…and comitting murders from beyond the grave!
Oh. That’s…NOT the big game secret? Hmmm.
I’m fully prepared to send HM to the great rink in the sky today, but what the hell was that bit about loading a sig file?
While I digest the info from Kat, I’ll respond to brewha
Absolutely. Unfortunately, there was an hour or so left when I needed to make the choice between you or no lynch. We need to avoid situations like that in the future.
You could be right. The problem is you could be Scum, nicely explaining why you failed to get the required number of votes. I don’t count that against you (since it’s equally likely those leading the vote against you are Scum).
I do hold it against those who chose not to vote for you. They need to explain themselves. We’ve heard from story (did not see the deadline), Hazel (forgot about the game?!), and Dio (Day ended before he could respond). I want to hear from faith and zuma about why they chose a no-lynch over lynching brewha.
your aggressive italics scare me pleo. i voted for faithfool. i wasnt around at the end of the day to change my vote. if i were id probably let brewha live.
i am pretty ok with the no lynch at this time when the alternative was lynching brewha, if you want a clear answer. i dont think he is scum.
Thank you for explaining your reasoning.
Everyone needs to account for their votes. I’m comfortable calling people on it.
No clue. I’m going to wait to see what Hockey has to say for herself… once again, I feel a little sketchy for using the dossiers as the sole basis to root out scum. Worked last time, though, didn’t it?
Sure did…that’s why I’m comfortable sticking with what works until we’re proven otherwise. I’d like to know what she has to say as well, but I don’t know how much of a defense can be brought on this one – she’s the only living player with that trait. Yes, someone could have been lying, but we’re never going to know that any scum lied about their traits until we see evidence to that end.
I may be the only living player that disclosed that trait, but someone else has it. Someone who also likes grilled cow udders. Which is not one of my traits. **Sachertorte ** is the only living player to have disclosed that one. **NAF ** explained that the color has nothing to do with anything. I did not kill Kat.
As far as the dossiers go, I thought they would be helpful to us in the very beginning. And they were. My thoughts are that the people who have 3 unique traits are Associates (me, storyteller, and ShadowFacts). It would have been much harder to lie about the dossier and still have 3 traits that no other person shared. I still feel that **brewha’s ** lack of a unique trait implicates him as a lying scum. **OAOW ** didn’t have any unique traits either.
I’m voting brewha. I will change it if needed to insure a lynch as long as it isn’t me.
Reading this again:
The “Thanks!” could be the clue. - I can say ‘hello’ and ‘thank you’ in nine languages.
That one belongs to brewha, hazelnutcoffee, and OAOW.
I chose not to vote brewha because of what I’ve already said… I believe Dio to be scum and put my vote there. I understand that’s not a popular opinion (or considered even a less valuable one than some of the others), but there it is. I promise I’ll go back over the evidence recently brought up again, sometime today, and re-formulate my choice if possible.
Other than the fact that I think that you’re scum, is there any reason you think I’m scum?
Okay, if we’re going to go from that perspective… other than the mistakes I made before we even started to play, why do you think I’m scum? Is it something that I’ve been proven to have lied about along the way? A discrepancy in my dossier? Not trying to follow the rules as the group has encouraged us to? Finally, I haven’t gone after anyone, vigorously or otherwise. However, I do think it’s strange when someone does with little or no reason to either. And considering what we have to go on, pushing in one direction adamantly in light of that comes across as misdirection.
I was wondering how people would react to Hal and Diomedes 's stance on Hockey Monkey. Now that Hockey Monkey has had her say, I’ll state that I’m suspicious of Diomedes and to a lesser extent Hal for the odd stance on Hockey Monkey. (Lesser to Hal because I believe his role claim). It strikes me as opportunistic.
Lynching Hockey Monkey for the VWBug attribute doesn’t make sense at all:
- It is far more likely that Kat’s killer is lying scum who has the VWBug trait and the cow udders trait, but lied about his/her dossier. (The lying is obvious because no one holds both the VWBug trait and the cow udders trait, so why is it such a stretch to believe that scum would lie about both?)
