Yeah, I will. I guess I just didn’t realize how fast the game would go considering how many people tend to die each (actual) week.
Plus, I was feeling a little worried about getting the votes in 24 hours before the actual vote time. I’m going to try to go back and read tonight and hopefully come up with something either late today or early tomorrow. I think the chances of us coming to a consensus 24 hours before the end are pretty low.
What do you want me to say about it? I saw the paragraph where the free-masons are described and thought that, since the other roles were in the same paragraph, they referred to particular abilities of masons. Since then I was corrected on that assumption and let it drop.
(In my defense, I saw “the scotsman” as the first description and, for some reason, I associate Scottishness with free-masonry)
I caught up on the thread, and gave my opinion on something that was being discussed. What more do you want?
A vote, for starters, I know…
Vote fluiddruid
The passage was this.
This could be taken to mean
a) Our wolf as in a wolf in the pack I belong to
or
b) Our wolf as in the wolf we are discussing
or
c) Our wolf as in the wolf that we killed overnight, although considering that it is likely that Fretful Porpentine was killed by scum, this is a kind of odd sentence to make.
At best, it could be a circumstancial link between **fluidruid ** and Fretful. At worst, it is just a poor turn of phrase.
Two of the three ways implicate fluid. “B” is just… odd. I certainly wouldn’t use that phrasing. For example, I would say, “Our president,”, but I wouldn’t say “our horse,”, if we were talking about a horse that died last night, and I didn’t identify myself with said horse.
fluiddruid and I have not seen eye to eye much so far in this game, so please don’t take this as a defense, but this point seems incredibly nitpicky to me. Unlike Santo Rugger, it reads to me like a casual way to say “the wolf that we are talking about.” Seems like a major reach to me. YMMV.
Nope, no problems with that. I just saw it while reading through and it pinged my scumdar. I thought I would bring it up for discussion as something to consider as we have so little to go on.
As I said, at best circumstancial, at worst just a turn of phrase.
Eh? I’m confused here as well. If I learn what the secret sign is (which is info), how wouldn’t I be able to use it in a subtle fashion if I ever wanted or needed to?
Just saying what I was told in some post question PMs I had. I was told I can use the info I gain in any way I wish. So I assume that if I ever talk with a dead Freemason and learn whatever this secret identification thing is, I’d be allowed to use it if need be. That is the point of my role. Not only can I resurrect players, I can semi-take the place of any other power role with the info I learn from then.
Talking with the/a Magician, I would NOT LEARN how to put off attacks. Talking with the/a Scotsman, I would not learn how to defend myself at Night. Those are powers. Talking with a Freemason, I’m pretty sure I would learn the sign.
Let me clarify even further. I do NOT talk with Pleonast when I choose who to talk with. I will be talking with the dead player directly. So whatever they know, whatever info they have, whatever they know about their role, how it works, what they’ve ever found out, what they know…I will learn. So again, I’m pretty sure I will learn what this secret sign is if I ever speak with a dead Freemason. If that’s the case, I don’t see what would stop me from potentially using it.
From what I read, Freemasons don’t even know each other, so how could I out one? Them doing the sign would be the only way I’d know it was them…and by that time, I’d know it too (obviously, if I’m recognizing it) and what’s to stop me from doing it myself at some point?
Well, I’m not a Freemason. I’m obviously getting my head too deep here in something which I thought I understood, but apparently have misconstrued. If Pleo has told you that the sign is part of the information a Mason can give you, then roll with it.
Eh, not to get sucked into more Idle Thoughts stuff, but my opinion is that he won’t get the Freemason handshake thingy. My read of the role is that handshaking is flavor text. They don’t actually shake hands, they send Pleonast a PM with the name of the person they want to check for masonhood. To me, this constitutes a power not mere information.
Not surprisingly, Idle Thoughts and I have different views of the universe.
But it doesn’t matter. I don’t think anyone wants Idle Thoughts chatting with a mason anyway.
Speaking of Idle Thoughts here’s a question:
Idle Thoughts, if I were to reveal all role information Today, would you act on that information Tonight? Or do you feel the need to wait until I’m more confirmed?
vote DiggitCamara
For the reasons I outlined Yesterday. Mostly the feeling that DiggitCamara has more information than he should at this time in the game.
I do? Could you please point it out, so I really do know it?
And here I was, feeling completely clueless… 
Have done a search on your previous posts but I can’t find the place where you outline the reasons for lynching Diggit. I am familiar with the general line of reasoning for why we should lynch but can you repost what you specifically said, or link to your post?
Well, I’d just like to say that I’m no less confused than I was yesterday, or the day before. I should have time to read the thread again tonight and pick up something to inspire a vote.
Out of my meeting for the day. I’ve caught up the vote count.
Hi everyone…so sorry for my extended absence this Day. I had a lot more fun on my vacation/business meeting than I thought I would. An open bar two nights in a row will do that.
I’ve read through everything that has been posted todayb but I have an unplanned and quite unpleasant all day meeting to attend tomorrow and will not be available at the end of the Day. I need to vote now, and the best candidate I see at the moment is Mhaye, for the **OAOW ** connection that someone (sorry, I can’t remember just who ATM) brought up. I was hoping **Sachertorte ** would give some information on **Rysto ** and **Hal ** before I made my vote so I could analyse player interactions if one of them was scum. Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like I’ll be able to do that toDay.
Vote Mhaye.
Damn. I know I’m being a hypocrite in voting so late, but I’m really at a loss here. Plus my brain is dead from grading so many inane papers.
I’ll post again before I go to bed, honest.
(I decided to use “she” as the possibly correct pronoun for HazelNutCoffee in this post. Apologies in advance if I guessed wrong.)
