Well, this is slightly awkward.
*
There’s no one here, so here I am by myself uh talking to myself. That’s, that’s chaos theory.* [/Goldblum mode]
I’m aware this is going to seem slightly coincidental which is fine by me. Don’t care, all I ask is that you guys take a look at this and tell me what you see. In all honesty, I was going to avoid and let things cool down for a bit. It was only that I got to choie’s name after working from the bottom of the list upwards and was summarizing each post in my notes, when things started gnawing at my gut in the worst way.
My notes, continued-
[SPOILER]
gnarlycharlie 23
gnarly talks about septimus and the level cap 157
gnarly discusses two vote 206
gnarly votes ATPG 228
gnarly discusses with Pizza 318
gnarly offers to prod LightFoot 348
gnarly asks Jan why she claimed 401
gnarly agrees that someone disguised Scath’s role 487
gnarly discusses game setup with LightFoot 496
gnarly questions Mental, mentions current vote leaders and Normal 646
gnarly questions Diver, talks with LF 647
gnarly votes Diver, Normal 649
gnarly talks to Normal, says septimus not suspicious 699
Inner Stickler 26
Inner votes Jan, disagrees with Skeezix on ShadowFacts 609
Inner adopts wait and see attitude toward Pizza 612
Inner discusses with Normal 671
Inner responds to Jan lynch 843
Inner presses Plankton 870
Inner continues 872
Inner presses septimus 881
Inner continues 883
Inner votes septimus 888
Inner presses septimus 890
choie 29
choie opens with roleplay 148
choie continues roleplay and ponders the opening color 151
choie says this is 1st game, says innocent and naive 164. I am concerned.
choie appreciates ped’s unvote, reminds everyone she’s a newcomer, uses word “slaughter” 187
choie snrubs Normal, again mentions her newness, disagrees with final day wagoning 198
choie snrubs Normal and Pizza, mentions lords of slaugher, sounds nervous 199
choie disagrees Pizza vote on Koldanar, AGAIN mentions inexperience, votes Kelly 247 Who is choie talking to?
choie talks to pedescribe, mentions guilt complex 291
choie discusses with Normal 308
choie discusses past games 333
choie defends Silver Jan 364
choie questions Silver Jan’s role claim 414
choie votes Silver Jan 419
choie says that choie is a noob, seems self conscious 445
choie suspects Silver more than Kelly 447, talks with Stanislaus
choie continues to mention that she’s lost and new, assumes Pizza, Spec ed, Normal are townie.
Votes Jan and Normal, assumes get dinged 566
choie thinks normal came to Jan’s aid 568
choie reacts to Jan’s vote 570
choie discuss with septimus and Jan 581 interesting post, gut is killing me
choie responds to TexCat and Skeezix 608 interesting post, gut is killing me
choie responds to Silver, continues talk about Pizza 731
choie apologetic 737
choie apologetic after Jan lynch, defends septimus(?), snrubs Plankton about Pizza. 863
choie snrubs Normal again, talkative, smears pizza 869[/SPOILER]
Clarification: “Snrub” is a Simpsons reference where the town got a lot of money from suing the power plant (iirc) and in the town meeting, a mister “Snrub” stands up and suggests re-investing it in the plant (Snrub is obviously Burns with a mustache) and Waylon Smithers, his assistant, then follows up with “I like the way this Snrub thinks!” Hence, Snrubbing… publicly agreeing with someone’s idea and saying what a great idea it is - or similar behavior. Not my word, but I’ve seen it used at CFC.
I tried to look at this from a fresh and dispassionate viewpoint. Until this point I hadn’t even especially noticed choie except for that one comment which felt not only bogus, but out of place in the game (to me).
That aside, I started reading those posts one-by-one from the beginning. Just her posts.
I’m getting a sense of two things which are bugging me right off the bat:
constant mention of her newness, this is her first game, etc, all this is over her head, and whatnot
contrasted with:
quoting several old games, mentioning that she’s followed other games, and also suggesting here and there things I wouldn’t expect from a non-confident new player (defending septimus, disagree with vote on Koldanar, and seems to assume Normal, Pizza, Ed are townie when asking to tone it down fellow townies).
