[QUOTE=brewha]
Nice! Very Nice!
I have since come forward and said that I believe that you are just a vanilla town. No reason you can’t be town and an asshole though is there?
Fuck Shit Ass Bitch Cunt!
OK, I got that out of my system.
Yes, Zuma I may have unfairly FOS’d you. let’s get back to the topic at hand.
[/QUOTE]
Less of this please. Insinuations of assholery violate both the rules of the game and the forum. This is a warning, you’ll only get one.
Enjoy,
Steven
OK, my turn, and whilst I agree with the dossier reveals, I wish I didn’t have to reveal mine! I am one of those shameful individuals who shares an attribute with last night’s murderer.
(Public) I once had sex in front of the Washington Monument.
I can say ‘hello’ and ‘thank you’ in nine languages.
I believe the Honda Element is a good-looking car.
I have had a conversation with Michael Chiklis
I’ve eaten grilled cow udder more than once.
I once drove a VW Bug through the front door of a 7/11.
[QUOTE=Mtgman]
Less of this please. Insinuations of assholery violate both the rules of the game and the forum. This is a warning, you’ll only get one.
Enjoy,
Steven
[/QUOTE]
I apologize - to you and to Zuma. It was out of line. It seems I should have a breathalyzer between me and the dope. That will be the last of my drunk posting here.
[QUOTE=zuma]
Mostly because he’s been one of the most vocal about revealing the dossiers. As I’ve stated previously I can think of no good reason not to do it, and I think it’s important to have them out there on day 1. I have similiar thoughts about Pleonast at this stage of the game. I guess it boils down to the fact that I tend to trust people in this game whose thoughts and actions most closely match my own.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that’s fair enough, I guess, but it’s pretty problematic, because it means - if you are not scum yourself - that you are making yourself pretty trivially easy to manipulate. Your opinion on the dossiers pretty much matches that of the large majority of the group, so for someone to agree with you (whether or not they “really” agree with you) costs them very little but gains them currency in terms of your trust.
For my part, now that most of this discussion appears to have shaken out, I’d put tiny pro-town check marks mostly in the columns of those who have argued most aggressively against dossier reveals, in spite of the fact that I myself am in favor of the reveals. My reasoning is this: I don’t believe the advantage conferred by a full reveal will be particularly significant. I think it will play as mildly - very mildly - pro-town. It is thus not in the interest of scum to argue against it, as by so doing they would be bucking the majority and thus drawing attention to themselves. In a game where only a small-ish number of mislynches are required to ensure a scum victory, I don’t think the scum would have made waves arguing against this idea. So, for my part, tiny - tiny - pro-town props in the direction of Rysto and sachertorte.
My suspicion list right now consists of Diomedes and, to a much lesser extent, zuma, based not on their opinion of the dossiers but on their behavior overall. I still think Dio’s early attempt to gently shove suspicion in the direction of Rysto, and his disingenuous back-away from his own vote shortly thereafter, was a hinky move, and his subsequent discussion of his actions hasn’t ameliorated that suspicion.
In the case of zuma, my suspicion stems mostly from that “town like me” comment, which could be an effort to curry favor with Dio if I am wrong and he (Diomedes) is, in fact, pro-town. This is pretty weak, of course, so my vote stays where it is for the moment.
Incidentally, it might be time to start getting a few votes on the record. The deadline is going to be upon us presently, and while I stand by my belief that a reasoned no-lynch is not a terrible outcome in every case, a no-lynch by default definitely is.
[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
My suspicion list right now consists of Diomedes and, to a much lesser extent, zuma, based not on their opinion of the dossiers but on their behavior overall. I still think Dio’s early attempt to gently shove suspicion in the direction of Rysto, and his disingenuous back-away from his own vote shortly thereafter, was a hinky move, and his subsequent discussion of his actions hasn’t ameliorated that suspicion.
[/QUOTE]
Go back and read the post I where I voted for Rysto. You may think my motives may have been shady, but I never backed away from anything: I made the vote with the specific intention of trying to force the random-order reveals. It wasn’t intended to be a strong lynch-effort, nor was it specifically directed towards Rysto other than he was 'on the cock", so to speak.
