otie dotie.
still not caught up by i feel burbs angst.
[b/]color=blue]vote pleo[/color]**.
well guck me.
vote pleo.
I don’t think that Idle is trying to “use meatspace excuses strategically”. Idle said he wasn’t feeling well, and I believe him. His last post of the Day was his vote against peeker. He says that he would have changed his vote, and I believe that as well. My issue is with the fact that he didn’t change his vote.
I think what rubbed me the wrong way was the phrase “For one, being willing to lynch a claimed mason yesterDay (and, unlike me, being willing to keep his vote on peek AFTER he saw the claim)”. He’s allowed to ‘judge me’ for keeping my vote on peeker (for a couple hours), but I’m not allowed to ‘judge him’ for keeping his vote on peeker (through the end of the Day). It’s not that I don’t believe him, it’s that I feel like I can’t defend against his argument since circumstances dictate that I can’t hold him responsible for his actions (or in this case, lack thereof).
And irrespective of all that, I think his argument is weak anyway.
Wrong.
I wasn’t ONLINE again after peekers claim. I didn’t see it. You, however, were (because you posted after it).
I guess I wasn’t clear enough. In this post, I am saying “I wasn’t on again after I voted for peeker”. I would have unvoted for him had I made it back on again and seen his claim.
That being said, I’ll be the first to admit my reasons are weak. But the game is played by voting for the person you find most suspicious…since you are the only one I have even an inkling of any suspicion, it goes there. Nothing personal.
I understand perfectly, and as I said, I believe you. I’m sorry if I came across otherwise; it was never my intent to cast doubt on you in that manner.
THe source of mu frustration is this: If you *had been *online late Yesterday, I could argue back at you that your argument was full of shit because you were guilty of the same behavior you were voting me for. But since you were not online for the reasons previously stated, I can’t argue against your behavior at all. In a sense, you get a ‘free pass’.
It’s rather frustrating, is all. As I said, I don’t doubt that you were unable to post, and I don’t doubt that you would have unvoted peeker had you been able. I think this detour has probably gone on long enough, and hopefully it won’t sidetrack things any longer.
Nothing personal taken…you vote the best you’ve got. I just wanted to point out that it wasn’t much…and if you agree then I’ve got nothing more to say on the matter.
I just logged on since my last post. Not enough time to update my notes or think about who to vote for yet.
I probably should have posted this several hours ago, but I got sidetracked and didn’t get back online until now. Of course, since it looks like most of the Southern Hemisphere is still suffering from a post-Christmas hangover, the few hours’ delay probably isn’t going to make much of a difference…
Here is my Role PM:
[QUOTE=sachertorte]
You are an International Spy.
Citizenship: New Zealand
Win Condition: Arrest all members of the International Crime Ring
Ah, the life of an international spy. It’s nothing like James Bond though. You used to think you always got the boring assignment because you’re a kiwi, but lately you realize all spys live a rather dull life… until now. You are on the trail of an international crime ring. You know that your decades of training and experience will be critical to cracking the case.
Each Night you experience in a City will enable you to use your incredible spy skills to determine the number of international criminals in that City during that Night. You will not be able to count criminals in the other City or criminals in transit. Your count will include all people alive during the Night, including those that wind up dead at Dawn. You may not repeat the survey of a City until you have surveyed the other City.
You may travel freely between the United Kingdom and New Zealand. Travel must be initiated (requested) during Night of your present location. Send a PM to the moderator with your intent to travel and you will spend the next Day of your current location traveling to your new location. You will be able to participate during that Day, but cannot vote. You will be able to vote at Dawn of your destination. On the Night you decide to travel you may not perform any other actions.
You begin the game in transit to Wellington, New Zealand.
[/QUOTE]
I can investigate at Night to determine the number of Criminals in the City I am in. I investigated Wellington on Night 1 and received the following information:
[QUOTE=sachertorte]
[QUOTE=Suburban Plankton]
Tonight I would like to know how many criminals are present in Wellington.
Big surprise there, I’m sure 
[/QUOTE]
You count one Criminal in Wellington.
[/QUOTE]
So, among the players who were present in Wellington last Night, there is exactly ONE SCUM. The players in question, are:
ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies - Claimed Nocturnal Hacker
peekercpa - Claimed Mason
Idle Thoughts - Claimed Vanilla
Suburban Plankton - Claimed International Spy
GuiriEnEspaña
Mahaloth
Normal Phase
Scuba Ben
special ed
USCDiver
I wondered if the presence of a Godfather would affect my investigations, so I asked, and was told:
[QUOTE=sachertorte]
[QUOTE=Suburban Plankton]
Hope you had a pleasant Holiday…I have a question about my investigative abilities.
If there is a traditional ‘Godfather’ role in this game, would that person appear to me as Town, or as Scum? I assume the former, but I’d like to be sure.
thanks,
SP
[/QUOTE]
Your count counts all criminals in the City you are counting.
[/QUOTE]
I take that as confirmation that a Godfather, should one exist, will still show up in my investigation as a Criminal.
So, to repeat,*** there was One Criminal in Wellington last Night***. Note that Pleonast was in transit during the Night, so he was not part of my investigation
Why did I claim now?
I would have preferred to be able to hold my claim until I could travel to London, spend a Night there, and get another investigation in. But that’s looking not very likely at the moment. Even if I were to survive Today, I still have to make it through the Night, then jump on a plane to London. It;s likely that action would be taken as ‘running away from Wellington after narrowly averting an arrest’, and I’d be forced to make my claim at that point or be arrested once I landed in London. And even if I were to make it through a Travel Day and a London Day without needing to claim, I’d still need to make it through the Night without getting killed, which I think would be quite unlikely.
