Mini 540: Nightmare (Game Over)

[roffman]

firstly, i agree with the mod, glork is awesome.

Secondly, the role name is "the pitcher". Mod has confirmed innocence.

[roffman]

quick question, how many pages does a normal day 1 normally take up on this site?

[Holy]

I heartily disagree that people should jump on the most probable bandwagon (except in the case of a deadline).

Not to derail things too far, but the discussion in MD over fear of being wrong leading to slow/replacement riddled games is encouraging me to be even more aggressive (assuming a 9/3 split with no other kills, town wins with a 50% hit rate).

Hmm, I mostly found that 1st day is usually long and so riddled for me. I really wish I got a nightmare in here when I joined. Or maybe it won't happen before the first day/night, I guess.

Since Draux has not picked up his prod yet and it's been almost two weeks, I will begin looking for a replacement

So are the people voting Draux going to unvote now?

Why should you so concerned about his position?

Holy's vote for Roffman in 74 feels pretty out-of-place.

Not really, it's more because I thought he just making an excuse to bandwagon someone. On a full re-read - with a fresh look (after many people questioned this over and over again, yeah.. this slacker doing a re-read ), I can sense he just wanted DS to be more explicit with his posts (i.e. to be more helpful) at that time. Soon after that, he found out that probably he won't ever got any helpful posts at all from him and decided to vote him anyway just to avoid him being stress. Thus alarmed my earlier suspicions at that time (that he just making excuses for an easy lynch, i.e. DS), and made me quite satisfied with his lynch before the mason claim came out.

Wow. Rishi/Roffman masons? I'm honestly at a loss for words.
What are your rolenames?
Rishi, is Roffman's innocence guaranteed?
Roffman, is Rishi's innocence guaranteed?

Nice questions!

I may be looking through some OMGUS-tinted glasses, but Holy's attitude towards Draux seems vaguely hypocritical.

When some people began to accuse Draux as lurkerish and then votes were on his way to make him speak, I was still neutral about him. It seems like the holiday seasons was still on the way or maybe he just busy.
Players consecutively asked a Draux prod.
And then tdp blew up and asked to be replaced, her replacements found soon. My thought was, if tdp's replacements was found so soon, why not Draux being replaced too, I thought maybe he wasn't replaced because he

already picked his prod but still lurking on purpose.

And I voted him for my suspicion of his lurking on purpose.
Angelmouse then said that he was appeared in other thread explaining that he was busy. Okay.., but days after that he still didn't showed up in here, that just confirmed my suspicions until the mod explained that he didn't picked up his prod at all. Meh!

I would be interested to see skitzer and angelmouse create an assess-every-player post, since they haven't really committed to any concrete positions on other players. Holy should probably do one as well.

Lets see:

pete d

> He doesn't sound his thoughts actively throughout the game, only appeared occasionally enough so everyone won't call him for lurking too long, and when appears his post is quite long but not really helpful IMO. He's concerned about the current votes on Draux (yeah, me only). Leaning scum for his way of play.

Glork/Draux

> Not much I can tell about Draux, but I like Glork's posts especially about the masons thing, quite insightful.
For that insightful point,

Unvote, vote: pete d

.

Skitzer

> He's too neutral about others, when he does vote someone soon enough he'll unvote him/her, hard to predict which way his intention was. Leaning scum.

Disciple Slayer

> A destructive player. After my full re-read some of his posts seem screaming asking to be lynch, made me think might be there's a jester in this setup. Might be a jester or purely an ass.

roffman

> Stressed by DS's acts. Claiming mason. I like his effort to analyze things, especially after his hiatus.

Rishi

> Claiming mason, but his choice of words sometimes made me raised my eyebrows.

farside22

> Actively searching scum with well reasoned suspicions.

opie

> Sound his thoughts and concerns actively. I like the way he's playing. Leaning town.

gorckat

> Actively searching scum under his own suspicions. I'm still watching him to found out more insight about his play.

Lulubelle

> Earlier, I casted my suspicions toward her, her explanation seems legit about it. She's not really outspoken lately.

tdp/angelmouse

> I honestly think that tdp's actually searching scum based on her own suspicions, I saw nothing wrong with that. Her replacement, angelmouse, is better at sounding her own concerns. I like her conclusion so far.

[Holy]

Secondly, the role name is "the pitcher". Mod has confirmed innocence.

On you both?

[Rishi]

Wow. Rishi/Roffman masons? I'm honestly at a loss for words.
What are your rolenames?
Rishi, is Roffman's innocence guaranteed?
Roffman, is Rishi's innocence guaranteed?

