Conquer Club

spiesr wrote:

usAir wrote:From wild's softclaim, it would be fairly easy to guess Mr. Mackey, Vanilla Townie.

Not exactly. From his posts we were able to deduce that he was basically claiming that his character was Mr. Mackey and that he had a post restriction. However, that is all that we could conclude. He gave no information at that point regarding what his actual role was. Vanilla townies were stated to be in this game, but we didn't know what the density of such roles is. Until, Wildwilliam were to tell us something we could make no real conclusions about what his role was. We didn't, and still basically don't, have enough information to know which characters are mafia aligned in this game. He could have been telling the truth about his character and post restriction and still been mafia, we couldn't know for sure at the time. He could also have simply been lying about his character and post restriction. If you can convince that town that you are such and such character right from the begging it can take a lot of pressure away from you and let you fly under the radar in later days.

that is, assuming you actually survive day 1. nice attempt to bury my last post btw.

zimmah wrote:

spiesr wrote:

drunkmonkey wrote:Not sure how to approach this on D1. No use in forcing you to claim, since we already know what that would be. I guess we could get a role from you, but I'm not sure that would be any help at this point in the game. Either we believe you or we don't. At this point, FOS wildwilliam.

Yeah, sorry wildwilliam, but you have now become the official day 1 bandwagon. Unvote Vote WildWilly. Basically you have done something that seems vaguely scummy and makes you stand out. On day 1 that is often the best we can do for a lynch, so at this point I will join in, as it looks inevitable that you will get enough votes to be lynched unless you throw up a competent defense/claim. So my vote is here is basically speed up this process. With you now at lynch -3 I suggest that you start on that defense buddy.

wow, how did we even not notice this?

quoted for emphasis.

Vote Count
slowreactor (3) - spiesr, drunkmonkey, MoB Deadly
drunkmonkey (1) - usAir

With 12 alive, 7 Votes are required to lynch.

Sorry about my inactivity.
I hang head in shame.

I will reread thread soon.

unvote for now, I need to regroup and read over some things.

zimmah wrote:that is, assuming you actually survive day 1. nice attempt to bury my last post btw.

zimmah wrote:

zimmah wrote:

spiesr wrote:

drunkmonkey wrote:Not sure how to approach this on D1. No use in forcing you to claim, since we already know what that would be. I guess we could get a role from you, but I'm not sure that would be any help at this point in the game. Either we believe you or we don't. At this point, FOS wildwilliam.

Yeah, sorry wildwilliam, but you have now become the official day 1 bandwagon. Unvote Vote WildWilly. Basically you have done something that seems vaguely scummy and makes you stand out. On day 1 that is often the best we can do for a lynch, so at this point I will join in, as it looks inevitable that you will get enough votes to be lynched unless you throw up a competent defense/claim. So my vote is here is basically speed up this process. With you now at lynch -3 I suggest that you start on that defense buddy.

wow, how did we even not notice this?

quoted for emphasis.

Okay, this post that you say I am now trying to bury. The reason that I didn't provide some sort of response to it is that I don't really even know what point you are trying to make with it. Your demeanor suggests that you seem to think it constitutes some sort of damning evidence against me, but I have no idea how you arrived at that sort of conclusion. If you could elaborate on just what you find so interesting about that post of mine, then perhaps I could respond to you with some sort of meaningful discourse, but right now I am just scratching my head as I see you once again making bizarre leaps in logic and this time not even bothering to explain them.

the fact you're just joining a bandwagon to get the wagon rolling and not even TRYING to hide that fact.

Was all that not on day 1? We had nothing to go on then did we? Am I missing something Zimmah?

dazza2008 wrote:Was all that not on day 1? We had nothing to go on then did we? Am I missing something Zimmah?

well i thought i'll just point it out, might be nothing, might as well be a scumslip.

zimmah wrote:

dazza2008 wrote:Was all that not on day 1? We had nothing to go on then did we? Am I missing something Zimmah?

well i thought i'll just point it out, might be nothing, might as well be a scumslip.

Ah ok I thought you were building a case without stating what it is. It could be something to bear in mind but to me at the moment it seems like a normal day 1 play. Could be scum or town. I will have to have a read through all of this again since it seems we are not getting much to go on from night actions.

spiesr wrote:

usAir wrote:From wild's softclaim, it would be fairly easy to guess Mr. Mackey, Vanilla Townie.

Not exactly. From his posts we were able to deduce that he was basically claiming that his character was Mr. Mackey and that he had a post restriction. However, that is all that we could conclude. He gave no information at that point regarding what his actual role was. Vanilla townies were stated to be in this game, but we didn't know what the density of such roles is. Until, Wildwilliam were to tell us something we could make no real conclusions about what his role was. We didn't, and still basically don't, have enough information to know which characters are mafia aligned in this game. He could have been telling the truth about his character and post restriction and still been mafia, we couldn't know for sure at the time. He could also have simply been lying about his character and post restriction. If you can convince that town that you are such and such character right from the begging it can take a lot of pressure away from you and let you fly under the radar in later days.

