[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
No more so than faithfool pissed in yours.
[/QUOTE]
Why do you think I’ve been so cranky all game long?
I’m still split between brewha and faithfool, so I think my FoS is on both of them.
I think we’re more likely to get a brewha lynch, though, and there does seem to have been more hard evidence against him. faithfool’s evidence just seems to be based on feelings and on her voting for herself.
vote brewha
[QUOTE=faithfool]
Hawkeyeop, apparently I can’t do it. As far as being frustrating, well I suppose that makes us in all in the same boat.
As for the rest of the weekend, I’m about to sign off soon and leave for a funeral tomorrow. I don’t think I’ll be back until Sunday. Unfortunately, after all the re-reading I did last night to consider other players than the one I’d been focused on, I still don’t feel that I’ve made any legitimate headway. So do I need to cast a vote now or what?
[/QUOTE]
Okay I’ll let it go. Enjoy your weekend, well as much as one can be enjoyed with a funeral in it.
[QUOTE=brewha]
Now you’re attacking me for frustrating you? After posted a case against me based on falsehoods and lies, you call me frustrating?
Weird.
[/QUOTE]
Okay so let me understand.
Breha pointing out that a person could of copied a trait from him and if he went by dossier evidence he would vote for him.
Not an attack, how dare I suggest such a thing.
Brewha voting for Kat to be lynched
Not an attack, how dare I suggest such a thing.
Me calling Brewha frustrating
ATTACK!
I find anyone who refuses to answer direct questions and would rather focus on issues of semantics to be frustrating.
Just to get it on record vote brewha though I’m okay with voting for Faithfool or Hal Briston
Due to an unexpectedly large workload today I won’t be able to get a vote count up until after 4:30 Pacific time. But I will get you a vote count sometime today. And remember, you have until Wednesday before the deadline.
[QUOTE=Pleonast]
Not so much free time today.I believe the game secret is the fact that the Dossiers come from two SDMB threads. That fact is entirely non-obvious, or least it was to me.
[/QUOTE]
It’s definitely non obvious, but…the secret? it just seems like a huge let down. Okay, maybe I’m hoping for fireworks and so forth, but…I dunno. I just want a bigger secret, damnit!
[QUOTE=NAF1138]
Due to an unexpectedly large workload today I won’t be able to get a vote count up until after 4:30 Pacific time. But I will get you a vote count sometime today. And remember, you have until Wednesday before the deadline.
[/QUOTE]
Luckily I’m bored.
Brewha 3 (Hawkeyeop, Freudian Slit, Hockey Monkey0
Faithfool 2 (Diomedes, Pleonast)
Hawkeyeop 1 (Brewha)
Sachertorte 1 (Zuma)
Diomedes 1 (Faithfool)
[QUOTE=Pleonast]
I believe the game secret is the fact that the Dossiers come from two SDMB threads. That fact is entirely non-obvious, or least it was to me.
[/QUOTE]
And the fact that one player having a secret would be equivalent to 7% of the player pool was what? A red herring?
How many people do we need for a majority vote, again?
Player List:
brewha
Diomedes
faithfool
Freudian Slit
Hal Briston
Hockey Monkey
Hawkeyeop
HazelNutCoffee
Pleonast
Rysto
sachertorte
storyteller0910
zuma
13 of you left, so that is 7 to start the clock and only 9 to end the Day.
[QUOTE=Freudian Slit]
faithfool’s evidence just seems to be based on feelings and on her voting for herself.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know if it’s mere feelings: it has a lot more to do with faithfool’s “second confirmation” as well as “trying to keep up with” some other site (which Mntgman later tried to cover up for her) WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY back at post #150.
[QUOTE=Hal Briston]
And the fact that one player having a secret would be equivalent to 7% of the player pool was what? A red herring?
[/QUOTE]
Communism was just a red herring.
Where do you get 7% from, again? We’ve got 19 players… one player has a secret document… and 1/19= 5.26% I think the 7% is much more likely to indicate the percentage of something in the dossiers compared to something else. Of course, if you’re telling the truth about your secret, one time other person dossier revelation, that pretty much -has- to be The Secret, dunnit?
This is why I’m starting to get the feeling that you’ll be the next bone I leap onto after faithfool is gone (if I don’t go first, of course).
I’ve not yet placed my vote, but it should come as no surprise that brewha is at the top of my list. I wanted to take the time to allow others to show and convince me I’m wrong other than simply stating that I’m wrong. Nothing has changed my mind so far.
vote brewha
Diomedes is a possibility too as I thought his stance on the VWBug thing was off and looked opportunistic. The problem with that theory is Hal Briston felt the same way, and I believe Hal’s roleclaim. Though Hal could just be mistaken and Diomedes is still being opportunistic. Diomedes is a weak second.
Others keep mentioning that they still suspect Hal Briston. I don’t see it, but as more people doubt Hal, my certainty is wavering slightly. People mention that 7% could refer to something else, but if so, then why specifically 7%? Why not 10%? To me 7% is very clearly 1/14, one of 14 townies; just as 17% was very clearly 1/6 (though NAF’s statement regarding 17% and 5 Days still doesn’t make sense to me). So I believe Hal Briston and by extension faithfool, but I’m open to being convinced otherwise.
- I don’t find Pleonast’s idea that ‘the source of the dossiers is the 7% secret’ compelling because I don’t see how that constitutes 7%.
I will note that I was convinced Santo Rugger was a Mason in The Conspiracy based on logical reasoning so perhaps I shouldn’t rely on this type of logic quite as much as I do.
