vote: Hazel
I will prod, if we hear nothing in 24 hours we will mod kill. It’s too late in the game to allow subs at this point.
brewha:
My desire to lynch brewha is well documented; however, over the course of Day 4 I found my doubt increasing. Other points in brewha’s favor include Freudian Slit voting for brewha, and my suspicion of storyteller (confirmed town) was strongly founded on brewha being scum. Not that brewha couldn’t be scum, but storyteller’s behavior clearly wasn’t scum protecting scum. Even so, I keep coming back to the idea that lack of votes to lynch is more likely to occur when scum is in the noose than if town.
faithfool:
I was originally suspicious of faithfool due to her self voting which I still don’t understand and can only come up with scum reasons to do so. I changed my mind when considering (storyteller’s?) point that Hal Briston being given a scum’s dossier makes no sense from a game construction point of view.
So just as I’m doubting my certainty of brewha’s scumminess, I’m now doubting faithfool’s townieness. I think I put too much into “logic” and not enough into “behavior analysis.” The reason for this is simple as I think I’m quite good at logic, but very bad at behavior analysis. For those that paid attention to The Conspiracy game, I was convinced that Santo Rugger was town based on “logic” when he was in fact scum.
I’d feel much better about voting for faithfool if I could rectify the existence of Hal Briston’s knowledge of faithfool’s dossier. So far I have the following options:
- Hal Briston is lying scum. I find this doubtful as I strongly believe the game contains a pro-town secret role. As Hal Briston is the only one claiming such a thing, I tend to believe him. I do have a creeping doubt however (more distrust of my so-called logic).
- Hal Briston is telling the truth, but faithfool knew (was told) that she needed to be truthful about her dossier. From a game construction point of view I find this clumsy and a sort of twisted way to make the data fit the result. But there’s that creeping doubt again.
From a behavior point of view I’m ready to vote for faithfool, but there’s still that nagging logistical problem. For now I’m going to rely more on behavior and
vote faithfool
Excellent. Putting blatent falsehoods out there makes me much more comfotable about my vote. Unless, of course, you think me capable of fixing a full slate of NBA games.
And if I could, I’d have the fricking Celtics doing a helluavlot worse than they’re doing…
Management has looked into the subject of Rysto’s attendance and has found it to be adequit. He has posted three times this Day, and that is good enough for me. But his failing to surpass the required attendence rate is being noted in his file. If behavior does not improve managment will be forced to take action.
Rysto will live not be mod killed toDay. But if he doesn’t start posting a bit more, he might get killed tomorrow.
Heh. I remembered you avoiding revealing until the end to scare scum into being honest. I didn’t realize you were actually scheduled to go last. I’m with you on the Celtics though. Living in Boston with their teams winning EVERYTHING is a tad aggravating.
zuma, the statement of mine you addressed was a response to Hawk’s accusation that my early Dossier reveal was scummy because there was no consensus. My early reveal and following discussion helped move us in the direction of the universal disclosure. That is definitely a pro-Town action, as you noted (and also as you note, not any indication of my alignment). I was simply trying to refute the assertion that I was scummy for leading the effort.
Also, zuma, do you want to explain “I find it interesting that those that had nothing tn dn with lynching FS are now voting the way they are.” And while you’re at it, explain your vote?
Hazel, some simple math: my estimation from my first list is that sach, HockeyMonkey, Hawkeyeop, Rysto, Hal Briston are 1/5 likely to be scum. From my second list: faithfool, zuma, Dio, Hazel are 2/4 likely. And my third: HockeyMonkey, Hazel, Hal are 2/3 likely. See how those on the first list are less likely because there are more people and fewer scum are likely?
It’s probably too late to look at this now, but early in the game Freudian said that she trusted Dio but really had nothing to back it up with. Now that we know that she was scum, it looks to me like the kind of mistake a newer player could make. He’s also been voting aggressively, and I’m not sure that’s pro-Town.
storyteller was killed by a new player last night. Why the change? Was Freudian the killer? Here’s the dossier she claimed:
I believe farts are really funny. People only pretend to not think they are. (public)
I have been an assistant on an archaeological dig in the ancient Malian capital of Djenne.
I have had a conversation with Michael Chiklis
I have performed on stage at Branson, MO.
I was once bitten by a wild animal while visiting Dollywood.
