NETA: Now that we’ve got his colors I still don’t think lynching him is a good idea. So
Vote Telcontar
What does Lylo mean?
Isn’t today, by definition, “a Day we’re unsure on?” Or are you really that sure about Telcontar that you can say to a certainty that there will come a day when we won’t have as good a lynch candidate?
Oh for Pete’s sake. I almost believe the ‘crazy gambit’ more than the ‘confessing wolf’ but either way this is just a fucking mess.
AFAIC, we should plan to lynch Seeker, though I could be persuaded to wait on the condition that we agreed to treat him as if he was the town nutcase and not actually expect him to contribute anything ‘rational’. Seeker has done absolutely nothing to deserve us paying any attention to what he says. Lying is very rarely pro-town, and this is definitely not an exception.
Damn it.
Lynch or lose typically meaning that there are only two more townies then scum so unless a scum in lynched the game is over.
You’re right the day could never come when we are uncertain about who is a wolf and we could go three for three on the up coming days if that’s the case what’s wrong with saving Seeker for Day 7?
On the other hand Telcontar had about double the votes of his nearest competitor with even more people listing him on their suspicious list, myself included. That kind of certainty doesn’t come often in my experience; in fact a perfect split is much more likely. If we had such a spilt wouldn’t it be good to have an extra day to test both candidates and lynch Seeker on the first day?
You know what, on second thought, I don’t believe the second more than the first. I think they are equally unbelievable and both in perfect accord with the same tone and weirdness that people have been picking up on since Day One.
At this point it reads like nothing more than someone who’s playing for their own enjoyment and not for the good of their team, whatever team that is.
OK, Seeker, tell us all the information you were going to tell us once you were tested.
What did you expect? Why did you not want to be tested?
I’m voting to lynch Seeker pretty soon, unless some reasonable argument comes back.
You have cut me to the very quick. I did this, selflessly, just to try to get as much information for the town as possible. That you are questioning my motives hurts me. Deeply.
I expect I’ll be dead soon. If I don’t somehow miraculously get lynched, I know the Werewolves will eat me.
I was only trying to help.
What I was going to tell after the test is what I decided to tell just prior to the test. See Post 822.
Seeker, if you are not a wolf, the werewolves will never eat you. You are a nice shiny distraction for them. Well done (sarcastic if you are town, sincerely meant if you are a wolf).
Oh, now, I think that was sarcastic no matter what. That’s what I suspect.
Oredigger, thank you for the explanation. It makes sense. I think I’m still motivated a little bit by anger toward that last little gambit, but I hadn’t thought about the possibility of a wide open vote later in the game. I’m still leaning toward lynching the silly thing, but I think the most appropriate thing is to
Unvote Seeker
and I want to listen to some other perspectives without my vote on the books making it easier to go in that direction.
OK, I’m dumb, confused, or mistaken. Post 822 isn’t by you, it’s by fluiddruid. If he/she said something that you were going to say, re-say it now so dummies like me can understand.
Why is it pro-Town to go after the next best candidate? If we have a very high likelihood of lynching a scum, why not lock it in so we can be sure of that before we proceed? Leaving a suspected scum alive only will serve as a distraction and will limit the amount of usable data we can get from the kill.
Frankly, Oredigger77, I’m having a hard time seeing why your position is pro-town. Choosing the next best candidate does not make any real sense unless you truly believe there is some sort of power in the game that hurts town when lynching a specific scum player. I cannot imagine why on earth this would be the case, it would throw off the whole balance of the game. I’ll say this much: my vote stands, and if Seeker shows up as scum as I strongly believe, I’m going to be taking a long, hard look at your posts.
Seeker means post #882:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10903906&postcount=882
Seeker is the most suspicious one on the table, and we have less room to maneuver than we’d like. I think we need to kill him to find out whether he’s an insane farmer or wolf. Frankly neither possibility makes any sense. Currently his logic is “these people didn’t freak out, so they’re suspicious.” Err, right, yeah.
Nuke him till he glows and then shoot him in the dark. Also, Oredigger77 i really don’t think your argument holds. To know who is suspicious we need to, in part, figure out what to make of seeker. A fair number of people want to lynch me tomorrow because seeker is clearly covering for his partner (meaning me). Hard to assess that argument without knowing if seeker is in fact a wolf.
But Seeker can’t influence us as a scum player ordinarily would, right? And you didn’t vote Telcontar to begin with. So for those of us who were convinced at one point that Telcontar was our best chance at getting a wolf, why is it bad strategy to stick to that and let the devil we know hang around?
These are all honest questions, by the way. I’m not saying you’re wrong and Oredigger’s right, or vice versa, I’m just having a hard time thinking about it in black and white terms.
I was originally inclined to believe Seeker after he told us he lied, because I thought it wouldn’t make sense for a wolf except to sow confusion, since protecting someone was unlikely to work.
Even then there were two reasons why it was a bad time to do that for a townie (see my last post).
But it was a good time to do that if he is a wolf: he claimed to be a farmer when no farmer was tested before, so it was relatively certain that the testerizer was no reliable scum tell (which was important because the probability to get tested was so high).
In that case, if he succeeds in not getting lynched, it would be pretty much impossible to figure out the testerizer (if it isn’t impossible anyway…).
Basically, it would be a high-risk strategy, but with actual potential benefits.
We can’t afford to take a chance with that.
Lynch Seeker
Jimmy, **fluiddruid ** is right, look at Telcontar’s last post as well:
if Seeker comes up wolf, it strongly implies he covered for Telcontar, which means he is going to hang tomorrow.
If he comes up town, the suspicion is not quite as strong and a better lead might turn up.
I don’t see how leaving Seeker alive would be any kind of distraction, unless you can’t skip his posts. We treat him like he’s dead until we need to buy a day. I don’t think we need to buy a day we were having a good discussion that was headed toward a single conclusion, Telcontar.
We don’t lose any data by not lynching Seeker because you can pretend he was lynched and came up wolf that way any rereads will be influenced by this bit of pretend. I don’t think that Seeker has a power and i was pretty clear about that in my post proposing this idea. I think he has some machination in mind that involves us lynching him and I don’t want it to go any where the easiest way is to ignore that he did anything an start over right before his post claiming to be a wolf until we get stuck. We will get stuck again, eventually, at which point we buy some more time by lynching him then.
To be fair a lot of us wanted to lynch you or were content with your lynch well before Seeker ‘covered’ you. You were tied for number two at yesterDay’s test and were number one before this insanity.
No, this is a dangerous idea. When Seeker comes up wolf it implies absolutely nothing about Telcontar. He is equally likely to be a townie being set up by the wolves as he is to be a scum being protected.
If Seeker comes up town it implies nothing about Telcontar except that Seeker played a bad game at the wrong time. A lot of people suspect Tel completely independent of the Seeker thing so I don’t think we should put any of that aside just because it’s a different day.
Does it mean that, though? I’m really trying to approach this without giving any credence to anything Seeker has said. At this point, he’s clearly nuts, whatever he is, so I don’t want to infer that he covered for anybody. And, I mean, Telcontar’s my other choice.
However, I suppose when it comes right down to it, my initial impression was the one to go with. The person who seems the most like a wolf is the person who should go. That’s Seeker.
vote Seeker