You seem to be forgetting that Crackrat voted for me on Day One, however (saying, in fact, that he agrees with YOU in his reasons for voting for me, Stan)
Vote Stanislaus
Rounding it out with the same two I voted for yesterDay:
Vote fluiddruid
Vote glowacks
At the time of Crackrat’s voting for me (on Day One), the top two vote getters were as follows:
So doesn’t it seem strange, if I were the ringleader, that Crackrat would vote to lynch me (his scumbuddy, if you believe I’m the ringleader) over Peeker?
In other words, I think you’re reaching, Stan. I think you’re looking for a good reason to get a mislynch going for toDay. If I’m scum, then Crackrat sure has a funny way of trying to save the ringleader’s skin when he could have voted away from me. As it was, though, his votes put me potentially TIED with the most votes gotten on Day One (as soon as everyone voted for four people).
And lastly…ever hear of Occam’s Razor? The most simple explanation is often the correct one?
If I’m ringleader, two different variable’s would have to be true, then:
However only ONE thing has to be true for me being Town:
You say all this stuff and claim you’re reading in depth and yet you’ve misinterpreted at least two rules and demonstrated a lack of attention to the game state with things like voting for fubbleskag after he had claimed.
The voting for fubbleskag was just plain forgetfulness.
It’s also interesting to look at the votes when Crackrat filled out his votes.
About 21 hours left in the Day:
No other votes between these. Partial votes still out are Texcat -> Hal, Idle;NP -> Drain Bead; Idle -> peeker, Natlaw; NAF -> peeker, fluid, Stanislaus
Leaving things:
Hal - 8
Idle - 8
peeker - 7
Drain - 7
Crackrat actually ended up with the last vote on Idle. If Idle had a few more or a few less votes it would be understandable for Crackrat to throw a vote on, but in a close race like that I find it hard to believe. He had a very good chance to be a deciding vote on Idle and didn’t even come back to unvote Idle after he was examined, suggesting that he wasn’t overly concerned about Idle topping the vote.
Given that a town Mahaloth ordered the investigation with no suggestion from anyone else and our one known scum didn’t seem to care much whether he would be a deciding vote on Idle, I don’t see Idle as the ringleader.
Idle, I’ll be honest - you as Ringleader is something that occurred to me as I was going to sleep last night, and your explanations for yourself just keep getting worse and worse. Occam’s Razor, two variables versus one? Come on, man. If you are Ringleader, how hard is it to ask another scum player to do you a solid?
If you’re not scum, I’d like you to lay out who is. I’m working on this myself. Trying to run through some potential scenarios, seeing who’s connected to who. With 3 scum players and 2 confirmed town, it’s not too early for a good unification theory of the entire scum team.
All that said, so far this morning I keep going back and forth on you. I keep starting a case for or against you, and keep getting stuck with things not making complete sense. I’m not convinced of your status either way. But I’m working on it.
The thing that’s sticking in my craw the most is fubbleskag’s death. I honestly am having a very hard time understanding why they wouldn’t kill a confirmed townie in the doctor spot, and that’s making it very hard to come across with a good scenario that makes sense. Still mulling it over but it just strikes me as important that the scum kills are happening on the low side of the roster. Why aren’t the officer spots being moved by scum? Why isn’t Inner dead?! All I can figure is that the scum team likes the spots exactly the way that they are for some reason, and I’m trying to figure out why.
I don’t understand this. You say my explanations keep getting worse and worse. What sort of defense are you looking for? I mean, I’ve already offered what seems to me to be a few good things in my defense…number one being the things I and glowacks just pointed out: Crackrat voted for me on Day One, near the end of the Day. He was the EIGHTH person to vote for me total…so I’d’ve had eight votes when everyone else voted all of their votes.
That vote (that Crackrat placed) made me TIED with most votes that Day. Why would scum risk having their own ringleader be lynched?
His (Crackrats) other votes that day, by the way, were Mahaloth (TOWN), Hal Briston (TOWN) and Drain Bead (TOWN)
So with me added, that makes four townspeople a scummy person voted for, with me being the one in the lead with votes at the time that he voted.
So again, not exactly the smartest thing for scum to do. You can’t just ignore that fact. I don’t care if you’re trying to reach so hard to find a reason to vote for me that your eyes are bulging, you cannot ignore that fact. That fact does have considerable weight to it.
So those who are casting suspicion on me say this could have happened: I’m the ringleader and Crackrat used his Hacker power to put me up in the ranks.
Why aren’t you considering the fact there were both mutinous and loyal Hackers? Seems to me that even if you admit it COULD be possible, it would lay to rest the issue until we find the other scum (that, by the way, couldn’t pass for loyal if examined).
