[QUOTE=Lightnin’]
Well now I’m really confused. I never voted for you, or even pointed the finger at you, until you accused me. I have only voted or pointed the finger at Diggit. Right?
[/QUOTE]
Ok, I see what he meant to say here. Replace the “have” with “had” and it makes more sense.
[QUOTE=dnooman]
Ok, I see what he meant to say here. Replace the “have” with “had” and it makes more sense.
[/QUOTE]
Ah, yeah. My bad. “Had”, not “have”.
Ok, time to catch up a bit.
I’m really torn here – play suspicions close to the vest, or point out every word someone says that tweaks you the wrong way? Pointing things out seems have the effect of putting a bull’s-eye on one’s chest, but NAF’s advice is sound: “Play the game like you are going to get killed tonight”. And has been pointed out several times – information helps the town, while silence helps the scum. Time to open my yap again.
NAF – Others have put out good arguments for him. I’m wavering, but the vote still stands.
percypercy – I’m suspicious, but that stems from his suspicions of DiggitCamara and DC’s mentions of being a townie. Perhaps I’m being a sucker, but I buy DC’s claims. Keeping my eye on percy.
A couple of quick, unquantifiable notes before I have to leave work:
dnooman – pinging heavily townie to me.
Projammer – I’ve got unfounded scum suspicions there.
Rachm Qoch I don’t really trust, but that just stems from his near-freakish ability to determine who is going to die.
[QUOTE=dnooman]
The reason for his initial vote was that DiggitCamara had “an itchy trigger finger” and could not be trusted. Now Lightnin’ is the person who has placed the most votes. I find the vote,unvote,revote behavior to be suspect, as well as his apparent reversal on being “trigger happy”. These reasons plus the general tone of some of his posts leads me to vote Lightnin’. Also he seems to have forgotten that he voted for NAF1138
[/QUOTE]
But as I pointed out, the only reason I voted Diggit, then unvoted him and voted Naf was that I suddenly found myself on the hangin’ end of a rope for what I thought was no good reason.
I’d also like to point out that my reason, right from the beginning, for unvoting Diggit was because I’d been convinced that the first day is pretty much random, and therefore an FOS is probably more likely to give us results with minimal bloodshed. At this point, the only thing we can possibly have is suspicion- nobody’s died at all, yet.
And, as someone (can’t really remember who, at this point) pointed out, killing someone at this point doesn’t really help anyone, right?
Why am I being defensive? It was my understanding that if a villager is under suspicion, he should try to defend himself. If that’s not the case, I’ll just shut up and let you guys kill off an innocent man.
[QUOTE=fluiddruid]
I haven’t forgotten and don’t believe anyone has; I simply have gotten a lot of flak for it (while the others’ votes had gone previously unexamined), and I believe I’ve explained my reasoning thoroughly.
[/QUOTE]
From my perspective Kyrie Eleison also reasonably explained his/her vote in post #373. I’m just saying, I’m not sure why you’re singling him/her out in this regard.
In the same vein, Kyrie isn’t pinging my radar. Care to elaborate?
[QUOTE=Lightnin’]
Why am I being defensive? It was my understanding that if a villager is under suspicion, he should try to defend himself. If that’s not the case, I’ll just shut up and let you guys kill off an innocent man.
[/QUOTE]
There is a difference between defending oneself and being defensive. Defensive posts look suspicious. As someone else said (not in as many words) you look more like you got caught with your hand in the cookie jar than you got sprinkled with crumbs while you were sleeping. I’m growing mighty suspicious of you, but I will say I’m also hesitant because your behavior reminds me eerily of the whole **Enfant Terrible ** debacle from the previous game. So I’m left wondering, are you making the same mistake, or is this a clever ruse? That said, and because there’s still a few others quite high on my suspici-o-meter, like fluiddruid in particular seems a little capricious with her FOSs. I’m still hesitant to give this wagon my endorsement with an official vote, but you are definitely deserving of an FOS.
