You-Solve-It Mafia Game [Archive] - Page 5 - Straight Dope Message Board

sachertorte

01-13-2008, 10:57 AM

Secondly, faithfool not lying about her dossier doesn't necessarily make her a townie.
I don't conclude that faithfool is Town because she didn't lie about her dossier. I conclude faithfool is town because from a game construction point of view, giving a pro-town Hal Briston a scum's dossier would be game-breakingly powerful. Giving Hal Briston a townie's dossier is mildly helpful, but not game-breakingly so.

I still, really, don't know how much weight to give this, but I'm just putting it out there. If anything it's something that makes me just a little bit more comfortable with my sachertorte vote.
Other than the fact that you are voting for me, I'm okay with using the dossier as supplementary reasoning. I outline my specific objection to the nightkill analysis below. I also disagree with your primary reasoning too: I've explained why I think brewha is scum. Convince me otherwise and I'll move my vote. Simply stating that I'm wrong doesn't help.

refutation of zuma's nightkill matching analysis:My theory is that they will first not kill people who have drawn interest from us, but will kill people that do not have traits matching their own actual or revealed traits.

If I were scum, which I am not, although I miss being scum, I would off people whose dossiers have little chance of being connected with the revealed trait. I would try to leave people around who had traits matching mine (if i were scum... enough disclaimers).
In zuma's original explanation of the nightkill analysis theory, he said that scum would kill people who didn't share traits with scum's actual or revealed dossiers. On the surface this makes sense, but which of the two really makes sense. Why would scum kill townies that don't match their false dossiers? I don't see any solid reason for it. I think only killing based on scum's real dossiers makes sense; we can't equate 'actual' and 'revealed' simply by hand-waving. Scum would only be interested in keeping around townies who match their real dossiers. Isn't it plausible that scum would steal a town attribute and kill the townie from whom they stole it? While there isn't necessarily a strong reason to do so explicitly, there is no reason not to do so.
Scum have no reason to avoid killing townies from whom they stole a trait. Therefore, it is entirely plausible that Kat, ShadowFacts, and Cookies have traits matching scum false dossiers.

I'm curious why Santo Rugger has been included in the analysis. Santo Rugger was killed on Night Zero, before he had revealed his dossier. Why is zuma (and Hockey Monkey?*) assuming that scum knew Santo Rugger's dossier before he was killed?
Supposition: Scum was given some or all of the dossiers at the beginning of the game.
- would explain why scum dossiers contain lies, but are not easily discernible from town.
- does not explain why OAOW's was truthful about the VWBug trait.
- would explain why zuma included Santo Rugger in the nightkill analysis, which makes me slightly more suspicious of zuma.

*Hockey Monkey's post is not clear as to whether or not she included Santo Rugger as a scum killed Townie or not. I also note that excluding Santo Rugger does not change who has zero connections, but Santo Rugger's matches ALL of the players listed under having three connections to murdered Townies. Removing Santo Rugger makes the max connections 2, which makes a difference, I think. (i.e. everyone has either 0, 1, or 2 connections, which I find within expectations).

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-13-2008, 07:58 PM

Sad Little Vote Count:

Brewha 4 (sachetorte, Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Hockey Monkey)
Faithfool 2 (Diomedes, Pleonast)
Sachertorte 1 (Zuma)
Diomedes 1 (Faithfool)

We've got 8 votes in out of 13... Hal, Rysto, storyteller0910, brewha and HNC all have failed to vote. (Well, brewha voted, then unvoted)

brewha

01-14-2008, 09:44 AM

I've been trying to say less on here, because it seems that my talking is one of the biggest reasons everyone is getting all stabby at me.

But, here's the deal. I'm not scum. We've already wasted all of yesterday discussing it and lynched no one. Last night the silent pigs took out one of us and tonight they will again. We really need to chuck one of them off a cliff today.

I see I'm up on the vote count again. If we spend today pointing the finger at me, yesterday's no lynch will be a complete waste. I would rather my lynch happened yesterday, than wasting a no lynch and then just turning around and lynching me today.

I'm not sure who I think is most guilty at this time, but we really need to get some discussion going instead of waiting until the last minute and making a rash decision (or non at all).

storyteller0910

01-14-2008, 12:44 PM

My vote will happen today. However, I have a new case to build and it's going to be a bit time-consuming; I may not do it until later tonight, but will do it before I go to sleep.

That's the best I can do for now. Sorry, all!

Idle Thoughts

01-14-2008, 09:13 PM

Hey guys, why's it so dead in here? I mean It's freaking Monday now, there shouldn't be any excuse why players aren't posting. Don't you know what you are putting the people watching this through? It's not pretty, so don't make me bust out with the size 72 font because it ain't gonna be pretty when I do. SO COME ON, WHERE'S ALL THE POSTING AND PLAYING AND STUFF. I'M GOING CRAZY HERE

please?

Freudian Slit

01-14-2008, 09:23 PM

::screams::

Ahem.

Okay. I think at this point, we all have to ally ourselevs with someone. Five others of us HAVE to vote. I think not voting is almost worse than voting for someone for a stupid reason.

HazelNutCoffee

01-14-2008, 09:35 PM

Secondly, faithfool not lying about her dossier doesn't necessarily make her a townie.
No, but I think it's likely she's town IF Hal is telling the truth, because giving him a scum's dossier just seems like giving him too much. I suppose this is somewhat of a meta-game reason though.

And upon further reading, I see sacher has already made that point.

Augh. I'm so tired right now I can barely think. But I want to get in a vote.

Vote Diomedes

Something about the way he's picking on faithfool just seems off to me. (I am still not sure about faithfool, but for the purposes of my vote her scumminess or lack thereof is irrelevant.) I don't think his reasoning per se is scummy; more like the manner in which he voices them. storyteller's post somewhere back there states things more clearly than I can put them right now. Sorry, I just started teaching classes this week so I'll be a little scarce until the weekend.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-14-2008, 09:43 PM

::grumble grumble grumble::

Well, HazelNut's vote against me means that we won't get 7 against faithfool today. I still don't like the brewha lynch, it doesn't look like the push against him is going away until he does. A no-lynch is the same as a townie lynch (according to someone's logic a couple of pages back), so I'll pull off faith and vote to lynch brewha, just to make a lynch happen today (and let us look at someone new tomorrow)

Yes, I do know that this will be inciting storyteller even further in his "Diomedes has crap reasons for voting" beliefs.

unvote: faithfool
vote: brewha

Hockey Monkey

01-14-2008, 09:44 PM

Folks, we are in deep doo-doo if we fail to lynch someone toDay. I suggest if you are town, you vote with the majority..whoever that happens to be for at the end of the day. And please take a good look at the people who brilliantly stalled the lynch yesterDay and so far toDay. I believe brewha is scum. I believe that other scum stalled his lynch.

Freudian Slit

01-14-2008, 09:48 PM

HazelNutCoffee

01-14-2008, 09:53 PM

I suggest if you are town, you vote with the majority..whoever that happens to be for at the end of the day.
I really don't like this line of thought. I do think it's important, if at all possible, to lynch someone at the end of the day, but asking town to vote with the majority won't achieve much other than giving scum a place to hide without having to be held accountable for their votes later on.

Having said that, I will glance back over the thread at yesterDay's stalling.

Hockey Monkey

01-14-2008, 09:57 PM

Rysto

01-14-2008, 10:01 PM

And at this point, no lynch is equivalent to lynching a townie.

*sigh*

Hockey Monkey

01-14-2008, 10:08 PM

18 of us to start with.
13 of us left.
Out of 5 dead, only 1 was scum.

If the 7% secret equates to 1/14 of the town...then that means there were 4 scum to start with and 3 left. (I'm not dismissing the possibility of more.)

13 left minus 3 scum equals 10 town. 7 of those 10 need to agree.

3 misguided townies costs a lynch.

It is imperative that we stick together and take action...even if that action turns out to be wrong. But, if brewha were town, the scum would have made sure he got lynched yesterDay.

HazelNutCoffee

01-14-2008, 10:09 PM

If the town doesn't vote as a block, we won't get a lynch. Is that not clear? That means if you are town, you need to vote with the rest of the town. All the scum have to do is vote for someone else or no one at all, and Boom! no lynch! Then they get to kill at night! What part of this is not clear?
I understand that we need to kill someone. Augh. I just don't feel comfortable with voting for someone I don't have strong feelings about just for the sake of having a lynch, any lynch.

I'm not seeing the "brilliantly" stalled lynch of yesterDay - unless the people who didn't vote did so on purpose in order to stall the lynch. I was one of them, and I didn't (do so on purpose, I mean).

I want to think about this a bit. We still have some time before Day's end - it ends Wednesday, doesn't it?

faithfool

01-14-2008, 10:09 PM

Sorry for the delay. I stayed with my family a bit longer than I thought I could stand. Anyway, I still don't think this is right, but considering that I've pretty much given up any hope of understanding what I'm doing, I'll change my vote to go with the majority (I so apologize brewha) because that appears to be what is expected if you want to show your town solidarity.

I know that regardless of why I do it, Dio will ignore it the next round that he campaigns for my termination. ;) But no matter, 'tis done so that we won't be intentionally making a town lynch by default. Hope that helps.

unvote Dio

vote brewha

zuma

01-14-2008, 10:18 PM

I don't think I'll be voting for brewha. My reasons probably only apply to me though, and here they are:

- I know I am town
- Scum know I am town.
- If brewha were scum, he would know I had not lied about my dossiers on day 1
- The premise he used with his day 1 attack on me was not seeing them in one of the threads
- If he knew I was town, he would know the premise of his attack had to be false and would probably be proven false, and it would likely blow up in his face (which it did to an extent)
- Hence, his day 1 attack on me makes no sense from a scum perspective

Like I said, this reasoning applies only to me. But I'll put it out there before I decide to do with my final vote.

zuma

01-14-2008, 10:30 PM

Hockey Monkey:

There were 19 to start with and 5 scum. There are 4 scum left.

The setup looks like this:
19 Players

5 Disgruntled Assosciates (scum)

14 Assosciates (town)

Hockey Monkey

01-14-2008, 10:32 PM

Gah! I forgot Santo! :smack:

Hockey Monkey

01-14-2008, 10:39 PM

Let's see if I can count right this time.

19 to start.
14 town
5 scum

6 are dead, only 1 scum.

13 of us left..4 scum.

It's worse than I feared. Only 9 of us are town and only 2 have to be misguided this time for a no lynch. :(

zuma

01-14-2008, 10:49 PM

It's worse than I feared. Only 9 of us are town and only 2 have to be misguided this time for a no lynch. :(

Well, count me as one of the "misguided". I can't pull the trigger on brewha though because I know his day 1 attack on me makes no sense if he were scum. Unfortunately, my alignment isn't verified, so my reasoning only works for me (but put yourselves in my position if you are town... he would know I had no reason to lie so he would know his reasoning probably would not hold up).

Although I think sachertorte is a better choice, I'm willing to start up the faithfool train again.

unvote: sachertorte
vote: faithfool

storyteller0910

01-14-2008, 11:05 PM

We have five for brewha, but that's not enough...more have to change their votes. And just vote to begin with. I'm not faulting brewha for not voting for himself, but I'm thinking either it is him or no one dies. And at this point, we're at a serious disadvantage against scum who get to kill someone every night.

OK, wait a minute. Am I missing something? The Day ends on Wednesday, right? Not, like, in seventeen minutes. There is an awfully intense push in this thread to get people to vote as a bloc - and, implicitly, to vote for brewha, because we don't want a no-lynch, and some people haven't voted, and HURRY UP AND VOTE FOR BREWHA AREN'T YOU A LOYAL TOWNIE WHAT DO YOU WANT A NO LYNCH?

We have 48 hours. This is time enough for people to vote based on reasoning. This is time enough for existing votes to change if a compelling case is made. It is too far from the deadline for panicky insistence that everyone vote along party lines to ensure a lynch.

For my part, I am not going to vote in response to this sort of pressure. It's a waste, and there's no reason to put brewha, or anyone, even close to on-the-clock status with this much time remaining.

Now, I do have a vote. It's going to be for Freudian Slit, if anyone is interested. Unfortunately, I don't have time to make my case right now. I'm opening another show this Friday, and I just got home from a technical rehearsal (it's about midnight); I could stay up another hour to write it all out, but I'm too tired to do that. It'll happen tomorrow, though.

In the meanwhile, I'll start with this: I remain fairly suspicious of Diomedes, of course, and to a lesser extent of brewha and sachertorte. But one of the things I've noticed watching other games is that there are times that everyone who is part of the dominant "storylines" early in the game turns out to be non-scum. So I did a complete re-read. I actually re-read assuming that I was wrong about nearly everything (I'm pretty confident about Hal being non-scum, and moderately confident about faithfool, so I didn't change those assumptions). Rereading with that in mind was eye-opening.

I found that Freudian Slit has been what I'd term a bit disingenuous, pushing toward well-worn avenues, stifling novel discussion in favor of redundant conversation, making pronouncements of trust in other players without much evidence or reason. Imagining that everyone involved was town made her behavior pattern look more noticeable. All to be documented on the morrow, but for now:

vote Freudian Slit

Freudian Slit

01-14-2008, 11:17 PM

You're voting for ME? Of all people?

Seriously, the only reason I'm so keen for a vote is because of Hockey Monkey's insistence that it is important to vote. And considering how town is dropping like flies, we pretty much have no choice here.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-15-2008, 12:24 AM

OK, wait a minute. Am I missing something? The Day ends on Wednesday, right? Not, like, in seventeen minutes. There is an awfully intense push in this thread to get people to vote as a bloc - and, implicitly, to vote for brewha, because we don't want a no-lynch, and some people haven't voted, and HURRY UP AND VOTE FOR BREWHA AREN'T YOU A LOYAL TOWNIE WHAT DO YOU WANT A NO LYNCH? =

Come on, story... you haven't noticed that this isn't the most active group of players, ever? I got accused of killing a day short, when I only did so after 24 FUCKING HOURS of inactivity!
I'm glad to see you're trying to create a case for someone new, and I'll go back and look at Zoggie just to see what I think about it. I do,however, think that impetus has a huge part to do with this particular game's lynchings.
For now, I'll unvote, trusting myself to check back Wednesday mornign at the latest.

unvote: brewdog

(because everyone deserves a misnomer on their votes from me)

zuma

01-15-2008, 12:46 AM

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 08:36 AM

I'm not saying hurry up and vote brewha. Brewha just happens to be the person I'm voting for. Yes the Day ends Wednesday. That's no reason for us to rest on our laurels and do nothing for the next two days. If there are other cases, I want to hear them. Convince me that I shouldn't vote the way I am. Make a compelling case for someone else. But come Wednesday, every Townie needs to be voting the same way. Whoever that's for. If you can't see that, then there isn't much more I can do.

I maintain my stance on brewha. If he were town, the scum would have lynched him yesterDay. All that was needed was one vote. Easy enough to be the hammer in that case. You just say you didn't want a no-lynch. No one wanted to to that. What reason would the scum have for not doing that? Brewha's scum!

zuma, do scum always make well reasoned, well thought out attacks? A little WIFOM for you. You can't say scum will or won't do something, based on your alignment. Maybe he's scum who saw an opportunity to smudge you, even though he had to backtrack later under the guise of confused townie.

storyteller, I'm almost fully convinced now that you are scum as well. I'll use what remains of this day to make my case (just in case I get killed toNight.)

brewha

01-15-2008, 09:23 AM

I maintain my stance on brewha. If he were town, the scum would have lynched him yesterDay. All that was needed was one vote. Easy enough to be the hammer in that case.

This is some great thinking. Really - no sarcasm here. I think you are really on to something.

But, you need to rethink your primary assumption. Let's take your question of why I wasn't lynched, but assume I'm town - not scum.

The only way my lynch doesn't happen is if all the scum were already voting for me. What's the accepted count? 4 scum left? At the end of yesterday, Sach, Hockey Monkey, Frued, Rysto, Hal, and Pleo all voted for me.

For now, I'm assuming you, Hockey Monkey are not scum. If you were, you would know why I wasn't lynched and it would be silly of you to point out that all scum were already voting for me. That leaves - Sach, Frued, Rysto, Hal, Pleo. Five votes, four scum - and one town. The only other problem I see is that HazelNutCoffee didn't vote and seemed to be oblivious to the game. So, she could be scum and one of the other four isn't. Or more likely she is just an absent minded town. My reasoning is that if I were to have a more exciting role - like a scum role - I'd be less likely to just forget about it.

I'm not voting yet, since we still have more than a day. But let's talk about this theory. If, I am indeed town, why wouldn't the scum have offed me yesterday? What other possibilities are there?

brewha

01-15-2008, 09:39 AM

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 09:47 AM

What do you think is important to scum? Town lynching town or anonymity?
It could be argued that the scum saw that the only two possible outcomes of yesterday were a town lynching or a no lynch. If there was a silent pig that hadn’t voted for me, would they want to come forward and make that last vote? When my death scene showed that I am town, I’m not so sure that scum would want to be the last vote counted. Sure it would be easy enough to be the hammer in that case – but wouldn’t we notice who the hammer is?

The possibility of scum being called out as scum is probably far worse of an outcome for scum than a no lynch.

This really muddies things up. If you can believe that I am town, then I wasn’t lynched either because all the scum had already voted for me or that the scum decided to stay in the shadows and anonymously kill a town once night fell.

When they could have had 2 kills for the price of one? Nah. In a game setup like this one, where you don't get a lynch if there is no majority, it is much easier for the hammer to claim that they were just doing the town a favor and ensuring a lynch. It's part of the dynamic. So no, I don't think the scum would have let the opportunity pass. In a previous game, Santo was a scum hammer 3 times in a row!

I hadn't thought of the possibility that all of the scum were already voting for you. I think it's very very remote that it happened that way. Scum rarely will put all their votes in the same pot. While I have to give some weight to the possibility, I think the more likely scenario is that they didn't bus you.

Hawkeyeop

01-15-2008, 10:01 AM

I need to do some rereading, but in the interest of further discussion here is how I currently see things. For the record, my reasoning is going towards meta-gaming and dossier rationales. Partially because it is the way I think, but also since I have never talked to anyone in this game before it is hard for me to notice personality shifts, since I don't know what personalities are usually like.