Even if I take the personality at face value, there are two streams of thought… one is a timid, not confident, apologetic, this-is-all-over-my-head, and another which is “I’ve read all about these games” and defending characters she couldn’t possibly know are innocent.
This suggests that she is emphasizing her newness to the point of it being a shield, and that her inexperience is not actually handicapping her, she’s actually confident enough to break with the crowd on rather controversial issues.
Then, I look at how her posts are framed; many seem to be addressed to no one in particular and are announcing how she’s feeling.
Why I bring that up is because I’ve seen this particular kind of acting-via-text before. On stage, if someone were ad-libbing lines and did not know how to convey emotions, they might just state how they’re feeling.
I again bring up a Simpsons reference where (Kang, Kodos?) someone mentions that they don’t like it when folks announce how they’re feeling… that makes them feel angry! Because it’s bad acting. It’s unnatural and forced.
I also get a sense reading choie’s posts that much of the drama is there to be dramatic.
Well anyway, regardless of how you feel about me or my motivations, take a look at what I’m looking at here.
What do you think? Am I way off base, or is there something there?
I’ll have to separate this preamble from the actual case as it is too long.
Interestingly, commenting on the Mayor character. I am not sure why I find it interesting. Just an odd twitch.
The question just seems odd to me; so far I am chalking this up to roleplay and a “detective” streak in choie’s persona. Pinging but nothing too dramatic.
Here’s a mention of her newbie status.
Seemed a bit too concerned about a single vote, specifically thanked the retraction
Said something was freakazoid rationale for lynching, followed by
“Have I mentioned I am a newbie today?”
Both (1) by itself and the combination of (2) an (3) together, in rapid succession, cause disturbances in the Force.
Here, we get a sense that choie is already quite comfortable with the mafia setting, as she remembers very well the details of situations in other games. Although not firsthand experience, this means choie is deceptively experienced at this game already, through watching it.
Which doesn’t mesh well with the “this is over my head” streak she’s playing up.
These questions feel like acting. I don’t believe they’re real.
Snrubbing.
Self-criticism feels like an attempt to ward off criticism from others; a defense mechanism. Not an indicator one way or the other, but obviously a tactic she’s familiar with.
“I’m too inexperienced to recognize…”
Does not mesh with her vast experience as a spectator.
“Experience as a spectator” = Doesn’t sound logical? Think about it. People watching baseball or football on TV who have never played the game have lots of “spectating” experience. They feel very confident to shout out words of criticism at the screen or at the players. They may not have experience coaching but while they’re a fan, they believe they know what is and is not smart play.
While choie’s point that she’s new warrants some leeway, she’s playing this card too much, especially when juxtaposed with her obviously keen interest in the game and reading of older games.
See, these are the sorts of comments and analysis you’re not going to see from folks who are truly unfamiliar.
Is this roleplaying?
It does not feel genuine. The last sentence smacks of acting in the extreme. Read it again and again, and tell me if that sounds like something you’d say without acting it.
choie is stating what she’s feeling in a manner that doesn’t make me believe she’s really feeling it.
This feels like more of the same sort of announcing what you’re feeling. Does not ring genuine.
The point. choie is not exactly new to the chess game.
I have a feeling like she’s like someone who has studied books and books and books and then came to the board going “what’s castling?”, then going “Well, in the Spassky-Fischer match of year XXXX, Fischer did a variation known as…”
You ever feel like someone is letting you win at pool and then says “let’s make it interesting”? It’s a trap. This all sounds like playing at inexperience because she can get away with it.
Mmm, again I pick up the same theme here. She’s defending Jan, then states what her reaction was to Romanic’s post “this made me double-take”, obviously confident enough to defend a player and look at another one oddly, but seems to be pretending that if no one else does similar actions, she would not be confident enough to make a fuss.
I don’t get that sense. I feel that’s a pretense and an act. Not even an act, so much as a statement of an act. Message too long, split into part II
I see Weedy’s post. I’m sorry you “hope I’m Scum.” :mad: This is about my 6th game so I can’t claim “newbie” anymore, but if that self-preservation vote is anti-Town when I know I’m Town and know SJ is either Scum or Vanilla, I hope someone can explain to me why. And I still think that Ed’s last-halfhour vote, with many players presumably off-line, is the “moral equivalent” of a last-minute vote.
