I’m just a little curious about the following statement:
Are you really suggesting that as you were posting a random vote on Kabenon you realized that you also had a reason to be suspicious of him? In the very act of posting? And if so are you now suggesting that the vote was not random by the time you finished the post?Wesaq wrote:I phrased it not as clearly as i thought. I selected you as a random target. And after that i found a reason to choose you.
You also posted this:
Are you maintaining that your vote on Kabenon is still serious? And that even though you now see “that was a parody of a name” that you still believe it is a reason to vote for Kabenon? Or has this vote reverted to its pristine “random” state?Wesaq wrote:@kabenon
I've seen, what that was a parody of a name, but like many others was too lazy to figure out.
But i still see no other choice, so the Vote is still with you.
Spacecase,
In sequence, I am curious about this last little series of statements you have made:
Spacecase wrote:So what we are basically saying is that we interrogate the "veteran" players, right?
Spacecase wrote:To tell you the truth, Wesaq has me confused in more ways then one. Such as his overall reasoning of voting you in the first place. unvote
I’m curious about this sequence because you first suggest that we should interrogate the veteran players. This would exclude you, of course. You then overstate the case that Peers raised by stating that it had to be “deliberate to take the most analytical person out” to try to keep attention focused on this (and once again, of course, it couldn’t be you acting in such a deliberate fashion, because you are new). And then you jump in with Kabenon on being suspicious of Wesaq, and once again take the issue farther than even the person who originated it with this:Spacecase wrote:but that's the thing. It had to be deliberate to take the most analytical person out of the game on night 0.
From what I read above I assume that you favor a lynching of Wesaq at this point, on the evidence available.Spacecase wrote:vote Wesaq, Seems like the smartest choice instead of playing the guessing game. Also, this will clear up confusion later in the game, sine it seems Wesaq can't keep his facts straight.
To me this looks less like trying to be legitimately helpful to town and more like trying to point attention in any direction as long as it is away from you. Just a couple questions:
What would a “deliberate” killing of the “most analytical” person in town tell you that would help you find scum, with no established relationships or suspicions within this game to guide you? What next step would you take, other than to encourage attention be focused elsewhere?
What are the “more ways than one” in which Wesaq has confused you? And are you in fact comfortable with a Wesaq lynch at this point, as your post seems to suggest?
Peers,
There’s a lot in this post that makes me curious of Peers.
I’ll forego the issue of which person was killed by mafia and which was killed by the serial killer. But this statement just makes no sense at all:Peers wrote:So, from the descriptions, Timmytuttut was killed by the serial killer, and CKD was killed by the Mafia. I think we can presume the SK kill was picked at random, as he has as little info to work with as the town does, but the CKD kill was deliberate -- at least one person in the Mafia has been in games with him and knows his playstyle could be dangerous to the Mafia, especially in an open game.
So, how many players here have played a game with CKD before?
The only information Mafia would have that the SK would not would be who the other Mafia are.Peers wrote:I think we can presume the SK kill was picked at random, as he has as little info to work with as the town does
This would be irrelevant for the reason you then give for Mafia killing CKD with reason. The SK would be as aware of who (s)he thought was threatening to him/her as Mafia would.
So since the SK would have the same information as the mafia for the purposes of selecting a target on night 0, specifically which players had in previous encounters seemed most adept at scum hunting or most proficient at seeming town, are you suggesting that the SK must be one of the new players? Or someone who has not played with any of the other players in this game before? If not, how does the logic in the above statement work?
And this is just really specific:
Why would his play style be especially dangerous in an open game, as opposed to some other kind? And why are you absolutely certain that the Mafia’s knowledge of this was the reason for his death?Peers wrote:but the CKD kill was deliberate -- at least one person in the Mafia has been in games with him and knows his playstyle could be dangerous to the Mafia, especially in an open game.
Lastly, what bothers me about your post on this is that you ask…
…but then you had to be directly asked, by Farside22, if you had played in games with Curiouskarmadog before you told the rest of us that you had. Was there a specific reason why you didn’t offer this information unprompted, since you asked others to divulge it?Peers wrote:So, how many players here have played a game with CKD before?
By the way, I was in the last try at the New C9 with Curiouskarmadog.
And thanks for any answers provided.