It was intended as a strong impetus for the reveals to come out in order. When it became apparent that that method wasn’t going to work (because nobody else followed me on it, and a single vote doesn’t provide any further impetus) I backed off.
EBWOP: Rysto wasn’t “on the cock.” He was “on the clock.”
“on the cock”
best typo ever!
I would agree that scum would be less likely to actively oppose dossier reveals - unless they were called to do it. Anyone keeping track of posting numbers? Has anyone been especially quiet?
Folks left to reveal: (in no particular order)
Freudian Slit
Mhaye
ShadowFacts
Hal Briston
Hawkeyeop
Kat
sachertorte
[QUOTE=Diomedes]
EBWOP: Rysto wasn’t “on the cock.” He was “on the clock.”
[/QUOTE]
BWAH!
On topic - I think the whole “I’m voting for you to make you do what I want” can be a sneaky tactic, in and of itself. It’s a consequence-free vote, because you get to claim you never thought he was scum. Of course, had your one vote turned into five or six or seven, we’ll never know whether you would have abandoned the bandwagon or stayed on it.
The bottom line is, I’m suspicious of you. I am by no means certain of anything, but given that no one has given me much cause to be more suspicious of them than I am of you, I’m going to keep my vote where it is.
[QUOTE=brewha]
I would agree that scum would be less likely to actively oppose dossier reveals - unless they were called to do it. Anyone keeping track of posting numbers? Has anyone been especially quiet?
[/QUOTE]
Sorry for the double post, but this is a valuable point. I do think that every player should be required to either:
(1) Post their dossier
or
(2) Explicitly decline to do so.
Anything else looks like avoiding the question, which there really is no pro-town reason to do.
Post Count:
These counts start from the beginning of Day One (I didn’t include the night posts beause they were all pretty much just boob talk). I didn’t include any mindless chatter, NETA/EBWOP posts, or similar flim-flam
1.storyteller0910 16
2.HazelNutCoffee 7
3.Freudian Slit 8
4.brewha 19
5.MHaye 7
6.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies 6
7.sachertorte 8
8.Hawkeyeop 5
9.ShadowFacts 9
10.Santo Rugger 1
11. Pleonast 10
12. One And Only Wanderers 9
13. Rysto 19
14. Hal Briston 7
15. faithfool 12
16. zuma 34
17. Hockey Monkey 13
18. Kat 2
19. Diomedes 31
[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
Sorry for the double post, but this is a valuable point. I do think that every player should be required to either:
(1) Post their dossier
or
(2) Explicitly decline to do so.
Anything else looks like avoiding the question, which there really is no pro-town reason to do.
[/QUOTE]
QFT
I have been and continue to be against dossier reveals. However, since a majority of dossiers have been published, I feel that the negative impacts of dossier private information in the game has already been realized. Also, Hal Briston claims dossier-knower so that gives a solid reason for revealing. Therefore, I will post my dossier now.
I will continue to argue against conclusions that are based on dossier private information.
(Public) I’ve climbed to the top chamber of Cheops.
I’ve eaten grilled cow udder more than once.
I have gone to Disney World 3 times and Disneyland at least 5 times
I’ve been a model appearing on the cover of a nationwide catalog.
I watched as over 30 people jumped out of an airborne aircraft.
I got an autograph from Billy Crystal on top of the World Trade Center.
[QUOTE=brewha]
“on the cock”
best typo ever!
[/QUOTE]
I beg to differ.
I did not have sexual relations with that man.
[QUOTE=Hal Briston]
Because that’s what the 7% secret was. I was given a copy of faithfool’s dossier at the onset of game, and she was honest about her traits.
[/QUOTE]
I have a number of thoughts on this at least a few of which are contradictory.
This seems odd to me on a couple of levels. One it seems like a weird ability. If the dossiers are solvable, then this ability is not overly necessary. It would seem to take away from the analytical level of this game. I’m just not seeing why the game designers would include it.