Questions also seem to be a play at reinforcing the idea that she has no idea of what’s going on, they do not feel interrogative but more rhetorical.
Here’s a problem.
choie is claiming th be lost and confused. But here, concluding that Jan claimed NPC mage instead of the publicly quoted NPC townsperson role.
Why would a scum do that to avoid suspicion? That doesn’t seem like a very good strategy. It’s also not an intuitive leap for someone to make.
I don’t buy this suspicion is real, especially the way it’s being phrased, like a statement, like all the other statements of emotion, which at this point, you’d have to figure a person experiencing these kinds of emotional states so rapidly in a forum game they’re unfamiliar with… you’d maybe conclude that they have a total lack of control in their emotional state, or that they’re acting.
The internets are no place to diagnose RL personality quirks, as it can be very difficult. However, I think it’s a fair theory that these emotions are fake as hell.
Takes too many positions. Says things can be one way, or the other. A bit unnatural if done excessively.
Comment at Jan felt rather self-conscious. What’s odd is that not many have actually called choie out on this but there is still a pre-emptive defense.
A rather large post to quote. Here, things I noted that seemed off were that she seems to love mentioning that everything is over her head.
This is later followed up with a suggestion for “townie members” of her team to tone things down, mentioning Pizza, Normal, Ed.
Because that’s what you do in an unfamiliar, confusing environment, right?
Think to yourself. Your first day on the job as a ________ fill in the blank. Your boss explains the rules, and introduces you to your co-workers.
Your first reaction is to tell your new co-workers what they should change about themselves.
No it isn’t.
I’m finding choie to be a bit of an Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer here. Your mafia world frightens and confuses me, but I do know one thing. My client is entitled to no less than one million dollars in compensatory damages.
And one million in punitive damages.
Look also at another pre-emptive defense. “I’m going to get dinged for this…”
Doesn’t feel natural at all.
We’re assuming what scums would do in certain situations, then asking if that’s not the only way of looking at it. Not genuine.
Characterization of Normal Phase as quick to dismiss, hurriedly making a claim, which seems “very, very” unusual… at least according to what I’ve read…
Goes against all good strategy…
I can’t reconcile these two thought streams. There’s one that is thinking hard about strategy, being skeptical, and analyzing things as being odd or scummy “unusual” “hurriedly”, “against all strategy”. Then, there’s another thought stream which goes “is that right? Could there be another strategy?” and “According to what I’ve read”.
They don’t jive. The act is conflicting with what choie wants to say, but she’s saying what she wants to say while acting and they don’t mix well together and it is noticeable.
Tonal shifting:
Starts out very interrogative, accusatory, against the person she’s voting for and questioning.
Second part, goes into a defensive posture; unsound or wrong reasoning isn’t necessarily scummy. Sort of asking for proof that she’s being deceptive here.
I find that kind of a knee-jerk reaction in some folks who haven’t had many chances to defend themselves from accusations; basically point out that the case isn’t crushingly strong and that it doesn’t prove anything, then inviting their accuser to show better proof.
It’s just a tactic I find so familiar. Then the tone shifts to “meh”.
That’s too much tonal shifting in such a short time frame. Much like the emotional display that seems also like forced acting. You don’t go from aggressive to defensive to apathetic in the span of a minute.
choie is hiding something and masking it with false emotional states.
Snrubbing.
Feels the need to pre-empt attacks of hypocrisy by stating right away that she’s guilty of the same behavior, but gives an excuse to ward it off.
It seems like every post choie makes is an attempt to make it clear that she’s over her head and naive, but she’s also decisively pre-empting any avenues of criticism as if that’s her number one priority.
Forgive me, but number one priority of townies is to find, accuse, vote for, and lynch, scumbags. Her priorities are askew and she’s faking it.
I don’t think she’s the sweet flaky neophyte she’s pretending to be indeed.
Choie is obviously both aware of what’s happening between ATPG and septimus, and able to exist happily in her own little world here with Jan and the others she’s talking to. It’s not a problem at all… but at the same time, it’s a huge distraction, she says.
Feels like acting, says Pizza.
That last bit is typical of one playing a part of new and naive. “Can you help me? Can you talk me through it?”
“In short, call me scum if you must, but do not tar me with the OMGUS brush.” And the statements preceding it. Instead of questioning TexCat on his error, the reaction is to warn against saying such things. It just doesn’t feel like the right reaction.