People I'm currently willing to vote for

Brewha
Brewha is right in that it might very well be town versus town and there were just some major misunderstandings. I still though think the case against him is strongest and I am going to leave my vote there unless it is needed elsewhere.

Faithfool
I do believe she voted for herself, because she was overwhelmed and I do think Mtgman sent her a link to that other website. However, I find the 2nd confirm to be suspicious and her first defense seemed a little bit too well thought out for my tastes. Additionally, she does not really seem to be coming up with new ideas, which are necessary in order to find where the scum are hiding.

People I have suspicions of.

Hal Briston

I go back and forth on him. On the one hand, his ability makes much more sense as a scum then as a town member. On the other hand, why tell us of the ability if he is a scum? On the other other hand, perhaps he was lying in order to hide was the true scum secret ability is. On the fourth hand, maybe him having that ability is to notify the town that the scum have it too, and are using it to lie about dossiers. At this point I'm leaning towards believing he is town based on the fact that 14-5 plus first kill is pretty favorably scum numbers, (Right?) so I don't think the scum have extra powers. In conclusion, I need more hands.

Sach

I think the case against him has merits and I shall do further analysis upon it.

Pleomedes

My reasoning on him is almost entirely his actions are so anti-scum that he must be scum. Am I paranoid enough yet?

Diomedes

Like with Pleo, I think the scum scattered their dossier revealed and my gut says one of the first two revealed was scum. I do not find the rest of the case against Diomedes particularly compelling.

People I have no read on. (This actually might be where scum lurk)

Freduian Slit

Zuma

Rysto

Person I thought wasn't scum, but I am a bit less sure of now.

Storyteller

I'm kind of surprised he is still alive. I'm interested to see what Hockey has the say on the subject.

People I believe are town

Hockey Monkey
I understand scum can be helpful, but I don't believe they would be quite as helpful as Hockey Monkey has been.

Hazelnutcoffee.
I don't think you forget about the game if you are scum.

Hal Briston

01-15-2008, 10:14 AM

My largest suspicions are directed at Pleonast and Diomedes for their continued disbelief over my role. Hockey Monkey pings me as well, but as others have mentioned, she's been very helpful. That doesn't necessarily exonerate her, but it keeps her off my personal chopping block for now.

I don't particularly want to see brewha swing, but I recognize that someone has to be lynched toDay -- I have a feeling he's town, but could very well be mistaken.

To sum up: vote Diomedes, but if need be I'll grudgingly switch tomorrow.

NAF1138

01-15-2008, 10:14 AM

Who likes vote counts?

5 - brewha (HM, Freudian, hawk, sach, faithfool)

2 - Dio (HNC, Hal)
2 - faithfool (zuma, Pleo)

1 - Freudian Slit (story)

10 out of a possible 13 votes have been cast. It takes 7 votes on a single player to cause a lynch. 9 votes on one player will end the Day.

You have about 25 hours left to make a decision.

brewha

01-15-2008, 10:19 AM

I don't know what you mean by 'they didn't bus you'. But, I'm guessing it means something along the lines of say that I'm scum and that my fellow scummies decided not to vote for me.

That makes sense that given the chance, the scum would throw in their vote to ensure a town lynch. If we can agree on that, there's only two possibilities here.

1. I'm scum and the other scum delayed voting or played other shadow games to ensure a no lynch.

2. I'm town and all the scum had voted for me.

We have to options here.
Option 1. We kill me off to prove that I'm town. Then we kill every person that voted for me yesterday.

Option 2. We believe that I am town and just kill off everyone that voted for me.

If there are only 3 scum left, either option will work. Worst case scenario we lynch me and the two innocent people that voted for me. We can still have 3 mislynches and win.

If there are 4 scum left, and we lynch me today, we only have one more mislynch to burn. If we can believe that because Hockey Monkey brought up this question of why I wasn't lynched yesterday, she is town, then we are still guarenteed a win.

Of course this is all based on the assumption that all the scum did indeed vote for me. If one of them were just not paying attention at the end of the day, my theory is shot.

brewha

01-15-2008, 10:30 AM

EBWOP:

My logic is messed up. It doesn't matter how my scum there are left.

6 people voted for me. If there's 3 scum, 3 town voted for me and we get 3 mislynches.

If there's 4 scum, 2 townies voted for me and we get 2 mislynches.

Either way, I'd rather we didn't waste one of them on me since the only thing I do know is that I'm not scum. If we do have to waste the first one on me to prove I'm town, I would hold off on killing Hockey Monkey since, IMO, she is the least likely out of those who voted for me to be scum.

sachertorte

01-15-2008, 10:43 AM

Here's another thought on brewha:

I've decided that I'm not voting for him because his day 1 attack on me, whereby he wronly accuses me of lying about my dossier, makes no sense to me (town), because brewha as scum would know I had no reason to lie, and would have to know his "evidence" (can't find my dossier items in one thread) was flawed and would likely be exposed as wrong (which it was).

For the benefit of the rest of the town that does not know my affiliation, brewha's actions don't even make sense if we're both scum. First you'd have to assume that brewhascum would attack zumascum on day 1 with reasoning he still knew would not hold up... and to what end? If scum launch an elaborate gambit (which is stupid and unlikely on day 1), it has to follow through with one sacrificing himself for the others' benefit (which it didn't). But on day 1? Come on. It has to make sense and it does not either way.

(and yes, I realize it would make sense if I'm scum and brewha were town, but it also makes sense if we're both town. I know I am and I now suspect brewha is as well, more than most people here, after thinking about his day 1 attack some more).
Thank you for this. I much prefer understanding why people disagree with my assessments rather than to be flatly told I'm wrong. I understand your perspective and I have to admit, that going after you the way brewha does seems out of character for scum to do on Day One, but you could be scum too and who knows what scum might have planned on Night Zero. With the number advantage given to scum, I can see scum taking a calculated risk and scummy brewha going after scummy zuma (even townie zuma for that matter). I look at brewha's behavior and see that it doesn't make sense for Town to behave that way. I'll try to take another look at brewha and other candidates, but the Day 3 close-but-not enough near lynch has me thinking scum protecting scum.

Hockey Monkey, I wonder if you are seeing the same thing I'm seeing.

brewha, seven people voted for you Yesterday. We needed 8 to lynch Yesterday, but due to Kat's death, we need 7 to lynch Today.
Here's a thought: scum killed Kat, who did not vote for brewha. If brewha were scum, wouldn't it make more sense to kill off someone who was voting for brewha to better protect him?

Pleonast

01-15-2008, 10:43 AM

My largest suspicions are directed at Pleonast and Diomedes for their continued disbelief over my role.Besides some arguable analysis of the game setup, what evidence is there that you're telling the truth about your role? Your claim is not self-confirming. Lack of a counter-claim is not convincing when the game setup implies no power roles at all. So I am skeptical of your claim.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I'm keeping my vote on faith for now. I'm willing to switch to brewha before the end, though.

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 10:56 AM

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 10:57 AM

[QUOTE=sachertorte]

Hockey Monkey, I wonder if you are seeing the same thing I'm seeing.
[QUOTE]

Not sure...care to elaborate?

sachertorte

01-15-2008, 11:43 AM

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 11:51 AM

Hey, there isn't any convenient way to view one player's posts in one thread only, is there? I'm writing out the Freudian Slit case, and since she's an active poster elsewhere on the Dope I have to comb through all her posts to other threads to track her history here. It's a pain in the ass - is there a better way?

-------

And to Hockey Monkey: Having no idea what your case against me is, I'll be unable to respond for the moment. Care to offer a preview? Your last post, to sachertorte, looks a bit like fishing to me - "hey, can somebody give me a hook here?"

It's funny how this game works. Intellectually I know that when another player accuses me of being scum, that doesn't make them more likely to be scum themselves. But then someone accuses me of being scum, and <bang> - emotionally, I start combing their posts for tells. It's a tough mindset to fight, even when you know you need to.

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 11:51 AM

Storyteller's behavior on Day 3 indicated suspicion of brewha, he even lays out a case, but he never votes for brewha and conveniently misses the Day 3 deadline. To me it looks like storyteller was setting up to vote for fellow scum brewha, but when he saw that brewha didn't have to swing, he "forgot" to vote. If he was against all the suspicion on brewha, I could understand his behavior better, but he laid out a case against brewha and called brewha suspicious, yet misses the vote entirely. I don't see Town behaving the way storyteller did on Day 3.

That's what I see. What do you see?

Thanks for the storyteller summary. I'll read it to see if there is anything else.

There's that, plus a lot of promises and excuses, and I can't do it nows. He's expressed suspicion of several people (including me) and comes out of nowhere today voting for someone completely different. "Missing" the vote because he didn't know what time the day ended isn't something a town storyteller would do. I have a lot of re-reading to do to do a point by point case.

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 11:56 AM

Storyteller's behavior on Day 3 indicated suspicion of brewha, he even lays out a case, but he never votes for brewha and conveniently misses the Day 3 deadline. To me it looks like storyteller was setting up to vote for fellow scum brewha, but when he saw that brewha didn't have to swing, he "forgot" to vote.

Well, this would be reasonable, but the actual explanation is that I missed the deadline. As I said. If you don't believe that, there's not much I can do about it. NAF's post with the deadline in it was at the end of a page, and I was involved in another discussion when it happened.

If he was against all the suspicion on brewha, I could understand his behavior better, but he laid out a case against brewha and called brewha suspicious, yet misses the vote entirely. I don't see Town behaving the way storyteller did on Day 3.

The last part is not true, and you know it. I'm suspicious of everyone; Town ought to be. I outlined evidence against brewha; I've outlined evidence against others. But I wasn't convinced he was the best candidate yesterDay, and I don't apologize for it. I thought I had more time to make a final decision, and was wrong.

ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies

01-15-2008, 11:58 AM

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-15-2008, 11:59 AM

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 12:04 PM

There's that, plus a lot of promises and excuses, and I can't do it nows.

You do realize that you're using this as one of your arguments against me, while at exactly the same time engaging in identical behavior? You have a case against me, but you can't post it right now. You have to wait. You have to re-read. A promise, and excuses.

That inconsistency on your part is worrisome, of course. And of course what you say is not true; I have delivered lengthy cases against Diomedes and (shortly) Freudian Slit, and shorter cases against brewha and sachertorte.

But even if it were true, as an argument against me, it kind of stinks, because it's unanswerable. So tell me this: do you suspect that: (1) I did not have a technical rehearsal last night' or (2) I did not have a work meeting this morning? Which real-life event do you suspect I am making up in order to avoid posting an argument that I could have avoided posting by not mentioning it at all?

He's expressed suspicion of several people (including me) and comes out of nowhere today voting for someone completely different.

Once again, I am suspicious of everyone. Perhaps it would be more convenient for the scum if I stuck rigidly to one avenue of investigation - as you would apparently prefer - but I'm not interested in doing that.

"Missing" the vote because he didn't know what time the day ended isn't something a town storyteller would do.

I've already responded to this. There's really no way to satisfy this point, so I'm not going to address it further.

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 12:08 PM

You do realize that you're using this as one of your arguments against me, while at exactly the same time engaging in identical behavior? You have a case against me, but you can't post it right now. You have to wait. You have to re-read. A promise, and excuses.

You asked for a preview! :mad:

Hal Briston

01-15-2008, 12:12 PM

Besides some arguable analysis of the game setup, what evidence is there that you're telling the truth about your role? Your claim is not self-confirming. Lack of a counter-claim is not convincing when the game setup implies no power roles at all. So I am skeptical of your claim.Therein lies the rub -- this is not a "power role". This is a tiny bit of extra info. The logic of the "7%" in the setup makes it pretty clear it's info supplied to a townie, and balance indicates that it would be info about a townie.

Trouble is, we already know all this. Continually trying to say it's something else reeks of scum.Let me get this straight: you're voting for me because I'm dubious of your power role?Sure enough. See above.

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 12:15 PM

You asked for a preview! :mad:

Well - the thing is, though, that you teased "being almost sure that I was scum" before I (or anyone) asked for a preview. Then you said you'd make your case later.

How does this differ substantially from what I've done with Freudian Slit in the last 24 hours?

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 01:02 PM

OK. Freudian Slit. All quotes below are hers unless otherwise noted. The numbers in parenthesis at the end of some quotes are added by me and are the post numbers. Also, I’m not going to include every post she’s ever made here. I’ll attempt to be representative but I think the longer these things get, the more they get tuned out, and this thing is very, very long.

Her first substantive contribution is here:

Part of me thinks faithfool is just discouraged. Another thinks that she's scum trying to psych us out...like, playing the part of the martyred, I don't know what the hell I'm doing, newbie townie. Because that is kind of what I did in the last game.

Waffling early. Placing herself on both sides of the faithfool issue. This is an neutral tell in my mind, as it could mean scum positioning herself or cautious townie reserving judgment.

Perhaps one reason faithfool is giving up so easily is because she doesn't want to reveal the dossier? That is, she assumes that if she just votes for herself, she doesn't have to make a big reveal because it'll be moot. She does have a chance of squeaking by if she doesn't get an exact majority of votes, though.

Still not really taking a position. This qualifies as a smudge of faithfool. I think, and the first appearance of Freudian Slit’s constant mentioning of needing to get an exact majority.

The only thing I have so far is MHaye's delay.

I don't know if I really want to vote for him based on that but it's the only thing we have to go on so far, IMHO. And I suppose it's better to vote than to sit around talking about how we SHOULD vote. (Vote or die!)

And I have time to change this....So... (vote mhaye)

This is the classic “I’m voting for him, but it’s just a vote to get a vote out there, I don’t really mean it, I can pull it back at any time vote. When this is followed by elaboration, further investigation of the player in question or another player, it’s a pretty neutral thing. When it’s followed by sitting on that vote - which was made with a disclaimer and had little basis - right up through the lynch, it seems scummy. You get to be on the lynch wagon, but you set yourself up with an easy way to jump the wagon if you need to - or to dissociate yourself from your own vote later. Which does Freudian Slit do?

Hey, I voted for MHaye too a while back. My vote was not counted! Hanging chads! (595)

Counting my vote for MHaye and also Hockey Monkey's vote, he now has 9. So we only need...is it one more person(?)? How many people are now in the game?

So if ten people have voted, that's a majority and if no one changes anything, then MHaye will die?

No additional analysis provided, and for someone who was so diffident about her initial vote, she sure is anxious to ensure a majority here. She will eventually state that faithfool reminds her of herself in the previous game, but she doesn’t want to switch her vote because she really wants to see mhaye dead.

mhaye dies, we go to Night, and suddenly Freudian Slit is a very prolific poster. Overall, I note, her fluff-to-content ratio is pretty high.

I guess we have to vote for OAOW, huh? I agree with Shadow. I liked the psychological aspects, the thrill of the chase. This game feels like it's more like taking the LSAT than about psyching each other out.

This one is a little tenuous, but the wording of this post, especially the last line, niggles. I’ve played this game a bunch of times now. Only once have I considered my role in it to be about “psyching each other out,” and that was the first time, when I was scum. Scum need to “psych out” the other players; townies need to do precisely the opposite. Could be just an unfortunate word choice, but I’m mentioning it anyway.

I'm not totally sure either...in fact, it's hard to say either way. I'm kind of leaning towards faithfool not for dossier reasons but for general weirdness and vibe reasons. (Yeah, emotion over logic!) But I am not totally convinced of that either. (773)

More waffling, over the same subject as on Day One. Still no evidence or analysis, but more importantly, still more careful backing away from her own opinion. “faithfool is giving me a weird vibe... but... um... not completely. Certainly not enough to vote for her yet.... but... yeah... weird vibe. Everybody look at faithfool!”

brewha seems pretty defensive...That's kind of making me suspicious. Then again, so was our dear friend Idle of the gigantic letters sooo....he may yet be a townie. And okay, maybe he does "suck at this" or maybe that's just a cover for the mistakes he's been making. Still ruminating.

“...or maybe brewha’s scum... lot of you seem to think so... or maybe he’s not... certainly don’t expect me to give an opinion with which you can ever connect me... Ooh, and somebody pass the maple syrup. Mmmm, waffles.

I think I'm a go with faithfool. If only because her interactions really remind me of mine with Idle last game. The defensiveness when being called on scumhood...for some reason, that's making me trust Dio and making me think that faith is disgruntled, and just not doing as good a job hiding it. Newbieness is not an excuse, and while I'm tempted to excuse her for that, it might just bite us in the arse if we do.

Finally, a firm vote.

So far now it seems like it's either lynch brewha or lynch no one. What I dislike about the majority rule is that I feel like I'm voting for someone just because it's pragmatic and we need to make some kind of progress. Joining the bandwagon is just that much easier. I'm willing to change my vote if it's really out there and a stupid vote, but I do think that this system makes it a little tougher on us. (823)

In light of her behavior leading up to it, this post reads like more of an effort to divorce herself from her votes. “Hey, if I join a bandwagon and kill a townie, it wasn’t because I was actually believing they were scum - it was because I was trying to be pragmatic, and keep the town from failing to lynch. Really, don’t ask me for a defense of my vote - my defense is “we needed a majority.” Blame the system (As a side note, this is why forcing people to vote just to get a majority is problematic, because it allows for defenses like this).

Okay, then. In the interests of putting this to bed on time and actually having a lynch of someone who may be scum as opposed to a no lynch, I'm going to change my vote.

brewha has seemed suspect, but I can't tell if it's out of true scumminess. But like you, Hockey, I'd like something to happen. I don't want to just throw out a meaningless vote that I believe but that will get us nowhere. (votes brewha - 828)

Basically, this post is the outcome of the one before it. The next post is about Hal and faith. Once again, note how our narrator uses “maybes” and “on the other hands” to express suspicion without taking a firm stand on anything.

I'm not sure I agree with that. What if they're both scum and covering for each other? This could easily be something they're doing to manipulate us into thinking they're both okay when they're both in fact scum.

Okay, that could be a reach, too. I'm just saying that I'm not 100% sold on anything anyone tells us without verification.

I ask her if she thinks Pleonast is right about the secret being the source of the dossiers, or if it’s something yet unrevealed. Shockingly, she’s not taking a stand:

I'm not sure yet. I'm leaning towards a different secret. I just feel like...this...would be too much of a let down. And it seems like we've spent the thread poring over the dossiers. I just feel maybe we need to think bigger. But I have no idea how so.