[QUOTE=Hal Briston]
<snip>
I’m really torn here – play suspicions close to the vest, or point out every word someone says that tweaks you the wrong way?.
<snip>
[/QUOTE]
Same here. I’ve posted here and there my suspicions but nothing really blunt or in-depth. I’ve considered it for a long time, though, and I’ve finally broken down.
So here is who I’m getting scum reads from, in order of suspicion:
fluiddruid tops my list, although I haven’t voted for her yet. This is for many, many, many reasons, not all of which apply to the actions or posts in the game (which is a main reason I haven’t voted for her yet). If that’s not a good way to play the game or to base assumptions on, then I’m sorry, but she has raised my suspicions in this game considerably and, added to the things I thought about last night (the things in question that are not game-based), it really raised her to a high scum level in my mind. However I don’t see why reasonable, common sense estimates wouldn’t also be valid in voting, even if it wasn’t all based on what kind of behavior they portrayed.
Anyway, in-game stuff first (which is what I noticed first). First, I know she wasn’t saying that we should have a no kill the first day. She actually said otherwise, that she thought it wasn’t a good idea. Yet she still volunteered that she CONSIDERED it in her first post in here after Day one started. Again, for reasons stated in my first post in here after Day one started, I found this odd.
Secondly, she seemed, as many others pointed out, to jump on the voting for NAF bandwagon to which she quickly took back when being called on it.
Third, most of her posts in here haven’t been all out accustory or strong. They seem to be little and small, like she’s taking pains to remain careful and walking on eggshells. And this leads me to…
..four, that she says she’s experienced (which doesn’t say much cause I did too) yet (unlike me) she hasn’t really been quick to tell her thoughts or keep a vote yet.
That’s in game. I took all this in and noticed it yesterday.
Now, overnight, that’s when other things (non-gamewise) crept into my brain that seemed to give more support to my convictions. Keep in mind, these things only came to mind after I became initially suspicious of her yesterday anyway.
Okay, first and foremost, and this may seem VERY, VERY unfair and a bad way to think someone is scum, but I think her status counts some. She’s a mod, and for some reason I don’t see her getting a dainty, “vanilla citizen” role. While I can’t begin to guess the actions of the host when handing out teams and power roles, I’d think that, for the first moderator playing, she’d probably get a pretty good role. So that makes me think she’s either got a power role…or she’s scum.
Added to this (and secondly), she was one of only two players who was a shoe-in before the topic was even made (the other being NAF). Again, this alone shouldn’t be used to put a strong FOS on anyone, however combined with all the other things, this further makes me me think that she wouldn’t just be given a role that would make it easy for her to be killed off in the first day or night.
So all in all, with it all combined, it makes sense and I have to think that fluiddruid either has a power role…or is scum.
Next on my list we have who I’m voting for currently, Lightnin’. This guy has not only flew off the handle a bit at anyone proposing he’s giving scum tells but has also voted for the person voting for him, right off a post to someone else how people shouldn’t be too quick to judge. It just really looks shady to me. I even went back and read all of his posts again before voting and just mentioning to DiggitCamara about being too triggerhappy but then turning around and voting for him/her looks weird. Then, when called on it, he took back the vote and then REVOTED when people said he was further looking suspicious.
And to top it off, he then changed his vote entirely to someone who voted for him because of all the shady actions.
All in all, it just looks really odd to me and is pinging my “scum meter” pretty hard.
I’m still a little suspicious of Millit the Frail, but it’s fading little by little.
Lemur866 is growing on it, however.
And lastly, I have to admit I’m just a teeny bit iffy on ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies, but it’s not really based on anything but just vibes based on reading his/her posts in here. Same with Lemur866 above (only a bit harder in his case).
[QUOTE=Rachm Qoch]
From my perspective Kyrie Eleison also reasonably explained his/her vote in post #373. I’m just saying, I’m not sure why you’re singling him/her out in this regard.