I’ve been mulling over whom I find suspicious and trying to find a good lead. I realized HazelNutCoffee was near the top of my list but I couldn’t remember why. After reading back through her posts I remembered mentally bookmarking the confusion that happened early Day 2 after One And Only Wanderers was lynched and amrussell and Fretful Porpentine turned up dead. HazelNutCoffee was the second post of the Day, saying (post 541):
Reading back through her posts this one struck me as odd because she seems to assume that amrussell was killed by the werewolves and that Fretful was killed by the vampire. Why would she assume the werewolves have more of a reason to kill a claimed mason than the vampire, unless she knew it wasn’t the werewolves that did it. At that point sach hadn’t yet made his claim as to what the sides of any of the dead were.
The post that really stood out to me, and I think why I had a mental “possible scum” mark next to Hazel, is post 549:
That was shortly after sach posted his claims for the sides of the dead (post 547).
I was skeptical of sach’s claim (and still am a little), especially since he only revealed the sides and not the roles. It seems from Hazel’s posts that she knew that one of the sides sach revealed was correct before the rest of us.
There are a few other minor things that seemed off in her posts but I find people glaze over if I quote more than a couple of posts. If anyone is interested I’ll elaborate a bit more. For now I’m more convinced that Hazel is scum than anyone else, so:
Vote HazelNutCoffee
So that everyone else can read through her posts to see if they see what I do without having to suffer through the CTRL-F drudgery, her posts to date are:
Day 1
151
157
184
237
253
254
282
309
322
394
395
426
457
Night 1
538
Day 2
541
549
554
566
564
577
590
624
631
656
657
678
765
827
829
amrussell being killed made sense no matter who it was since both scum sides would not want a confirmed Townie around anyway. I wasn’t the only one who thought Fret’s death was odd. At the time my reasoning was that Vampires would be less discriminatory about their kills than Werewolves; Vampires work alone and are interested only in piling up bodies, while Werewolves are a pack and will kill strategically. Fret’s death at the time was unexpected, so I was suggesting it was more probable that it was a Vampire kill. Notice the word “if” in my post.
Good Lord. I wasn’t the only one prematurely rejoicing. I’m just so used to taking Role/Side announcements after death for granted that it slipped my mind it was a) sachertorte, not the mod, making this announcement, and b) sachertorte had yet to be confirmed in his claims. It was an absent-minded mistake, unfortunately, and a result of unfamiliarity with the rules - I have no better defense than that.
Okay, I’ve reread most of the thread.
Here’s some interesting things.
Interactions with Known Scum:
Posts 283, 285 and 286 consisted of some fluffy back and forth between MadTheSwine and Fretful Porpentine.
Posts 332, 335, 336, 337, 339, 341 and 350 consisted of strategy discussion between Pygmy Santo Rugger and OAOW.
I didn’t see much worth quoting from Mad. He was more noticeable on lack of posts.
Couple of things that caught my attention from Santo Rugger:
-Smudged Rysto in post 420 by quoting Rysto’s post that Witches shouldn’t out themselves to counterclaim and “interpreting” it as:
-Gave what I’d consider correct advice in post 448:
Fretful Porpentine voted for fluiddruid in post 283 “for lack of any better ideas” and with a disclaimer that it was subject to change. That may or may not indicate anything, but I put it in my notes, so damn you, you’ll read it and like it! 
Comments by OAOW:
Post 439
Of the three smudges by OAOW there, and again in a later post that I didn’t write down the post number for, sach has roleclaimed Coroner, and hopefully we’ll get enough into soon to either verify him completely or lynch him.
MHaye’s getting discussed (and voted for) by several other people right now. One comment from him that hasn’t been mentioned that I noticed is that he was the one who pointed out in post 555 that sach had reported Sides and not Roles in the revelations of death post.
I don’t seem to have taken note of any comments by Diomedes. OAOW’s suspicion of him was explained as
in the above mentioned post 439.
And playing off of the MHaye note 2 paragraph’s up, DiggitCamara was the first person to directly ask sach to reveal the Dead People Roles.
I guess all that stuff above can be considered “smudges” or the like.
In post 221, Zoggie posted
I probably read this and dismissed it at the time, but in my re-read, it just struck me as trying to seem uninformed about the Cabal and…where did she get the idea that Cabal had “mystical powers” that we don’t know about? The flavor text in the OP describes them as having “limited mystic powers” but no mention of communication. Since she knew about the communication, she has to have read the complete description on google docs or the mirror board, which spells out the Cabal’s power as blocking. Perhaps it caught my attention because sach and Idle Thoughts have since announced that additional powers were revealed in their PMs.
Now, if Zoggie had received a Town PM with an extra unrevealed power, she may have assumed that other Roles may or may not have them as well, but then why ask specifically about the Cabal’s powers, using a similar, but not identical, phrase from the flavor text?
Theory: She received a Cabal PM using the phrase “mystical powers”?
Also: Zoggie voted for OAOW in post 484, shortly after he made his (now known to be false) role claim, yet didn’t acknowledge the role claim. She could have said she didn’t believe it, or could have said Vig was a less-than-useful role (like **Santo Rugger did in post 482, but did neither. Could be a sign that she was busing him? The vote post was like 3 lines long, so I don’t think she took that long to write it. Plus, she had time to go back and edit that post, so she likely saw it after voting if not before and could have commented.
Oh, and that isn’t the edited post that she was called on later (that one was post 655). I’d like to know what was edited in 484, but I doubt I’ll find out.
One further comment before I vote:
In post 380, CatInASuit posted:
The odd vote is not so odd now, yes?
Vote Zoggie
Wow. That was long.