Shortly thereafter - way back at the BEGINNING of the day:

Personally, I think we need to try and vote off someone because we've only managed to get one scum and our numbers are dwindling. Are we all just going to go for brewha, or is it going to be someone else? The only other person I can think of is faithfool. I mean, we pretty much have to make a concerted effort because it's the only way we can do it... (954)

Are we all just going to go for brewha? At the very beginning of a seven-day Day? Or if not, are we just going to go for faithfool? We’re just going to keep looking at the same two people, right, everybody? We’re not going to branch out in any crazy directions, right? We’re just going to vote as a big bloc and not think about it too much, right?

Next, in response to me. I had just posted a very long indictment of Diomedes. Very long, with multiple points. Here’s her response:

Skimming is a sign of scumhood because scum doesn't need to read as carefully? I'd say that's pretty off. Scum needs to pretend to be like town. I think that's a weak case against Dio. Also, I thought the third vote thing was pretty much crap? (975)

She dismisses one of my points with a non-sequitur, addresses one other point of mine that was literally made with one character, and ignores the rest of the argument but declares the case “weak?” Hey, a strong opinion from Freudian Slit. Cool!

I'm still split between brewha and faithfool, so I think my FoS is on both of them.

I think we're more likely to get a brewha lynch, though, and there does seem to have been more hard evidence against him. faithfool's evidence just seems to be based on feelings and on her voting for herself.
(votes brewha - 982)

“Let’s keep chasing these two, guys! They’re the only people in the game! brewha and faithfool, faithfool and brewha. One of them has to be scum, right? So if one of them isn’t, then we’ll just jump on over to the other. After all, we can afford more than two mislynches, right, guys?”

Yeah...I see your points. It's just that I'm more inclined to doubt Hal and faithfool and side with Dio as town. Everyone else...I'm not totally sold on either way. Okay, maybe a mod wouldn't cover up...but I'm still not totally sure I trust faith. (997)

“Still not totally sure I trust faith.” Gosh, I hope so, since she’s been one of the people you’ve been talking about all game. Heck, just yesterDay you were telling us that you really wanted to lynch faith, but you just had to vote for brewha instead to ensure a majority. Now, suddenly, it’s back to “not totally sure I trust faith,” which is about the mildest expression of mistrust that’s possible. I’m not totally sure I trust ANYBODY. No town should be.

But the big problem for me is this phrase: “I’m more inclined to doubt Hal and faithfool and side with Dio as town..

What??

No explanation, either in this post, before it, or after it. She’s just inclined to side with Dio as town. It was this post that made me take a step backward pursuing Dio, and try to figure out who would benefit if I was wrong. Here Freudian Slit is aligning herself with Dio for no reason at all. This is the best trust-building strategy in the world for scum, because who doesn’t like it when someone else calls them town? Especially if they are?

Summary post to come under separate cover.

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 01:13 PM

Jeez, that ended up being longer than I'd anticipated. That was the long version; here's the synopsis:

The Case Against Freudian Slit, with Bullet Points

She has shown a consistent pattern of throwing opinions, ideas, suspicions, and even votes out for consideration - but hedging them and backing away from them to an extreme degree, usually in the same post. She consistently seeks to avoid responsibility for her own votes, casting votes to lynch mhaye and brewha while protesting her own uncertainty and citing the need to achieve majority as her primary justification. The only strong and unqualified opinion she's had has been:

Her utterly groundless expression of trust for Diomedes "as town."

Also concerning has been her constant and insistent effort to get people to focus on faithfool and brewha as the primary (even only reasonable lynching candidates), even going so far as to ask if we were all just going to lynch brewha before the current Day had even really begun. The fact that her myopia just so happens to concern two of the more popular targets over the past several Days appears to me to be further evidence of her effort to protect herself with a nice cozy cocoon of waffling and majority opinion.

Finally, she used exactly the same phrase - "psyching [each other] out" - to describe her own perception of how the game should feel as she previously used to describe her own behavior as scum.

My vote, obviously, stands.

brewha

01-15-2008, 02:00 PM

Based on my almost certainly flawed theory, I would say that the four most likely canidates for scumhood are
Pleonast, Hal Briston, Fruedan Slit, and Rysto

Hockey Monkey at least acknowledged my theory as a possibility and was the one who pointed out that if I were town, there's no reason that one more scum wouldn't jump on the wagon to lynch me.

I dont' have much of a reason to believe sachertorte is scum. All I have is yesterday's vote for me and is FOS at me based on him misinterpreting my words.

After four posts that implicated those six as possible scum, Hal and Pleonast didn’t even acknowledge that I had pointed the finger at them. Which very possibly means that my theory held some water and they just would rather not acknowledge it and bring more attention to it. Or, they missed it by skimming. Rysto has said nothing – which makes me lean more towards scum. And Slit’s voting just to ensure a lynch - any lynch - makes me lean scum as well.

This in particular bothered me:

We have five for brewha, but that's not enough...more have to change their votes. And just vote to begin with. I'm not faulting brewha for not voting for himself, but I'm thinking either it is him or no one dies. And at this point, we're at a serious disadvantage against scum who get to kill someone every night.

It's me or no one? We have time. I'm siding with Storytellor on this one. There's no rush to switch votes to one person.

Vote Freudian Slit

Freudian Slit

01-15-2008, 02:02 PM

Considering last day, we had no one to vote for and town is dropping like flies, yeah, I think we do need to rush a vote.

I have no idea why you think this is scummy in me, but not in Hockey Monkey.

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 02:07 PM

Considering last day, we had no one to vote for and town is dropping like flies, yeah, I think we do need to rush a vote.

I have no idea why you think this is scummy in me, but not in Hockey Monkey.

1. This was not the only reason I gave for finding you scummy; and
2. I haven't looked closely enough at Hockey Monkey to say whether her push, like yours, is representative of a pattern of dodging responsibility for her vote. Her arguments against me have been dodgy and inconsistent, but of course I would think that - I know them to be false.

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 02:29 PM

Considering last day, we had no one to vote for and town is dropping like flies, yeah, I think we do need to rush a vote.

I have no idea why you think this is scummy in me, but not in Hockey Monkey.

I've been trying to spur discussion, not rush a vote. I've made my feelings perfectly clear - at the end of the day, regardless of who has the majority, every town member needs to be on that wagon. We have to make sure a lynch happens, but there is no need to start the clock early.

I've also made it perfectly clear who I'd like to toss over a cliff today, but storyteller has a compelling case against you which I will be pondering further. Yes I know I just agreed with storyteller. I have an open mind.

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 02:42 PM

I've been trying to spur discussion, not rush a vote. I've made my feelings perfectly clear - at the end of the day, regardless of who has the majority, every town member needs to be on that wagon. We have to make sure a lynch happens, but there is no need to start the clock early.

Actually, I quite agree with this. This idea has been floated in previous "majority-required" games, but has never actually been used, but is there any reason we can't set an advance deadline, with the period between the advance deadline and the real deadline essentially "not counting" for game purposes?

Here's what I propose. Whatever the actual deadline is - it's Wednesday, at what time? - we set our advance deadline six hours ahead of it. From now until the advance deadline, everyone votes as if a majority vote were not required - ie, vote for the person you think is most likely to be scum. Don't worry about trying to secure a majority, just make your arguments and vote naturally.

When the advance deadline arrives, whoever is in the lead is the target of choice. From that point on, everyone changes their vote to that player, as a purely mechanical action to secure the lynch. Essentially, this would allow us to operate as if the majority requirement didn't exist, in exchange for shortening the Day by six hours.

I've also made it perfectly clear who I'd like to toss over a cliff today, but storyteller has a compelling case against you which I will be pondering further. Yes I know I just agreed with storyteller. I have an open mind.

Is it just me, or is this the most paranoid game of Mafia yet? You just agreed with me, and it made me feel more suspicious. Ack.

Mtgman

01-15-2008, 02:57 PM

Storyteller Post History (http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcbk3rwp_0hsr2tffn)

It's much too long to repost here so I made you a google doc. It includes post numbers and quotes for context. I'm delving in now.
While management appreciates your initiative, and innovative solution to the problem you've encountered, we regret to inform you it does not meet company requirements. Using external sources to house data creates several issues for corporate. Firstly, the integrity of the data. Since external data stores carry different rules about editing and updates, the management can not verify, without tedious oversight, the document's integrity on an ongoing basis. Secondly, the channels of communication have been designed to flow organically among our staff. Branching off of these channels causes disruption and we can not guarantee all staff have access to said external data stores or can render them properly. Thirdly, the archival scheme of external data stores may vary from the company's own. Future teams wishing to re-visit the experiences of this team during your team-building retreat may be unable to do so if the external data is no longer available and was never merged into the main documentation.

Thanks for your prompt attention to this matter.
Mgmt.

In case anyone missed any of that, here are the problems the mods have with using external docs, in English.

1. Having documents outside the thread, owned by individuals, could bypass the "no edits" rule. No edit timestamps or window for edits are imposed on outside documents.

2. Players, or spectators, may not be able to access google docs.

3. People wanting to re-read the thread in the future may find a broken link if whoever created the document deletes it later.

I'm not accusing Hockey Monkey of doing anything untoward, and I genuinely appreciate her initiative. I just think it's too dangerous a precedent to allow. Instead of having a static, uneditable, single source to analyze for behavior or votes, both the players and mods have to go multiple places to get the whole picture, and that picture can change, be unaccessible, or disappear entirely. That wouldn't be good.

Enjoy,
Steven

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 03:11 PM

I am hereby shamed and chastized. I just copied and pasted all the posts into a word doc so I could read them better, and thought it would be helpful to share the info. (Instead of pasting a 26 page word doc into the thread.) :p

Noted boss...won't happen again.

Mtgman

01-15-2008, 03:17 PM

Eh, find a slow time and post them once every couple hours or so. It'll keep the thread bumped if nothing else.

Enjoy,
Steven

NAF1138

01-15-2008, 03:33 PM

Whatever the actual deadline is - it's Wednesday, at what time?

11am Pacific, 1pm central.

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 03:43 PM

11am Pacific, 1pm central.

OK, six hours before that is 5AM Pacific, 7AM Central, and 8AM my time. So, under my proposed plan, we'd have until tomorrow morning to reach a consensus, and then we all would swing to the object of that consensus. Which seems unlikely to be useful toDay, as that's not a lot of time and literally no one has agreed to this proposition, but might work on future Days if there is agreement that it's a workable plan.

brewha

01-15-2008, 04:03 PM

I will go along with your plan, if you go along with mine. The problem I see with your plan, Story is that by the looks of it, I'll have the most votes at 7AM tomorrow. If I do get chucked off a cliff tonight, what's going to happen when it turns out that I am town?

Will it be a bunch of, 'well that sucks, sorry brewha. Now what'? Or, when it becomes obvious that I am indeed town, can we go after those who voted for me?

It seems no one has really given my theory any thought. But, the fact of the matter is that I was on the edge of the cliff and no scum took the opportunity to boot me off. When it becomes clear that I am town, the only logical explanation of why I survived is that all the scum were already voting for me. I wish someone would poke holes in this theory. I'd like to hear of a plausible explanation of why I wasn't killed yesterday, under the assumption that I am town.

If we can accept that the rest of the scum are among the six that voted for me, I'll happily play martyr. We are accomplishing nothing while focusing on me. At least if I'm gone, the remaining town can focus on someone else.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-15-2008, 04:08 PM

OK, six hours before that is 5AM Pacific, 7AM Central, and 8AM my time. So, under my proposed plan, we'd have until tomorrow morning to reach a consensus, and then we all would swing to the object of that consensus. Which seems unlikely to be useful toDay, as that's not a lot of time and literally no one has agreed to this proposition, but might work on future Days if there is agreement that it's a workable plan.

The problem with that idea is that it would encourage a lot of unaccountable votes. Aren't you the one usually leading the charge against people voting for a lynch with no reason other than "Somebody's gotta die?"

Pleonast

01-15-2008, 04:09 PM

Therein lies the rub -- this is not a "power role". This is a tiny bit of extra info. The logic of the "7%" in the setup makes it pretty clear it's info supplied to a townie, and balance indicates that it would be info about a townie.

Trouble is, we already know all this. Continually trying to say it's something else reeks of scum.Eh, I don't find that explanation convincing. And I keep bring it up because some players seem to think you're confirmed. I don't want us locked in some sort of groupthink that treats potential scum as confirmed.After four posts that implicated those six as possible scum, Hal and Pleonast didn’t even acknowledge that I had pointed the finger at them. Which very possibly means that my theory held some water and they just would rather not acknowledge it and bring more attention to it. Or, they missed it by skimming. Rysto has said nothing – which makes me lean more towards scum. And Slit’s voting just to ensure a lynch - any lynch - makes me lean scum as well.I thought about responding, but you're theories seemed like the flailing of someone trying to avoid being lynched. That is, throwing more suspicion on yourself than me. You even admit it is an "almost certainly flawed theory".

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Let me analyze yesterDay's vote. The final count:
7 - brewha (sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo)
2 - Diomedes (faithfool, kat)
2 - faithfool (zuma, Dio)
1 - Hawkeyeop (brewha)
No Vote - story, Hazel

There's sets of voters: for brewha's lynch [Pros](sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo) , against his lynch [Cons] (faith, Kat, zuma, Dio) and non-voters [Abs] (story, Hazel). I'm leaving brewha himself out of this, since he's not going to vote for himself no matter what his alignment.

Let's consider that brewha is Town. Why wasn't he lynched?
1. The Scum all voted for him, but enough Town chose wisely. Pros are 4/7 Scum, Cons 0/4, Abs 0/2. Likelihood = 10%
2. The Scum mostly voted for him, but missed the hammer deadline. Pros are 3/7 Scum, Cons 0/4, Abs 1/2. Likelihood = 20%
3. The Scum mostly voted for him, but one decided a no lynch is tactically better than a mislynch. Pros are 3/7 Scum, Cons 1/4, Abs 0/2. Likelihood = 20%
4. Some Scum voted for him, but some didn't. Pros are 2/7 Scum, Cons and Abs 2/6. Likelihood = 40%
5. The Town is driving the wrong way. Pros are 1/7 Scum, Cons and Abs 3/6. Likelihood = 10%
Weighted means: Pros are 2.5 Scum, Cons 1, Abs 0.5.

Let's consider that he's Scum. Why wasn't he lynched?
6. No Scum voted for him, and enough Town chose poorly. Pros are 0/7 Scum, Cons and Abs 3/6. Likelihood = 10%
7. Scum split vote for/against, but one conveniently forgot to vote. Pros and Cons are 2/11 Scum, Abs 1/2. Likelihood = 30%
8. Scum split votes for/against. Pros are 1.5/7 Scum, Cons and Abs 1.5/6. Likelihood = 50%
9. Scum try to throw brewha under the bus while Town is hopelessly lost. Pros are 3/7 Scum, Cons and Abs 0/6. Likelihood = 10%
Weighted means: Pros are 1.5 Scum, Cons 1, Abs 0.5.

And, the net result: not that much information, Scum are probably divided proportionately among all groups, no matter what brewha's alignment. It doesn't look like we'll gain much by lynching brewha.

I think we should focus on someone else for now. Lynching brewha toDay won't gain us any info we don't already have from yesterDay's vote count. No matter what his alignment is, when we lynch him, the votes are likely to be a repeat of that vote count. Nothing new.

My suggestion: let's put him on hold for one Day. If you think he's Scum (and I think he's more likely than not), save your vote for Tomorrow and vote for your second-place toDay.

Currently I think we'll get more information from how people vote for others.

I like story's idea to guarantee a lynch.

faithfool

01-15-2008, 04:29 PM

....Let me analyze yesterDay's vote. The final count:
7 - brewha (sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo)
2 - Diomedes (faithfool, kat)
2 - faithfool (zuma, Dio)
1 - Hawkeyeop (brewha)
No Vote - story, Hazel....

Just to make sure no one misconstrues my voting this time (no fault of yours [B]Pleo, I'm sure, this is a LOT to digest, but I'm afraid of being accused of something again if I don't point this out), I actually changed my vote to brewha.

brewha

01-15-2008, 05:45 PM

Pleonast, you're going to have to show your work. You say:

1. The Scum all voted for him, but enough Town chose wisely. Pros are 4/7 Scum, Cons 0/4, Abs 0/2. Likelihood = 10%

10% of what? How are you getting that number?

I just don't buy your math. Either the scum decided that they would or would not vote together. That looks alot like 50/50 odds to me.

If there are 4 scum, 3 town had voted for me. I'm not sure what order it happened, but I'd guess that once two or three town voted against me, the scum all jumped on board and hoped a 4th and 5th townie would cast their vote and lynch me.

Like Hockey Monkey said, there's not much strategic advantage to letting me live. The only scenario that makes sense that I'm alive is that all the scum had voted for me. Unless the scum just missed a deadline or weren't paying attention. It which case, they aren't very good at this and we should be doing much better than we are.

As for this:
My suggestion: let's put him on hold for one Day. If you think he's Scum (and I think he's more likely than not), save your vote for Tomorrow and vote for your second-place toDay.

I couldn't be more opposed. Either kill me today or call me town and focus on someone else. This is two days in a row that too much time has been analyzing me to no positive outcome. So you are suggesting we do that again tomorrow? That would be the most pro scum thing we could do.

If the majority opinion is that analyzing me again tomorrow or the next day is a good idea - just chuck me off the cliff now - because there is no way we can win if we keep wasting time like this.

HazelNutCoffee

01-15-2008, 06:14 PM

When the advance deadline arrives, whoever is in the lead is the target of choice. From that point on, everyone changes their vote to that player, as a purely mechanical action to secure the lynch. Essentially, this would allow us to operate as if the majority requirement didn't exist, in exchange for shortening the Day by six hours.

I need to say this beforehand - I have to teach class from 8am to 2pm tomorrow, and because I don't have a log-in ID for the Internet yet at my new school I won't be able to check back in until I get home, which will be about 3pm. (I leave for work at 6am.) So I won't be able to swing my vote. I think storyteller's idea is a good one, for what it's worth, but real life makes it impossible for me to participate. My mornings are rushed as it is. Sorry.

I disagree with Pleonast's point - that anything we could learn from brewha's lynch we could probably learn from the votes of yesterDay - because votes won't really help until we know the alignment of the person being lynched. And dragging this brewha thing out is the last thing we need right now. If he's town, we're wasting our time; if he's scum, we're playing right into his hands. (As brewha himself has noted, interestingly enough.)