“Nah, that was just me roleplaying. I’ve been kvetching about the lack of color here and I’m trying to add a dash of flavor.”
Doesn’t feel like the sort of thing that would be high on a new player’s mind who is “kvetching” about being confused and arguments made over her head.
Wants it to be more confusing by having people speak in character? Nah, doesn’t feel like a real desire, because that doesn’t follow from what she’s established herself to be.
Have I mentioned I’m a newbie today? Apologetic, apologetic, apologetic. Basically just stating straight out “I’m an overly apologetic newbie”.
This is a tactic. It is a way of warding off criticism by simply agreeing with it and playing at vulnerability. It’s sort of like bambi eyes or playing dead. It’s calculated.
Lots of stressed words and italics.
Perish the thought. There could be a dark side to choie?
From my notes: choie apologetic after Jan lynch, defends septimus(?), snrubs Plankton about Pizza. 863
The reaction about septimus feels like perfect information syndrome.
This part takes two positions, and goes for a HIGHLY unusual play for a newbie townie, which is to defend septimus here.
This tells me choie maybe knows septimus is a wrong lynch but is pretending not to know that, while still attacking reasons why septimus could be evil.
You see why it is wrong is because experience would suggest that the literal last minute save is a very strong indicator of scum. And many diverse personalities agree on that.
“They’re all very experienced and seem to know what they’re talking about, so now I’m finding myself being swayed by their certainty.”
AND THEN, goes directly into what amounts to a “but”.
A newbie player, who finds things to be way above her head simultaneously going:
Well, I’m swayed by their experience and certainty
But, maybe that thing lots of people agree is scummy might just be a townie reaction. I sure would, yadda yadda.
No. I’d imagine being confused as to why it is scummy, and I’d also imagine being swayed by experience or the crowd’s certainty, but I am not seeing both happening at once from a new player who continually apologizes for everything, while playing the naive card.
This is someone playing at naivete while also revealing perfect information syndrome, while also sitting on the fence.
The duality of thought is too much, most of these posts take two stands on things, or have two or more emotional states, or pretends to be two different people.
I cannot reconcile the two choies.
Egregious Snrubbing.
The lecturing tone doesn’t fit an inexperienced player, the exclamations don’t match a timid player, and the fact that choie has been able to play this game just fine without Pizza’s antics really interfering, suddenly agrees with someone that I’m wasting other people’s time and being distracting.
Not genuine. None of what I did stopped choie or others from going about their play. Choie also didn’t have nearly as much problem with it at the time. The reaction is delayed, and it is Snrub-level agreeing. And it is out of character for the character choie is playing. http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14053534&postcount=869
Massive Snrub towards Normal Phase, followed by excessive exaggeration and echoing/intensifying of others’ sentiments, followed by a BAFFLING suggestion that Plankton was not arguing for my death. He very clearly was and I demonstrated why before, and immediately after this post.
Nonsense and bovine fece-ry. After straddling the line on the subject of Pizza choie comes down hard on a really odd set of points, both inaccurate and inconsistent with her own reactions so far this game.
It’s lying and being late to the wagon on Pizza when it is politically popular to do so, but not only so, but by going further than anyone else, and in a way I can’t reconcile as being honest in any way shape or form.
I was caught quite off-guard by the hostility, but also how completely out of whack it was. It seemed to be breaking character and without real justification.
Not only that, choie completely ignored everything else I had to say, and I had a lot of things to say which, IMO, should have and would have normally provoked the same sort of reaction she gave to Normal, but this was overshadowed by a sharpness that didn’t belong, which didn’t make real sense, which was based on a reaction to something that’s really hard to argue against.
So many things add up, but what’s really pushing my pepperonis completely off my slice is the fact that she went “experienced players seem certain on septimus, BUT…”
After the game she’s played. Her dual personality, dual voice, dual thought streams, dual stances, it all adds up to a massive contradiction. Deception, exaggeration, feints, concerted tactics. Overly defensive, and the emotion and the aggression feels all wrong.
