and then we claim like this.
hey this should help z
you have my sympathies, peeker.
hey, ed i am playing for a town win. anything less than that is unacceptable.
How do you Un-FOS someone ?
**I would like to UnFOS Jimmy.
**
In general, I feel as if I will never be able to breakthrough and play as you guys do. That may or may not be a good thing, but, If I can never get there, no point in debating it.
To me, It just feels like so much of an uphill battle, trying to reach a point where we all can understand each other, at times I wonder if its not 90 degrees or more.
To Jimmy’s point:
I felt like the vote stunk to high heaven. I felt I could explain why it was a bad vote by starting up the entire “you can’t switch a vote” discourse.
Perhaps I made my point, and took a few steps too many gilding the lily, tying to make it into a
** I can haz ultimate Mafia winz?!**
calculus / gaming system.
Either way, that vote no longer stands, and I think we ran this moot conversation into the ground.
Wait, so you’re Madonna? Now I’m confused.
maybe this will help
Are you claiming Madonna now, Drain? :dubious:
OOG:
Of all nights for my Internet connection to act up.
I just want the 360 Game Room, is that too much to ask?
apparently.
This is taking a ridiculously long time, and Ive got to get to bed as I have two hours manning a stall to publicise the people I work for tomorrow morning. So here’s the abbreviated version of what I’ve done so far.
- The nameclaim.
This was decided on very quickly, in something like 2½ hours, and by one-third of the players. If, when we start learning rolenames and powers, we discern a pattern, we might find one of the nefarious forces pushed it. If there’s no pattern, then I doubt anything will be learned.
2.Peeker’s “roleclaim.”
It’s in quotes because I did not see it as a claim at the time, and still don’t. Most of the reason is that this :
(which is the sum total of information I get from the post) is not a roleclaim. YouTube links are, to me, utterly meaningless, since I can’t watch the videos.
Peeker, if you try and convey a concept to someone else, you have to consider not only how you want to articulate your message, but also how the intended recipients might interpret the message. If a significant portion of your audience does not understand the message, then the problem lies with your choice of method, not with their reception gear.
Or, to say it another way, you need to avoid elliptical and misleading statements coupled with meaningless links if you want to get your message across. I had no idea that was your claim until you came out and said so explicitly. None.
That’s all I want to say on that entire episode.
- OAOW and the misspellings.
I don’t think you can tell, form the fact that two letters in a word are transposed, who mistyped. It’s the sort of mistake anyone can make, unlike the mistake which should have, but did not, feature in my lynch in Pollux’s bastard game. The word “neutralise” was not spelled in the American fashion (ie with a “z”), a clear pointer to the author being non-American. Sach might have transposed the letters while working up the PMs (and, if he was using a spellchecker it was probably being ignored owing to the high number of false positives it would generate from the strange names.)
OAOW also collected at least one vote for role-fishing. I can see why a bad guy might want to go fishing for indications of a nonscum being non-vanilla, as that would indicate Town power, or possibly third party. Or it might be a Townie pushing for something which indicates non-vanilla status, and who could thus be a bad guy. The problem with this is that the nefarious forces would learn more than the Townie would, hence it is a decidedly anti-Town action.
- KellyCriterion.
Kelly’s had only one spurt of participation. I read his posts as being made as he read the thread - read this, post that - and his vote for NAF to arise from his lack of online experience meaning he failed t realise the fundamental weakness in OAOW’s accusation. I’m not sure that this is the sort of mistake that one of the nefarious forces is particularly likely to make, so I’m going to cut him a little slack.
I need to read the rest of the thread, and I can’t afford to sit up all night. Ill try and put an hour in over morning coffee.
Well, it seems I DIDN’T as intended post that I was going to be out of town for two days at a blackjack tournament (at which I got stomped hardcore. =P) so yeah.
On the other hand, I’m glad I missed it, upon re-read.
Man, Peeker. I like him personally but his playstyle drives me up a wall. I think both is opening gambit of “arbitrarily vote a strong player” and Chronos’ analysis of his pseudo-claim are the best thing we have going right now–and I think they both kinda suck as reasons. Grant that it’s day one.