I'm almost tempted to vote for him just so we won't drag this out another Day, but I'm still not convinced he's scum. If he IS scum he's playing a rather ballsy game by saying we either need to lynch him toDay or move on to someone else.

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 06:47 PM

I need to say this beforehand - I have to teach class from 8am to 2pm tomorrow, and because I don't have a log-in ID for the Internet yet at my new school I won't be able to check back in until I get home, which will be about 3pm. (I leave for work at 6am.) So I won't be able to swing my vote. I think storyteller's idea is a good one, for what it's worth, but real life makes it impossible for me to participate. My mornings are rushed as it is. Sorry.

I disagree with Pleonast's point - that anything we could learn from brewha's lynch we could probably learn from the votes of yesterDay - because votes won't really help until we know the alignment of the person being lynched. And dragging this brewha thing out is the last thing we need right now. If he's town, we're wasting our time; if he's scum, we're playing right into his hands. (As brewha himself has noted, interestingly enough.)

I'm almost tempted to vote for him just so we won't drag this out another Day, but I'm still not convinced he's scum. If he IS scum he's playing a rather ballsy game by saying we either need to lynch him toDay or move on to someone else.

Are you convinced that anyone is scum? You don't have to be convinced to make your vote. Not even reasonably sure. Vote for who you think is scummiest. Surely there is someone. If you aren't going to be online in the morning, make your vote now. Make sure you have some say in the process. Otherwise you're useless. I don't mean that personally of course, but in the context of the game if you aren't contributing you are just useless.

HazelNutCoffee

01-15-2008, 06:50 PM

Um ... I already voted last night.

Hockey Monkey

01-15-2008, 06:54 PM

Sorry, I saw the "almost tempted to vote for him" part and got a little revved up. :o So I'll direct that entire sentiment to anyone who hasn't voted yet. :p

storyteller0910

01-15-2008, 10:23 PM

The problem with that idea is that it would encourage a lot of unaccountable votes.

No, it wouldn't. For purposes of accountability, the Day would simply end six hours earlier. We'd look at the votes at the "advance deadline" as the "final votes;" if you voted for Player X at the advance deadline, then changed your vote to Player Y to participate in this plan, you'd be evaluated as if you actually voted for Player X. If you had no vote in place at the advance deadline, then voted for Player Y to be part of the consensus vote, you'd be evaluated as if you didn't vote at all.

Hopefully that makes sense; I can't think of a clearer way to explain it.

zuma

01-16-2008, 01:07 AM

This is probably the last time I'll be here before the lynch. I need to spend time in Story's game the next couple days (Playing 2 games at once is a terrible idea for me, I'll never do it again).

I agree with a lot of what story laid out with a few reservations. His point about the early-game "storylines" almost always being town is a good one.

As such,
unvote: faithfool
vote: freudian slit

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-16-2008, 02:11 AM

No, it wouldn't. For purposes of accountability, the Day would simply end six hours earlier. We'd look at the votes at the "advance deadline" as the "final votes;" if you voted for Player X at the advance deadline, then changed your vote to Player Y to participate in this plan, you'd be evaluated as if you actually voted for Player X. If you had no vote in place at the advance deadline, then voted for Player Y to be part of the consensus vote, you'd be evaluated as if you didn't vote at all.

Hopefully that makes sense; I can't think of a clearer way to explain it.

No, it makes perfect sense to me. I just don't believe that you won't try to turn this around at some later point.

That being said, I -still- don't like the brewha vote. So I'll toss my hat towards my favorite ex-Necromancer

vote: Freudian Slit

sachertorte

01-16-2008, 07:53 AM

While I have suspicions of storyteller, the case against Freudian Slit is a good one, and a better one than what I've found for brewha so far.

unvote brewha
vote Freudian Slit

I have a meeting this morning. I should be back before the end of the Day, but I can't guarantee it.

Hawkeyeop

01-16-2008, 08:24 AM

So Freudian and Brewha are nodded at five now? Eh. I prefer voting for Brewha, but will switch over if needed for a lynch. (I don't think the case against Freudian Slit is bad, I just find Brewha scummier.)

storyteller0910

01-16-2008, 08:33 AM

COMPLETE UNOFFICIAL VOTE COUNT:

Freudian Slit (5) - storyteller0910, brewha, zuma, Diomedes, sachertorte
brewha (4) - Hockey Monkey, Freudian Slit, hawkeyeop, faithfool
Diomedes (2) - HazelNutCoffee, Hal Briston
faithfool (1) - Pleonast

-----------------------

General observations: wow, that was fast. Nothing about my case against Freudian Slit has changed, but in a game where relatively cautious voting has been the rule, the very rapid shift in the voting gives me pause. Unfortunately, that shift could signify very nearly anything - scum seeing an opportunity to save one of their own, kill a townie, and blame it on me; townies dis-satisfied with the case against brewha leaping on the first viable alternative; something else that I'm not considering. I'm not going to change my vote because of it.

It is plain that either brewha or Freudian Slit is likely to be today's target. My preference is for the latter - particularly in light of her brief and insubstantial defense and subsequent disappearance - but I am willing to switch my vote to the former to ensure a lynch if necessary. I'll be monitoring the voting pretty closely for the next two hours, but I will be gone completely between 12:00 and 1:30 my time (ie, until one half hour before the deadline). Hopefully others will be here during that time period to guard against the possibility of a no-lynch.

Hal Briston

01-16-2008, 08:40 AM

townies dis-satisfied with the case against brewha leaping on the first viable alternative;While it could be any of your other theories, this is the one that sums up my feelings best. If it's not going to be Diomedes or Pleonast, then I'd much rather switch to Freudian Slit rather than brewha.

brewha

01-16-2008, 10:03 AM

Only three more hours until the final vote.

Hal, you need to back your statement up with action.

Rysto? You still playing?

Rysto

01-16-2008, 10:25 AM

I am still playing. I don't have a good excuse for not participating more. I just don't have a good read on anybody and I feel like I've been chasing my tail the whole game.

We have less an hour until the deadline, correct? storyteller's case seems the strongest and Freudian Slit is the leading candidate.

[colour=blue]Vote Freudian Slit[/color]

I believe that means that Freudian Slit is one vote from the require majority.

Rysto

01-16-2008, 10:28 AM

That's the second time I've done that this game:
Vote Freudian Slit

Hawkeyeop

01-16-2008, 10:33 AM

unvote brewha
vote Freudian Slit

faithfool

01-16-2008, 10:45 AM

Since I changed my vote in accordance to what seemed to be necessary, I'll do it again and I won't even have to voice my opinion about it, seeing as I'm already on record once. :(

Unvote brewha

Vote Freudian Slit

Hockey Monkey

01-16-2008, 10:54 AM

You guys don't need me to change my vote right now, so I'll keep mine where it is. I find it quite interesting that brewha has managed to escape the noose two Days in a row. If the rest of you guys don't find that to be compelling I don't know what more I can do. I think the Freudian Slit wagon built a head of steam way too fast, but if any funny business happens at the end of the day I'll make sure I do what I can to make the lynch happen. (Unless you all want to switch back to brewha.)

NAF1138

01-16-2008, 11:05 AM

8 - Freudian Slit (story, sach, brewha , zuma, dio, faithfool, rysto, hawk)

2 - brewha (HM, Freudian)
2 - Diomedes (HNC, Hal)
1 - faithfool (pleo)

Everyone has voted and Freudian Slit has a majority of votes. If there were 12 hours left in the game the countdown clock would have started. As it is, it will take one more vote to end the Day instantly or 2 unvotes to stop a lynch. If neither of those things happen, the Day will end in 2 hours.

Pleonast

01-16-2008, 11:15 AM

Pleonast, you're going to have to show your work. You say:

10% of what? How are you getting that number?

I just don't buy your math. Either the scum decided that they would or would not vote together. That looks alot like 50/50 odds to me.

If there are 4 scum, 3 town had voted for me. I'm not sure what order it happened, but I'd guess that once two or three town voted against me, the scum all jumped on board and hoped a 4th and 5th townie would cast their vote and lynch me.I thought I was showing too much work, so didn't go into more detail. I explicitly laid out all the cases I could think of, including how the Scum would be distributed among the voting groups, and then estimated the likelihood that each case is correct.

I think it's unlikely that all the Scum (assuming you are not) ended up voting for you. That seems a very risky move. You'll notice, however, that I give a total 50% chance of 3 or more Scum voting for you (cases 1,2,3).Like Hockey Monkey said, there's not much strategic advantage to letting me live. The only scenario that makes sense that I'm alive is that all the scum had voted for me. Unless the scum just missed a deadline or weren't paying attention. It which case, they aren't very good at this and we should be doing much better than we are.

I couldn't be more opposed. Either kill me today or call me town and focus on someone else. This is two days in a row that too much time has been analyzing me to no positive outcome. So you are suggesting we do that again tomorrow? That would be the most pro scum thing we could do.

If the majority opinion is that analyzing me again tomorrow or the next day is a good idea - just chuck me off the cliff now - because there is no way we can win if we keep wasting time like this.Wow, you attack me for trying to get others out of the blinders of focusing only on you. I was beginning to lean towards thinking you were one of us. But this whole "lynch me or trust me, NOW" simply reeks of Scum trying to force a false dichotomy. (Similar to what Hal's been trying to do, too.)

And then this sudden rush onto Freud? story made a reasonable case and now there's a headlong rush to lynch? Looks like a lot of me-too votes, perfect for scum jump on. Count me as highly skeptical of that bandwagon.

Based on brewha's reaction to my post and speed with which the Freud votes built up:
unvote faithfool
vote brewha

NAF1138

01-16-2008, 12:11 PM

Actually you only have 50 minutes now. It took me 10 minutes to get this posted.

Freudian Slit

01-16-2008, 12:14 PM

Okay, um, wow...I wasn't expecting this?

Not sure i'll have time to debunk the case against me, but...

Jeez, that ended up being longer than I'd anticipated. That was the long version; here's the synopsis:

The Case Against Freudian Slit, with Bullet Points
[list]
She has shown a consistent pattern of throwing opinions, ideas, suspicions, and even votes out for consideration - but hedging them and backing away from them to an extreme degree, usually in the same post. She consistently seeks to avoid responsibility for her own votes, casting votes to lynch mhaye and brewha while protesting her own uncertainty and citing the need to achieve majority as her primary justification. The only strong and unqualified opinion she's had has been:
Well, I really don't think that being unsure=scum, but, um, okay...

Her utterly groundless expression of trust for Diomedes "as town."He hasn't given me any evidence that he's scum...

Also concerning has been her constant and insistent effort to get people to focus on faithfool and brewha as the primary (even only reasonable lynching candidates), even going so far as to ask if we were all just going to lynch brewha before the current Day had even really begun. The fact that her myopia just so happens to concern two of the more popular targets over the past several Days appears to me to be further evidence of her effort to protect herself with a nice cozy cocoon of waffling and majority opinion.
faithfool seems suspicious to me, as she does to others--her even asking us to lynch her seems proof of it.

Finally, she used exactly the same phrase - "psyching [each other] out" - to describe her own perception of how the game should feel as she previously used to describe her own behavior [i]as scu
This just seems so entirely baseless to me. Using the same, innocuous word equals town? Give me a break.

faithfool

01-16-2008, 12:40 PM

....faithfool seems suspicious to me, as she does to others--her even asking us to lynch her seems proof of it....

For what it's worth, I'll try explaining this again, I think.

Right off the bat, the game was coming across plenty different than I expected. To put ridiculously, before (and right after) the start and how it was handled, I got my feelings hurt. But I tried to play along correctly, to this best of my ability, apparently all to no avail with regards to how others saw my 'slips'. I understand now that doesn't really matter, but I'm explaining why I thought / felt / decided the way I did.
Since said feelings were hurt and I didn't foresee how the game was progressing as it was, I added bewilderment on to that. Like I said, I'd been looking only at the mechanics of the other games I'd read (not what I thought was just chatter) and apparently misunderstood. I was thrown off right off the bat by what happened prior to and it only got worse with all the seeming paranoia, statistics and the impetus somewhat implied to go ahead with a lynch no matter the evidence. Not to mention, I've been dogged (so to speak) by a lot of things, one of which is not having opinions based on fact when I didn't see the same things in many others who were basically ignored and thus the same logic not applied. < shrug >
It's been gently pointed out to me (that I appreciate) that I shouldn't be in relentless pursuit of just one person. By others, that's been viewed as suspicious. Unfortunately, I wish more folks would think the latter about a certain party and his single minded focus on me and what that may mean. I wonder if that has any basis in anything?
Finally, all that leads to this.... Although some of those things came pre and post my initial vote for myself, the reasoning has remained the same. Total honesty here, but this game is stressing me out and I just wanted to be dead as soon as possible to get it over with and allow you guys to have someone who could help you better in all capacities.

Nothing much has changed about its tone in the interim (I don't seem to be the only one to notice things not going swimmingly) and even then, I assumed it would be much better to get rid of me, in addition to the above, because I'm lost, clueless and obviously going to be snuffed sooner or later (in my humble estimation) regardless of what I do. So that's WHY I did it and nothing more.

Everyone is more than welcome to file this explanation under the fact that it's just like someone else behaved last game (and they proved to be scum), M for Martyr, N for Not Your Problem (which I completely agree, hence I've tried to make the best of it no matter what) or D for Don't Give a Crap, (maybe P for Protesteth Too Much would be more applicable) because I'm likely one of the bad guys anyway. Y'all's choice. But like I said previously, I'm putting all this out there for one last time in hopes that it'll do any good. Sadly, I'm not very optimistic.

faithfool~
[totally guilty of terrible sentence structure and poor, poor choices of words, obviously and unbelievably long posts -- sorry]

Hawkeyeop

01-16-2008, 12:46 PM

unbelievably long posts -- sorry]

Umm have you seen Storyteller's posts?

NAF1138

01-16-2008, 12:51 PM

If you have anything else to say, say it now.

Hockey Monkey

01-16-2008, 12:55 PM

Twice now the scum have managed to save you brewha! I'll be on your case again tomorrow if you guys don't kill me tonight.

storyteller0910

01-16-2008, 01:02 PM

Umm have you seen Storyteller's posts?

:D

Sorry. I am what I am, as a great philosopher and vegetarian once said.

Incidentally, HM - what happened to the case you promised against me?

Hockey Monkey

01-16-2008, 01:05 PM

:D

Sorry. I am what I am, as a great philosopher and vegetarian once said.

Incidentally, HM - what happened to the case you promised against me?

Could ask you the same thing on the one that you promised on me. I got busy at work yesterday and didn't get more than the compiliation done. Haven't forgotten about you though. ;)

storyteller0910

01-16-2008, 01:10 PM

Could ask you the same thing on the one that you promised on me.

It's after deadline now. More toMorrow, if'n we're both alive to see it.

NAF1138

01-16-2008, 01:27 PM

bah, I just wrote a whole death scene. And then the dope ate it.

Give me a few more minutes to re write.

brewha

01-16-2008, 01:31 PM

come on! the suspense is killing me!

NAF1138

01-16-2008, 01:34 PM

This death scene is going to be quick because I can't spend another half hour writing. But trust me the last one was awsome. It had everything blood, guts, prophetic last words, a double twist fake out. I was way proud of it. I hope that the hamsters thought it was tastey.

Freudian Slit - disgruntled associate

is dead.

Nice work team.

This night will last 48 hours and will end no later then 11:30 am pacific time on January 18, 2008. (That's Thursday) Fruidian, if you want to write up a death scene, you need to get it to us by the start of the next Day.

It was a rocky Day, but in the end you all pulled together as a team and made the right decision. Good work people.

Go Team!

storyteller0910

01-16-2008, 01:37 PM

Hockey Monkey

01-16-2008, 01:43 PM

Nice work!

Hawkeyeop

01-16-2008, 01:47 PM

Certainly worth the epic post.

brewha

01-16-2008, 01:48 PM

Whoo Hooo!

::Does a Happy Dance::

Pleonast

01-16-2008, 02:35 PM

Amazing! I was sure such a sudden vote swing could only be bad. Looks like we have a chance after all.

Hal Briston

01-16-2008, 02:41 PM

Woot!

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-16-2008, 03:55 PM

Yippee Kai-Yay, Mother Fuckers!

Go Gruntled Associates!

brewha

01-16-2008, 04:16 PM

Oink Oink Bitches!

Kat

01-16-2008, 07:49 PM

Is it zombie cheerleader time yet?

Hal Briston

01-16-2008, 08:00 PM

Can I at least get a Zomblebee's waitress to bring me a drink? A 7-and-Seven seems apropos.

dotchan

01-16-2008, 10:19 PM

*unfurls banner from the Peanut Gallery*

Sign up for the next off-board game! (http://psychopathgame.proboards106.com/index.cgi?board=temp&action=display&thread=1200415290)

There will be blood! There will be guts!

There'll be frickin' LASERS! :D

(Well...all right. Maybe not lasers. But I've been playing Dynasty Warriors, and it'll be very hard to not let the awesomeness that is KOEI color the mod flavor.)

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-16-2008, 10:37 PM

HazelNutCoffee

01-16-2008, 10:46 PM

Whoa. Seems like a lot went on in the last few hours of the Day. Sorry I missed all the action but ... sweet!

Who's bartending around here? I needs a drink.

NAF1138

01-17-2008, 10:00 AM

Go figure that I am having calander problems again. The 18th is tomorrow, and tomorrow seems to be Friday. The week went by too fast. So the Night deadline is still the 18th, I just seem to be incapable of keeping track of what day of the week it is.

zuma

01-17-2008, 10:25 AM

I think Queen Latifa is kind of hot.

dotchan

01-17-2008, 07:50 PM

Another Peanut Gallery post-bump.

zuma

01-18-2008, 11:09 AM

i am done with mafia games. g have managed tn lead my team to defeat in every game i have played. its getting deppressing and i think im done.

NAF1138

01-18-2008, 11:19 AM

i am done with mafia games. g have managed tn lead my team to defeat in every game i have played. its getting deppressing and i think im done.

Hey! Don't feel blue zuma. You are doing fine. Try running a game, I don't think anyone is on the list after me. Put together a basic mafia game for the dope (we could use a real back to basics game here), it will give you a fresh perspective on the game.

zuma

01-18-2008, 11:50 AM

i know, i know. im really just frustrated at the impending demise of my side in storys game. i could have done more.

