There are any number of reasons why someone might have tried to kill you. Perhaps it was to purposely put suspicion on anyone who you voted for yesterDay (which seems to have worked on you) or it could just be that someone else thought you were a good player and wanted you dead. Or maybe we have a town vig who tried to kill you because he/she thought you were not town.
I’m not sure why you are mentioning any defense of Oy! or NAF. Do you think that’s some reason for you to be a target?
I’m a little surprised by this post. You usually have more analysis in your posts and this one just seems like a huge smudge against OAOW, Drain Bead,Telecontar and Mrs. McGinty.
One and Only Wanderers – 1 vote – Total Lost (1279)
I know I owe several of you responses to various questions, requests, and issues. I promise to address all of them today; if you don’ t get a response to me today then re-PM me with a reminder.
Yes, remove my vote for Telcontar. Also, I voted peeker before that post #, though I forgot to unvote. For “analysis” purposes, though, I voted slightly earlier.
I don’t have time – I’ve had relatives over the last few days and have only been able to minimally keep track of what’s going on. I’m bringing them to the train station shortly and will have this afternoon as normal, but it’s going to be a while before I have my feet under me again after such a long break, particularly as I am in two games.
As regards Oy and NAF, no, I don’t think that’s related to why I was targeted; I only mentioned it because I was thinking on my day one interactions anyway.
Regarding the rest –
I categorically reject the idea that I might have been attacked to lend support to my arguments against any of the four named players. Scum in that case would be better off leaving me alive to follow up on my misguided ideas, so that they themselves do not have to expose themselves by promoting the concept. In all my times playing scum, I have never killed anyone to frame another in such a manner in a situation/game like this, nor have I had a teammate suggest it. It’s not plausible as a motivation.
Town vig? For real? Would have to be the most oddball vig in existence, then. I think neither MHaye nor I were vig kills/attempts.
Good player? Sure. Or whoever attacked me might have chucked darts at a dartboard for all I know. That’s why it’s only a small mark against the four. I can’t be sure. But I refuse to ignore it and pretend it’s not there.
This is no smudge. Your post, on the other hand, looks like one big attempt to discredit me and/or my logic regarding the four named players.
Separately on peeker – although I rate the strength of each individual piece of evidence almost backwards from what Guiri does a few posts back, I do agree with the conclusion that peeker is suspicious.
How can you be so sure? It seems like your response here is that “scum would never do that” which I think we all know by now isn’t always valid.
Why is it so outrageous that a vig would kill you or MHaye?
If someone is “just throwing darts”, why would it not be the vig?
And yes, my post is an attempt to discredit you. That’s why I posted it in the first place. I think you are trying to use the (alleged) attempt on your life to further your cases against others. We do not even know if what you are telling us is true nor how you could even come to know that in the first place.
I’ve been thinking about this **peeker **situation. I think that there is a possibility that he was just confused but the fact that he has not come back with any defense other than that he doesn’t have the book (but really - what else could he say?) makes me think he did slip.
To me (and I’ve read it over and over again) it looked like peeker just posting without thinking. Somehow that kind of behavior from him doesn’t make me think he’s scum.
So my gut is telling me that he could have made an honest mistake. Read a post from idle and then thinking it was made by NAF. Writing without checking.
However - the lack of defense and the strange explanation seems very unlike peeker. But could be related to him being busy IRL.
I’m running out of computer-time for now. And I’d like to hear from peeker before trying to figure out what’s going on with him.
But there isn’t any scum motivation for the lie either. Lack of town motivation and lack of scum motivation to me implies that the lie is not a lie but an error. Seriously, what’s the theory here? Peeker knew NAF didn’t have the book…when NAF claims to still have the book. I can see “both peeker and NAF are scum”, then peeker is misunderstanding NAF’s book related deceptions and Ed’s snark was right; peeker read it on the scum board. I can see “peeker is town and wasn’t reading carefully before posting”, that’s classic peeker. I can’t see “peeker is scum and somehow had preknowledge of the theft/loss from town NAF”. So, why is town comfortably with lynching peeker when it seems much more comfortable with NAF? I see a clear link. Also, under what theory is NAF voting peeker?
NAF: If you think peeker is the one who took the book, then don’t you’d think it would be really salient to him that he didn’t yet have it? That’s quite the stretch. In games when i’ve had night actions, I’ve always feared that they would fail. Since you had the book, you went into last night with a giant “target me!!!” sign. Frankly, I’m surprised that a hostile night action targeted at you succeeded (assuming this wasn’t just a side effect of your spell).
My top suspicion is still idle, because I’m not convinced that this peeker business is all the different from the oredigger and romanic trains. I mean, we’re bound to be right eventually if we keep shooting at random, but i rather target strategic behavior then another “PIS! PIS!”. Also idle’s continued defense of himself is “I changed my mind, so what” which i find less then persuasive. It’s far enough into the day that I’ll place a vote:
heebus pleebus, finally first in a popularity contest that i really don’t want to win.
hey, i misread naf’s 1095 post. i guess this will be another case of niller town getting it in the neck because of punctuation or gender or some such nonsense that this board likes to engage in. i mean i really thought that roman’s post was whoops. but shit if it had been based on something spurious i would have gotten away from that quickly. matter of fact i would have expected that someone bringing it up would get some serious scrutiny.
hey, i have been busy and have not spent as much time on this game as others in the past. if you want to use rl to crucify someone that’s your fucking problem (plus two other games at the same time doesn’t help).
mcginty has lied about what he/she said (can someone please clarify this for me - the gender thing not the obvious lies). he/she also made the case against her/him self that i merely pointed out. and now she/he gets a burr in her/his saddle for me for merely quoting.
and i just have to add, my lynch based on a freaking mis undertstanding of a post that was already out there is just horrible. i mean do what you will, because i know that not everyone voting for me is scum. but look at who drove this fucker and then as town you can kick yourself in the collective ass for being led around by the nose. that’s why scum win so often on this fracking board. fucking lemming mentality.
oh, unless you look at lotr where yours truly kept the fucking thing in town’s ballpark.