In the same vein, Kyrie isn’t pinging my radar. Care to elaborate?
[/QUOTE]
Well it’s nothing big but I’ve noticed a lot of small things that come together. He’s quiet, which isn’t a big tell, but it certainly doesn’t help. Like you already mentioned, it seems like he was fishing for mason strategies early on, and that seems like a really silly thing for town to do for a couple of reasons:
a) If he was a mason it would be in his best interest to let the group go unmentioned; masons get exponentially more valuable as townies drop off the map, and it would be suicidal for them to draw attention to themselves this early in the game.
b) If he was a townie, at least until late midgame and early endgame the masons are his friends. Assuming we manage to nail about half of the mafia by the time midgame rolls around it’s going to get extremely hard to find the remaining mobsters, and it’s at that point that having some confirmed masons would be a real bonus. (I GUESS. I admit to not having seen this particular rule set before, where the masons are apparently set to lose if townwins.)
c) If he were scum, he needs to find and kill the masons ASAP. Trustworthy townies are a lot less dependable than confirmed masons, and it’ll make it much easier to start and maintain bandwagons against innocents if the only “confirmed” townies are only confirmed insofar as they’ve been helpful in finding scum. (I should note that this isn’t even a very safe measure any more; since the mafia are allowed to turn one of our own against us, it’s pretty obvious that they’re going to recruit the first townie that our cops confirm. So I’m honestly not sure how to handle this when midgame rolls around. Ideally we’ll never find our cops, but if it comes to the point where they roleclaim I can’t imagine how we’ll be able to use their inveistigations without second-guessing ourselves.)
So that’s the mason angle. Third, I don’t know what it is, but the tone of his answer to people’s accusations strikes me as a little fishy:
[QUOTE=Kyrie Eleison]
Yes, I voted for NAF. I was the first to do so, and I didn’t try to persuade anyone or make any further case against NAF after the message containing and explaining my vote. Many people have cast first votes against others. As has been discussed, that’s pretty much how the first day works. Would those votes also retroactively become scummy if others were to add their weight to them? IIRC, he garnered three whole votes, yours among them, before I unvoted – again, the first to do so – and the generously-named “mini-wagon” started to unwind. I’d love to know exactly how this is suspicious behavior – it’s not like I could have known you and Hal Briston would also vote for him.
[/QUOTE]
He notes that discussion is bad for the scum and good for town, which I wholeheartedly agree with… but he somehow strikes me as being too eager-to-please in general. Fluid calmly refuted my suspicions and waited to see if I had anything else to add, which makes me want to trust er. Kyrie, on the other hand, seems to want suspicion taken off himself as soon as possible. This could mean that he’s either a) scum who got hit with the corner of the spotlight and really wants to get back out of it or b) a nervous townie who doesn’t want to get randomly lynched on the first day.
I honestly don’t know which it is, but my gut tells me that he stinks of old warehouses and instant cement, so until I see something more convincing that’s what I’m going to follow.
[QUOTE=Idle Thoughts]
She’s a mod, and for some reason I don’t see her getting a dainty, “vanilla citizen” role. While I can’t begin to guess the actions of the host when handing out teams and power roles, I’d think that, for the first moderator playing, she’d probably get a pretty good role.
[/QUOTE]
Ok, this is bringing up a question that has jumped out at me before.
Gadarene – how did you assign roles? We’re they completely random, or did you pick and choose who became what?
Oh! And now that everyone seems to be in the mood to talk about their suspicions, lemme fork over a quick list:
Trust: Nobody.
Sort-of trust: NAF, just because bandwagonees on the first day turn out to be town pretty frequently. Idle, because it seems like he’s honestly looking for scum with his votes.
Distrust: Kyrie, Fluid ( I said I trust you more than Kyrie, but that doesn’t take you off of my radar! Especially since other people are starting to suspect you, which reassures me that I’m not being overly paranoid.)
Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she’s flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she’s scum, and trying to confuse us by “helpfully” providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn’t feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it’ll be much more obvious what the deal is.