NAF1138

01-18-2008, 01:26 PM

It surprises almost no one to find storyteller was the victim of last Night savage attack by Disguntled Associates LLP.

What suprises almost everyone was that his body was found strung up like a marrionette from the gallows tree where Freudian Slit was supposed to be lynched; dressed like a ballerina. (Don't ask, I don't know what that is all about either.)

The silent pigs are getting silly. Stike back while they still think you are easy prey!

The Day will end 7 Days from the time of this post, Friday January 25th at 11:30am pacific time.

With 11 alive it will take 6 to lynch and only 7 to end the Day instantly.

Keep up the good work, and as always...

Go Team!

NAF1138

01-18-2008, 01:30 PM

Alive

brewha
Diomedes
faithfool
Hal Briston
Hocky Monkey
Hawkeyeop
HazelNutCoffee
Pleonast
Rysto
sachertorte
zuma

Dead

Santo Rugger - Associate killed Night 1
MHaye - Associate tossed off the Mountain Day 1
ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies - Associate Killed Night 2
ShadowFacts - Associate Killed (and possibly eaten by the town?) Night 3
Kat - Associate Killed Night 4
Storyteller - Associate Killed Night 5

One And Only Wanderers - Disgruntled Associate Lynched Day 2
Freudian Slit - Disguntled Associate Lynched Day 4

storyteller0910

01-18-2008, 01:36 PM

Yeah, I kind of saw that one coming. As they say: Bah! Go town!

Hal Briston

01-18-2008, 01:37 PM

Damn...

I always have a problem with storyteller -- IMO, he plays this game probably better than anyone else. He's very insightful, and often picks up on and points out small quirks and trends that I'd have never noticed otherwise. Therefore, I often find myself almost blindly following his lead.

The problem is, in the back of my mind I'm always wondering if all this brilliant insight isn't going to be followed up by an M2-style sledgehammer to the head.

So then...story, damn sorry to see you go, but at least we have confirmation that your theories were coming from the right place. Time to go back and reread.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-18-2008, 01:41 PM

::scratches chin::

And here I was, thinking he might be a reasonable lynch target. But in the end, I agree with Hal: Boy's too smart for this game. I eagerly await your final post.

Pleonast

01-18-2008, 04:37 PM

Looks like I need to re-evaluate everyone from scratch. That'll have to wait until after the weekend, though.

Hawkeyeop

01-18-2008, 07:24 PM

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-18-2008, 07:35 PM

So Hockey, how is your profile on Storyteller coming? ;) My goal for the weekend is to study Freudian's dossier, and to look at who did and didn't vote for him. I believe OAOW dossier was a decoy and not of much use, but Freudian should give us a better idea how the scum are playing this game.

Freudian was a lady, FWIW. When you check Freudian's dossier, make sure you check what order she revealed in. I have a feeling that, unlike OAOW, she wasn't intended to be a mob-sac.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-18-2008, 07:36 PM

EBWOP: There should have been something to the effect of "I agree with you that..." in there.

Hockey Monkey

01-18-2008, 07:36 PM

Kinda moot now dontcha think? :p I am eagerly awaiting his death scene.

zuma

01-19-2008, 11:56 AM

Hurry the hdl up, story.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-19-2008, 02:06 PM

Damnit... hy do we always have to waste half our day waiting on the dead guy? Can we start throwing out votes now?

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-19-2008, 06:44 PM

All right:
This is all pending a change based on storyteller's death post, but I'm going to do a rapid about-face toDay. I'm not voting for faithfool!
The fact that there have only been two people who have regular joined me on this particular Crusade of mine wasn't going to dissuade me. The fact that one of those two just turned out to be scummalicious gives me pause. Freudian didn't have much reason to think she'd be found out this quickly (reducing my WIFOM thoughts), and had joined me on prior days makes me think that she was taking advantage of my bull-headed tenacity to get a townie lynch in (and entirely discredit me).
So.......... zuma was the other person who leapt onto my ready made bandwagon, and also tried to buddy up to me in the same manner as Freudian. Seems a bit too ripe to hope for two scum doing the exact same thing. Hawkeyeop and Pleonast are currently my Dio-gut leaders in scumminess... but I bet you folks will want more than that before I toss a vote down. I'll look over thier posts and see if I can put together a coherant argument against either. If not... well, rationale hasn't slowed me down yet in voting.

brewha

01-20-2008, 09:48 AM

Before I get into assumptions, here are the facts. Pleonast, HockeyMonkey, HazelNutCoffee, and Hal Briston did not vote for Frued.

Obviously, they are not all scum. But, I'm willing to bet at least one of them is - maybe both (or all three?).

I couldn't be more opposed. Either kill me today or call me town and focus on someone else. This is two days in a row that too much time has been analyzing me to no positive outcome. So you are suggesting we do that again tomorrow? That would be the most pro scum thing we could do.

If the majority opinion is that analyzing me again tomorrow or the next day is a good idea - just chuck me off the cliff now - because there is no way we can win if we keep wasting time like this.

Wow, you attack me for trying to get others out of the blinders of focusing only on you. I was beginning to lean towards thinking you were one of us. But this whole "lynch me or trust me, NOW" simply reeks of Scum trying to force a false dichotomy. (Similar to what Hal's been trying to do, too.)

And then this sudden rush onto Freud? story made a reasonable case and now there's a headlong rush to lynch? Looks like a lot of me-too votes, perfect for scum jump on. Count me as highly skeptical of that bandwagon.

Based on brewha's reaction to my post and speed with which the Freud votes built up:
unvote faithfool
vote brewha

Here’s the first post that tripped my scumdar. You claim that I ‘attacked’ you. I did no such thing. I can’t even see a way that my post could be misconstrued as an attack. I assure you that the 'lynch me or trust me' was not a bluff. I didn't want another day wasted by analyzing me. This post seems alot like someone trying to protect Frued by getting the bandwagon focused back on me.

Then there were these two posts:

You guys don't need me to change my vote right now, so I'll keep mine where it is. I find it quite interesting that brewha has managed to escape the noose two Days in a row. If the rest of you guys don't find that to be compelling I don't know what more I can do. I think the Freudian Slit wagon built a head of steam way too fast, but if any funny business happens at the end of the day I'll make sure I do what I can to make the lynch happen. (Unless you all want to switch back to brewha.)

Twice now the scum have managed to save you brewha! I'll be on your case again tomorrow if you guys don't kill me tonight.

I would like to point out that there are no power roles in this game. I can’t think of any reason why scum would sacrifice one of their members for another. If I were scum, it makes no sense that my fellow DA's would save me by lynching another DA. The scum were obviously not involved in getting the vote switched from me to Frued. If fact, I’m willing to bet that they were probably trying to cast guilt on someone else as a last ditch effort to save Frued.

I’m pointed the big stinky FOS at both these Hockey Monkey and Pleonast.

brewha

01-20-2008, 09:50 AM

EBYOP

Please disregard the extraneous 'these' at the end of my post.

Stupid no edit rule. Grumble grumble.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-21-2008, 01:53 AM

::kicks story's corpse::

Speak, damn you!

zuma

01-21-2008, 08:00 AM

story is smelling awfully ripe. I gavent had a chance to review the voting history yet, but that is where I will be looking today. Hopefully mayby whatever last maggot is feeding on whats left of story will mayby tell us things.

storyteller0910

01-21-2008, 10:38 AM

<dead voice>

Stop yelling at me! My maggots submitted their final report before kickoff of the early game yesterday.

</dead voice>

Hawkeyeop

01-21-2008, 11:30 AM

I agree with Brewha in that there is likely scum among those who didn’t vote for Freudian. This was a key lynch for us and probably an unexpected one for them. I tend to doubt that they did much jumping on the bandwagon, when without each individual vote, Freudian might not have been lynched, This analysis doesn’t work as well if Brewha is scum, but his vote for Freudian made her a viable candidate, a dangerous action for a scum.

I would, however, throw Faithfool into the list of suspects. Her vote for Freudian came after we already had a majority. In fact, I find that much more suspicious then Pleo’s refusal to jump on the bandwagon and vote of Brewha. Pleo could of voted Freudian there with no risk. Hockey and Hazel, for reasons already stated, do not seem scummy to me. Hal, on the other hand, said he would rather vote for Freudian then Brewha, but then never actually voted, sending massive red flags my way.

On to the dossier analysis. As it turns out, Freudian’s dossier was remarkably similar to OAOW. He revealed his hand right after OAOW, (He was 16th) and like OAOW, he had no first traits. He had 4 unique and 1 copied. So perhaps our reasoning on Mhaye was solid, and he was just the exception to the rule. The other people with no first traits are Faithfool, me, Kat (dead), and Hal Briston.

Hey look there. Faithfool and Hal Briston come up as most suspicious under both of those ways of looking at things. So they are my top two targets. Faithfool, due to having more additional evidence against her is the current #1. Of course, I think one can twist my arm into voting Brewha.

Pleonast

01-21-2008, 11:33 AM

Hockey Monkey

01-21-2008, 11:36 AM

Hawkeyeop

01-21-2008, 11:47 AM

I only want to address this part right now. If brewha is scum it would have been dangerous for him NOT to vote for Freudian. Or for Freudian not to vote for brewha. It would have looked especially suspicious for them not to. If there were two of them up on the block yesterday, they would have had to vote for each other because not doing so would have garnered extra suspicion. We can't assume now that brewha is not scum because he voted for one. No no no.

You are arguing that I don't find Brewha scummy enough? Yeesh. In this case though, Brewha's action was not scummy. He didn't jump on a bandwagon, he started one. At the time of Brewha's vote, Freudian had only one vote upon him. A number of people had one vote on them. They, in part, weren't getting additional votes, because they were unlikely to reach majority. Brewha's 2nd vote for Freudian started the momentum. Now an additional vote would be the third and she would a viable alternate to Brewha. So, if Brewha was scum, he was trading a scum with little suspicion upon him (at the time) for one of great suspicion. It doesn't seem like a great trade off to me.

Hawkeyeop

01-21-2008, 11:55 AM

EBWOP

Yes I do know Freudian is female. No I don't know why I keep posting he/him.

Hockey Monkey

01-21-2008, 11:57 AM

You are arguing that I don't find Brewha scummy enough? Yeesh. In this case though, Brewha's action was not scummy. He didn't jump on a bandwagon, he started one. At the time of Brewha's vote, Freudian had only one vote upon him. A number of people had one vote on them. They, in part, weren't getting additional votes, because they were unlikely to reach majority. Brewha's 2nd vote for Freudian started the momentum. Now an additional vote would be the third and she would a viable alternate to Brewha. So, if Brewha was scum, he was trading a scum with little suspicion upon him (at the time) for one of great suspicion. It doesn't seem like a great trade off to me.

No, I'm not arguing anything at the moment. Just saying that scum do in fact vote for each other.

Hockey Monkey

01-21-2008, 12:36 PM

Here's my best estimate at final vote counts (since NAF doesn't post them). I've colored the dead based on their alignment.

Day One
10 - MHaye - (OAOW, zuma, brewha, Dio, Hawkeyeop, Kat, Cookies, Pleonast, HockeyMonkey, Freudian Slit)
3 - zuma - (sach, Mhaye Hal Briston)
1 - Diomedes - (Storyteller)
1 - brewha - (ShadowFacts)
3 - No Vote - faith, Hazel, Rysto

Day Two
8 - OneAndOnlyWanderers - (Hal Briston, Hawkeyop, sach, shadowfacts, Pleo, Freudian Slit, Kat, HockeyMonkey)
1 - Diomedes - (Faithfool)
1 - Faithfool - (Dio)
6 - No Vote - brewha, Hazel, Rysto, zuma, story, OAOW

Day Three
7 - brewha (sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo)
2 - Diomedes (faithfool, kat)
2 - faithfool (zuma, Dio)
1 - Hawkeyeop (brewha)
2 - No Vote - Hazel, story

Day Four
8 - Freudian Slit (story, sach, brewha , zuma, dio, faithfool, rysto, hawk)
2 - brewha (HM, Freudian)
2 - Diomedes (HNC, Hal)
1 - faithfool (pleo)
0 - No Vote - N/A

I'll go ahead and post, but I want to stare at this a bit to see if it means anything.

The first thing that jumps out at me here is that HazelNutCoffee did not vote for either OAOW or Freudian Slit. She was the only person not to vote for either one. The fact that she did not vote at all for the first 3 days is also concerning. Good way for scum to hide.

Back to brewha. I believe that when he cast his vote on Freudian, he was pretty sure he was going to be lynched. It was a good place to put his vote at the time. If he had been lynched, it would have bolstered Freudian a bit as a townie. (Because people could make the exact argument that hawkeyeop is making that he wouldn't have voted for her if she were fellow scum. It's all WIFOM anyway.) When the wagon started rolling it was too late for him to get off without looking suspicious. So yeah, I still think brewha is scum, and his vote for Freudian Slit is another tic in that column.

brewha

01-21-2008, 01:08 PM

<snip>

Day Four
8 - Freudian Slit (story, sach, brewha , zuma, dio, faithfool, rysto, hawk)
2 - brewha (HM, Freudian)
2 - Diomedes (HNC, Hal)
1 - faithfool (pleo)
0 - No Vote - N/A

I'll go ahead and post, but I want to stare at this a bit to see if it means anything.

Hey Pleonast, I find it a bit suspicious that you seemed to have forgotten who you voted for yesterday. It's appears that you didn't put your name right next to Freudian Slit's where it belongs.

Day Four
8 - Freudian Slit (story, Brewha, sach, zuma, dio, faithfool, rysto, hawk)
2 - brewha (HM, Freudian, Pleonast)
2 - Diomedes (HNC, Hal)

0 - No Vote - N/A

I don't know if you were implying that the voters are listed in order or not, but FTR, I'd like to point out that I was the second one to vote for Freudian Slit. I did not jump on a bandwagon at the end when it didn't matter.

brewha

01-21-2008, 01:13 PM

EBWOP

I see that you just copied the order that NAF listed the votes. So disregard that part.

But, you Hockey Monkey and Fruedian Slit all did vote for me. It seems that you and HockeyMonkey were also trying to get the bandwagon shifted off of Fruedian at the end.

Pleonast

01-21-2008, 01:46 PM

I'm looking over the votes over the past Days. If brewha were scum, we'd be three for four. Possible, but I'll file that under less likely than he's not.

I'll work from the assumption that's he's Town, for now. So, why would the lynch fail?
1. The Scum all voted for him, but enough Town chose wisely. Pros are 4/7 Scum, Cons 0/4, Abs 0/2. Likelihood = 5%; I don't think they're likely to all vote the same way. Why risk it for a non-critical lynch so early in the game?
2. The Scum mostly voted for him, but missed the hammer deadline. Pros are 3/7 Scum, Cons 0/4, Abs 1/2. Likelihood = 5%; I can't see Scum unintentionally missing an opportunity.
3. The Scum mostly voted for him, but one decided a no lynch is tactically better than a mislynch. Pros are 3/7 Scum, Cons 1/4, Abs 0/2. Likelihood = 30%; Possible. Scum might not be willing to place the lynching vote, especially if they have a good excuse to vote for someone else.
4. Some Scum voted for him, but some didn't. Pros are 2/7 Scum, Cons and Abs 2/6. Likelihood = 50%; this is most likely. Scum have a disincentive to create a pattern. I think this is by far the most likely pattern.
5. The Town is driving the wrong way. Pros are 1/7 Scum, Cons and Abs 3/6. Likelihood = 10%; we can't discount the possibility that it was mostly Town hounding brewha.

(In case it's not clear, my likelihoods are estimates of how probable each case is in my own opinion.)

So let's say the scum were split on the brewha vote. That means one of sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo are scum. And two of faithfool, zuma, Dio, Hazel. (Removing brewha, since this is all premised on him being Town.)

And I think scum were more likely to not vote for Freud. These are HockeyMonkey, Hazel, Hal, Pleo. The intersection of my two short lists is Hazel. Based on this vote analysis, I'll
vote Hazel

I'm also now suspicious of faithfool, zuma, Dio, HockeyMonkey, and Hal (in no particular order). And least suspicious of brewha, sach, Hawkeyeop, and Rysto.

On preview: oops, that's what I get from blindly copying NAF's vote counts.

Pleonast

01-21-2008, 01:53 PM

I couldn't be more opposed. Either kill me today or call me town and focus on someone else. This is two days in a row that too much time has been analyzing me to no positive outcome. So you are suggesting we do that again tomorrow? That would be the most pro scum thing we could do.

If the majority opinion is that analyzing me again tomorrow or the next day is a good idea - just chuck me off the cliff now - because there is no way we can win if we keep wasting time like this.Wow, you attack me for trying to get others out of the blinders of focusing only on you. I was beginning to lean towards thinking you were one of us. But this whole "lynch me or trust me, NOW" simply reeks of Scum trying to force a false dichotomy. (Similar to what Hal's been trying to do, too.)

And then this sudden rush onto Freud? story made a reasonable case and now there's a headlong rush to lynch? Looks like a lot of me-too votes, perfect for scum jump on. Count me as highly skeptical of that bandwagon.

Based on brewha's reaction to my post and speed with which the Freud votes built up:
unvote faithfool
vote brewhaHere’s the first post that tripped my scumdar. You claim that I ‘attacked’ you. I did no such thing. I can’t even see a way that my post could be misconstrued as an attack. I assure you that the 'lynch me or trust me' was not a bluff. I didn't want another day wasted by analyzing me. This post seems alot like someone trying to protect Frued by getting the bandwagon focused back on me.Here's the entire post where brewha claims he didn't attack me. I've added green for emphasis.Pleonast, you're going to have to show your work. You say:1. The Scum all voted for him, but enough Town chose wisely. Pros are 4/7 Scum, Cons 0/4, Abs 0/2. Likelihood = 10%10% of what? How are you getting that number?

I just don't buy your math. Either the scum decided that they would or would not vote together. That looks alot like 50/50 odds to me.

If there are 4 scum, 3 town had voted for me. I'm not sure what order it happened, but I'd guess that once two or three town voted against me, the scum all jumped on board and hoped a 4th and 5th townie would cast their vote and lynch me.