I’m going to re-read this again and vote tomorrow. I’m normally an early and often kind of guy but meh, vacation screws up the rhythm.
FOS at everyone who brought up peeker voting story straight off as a reason to vote him.
He’s done it in every game I’ve played with the two of them, and I think every time I’ve seen him do it, he’s been Town. He’s probably done it as Scum too, just not in any games I’ve been in. Point is, he does it in every game, so it’s pretty much a null tell. At this point, I’d worry more if he didn’t do it. And most of you have been in the same games, or watched them, and know this.
/snipped
Do you mean to FOS Zeriel alone or have others used the vote on Story as part of their reasoning for their vote on Peeker?
So not much in the way of new arguments since my last post - two votes for peeker, one for Kelly (Jimmy, also citing the “i don’t believe OaOW is catching so much heat” remark) and a small blow-up surrounding Meeko and the gambler’s fallacy.
I still haven’t had a chance to really go back and reread Chronos’ interactions with peeker to evaluate story’s argument about him.
I will note that there are about 7 players who haven’t voted yet - please vote, townies.
Ugh, ugh, ugh. I worked from home yesterday, and was gleefully anticipating spending a good hour developing a case. I had time, I had my own computer with a better connection so I could browse the thread more easily, it was going to rock. Then a tree in my backyard freaking fell down.
So I’m going to need to be a bit abbreviated. I don’t like the case against peeker, which at this point is starting to border on an arbitrary “let’s just lynch peeker on general principles” thing than any kind of actual game play. How many times do we have to go along with a shitty argument and lynch peeker Day One before we stop doing that?
I mean, he might be Scum, and I hope he is, because at least then this Day won’t be a total lost (see what I did there? Hi, Total! You never play any more!). But we’re collectively on the same path we stumbled down for Days in the Cecil Pond game, and it’s a terrible idea. For everyone who’s on about peeker being a distraction - which is more of a distraction: the guy who makes one single sort of confusing post then clarifies it, or the people who keep banging on about that single confusing post for real-life days on end?
Oh, and by the way, peeker:
Seriously, Elizabeth Berkley? She’s scary, and I think I got a social disease just from looking at her picture.
Hmmm… no change in vote count. That’s probably not a good sign.
storyteller (0): [del]peekercpa 116 201[/del]
peekercpa (4): [del]Zeriel 151 190[/del], [del]TexCat 314 356[/del], Chronos 360, Meeko 383, Freudian Slit 478, Mahaloth 482
NAF1138 (0): [del]One And Only Wanderers 179 288[/del], [del]KellyCriterion 242 244[/del]
One And Only Wanderers (0): [del]Chronos 180 360[/del], [del]Jimmy Chitwood 184[/del], [del]Meeko 220 291[/del]
Mahaloth (0): [del]Meeko 291 298[/del]
KellyCriterion (2): NAF1138 313, Jimmy Chitwood 484
TexCat (2): Red Skeezix 316, Tom Scud 328, [del]peekercpa 346 450[/del]
Oredigger77 (1): Drain Bead 347
Red Skeezix (1): TexCat 356, [del]Freudian Slit 364 478[/del]
Chronos (2): storyteller0910 416, peekercpa 450
Well, this time it seems we’re not just voting for him for that. Chronos made the argument that he was scum trying to pretend he wasn’t the Wicked Witch until he was sure it was safe to claim an “evil” character, and I agreed with that assessment.
/snipped
I haven’t voted. I’m on the fence about Peeker and therefore Chronos and Special Ed in their accusation. I’d like the noise to end but am not sure which of them, if any, is scum.
With all the discussion focused on 2 or 3 players, it’s been hard to get a read on anyone else. I’m a little suspicious of Rysto for starting the discussion on the name claim, not actually taking part in the discussion (but posting), and then being almost the last player to actually claim. Not a lot to go on.
Okay, so you’re going to FOS me for… calling out a stupid play. Repeated anti-town play is still anti-town, even if it’s traditional and he always does it.
And I don’t have anything better to go on right now, so since you’re fostering anti-town behaviors (and, I might add, FOSing an apparent list (“everyone”) that includes pretty much me and…me,
vote Drain Bead