My role PM calls me a mason. It also calls me "The Catcher" but I have no idea what that means. The PM doesn't say if we're confirmed, so I PMed MBF before the game began, and he told us we were confirmed innocent.

The strength in masons is in remaining

hidden

innocents. Breadcrumb your role and your partner's identity, but don't claim unless you absolutely have to. Assuming you are innocent, the scums now know a hell of a lot more about the setup than they did before you claimed for the two of you.

I still feel good about the claim. It was a little early, but I am fairly sure that either me or roffman would have been pushed to L -1 at some point on Day 1, and then we would have had to claim anyway. The effect is the same.

I felt reasonably sure that I could defend myself against further attacks, but I'll admit I had less confidence in roffman, which is why I wanted to take lead on the claim.

And, believe me, I might value masons a little less than most players, BUT I wouldn't have claimed if there wasn't already pressure on both me and roffman.

[Rishi]

Hmm. Does everyone have baseball names in their role PMs? You don't have to say what it is, but I'm just curious.

[Glork]

I still feel good about the claim. It was a little early, but I am fairly sure that either me or roffman would have been pushed to L -1 at some point on Day 1, and then we would have had to claim anyway. The effect is the same.

Do you think you got as much info from a three-person bandwagon as you would have a five- or six-person bandwagon?

[Holy]

^and wow! Glork iS awesome ('-') (._.) ('-') (._.) (nod nod)

My role PM calls me a mason. It also calls me "The Catcher" but I have no idea what that means.

Lol! Pitcher and catcher, an inseparable pair.

The PM doesn't say if we're confirmed, so I PMed MBF before the game began, and he told us we were confirmed innocent.

Okay..

Hmm. Does everyone have baseball names in their role PMs? You don't have to say what it is, but I'm just curious.

Nope.

[Rishi]

I still feel good about the claim. It was a little early, but I am fairly sure that either me or roffman would have been pushed to L -1 at some point on Day 1, and then we would have had to claim anyway. The effect is the same.

Do you think you got as much info from a three-person bandwagon as you would have a five- or six-person bandwagon?

You have a good point. Still, with players like DS and TDP (who is no longer in the game), I didn't want to risk my bandwagon going to five and getting two quick votes.

Wow, Holy is really trying to get on your good side.

[mikeburnfire]

Official Vote Count, no longer being editted in by MikeBurnFire
7 votes needed to lynch

4 skitzer (skitzer, pete d, Lulubelle, gorckat)
2 Disciple Slayer (Rishi, farside22)
2 opie (opie, roffman)
1 pete d (Holy)
1 Holy (Glork)
1 Lulubelle (Disciple Slayer)
1 angelmouse (angelmouse)

[farside22]

Lol! Pitcher and catcher, an inseparable pair.

My mind was in the gutter on this one. Either the mod is a perv or a baseball fan. I'm sorry, but I'm laughing at the imagine in my head right now. I'll weigh in when I can get more serious.

[Glork]

Wow, Holy is really trying to get on your good side.

I bet she has a serious case of "Crap, Glork's onto me!"

[opie]

I don't know if you're paying attention, but I have already previously explained why I think they're suspicious.

I have been paying attention. But a week went by between your last two posts and I was wondering if there was anything else you noticed in that week or so that would further your case. Especially with regards to skitzer.

Holy, I don't understand the beginning of Post 302. What do the quotes from Rishi and gorckat have to do with what you said just after?

unvote
vote: skitzer

I feel like he has been active but hasn't really offered much that's given the town new info or perspective. Seems to go along with others. Will vote for a person and then quickly retract it. Here are a few posts that stood out as suspicious to me:

Post 80 -- Having just voted for him in Post 76, he says that Disciple Slayer always plays like he does.
Post 112 -- Again reiterates that this is how Disciple Slayer always acts but considers it suspicious.
Post 122 -- Says Disciple Slayer always acts this way which makes him hard to read.
Post 211 -- Finds gorckat's vote strange. Which I find strange.
Post 228 -- Then there is the whole voting for thedragonprincess' replacement.

I feel like the people he has voted for have been the easily lynchs. His vote on Disciple Slayer is an example of this. He votes for Disciple Slayer when he is cathing a lot of heat from other players, all the while stating that this is how he always acts. Which to me seems more of an argument

not

to vote for Disciple Slayer. Then when spotlight shifts from Disciple Slayer so too does his vote. Not that I expect skitzer to keep his vote there but the way he justified it is just odd. I just get the impression that he is scum trying to avoid getting into a real spat with anyone so that he can avoid scrutiny.