Like Hockey Monkey said, there's not much strategic advantage to letting me live. The only scenario that makes sense that I'm alive is that all the scum had voted for me. Unless the scum just missed a deadline or weren't paying attention. It which case, they aren't very good at this and we should be doing much better than we are.

As for this:My suggestion: let's put him on hold for one Day. If you think he's Scum (and I think he's more likely than not), save your vote for Tomorrow and vote for your second-place toDay.I couldn't be more opposed. Either kill me today or call me town and focus on someone else. This is two days in a row that too much time has been analyzing me to no positive outcome. So you are suggesting we do that again tomorrow? That would be the most pro scum thing we could do.

If the majority opinion is that analyzing me again tomorrow or the next day is a good idea - just chuck me off the cliff now - because there is no way we can win if we keep wasting time like this.He directly says my suggestion is a scummy thing to do. That's personal and to me feels like an attack. Especially when my intention was to get players to consider other people to lynch.

Gah! I wrote this before the previous post, but it refuses to post! :(

Rysto

01-21-2008, 02:05 PM

Somebody needs to check Pleonast's vote counts. I know for a fact (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9315726&postcount=725) that I voted for Dio on Day 2. I'd do it myself but I don't have the time right now.

Hal Briston

01-21-2008, 02:09 PM

Hal, on the other hand, said he would rather vote for Freudian then Brewha, but then never actually voted, sending massive red flags my way. <shrug> My vote wasn't necessary to sent Freudian over the cliff. If I had switched and she turned up scum, then you could claim "oh, scum had to vote for her because they couldn't save her". If I switched and she turned up clean, then it would be "oh, what a scummy bandwagon vote".

Since I had no idea if she was scum or not, and couldn't influence the vote either way, there wasn't much point in my rushing to switch my vote.

HazelNutCoffee

01-21-2008, 05:08 PM

The first thing that jumps out at me here is that HazelNutCoffee did not vote for either OAOW or Freudian Slit. She was the only person not to vote for either one. The fact that she did not vote at all for the first 3 days is also concerning. Good way for scum to hide.

WTF? I voted the first day for zuma. I didn't vote the second Day because OAOW was on the verge of being rush-lynched, which I didn't agree with; Day 3 was my brain fart when I completely forgot about the entire game.

Why, exactly, is my not having voted for OAOW and Freudian Slit suspcious? Freudian Slit's lynch became inevitable during the half-day I was unable to be online (and I explained this ahead of time). I did vote that Day and I had my reasons for doing so.

Pleonast

01-21-2008, 05:37 PM

It looks like my final vote counts have multiple errors. Anyone want to try to come up with the correct ones? (Hint: it's traditionally a mod's job to post final vote counts.) I don't have time at the moment.

I don't think the analysis leading to my vote for Hazel is affected, so I'll be leaving it there.

Where is everyone? I'm rather busy at work today, but at least I posted an attempt at analysis.

HazelNutCoffee

01-21-2008, 06:02 PM

faithfool

01-21-2008, 07:41 PM

....I would, however, throw Faithfool into the list of suspects. Her vote for Freudian came after we already had a majority. In fact, I find that much more suspicious then Pleo’s refusal to jump on the bandwagon and vote of Brewha.....

Useless question and explanation: 1) When we vote (especially if we don't wish to change it) matters? 2) I thought I was making it a majority, when upon looking back at it, I got the damn thing confused with ending it early. Or am I still not understanding the process right?

....Hey look there. Faithfool and Hal Briston come up as most suspicious under both of those ways of looking at things. So they are my top two targets. Faithfool, due to having more additional evidence against her is the current #1. Of course, I think one can twist my arm into voting Brewha.

Of course. Again. Oh yay.

P.S. Thanks to Dio for at least giving me a bit of a rest. 'Twas much appreciated.

Hockey Monkey

01-21-2008, 08:00 PM

Please take these comments Out Of Game:

::game hat off::

Useless question and explanation: 1) When we vote (especially if we don't wish to change it) matters?

Yup. :D

2) I thought I was making it a majority, when upon looking back at it, I got the damn thing confused with ending it early. Or am I still not understanding the process right?

There is no process to follow. You aren't doing anything right or wrong. Everything you do and say, when and how, will be scrutinized at some point. Ain't it fun? :D

Of course. Again. Oh yay.

P.S. Thanks to Dio for at least giving me a bit of a rest. 'Twas much appreciated. Aren't you glad you aren't brewha? :D

:: puts game hat back on ::

Mtgman

01-21-2008, 08:05 PM

You thought you had seen strange. You thought you had felt weird. You thought nothing could shock you by now. How many times had you been inside someone else's head as they died by now? Just once was enough to really mess up Jean Grey, and you've been through it several times.

So, when a flow of maggots seeped out into the courtyard at sunrise, you looked at them with jaded eyes. It was when they looked back that you started getting a bit suprised. Tens of thousands of tiny eyes locked with each of the surviviors, and the world dissolved.

It was a dark and stormy night.

Well, rather more drizzly than stormy, but being night, it was certainly dark.

Although it was no more dark, optically speaking, than any other standard night might have been, so from a certain standpoint the employment of the adjective “dark” to apply to this particular night might engender in the reader a sense that its darkness was of darker quality than the darkness of a more typical night.

So it would be more appropriate to indicate that it was a drizzly night with relatively standard post-dusk illuminatory characteristics.

Although in the strictest sense, the use of the word “night” might be construed as misleading, as the event in question actually occurred both before and after the time-point commonly called “midnight,” and therefore might be said to have occurred both at night and in the morning. And so I shall further revise my previous statement to say:

It was a period of time bridging the gap between evening and morning, in which ambient illumination was at a level considered to be temporally average and outdoor precipitation was mild and intermittent. As I tossed uneasily in my bed, I heard a very strange sound in the hallway outside. Now, my father was a wise man, before his life ended in that tragic hula hoop incident, and on matters such as these I have always adhered closely to his counsel. My father’s advice was as follows: Son, if you’re ever trapped in an abandoned monastery miles from any chance of rescue, and surrounded by psychopathic killers who want to snuff out your life, and you hear a suspicious noise in the hallway, there’s only one intelligent course of action – tell no one, and wander the halls alone to investigate.

So I did. I followed the source of the strange sound down a dark staircase, into a hallway in the catacombs below the monastery. Eventually, I happened upon a small pile of wooden boxes, stacked neatly in a corner; each one was labeled “DANGER: HIGH EXPLOSIVE. DO NOT TOUCH!!!!!” With five exclamation points, and quote marks, so you knew they were serious. I sat on the boxes for a few minutes – I was winded from my walk – then proceeded on my way.

Eventually I passed over a strange suspension bridge. Hm, I thought, that’s an unusual thing to have in a monastery.. I looked over the side and saw that the area under the bridge was filled with molten lava. I leaned way over the rope handle of the bridge, far enough that the slightest shove would disturb my balance and send me plunging into the hot red death below.

Then I continued on my way. I navigated a narrow walkway beside a pit filled with swords, all buried hilt-first into the ground with their blades pointing straight up. I walked along a large hallway with a line of high-powered machine guns, all clearly loaded and placed on stands pointing directly at the hallway. I continued under a gigantic sheet of plate glass, suspended over the walkway by a single piece of fishing line that could have been cut with ordinary office scissors. Finally, I descended another stairway, this one winding and unsteady, filled with gaps such that the slightest mis-step would send me plunging to my doom.

I reached the bottom, and there waiting was a small wooden table, and on it, a single small, white, fluffy bunny – the source of the noise. Laughing at my own nervousness, I approached the bunny.

The last thing I heard before it murdered me and feasted on my flesh were these words. These words - especially the last of them - were easily the most memorable I had ever heard, or would have been, if the bunny hadn’t consumed the portion of my brain responsible for creating new memories.

“I trained this bunny just for you,” the voice of the person responsible for my death said coldly. “My noble predecessor lost a battle of wits over a buttercup. I refuse to lose.”

And the rest was silence.

And white fur.

Management would like to apologize for any inconvenience assosciates felt as a result of the schedule slippage on the release of this information. Unexpected occurrances have been the norm this cycle.

Enjoy,
Steven

zuma

01-21-2008, 08:21 PM

Is the last bit a Princess Bride reference?

What's with the white bunny? Jefferson Airplane? Monty Python? I was once attacked by a wild animal?

Hockey Monkey

01-21-2008, 08:33 PM

Color me confused.

Rysto

01-21-2008, 08:44 PM

That last bit was clearly a Princess Bride reference (http://youtube.com/watch?v=TUee1WvtQZU). I'd bet just about anything that's the trait.

zuma

01-21-2008, 09:05 PM

How is the Princess Bride a trait?

Rysto

01-21-2008, 09:14 PM

I think that our killer lied about his/her dossier. I'm going through the 2 threads to see if there's anything about The Princess Bride in either. So far, not so good.

HazelNutCoffee

01-21-2008, 09:25 PM

I think that our killer lied about his/her dossier. I'm going through the 2 threads to see if there's anything about The Princess Bride in either. So far, not so good.
The battle of wits in The Princess Bride was between what's his face, Westley, and the other guy, over the poisoned wine - wasn't it?

Or maybe there was more than one battle of wits. It's been so long since I've read that book.

Okay, I just googled "princess bride battle of wits" and the hits on the front page are the dialogue between "Man in Black" and "Vizzini." Vizzini is the one that lost. He is the killer's predecessor ... ? :confused:

:: goes back to review dossiers ::

HazelNutCoffee

01-21-2008, 09:27 PM

Holy crap.

:smack: :smack: :smack: :smack: :smack: :smack:

Vizzini is the Scilian.

My great-great-grandfather was a duke in Sicily.

HazelNutCoffee

01-21-2008, 09:29 PM

Er, and upon further reflection, the only ones that have that trait are zuma and me. This is of course assuming that everyone revealed their dossiers truthfully.

Sorry for posting multiple times - I got a bit carried away.

Rysto

01-21-2008, 09:54 PM

Holy crap.

:smack: :smack: :smack: :smack: :smack: :smack:

Vizzini is the Scilian.

My great-great-grandfather was a duke in Sicily.
Fuck.

I've just wasted a goddamned half hour. Hazel's nailed it.

zuma

01-22-2008, 08:50 AM

oh noes. I has Sicilian royalty. I feel your pain, HM and sach.

Hockey Monkey

01-22-2008, 08:54 AM

Holy crap.

:smack: :smack: :smack: :smack: :smack: :smack:

Vizzini is the Scilian.

My great-great-grandfather was a duke in Sicily.

Bingo!

My synapses couldn't parse the trait from the death scene, but of course now, it makes perfect sense.

Oh and storyteller...I love reading your stuff dude.

Hawkeyeop

01-22-2008, 09:06 AM

I think it also worth noting that Storyteller did not hear any previously revealed traits. So either Freudian Slit was the previous killer, or the scum was worried that the odds of the dossier revealing the previous killer was too great.

I also think that we should revisit Story's idea of having votes in prior to deadline. I would suggest a few modifications.

1. Everyone get there vote in 24 hours prior to the end of day.

2. Each individual who did not pick one of the top 2 vote getters, should choose between those two.

3. Once an individual reaches majority, someone else should switch there vote to lynch that person. That way there can not be a last minute vote change causing a no lynch.

Obviously common sense applies, so if we have ties someone will need to switch over to ensure a lynch.

Pleonast

01-22-2008, 09:30 AM

You know who else intersects both of your lists, Pleo? You.

I find your reasoning rather arbitrary. Why do you think scum wouldn't jump on the Freudian bandwagon? Her lynch, from what I can tell, became inevitable fairly quickly. Don't you think scum would more than willingly vote for their own if it became clear she was going to be lynched anyway?

I would also like to point out that when I last signed on yesterDay, brewha and not Freudian Slit was on the chopping block. The votes swung during the half-day I couldn't log on. I didn't vote for brewha because I didn't feel he was scum. I voted for Dio. I'll go back and find the reasons I posted when I get the chance.Read my lists again:So let's say the scum were split on the brewha vote. That means one of sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo are scum. And two of faithfool, zuma, Dio, Hazel. (Removing brewha, since this is all premised on him being Town.)

And I think scum were more likely to not vote for Freud. These are HockeyMonkey, Hazel, Hal, Pleo. The intersection of my two short lists is Hazel.Orange added for emphasis. Everyone except brewha is on one of the first two lists. But the short lists have players more likely to be scum. And their intersection is you.

The Freud lynch came out of nowhere. If he'd turned out to be Town, I would've been very suspicious of everyone on it. But he was Scum. There's three of them left, and I don't see why two of them would have voted for Freud. It seems much more likely to me that no more than one Scum voted for him. That leaves two scum on the list of HockeyMonkey, Hazel, Hal, and Pleo. I know I'm not Scum, so I see good odds on the other three. You being on the other short list makes you an easy pick.

I now with the clue from storyteller, I'm happy with my vote. I wouldn't mind changing my vote to zuma, but I'd like to have more of a case than the killer's trait.

I'm in favor of using story's voting plan.

NAF1138

01-22-2008, 10:32 AM

(Hint: it's traditionally a mod's job to post final vote counts.)

Fine by me since you asked for it. I don't traditionally post final vote counts, FWIW. The reason being that I generaly consider keeping track of those sorts of things to be part of the game. You may notice that I am a bit more hands off then the typical mod on these boards, and have been even more hands off in this game than I usually am. That is because I am trying to allow both sides all the tools they have available to them without mod interferance. I know that my game plans have been thwarted on more then one occasion by a "helpful" mod, so I am trying to avoid that.

But if y'all want me to post final vote counts, it's no skin off my nose. Frankly it's easier then posting the running vote tally since the information is static, and I have it all collected already. Give me an hour or so to get caught up from the long weekend at work and I will post the final counts for all Days up until this point AS I HAVE THEM. If you know you voted and don't see it there, it is because that vote wasn't counted for some reason.

Remember, all vote counts posted my mods are accurate. We are willing to correct fluid vote counts but no corrections will be made to the static final vote count. If you see an error in the count it is on you to post proof that I screwed up (and I know I did at least once.)

NAF1138

01-22-2008, 12:45 PM

Day 1
1- Diomedes (Storyteller)

10- MHaye (OAOW, zuma, brewha, Dio, Hawkeyeop, Kat, Cookies, Pleonast, HockeyMonkey, Freudian Slit)

3- zuma (sach, Mhaye, Hal Briston)

Day 2

1- Diomedes (rysto)
8- One And Only Wanderers (Hal Briston, Hawkeyop, sach, shadowfacts, Freudian Slit, Kat, HockeyMonkey, Dio, faithfool, OAOW)

Day 3
7 - brewha (sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo)

2 - Diomedes (faithfool, kat)
2 - faithfool (zuma, Dio)

1 - Hawkeyeop (brewha)

(faithfool had voted for brewha also, but I didn't see it so it didn't count. Sorry folks.)

Day 4
8 - Freudian Slit (story, sach, brewha , zuma, dio, faithfool, rysto, hawk)

3 - brewha (HM, Freudian, Pleo)
2 - Diomedes (HNC, Hal)

And that's the show recap for the day. The one count mistake I know made I placed as a note under the count for the day. Yes, brewha is lucky to be alive.

Now that I have posted this, get crackin. Today is Tuesday, you only have until Friday at 11:30am pacific time to get a lynch together.

Remember it is 6 to lynch, 7 to end the Day instantly.

NAF1138

01-22-2008, 12:50 PM

I am in a counting mood:

1 - HNC (Pleo)

and that's all she wrote.

Go Team!

Pleonast

01-22-2008, 01:44 PM

Here's a color-coded list: Town, Scum.

Day 1
1- Diomedes (Storyteller)
10- MHaye (OAOW, zuma, brewha, Dio, Hawkeyeop, Kat, Cookies, Pleonast, HockeyMonkey, Freudian Slit)
3- zuma (sach, Mhaye, Hal Briston)
4 - No Vote - faith, Hazel, Rysto, Shadowfacts

Day 2
1 - Diomedes (rysto)
10 - One And Only Wanderers (Hal Briston, Hawkeyop, sach, shadowfacts, Freudian Slit, Kat, HockeyMonkey, Dio, faithfool, OAOW)
5 - No Vote - brewha, Hazel, zuma, story, Pleonast

Day 3
7 - brewha (sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo)
2 - Diomedes (faithfool, kat)
2 - faithfool (zuma, Dio)
1 - Hawkeyeop (brewha)
2 - No Vote - Hazel, story
(faithfool had voted for brewha also, but I didn't see it so it didn't count. Sorry folks.)

Day 4
8 - Freudian Slit (story, sach, brewha , zuma, dio, faithfool, rysto, hawk)
3 - brewha (HM, Freudian, Pleo)
2 - Diomedes (HNC, Hal)

Hockey Monkey

01-22-2008, 02:05 PM

WTF? I voted the first day for zuma. I didn't vote the second Day because OAOW was on the verge of being rush-lynched, which I didn't agree with; Day 3 was my brain fart when I completely forgot about the entire game.

According to the NAF official vote count, you did not vote on DAYs 1, 2, or 3. If you voted for zuma, then unvoted you DID NOT VOTE. You can vote and unvote all Day long, but at the end of the Day, if you don't have a vote on the sheet, then you didn't do anything. Don't try to spin it like you did.

Why, exactly, is my not having voted for OAOW and Freudian Slit suspcious? Freudian Slit's lynch became inevitable during the half-day I was unable to be online (and I explained this ahead of time). I did vote that Day and I had my reasons for doing so.

It's suspicious because you are the only person not to have voted for known scum.

HazelNutCoffee

01-22-2008, 04:37 PM

Hockey Monkey

01-22-2008, 04:45 PM

I DIDN'T UNVOTE! Seriously, if you're going to accuse me get your facts straight. I voted for zuma on page 13 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9296303&postcount=611) just before the Day ended.

It was just yesterDay when you snapped at me as well for supposedly not voting when I had voted for Diomedes. Who is the one trying to put a "spin" on things? Certainly not me.

NAF, I DID vote on Day 1 before the Day ended.

OK Hazel...don't get your coffee all in a froth. :p I haven't snapped at anyone, and if it read like I did, please accept my apologies. I was using the offical vote counts, not trying to spin anything.

Pleonast

01-22-2008, 04:50 PM

Out of game note: I'll be on a short business trip Wednesday through Friday. I'll have internet access and should be able to keep up on reading, but won't have much time to post.

