OK, so **peeker **is a Mason again? This is getting to be quite the trend now…
Of course, there is absolutely no way for **Astral **to confirm this before Dusk, so that throws a small wrench in the proceedings…
And since peeker has still failed to address his bizzare behavior earlier, and hasn’t unvoted me despite the fact that his case against me requires that either **sachertorte **or I are time-travelers, I’m letting my vote stand.
netata: and sorry astral i probably sealed your doom. since scum will most likely want you out of the way since you will be confirmed upon my death. the only way it plays out good is if i don’t get lynched (sorry sach it’s just how i term things regardless of color). if i don’t get lynched then your ass is probably otay because killing you confirms me. but from the land of lamb tenders i am just not so sure.
How big is the wrench?
Let’s say Astral doesn’t confirm that he too is a mason and a scummy Peeker can travel. What happens?
Wellington Night 1/London Day 2 - peeker submits request to travel
Wellington Day 2/London Night 2- peeker is in transit
Wellington Night 2/London Day 3 - peeker arrives at Dawn, is lynched at dusk
This claim is a pretty good way to buy time. Hmm, I need to feed the babies.
when i voted for you i felt there were some inconsistencies between the whole voluntary v unvoluntary travel thing. so you are correct i should have down this a couple hours earlier.
unvote plankton
<snipped>
HOLY FUCK you want to lynch a mason?
vote plankton
@Guiri,
The wrench is huge Today…normally a Mason claim can be more or less immediately confirmed or countered, but in this case that is impossible. So the question becomes whether we let **peeker **off the hook and wait for dawn to break in London, or not?
I admit that my vote at the moment sounds a bit like OMGUS, and it may well be, but I still think peeker has some things to answer for, which he has steadfastly refused to do.
On preview, after seeing peeker’s unvote/revote, I have this to say:
There were absolutely no “inconsistencies between the whole voluntary v unvoluntary travel thing”. You were the only person who claims to have seen them, and even after several players beat you about your virtual head and shoulders you refused to see reason. It looks to me like you came out with your claim, it didn’t get everybody off your back like you thought it would, so now you’ve finally decided to remove your idiotic vote, which is what got you in trouble in the first place.
You know, if you’d unvoted me earlier, you wouldn’t have needed to claim anything in the first place. And if you’d simply unvoted me here without your clever ‘unvote/revote’, that probably would have been enough for me too.
But at the moment, I am not voting to lynch a Mason, I am voting to lynch someone who says he’s a Mason. I have no reason to believe your claim at this point. Your claim is untestable until Dawn breaks in London. Maybe a couple hours from now, I’ll unvote you, but right now you’re still at the top of my suspect list.
Babies are fed.
I’m not willing to lynch a claimed mason. Let’s see what Astral says toMorrow, let’s see if there’s a counterclaim.
NETA:
I want to reiterate something. peeker picked up votes mainly because of his inexplicable vote on me, and his refusal to remove it, or even comment on it. When he finally decided to make a statement, he could have come back and said something like:
"when i voted for you i felt there were some inconsistencies between the whole voluntary v unvoluntary travel thing. so you are correct i should have down this a couple hours earlier.
unvote plankton"
That might well have done the trick, given that none of his other behavior was particularly Scummy, just bizarre. But instead he came out with his claim…a claim that can’t be immediately tested and which he admits will quite possibly lead to Astral’s death one way or another.
Right now, I’m really on the fence about peeker. On the one hand, his claim is testable, just not right away. On the other hand, his behavior has been pissing me off (in a game-related sense only, nothing personal). There’s still plenty of time before Dusk, and my one vote can’t arrest anyone all by itself, so that’s why I’m not moving it right now. I’d like to hear from the rest of the Kiwis some more, and there are also one or two discussion items floating around that are not peeker-related that deserve some more time before Night falls.
more to the point:
way to go mason, acting scummy as scum to cloudy up the waters on Day 1 and force yourself to claim.
you’re going to keep a vote on a claimed mason on Day 1?
When there’s actually a serious chance he might be lynched despite the claim?
Unvote peeker
I believe his claim for the time being.
Suburban, what non-peeker issues do you feel need to be discussed?
