good and I don't have a particularly convincing reason to vote RoOsH right now, so I'm not going to. I could give a damn about the heat. The Unvote has more to do with me thinking I made an error than anything else. I have never had a problem sacrificing myself if Town's survival called for me to do so. But I'm no longer certain that suspicion is justified. I'm rescinding my vote because I am insufficiently suspicious of Pollux to think killing him would be good for Town, and that's what we need to do to bring down the Scum, right? Yes, I could have left my vote on Pollux, but I saw withdrawing it as a neutral action. YMM(and obviously does)V. Right now, I want to go back over the whole Day so far, because there are a few things I'm having difficulty understanding and I want to be sure I'm clear on them before I vote again. Well, thanks. I think.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 16:28:12 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 30, 2009 16:28:12 GMT -5
"of a lack of a lack of paranoia"? What the hell is that?
Should say "of a lack of paranoia."
Send more coffee.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 16:44:11 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Apr 30, 2009 16:44:11 GMT -5
If you agree that we have to kill him eventually for all the reasons he's said, and if you believe him when he says he cannot be night killed explain to me why we shouldn't lynch him today? What is gained by leaving him alive for one more day? I believe that Pleonast can be nightkilled. I'm pretty sure I said this quite recently. I stated that people who can't be nightkilled have no reason to say that they can't be nightkilled. I surmise that Pleonast said he can't be nightkilled as a ruse. i.e., Pleonast can be nightkilled, and if Pleonast can be nightkilled, then putting off his lynch for Day Two gives night actors the opportunity to kill Pleonast. If they can't, then they can't and we lynch Tomorrow. But if we lynch Today, then the opportunity is lost. Pleonast has a record of being NK on Night One. I've had some experience with this phenomenon as well. If my role stated I was nightkill resistant (even if only partially resistant) you bet I'd keep that secret. I would spend Day One trying to root out scum and draw the NK. If I'm resistant to scum's NK, I want them to try. That Pleonast publicized his resistance makes me think he really isn't resistant.
|
|
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 17:29:49 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Apr 30, 2009 17:29:49 GMT -5
Your logic is sound, sach, except that it ignores the fact that I think I can be recruited. That's why I made my claim. Since the obvious response to a recruitable player is a Night-kill (so we don't have to waste a lynch), the fact that I'm difficult to Night kill becomes important. That's why I revealed it. Yeah, it means that the Scum won't bother to Night kill me, but it avoids the Town unproductively wondering why I didn't die.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 17:38:03 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Apr 30, 2009 17:38:03 GMT -5
(Since there are a lot of new people/people I haven't played with before, Roosh and I were roommates in college, thus why I randomly decided to vote him for no reason.) So I'm going to trust my nether regions more this game. And they're getting all tingly. Yup, that's pretty much why I didn't get all huffy about the vote. I introduced Pollux Scared Straightto Mafia here, and I've lived with the guy for a year besides having gone to college with him for 4 years. Him and Boozy are two people who I don't mind joke voting me out of the Blue just because it's for shits and giggles in the early stages of the game. And did you honestly just justify your vote for Sach because you've got itchy balls? Well played, sir, and good to have to back and serious.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 17:44:01 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Apr 30, 2009 17:44:01 GMT -5
If you agree that we have to kill him eventually for all the reasons he's said, and if you believe him when he says he cannot be night killed explain to me why we shouldn't lynch him today? What is gained by leaving him alive for one more day? Well, random shit could happen. -OR more likely, he dies because of a Vigging and he's lying. -OR he's telling the truth and lives, and the person who tried to kill him knows it. -OR the Vig didn't take a shot at him, no one knows what happens, and we're back to square one again. -OR he gets recruited and we're back to square one but with the negative consequence of him now adding +1 to scum and us still being wishy washy on him being alive. That's my worst case scenario. There's lots of options, I'm kinda leaning towards the first "OR", but there could be other ones. But yeah, if EVER Pleonast you suddenly don't want to die.... That's going to set off HUGE ALARMS in my head, and I'm going want you to hang... no hurt feelings. So basically we're giving him one night to live to help prove himself in case there IS a Vig out there that does want the option of trying to test things out for themselves. If there isn't one out there, well then yeah, we've gained nothing.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Apr 30, 2009 17:48:46 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Apr 30, 2009 17:48:46 GMT -5
Yeah, it means that the Scum won't bother to Night kill me, but it avoids the Town unproductively wondering why I didn't die. Here's a Q I guess for everyone, but you may know more/be willing to talk more on this- how do you think recruitment works? Because in the past games (Blade Runner) to recruit Dotchan we scum just had to choose her as our NK target and that'd activate her. So basically any night that scum doesn't NK is a night that would create the worry that scum have chosen to recruit instead. I worry that your NK statement may cover the idea that if there is a no kill and in fact you've been recruited, you've just covered your ass by saying you're NK resistant when in reality all you are is- if scum target you they recruit you instead of killing you. So your interpretation of "recruitment" must obviously be different than mine right now, care to share how YOU think recruitment works? (Same with anyone else who may have an opinion/thoughts on this just from a Mod Perspective).
|
|