[pete d]

He doesn't sound his thoughts actively throughout the game, only appeared occasionally enough so everyone won't call him for lurking too long, and when appears his post is quite long but not really helpful IMO.

lol hypocrisy

So seeing how Glork is so wonderfully insightful and I'm a scummy lurker, how come we both have very similar suspicions?

[roffman]

hmm, skitzer's at -2, though it could count as -1 with DS in the game. Skitzer, i recommend voting for someone else before u go to -1 and someone hammers u.

[Glork]

Skitz should definitely claim, because he is absolutely on my 'people who should die' list.

[roffman]

interesting name for a list. Just wondering who else is on it, seeing as ur currently voting for Holy.

[Glork]

Did you see that

gigantic

post I made when I replaced into the game?


Yeah, go look at the three names in bold at the end of that post.

[Holy]

Wow, Holy is really trying to get on your good side.

We'll see, Shrine Priest...

Holy, I don't understand the beginning of Post 302. What do the quotes from Rishi and gorckat have to do with what you said just after?

O yeah sorry, my writings wasn't connected well for others to understand.

Rishi sounded his disagreement with jumping on "hot" wagon hastily when no deadline is set. That's true but somehow it prevents a progress (we still can avoid wild cards hammer by our unvote before a claim made/clues gathered from the suspect), we should try our best to gather clues before the deadline occurs to prevent chaos or a scum sneak on the deadline chaos wagon. If we continues thinking that there's no deadline anyway at the moment, we'll be slack and unready. Thus will make the scum easily hides and take opportunities when the deadline is near, which is bad.
And gorckat sounded that a too slow and riddled game lead him to be a more aggressive player. I felt that this game is quite riddled too on this day 1 (with the early masons claim [which is somehow confirmed] and a jester probability [which is still my speculation]) and hoping maybe on the next day, all will be clearer. I don't know...

He doesn't sound his thoughts actively throughout the game, only appeared occasionally enough so everyone won't call him for lurking too long, and when appears his post is quite long but not really helpful IMO.

lol hypocrisy

Yep!
Vice versa

So seeing how Glork is so wonderfully insightful and I'm a scummy lurker, how come we both have very similar suspicions?

Not really, my read on him is still not much (I'm still analyzing him), while mine on you.. well.. my suspicions plus I add that cynical vibe of you too ;.;

[farside22]

Okay now that I'm back to normal let me start with pete d

Pete d:

Your vote is on Skitzer, but you feel both Holy and he are scummie. I did agree with one comment Holy she made about you which was this:

only appeared occasionally enough so everyone won't call him for lurking too long,

Do you find her more scummie or Skitzer more scummie?

@Skitzer:

You need to claim.

@Rishi

Your comment about Holy tring to get on Glorks good side seemed to imply you feel she is scum. I'm just curious to know where you stand on this subject.

@Holy:

Your vote and comment did come across as OMGUS against pete. You are acting like a cheerleader with Glork. (no offense to any cheerleaders out there) and really seem to not be coherant since Glork outed you. I was uncertain at first, but your most recent actions have me thinking you are scrambling to get free from the scrunity and doing a poor job of it.

Unvote: Vote: Holy

[gorckat]

I don't see how her stance was unreasonable, gorckat. *shrug*

I'm probably dealing with a case of confirmation bias, then. I keep looking at her posts and getting the feeling she's hiding something.

I had done my own, unpublished, person by person list right before Glork joined and was actually thinking Holy's recent posts made her more town. Then Glork came in and seems to have rattled her.

I'm very uncertain there- I've been in the shoes of a relative newbie townie getting called out by the big, bad, experienced player who just replaced in and it

is

unnerving.

Skitzer's waffley back and forth of vote and unvote seems more likely motivated by scumminess.

[Rishi]

@Rishi

Your comment about Holy tring to get on Glorks good side seemed to imply you feel she is scum. I'm just curious to know where you stand on this subject.

Not necessarily, but it was something worth pointing out. Maybe she's just trying to get Glork to remove his vote. Or maybe she genuinely likes Glork's analysis and didn't realize she was sucking up to him. Lots of explanations. I brought up the point to see how Holy reacted the statement. Yes, I did think it could be a scummy move as well.

I wouldn't say that Holy was scummy merely based on that one observation, but it's one of those IGMEOY things.

[skitzer]

I don't have a problem with claiming.

I'm a dancer. It's the same thing as a roleblocker.

I'm still working on my assess every player post.

[opie]

skitzer do you realize that you are still voting for yourself?

[pete d]

Pete d: Your vote is on Skitzer, but you feel both Holy and he are scummie... <snip>

...Do you find her more scummie or Skitzer more scummie?

Well, I was voting for skitzer, so there's your answer.

unvote

The claim is, at the very least, credible. /waiting for skitzer's big post.