[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
There is a difference between defending oneself and being defensive. Defensive posts look suspicious. As someone else said (not in as many words) you look more like you got caught with your hand in the cookie jar than you got sprinkled with crumbs while you were sleeping.
[/QUOTE]
But you see, that’s what’s so irritating about all of this. I’ve tried, repeatedly, to explain my actions. Every time, someone else sees it as “being defensive”, and says that it makes me look suspicious. And once someone sees you as suspicious, that just leads someone else to see you as suspicious.
The logical thing to do, then, would be just shut up- but, as someone else said, “silence is suspicious.”
So I can’t defend myself, and I can’t NOT defend myself. I can’t accuse anyone else, should new evidence appear. I can’t defend anyone else if I think they’re innocent. There’s not a damn thing I can do. Heck, even just trying to make small talk just to show that I’m paying attention can make me look guilty. shrug
This is all I can do, as near as I can tell-
I’m not one of 'em. I’m exactly as I am trying to portray myself as. The ones you should look out for, at least from my point of view, are the ones who keep maintaining my guilt either through “me toos” or through silence.
I’m not entirely certain I’m enjoying this game. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Idle Thoughts]
Okay, first and foremost, and this may seem VERY, VERY unfair and a bad way to think someone is scum, but I think her status counts some. She’s a mod, and for some reason I don’t see her getting a dainty, “vanilla citizen” role. While I can’t begin to guess the actions of the host when handing out teams and power roles, I’d think that, for the first moderator playing, she’d probably get a pretty good role. So that makes me think she’s either got a power role…or she’s scum.
Added to this (and secondly), she was one of only two players who was a shoe-in before the topic was even made (the other being NAF). Again, this alone shouldn’t be used to put a strong FOS on anyone, however combined with all the other things, this further makes me me think that she wouldn’t just be given a role that would make it easy for her to be killed off in the first day or night.
So all in all, with it all combined, it makes sense and I have to think that fluiddruid either has a power role…or is scum.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, she’s a mod, but I’m under the impression roles were given out randomly (probably using our friend random.org, I imagine Gadarene can clear this up). This sort of reasoning looks suspiciously like the whole voting for sturmhauke on the first day in the previous game. Yes, **fluiddruid ** is high on my scum list too but, just like I’m hesitant to vote for **Lightnin’ ** because of Enfant Terrible, I’m hesitant to vote for fluiddruid because of sturmhauke.
Similarly, say we were to lynch **fluiddruid ** tonight and she comes up scum, what does that mean for NAF? If we are to believe your logic, then if fluiddruid is scum, then NAF must also be scum or a power role and thus, if NAF isn’t scum, and would thus probably die tonight.
Basically, assuming roles were assigned randomly, making any kind of judgment about someone’s role based on information outside the game is specious at best. Thus, this post seems deliberately designed to throw in noise… and, because I’m hesitant to vote for either **fluiddruid ** or Lightnin’ for the reasons above, I’ll be bold and go ahead and vote Idle Thoughts instead. I’ll be prepared to unvote if Gadarene says roles were assigned anyway but completely at random.
[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
I’ll be prepared to unvote if Gadarene says roles were assigned anyway but completely at random.
[/QUOTE]
That should say “assigned any way but completely at random”.
[QUOTE=Omi no Kami]
Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she’s flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she’s scum, and trying to confuse us by “helpfully” providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn’t feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it’ll be much more obvious what the deal is.
[/QUOTE]
Good point, and I’d noticed that as well; but don’t forget she was also the detective last game and the instinct with that kind of power role is to play safely. That said, while the chance that she’s a cop again is low, I’m still inclined to trust her because she appears to have learned from that mistake. In fact, i’d be more suspicious if she was playing the same way, given how it turned out last time.
Well, Idle Thoughts, I’m glad you finally laid it out on the table. I had noticed you kept posting your suspicion of me, but had very little about why.