Huh? The other scum that couldn’t pass for loyal? That almost sounds like an admission that you are the ringleader and know that the other scum would be examined as scum. What exactly were you trying to say here? Why are you assuming that the other scum can’t pass for loyal if examined? And what does “other scum” mean? “Other” than you?
I will admit that there could be both scum and townie hackers, but I don’t see how that lays to rest your loyalty, Idle.
Would you mind explaining why you were obviously not paying much attention to the game previously and now after a scum has died you seem to be much more active?
Except not all of it makes sense or is the evidence you’re claiming it to be. That’s my problem. I have a problem with you beating up a strawman that there can be multiple hackers and nobody’s acknowledging it (we’re very much aware of this but it doesn’t confirm your role - it is, taken as a whole, a mild point against you).
I also have a huge problem with you semi-quoting me and then not actually acknowledging the nut of my issue with your post, which was the whole Occam’s Razor stuff that came across as oily B.S. You quoted me, then ignored the point.
Crackrat didn’t even post a vote in his own defense. He could have forced a tie, even a three-way tie, for voting for Texcat and myself. Yet, he didn’t. Why? I don’t know why. Maybe Crackrat doesn’t have a lot of availability towards the end of the day and missed the deadline; maybe he figured it was useless to do so or he’d make things worse; maybe it’s part of a bigger scum plan that completely escapes me, though I sincerely doubt it. In any case, he didn’t vote in his own defense, even when it seems outwardly beneficial to have done so, with no clear negative to a scum victory. The only possible scenario which makes sense to me is that if you assume TexCat and I are both scum, but I find this difficult to believe - then, why would TexCat have placed Inner, a trusted townie, in the doctor spot – an incredibly pro-town move which bought us a town confirmation?
What we do know is that Crackrat is a newer player and he voted for you on Day One. Was it an ideal play? Probably not. Maybe it’s because you’re Town, sure. Or maybe he was looking for credibility. Maybe he intended to return to the thread before the vote was finalized, and couldn’t make it; perhaps he had intended to unvote but now considered it too dangerous to do so. I don’t find it implausible that he could have voted poorly on Day One considering his whole voting history.
I honestly was leaning against you being the Ringleader, Idle, when I started my post this morning – but you’re rapidly convincing me otherwise. I say again: If you’re not scum, I’d like you to lay out who is. Lay out a scenario for me. I’m not asking you to be 100% right but I’d sure as heck like to know who you think is scum, and why.
:rolleyes:
If it was an admission, why would I say “until we find”? “Find” being a word that applies to me, too, here.
And it’s not a stretch to assume all the other scum (other than the ringleader) will investigate as the scum they are. Pleonast has made it clear that only the ringleader will come back as loyal.
I know it doesn’t. Never said it did. What I am saying is that there are six other unconfirmed players in this game, where as I am either the ringleader or telling the truth.
To me, it makes more sense to look for the actual 2 remaining scum who, yanno, without a doubt, are also scum. Because along the way, we may actually find the REAL ringleader and then that will lay to rest all the suspicions on me (and finally lay to rest the huge diversion it has been causing–which are probably making the scum wet their collective panties over it).
Not saying “Don’t vote for me because I could be a Hacker”
I’m saying "It’s stupid to vote for me RIGHT NOW when you admit there’s the chance I could be a Hacker and there are other players out there we don’t know anything about either way"
Occam’s Razor exists for a reason, obviously because there’s been many times it’s been applicable (like this one). People are overthinking it (or they’re just scum).
Anyway, I think you’re one of the scum, hence why I’m voting for you.
But lynching someone who is not you who is a ringleader does not clear you. As far as town knows, there could be 2 or 3 ringleaders. There’s nothing in the rules that limits the number of ringleaders, mates, commissars, hackers or crackers. I understand the appeal of just assuming that there’s a scum hacker, a scum cracker, a scum, ringleader and a scum commissar. But we don’t know that. The scum team could very well be a hacker and 3 ringleaders. And frankly, unless Pleonast says something against that setup, it’s the one that I’ll be going off of because any other setup makes dangerous assumptions.
If there are more than one ringleader, it sort of makes the word ringLEADER become redundant, now doesn’t it?
Inner, while I don’t agree with Idle’s idea, I don’t think it’s likely that there are multiple ringleaders. Check the first line of the role PM:
“You are the Ring Leader of the mutiny.”
(Bolding mine)
That said, I see no reason to spare Idle just because someone else might be the ringleader. If Idle is Ringleader then an awful lot of other things fall into place.
I’m sorry, but that doesn’t make sense. That’s not what you said, when you talked about Occam’s Razor. What you said was:
"If I’m ringleader, two different variable’s would have to be true, then:
However only ONE thing has to be true for me being Town:
That’s not the same argument as you’re making now. What you said in this second example was, essentially, ‘because the scenario in which I am town is one step less complicated, it is most likely true’. Which is bollocks, in this case. Two scum players helping each other out is not a complicated concept.