That’s my analysis of choie. I think it’s clear why septimus was behaving the way he did… he’s either scum or he’s trying to preserve his life. But even that last second save doesn’t yield scum in as many instances as the duality I see in choie. vote: choie
You guys have a much smaller character limit than I’m used to. I should have edited those quotes a bit more, but I was trying to preserve as much content as I could.
Sorry, I did not mean that personally. Just that it would be less than great to have the Doc and the Cop both outed already. Instead I see you have claimed something else entirely, which I will have to think through, along with ATPG’s case on choie, which is kinda massive.
ATPG, can you give me a Cliff notes version? You think she is not actually a newbie, or she is playing up her newbie status excessively to … I got lost, at this point. Attack you?
No, the point behind it is not to attack, but to defend.
choie’s performance is specifically designed to do the following:
Present herself as less of a threat due to her real inexperience, and her portrayed inexperience
Dissuade criticism by agreeing with it, apologizing profusely, and providing the same one or two excuses.
Pre-empt criticism from happening
Distance herself from any true emotional state
In particular, there are some points which are more revealing than others. I get a sense she knew septimus was a wrong lynch beforehand (if this is in fact the case) and was following a particularly fence-sitting bit of acting while showing that point, breaking pattern for a new player by directly challenging what experience says about last minute votes, in a situation which has a not-controversial agreement on that kind of thing, but trying to avoid looking like she knew in advance anyway by fence-sitting.
The overall theme is the duality. It’s not one person in choie, its two. At least one of them is fake. As such, without a darned good convincing reason to believe otherwise, I’ll assume choie is putting on an act and playing at naivete to last longer, which suggests real nervousness at death. Especially when she got voted here or there, and her relief at the pressure disappearing.
It’s by no means ironclad, but if I had to go with a profile-based case on someone (and I do, lacking other means) choie sticks out. But only under examination. The blending in and deflection of criticism, as well as other events, had put her in my blind spot beforehand.
She’s worth a re-read. Ignore everything I just said, even think I’m scummy if you like. Play her defense lawyer if you like. But look at her posts, and tell me whether you think she’s on the level. I do not.
@ **Septimus **and his reveal
It was the only other plausible reason for your move. Did not seem vanilla to me. I wouldn’t have thought it *likely *were it not for the literal last minute thing, plus the refusal to explain.
Now, that’s a somewhat plausible excuse. I’m not saying you shouldn’t still die for it to make sure.
In fact, you’ve now made it perfectly clear the only way you’ll die is via a lynch. That puts the pressure on folks to determine cold whether you’re bulletproof or scum. That’s a hard choice. I really wish the cop could scan you to be sure. What would really help my assessment of you is your response to the question of 4 suspects. I gotta know you’ve actually been scumhunting this whole time.
I’m perfectly willing to challenge my earlier assessment of you, but you are a risk. You won’t be picked off by scum if you’re scum, and you won’t be picked off as scum if you’re bulletproof. Essentially, you’ll either face the lynch or likely survive the game. I’d like to decide which way you fall while there’s still attention and suspicion on you, as people do tend to be forgetful or apathetic after failed lynch attempts.
I still have to explain what the scum were doing while this all went down. I gotta see the whole picture. And I gotta see your suspects, and that’s for you to tell me.
No rush at all. And feel free to re-read anyone here and offer counter-examples of things which may be off.
The proposed case on choie may not be the best possible case; let’s see alternatives. I think septimus is a great *default *lynch due to the fact that he’s only ever going to die by the lynch and acted scummy. I’d also like to decide conclusively should he live or die now, not be a nagging threat in the endgame.
But I think today does not have to be a foregone conclusion on septimus. We have time, let’s put our best cases forward. And dude on the chopping block especially; at least convert a bad lynch of a bulletproof into a next round good lynch of a Lord of Slaughter. Choose wisely.
Wow, Askthepizzaguy, that was fun. And bizarre. I’ve wondered what it’d be like to have my own posts analyzed the way others have. What a snivelling toadie I sound like, especially early on. However, before I start, I should mention that I find I can’t defend myself without mentioning that I’m a newbie so could I please get a pass from everyone who’s sick of my harping on that? So no “OMG shut the fuck up about your inexperience, choie!” related this post, please? That wouldn’t be cricket.