I’ve been a model appearing on the cover of a nationwide catalog
If she was the killer, clearly she lied about her dossier. I find it quite interesting that her she did not claim a single trait from the “Controversial Opinions” thread(her public trait was from that thread). Remember, there was initially a lot of confusion about where the dossiers came from – as I recall, a lot of people thought that they only came from the “Two Truths” thread.
This doesn’t seem to help much, though. 9 people have claimed nothing but traits from the “Two Truths” thread(including Freud and faithfool, who’s public trait is from the Controversy thread). That includes Kat, who is confirmed as Town.
Another thing that caught my eye, but I never took the time to look into, are the night-killed players. Santos Rugger, who knows as well as anyone how scum think, makes sense as a first target. But I’m very curious as to why they left storyteller alive until he started leading the Town and weeding out scum. Frankly, were I scum, storyteller would have been a prime target for me, especially in a game with no power roles. You’d think that the scum’s main goal with the night kills would be to kill off the potential leaders, but they didn’t seem to be doing that. I can only conclude that the dossiers have come into the decision process. Perhaps the scum are trying to off the players with the most dossier overlap with the killers, so that the clues from the dead lead us astray?
But if that’s the case, why hasn’t anybody been jumping on the Sicilian trait? Maybe the scum thought that’d be too obvious? This is worth looking into, I think, but it’s nearly 3 in the morning here. It’d be fair to ask what I didn’t look into any of this earlier. I could tell you about how I had a self-imposed milestone for a project last Friday and only completed it just tonight, but I could have found the time. I just didn’t.
Anyway, I’m just going in circles here. I don’t have any firm suspicions, especially against our leading lynch candidates.
I realize that this is a response to Hawkeyeop’s accusation (and I agree his accusation is flawed). However, since you had basically locked yourself into such a day 1 action before your role was assigned, I think that while I consider your day 1 actions to be pro-town, those actions will not be viewed by me (nor should they by anyone else) as adding to whatever credibility you have. You do, however, have a valid point that the fact that it was in response to hawkeyeop shouldn’t implicate you, but I read it as “look at me and my pro-town actions!” during my re-read.
I consider the day 4 voting, especially the turn to Freudian Slit to be the best evidence we have at the moment. Yes, scum will scatter their votes, but I don’t think they’d be very helpful in making yesterday’s vote happen, especially as it did with so little time left. I’d look for them to be conveniently absent in those last 12 hours, or defending the brewha vote in hopes of at least getting a no-lynch. That we don’t know brewha’s alignment makes it a bit more difficult (but even if brewha is scum they’d be looking for a no-lynch at that point), the fact of the matter is that I think those that voted for freudian are significantly more likely to be town than those that did not.
There are 5 people who did not contribute to the freudian lynch, and those are Pleonast, Hockey Monkey, Hazel, Hal, and faithfool (faith voted after majority had been reached). Those are my leading scum candidates. Honestly, choosing one of them is difficult for me. I’m discounting you and Hal for the time being (although I think Hal and his claim should be a topic of discussion for tommorrow) as you two haven’t struck me as scummy as the remaining three. And Hockey Monkey I’m kind of torn about at the moment. She has struck me as earnest about her motives, but her vote yesterday, and having a trait matching a killer concern me. So, at this very moment, I am torn between faithfool, for her after-the-fact vote, and Hazel, for what I see is a pattern of throw-away votes and sharing a trait with a killer (yes, I share it too, but I know I am town, so, for me, Hazel is the sole unknown who has claimed that trait).
My comment about “voting the way they are” was really just a reaction to faithfool trying to start up the brewha train again, with what I consider terrible reasoning:
I still don’t understand how you aren’t just pulling those numbers out of your ass 
I think the actual votes from yesterDay, especially as late in the Day as it happened, would be the most telling. I’m imagining what it must have looked like to scum as it happened, and I think they’d have done something to derail the process, even if it was just not participating or sticking to their brewha guns.
I was giving this some thought today. Maybe freudian was not the killer, but they decided to change killers because they were afraid of another trait being revealed from the previous killer? If so, that would implicate Hockey and sach. But it’s just a thought I’ve been kicking around. We don’t know to what extent scum has lied (although we know for a fact they have at this point, as nobody has claimed cow udder and volkswagon) so I’m not willing to act on it at the moment.
