Whoa. “Gung ho”? I made one comment that her initial posts struck me in a certain way. I never voted for her - in fact, I mentioned that I perfectly understood being vociferous. Methinks you have a low threshold for “gung ho-ness”
I still think we should vote november/**november **sub, for the following reasons
We should test/lynch Day 1 the same person
I think voting november is a smart choice, because it eliminates any noise. We get the color scheme and role, and we don’t have to analyze the lynchee’s posts to see where our instincts went wrong or right, and then reapply those instincts/guesses to other people and their communications. Just get us some data.
I removed my vote from Seeker and then went to work. I’m not sure I see a good case against Telcontar, even though he is advocating no-lynch. Seeker is reading townie to me at the moment, although he is continuing to misread my posts. I think it is because he has convinced himself of my scumminess and is therefore reading everything I say thru scum-coloured glasses.
This discussion about power roles is probably not helpful in the long run.
I don’t like LTL, but with this little time left, I don’t see a viable alternative.
test november
Elendil, I’m not sure it was wise to reveal your side, but I can’t see a scum motivation for that at this point.
My post was largely in response to the lynch lurker post. I figured I’d review prior posts since I was largely going with my gut, and I really only feel that I’ve confirmed the need to feel suspicious. Lemur866 seems to just parrot things that have already been said; he/she is not breaking new ground. Her prior posts in fact seem to be pretty much parroting things that I’ve said, but without responding to me.
Why is this a problem? Lack of innovation and parroting others’ ideas as your own is, to me, a potential scum tell. Sure, it could be lack of reading the thread or just wanting to avoid the appearance of seeming like a lurker for benign reasons, but there are just too many scum reasons to show this behavior. After all, on the one hand, you can say “Look, you agree with me! Don’t vote for me!” You can ‘ally’ yourself with a townsperson and either gain credibility from theirs or sully their good name.
Scum posts won’t be nonsensical. In fact, I tend to agree with what was said upthread - bad strategy and bad ideas are not a scum tell. I believe it was Storyteller in a previous game who explained that it’s really a null tell to have a strategically bad idea in most cases. After all, scum weigh their posts much more carefully than Town on average because they have more to risk (limited numbers) and more information to go on. What could on the one hand be someone trying to mislead the Town into doing something foolish in a rather reckless scum ploy is often likely to be a townie, particularly a new townie, grasping at straws. I won’t say it’s a town tell because it’s too easy for scum to mimic if necessary but I haven’t found it terribly successful in finding townies in the past.
As for revealing your side - I don’t see a strategic reason for or against it either way. It would only really matter if we all revealed our sides and the count was really off kilter in one way or the other. In the end I bet we’d just end up with an even count and we’d end up lynching people who were late to post, and I don’t think it’s a particularly good strategy so early. It’ll probably be more of a factor in the late game. Remember that the town split is a boost to the scum team and I’d just as soon go for the 50% chance of winning if we destroy the scum rather than the 0% chance of winning if scum overtakes us.
I really hope people can get their test votes in soon… I don’t think lynching or testing a lurker who’s away from the board entirely is an especially good strategy at all.
Wait, what? Lemur posted much earlier and more than you at the start of the Day, which is easily verifiable.
With the original post this was not much more than a hunch, but I’m now deeply suspicious…
november (8): Lemur866, Freudian Slit, Mahaloth, Jimmy Chitwood , rexnervous, Allwalker, Daphne Black, Ichini Sanshigo
Daphne Black (3): Telecontar, Seeker of Truth and Beauty, Oredigger77
Telcontar (2): Zeriel, Elendil’s Heir
Seeker of Truth and Beauty (1): Justin Credible
Lemur866 (1): fluiddruid
fluiddruid (1): [Undecided] Adrian
Freudian Slit (1): Scuba_Ben
november (6): Lemur866, Jimmy Chitwood, rexnervous, Elendil’s Heir, AllWalker, Ichini Sanshigo
Seeker of Truth and Beauty (1): Justin Credible
Lemur866 (1): fluiddruid
Telcontar (1): Zeriel
[/QUOTE]
I think that lynch the lurker only works on the active lurkers, the people who are reading the thread but not posting or voting. Which is why I voted for Daphne, I figured she would get in here with a vote after reading that post. But this puts me in an uncomfortable position. I think that any votes for november are wasted because we are going to have him subbed out and a non-lurky poster brought in. There has been no defense by any scum buddies so more then likely he is town.
My problem is that I don’t want to do a second last minute vote shift with out being able to change the out come of the vote. It appears that november is a lock to be tested and then lynched so any where else that I vote it doesn’t matter. Instead of jumping once more I’m going to sit with my vote even though the reason for it has been pulled out from under me.