I think what’s bothering you is that we’re two antithetical Mafia personality types: you’re meta-analytical-aggressive-paranoid-experienced, and I’m emotional-apologetic-insecure-inexperienced. I think we’re destined to have different play preferences. Either that or if this were a romantic comedy we’d be at each other’s throats for the whole movie until the realization that we’re actually deeply in love.
Anyway, addressing the “she says she’s new but she’s clearly read lots of threads so why is she claiming ignorance OMG what the hell how could this be?” accusation: I just don’t see reading old threads as being true experience. You can read Moby Dick and Horatio Hornblower all you want, but if you go out on a boat for the first time, you damn well better accept that you’re no old salt and show due humility and respect to the experienced crewpeople, because otherwise you’ll get keel-hauled for putting the others in danger (and just for being an annoying pain in the ass wannabe). Or to put it another way, I’ve watched L.A. Law and Law and Order, and used to gobble up live CourtTV cases. Doesn’t make me ready to try my own case, and if I’m ever in that situation I may state some general ideas I’ve learned from the shows (especially the real cases from CourtTV), and hell, some of the strategy might even be sound, but I’d still be an absolute moron to go in without admitting my neophyteness, asking for advice and realizing just how different a real-life courtroom is.
One more analogy: watching porn doesn’t prepare a virgin for real-life sex. At least, I hope all y’all know that.
So yes. For me, playing the game is very, very different from watching it. It just is.
The dual personalities you’re seeing of choie are easily explained: part of me, the real-life part that is intrinsically, pathetically people-pleasing and insecure, uncertain of her talents and apologetic for breathing – that part is the one who doesn’t want to make a mistake in front of you guys, and even more important, doesn’t want to mess up everyone else’s good time. So she asks for a lot of clarifications and is polite and thanks people for being helpful, because that’s what you do in social interactions (I do it everywhere on the forum, not just in games), and she makes it clear that she knows her opinions aren’t facts, and she pre-emptively assumes people are gonna be annoyed by her ineptitude so she apologizes for it beforehand.
The second choie, the one who writes gruesome gothic romantic suspense novels and loves gibfest FPS shooters like “Just Cause 2” because it lets me get my pent-up aggressions out (and being such a wimpy insecure type, you damn right I have lots of pent-up aggression!) – that’s the part that enjoyed reading the old Mafia threads. That’s the part that tries to fit in and play the game the way I see others playing it, and to get past my innate wimphood because I really do have opinions of my own. Gleaned from past games, and also from my gut instincts. Mostly the latter.
To be frank, one of my opinions is that pizza’s style of play was making the game less fun (for me) to watch and play in. I’m sorry. So yes, I stated as much, and vociferously, because you seem to respond to that type of post. Probably because you are an awfully aggressive and melodramatic kinda player. Which is why it’s amusing that you were so taken aback by my own similar addressing of you, calling it “spittle-flecked.” (I mean, seriously? Someone who’s been openly demanding others’ deaths was so wounded by some heavy sarcasm? Talking about dishing it out but not taking it!)
Anyway, the other reason I responded to you the way I did – and this is also related to why I’ve repeated the newbie info so often – because to be honest, sometimes in the thread, I’ve felt like I’m on people’s Ignore list. I never believe people will remember, or take note, of stuff I say. This wasn’t helped when none of my questions (about the Mayor and the first-killed teacher, for example) were answered. Sure, the Mayor/teacher stuff was probably unimportant color. But I dunno, Astral and Mahaloth are taking the time to write this stuff, presumably for a reason, so I was trying to be useful and see if maybe they were hiding info that no one else was picking up on.
Speaking of which, the reason I was harping on the roleplaying part is because, well, I thought that was the theme of the game. My favorite parts of the Weird West and LOTR games were the theme-related parts, and I was assuming that a D&D roleplaying game would have relevant color. Some of the colorful bits that Astra added seemed purposeful to me: the extreme youth of the first-killed teacher, and the somewhat callous behavior on the part of the adventurers vs. the townspeople.
(Here’s the sort of color that I notice but probably doesn’t mean anything: how come the Mayor spoke up so firmly in Scathach’s defense, recognizing him instantly as a townie, yet when Silver Jan was brought before him, the Mayor didn’t reveal that he knew Jan? Doesn’t this guy know his own constituents, especially in a town with only 21 inhabitants? Yeesh! I can’t speak for the rest of the townies, but I know I ain’t gonna be voting this guy in for a second term!)