So I’m claiming now in hopes that the information I do have can be put to good use. And there’s always the chance that I can still manage another good investigation once I make it to London.
And in case it’s not bloody obvious, I do plan to travel to London Tomorrow, should I survive that long. And in the event I’m still here a full Day/Night after that, I’ll be on a plane back here to Wellington again.
And while I’m here:
**vote USCDiver
**
I’ll be the first to admit, I don’t have much of a case. I’ve been going over the Day 1 posts of all the people I don’t consider ‘likely confirmed’, and the only thing that sticks out for **USCDiver **is his “me too” vote on Natlaw. And I do mean that’s the only thing. He seemed to cruise through Day 1 without saying anything of substance at all. So my case here is more or less ‘vote the lurker’.
The problem is that almost every other case I can make, based on voting records, or posts in support of/against other players, seems to wind up pointing to multiple Scum working together. But I know that there are ***not ***multiple Scum here, so those cases break down. I still think that **Mahaloth’s **play has been scummier than anyone else’s, but I’m having a very hard time figuring out why he, as Scum, would have made that claim in the first place. It could always be a very daring ploy, but I appear to be the only one harboring any sort of suspicion along those lines.
I’d really like it if some of the other Wellington folks would chime in before Dusk. It’s been very quiet here today (small ‘t’).
NETA: on second thought, it’s been very quiet here Today (big ‘T’), too. I know that most, if not all, of us took a long weekend off, but the overall participation Today has been subpar, and if it doesn’t pick up soon the Town is going to suffer for it.
The Christmas holiday has taken it’s toll on my participation. As has Day 9 in the game on Giraffe.
I have been mostly keeping u though (not that difficult with the volume.)
I have 14 hours and a couple of things I’d like to reread before I vote.
Active players:
ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies: claim seems plausible, but isn’t indicative of alignment. Choice of voting calls her alignment into question.
Mahaloth: claims seems plausible. Interesting to hear what London has to say to see if there is a counter claim or anything to call him into question or confirm him.
Normal Phase: voted for Pleo buts welcomes attention on here as it should get attention on me. I just feel icky after reading that. Then immediately switched to Plankton as a bandwagon was starting. (granted I’m very suspicious of plankton as well)
peekercpa: mason claim is solid
Scuba_Ben: unhappy with his willingness to dismiss anyone who has claimed anything. Is it a sign of scumminess in that he trusts them so implicitly?
special ed: that’s me!
USCDiver
Idle Thoughts
Suburban Plankton: Odd claim, I wouldn’t have imagined this role, seems useful, yet potentially overpowered and completely unable to test. Seems a safe claim for Scum, yet it’s still a plausile role. Unlikely to be counter claimed. Still, will be useful information if he dies. (i.e., We’ll know that if he dies and we eliminate a Scum out of those of us in Wellington at the time, that the others are in effect confirmed. This claim makes me uneasy. The claim also came under lynch pressure.
Pleonast: sigh. I dislike his early claiming. I do wish he’d see how it impacts the town in a negative fashion. But then, I don’t expect him to.
Did anyone look back at guiri's comments during the 1st cycle?
I have an unofficial vote count:
Suburban (4) Idle (627), Mahaloth (631), Normal (648), Scuba Ben (654)
Pleo (1) [del]Normal (620 648)[/del], peeker (624 and again in 662)
USCDiver (1) Suburban (671)
NAF (in London) (0) [del]Scuba Ben (645 654)[/del]
Not voting:
Special
Cookies
USCDiver
Pleo
I’ll check back in the AM. I’d lie to see if anyone has any thoughts on my comments. I hate being so suspicious of someone who claims an investigative role, but I am.
Idle: Do you mean my choice to vote in London at all or the choice of who I’ve voted for in London? As I helped to lynch scum with my Wellington vote, I’m assuming that isn’t the vote you mean.
We have investigation results that indicate London’s tie was between two Town players.
Assuming the results on ShadowFacts are true, if I were scum, I wouldn’t have had to do anything and ShadowFacts would have been thrown in the clink. At least I believe he was the first to reach the number of votes in the tie. Yeah, yeah, scum would never do that but I’m not asking you to put me on the confirmed list. I think a null tell is a more appropriate fit for my play in London at this point, than calling my alignment into question because of it, which has a non-null feel to it as far as phrasing goes.
Re-reviewing things from Wellington’s first Day, something that I noticed (while trying to review my play for signs of defensiveness) was how many times I had to explain what I had done to apparently satisfy Ed’s need for clarification. The paranoid part of me wondered at the time if it could be a way to cause a distraction. I’d be be busy with explaining myself and not scum-hunting, and anyone reading the game would have to read things redundantly.
This along with the smear as to my voting record (which does nothing on its own and can only build on what the Londoners do during their Day) is enough for me to make a vote for Ed at this point.
Vote Ed
Jesus H.
Why am I mixing you two up so bad this game? I blame Idle’s sparse playing these days and the fact that they both have two-word names with D’s in them. 
Yeah, that that sounds crazy but I’m only half joking.
**unvote **while I figure myself out.
Ok aside from the brainfart at the opening of the previous vote post, the rest was what I actually meant to say.
Apologies.
Vote Ed Sorry about not bleaching and I still don’t wish to edit. Backing slowly away from the keyboard now…
Unless Pleonast is lynched; and/or we lynch a scum; you should consider staying. It’d be as good as a specific investigation on him (right)?
unvote: SP
vote: Pleonast
unvote
vote: Special Ed
Comments on Cookies, me and Scuba all feel off. (Regarding his last post.)
Also, about SP, llynching a non-Pleo scum wouldn’t change the argument for considering staying.