Skruffs' Non-Posted Introductory Post wrote:
Patrick wrote:
Simenon starts out looking for trouble, as usual, and jumps on the same thing as I did on Jordan. Is acting weird about not giving his earlier reasons for suspecting Jordan; I don't see how it's going to lead to a slap fight. The fact that there is a counter-wagon of sorts against Simenon based largely on what seems to be Simenon just being Simenon, makes me feel a little better about him. Possible being used as a distraction if Jordan is scum.
Ripley starts off the game with more joking than usual, then a little theory/meta of the previous pie c9's, then talks about Jordan. Plays devils advocate on the Jordan issue, has yet to take a firm stand on anything. I'm still thinking about the validity of his points; they seem logical enough mostly, I'm just not sure if they are right being applied in this case, which to be fair Ripley acknowledged he might be over-thinking. I can see where Simenon is coming from in saying it's Jordan/Ripley, but it's obviously overstated at this stage.
This part of this post reassures me about Patrick (it's at the start of page 4) and reinforces the 'devil's advocate' i was seeing in Ripley. I didn't like how he was kind of goading Patrick's 'scum tell' (which we now know is false) on jordan without actually investing himself in it.
Aight, I've read through again. Third time is the charm.
Aimee's player post is similar to open 19, where she is dead in town. She infuses her opinions about the players in with how they've acted. I also like her comment on Ripley being "objective like scum should be' - I actually agree with that. Good scum want to be pleasant and helpful by day, knowing they won't be killed at night.
I am willing to offer a disclaimer on the following statement. I got in a lot of trouble in PieE7 #2 by not liking the Ripley/Patrick relationship. Neither of them were scum in that game but the way they reacted with each other really tripped my buttons. It happens again on here. Ripley, for example, mentions that Patrick always seems to be town - briefly mentions the first C9, even offers a link to it, but seems to dislike the idea of using Patrick's past behavior as an example in this game. In a lot of the first pages, Ripley plays a gentle devil's advocate - and I think Aimee also pointed this out - by pushing points that Patrick has made. I have not seen Ripley question Patrick in a way that seems suspicious, yet.
Para was a good target for a late day lynch, and IH is the one who really russled up that wagon. I really like Paradoxombie's call out in
post 211. I'm curious about that game Jordan was talking about - the one where teffc replaced out and may be scum. When it was talked about, presumably, she was still a live?
Patrick really quieted down after the wagon on jordan because of his tell was replaced by IH on Paradoxombie action. Laziness is what was used, but again, I'm suspicious. More of Ripley than of Patrick. Why hasn't Ripley voted yet??
Right after Patrick says he's bored, Ripley pipes up with almost the exact same thing.
Check it out. Note how Patrick responds to the IH/para case by talking only about Paradox.
Ripley sums it up best when he says he's not lurking, he's maintaining an enigmatic silence.
PAtrick pushes in a few posts that jordan or paradoxombie (both power roles who are now dead) should be lynched, or at least claim. (Why in the hell would a power role claim in a game where scum can block AND kill each night?? Patrick should know better than this...) and I am really digging this quote of his:
Patrick wrote:If Jordan isn't lynched, it seems that Paradoxombie would be the main alternative lynch. I guess I'd go with an Aimee or an IH lynch to avoid a no lynch.
One slightly interesting thing I noted just skimming back was that neither of the vote leaders are voting for each other. I wonder if that means anything. If I see CTD in scum-chat I'll poke him to get clarification on the deadline.
Patrick has not really referred to Ripley directly all game - it's as if the two of them just Assume the other is town and don't bother with each other. Again, this REALLY aggravates me, to the point where I am having a hard time looking at other players..
IH's play hasn't gone well in this game either, though. He posted and squabbled with para for a while, then, well, disappeared. Come back. IH.
Ripley's Post 268 is AWESOME. I hope he continues this train of thought in the following day.
Simenon (me) puts Para at 3, Patrick keeps his vote on the claimed doctor, questioning Simenon's' switch. zombie puts IH at 2 - and both Ripley and Patrick are not voting. Patrick rescinds his vote, and Ripley starts setting up the next day. The way he talks isn't anything more than 'perusing a newspaper' in nature, somehow I get the feeling that he knew no matter who got lynched, he would be okay. Patrick made a lot of fuss of being around for deadline - but if he was, he made no posts to demonstrate it. Certainly no votes, and after some discussing, Ripley finally hammers the cop.
