[QUOTE=DiggitCamara]
Another thought now: Until now I’d thought Malacandra was a Believer (or at least not a Cultist) because he’d almost gotten voted off on Day 2 instead of Kat. Looking back at the final vote tally it’s interesting to see that out of the 5 votes at the end of that Day (Pleonast, fluiddruid, sachertorte, Hal Briston, **Kat **) only one is unidentified (sachertorte, if we assume Pleonast) roleclaimed accurately. His was also the fateful “3rd vote” on Malacandra. And it came at a time where Kat and Malacandra were tied at 2 votes…
Sadly we don’t know the alignment of half the players who voted for Kat (Fretful Porpentine, Autolycus, SnakesCatLady,** Kyrie Eleison** ,Scuba_Ben, Idle Thoughts ), but after my (probable) dunking you will know at least those of me, **SnakesCatLady **and ScubaBen. I am now almost sure Idle Thoughts is town-aligned (a combination of playing style adding Malacandra’s post) which would make it at least 4 town-aligned players. This is important, because it would explain why the Cultist didn’t make a strong effort to save Kat.
So: if sachertorte was investigated by the Oracle and came back as a “Believer”, this would mean he is the Prophet and made the mistake of trying to divert the bandwagon against Kat.
So: unvote Kyrie
vote sachertorte
[/QUOTE]
For some reason I’m getting lost in your parentheses. Can you try the first two paragraphs again?
I’ll be honest, Mal…your claim seems REALLY fishy to me. You don’t know what information you possess and you say you’ve protected Pleonast before he claimed Martyr. OK, you say you missed a night, but I get the feeling you’re lying and trying to cover up a mistake.
[QUOTE=ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]
For some reason I’m getting lost in your parentheses. Can you try the first two paragraphs again?
[/QUOTE]
No problem.
Day 2:
[ul]
[li]Kat started off with an early vote list (2 votes)[/li][li]Malacandra caught up, soon enough[/li][li]sachertorte attempted to jump on the forming bandwagon to save Kat(possibly–and if so, bad strategy)[/li][/ul]
In addition to that, all voters (excepting sachertorte) for Malacandra on Day 2 have known alignments. Many of those who voted for Kat are known as well. It all points towards abandonment of Kat’s cause, except for sachertorte’s (possible) mistake.
Hal’s “breadcrumb” would exhonerate sachertorte if
[ul]
[li]it was pointed at sachertorte[/li][li]we knew the Prophet[/li][/ul]
I’m betting sachertorte is the Prophet.
I hope that clears up my convoluted thought process.
I won’t vote for hockeymonkey, pleonast, zeriel, or I guess Malacandra now. Nor will I vote sachertorte as he is gone and can’t role claim. Or myself of course
(snip)
Nor will I vote sachertorte as he is gone and can’t role claim.
(snip)
[/QUOTE]
You’re quite right about that. On the other hand, I think people definitely should unvote Malacandra (unless there’s a counterclaim, of course). That would mean, quite probably, that I’ll be dunked, but I would, at least, leave a meaningful vote behind.
Right now the evidence strongly indicts **sachertorte **(in my mind, at least). Not only because of what I posted but because he:
Was extremely “helpful” so far, which seems to emulate storyteller’s infamous run as Godfather in M2
Has been a strong advocator of the “summing up” trend. In my mind that has helped to “muddy the waters” more than anything else.
amrussell has been pinging my scumdar as well. He seems to have been on a parallel course to Kyrie’s campaign against me, avoiding to seem to be in cahoots with him.
So. Right now, my suspect would be sachertorte, Kyrie, amrussell, in that order.
[QUOTE=DiggitCamara]
In addition to that, all voters (excepting sachertorte) for Malacandra on Day 2 have known alignments. Many of those who voted for Kat are known as well. It all points towards abandonment of Kat’s cause, except for sachertorte’s (possible) mistake.
[/QUOTE]
I went to check this claim.
Malacandra had five votes in Day 2 :[ul]1004 : Pleonast.
1031 : Fluiddruid.
1119 : Sachertorte.
1167 : Idle Thoughts. 1281 : Unvoted.
1267 : Hal Briston.
1273 : Kat.[/ul]Of those three are certainly known and we have one claim. I’m not sure whether that quite supports “all bar one” as there must be some lingering doubt over the claim (we have true certainty only in death.) But it’s close enough.
For Kat we had six :[ul]1064 : Fretful Porpentine.
1120 : Autolycus.
1142 : SnakesCatLady.
1154 : DarkCookies. 1171 : Unvote.
1166 : Kyrie Eleison.
1233 : Scuba_Ben.
1309 I Idle Thoughts.[/ul]The only two we know there are SCL and Scuba_Ben. The other four don’t have a claim between them.
Two out of six is not “many” - it is “a few.” The latter doesn’t sound nearly as emphatic, does it?
The overstatement inclines me not to accept the case, and look a bit more askance at DiggitCamara[sub]2[/sub]. I’m not voting for DC[sub]2[/sub] yet though.
[QUOTE=FlyingCowOfDoom]
I’ll be honest, Mal…your claim seems REALLY fishy to me. You don’t know what information you possess and you say you’ve protected Pleonast before he claimed Martyr. OK, you say you missed a night, but I get the feeling you’re lying and trying to cover up a mistake.
I’m not really sure what to make of you yet.