- Why single out Hockey Monkey today when my being the only living player with the cow udders trait passed without much comment Yesterday?
- NAF was playful with Hockey Monkey in his posting. While he says (after the fact BTW) that he means nothing when he posted, NAF knows Hockey Monkey’s alignment and whether or not she killed Kat. If Hockey Monkey really did kill Kat, then NAF wouldn’t go anywhere near mentioning Hockey Monkey like that. He simply wouldn’t do it. But he did mention Hockey Monkey and I think he did so without thinking, it didn’t occur to him until too late that he allowed himself to be that playful because Hockey Monkey didn’t kill Kat. (I feel like I’m babbling, sorry.) I know that meta-game gets thrown around often, but NAF is a person just like the rest of us, and analyzing his behavior is no different than analyzing a player’s. And we KNOW that NAF has perfect knowledge so analyzing him is even better.
- I stated on Day One that using private data for lynches is a bad idea since scum could very easily lie.
If anything, I’m less inclined to lynch Hockey Monkey today.
Also, the dossier-based lynch of OAOW worked because the revealed traits matched his private trait and his public trait. Comparing OAOW’s situation to Hockey Monkey’s (or mine) is off-the-mark and opportunistic.
On Day Two we knew the killer
- drove a VWBug into a 7-11
- had sex at the Washington Monument Mall
These traits matched OAOW, and most importantly the Mall trait was OAOW’s public trait.
In order for OAOW to be Town, he would
- have to have a dossier with two traits matching the killer (this doesn’t happen often amongst our population) and,
- have those two matching traits be the ones randomly pulled (also small chance)
The chances of OAOW being town required too many coincidences to have occurred, thus we lynched OAOW on Day Two. (At least that was my reasoning for voting for him).
Now look at Hockey Monkey and me (sachertorte)
We each have a private trait that matches one of the two traits revealed by the second killer. Unlike OAOW’s case, this situation is easily explained by the existence of a killer who shares one trait with each of us and the trait just happened to be the one pulled up. In this case one is significantly different than two, and very different than one private and one public.
Did that make sense, or am I babbling again?
Also, all FOUR traits point to OAOW. That can’t be simple coincidence. (well the first two are easily explained, but the most recent two look less like chance).
That is some serious reaching. And it seems more likely that our last clue indicated that the killer in question had not eaten grilled cow udders. But of course, I could be wrong about this, which is why overdependence on the dossiers will kill us. But it’s certainly a starting point. I have two goals in the next day or so: an outline of my case against Diomedes, as requested late yesterDay, and a post history / analysis of Hockey Monkey.
I also think, by the way, that we should avoid spending too high a percentage of toDay discussing brewha. He might be scum, but if he is, he’s one of four. YesterDay was all about brewha; if toDay is all about brewha again, we 'll waste our no-lynch.
sach, I agree with most of what you’ve posted, but I do have a question about this:
Given that you yourself have stated that the scum may lie about their dossiers, and therefore we have no way of knowing what a scum dossier looks like…
How do you know the parenthetical to be true?
Really? Why is that serious reaching? We already knew the VW clue, and the cow udders. Is it really that much of a stretch for me to read back over all of the dossiers and see if anything striking pops up? Why would someone say “Thanks!” anyway, if it’s not pertinant?
faithfool,
I no longer suspect you due to the Hal secret role thing. But I would just like to point out that even if you are correct and Diomedes is scum. Diomedes is not the only scum in the game. There are 4 scum left.
If you chose not to vote for brewha because you believe brewha is Town, that is valid; but thinking Diomedes is scum should not prevent you from considering other players as also being scum (whether brewha or someone else).
Well why not? If you believe Diomedes is scum, then why aren’t you trying to convince others that he is. I am willing to be convinced, but I’ve yet to see you make an argument. If you aren’t going to try to convince others, I don’t see the point of the vote.
I’m not sure I agree with that. What if they’re both scum and covering for each other? This could easily be something they’re doing to manipulate us into thinking they’re both okay when they’re both in fact scum.
Okay, that could be a reach, too. I’m just saying that I’m not 100% sold on anything anyone tells us without verification.