[QUOTE=Idle Thoughts]
fluiddruid tops my list, although I haven’t voted for her yet. This is for many, many, many reasons, not all of which apply to the actions or posts in the game (which is a main reason I haven’t voted for her yet).
[/quote]
What does this mean?
Considering and rejecting a point is bad? This was in response to someone else posting about it, and I reinforced that it was a bad idea.
I feel I’ve explained this pretty well, so I won’t hash it out here, but I think it’s only fair to point this out if you’re giving a laundry list against me.
I’m a little curious as to where this is coming from, frankly, as I’ve had suspicions thrown at me several times for being too aggressive and too accusatory.
I’ll quote myself in response from this post:
I don’t think the rest of the people in the game would agree that I’m keeping my thoughts a secret. As I’ve stated, Lightnin’ and Kyrie are my main contenders at this stage of the game. The only person next on my list, except for lurker reasons (which still concern me) is, frankly, you.
I really think your post muddies the waters of my posting record in a way that just doesn’t ring true. I’m not going to say that you blantantly misrepresented me, but you did misrepresent me at the very least on the fourth point and I’d argue on every point except my voting record. Painting me as “walking on eggshells” and that I haven’t “been quick to share my thoughts” is demonstrably not the case.
[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
Similarly, say we were to lynch **fluiddruid ** tonight and she comes up scum, what does that mean for NAF? If we are to believe your logic, then if fluiddruid is scum, then NAF must also be scum or a power role and thus, if NAF isn’t scum, and would thus probably die tonight.
[/quote]
Well to me, NAF hasn’t set off any alarms. Similiar to what other’s have said about him, he seems to be really putting himself out there and playing hard. This doesn’t strike me as something a mafia member would do. I’m thinking back to the first Werewolf game that RT held and I seem to remember a rule was “Werewolves may talk and vote when it’s day but cannot lead the town in any overly way”. I’m assuming that’s a rule for the game usually.
And those two things alone don’t make NAF suspicious in my eyes. Like I had said, I was already suspicious of fluiddruid for four reasons and then thinking about the other, non-game facts, it made the seed of doubt grow.
So no, I don’t think NAF is scum. At least not yet. No vibes from him yet, however he could be fooling us both (and others) very easily. But combined with other suspicions, I do think fluiddruid gives off the impression one (or having a power role).
[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
Yes, she’s a mod, but I’m under the impression roles were given out randomly (probably using our friend random.org, I imagine Gadarene can clear this up).
[/QUOTE]
I will state unequivocally and for the record that no particular role was asked for nor given based on moderator status.
I am sure Gadarene will confirm this.
Gah! I will learn to preview sometime, heh. I have before but reading my last post over, I realize I put in a pointless apostrophe.
[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
Good point, and I’d noticed that as well; but don’t forget she was also the detective last game and the instinct with that kind of power role is to play safely. That said, while the chance that she’s a cop again is low, I’m still inclined to trust her because she appears to have learned from that mistake. In fact, i’d be more suspicious if she was playing the same way, given how it turned out last time.
[/QUOTE]
Well it’s true that the instinct with power roles is to play safely, but this seems like a 180% turnaround from sly, shadow-lurking sleuth to smack-you-with-a-phonebook obvious vagrant. (Not that that’s a bad thing, necessarily!)
[QUOTE=Omi no Kami]
Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she’s flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she’s scum, and trying to confuse us by “helpfully” providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn’t feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it’ll be much more obvious what the deal is.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=BlasterMaster]
Good point, and I’d noticed that as well; but don’t forget she was also the detective last game and the instinct with that kind of power role is to play safely. That said, while the chance that she’s a cop again is low, I’m still inclined to trust her because she appears to have learned from that mistake. In fact, i’d be more suspicious if she was playing the same way, given how it turned out last time.
[/QUOTE]
… these two posts ring my scum-o-meter.
CaerieD only has two (count them two! !) posts after daybreak!