–FCOD
[/QUOTE]
I’m not necessarily saying I protected Pleonast before he claimed Martyr. I miscounted the Days, that was all. I appear to be discouraged from revealing any more. I know perfectly well what information I possess: who the Priest is. You know it would be fatuous play to reveal that even to save my own life.
Sorry. At least you know that my role does exist in the game.
:smack: Well, I sure do know how to pick 'em, don’t I?
Unvote Malacandra.
Vote Pygmy Rugger who strikes me as the most likely scum among the remaining candidates, thanks to the silence of the first two incarnations followed by a flurry of energetic posting that strikes me mostly as a way to say “See! See, I’m not being silent!”
[QUOTE=Malacandra]
I know perfectly well what information I possess: who the Priest is. You know it would be fatuous play to reveal that even to save my own life.
[/QUOTE]
That’s for sure. I was referring to when you said “and it’s obvious that I’m not in possession of privileged information”. See, if I was the Disciple, I can’t imagine ever saying that. I would say that, however, if I was pretending to be the Disciple and forgot that detail about the role.
Two out of six is not “many” - it is “a few.” The latter doesn’t sound nearly as emphatic, does it?
The overstatement inclines me not to accept the case, and look a bit more askance at DiggitCamara[sub]2[/sub]. I’m not voting for DC[sub]2[/sub] yet though.
[/QUOTE]
Dude: not only didn’t I say “many” I said
… which is the same thing you said.
I went on to add that I now believe another of those who voted for Malacandra was town-aligned… Which, to me makes 4 out of 6 votes.
[QUOTE=FlyingCowOfDoom]
That’s for sure. I was referring to when you said “and it’s obvious that I’m not in possession of privileged information”. See, if I was the Disciple, I can’t imagine ever saying that. I would say that, however, if I was pretending to be the Disciple and forgot that detail about the role.
–FCOD
[/QUOTE]
[mode=clue-by-four]Does this help? Paragraph two, second and third sentences.[/mode]
[QUOTE=Fretful Porpentine]
<snip>thanks to the silence of the first two incarnations followed by a flurry of energetic posting that strikes me mostly as a way to say “See! See, I’m not being silent!”
[/QUOTE]
I can’t stress enough that I have no control over the silence that was before me. Most of my “energetic posting” comes from my one post and vote for Hockey, which took me what felt like twenty posts to fully explain. I’ve since agreed to put that logic on the back burner for now.
[QUOTE=FlyingCowOfDoom]
That’s for sure. I was referring to when you said “and it’s obvious that I’m not in possession of privileged information”. See, if I was the Disciple, I can’t imagine ever saying that. I would say that, however, if I was pretending to be the Disciple and forgot that detail about the role.
[QUOTE=Malacandra]
<snip>
Since no-one knows whether my protection succeeded or failed on a given Night, and it’s obvious that I’m not in possession of privileged information<snip>
[/QUOTE]
Never mind, the “privileged information” is weather or not the protection succeded or failed. :smack:
[QUOTE=FlyingCowOfDoom]
That’s for sure. I was referring to when you said “and it’s obvious that I’m not in possession of privileged information”. See, if I was the Disciple, I can’t imagine ever saying that. I would say that, however, if I was pretending to be the Disciple and forgot that detail about the role.
–FCOD
[/QUOTE]
After first reading this I thought, hmm, that was odd of the disciple to say…until I read it in context.
[QUOTE=malacandra]
You know, that’s what I get for answering the question before it’s been asked. I just naturally assumed that was the first thing people would be demanding to know. Of course, it would be quite funny if the scum had hit the Psychopath on a Night when my protection missed, wouldn’t it? (I mean, insofar as having the Psychopath on the loose is funny at all, which is questionable in itself.)
Since no-one knows whether my protection succeeded or failed on a given Night, and it’s obvious that I’m not in possession of privileged information, I hope it’s not given the scum too much information. I just took a view on who might be in need of protection and hoped to second-guess the scum. Up to now that’s not worked out wonderfully well, but my odds weren’t that good in the first place.
[/QUOTE]
Reading the whole post seems to bring that 1 sentence into a different light, at least I read it as such. To me it seems that he is saying he doesn’t know if his protection was successful.
If I am right it leads the suspicion back to you, as taking one sentence out of context to cast doubt onto someone who is claiming an important believer role.
[QUOTE=Malacandra]
[mode=clue-by-four]Does this help? Paragraph two, second and third sentences.[/mode]
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that helps. I didn’t parse that paragraph the way I should have the first time I read it.
[QUOTE=DiggitCamara]
Dude: not only didn’t I say “many” (snip)
[/quote]
Actually you did use the word “many.” You will find the statement I quoted in 2763.
I will concede that what you said in 2761 wasn’t the same as 2763.
I assume you meant Kat?
Yes, you may know (or think you know) four of Kat’s voters, but we know only two. And that’s what I picked up on.
Obviously DarkCookies wasn’t the only one slightly intimidated by 2761.
You say you’re the Disciple and then reveal who you’ve been protecting? If you’re really who you claim, you’ve just given the Cult a lot of very useful information. The Town doesn’t need to know who you protected. The Cult can use it to determine if their target was protected. To help them figure out if they activated the Psychopath or hit the Priest. And potentially help them out-guess who you’ll protect in the future. Gah! poorly played, Mal!
That said, we need to spare you for the time being. If you’re false claiming, we’ll you catch one way or another. Unvote Malacandra
Moving down my list: Vote FlyingCowOfDoom