Anorther thought I had (I’m just rambling now) is, if Hal is telling the truth, would scum who revealed before Hal made his claim be more likely to have lied than those who revealed after? Probably not worth wasting time on at this point as the jury is still out on Hal, but something to consider in the future.
You know, I’m not sure who it was that said something similar to this, but if you vote first you are circumspect because you’re trying to lead everyone down whatever path they’re supposed to conjuring up. If you vote later, you were holding out. If you don’t vote until there’s a majority, you’re probably scum and you’re trying to slide by (or something). If you admit right up front, like I’ve constantly been doing, that I have no clue what’s going on, in my humble opinion, from the evidence presented… YOU STILL HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. Or that makes you scum too. I think.
Several people have said there’s not much to go on. Others have commented on the fact that brewha almost got lynched however many times. And that’s not speculation, anyone can see that brewha almost got lynched however many times. I threw out the only thing I could think of, that had already seemed like a somewhat tested theory, so that I would be doing something. So, no I don’t have a brewha train started, nor do I want to start one. I was simply trying to go with the best logic I had at my disposal.
You know, faithfool, I had your unvote and a HNC vote all ready to go, then said “fuck it” and was about to leave. Then you have to go and post.
I know this is your first game and I try to keep that in mind when judging you.
Fuck this I have to leave. HazelNutCoffee is the only unknown (from my perspective) with the Sicilian trait. I’ll let that be my (admittedly very weak) tie-breaker between you two.
unvote: faithfool
vote: HazelNutCoffee
We are coming down to the wire here and we looked to be heading to a no lynch with the way the votes are spread around. Here’s my count ( I have no claims of accuracy)
**HazelNutCoffe - Pleonast, Dio, Zuma
Hockey Monkey - Brewha
Faithfool - Hawkeye, Sach
Brewha - Hockey, Faithfool**
Hawkeye - Hal Briston
I don’t like the HazelNutCoffe vote. She straight up forgot about the game. I just don’t think that I could forget that I was scum. A vanilla townie role would be much more forgettable. Or maybe it was all a ploy?
I don’t buy Faithfool as scum either. But, her Fruedian Slit vote was worthless, and her behavior at the beginning of the game could have just been a ploy to get the suspicion off of her. I need to do some more reading.
Even if Freudian wasn’t the killer, I don’t think it implicates anyone. They could just have been worried about a public trait being revealed. They might of liked 1/6 odds over 1/4.
So, by your logic, we scum decided that instead of letting the town kill me - me who has been at the top of the town’s scum list since day one - we introduce Fruedian Slit as scum and get the vote swung towards her. There was very little suspicion on her, yet we scum decided it would be better to kill her than to kill me.
Do you see the flaw in your logic?
Steadfastly sticking to me only makes sense if you don’t care which of us townies are lynched. I’ve almost gotten lynched once and have consistently been getting votes. So, instead of taking the successful Fruedian Slit lynch as an opportunity to re-evaluate who you think is scum and who isn’t, you stick to which townie you could most easily get lynched.
I like my vote right where it is.
We are running out of time so
unvote faithfool
unvote Brewha
That leaves us with 2 candidates with 3 votes and no one else with more then 1. So can everyone else pick one of those two options.
We are running out of time so
unvote faithfool
vote Brewha
That leaves us with 2 candidates with 3 votes and no one else with more then 1. So can everyone else pick one of those two options.
EBWOP
I just wanted to point out that the first quote was before the FS lynch. The second quote was after.
Hawkeye, why are you voting for me? This is why I don’t like the ‘pick one and pile on’ logic that Storyteller came up with. Everyone can vote for me and claim that they were just doing what the majority wanted. There’s no accountability.
Your vote ties me for majority. You’d better have a good reason to vote for me. Because if I get lynched, I will be proven town and you will look quite scummy.
You remember when I voted for you before and listed about 17 reasons. Those. I can add a couple more if you really like. Just because I voted for Faithfool today, doesn’t mean my case against you went away. Plus, we need to lynch someone. I don’t like the case against Hazel, but is better then a no lynch. Do you suggest we continue to have scattered votes and wait til the scum pick us off one by one at night?
Your threats aren’t helping your case. If you vote for me, there will be revenge, doesn’t seem to be a pro-town sentiment. If you are either a scum or a town, we will evaluate everyone’s votes tomorrow, like we do every day. No one is extra scummy for voting for you regardless of your alignment.