Finally to address pizza’s whole post, seems to me you’re not pointing out anything I’ve done that’s actually scummy. Inconsistent posting on my part (which I think is easily explained by my inexperience maybe, but have I done anything that’s anti-town? I don’t think I have, or at least, I certainly haven’t done so purposely. I guess the mislynches of Jan and Kelly count as anti-Town, so that’s in his favor. Oh wait, pizza also mentions my alleged perfect information about septimus. But that doesn’t make sense to me at all. If I had PIS about septimus (presumably because I’m scum and somehow knew he’s town w/some power role), why the hell wouldn’t I have kept my mouth shut and let the lynch roll forward? Wouldn’t it have been better for the scum to let a doc get lynched? The baddies try to lynch the power roles, don’t they? So assuming that’s we’re supposed to believe – that septimus is the town doc – a Scum choie would be joining the septimus bandwagon.
This Morning I’m really too confused to vote for anyone yet. I’ve been wrong twice and I’m not going to jump on any bandwagons because apparently my instincts aren’t working in the right direction. I’m certainly not gonna seek a retributive vote against you, pizza, though one could sorta see your own sudden turn against me as an OMGUS of its own. But in fairness, you’ve done a lot of analysis and that doesn’t fit the OMGUS pattern as I understand it. I actually do understand why my posts aren’t making sense to you. They’re the work of a shy person who’s trying to be a good player and fit into the game dynamic of better, or certainly more confident, players.
Well, anyway, this is my initial defense. Yep, it’s haphazard, emotional, apologetic, somewhat snarky, curious, and rambling. In other words, status quo.
I remembered: I was thinking scotsman, not bulletproof. The same “let yourself be lynched” argument doesn’t apply for the latter as for the former. I still have WIFOM-y issues with the scum killing Special Ed over you if you’re not scum, given they must know you’re a power role in that case, and must have considered vig or (non-self-protecting) doc as possibilities. (Or attacked Lightfoot.) And I have issues with your initial explanation this morning, as described above.
Under different circumstances I would probably just let you slide a day or two and concentrate on other things (like finding whoever’s blocking Lightfoot) – but I think it’s possible that you ARE the person blocking Lightfoot. So I still don’t know.
I find it interesting that I was blocked and not killed
1 Scum have a roleblocker and felt confident blocking me and shooting blind?
in my limited experience with power roles this makes no sense to me why didn’t they just kill me?*
2 Scum figured I’d be protected so they shot blind?
which would lead me to believe that we do have paranoid doc and that is what blocked me?*
3 The player I chose to investigate has some sort of power that blocked me?
**Askthepizzaguy’s **case on **choie **is worth a closer look. I had similar feelings about her on Day 2, and had voted her at one time, but I later decided it wa no longer worthy of a vote. I need to go back and figure out why I thought that.
Regarding Septimus’ claim, I’d call his role ‘Scotsman’ rather than ‘Bulletproof’. I’ll admit I hadn’t considered that as a possibilty when he was hinting at his role. I find his late action less justifiable given his current claim than I did when I thought he was claiming a more ‘active’ Power.
In my experience a scotsman is immune to one kill attempt, be it a night action or a lynch. I would think it weird for someone to claim scotsman but only be protected against a night action.
If the scum aren’t particularly worried that a detective will find them via game thread means, they’re just as well off to block the detective and go after other players who seem more dangerous to them from an analytical point of view.
I’d guess a combination of 1 and 2, assuming you yourself are being truthful, but I don’t think that a Paranoid Doc is necessarily implied. If the Scum have a Roleblocker, then it makes perfect sense they would assume you are being protected, block you, and shoot for the Doc elsewhere. In my experience, a Scum Roleblocker is more common than a Paranoid Doc.
I guess it would be some sort of ‘limited Scotsman’ then. I’ve seen a fair variety of ‘kill-immune’ related roles, so I don’t find the role itself to be hard to swallow.
which is fine by me. Don’t care, all I ask is that you guys take a look at this and tell me what you see. In all honesty, I was going to avoid and let things cool down for a bit. It was only that I got to choie’s name after working from the bottom of the list upwards and was summarizing each post in my notes, when things started gnawing at my gut in the worst way.