[QUOTE=sachertorte]
To me 7% is very clearly 1/14, one of 14 townies;
[/QUOTE]
:smack:
[ghost] oooOOOOoooooOOOOOOOoohhh…I can hardly believe my fellow Associates are letting this thread drop to page twoooooOOOOOoooooooooOOOOO…[/ghost]
[QUOTE=Freudian Slit]
It’s definitely non obvious, but…the secret? it just seems like a huge let down. Okay, maybe I’m hoping for fireworks and so forth, but…I dunno. I just want a bigger secret, damnit!
[/QUOTE]
That seems like a rather … meta-secret, if you ask me. It’s something that we would potentially never figure out within the boundaries of the game, which is why I’m inclined to doubt that it is the secret.
I already mentioned this before, but Dio’s whole thing about faithfool’s supposed slip and Mtgman’s supposed cover-up just seems silly to me. I really don’t see the moderators being willing to cover up for anybody’s slip, newbie or no.
I suppose disagreeing with me isn’t necessarily scummy ;), but it could potentially be scum grasping at nothing and trying to turn it into something.
I suppose it could also be scum and scum putting us on. But like sachertorte, I am tentatively trusting Hal’s claim, which by extension means putting faithfool on the townie list as well. For the time being, anyway. Hmph.
[QUOTE=HazelNutCoffee]
I already mentioned this before, but Dio’s whole thing about faithfool’s supposed slip and Mtgman’s supposed cover-up just seems silly to me. I really don’t see the moderators being willing to cover up for anybody’s slip, newbie or no.
I suppose disagreeing with me isn’t necessarily scummy ;), but it could potentially be scum grasping at nothing and trying to turn it into something.
I suppose it could also be scum and scum putting us on. But like sachertorte, I am tentatively trusting Hal’s claim, which by extension means putting faithfool on the townie list as well. For the time being, anyway. Hmph.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah…I see your points. It’s just that I’m more inclined to doubt Hal and faithfool and side with Dio as town. Everyone else…I’m not totally sold on either way. Okay, maybe a mod wouldn’t cover up…but I’m still not totally sure I trust faith.
[QUOTE=HazelNutCoffee]
I already mentioned this before, but Dio’s whole thing about faithfool’s supposed slip and Mtgman’s supposed cover-up just seems silly to me. I really don’t see the moderators being willing to cover up for anybody’s slip, newbie or no.
But like sachertorte, I am tentatively trusting Hal’s claim, which by extension means putting faithfool on the townie list as well. For the time being, anyway. Hmph.
[/QUOTE]
Two things: First, mtgman was covering up for faithfool one way or another. Either he was covering up for a newbie scum mistake, or he was covering up for a newbie town who made a bit of a gaffe when phrasing a statement. While I know it doesn’t seem likely either way, especially with a mod like mtgman, it still happened.
Secondly, faithfool not lying about her dossier doesn’t necessarily make her a townie.
[QUOTE=Hawkeyeop]
Okay so let me understand.
Breha pointing out that a person could of copied a trait from him and if he went by dossier evidence he would vote for him.
Not an attack, how dare I suggest such a thing.
Brewha voting for Kat to be lynched
Not an attack, how dare I suggest such a thing.
Me calling Brewha frustrating
ATTACK!
[/QUOTE]
I can see you problem with the first issue. I thought I had made it perfectly clear that I was opposed to using dossier info as a basis for votes. I really should have spelled everything out. Instead of saying, “If I were to cast a vote based on dossier traits, I would vote for Pleonast”. I should have said, " If I were to cast a vote based on dossier traits, I would vote for Pleonast. But, I think that the dossier traits will do nothing but muddy the waters. I do not believe that dossier traits are at all indicative of who is scum and who is innocent and therefore will not vote based purely on supposed dossier patterns."
Issue two. I did vote for Kat. Mostly to get a response - Mostly. She had said very little during the course of the game and I hoped that a vote for her would incite some type of rebuttal. I did switch my vote to you, however, when you decided it would behoove you to just make shit up and claim that it is what I said.
The last issue. The one I had a problem with. Faithfool had an issue with you. You responded to an issue between you and Faithfool with a ‘Brewha is frustrating’ thrown in there for no reason. It made no sense to me for you to randomly throw my name into a discussion between you and Faithfool. It now occurs to me that you may actually be frustrated with me. This could be another case of two townies butting heads and getting all pissed at each other much to the delight of the actual scom.
I’m not saying this is the case between you and me, but I’m saying it is a possibility. So, for now, I’m willing to look at other suspects.
UNVOTE Hawkeyeop
[QUOTE=Diomedes]
Two things: First, mtgman was covering up for faithfool one way or another. Either he was covering up for a newbie scum mistake, or he was covering up for a newbie town who made a bit of a gaffe when phrasing a statement. While I know it doesn’t seem likely either way, especially with a mod like mtgman, it still happened.
Secondly, faithfool not lying about her dossier doesn’t necessarily make her a townie.
[/QUOTE]
I also agree that mtgman made his post in response (or, “covering up”) to faithfool’s post. I find it likely he saw it as something that would become troublesome for her, whether scum or town. A third option you didn’t cover is that faithfool is scum yet was telling the truth in regards to the “link mtgman sent” and “other confirm” being what she claimed they were.
In any event, re-reading the events of night 0, I am pretty convinced NAF sent out all PMs. It’s also possible I guess that mtgman sent out the scum board link… The “keeping up” comment could apply to the night 0 thread but I have more trouble with the “keeping up” comment in regards to the mafia tutorial mtgman sent.
Here’spost 150 again for anyone who wants to look at it.
Also, sachertorte makes a good argument about NAF toying with Hockey Monkey in his dawn scene. If Hockey Monkey was truly the night-killer, I don’t think NAF would have done what he did.
OK, enough meta-gaming, although I think it’s valuable.