Werewolf - a game.

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
361

Note about the Seer. He/she shouldn’t claim today, not at all. What the strategy should be is to lay breadcrumbs about your results. Something extremely subtle, so it won’t be picked up on now. But later, if you die unclaimed, we’ll be able to comb through your posts and get an idea of who you investigated. If you casually mention, for example, that you felt Captain Carrot was town, then we’d be liable to believe you. That’s how that role should be played. Live as long as possible.

I should mention, though, that if you think you’ve tipped your hand enough that the bad guys may have noticed, then you should probably go ahead and claim out loud. That way, our Guardian Angel will know who to protect.

362

[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
They would have to vote, of course, but would just do so as part of a bandwagon and without much fanfare. By that standard, my vote is: Kat. (For now.)
[/QUOTE]

Hey, Menocchio wasn’t a bandwagon yet when I voted for him! He only had 2 votes at the time (3 counting Ogre’s simulpost with my vote).

As for today, I haven’t any idea yet as to who I’m voting for yet. I’ve got one or two who I’m considering, but no firm suspicions yet so I’ll keep my mouth shut on that for now.

Well, my vote was strongly influenced by his defense of eating kibble. I read the comment as a joke at first, but after re-reading it a few times, it just felt werewolf-like to me.

363

[QUOTE=Rubystreak]
Just FYI, these are the three lurkingest posters as of now. I didn’t include unfinished symphony because he (she?) was added after the first round, and seems to be contributing and not laying low.

Miller
Richard Parker
moonstarsun

You three are on notice for non-participation. Come out into the light!
[/QUOTE]

I gotta say, this is just silly. Adding posts about baco-raisons is cute, but can hardly be called participation in the game in any meaningful sense. Indeed, this effort to call people out strikes me as more of a tactic than something done out of a sense of fairness or for the spirit of the game. Whether it is the tactic of a werewolf or a confused townsperson is another question, I suppose.

364

[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
I gotta say, this is just silly. Adding posts about baco-raisons is cute, but can hardly be called participation in the game in any meaningful sense. Indeed, this effort to call people out strikes me as more of a tactic than something done out of a sense of fairness or for the spirit of the game. Whether it is the tactic of a werewolf or a confused townsperson is another question, I suppose.
[/QUOTE]

It is a tactic, just like lurking and not posting is a tactic. If you’ve got nothing to hide, why not get into the convo and mix it up? My idea was, get people to talk so I and others can have a decent idea of who might be a werewolf. So my tactic worked. Here you are. All the better for the game, and if you stick around and chat, then I probably won’t vote to lynch you… unless you say something really suspicious. See, you’re damned if you do and damned if you dont. :stuck_out_tongue:

Now where are Miller and moonstarsun? Miller has posted quite a bit elsewhere on the board in the last couple of days, but his last post to this thread was 10 days ago. My feeling is, either he’s hiding something, or he’s not playing anymore. Either way, I’d vote to lynch him because I don’t think it’s in the spirit of the game to withhold participation like that. moonstarsun, OTOH, has apparently only posted to this thread and no others since 2/14. So s/he is paying attention to the game, but deliberately not saying much. Does that strike you as suspicious? It does me. So for me, these two are high on my list of potential people to lynch.

As for you, Richard Parker, interesting that you pop up so fast at the mention of your name, which you have done twice now (once when mentioned by RT for low participation, once when mentioned by me for same). As with moonstarsun, it makes me wonder why you are following the thread so closely but choosing to say so little.

But still, I have no idea if I’m onto anything or what. You guys might be laying low because you are the GA or the Seer. And wouldn’t that suck if you got lynched for being too quiet…

365

Yammering like a fool nearly got me killed, but it was more fun than being quiet. I think I’ll go back to yammering. Gotta go out in style, baybee!

My beady eyes are on Miller, oh yes.

366

[QUOTE=Captain Carrot]
jsgoddess, I hate to point this out, but Menocchio’s lynching and subsequent unveiling does nothing to prove you innocent.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I know. And I didn’t vote for the Alpha Wolf, which turns out to be really dumb.

I told ya I was too dumb to be a werewolf target! sob

Wait, why am I sobbing over that? Gah.