HazelNutCoffee

01-22-2008, 04:59 PM

OK Hazel...don't get your coffee all in a froth. :p I haven't snapped at anyone, and if it read like I did, please accept my apologies. I was using the offical vote counts, not trying to spin anything.
Sorry. :: sheepish :: I've been on my feet all day hammering grammar into the minds of idiots, so you'll have to excuse my, er, frothiness. :)

ShadowFacts

01-22-2008, 10:03 PM

Day 1
1- Diomedes (Storyteller)

10- MHaye (OAOW, zuma, brewha, Dio, Hawkeyeop, Kat, Cookies, Pleonast, HockeyMonkey, Freudian Slit)

3- zuma (sach, Mhaye, Hal Briston)

OOoooooooOOOOOOh...I voted for brewwwwwwwwwwha on Day One - post 547 (and, oddly, you missed it then, too.) OOOooooooooOOOOhhh....go tooooowwwwwnnn...

zuma

01-22-2008, 11:26 PM

OK, I started a complete re-read tonight. I also wanted to put together a vote list, because I noticed on at least one occasion NAF was not listing votes in the correct order (not sure if it was his intention to or not...). I've just finished day 1 and noticed that NAF missed a couple votes. BAD NAF.

Here is the vote total day 1, in the order they came in:

Mhaye (10): OAOW, zuma, brewha, freudian slit, Diomedes, Hawkeyeop, Kat, Cookies, Pleonast, Hockey Monkey

zuma (4): sachertorte, Mhaye, Hal Briston, HazelNutCoffee

Diomedes (1): storyteller

brewha (1): shadowfacts

No Vote (2): faithfool, Rysto

I'll try to get the rest of the days in later tonight...

faithfool

01-22-2008, 11:44 PM

zuma

01-22-2008, 11:57 PM

Day 2 votes in correct order... I'm not sure there's much to be gleaned from day 2, for when Cookies revealed the killer's trait, a OAOW lynch was inevitable.

However, I thought I'd list the pre-revelation vote count:

brewha (2): shadowfacts, Hockey Monkey
faithfool (2): Diomedes, Pleonast
Diomedes (1): faithfool

Here's the end of day vote count:

OAOW (10): Hal, Hawkeyeop, sachertorte, shadowfacts, freudian slit, Kat, Hockey Monkey, faithfool, Diomedes, OAOW
Diomedes (1): Rysto
No Vote (5): brewha, Hazel, zuma, story, Pleonast

The only things to note were that Pleonast placed the 5th vote on OAOW, then unvoted because he said he didn't want to end the day early. Diomedes placed the 9th vote (I think we've discussed that one), and OAOW self-hammered the 10th vote to end the day instantly. Rysto said he placed his vote on Diomedes because of Diomedes's 9th vote.

zuma

01-23-2008, 12:05 AM

Aargh. Well, NAF missed your vote too :)

OK, Final and I think correct day 1 vote counts, in the correct order:

Mhaye (10): OAOW, zuma, brewha, freudian slit, Diomedes, Hawkeyeop, Kat, Cookies, Pleonast, Hockey Monkey
zuma (4): sachertorte, Mhaye, Hal Briston, HazelNutCoffee
Diomedes (1): storyteller
Hal(1): faithfool
brewha (1): shadowfacts
No Vote (1): Rysto

zuma

01-23-2008, 01:54 AM

Day 3 vote counts: (This was the no-lynch day - Brewha was 1 vote short of majority)

brewha (7): sach, Hockey Monkey, Hawkeyeop, fruedian slit, Rysto, Hal, Pleonast
faithfool (2): Diomedes, zuma
Diomedes (2): faithfool, kat
Hawkeyeop(1): Brewha
No Vote (2): HazelNutCoffee, storyteller
(faithfool had voted for brewha also, but I didn't see it so it didn't count. Sorry folks.)
I didn't see faithfool vote for brewha anywhere on day 3.

zuma

01-23-2008, 02:22 AM

Day 4 vote counts in the correct order:

Here was the state of voting before story laid out his case against Fruedian Slit if anyone is interested:

brewha (6): Hockey Monkey, freudian slit, hawkeyeop, sachertorte, Diomedes, faithfool
faithfool (2): Pleonast, zuma
Diomedes (1): HazelNutCoffee
Not yet voted: Rysto, storyteller, brewha, Hal

And the final vote count in the correct order:

Freudian Slit (8): storyteller, brewha, zuma, Diomedes, sachertorte, rysto, hawkeyeop, faithfool
brewha (3): Hockey Monkey, Freudian Slit, Pleonast
Diomedes (2): HazelNutCoffee, Hal

zuma

01-23-2008, 06:18 AM

Based on an incomplete so far reread, I will most likely place a vote tnmmorow on Hawkeye, Pleonast, faithfool. or Rystn. Voting history will play a part, along with other issues.

zuma

01-23-2008, 07:41 AM

I also have issues with the shady accounting department in this company. I think toeays postr will influence my vote a lot.

Hawkeyeop

01-23-2008, 07:45 AM

The only things to note were that Pleonast placed the 5th vote on OAOW, then unvoted because he said he didn't want to end the day early. Diomedes placed the 9th vote (I think we've discussed that one), and OAOW self-hammered the 10th vote to end the day instantly. Rysto said he placed his vote on Diomedes because of Diomedes's 9th vote.

To be fair to Dio, by the time he made the 9th vote, discussion had come to a standstill. I don't think we lost anything for ending that day early.

brewha

01-23-2008, 08:18 AM

I've been stupid busy at work all this week. I don't have much time to post, but I have been reading.

Right now, I've comfortable with a vote for either HockeyMonkey or Pleonast based on their attempts to disuade the Fruedian Slit vote yesterday.

I will be voting for one of them later today - hopefully after more research if I get time.

zuma

01-23-2008, 08:43 AM

Hawk, I have been more than fair. I was simply putting all votes out there in context. I had no problem with dios vote. if i did I would have challenged hhm on it...

zuma

01-23-2008, 09:07 AM

I would like tn hear from hawk what he thinks of the voting of the part two days. I would also like to hear anything, other than a drive by vote from Rysto.

Hawkeyeop

01-23-2008, 09:12 AM

I would like tn hear from hawk what he thinks of the voting of the part two days. I would also like to hear anything, other than a drive by vote from Rysto.

The past two days? I don't think we can tell anything from the Brewha voting without knowing if Brewha was scum or not. I analysed the last days' voting already in a previous post already. My stated conclusion was I found Faithfool's and Hal Briston's votes as most suspicious.

zuma

01-23-2008, 09:22 AM

We know FS is scum. You can give us your opinion on that vote.

zuma

01-23-2008, 09:36 AM

I may have missed your day 4 analysir. Hawk. I Will look tommorow. I still want to hear from Rysto why he should not get my vote today...

Hawkeyeop

01-23-2008, 09:43 AM

I may have missed your day 4 analysir. Hawk. I Will look tommorow. I still want to hear from Rysto why he should not get my vote today...

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9390524&postcount=1137

zuma

01-23-2008, 09:52 AM

Thanks Hawk. I agree with your thoughts on the faith vote. that is why i put her on my suspect list.

sachertorte

01-23-2008, 12:57 PM

Hi. Sorry, I've been absent. I've been sick.
I'll try and catch up tonight and post something of value tomorrow.

Mtgman

01-23-2008, 06:02 PM

Day 3
7 - brewha (sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo)

2 - Diomedes (faithfool, kat)
2 - faithfool (zuma, Dio)

1 - Hawkeyeop (brewha)

(faithfool had voted for brewha also, but I didn't see it so it didn't count. Sorry folks.)

...
The one count mistake I know made I placed as a note under the count for the day. Yes, brewha is lucky to be alive.To whom it may concern. The memorandum above has undergone post-issuance review by management. The areas addressing an error on the accounting for a vote by faithfool have been scrutinized, and the following position reached.

No vote for brewha was cast by faithfool during Day 3. As a result, no majority, as required for a lynch, was reached during the Day. To the best of our knowledge, no one who should have been lynched has been left unlynched, and no one who should not have been lynched was lynched.

Enjoy,
Steven

Pleonast

01-23-2008, 10:06 PM

Uh, where is everyone? I'm not seeing much going on. We need to lynch three scum in five lynches. Let's not get apathetic!

Do you really want me to come up with some hare-brained scheme to get everyone riled up?

HazelNutCoffee

01-23-2008, 10:15 PM

When does the Day end again? Sorry, I'm really bad at keeping track of dates and times.

I'll be able to post more after tomorrow evening. It's just that from Monday-Thursday I'm teaching over a full-time workload, so after being on my feet for hours and grading papers that would make Strunk writhe in his grave, I'm usually burned out once I come home.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-23-2008, 10:47 PM

Hal Briston

01-23-2008, 10:54 PM

Hell, I'm still playing the "anyone who says I'm scum stands an excellent chance of being scum" game, so I'm up for a hare-brained scheme...

zuma

01-24-2008, 02:06 AM

I'm going to be voting for one of the non-freudian voters. And I count faithfool in that group, given that her vote came after it was already a done deal. My vote will probably come down to either her or HazelNutCoffee who really does seem to have a voting history of hiding in the shadows with one-off votes, and avoiding taking any sort of stand. That said, I'm not done reviewing and re-reading.

Also, I want to address this, from Pleonast, day 3 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9340701&postcount=847):

Revealing our Dossiers was to me so obviously a pro-Town move, I felt unilaterally stating mine was the best course of action. And, as it turns out, the Town ended up following me. If you think leading the Town in a pro-Town direction is scummy, then you need to re-adjust your scumdar.

I agree with you completely, if you are town. However, while recently browsing through the pre-game, before the game was full and before roles had been assigned:

The Dossier: I'm tempted, as a player, to immediately reveal my Dossier. Of course, if I'm scum, I'll probably lie some. Is there any reason for a Townie not to truthfully reveal all their Dossier at the beginning?
I'm not certain how the Dossier will work either. But three points: 1) all the Town truthfully revealing their Dossier won't break the game, 2) no Townie is more valuable than any other, so no one to protect by hiding among the vanillas, and 3) more information will make any Dossier analysis easier. Thus, I'm thinking Townies should quickly and truthfully reveal their Dossiers.
Now, like I said, I agree with you, but I don't think you get to "take credit" for something you basically locked yourself into doing before your role had even been assigned. If you are town, well, you're doing what you said you thought would be a good idea for town to do. If, however, you are scum, you had no choice but to pursue this on day 1, as you'd eventually have been strung up if you didn't, given your pre-game comments.

So that post bugs a little.

faithfool

01-24-2008, 07:48 AM

Sorry to say, but I'm equally clueless as some of the others. So I'd be thrilled to know which rabbit to follow down what hole.... [last sentence to be misconstrued later.]

zuma

01-24-2008, 08:00 AM

Faith. I am of the opinion that vote histories are an excellent place to start now that we know many alignments. Take a look at revealed traits too.

HazelNutCoffee

01-24-2008, 08:03 AM

Gee, if I'd known that voting with the majority would have confirmed my Towniness, I would have jumped on every bandwagon that formed from Day 1. [/sarcasm]

I have to run to class - but I do want to say that I voted based on what I thought was right. If I'd been the last vote to swing the majority you'd probably find that scummy too, no? :dubious:

brewha

01-24-2008, 08:27 AM

NAF1138

01-24-2008, 09:17 AM

When does the Day end again? Sorry, I'm really bad at keeping track of dates and times.

Friday at 11:30 am.

Hawkeyeop

01-24-2008, 09:26 AM

Okay. Seems like it is time to get some votes on the board.

Vote Faithfool

For the reasons in the post I linked for Zuma.

Hockey Monkey

01-24-2008, 09:37 AM

I've already outlined my reasons back in post 1132 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9387316&postcount=1132)

I don't like that Hockey Monkey said that she would be on my case tomorrow regardless of the outcome of Fruedian Slit's lynch. It seemed to be a last ditch effort to save her fellow scum.

Vote Hockey Monkey

I think Pleonast is equally scummy and would be willing to vote for him as well.

I made no last ditch effort to save anybody. If you will recall, I said I would change my vote if any funny business happened at the end of the day to make sure she was lynched. My vote wasn't needed at the time, and I wanted to stay on record with my vote for you.

ToDay, however, another person has come to the forefront of my mind as scum. I still think you, brewha, are scum, but HazelNutCoffee has gained some ground in that area too. I will be happy voting for either of you today, but to be consistent...

vote brewha

Hal Briston

01-24-2008, 09:58 AM

Ok, less than a day remaining...time to get on record.

For all the faulty logic employed in post 1137 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9390524&postcount=1137) and for voting for someone I'm pretty sure is town --
vote Hawkeyeop

If it comes down to necessity, I'd also be behind taking out Pleonast, Diomedes or (to a lesser extent) brewha.

Hawkeyeop

01-24-2008, 10:06 AM

faithfool

01-24-2008, 10:31 AM

Well since we'd better hurry up and do something, I'm going to go with the fact that we constantly came >thisclose< to lynching brewha. Must be something there, right? 'Least that's what I'd previously been reading some. Therefore...

vote brewha

zuma

01-24-2008, 10:49 AM

you are vnting brewha?[vote faithfool[ I was ready to vote HNc.

NAF1138

01-24-2008, 10:58 AM

looks like there are finally enough votes to warrent a count:

2 - brewha (HM, faithfool)
2 - faithfool (hawkeye, zuma)

1 - Hocky Monkey (brewha)
1 - Hawkeyeop (Hal)
1 - HazelNutCoffee (Pleo)

7 out of 11 votes cast.

It takes 6 on one person to make the lynch thing happen, it takes 7 to end the Day early.

You have 26.5 hours left to make a decision.

zuma

01-24-2008, 11:13 AM

I find it interesting that those that had nothing tn dn with lynching FS are now voting the way they are.

Hal Briston

01-24-2008, 11:17 AM

Faulty logic? Care to elaborate?Already did:
Hal, on the other hand, said he would rather vote for Freudian then Brewha, but then never actually voted, sending massive red flags my way.
<shrug> My vote wasn't necessary to sent Freudian over the cliff. If I had switched and she turned up scum, then you could claim "oh, scum had to vote for her because they couldn't save her". If I switched and she turned up clean, then it would be "oh, what a scummy bandwagon vote".You also found suspicion with the fact that I had no first traits, ignoring the fact that as the last to reveal, I wouldn't have first traits.
Hey look there. Faithfool and Hal Briston come up as most suspicious under both of those ways of looking at things. So they are my top two targets. And I counter that both of those way of looking at things reveal nothing suspicious. Scum, however, would be well served to convince everyone otherwise.

Hawkeyeop

01-24-2008, 11:30 AM

Already did:
You also found suspicion with the fact that I had no first traits, ignoring the fact that as the last to reveal, I wouldn't have first traits.

Well yes. But the fact you were last wasn't random. You chose to reveal after everyone else had.

Hockey Monkey

01-24-2008, 11:33 AM

I find it interesting that those that had nothing tn dn with lynching FS are now voting the way they are.

How exactly?

HazelNutCoffee

01-24-2008, 11:40 AM

So let's say the scum were split on the brewha vote. That means one of sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Rysto, Hal Briston, Pleo are scum. And two of faithfool, zuma, Dio, Hazel. (Removing brewha, since this is all premised on him being Town.)

And I think scum were more likely to not vote for Freud. These are HockeyMonkey, Hazel, Hal, Pleo. The intersection of my two short lists is Hazel. Based on this vote analysis, I'll
vote Hazel

I really don't get the first part of your reasoning - that one person from your first list and two people from your second list are scum. If that is true, HockeyMonkey, you, and Hal all intersect your supposed "might be scum" list. I am the only one that intersects the "two scum in this list" and "didn't vote for Freudian Slit" list, but why the hell does that make me more suspcious than those who intersect your "one scum in this list" and "didn't vote for Freud"?

I think most of you are thinking I'm scummy because I never cast a vote for known scum, and have never followed the majority when it comes to casting votes. Well, let's see what the possibilities are.

- I am scum, and I deliberately stayed away from voting for my scum buddies because I didn't want them to get lynched. I stayed away from the majority in the hopes of staying below the radar.

- I am Town, and my scumdar is apparently broken, but I'm being stubborn about sticking to my opinions, flawed as they are.

First of all, none of us know whether or not I have voted for scum or not. For all we know zuma and Dio could be scum and they just haven't garnered suspicion yet. You guys are mostly suspecting me because I've been "safe" voting. I find this definition of safe voting weird. If I wanted to hide my votes, don't you think I would have buried myself in a majority? (Besides, I was one of four who voted for zuma; I wasn't exactly a lone voice in the wilderness.) And if I was anxious about trying to appear like town, wouldn't it make sense to, you know, vote at least once for scum? Scum that was obviously going to get lynched?

I know scum never have set voting patterns, but the reasoning behind my supposed scumminess could go either way. And for those of you who are going on about my non-votes; well, I have nothing to say about my most recent one, because it was due to a RL circumstance, and if you think I'm lying about that, all I have to say is that I think lying about a RL situation to sway the game is something akin to cheating, and that I would never do that. I'm saying this completely out of game: my non-vote that time was not a strategy of any sort, scum or Town.

My first non-vote was when brewha was in the hotseat and about to be rush-lynched. I felt that it was in the town's best interest to delay that, as I stated at the time.

zuma, why are you voting for faithfool? Because she's voting for brewha?

zuma

01-24-2008, 11:42 AM

Can something be done about Rysto? Modkill or replace him please.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.

01-24-2008, 02:46 PM

vote: Hazel

NAF1138

01-24-2008, 03:43 PM

Can something be done about Rysto? Modkill or replace him please.

