No need to lynch non-participants in this game, the mods will look after them.
I’d suspect it’s a red herring, if the mods wanted to tell us that there are exactly 17 town powers, 20 VT, 4 third parties and 14 scum, they’d do it in the rules, right?
And I don’t approve of policy votes - far too easy to hide behind. But is voting for a policy vote a policy vote in itself?
Does this ever work - voting for a non-participant, without a mention notification?
/snipped Not sure I get your point here, scum could fake claim a role, the real role holder could stay quiet and let the other scum team kill them claimant, but a doc may try to protect the fake claiming scum, so maybe claim after all? Is there really a difference to a normal game?
Re: Meeko & Johnny Bravo, I don’t think there are perfectly accurate scum tells - short of claiming or mis-posting, but there’s not “tells”. And I disagree that D1 votes are not useful - there are joke votes, poke votes, but they are the start of a pattern, scum do get lynched D1 @Total, Boozy’s question had some level of plausibility - it was his response to the FOS that pinged, but Pleo’s comment has been interpreted differently - to some, including Toejam and me, he was saying there are no off boards for scum teams - which makes no sense given the rules and discussion, but for others - Lightfoot for example, he was talking about cross-team communication - which is even weirder, how would scum know who’s on the other team to attempt to communicate through editing, and why, if they are enemies? It’s almost too blatant, his earlier defensiveness was more telling.
Good catch, looking at the color or later discussion, I don’t see anything that clearly identifies a first team in contrast to the other team.
The first one was a very slight ping along the lines of what snfaulkner and ThingFish pointed out – self-consciously grouping oneself with town. The second quote morphed from defense against the accusation (‘don’t we all present ourselves as town?’) into some kind of weird promotion of information-gathering – which he wasn’t even doing – as a pro-town tactic, and manages to drive the “look how townie I’m being” ping up several notches.
And then I guess asking about scum communication is more of the same, though I didn’t notice it negatively at the time.
I’m not thrilled with Johnny Bravo’s defense against my skepticism of his vote on me, either. ‘You’re trying too hard to find me scummy’ is not exactly a convincing read in a game where even the scum have rich hunting grounds to go after. On the other hand, the ‘ohmygodyousuck for suspecting me’ impulse is strong in some townies and could be the real reason for the vote. I’ll let that one percolate a while.
It does if the non-participant in question has been hanging around lurking for as long as they think they can get away with. And Angel of the North did show up. (To be clear I don’t find anything funky about their posting once they did, at this point.)
I’m all for Biotop moving on to nonparticipant number two.
This is all kinds of terrible. So you admit that you don’t think Normal was hiding anything, but you are willing to vote for Normal simply because you disagree about editing? There was a time that policy votes were considered scummy. I don’t think that is the case here, but I do think such a policy vote is dumb.
If anything, I’d say Normal Phase’s hardline stance (as well as Suburban Plankton and Plumpudding) are minor indicators of Towness. It’s clear that there exist people that don’t like editing and find editing ‘suspicious,’ so openly flouting that opinion is not something that someone trying to hide is going to want to do.
Terrible vote.
Terrible policy.
Let’s not have this game devolve into a referendum on editing, shall we?
I’m of the Normal Phase school of thought on Scum slips. This one seemed fairly straightforward to me, and actually a bit town-leaning. If you’re town, literally everyone else is on “the other team”. If Colby turns out to be Town, there’s a lot of info to be gained on the early attempt to force a bandwagon here. It feels forced to me. There are a lot of “me, too” type of votes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you make of it then? I haven’t made up my mind entirely yet. But I am very puzzled at the way it was phrased. So I’d very much like to hear how others read it.
OK, working with the idea that we should be looking for tells, here’s where I find mine. This really long, overly sensitive proclamation of innocence on Day 0. I thought it was excessive and a case of “the lady’s doth protest too much”
Hi everyone. It’s great to see so many names from way back. Thanks to the Mods for letting us latecomers in.
Sorry to see Dante go. I spectated a few of his games on GB and was looking forward to playing with him. I hope everything is OK.
It was a long time ago, and my memory is poor, but I don’t think I was part of Monkgate. I remember it, but I’m not even sure I was in that game or just spectating. You might be conflating that game with another, where Cookies did end up in the final three with scum me and DiggitCamera (I might be mangling that name horribly), and chose correctly. In that game I was town until recruited at the last minute by the final remaining scum, Blaster Master, who was going to be lynched the next Day. That game is why I’ll never sign up for one where recruitment is on the table. Anyway…
I like this post. I hadn’t thought of this angle, and despite the WIFOM aspect, I think “scum wouldn’t post this”. I’m not sure I agree with counter claims holding off, but it’s an interesting thought that I don’t think scum would want to bring up. Thinking out loud here:
Pros:
[ol]
[li]The second scum team might kill the false claimer, saving us the trouble.[/li][li]The player with the power role gets to stay hidden.[/li][li]The false claimer will be forced to share false actions and results which we can analyze for information.[/li][li]Eventually the false claimer will be outed, either through a later true claim, or from death reveal. I don’t think a false claim can last to the end game.[/li][/ol]
Cons:
[ol]
[li]The docs might protect them, negating the most obvious pro of the other scum team killing them. This is a bad WIFOM situation for the docs, of whether to protect a claimed power.[/li][li]If they claim a cop or watcher or something, we might trust their “results”, leading to a mislynch.[/li][li]A later claim by the true role will be distrusted because they didn’t immediately claim, leading to a mislynch.[/li][/ol]
It’s something for our power roles to think about. Kudos to Captain Klutz for seeing the possibility.
Even much later in the game I have trouble making black/white judgments. Here in Day 1 I’m seeing only shades of gray, almost all the same. Pleonast is ever so slightly more likely to be Scum than average, and Colby just slightly more so.
Sent from my Heckler & Koch MR 556A1 using Tapatalk
Seems early to being casting votes already on Day one. We’ve got players that haven’t posted at all in the game. I’m not a big fan of lynching the loud. We have to get discussion going and if we start voting players just because they post, the scum will have the advantage.
I do find Colby’s wording suspicious as well. And I thing the Durpclears are a bit to obvious.
But, I want to wait for more discussion before casting a vote.
I’m really torn on this. The charitable interpretation of “the other team” may be the correct one. Or it may be a significant slip, as the phrasing is certainly awkward and potentially revealing. I’m not sure which way I’m leaning on it at the moment.
But: I can absolutely see why people find it worth voting for. In that case, what else really could be said about it than, “me too”?