Patrick complains about why Paradox didn't claim - which is stupid. The doc was already being killed for claiming, it wouldn't be hard to block the cop. This was a bad post, a very bad post, one that an experienced PIE-er should have known way before he started fishing for claims. Paradox made the right play in not claiming - all it would do is make the scum's job completely easier, for two nights.
He followed it up by asking Simenon why he voted for town.
If I remember correctly, Patrick abstained from voting either player, so he doesn't 'get' to criticize others for voting badly, does he? No. If he had voted IH, Ripley could have 'chosen' between the two of them, but Patrick writes off Ripley in his first post. Why??!
Ripley's follow up post is even worse. "Well, Patrick, you see, I didn't *like* hammering him, I *thought* he was town, but I just *had* to do it." Why didn't he ask Patrick why he didn't vote?? And immediately after saying "I was sure paradox wasn't scum with anyone but you AND I knew it would be a bad lynch" he agrees with Patrick that Simenon was suspicious for switching to someone he thought of as town, earlier.
Patrick says Simenon is curious. Ripley echoes Patrick. Aimee echoes Ripley and Patrick. Hmm. Ripley and Simenon have an argument, and Simenon finally notices the relationship between Patrick and Ripley. Thank goodness I'm not the only one. He asks Patrick to comment on it, and Patrick, who's avoided directly accusing Ripley the entire game, and who has been trading off arguments with Ripley, for each other, sicne the beginning of day one, against Jordan, says this:
Patrick wrote:You attacked Ripley. You've asked him questions, made bold declarations in big letters. Why do you want me to answer that? Surely it's for him to respond to. Ok so you've randomly said you're pretty sure I'm scum with Ripley, but I can't give an answer to that unless you actually give a tangible reason. The only part I could see you want me to respond to is that bit at the start where you accuse him of completely ignoring everything you said. Which is an exaggeration.
Direct turn of pace. And yet it doesn't cast suspicion on Ripley, but rather on Simenon for asking him to comment on Ripley.
Ripley's response is that Simenon is ruining the game. To b frank, I've been in Simenon's shoes in those kind of games, and it Sucks to be town and feel like the odds are against you. Ripley, though, is doing Great. The game is great. Sure he hammered someone he thought was town, but Simenon *voted* for him. That Patrick avoided voting at all at deadline never, ever, crossed Ripley's lips, and Ripley has been very astute about his observations with both known towns. Somehow he's trying to push it on to Simenon after confessing to acting in the same way. It's bad. Very bad.
Ripley and Patrick tag team Simenon, without voting. This is Ripley's style anyways - he managed to encourage two wagons day one, on both power roles, without voting except as the last post of the day. As scum, a very finessed style.
Patrick didn't pile on a vote onto Ripley, but Ripley and Patrick were the only two people posting at that time besides Simenon. Ripley's response towards Simenon was that Simenon was acting brashly, with a healthy dose of appeal to emotion. He did not suggest that Simenon was pushing for a quick lynch - he more tried to convince Simenon that voting him could result in a quick lynch. The main focus was that he could be lynched, though, and wasn't really directed towards Simenon's alignment, if you get my drift, which makes me think it was all bluster. Slick, smooth bluster.
Patrick finally questioned Ripley in asking him about Ripley's statements in regards to if Patrick knew that Ripley was suspicious of he and Simenon and was trying to inflame those suspicions. Which is weird, because the meat of that logic is that Ripley may be being misled by Patrick. This also only happened after Simenon pointed out the relationship between the two - the first, if small, example of distancing. Regardless, Patrick's response was polite and curious, and Ripley rather avoided it completely by talking about experienced players on Jordan. I don't follow that, but Patrick did, and dropped it. It was all very courteous and almost scripted, I dunno.
Ah. IH is back. He notes that Ripley avoided Patrick in his suspicion of Simenon. YAY!
More reading, but it seems to be Simenon and Aimee right now. They both took Patrick's lead in casting suspicion over Simenon (me), and I get the impression that they were maybe hoping for a Patrick vote to quick hammer. I could be wrong though. LYLO with five players means anything goes as long as you can convince one townie to misvote.