I will prod, if we hear nothing in 24 hours we will mod kill. It's too late in the game to allow subs at this point.

sachertorte

01-24-2008, 04:23 PM

brewha:
My desire to lynch brewha is well documented; however, over the course of Day 4 I found my doubt increasing. Other points in brewha's favor include Freudian Slit voting for brewha, and my suspicion of storyteller (confirmed town) was strongly founded on brewha being scum. Not that brewha couldn't be scum, but storyteller's behavior clearly wasn't scum protecting scum. Even so, I keep coming back to the idea that lack of votes to lynch is more likely to occur when scum is in the noose than if town.

faithfool:
I was originally suspicious of faithfool due to her self voting which I still don't understand and can only come up with scum reasons to do so. I changed my mind when considering (storyteller's?) point that Hal Briston being given a scum's dossier makes no sense from a game construction point of view.
So just as I'm doubting my certainty of brewha's scumminess, I'm now doubting faithfool's townieness. I think I put too much into "logic" and not enough into "behavior analysis." The reason for this is simple as I think I'm quite good at logic, but very bad at behavior analysis. For those that paid attention to The Conspiracy game, I was convinced that Santo Rugger was town based on "logic" when he was in fact scum.
I'd feel much better about voting for faithfool if I could rectify the existence of Hal Briston's knowledge of faithfool's dossier. So far I have the following options:
1) Hal Briston is lying scum. I find this doubtful as I strongly believe the game contains a pro-town secret role. As Hal Briston is the only one claiming such a thing, I tend to believe him. I do have a creeping doubt however (more distrust of my so-called logic).
2) Hal Briston is telling the truth, but faithfool knew (was told) that she needed to be truthful about her dossier. From a game construction point of view I find this clumsy and a sort of twisted way to make the data fit the result. But there's that creeping doubt again.
From a behavior point of view I'm ready to vote for faithfool, but there's still that nagging logistical problem. For now I'm going to rely more on behavior and
vote faithfool

Hal Briston

01-24-2008, 04:51 PM

Well yes. But the fact you were last wasn't random. You chose to reveal after everyone else had.Excellent. Putting blatent falsehoods out there makes me much more comfotable about my vote. Unless, of course, you think me capable of fixing a full slate of NBA games (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9292551&postcount=557).

And if I could, I'd have the fricking Celtics doing a helluavlot worse than they're doing...

NAF1138

01-24-2008, 06:12 PM

Management has looked into the subject of Rysto's attendance and has found it to be adequit. He has posted three times this Day, and that is good enough for me. But his failing to surpass the required attendence rate is being noted in his file. If behavior does not improve managment will be forced to take action.

Rysto will live not be mod killed toDay. But if he doesn't start posting a bit more, he might get killed tomorrow.

Hawkeyeop

01-24-2008, 07:24 PM

Excellent. Putting blatent falsehoods out there makes me much more comfotable about my vote. Unless, of course, you think me capable of fixing a full slate of NBA games (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9292551&postcount=557).

And if I could, I'd have the fricking Celtics doing a helluavlot worse than they're doing...

Heh. I remembered you avoiding revealing until the end to scare scum into being honest. I didn't realize you were actually scheduled to go last. I'm with you on the Celtics though. Living in Boston with their teams winning EVERYTHING is a tad aggravating.

Pleonast

01-24-2008, 09:34 PM

Rysto

01-25-2008, 01:48 AM

It's probably too late to look at this now, but early in the game Freudian said that she trusted Dio but really had nothing to back it up with. Now that we know that she was scum, it looks to me like the kind of mistake a newer player could make. He's also been voting aggressively, and I'm not sure that's pro-Town.

storyteller was killed by a new player last night. Why the change? Was Freudian the killer? Here's the dossier she claimed:

I believe farts are really funny. People only pretend to not think they are. (public)
I have been an assistant on an archaeological dig in the ancient Malian capital of Djenne.
I have had a conversation with Michael Chiklis
I have performed on stage at Branson, MO.
I was once bitten by a wild animal while visiting Dollywood.
I've been a model appearing on the cover of a nationwide catalog

If she was the killer, clearly she lied about her dossier. I find it quite interesting that her she did not claim a single trait from the "Controversial Opinions" thread(her public trait was from that thread). Remember, there was initially a lot of confusion about where the dossiers came from -- as I recall, a lot of people thought that they only came from the "Two Truths" thread.

This doesn't seem to help much, though. 9 people have claimed nothing but traits from the "Two Truths" thread(including Freud and faithfool, who's public trait is from the Controversy thread). That includes Kat, who is confirmed as Town.

Another thing that caught my eye, but I never took the time to look into, are the night-killed players. Santos Rugger, who knows as well as anyone how scum think, makes sense as a first target. But I'm very curious as to why they left storyteller alive until he started leading the Town and weeding out scum. Frankly, were I scum, storyteller would have been a prime target for me, especially in a game with no power roles. You'd think that the scum's main goal with the night kills would be to kill off the potential leaders, but they didn't seem to be doing that. I can only conclude that the dossiers have come into the decision process. Perhaps the scum are trying to off the players with the most dossier overlap with the killers, so that the clues from the dead lead us astray?

But if that's the case, why hasn't anybody been jumping on the Sicilian trait? Maybe the scum thought that'd be too obvious? This is worth looking into, I think, but it's nearly 3 in the morning here. It'd be fair to ask what I didn't look into any of this earlier. I could tell you about how I had a self-imposed milestone for a project last Friday and only completed it just tonight, but I could have found the time. I just didn't.

Anyway, I'm just going in circles here. I don't have any firm suspicions, especially against our leading lynch candidates.

zuma

01-25-2008, 02:35 AM

zuma, the statement of mine you addressed was a response to Hawk's accusation that my early Dossier reveal was scummy because there was no consensus. My early reveal and following discussion helped move us in the direction of the universal disclosure. That is definitely a pro-Town action, as you noted (and also as you note, not any indication of my alignment). I was simply trying to refute the assertion that I was scummy for leading the effort.
I realize that this is a response to Hawkeyeop's accusation (and I agree his accusation is flawed). However, since you had basically locked yourself into such a day 1 action before your role was assigned, I think that while I consider your day 1 actions to be pro-town, those actions will not be viewed by me (nor should they by anyone else) as adding to whatever credibility you have. You do, however, have a valid point that the fact that it was in response to hawkeyeop shouldn't implicate you, but I read it as "look at me and my pro-town actions!" during my re-read.

Also, zuma, do you want to explain "I find it interesting that those that had nothing tn dn with lynching FS are now voting the way they are." And while you're at it, explain your vote?
I consider the day 4 voting, especially the turn to Freudian Slit to be the best evidence we have at the moment. Yes, scum will scatter their votes, but I don't think they'd be very helpful in making yesterday's vote happen, especially as it did with so little time left. I'd look for them to be conveniently absent in those last 12 hours, or defending the brewha vote in hopes of at least getting a no-lynch. That we don't know brewha's alignment makes it a bit more difficult (but even if brewha is scum they'd be looking for a no-lynch at that point), the fact of the matter is that I think those that voted for freudian are significantly more likely to be town than those that did not.
There are 5 people who did not contribute to the freudian lynch, and those are Pleonast, Hockey Monkey, Hazel, Hal, and faithfool (faith voted after majority had been reached). Those are my leading scum candidates. Honestly, choosing one of them is difficult for me. I'm discounting you and Hal for the time being (although I think Hal and his claim should be a topic of discussion for tommorrow) as you two haven't struck me as scummy as the remaining three. And Hockey Monkey I'm kind of torn about at the moment. She has struck me as earnest about her motives, but her vote yesterday, and having a trait matching a killer concern me. So, at this very moment, I am torn between faithfool, for her after-the-fact vote, and Hazel, for what I see is a pattern of throw-away votes and sharing a trait with a killer (yes, I share it too, but I know I am town, so, for me, Hazel is the sole unknown who has claimed that trait).

My comment about "voting the way they are" was really just a reaction to faithfool trying to start up the brewha train again, with what I consider terrible reasoning:
Well since we'd better hurry up and do something, I'm going to go with the fact that we constantly came >thisclose< to lynching brewha. Must be something there, right?

Hazel, some simple math: my estimation from my first list is that sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Rysto, Hal Briston are 1/5 likely to be scum. From my second list: faithfool, zuma, Dio, Hazel are 2/4 likely. And my third: HockeyMonkey, Hazel, Hal are 2/3 likely. See how those on the first list are less likely because there are more people and fewer scum are likely?
I still don't understand how you aren't just pulling those numbers out of your ass :) I think the actual votes from yesterDay, especially as late in the Day as it happened, would be the most telling. I'm imagining what it must have looked like to scum as it happened, and I think they'd have done something to derail the process, even if it was just not participating or sticking to their brewha guns.

zuma

01-25-2008, 02:41 AM

storyteller was killed by a new player last night. Why the change? Was Freudian the killer?

I was giving this some thought today. Maybe freudian was not the killer, but they decided to change killers because they were afraid of another trait being revealed from the previous killer? If so, that would implicate Hockey and sach. But it's just a thought I've been kicking around. We don't know to what extent scum has lied (although we know for a fact they have at this point, as nobody has claimed cow udder and volkswagon) so I'm not willing to act on it at the moment.

Anorther thought I had (I'm just rambling now) is, if Hal is telling the truth, would scum who revealed before Hal made his claim be more likely to have lied than those who revealed after? Probably not worth wasting time on at this point as the jury is still out on Hal, but something to consider in the future.

faithfool

01-25-2008, 02:54 AM

....My comment about "voting the way they are" was really just a reaction to faithfool trying to start up the brewha train again, with what I consider terrible reasoning....

You know, I'm not sure who it was that said something similar to this, but if you vote first you are circumspect because you're trying to lead everyone down whatever path they're supposed to conjuring up. If you vote later, you were holding out. If you don't vote until there's a majority, you're probably scum and you're trying to slide by (or something). If you admit right up front, like I've constantly been doing, that I have no clue what's going on, in my humble opinion, from the evidence presented... YOU STILL HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. Or that makes you scum too. I think.

Several people have said there's not much to go on. Others have commented on the fact that brewha almost got lynched however many times. And that's not speculation, anyone can see that brewha almost got lynched however many times. I threw out the only thing I could think of, that had already seemed like a somewhat tested theory, so that I would be doing something. So, no I don't have a brewha train started, nor do I want to start one. I was simply trying to go with the best logic I had at my disposal.

zuma

01-25-2008, 03:07 AM

You know, faithfool, I had your unvote and a HNC vote all ready to go, then said "fuck it" and was about to leave. Then you have to go and post.
I know this is your first game and I try to keep that in mind when judging you.

Fuck this I have to leave. HazelNutCoffee is the only unknown (from my perspective) with the Sicilian trait. I'll let that be my (admittedly very weak) tie-breaker between you two.

unvote: faithfool
vote: HazelNutCoffee

brewha

01-25-2008, 07:04 AM

We are coming down to the wire here and we looked to be heading to a no lynch with the way the votes are spread around. Here's my count ( I have no claims of accuracy)

HazelNutCoffe - Pleonast, Dio, Zuma

Hockey Monkey - Brewha

Faithfool - Hawkeye, Sach

Brewha - Hockey, Faithfool

Hawkeye - Hal Briston

I don't like the HazelNutCoffe vote. She straight up forgot about the game. I just don't think that I could forget that I was scum. A vanilla townie role would be much more forgettable. Or maybe it was all a ploy?

I don't buy Faithfool as scum either. But, her Fruedian Slit vote was worthless, and her behavior at the beginning of the game could have just been a ploy to get the suspicion off of her. I need to do some more reading.

Hawkeyeop

01-25-2008, 07:43 AM

I was giving this some thought today. Maybe freudian was not the killer, but they decided to change killers because they were afraid of another trait being revealed from the previous killer? If so, that would implicate Hockey and sach. But it's just a thought I've been kicking around. We don't know to what extent scum has lied (although we know for a fact they have at this point, as nobody has claimed cow udder and volkswagon) so I'm not willing to act on it at the moment.

Even if Freudian wasn't the killer, I don't think it implicates anyone. They could just have been worried about a public trait being revealed. They might of liked 1/6 odds over 1/4.

brewha

01-25-2008, 08:04 AM

Twice now the scum have managed to save you brewha! I'll be on your case again tomorrow if you guys don't kill me tonight.

I still think you, brewha, are scum, ...

So, by your logic, we scum decided that instead of letting the town kill me - me who has been at the top of the town's scum list since day one - we introduce Fruedian Slit as scum and get the vote swung towards her. There was very little suspicion on her, yet we scum decided it would be better to kill her than to kill me.

Do you see the flaw in your logic?

Steadfastly sticking to me only makes sense if you don't care which of us townies are lynched. I've almost gotten lynched once and have consistently been getting votes. So, instead of taking the successful Fruedian Slit lynch as an opportunity to re-evaluate who you think is scum and who isn't, you stick to which townie you could most easily get lynched.

I like my vote right where it is.

Hawkeyeop

01-25-2008, 08:04 AM

We are running out of time so

unvote faithfool
unvote Brewha

That leaves us with 2 candidates with 3 votes and no one else with more then 1. So can everyone else pick one of those two options.

Hawkeyeop

01-25-2008, 08:05 AM

We are running out of time so

unvote faithfool
vote Brewha

That leaves us with 2 candidates with 3 votes and no one else with more then 1. So can everyone else pick one of those two options.

brewha

01-25-2008, 08:05 AM

EBWOP

I just wanted to point out that the first quote was before the FS lynch. The second quote was after.

brewha

01-25-2008, 08:10 AM

Hawkeyeop

01-25-2008, 08:19 AM

Hawkeye, why are you voting for me? This is why I don't like the 'pick one and pile on' logic that Storyteller came up with. Everyone can vote for me and claim that they were just doing what the majority wanted. There's no accountability.

Your vote ties me for majority. You'd better have a good reason to vote for me. Because if I get lynched, I will be proven town and you will look quite scummy.

You remember when I voted for you before and listed about 17 reasons. Those. I can add a couple more if you really like. Just because I voted for Faithfool today, doesn't mean my case against you went away. Plus, we need to lynch someone. I don't like the case against Hazel, but is better then a no lynch. Do you suggest we continue to have scattered votes and wait til the scum pick us off one by one at night?

Your threats aren't helping your case. If you vote for me, there will be revenge, doesn't seem to be a pro-town sentiment. If you are either a scum or a town, we will evaluate everyone's votes tomorrow, like we do every day. No one is extra scummy for voting for you regardless of your alignment.

brewha

01-25-2008, 08:24 AM

Hawkeyeop

01-25-2008, 08:31 AM

It's not a threat. And as cliche as it is to say, it's a fact.

How could your suspicions of me remain despite how the voting went yesterday?

I guess my death might actually be the best thing for the town at this point. No one can get their focus away from me, and it's killing our chances of winning. Maybe my death will convince the town to look at those who have been on my case.

I'm still not voting for me though.

Yes, but it is a fact with any vote. You have chosen to emphasize it about votes for you many times.

Your vote is one piece of evidence. Of course scum will vote for scum. It doesn't clear the rest of the case against you. Scum will take protown actions to confuse town members. They are sneaky like that.

zuma

01-25-2008, 08:31 AM

Oh Lord, not this Brewha shit again. I think we are playing a very sloppy game right now.

brewha

01-25-2008, 08:34 AM

You remember when I voted for you before and listed about 17 reasons. Those. I can add a couple more if you really like.

Care to reiterate those 17 reasons? Your case against me was based on me having no unique dossier traits. You then said that me defending myself was too thought out and defensive and that me suggesting that Pleonast copied my public trait was 'pointing my finger at anyone and everyone'.

I can see one reason - maybe three if you break it down. That's a far cry from 17.

brewha

01-25-2008, 08:36 AM

Oh Lord, not this Brewha shit again. I think we are playing a very sloppy game right now.

I fully agree. That's getting me out of the picture may be the best thing for the town.

Hawkeyeop

01-25-2008, 08:43 AM

I can if you like, but it will take a while. Kind of understaffed here today.

zuma

01-25-2008, 08:44 AM

Except that very few of us seem to be looking at the best evidence we have tn date. Actual voting history.

Hawkeyeop

01-25-2008, 09:15 AM

Zuma,

How do you suggest we achieve a majority to ensure that someone gets lynched? I mostly switched my voted to Brewha, so that there would be two viable choices. If everyone votes for one of those two, we will have a majority.

brewha

01-25-2008, 09:19 AM

I can if you like, but it will take a while. Kind of understaffed here today.

It's more for your benefit than mine. You are not going to convince me that I'm scum - I know better. But you are the one who tied me for the majority of votes. The other two - Hockey and Faithfool have already stated that they are just voting for me out of habit.

Like I said before, I don't have reason to believe you are scum. But if I get lynched you will look scummy. That may very well lead to another town getting lynched tomorrow. That is very bad for us.

I want scum to die today - but if that can't happen, I'll jump off the cliff just to get the game focused on someone else.

I haven't seen a good arguement out of you as to why you think I'm scum. I'm pretty sure the town will assume you to be the bad guy if I get lynched and you don't have a valid reason for voting for me.

HazelNutCoffee

01-25-2008, 09:24 AM

Fuck this I have to leave. HazelNutCoffee is the only unknown (from my perspective) with the Sicilian trait. I'll let that be my (admittedly very weak) tie-breaker between you two.

Well, according to your logic, I should be voting for you, since I know I'm not scum, and you're the only other person who's admitted to that trait. I'm going to stick to what I said before, though - the only dossiers we can trust are those of known town. Which means there is still the possibility that you aren't scum and the killer has lied about their dossier. So tempting as it is to turn your own logic back on yourself and vote for you, I won't.

I am also tempted to vote for Pleonast, because his numbers just seem completely arbitrary to me, and I have never agreed with the idea of playing mafia based on percentages and possibilities. However, I must reluctantly concede that a disagreement of gameplay does not necessarily equal scumminess ... so again, I am witholding judgement for the time being.

brewha, I'll just have to repeat what I've said before - me forgetting about the game was simply ... me forgetting about the game. It was not a conscious decision. I almost wish I'd just asked for a modkill, since it seems impossible for people to get around this. It was just a very hectic time for me, and the game was frequently not on the first page, so the whole thing slipped my mind until I was reminded via PM.

Speaking of getting around something, I am also tempted to vote for brewha simply to get him out of the way so we can move forward. But I don't believe he's scum. And this is why I didn't vote for Freudian Slit. I didn't believe she was scum! can't believe you guys are giving me so much grief over that vote. When I voted for Diomedes, it was still well before the end of the Day. The votes against Freudian Slit didn't build up until after I'd voted, and during the span of hours in which I was unable to log in because of work.

Neither Pleonast nor Diomedes have responded to my arguments. Diomedes simply posted a vote for me without even an explanation. WTF?

I'm

voting Diomedes

for now. I don't have work today, so I'll be keeping an eye on the thread - if it looks like there's going to be a no-lynch I'll swing my vote to create the necessary majority.