367

[QUOTE=Rubystreak]
It is a tactic, just like lurking and not posting is a tactic. If you’ve got nothing to hide, why not get into the convo and mix it up? My idea was, get people to talk so I and others can have a decent idea of who might be a werewolf. So my tactic worked. Here you are. All the better for the game, and if you stick around and chat, then I probably won’t vote to lynch you… unless you say something really suspicious. See, you’re damned if you do and damned if you dont. :stuck_out_tongue:

Now where are Miller and moonstarsun? Miller has posted quite a bit elsewhere on the board in the last couple of days, but his last post to this thread was 10 days ago. My feeling is, either he’s hiding something, or he’s not playing anymore. Either way, I’d vote to lynch him because I don’t think it’s in the spirit of the game to withhold participation like that. moonstarsun, OTOH, has apparently only posted to this thread and no others since 2/14. So s/he is paying attention to the game, but deliberately not saying much. Does that strike you as suspicious? It does me. So for me, these two are high on my list of potential people to lynch.

As for you, Richard Parker, interesting that you pop up so fast at the mention of your name, which you have done twice now (once when mentioned by RT for low participation, once when mentioned by me for same). As with moonstarsun, it makes me wonder why you are following the thread so closely but choosing to say so little.

But still, I have no idea if I’m onto anything or what. You guys might be laying low because you are the GA or the Seer. And wouldn’t that suck if you got lynched for being too quiet…
[/QUOTE]

Well, I am following the thread closely. But short of offering my take on the game so far and my vote, I’m not sure exactly what it is I am to be contributing (aside from banter, and I’m not sure how that affects things tactically).

For the record: I think **Ogre **behaved somewhat suspiciously on the first day, and I am also suspicious of JSexton’s open strategizing. But I don’t have much strong to go on, so I voted for **Kat **given the reasons I offered.

There are many ways to play this game, and the beauty is that there is no one true set of tactics because we’re all constantly adapting. Since I am a “lurker”, and also a townsperson, naturally I find it a bad idea to lynch lurkers (like me!).

368

[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
Well, I am following the thread closely. But short of offering my take on the game so far and my vote, I’m not sure exactly what it is I am to be contributing (aside from banter, and I’m not sure how that affects things tactically).

For the record: I think **Ogre **behaved somewhat suspiciously on the first day, and I am also suspicious of JSexton’s open strategizing. But I don’t have much strong to go on, so I voted for **Kat **given the reasons I offered.

There are many ways to play this game, and the beauty is that there is no one true set of tactics because we’re all constantly adapting. Since I am a “lurker”, and also a townsperson, naturally I find it a bad idea to lynch lurkers (like me!).
[/QUOTE]

Look, I addressed this yesterday. Aside from the Seer, the only method we have to find scum is to analyze the thoughts and positions put forth by players in this thread. Therefore, one typical scum strategy is to avoid posting opinions and analysis. See, scum are in an awkward position. They can either attack and vote for townies (which will inevitably look bad for them), or they can attack and vote for their teammates (which makes it hard to actually win).

What that means is, we cannot allow any players to not post. Lurking cannot be considered a valid playstyle, because it takes away our best chance of winning this game. If someone cannot post, or simply chooses to not play, they should be replaced. But if you are deliberately following the game and avoiding posting, then that is simply anti-town, and you’ll hang for it. I’ll make sure of it.

369

[QUOTE=JSexton]
Look, I addressed this yesterday. Aside from the Seer, the only method we have to find scum is to analyze the thoughts and positions put forth by players in this thread. Therefore, one typical scum strategy is to avoid posting opinions and analysis. See, scum are in an awkward position. They can either attack and vote for townies (which will inevitably look bad for them), or they can attack and vote for their teammates (which makes it hard to actually win).

What that means is, we cannot allow any players to not post. Lurking cannot be considered a valid playstyle, because it takes away our best chance of winning this game. If someone cannot post, or simply chooses to not play, they should be replaced. But if you are deliberately following the game and avoiding posting, then that is simply anti-town, and you’ll hang for it. I’ll make sure of it.
[/QUOTE]

You addressed it, yes, but I disagree (for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the significance of votes, and the uselessness of banter). Gotta love town democracy! You’ll note what I said earlier about there not being any such thing as the one true strategy was not directed at you, but it may as well have been.

That said, I just re-read the whole thread again, and I’ve come to agree with you on one thing: One and Only Wanderers is particularly suspicious. The first to vote, admits reading up on the game elsewhere (seems like more of a werewolf behavior than a townie behavior), and was voted for by the lately departed Rysto. Therefore I unvote Kat and vote One and Only Wanderers.

370

Richard Parker casts the fateful third vote for One And Only Wanderers!

I think that took guts. Breaking the “3rd person to vote for a person is a wolf” thing was something that needed to be done. Unless he is a wolf and is just being clever, but that doesn’t seem to be the case, to me at least.