I’m a bit alarmed by how quickly this case has taken off. It may be just because Diver laid it out in a clear and easy to follow manner, but we went from relatively sparse voting to a full on bandwagon pretty quickly. More to the point, I’m not convinced that the initial slip/lie/PIS is anything other than thoughtless play.
The key points are that a) peeker said he thought he’d seen NAF say he didn’t have the book anymore and b) peeker attributed this to misreading Idle, then to misreading NAF.
One explanation: Peeker really did think NAF had said he didn’t have the book. He really did think this because he was skimming, and picked up that impression from both Idle and NAF.
The explanation people are voting for: peeker knew that NAF didn’t have the book, or was going to say he didn’t have the book, either because NAF had told him this in the Scum thread or because peeker (or one of his teammates) stole the book. Knowing that NAF either didn’t have the book or was going to claim not to have it, peeker reads some discussion about what NAF should do with the book and gets confused. So he immediately posts to this effect, saying that he thought NAF had said he didn’t have it. Then he waits a bit, and posts that he misinterpreted Idle. Then when he starts to get some heat, he decides it’ll be better to claim that he misinterpreted NAF.
I know this is predicated on peeker making a slip, but I don’t see how anyone who had just hatched a dastardly plan concerning the book would go on to make a clumsy, PIS comment at the very beginning of the Day, just as the plan goes into action. I think it’s much more likely that what we’ve seen is just the result of skimming.
More in a second - there’s something I need to look up…
I am happy to leave my vote on NAF. I thought he was suspicious for his wanting to hold on the book and still think he is suspicious for it. Idle’s logic regarding NAF seems to baffle me. But I agree that peeker looks bad. I thought his original halucination was easily explained by Idle’s post, but then when he went back to 1095?? It started looking more like a scum trying to explain away a slip.
OK, NAF has said that peeker’s response to Oy!'s outing marked him as non-vanilla in his eyes. Given that peeker has now claimed vanilla, I wondered if there was anything in this, so here’s peeker’s response to Oy!'s outing:
Now, I think that I see why NAF thinks he’s not vanilla, but at the same time I’m not sure I agree. Rather than get into a tangle arguing with myself, can NAF or anyone else point out where peeker indicates he’s not vanilla.
NB The only reason I’m bringing this up is that peeker has (I think) claimed vanilla. At this point, if we’ve got any evidence that he’s not, it becomes material.
Wow. That’s an…intesting bandwagon. I’m not understanding it in the least though.
Peeker’s supposed “slip” came during the Night. What exactly are the people voting for him assuming? That he’s scum and planned to steal the book from Naf and somehow slipped and said that Naf didn’t have the book before the event even occurred? Or maybe that the stealing was a special action that took place right away? But if that’s the case, why didn’t Naf mention he had lost the book before Day started? Or maybe, I see a few bring this up, Naf is scum with peeker, and Naf mentioned losing the book on the scum board. Again though, the original interchange that caused all the brewhaha occurred during the Night. So once again we have to assume the steal action, whatever it is, occurred during the Night and resolved before the Dawn. I guess I can kinda see it if Naf is scum and planned to hand the book off and peeker misunderstood/misposted it. But then why make the post about Idle right away? This just strikes me as far more likely to be a skim/misunderstanding than a scum slip. And it’s disturbing how many people just jumped all over it. Clearly it’s not all scum doing so, but it sure does smack of lazy Town.
My feeling is that it is not possible for a vanilla townie to have posted this
Which was posted with the clear intent to discredit Diggers vanilla claim, because it wasn’t generic.
I am going to repeat that it is plainly impossible for anyone who is vanilla town to hold the opinion that every vanilla player has the same generic description.
This is why I am positive that DB isn’t vanilla town. The sticking point is that peek may just not have been paying attention to what way going on, going by the way that post was phrased. I still lean toward not vanilla town rather than not paying attention, but it’s less of a slam dunk.
I think that you guys are missing the rather critical point that peeker has changed his story on the matter. First he said that he had misinterpreted Idle’s post, but later on he said that he’d misinterpreted one of NAF’s posts. That, to me, is the critical part of the case. One of those two statements cannot be true.
That’s the crux of it for me as well. Peeker’s narrative doesn’t fit well as a legitimate misread because he’s pointed at two different posts made by two different people at two different times as the source of his confusion.
What? I’m asking why you thought peek was not vanilla town. Not Oy!, not DB. You voted for peek partly because you thought he wasn’t vanilla. Why did you think that?
I’m sorry, I thought I was clear. Let me try again.
If someone thinks that what Oy! posted was an innocent question then they did not receive a vanilla PM or they were really really really not paying attention to the context of what was going on in the game.
Peeker falls into the catagory of people who stated that they thought that a vanilla townie could have wondered if vanilla town wasn’t generic. So he is either not vanilla town or he has not been paying any attention at all.
My problem is that there is a real possibility that he just wasn’t paying *any *attention, so it is not as slam dunk that he is not vanilla town as it is with other players like Drain Bead. But to counteract that, peek usually pays fairly close attention to these sorts of things when he is town, and only gets all quite an avoiding of conflict when he is scum.