Which actions? Why? If you think he’s scummy, you want lots of us to vote for him. So give us good reason.
Not exactly. I got a bit of a feeling of cautiousness from you about Astral early on. Here’s your two posts from that early period: at this point Astral has already been caught forgetting his alignment, and has suspicion and a few votes on him stemming from that.
I wondered if the second comment might have been a scummy you fishing for the likelihood of Astral himself being third party, to see whether you might be able to bandwagon a non-scum Astral for the reasons given, and still be “right”.
I want to post your history on Astral and gnarly on day one in full; that’s up next when I get the chance.
I was reading through everything that Inner has posted because Stanislaus had intrigued me with his post. At the end of night one it has** Inner** voting for Sister Coyote. I can’t find an unvote for **Astral **or a vote for SisC.
Am I just going mad or has the** Mod** just made a mistake and why hasn’t** Inner** pointed it out or have I made a mistake.
If anyone can shed some light on this I would be very interested.
OOG I haven’t been posting a lot cos I have bronchitis and I feel like death warmed up, well not even warmed up really /OOG
OH ok, fair enough I suppose, just note that I did unvote both although the way gnarly voted for himself, I should have kept my vote on him. You read more into my posts than I do, I hadn’t even thought of it like that.
Silver Jane, here is the Night post. I think maybe you were looking at a different one. Inner Stickler voted for Astral in post 492
I don’t know what to think today. I can’t see much in the voting patterns. The votes on Astral and fubbleskag all look reasonable to me, but I’m not sure what to look for. The votes on Pleonast are a different story, but I’m not sure what to make of them.
Jan, not Jane, sorry.
Are you voting gnarly now?
You unvotes are actually my biggest issue with your day one posts, the reasons for them, that is.
Sorry guys, do not have the brain-cycles to spare from work to really dig into anything; will attempt to do another couple long posts on the weekend.
Responding tothis post (I butchered the quoting; Sorry)
Normal Phase, I’m interested in seeing what you have to say about this, but I would ask that if you are going to make a case that is based on some time/post-sensitive (i.e. in context) that you include post numbers or links to the original post if possible. I think it will just make it easier for the rest of us to follow.
[Quote=Silver Jan]
Thanks Stanislaus, it was a question that I had asked quite early on day 1, mainly for something to talk about but Normal wanted an answer as to why I had asked it. I think he was wondering why I brought it up first when in fact, I hadn’t.
[/quote]
[Quote=Silver Jan]
So, I am confused already, my usual state in these games. This is the first time I have played a closed game. I also thought that Raftdwelling Slumlords was a scummy sounding name, although I don’t think I would have forgotten it.
[/quote]
[Quote=Silver Jan]
It just worries me that Astral could forget his alignment and is it possible that there is a third faction? Ok, to my answer my own question, it is possible but is it likely?
[/quote]
[QUOTE=Normal Phase]
I wondered if the second comment might have been a scummy you fishing for the likelihood of Astral himself being third party, to see whether you might be able to bandwagon a non-scum Astral for the reasons given, and still be “right”.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Normal Phase]
I want to post your history on Astral and gnarly on day one in full; that’s up next when I get the chance.
[/QUOTE]
I drafted the last post and this one as a single post, but it didn’t scan well so I cut it in two…
In the mean-time I’m going to re-submit my vote for Pleonast.
Vote Pleonast
My reason for this vote is the same as yesterday: a soft claim that I perceive as magic bagging, followed by a really, really lame response when challenged on it (claim was for scum consumption, town should disregard the claim entirely)
Pleao said “Scum must decide if I’m telling the truth or not” but town must decide as well. I can see no pro-town reason for a claim of this sort, followed by the unreasoned responses and lack of responses.
Special Ed made some fairly pointed questions which Pleo basically blew off. Ed went about his own search to determine Pleo’s claim history but the results seemed inconclusive.
Ed was working out his analysis but unfortunately isn’t here today to present the results.
Decolored by me.
I would apply the same logic to you, Pleonast. You’re chastizing gnarlycharlie for voting for himself telling him what townies need to do, but you didn’t actually make a case for gnarlycharlie being scum. Or, as far as I can see, even seem to believe that he is scum, unless you’re being intentionally unclear. Good for the goose, good for the gander, et cetera.
vote Pleonast
More or less the same rationale as yesterday (post 356), plus the above. I don’t like his claim, I don’t like being told to ignore what he said and I don’t like his lack of substantial commentary about this very serious issue.