I realize that this is joining the bandwagon, but as we still have no input from november, we lose nothing by using em to get our first datum point.
Untest Freudian Slit
Test november
Lynch november
A larger point to keep in mind is, we have three groups, each of whom would love to wipe out the other two groups. But unlike usual mason / monk groups, if I recall correctly neither the Farmers nor the Ranchers know who else is in their group (barring undisclosed special roles).
I don’t get a clear scum read from the Daphne - Seeker debate. I sympathize with Daphne possibly freaking out under the stress, as that’s what got me lynched in my first game. It’s certainly worth keeping them both in a spotlight for a while, maybe somebody will slip up and reveal something useful.
Of course, that means everybody else gets a turn in the spotlight sooner or later. Even me. Hopefully I’ll survive the experience.
I realize that this is joining the bandwagon, but as we still have no input from november, we lose nothing by using em to get our first datum point.
Untest Freudian Slit
Test november
Lynch november
A larger point to keep in mind is, we have three groups, each of whom would love to wipe out the other two groups. But unlike usual mason / monk groups, if I recall correctly neither the Farmers nor the Ranchers know who else is in their group (barring undisclosed special roles).
I don’t get a clear scum read from the Daphne - Seeker debate. I sympathize with Daphne possibly freaking out under the stress, as that’s what got me lynched in my first game. It’s certainly worth keeping them both in a spotlight for a while, maybe somebody will slip up and reveal something useful.
Of course, that means everybody else gets a turn in the spotlight sooner or later. Even me. Hopefully I’ll survive the experience.
(Added on forced preview: I was forced to wait out a 60 second timeout between posts, and I didn’t even post!)
Well, I think at this point, the vote for november is looking more or less like a lock, for good or less than good. I don’t think it is a horrible vote, as long as we testerize him/her first(which I guess we will in about 2 1/2 hours).
I think this is the closest we’re coming to a town-wide decision on DAY ONE.
Anyway, I don’t want to delay my lynch vote to the last second and look like a wolf jumping on the town bandwagon. I already voted to test november a little while ago.
I’m still of the opinion that we should test and lynch the same person. If we don’t, I think it’ll just make the testerizer guesswork all the more difficult.
I’m fine with testing november, even though he does seem to me to just be townie. Like someone else said, no one has defended him, and I’d think at least one wolf would have early on. Unless maybe they all decided just to sacrifice him and keep their distance. But, at least testing him will give us something to go on.
Since it looks like no one else is going to vote for Seeker, I might as well change my vote. To be honest, I wouldn’t mind if Daphne was the testee, and since she has the second most votes, I’ll add another one for her. Nothing personal, Daphne, but I am still a bit suspicious of you. I’ll remove my lynch vote for now too, and re-apply it later, after someone gets tested.
It’s not hostility, per se, its just that you’re the scummiest person extant right now, and like I said, I play aggressive.
Besides, getting used to having a hound dog gnawing on your butt is one of those “life skills” of mafia–gotta learn eventually, but there are a LOT of scum players who get caught when they melt down because someone’s harrying them a bit.
Again, return to my prior posts about lurking. Posting more and sooner is not a town sign, nor should we be satisfied that someone is not a lurker.
Lemur866 is posting a lot of generally short posts that generally echo others, including myself. Look at my post about synching testerizing with lynches and look at Lemur’s post. Look at Lemur’s challenges to other posters… e.g. oh yeah, we could lynch people without testing them, but it wouldn’t be as useful. Well duh.
This is early in the game, but I lay my votes where I see them. I see a lack of substantial discussion and a lot of noise posts. I think that is far, far scummier than someone who simply hasn’t been back to the board, who is the current vote leader. We’re testing someone based on a complete null tell. That’s bad, and it’s a habit we simply cannot continue. Going by post count is a bad mistake and it’s important to view posts substantively. Granted, you don’t agree with my opinion of Lemur - that’s fine – but argue based on substance, not just ‘Lemur posted more’.
This is an important point that needs to be made in a newbie game. Hostility and suspicion are a part of the game. Too often, townies will fall into the mistake of voting for people who are hostile, with the assumption that hostility equals scumminess. Hostility is at best a null tell and at worst a sign that you’re going after someone who has more info than you (unlikely at this point) or who is emphatically trying to root out scum. It’s something that skillful scum will manipulate. Beware the nice guy that tries to offend no one and never criticizes you. Rigid investigation and being called to task are stressful, I know, but they’re important townie advantages.