Plus, if Hal Briston has this ability, it is a strange time to use it. While faithfool had a couple of votes upon her, she was no immediate danger of being lynched. Furthermore there were a couple of other players who already confirmed her dossier via patterns they found. Confirming that a player is not lying about their dossier has limited value. The player is more likely then not to be scum and being truthful does not mean that person is not scum. On the other hand, given there are no power roles, lying almost certainly means a player is scum. Why waste the secret power here?
Three possibilies come to me in answer of that last question in order of likelyhood.
Hal played his hand differently then I would. Certainly the most likely scenario.
Hal is a non affiliated scum trying to warn the other disgruntled employees.
Hal lied about his ability in order to trick the scum into being honest.
One other thought while I’m at it. We had a night start which I gather atypical. I’m sure the mods would of preferred to let everyone play a day before being killed. So there had to be some game mechanic that required the scum talk to each other before day 1. If various town members knew everyones dossiers then that could quickly break the game. Everyone would reveal their dossiers, and then town members would be able to call out who was lying. There might be some initial confusion, but the scum would be outed in short order. Which leads me to believe that at least 1 scum has extra dossiers, totally erasing my initial point.
[QUOTE=sachertorte]
I have been and continue to be against dossier reveals. However, since a majority of dossiers have been published, I feel that the negative impacts of dossier private information in the game has already been realized. Also, Hal Briston claims dossier-knower so that gives a solid reason for revealing. Therefore, I will post my dossier now.
I will continue to argue against conclusions that are based on dossier private information.
I strongly agree with everything sach says here. But with most everyone already revealed, it seems pointless to hold back now. I am hopeful that if we can get all these out there, maybe other avenues of conversation and analysis will be opened. Anyway, here’s mine:
(Public) I enjoy practicing the cello
I once met Cliff Burton from Metallica before he died.
I have a photo of myself with Dick Clark
I went trekking after gorillas in The Impenetrable Forest.
I believe that spending years building kids’ self-esteem does more harm than good, in the long run.
I believe that the Apollo moon landings were filmed in Hollywood.
On the topic of Hal Briston and his secret Dossier knowledge, upon reflection I am inclined to believe him for the moment, simply because I don’t think it makes sense for scum to make it up. What’s the motivation? To protect a fellow scum in faithfool? That doesn’t make sense, as she’s not in any real danger at this point. And if she gets lynched and we find out she is scum, Hal would be immediately next on the block. So it seems both unnecessary and risky to me. While I am not usually a fan of applying logic to scum actions, since they are inherently tricksy, in this case I just cannot see any advantage at all.
And speaking of faithfool, I do believe she is a newbie. This “I’m in way over my head so vote for me” strategy is either incredibly brilliant scum play, or just someone who feels way in over their head. I incline toward the latter.
Unvote faithfool
(That said, faithfool, if you really are town, cut the crap and play. Sacrificing yourself is detrimental to the town, period.)
[QUOTE=ShadowFacts]
And if she gets lynched and we find out she is scum, Hal would be immediately next on the block.
[/QUOTE]
I do not agree with this statement. Hal may be telling the plain truth, and faithfool may be scum telling the truth about her dossier. The alignment of the one tells us precisely nothing about the alignment of the other.
3 - faithfool - (shadowfacts, zuma, Dio)
2 - zuma (sach, Mhaye)
1 - Diomedes (Storyteller)
1 - MHaye (OAOW)
7 out of 18 votes cast.
With 18 alive 10 starts the clock and 12 ends the Day.
There will be no lynch without a majority.
Day ends no later then Friday December 21st at 1:30 pm Pacific (by board time).
That means you have about 2 days 5 hours and 15 minutes to start getting a concensus.
Go Team!
[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
I do not agree with this statement. Hal may be telling the plain truth, and faithfool may be scum telling the truth about her dossier. The alignment of the one tells us precisely nothing about the alignment of the other.
[/QUOTE]
You’re right. It is stupid to assume that scum will lie about their dossiers. My bad.