I’ll weigh in a finger of suspicion on Inner Stickler too, but to me the Pleonast issue is more pressing. I need a good explanation as to why the claim was made.
He won’t give you one.
Right now, I’m finding the case on Inner more compelling than the case on Pleo, though I do find Pleo’s vote on Charlie problematic.
Vote Inner Stickler
In other news, I’ve stretched myself a bit thin between this game, my Alice game (which may be coming to a close) and the May Mini on Giraffe, so sorry for my low levels of participation.
You come out of lurking with this?
What?
Pleo makes a half-assed claim, won’t back it up, justify it or explain himself, and you pop in and give him a free pass?
Oh, and you find a more compelling case on Inner Stickler?
What case?
Also, you’re telling us you’re just lurking because you’re busy playing other games?
Is this some kind of joke?
Pleo always makes half-assed claims, and never backs it up, justifies it, or explains himself. I’m not giving him a free pass, I’m saying that overall I find that to be a null tell.
And no, I’m not just lurking because I’m playing other games. I’m just lurking because between my 40-hr work week, the game I’m moderating, and classes I’m stretched a little thin at the moment and haven’t been able to give this game as much attention as I’d usually like.
Specifically, I am referring to stanislaus’ case on IS, and my own quick perusal of IS’s posts which seem to back that case up; Inner seems to be hiding in plain sight and I find that problematic behavior at best.
SisC, are you talking about the Stanislaus case on Inner?
Sorry, should have previewed.
@ Weedy, thanks, I was reading the entire vote count thing wrong, my mistake (sorry no wine to blame on this one lol) If anyone wants to ask how I was reading it, I can explain but it will take a longer post :smack:
I’m going back over final votes on known townies, in the hopes of finding a scum motivation. So far, that’s the seven votes on fubbleskag.
nesta, 523: presents a pro-town case on fub, which is something we want to encourage.
Pleonast, 530: simple, follow-on vote. Judge for yourself.
Tom Scud, 583: vote for same reason as nesta.
special ed, 603: another follow-on vote.
Silver Jan, 624: slight variation from others, voting because of Astral’s strong defense.
Weedy, 626: yet another follow-on vote.
TexCat, 645: slight variation; because of moderator clarification, the pm order is not a determining factor.
In summary: not much information to be gained from these votes. I expect one or two of these voters is scum, simply because it’s easy to make a “me-too” vote when several townies already have. But I don’t see any way to differentiate among the votes at this point.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
In the interest of being explicit, can you restate or summarize your reasons for your vote?
Why are you asking that?
My plan is to lynch Astral on Day Four unless they’ve reported a scum. Other information by then might change the plan, like a dead scum blocker or a revealed investigator.
I’m not going to change my vote because of it, but this is a good case you make.
While I agree with you that Mahaloth’s argument is not convincing at all, there’s nothing wrong with an argument being semantic. Scum look at the game from a different perspective and sometimes lie. That means semantics can be important.
You are misinterpreting me. I am not stating a hard and fast rule. Note my conclusion: “I think charlie is likely scum” (emphasis added).
Also note that I am not voting for gnarlycharlie because they are not voting for scum. I am voting for them because they are voting for a player they do not think is scum. charlie has not expressed any reason for why they think their vote is on scum. That is why my vote.
While ed might have been killed because of their unfinished examination of me, I think I know why. And since this could have important ramifications, I’m going to describe it.
and
I think vanilla town players all got the same ordering in their role pm. I suspect other players got a variety of orderings. I suggest our town power roles consider this information.
And just to be explicit, you think all that means I’m likely to be scum?
Sorry for being unclear, I hope my responses to Stanislaus clarify it.
And again, to be explicit, you think all that means I’m likely to be scum?
Yes, Pleonast, to be explicit, I think you are scum and that is why I’m voting for you.
That does not address the question I asked: do you think I’m scum because of the reasons you stated previously?
This might seem pedantic, but players need to be clear about why they think someone is scum. It helps townies to evaluate motivations. So far, you’ve stated reasons for voting for me. And you’ve stated you think I’m scum. Now, please, connect the two.