Do I vote for Miller or OAOW now? I see the merits of voting for either of them, but I’m still not confident about any analysis at this point. I’d hate to back up the lynching of someone we find out to be a fellow townie. So, for the time being my vote stays the same, but I can change it if a consensus is needed.

371

[QUOTE=dnooman]
Richard Parker casts the fateful third vote for One And Only Wanderers!

I think that took guts. Breaking the “3rd person to vote for a person is a wolf” thing was something that needed to be done. Unless he is a wolf and is just being clever, but that doesn’t seem to be the case, to me at least.

Do I vote for Miller or OAOW now? I see the merits of voting for either of them, but I’m still not confident about any analysis at this point. I’d hate to back up the lynching of someone we find out to be a fellow townie. So, for the time being my vote stays the same, but I can change it if a consensus is needed.
[/QUOTE]
[Emphasis mine]

So I’m either not clever or not a wolf, eh? :smiley:

372

Wait, wait, I’m still here! I’m not lurking, just haven’t had time to participate as much as I should. My apologies. In my defense, I’m not a big poster in any thread. I’ll try to do better here.

However, I do know that Miller posts a lot, so his lack of participation strikes me as a bit suspicious. It’s with regret that I cast my vote for Miller.

373

[QUOTE=JSexton]
Look, I addressed this yesterday. Aside from the Seer, the only method we have to find scum is to analyze the thoughts and positions put forth by players in this thread. Therefore, one typical scum strategy is to avoid posting opinions and analysis.
[/QUOTE]

I agree in principle. However, I think Richard Parker is being unfairly singled out here. He has voted several times now, and stated his reasons each time. That is plenty of participation. Now, someone who posts 5 times a day but says absolutely nothing that could even influence a vote one way or another is just as bad as someone who doesn’t post at all, only they are attempting to hide in plain sight. Merely adding up someone’s post count on a given day gives an incomplete picture. You have to find other pieces and see how they fit into the puzzle.

374

From what I can see, dnooman, Richard Parker, and JSexton have all bluntly stated that they are townspeople. When JSexton first said this, I became suspicious, but re-reading, have decided to believe him. (For now at least.)

I haven’t made up my mind about dnooman yet, but I’m keeping my eye on things. :wink:

Richard Parker, on the other hand, seems to be trying very hard to convince us that he is a townsperson. When people lie, they tend to go overboard on details. Namely:

He is trying to nail home the point that he is a lurking townsperson, and that it would be very bad to vote for him because of this. I, however, see it as overcompensation. (That word doesn’t look right :dubious: ) I vote for Richard Parker

375

im gonna

vote Richard Parker

purely on the third vote reasoning.

376

An early count. The people in brackets are the people that have voted for them.

One and Only Wanderers - 3 Votes (JSexton, MadTheSwine, Richard Parker)

Miller - 2 Votes (dnooman, moonstarssun)

Richard Parker - 2 Votes (hocow, One and Only Wanderers)

377

[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
You addressed it, yes, but I disagree (for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the significance of votes, and the uselessness of banter). Gotta love town democracy! You’ll note what I said earlier about there not being any such thing as the one true strategy was not directed at you, but it may as well have been.
[/quote]

I’ll certainly agree that there are multiple playstyles. However, lurking cannot be on of them. Period.

378

[QUOTE=dnooman]
Richard Parker casts the fateful third vote for One And Only Wanderers!

I think that took guts. Breaking the “3rd person to vote for a person is a wolf” thing was something that needed to be done. Unless he is a wolf and is just being clever, but that doesn’t seem to be the case, to me at least.

[/QUOTE]

I did say it’s the sort of thing that only works once. When people are hyperaware of it, it loses usefulness.

379

[QUOTE=One And Only Wanderers]
im gonna

vote Richard Parker

purely on the third vote reasoning.
[/QUOTE]

Wow. WOW. You’re big on voting for people who vote for you, aren’t you? That’s incredibly defensive.

Very happy with my vote on you.

380

[QUOTE=sturmhauke]
I agree in principle. However, I think Richard Parker is being unfairly singled out here. He has voted several times now, and stated his reasons each time.
[/QUOTE]

The reason I’ve been addressing this to Richard Parker is because he is the only one attempting to justify lurking as a legit strategy, as opposed to merely not playing the game, like Miller. Richard’s level of participation really isn’t that bad, as you point out, but it seems like he might be trying to lay groundwork for lurking later on.