Suburban, have you claimed? I thought you had, but I’m re-reading and I can not find an actual claim or full role PM from you. Did I imagine your claim?
i am not sure that my conclusion about burby is wrong. i always say vote for the person you think to be the most scummy. i thought he was and is so that’s where my vote went and will stay. hey, you don’t like my reasoning or my confirmability that seems to more of your folks’ problem and not mine.
neta: and sorry folks. i play this game like we need to generate discussion and therefore information. apparantly my methods are not in congruence with the rest of the crowd. and even more readily on this board as it is ill received. i’ll shut up now.
I agree with this.
Post #273:
Post #295:
Post #302
Post #333:
Why push you two and not continue to argue for a mass claim of travel abilities? Neither of you volunteered to travel and why should he treat you differently to the rest of us. How is this different to asking a claimed cop or roleblocker who they plan to investigate/block for the remainder of the game? What I can understand wanting to compare a player’s claim of travel abilities with future travels. I’d like to hear his reasoning.
Here’s the post I made that caused Normal to feel anxious about my health
and maybe a roadmap as to where it’s leading me.
As to Scuba Ben’s musings: Yes, it appears that anyone might have a reason to travel no matter their alignment. It’s worth noting when someone travels, but certainly not worth voting.
Normal’s post 287 is still a good analysis of the flaws in Mahaloth’s thinking. It’s not a really strong Scum tell. I see it more as a strong tell of Normal’s powerful analytical mind.
I still don’t agree with Scuba Ben regarding our ability to be objective about the Londoners. I see our role to maybe point out what we are noticing over there very subjectively so that they can use our insight and so that we can be held accountable for our comments regarding them. I guess that’s why I don’t like it. It almost makes it seem like we shouldn’t hold a Wellington person accountable for what they say about a Londoner. I don’t think that’s what Scuba Ben meant, but it’s how it struck me.
(with all that, I still haven’t caught up on what was said during their Day. Fortunately tomorrow is the last day of the semester, though it’s followed by the school Christmas party, so it might take a couple of days for me to recover.)
I understand the process that Cookies is claiming happened with her vote. I don’t much like it. Her motivations and her actions don’t quite seem to mesh. OK, maybe I’m still not completely understanding it.
Posts 322-3 don’t strike me as particularly scummy, especially with peeker’s claim at this point. I’ll admit I was puzzled by peeker’s actions as I read them. Guiri’s comments actually strike me as something I might say. Of course, I might say them as Town or as Scum.
So, yes, Normal, that was the long road to nowhere. I look forward to your vote.
This doesn’t sound like the usually over-confident peeker-Mason :eek:
I pointed out a couple of items that bugged me in this post. Normal mentioned “getting some pings” from Guiri aways back. I assume other people must have seen something today that piques their curiosity. We need to arrest someone Today (OK, strictly speaking we don’t, but in practical terms we do), so who should it be? Who do you suspect at this point?
I have not claimed.
peeker, please explain exactly what I did or said that you found Scummy. Leave out all of the things that you thought might possibly have happened had the rules of the game been different than they actually are, and focus only on things that actually occurred.
There’s exactly zero chance that he’s going to be lynched in the next 24 hours. There’s still plenty of time for me to change my vote…
…and having said that, there is actually a lot less time than I thought. I only now realized that the Day ends tomorrow (Friday). I thought that we had until Saturday, so that we were currently 48 hours out. It wasn’t until I just checked to see exactly what time Dusk was that I realized I had overestimated the remaining length of the Day by 100%.
I’m off to do a hospital visit now…I’ll think about changing my vote when I’m done there in a couple hours.
It’s day one, Guiri. Who cares if it’s a claim that could buy time – it’s a mason claim. It’s confirmable by the death of either; and unless one or the other is a godfather, also disprovable by a scan directed at either. Ditto death of either by hypothetical serial killer. Ditto, potentially, counterclaim. What’s to think about?
unvote
Vote at this point will probably land on you, though I think I’ll have a few minutes tomorrow morning to make it more than a gut thing (or change my mind, who knows).
I think you meant Mental Guy up there, not Mahaloth.