The non-sensical rush to lynch peeker was pointless, and I am on the record stating that I thought the case against him was weak, and I stated it prior to us learning that peeker was town.
My vote had some motive which I stated… basically it was a “let’s even up for the voting tally to see if the extra pressure being applied causes some sort of slip”. At least I was trying something.
In other news… is there ever a good reason that we wouldn’t lynch a spawn every single day? I can understand if we reach an end-game where we think the scum are on the verge of outnumbering us, so we throw a “Hail Mary” double player kill in an effort to steal the win… but other than that, why would we not always lynch the spawn?
Well, the good news is that we’ve got two new bits of information. The bad news is that I’m not very sure they help us all that much.
Firstly, we know **peeker **was town. But that doesn’t really tell us a huge amount about the motivations of people voting for him. I can see that he made it easy for scum to vote for him; the flip side is, he also made it easy for town (e.g. special ed). So while there’s a plausible scum-motivation for a peeker-vote, by itself it’s not such outlandish behaviour as to tell us anything. In other words, I think there probably
Secondly, we know **ed **was town. That at least tells us that everything he posted was in good faith. But most of what he posted was about double-lysing (or not), or his case against peeker, which doesn’t seem to tell us much. He was also the most prolific poster at the time of his death - I half-wonder if the point of killing him was just to make us waste time reading all his posts for clues? In any case, it feels like empty speculation at this point.
My unfortunate suspicion is that the Day One narrative is: **peeker **stirs the pot, and attracts votes from town, plus some scum who see cover; **Scuba **attracts votes from townies who want an alternative to peeker, plus some scum who see cover; the remainder, unconvinced by either case, pursue their own one-off votes - plus some scum who see cover.
I’m certainly interested in hearing more from Scuba, as this may throw some more light on his wagon. (Not knowing his alignment makes it more difficult to even guess at motivation, but obviously lysing him just for the info would be poor play indeed, so further interrogation is all that’s warranted.) I’m also interested in hearing from our quietest players - TexCat, fluiddruid, **Diggit **and USCDiver. We need play to generate info.
When I voted for Freudian Slit, the Scuba_Ben bandwagon had not yet come to fruition. I think I have been quite clear on my stance regarding peekercpa. I stuck with my vote for Freudian Slit because I felt she was the best lynch candidate. I supported neither the Scuba_Ben nor peekercpa wagons. Therefore my vote was on neither.
DiggitCamara voted even earlier than me, so it isn’t as though he chose Freudian to duck some mysical referendum.
storyteller’s vote was later, he will have to tell you what he was thinking.
I could follow this reasoning if peekercpa was scum, but peekercpa is Town so I’m not following the reasoning one bit. Are you saying that scummy KellyCriterion tried to derail the peekercpa lynch? If it turned out that Scuba_Ben is scum, would you change your opinion on KellyCriterion?
My interpretation was KellyCriterion’s reason for voting Scuba_Ben was to establish a two horse race. Not necessarily a fantastic reason, but it is a reason, and not one that I entirely disagree with.
Regarding my vote for Freudian: I voted for the person for whom I was most suspicious, at the time when I had done enough reading and discussing to feel more or less comfortable with the vote. With rare exceptions, I don’t believe in voting in any other way; if I didn’t find the cases for peeker or Scuba compelling - and I didn’t - then voting for one of them just because they happen to be the lynch leaders doesn’t accurately reflect my thinking.
And I will almost always vote late, unless something happens to promote a very strong suspicion earlier in the Day.
You must be kidding. I voted for a Town power role? How on earth was I supposed to know that he was a power role? Seriously, this is just weak. As to the fact that it was late, well, the behaviour that I voted for occurred just a few hours before. Yes, it was a one-off, but I felt that it was worth bringing attention to.
Sorry for the delay but I wanted to be able to quote a bunch o posts and that’s a pain from my phone.
I think what gave me the idea was it actually being suggested . . . umm but I can’t find it. I thought I remembered Freudian or Fluid posting something about how we needed to lynch both Scuba and Peeker so that our discussion could move on toDay. I guess since that is just a figment of my imagination I’m probably imagining the whole thing.
There a couple of people missing from your list thought and it’s another example how there could be a wagon formed by scum who aren’t on it at the end. (No I’m not accusing the missing of being scum). Here is Ed’s list of the people on Scuba’s case.
I’m going to drop this unless someone can back up my memory of the quote. Still even though I was part of it the Scuba case felt weak yesterDay and I had some concerns even while it was happening that we were being manipulated. Who know’s maybe I was full of it.
Well Ed put the list of people at seven and since I know that I’m town I’d say that up to six of them were scum but since I think there are only 4 scum I would say probably no more then 3 of them are scum. I never was looking about Scuba in this case because I think the make up of the wagon doesn’t reflect at all on the people on it. There is just as much chance of there being scum on the Peeker wagon now that he has been show to be town as there would have been if he had flipped scum.
Since I don’t think we should lynch two people in one day (we should lynch one potential scum and one spawn, IMO), I think you’re right about it being a figment. At least in regard to me.
Yep, that would be pretty much it I just misremembered the person. Of course having a proven townie suggest it really doesn’t help with my thought process of scum trying to motivate us.
I’ll do some more thinking and see if I want to pick this idea back up. I don’t have much else to go on so it may be worth it to try and see how he was manipulated, if he was.
I can understand voting for a late, one-off vote. But how does the fact that it was a Town power role mean anything? Who could have known that he had that role prior to his lysing?
How is the bolded part relevant at all? We didn’t have a night start, so it’s pretty good (granted not certain) odds that scum would have no knowledge about it yesterday.
The motivation quoted looks good on the surface, but it smells funny. vote Drain Bead for now.
Try going back to Yesterday, I outlined a few reasons I thought were good. This smacks dangerously of skimming. Skimming is a potential sign of scumminess–and frankly I’m not buying your innocent newbie schtick–you’re juxtaposing “what’s a mason” with at least pseudo-sophisticated self-defense like in the beginning of this post. It smells bad to me here too…
vote KellyCriterion
Before the lynch, I will switch a vote to Spawn because at this point I believe we are still too early in the game to not lynch Spawn. However, I don’t feel any need to hold back votes for players this early in the Day.
I don’t think Drain Bead’s reasoning is as bad as you are saying. No, Rysto couldn’t have known it was a power role. But special ed was playing fairly pro-town, and to vote for him at the last minute does kind of show that it’s a poor vote. Plus then he just so happens to die…though then again, could be scum trying to make it look like a townie Rysto is scum, so who knows.
No no, I agree here. I went back and grabbed a lot of Ed’s quotes. I wanted to compare it to other people advocating for double player kills, that spawn can wait.
If I may go one further on you amrussell:
Scum do not want Spawn dead. Spawn are aligned with Scum and their guaranteed population increase each summer outweighs the random chance of adding a vote to scum.
Was Ed adding or taking away to their conversation? Would it be easier to sell just one box of Spawn misconceptions [excuse the pun] with the Scum brand, or was Ed on to to something? Was Ed Noise or Signal to Scum?
WIFOM.
Why would Scum kill someone who was against an immediate Spawn vote every day?
Why would Scum kill someone who was that vocal about it ?
Is that beccause you have nuts, or are nuts? :)