Now, your most recent argument is that (repeating):
‘I’m saying “It’s stupid to vote for me RIGHT NOW when you admit there’s the chance I could be a Hacker and there are other players out there we don’t know anything about either way”’
This still doesn’t make any sense! Granted, Hacker is a power role - but a one-use one. If you’re right, and you’re Town-aligned, you’re no more valuable than anyone else here. Not only that, but by presumably blowing your wad on Night 1, you’ve removed any chance of proving yourself to boot. And, even further, finding the Ringleader is an incredibly beneficial find for Town, especially, frankly, if it’s you – given that you also control our ability to brig anyone!
Look. Everything you’ve said today, as far as I’m concerned, is twisting in the wind. You’re ignoring the vast majority of what I’m saying, and the majority of points that I’m making. Why? This isn’t rhetorical, I’m asking. If you have nothing to hide, why not explain yourself? Why do you keep moving the goal posts and changing your arguments? Your latest post basically is pleading for us to look the other way. Again, why? Why can’t you explain yourself? Why won’t you explain your votes? Why won’t you make a case for who is scum?
Speaking of votes: you placed some early votes (with practically zero explanation) at the front of the day, and haven’t defended them at all. Even when I’ve repeatedly asked you to define your case about who is scum and why, you refuse. You’ve originally said said I’m scum in a carryover vote from yesterday, and now you say:
Why are you so certain? Your reason yesterday was, “sorry, I trusted you earlier in the game, but I’m not voting for Fubble, Inner, NAF, or peeker…that leaves less and less to choose from from everyone else”. You carried that over to today. Why? Why not TexCat, for example? You didn’t vote for him today or yesterday, and he’s not one of the people you said you couldn’t vote for. Surely there must be some reason why you’ve chosen not to vote for him, but yet, you’ve never explained yourself, or your reasoning.
You’re suddenly so convinced I’m scum that you’re discarding my argument (seems to me, anyway) – yet you have never made a case against me. In fact, before I started garnering serious accusations, you supported me. And yet the worm turned the moment it was convenient for you. Now I am scum to you – because I’m not Inner, NAF, or peeker. Yet others aren’t.
That is all that you have on me, apparently? Enough to poison the well of even discussing your votes in any substantial way? Enough to deflect the vast majority of my concerns about you?
Idle, I just don’t buy it. I just don’t. There is no logic in what you are saying. If you are a Town player as you assert, and holding as powerful a role as you do, you could have died at any time before now as a night kill. Yet you were willing to go to your grave and give us little to no perspective on your thoughts, or your votes. You’re making little to no effort in helping find scum players. You’re drifting through, not reading things carefully, picking out little phrases here and there to make an argument without substance.
I’m convinced. You are the Ringleader.
vote Idle Thoughts
Presuming Idle is scum, which I obviously think he is, I’m going to place my other votes. I’m showing my work, below. Note all of the below assumes Idle is scum, because that is what I think right now.
Remaining, we have:
Taking out peeker and Inner, Idle already has a vote, and myself of course, we have:
Of these I find it difficult to vote for Stanislaus as I think his perspective on Idle was absolutely spot on and definitely bore the fruit of our discussion today that has led me to vote for Idle. That’d be pretty ballsy for scum at this point considering they are at the advantage - there’s absolutely no reason to risk losing a valuable officer spot and a ringleader just for Stanislaus to get street cred. So I’m taking him out.
TexCat, again, I’m feeling townie about today. I can’t be wholly convinced of this but placing Inner as Doc is, seemingly, pro-Town. So despite my vote yesterday, I can’t muster up a vote for him.
That leaves you guys:
vote Red Skeezix
vote glowacks
vote NAF1138
I’m happy with the Red vote, not so much with glowacks (who I’m neutral on) and NAF (who is a poor candidate for spacing at this stage). All this said, I’ll move my votes around if it will help get Idle get spaced.
I wrote a long post and on preview fluid said it all except for the main point: it’s perfectly consistent with Idle’s behavior as town. If Idle is the ring leader he’s played it brilliantly for a long time, and got some breaks that make it seem like (to me) he couldn’t have been. If Idle knew how to get people angry at him exactly enough to get an investigation but not immediately lynched, he perhaps deserves to win it for the scum because I just can’t imagine it happening.
I had good ideas for votes as well, but with this heavy discussion about Idle I’m going to work on finding combinations of unconfirmed as scum that would need an Idle lynch to win and are consistent with the facts. If I go through them all and can’t find one, then I’ll go back to what I was going to do.
Psst fluid, you only get 3 votes.
I’ve been really concerned about a scum team that includes Tex and fluid. If the scum reduce us to a one vote advantage, Tex can promote the security chief then brig whoever fluid orders arrested. That will even the votes and leave the scum with the tiebreaking vote. That’s the reason that fluid said things didn’t look good for town, because the scum had become incredibly close to winning in a 1-2-3 sweep, helped by peeker’s vig kill.
Tex really talked up that promotion yesterDay and fluid swallowed it easily, ignoring the rest of the case built up on Tex. Sure that promotion helped town, but so what? If fluid and Tex are scum, they don’t care at all about those people, they just need to get one more mislynch before either of them gets lynched. Crackrat was a throw-away to get heat on Idle because there was no other easy town lynch and Tex had already planted the seed long ago.
That leaves either Red or Stanislaus as the last scum, and I’ve been leaning towards Stan most of the game. That he was suspicious of Idle before Crackrat flipped is a real eye-opener; he wasn’t suspicious of me or Red for voting for him, but went for Idle despite the investigation? It looks pre-planned that Crackrat would flip scum hacker and they’d throw everything they had at Idle. That I voted for all of them yesterDay makes it even more compelling for me.
vote TexCat, fluiddruid, Stanislaus
My other choice is to believe this nonsense about Idle and vote for Idle, Red, and NAF I guess. Even if I believe Idle was ringleader, I don’t see the other two as scum, and I definitely don’t see a team there. As fluid said, we need to look for teams of scum now, and well, I’ve already found one.
The only problem with this team is that they can probably force a no-lynch, and could have yesterDay as well. However, they need 2 no-lynches to win I think, and while it might not be possible to get peeker and NAF back to vote, we’d certainly have incentive to make sure they do once the first no-lynch happens.
I still feel that something needs to be done about him.
vote NAF
vote Fluiddruid
Here’s why:
Day 1:
The underlined phrase is weasely as hell. She’s selected a group of people to vote for and simultaneously down playing her own vote. It’s shady, and it ignores the fact that at least one of the people who she’s voting for there haven’t even seen Idle’s claim yet. She’s rushing in early here to defend Idle with the “best reason she has”.
She then follows it up with further defense of idle’s play and her crappy votes: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13604567&postcount=300
Although this defense of her crappy votes contains a blatant mistruth. She got caught making BS votes (randomly picking 4 voters for a “scummy bandwagon”). So she justfies part of it by saying that she excluded Inner Stickler because of his claim; but his claim came after her vote. So her selection of that scummy bandwagon was more bull.
At the end of the day, she demotes Natlaw. Instead of promoting Inner, which would have been a pretty protown move.
Ahh it’s time for Day 2!
I ask you a question, and you don’t answer it. You have yet to explain why you felt a demotion of Natlaw was favorable to a promotion of Inner.
Your votes that day you give reasoning behind 3 of them, and no real reasoning behind the last. The one missing the reasoning:crackrat. It feels like a bus to me. The vote isn’t going to get crackrat lynched at that point. It looks like a vote to confuse vote analysis, or something you can point back to.
You didn’t promote/demote anyone that day. Why is that?
Then onto Day 3:
You vote peeker, completely ignoring the fact that he cannot be the ringleader. (Despite the fact that it has been suggested already.)
This post has two huge strawman misrepresentations in it:
You accuse me of being irresponsible by voting for NAF or wishing his alignment be known. What else should we do with NAF? Let him live till the end of the game?
Time for toDay:
Inner starts getting suspicious about Idle, and fluid (and Stanislaus) jump right on board. It looks like jumping on the coattails of suspicion to me.
Plus a vote for NAF today, although I’m not sure it counts. That’s a quick reversion on your comments about how that vote is irresponsible.
It’s getting late. Between my two other votes yesterday (Stanislaus and glowacks) I want to review the full body of their respective play before feeling comfortable my last vote, but right now I’m leaning towards Stanislaus on the basis of his Idle vote.
Day Four Vote Count
All Votes by Voting Player
fluiddruid => Idle Thoughts (674), Red Skeezix (675), glowacks (675), NAF1138 (675).
TexCat => no votes.
Idle Thoughts => Stanislaus (661), fluiddruid (661), glowacks (661).
Red Skeezix => NAF1138 (678), fluiddruid (678).
Inner Stickler => no votes.
glowacks => TexCat (677), fluiddruid (677), Stanislaus (677).
Stanislaus => Idle Thoughts (659).
NAF1138 => no votes.
peekercpa => no votes.
Net Votes
fluiddruid (2) <= Idle Thoughts, glowacks.
Stanislaus (2) <= Idle Thoughts, glowacks.
glowacks (1) <= Idle Thoughts.
TexCat (1) <= glowacks.
With 9 players eligible to vote, 5 votes are needed to space. With these votes, no one will be spaced.
By the way–I really hope peeker is okay, don’t get me wrong…I’m worried about him–but it really sucks Town could have a killing role right now but it’s going unused. It’d be really useful about now.