Whether or not you believed his softclaim, all of the roles seem to be associated with their abilities. E.g, Cartman was a JOAT, Mr. Macky, aside from being sort of annoying, doesn't really do anything.

Anyways, it seems Zimma has a point. I also don't like how drunkmonkey tries to make it seem obvious that the people he's voting for are scum. I'm voting for monkey because I think that he's the most dangerous player out there. Not because he skimmed, not because he accused someone of skimming. Just because it seems that he's trying to drive stakes into people. If someone has a better case for someone else, I'll change my vote. But for now, my vote stands.

spiesr wrote:

slowreactor wrote:@ the Iron Butterfly comment: If Kenny isn't in this game I'll be damned, and based on what IB did, I honestly believed that Kenny would be a jester.

The question here then, is what do you think there would have been to gain from having the cop visit a jester? I am not even sure what sort result a cop would get upon visiting a jester, but I am fairly confident that the result wouldn't simply say "Jester." Depending on the mod, I could see the result coming back as either "Innocent" or "Third Party." So would that result actually have been that useful to us, when the alternative would be the cop investigating some other person and possibly finding a scum?

Aren't jesters 3rd party?

slowreactor wrote:@ wildwilliam. READ MY POST AFTER THE ONES YOU QUOTED. I specifically said that I misread his posts. Frankly, it's not that easy trying to decipher what he has been saying...

And yet after you come to this realization you don't bother to change your vote or anything. The vote that you appear to have made primarily on your mistaken assumption that Wildwillaim had been skimming.

That was bad play on my part, I admit, but at that point he was just getting on my nerves.

Still need to hear from the following today:

Epitaph1
drake_259
LSU Tiger Josh
sensfan
skillfusniper33

The minor case vs drunkmonkey has a little merit to it. But not enough at this time to gain my full attention

But I agree more with the case against slow. His timing probably could have been overlooked if it wasn't on day 1. But the part that really is selling me on that case is the fact of trying to push a power role onto someone else so early in the game.

I will hold my vote until later.

vote zimmah

I find zimmah's attempt to make spiesr looks scummy deeply suspicious. After days of inactivity, spiesr makes a decent argument (given what little we have to go on) and instead of analyzing and critiquing spier's argument and slow reactor's response, zimmah instead changes the focus and moves onto another topic. Not only does he change the subject without further discussion, but he merely highlights a quote and then leaves it at that. Just pointing to a quote and assuming everyone will arrive at the same conclusion does not help the investigation.

Spiesr's quote re: the wildwilliam spews many words only to confess that it's a vote for the sake of bandwagoning. It could very well be a scumslip, but it's hard to say at this point. It just seems like zimmah was perhaps trying to direct the spotlight away from slowreactor.

slowreactor wrote:Aren't jesters 3rd party?

Yes. However, how third parties show up under cop investigation can vary from mod to mod. There was a discussion a while back in the usergroup about how third parties turn up under investigation. There wasn't any clear consensus shown in that discussion, with some mods simply having "Third Party" as a result, and other only using "Guilty" and "Innocent" results shunting any third party role into of of those two categories depending on the circumstances.

zimmah wrote:the fact you're just joining a bandwagon to get the wagon rolling and not even TRYING to hide that fact.

Well, as I admitted in that post, I wasn't very enthusiastic about the "case" on Wildwilliam, but voted for it anyway for reasons all coming back to the fact that it was day 1. As I just said, it was day 1 and we really had nothing to go on, as always. Such scenarios pretty much always end in one of two ways. 1: We can't come up with anything and end up hitting the deadline for a no lynch. 2: Someone says something stupid and then they get bandwagoned because we have nothing better to do. At which point they either continue being stupid and get lynched, or they roleclaim and/or provide some sort of reasonable defense, then we either believe them and go do something else or we disbelieve them and lynch them anyway.
So yeah, Wildwilliam was the most prominent candidate for a lynch at that point in time and it seemed inevitable that he would pick up more votes. Since going down that path seemed marginally better than just waiting around for the deadline to give us a no lynch, I voted for him to speed up the process. At that point Wildwilliam could either provide an intelligent defense and probably avoid being lynched, or continue being stupid and get lynched. He ended up choosing the latter, too bad he was town but what are you gonna do.
So yeah, from one perspective you could say my vote was a shameless bandwagon. But, I was upfront and honest about it being so and my reasons for doing it. And it was Day 1, so really there weren't many better courses of action available to me at the time.

At some point on D1, I think people have to say "I agree, let's pressure him" in order to get something moving. In the short time I've played, I've seen a lot of people do it, and I've yet to see it be directly tied to their alignment. It's the pattern of bandwagonning you have to look out for.

Epitaph1 wrote:vote zimmah

I find zimmah's attempt to make spiesr looks scummy deeply suspicious. After days of inactivity, spiesr makes a decent argument (given what little we have to go on) and instead of analyzing and critiquing spier's argument and slow reactor's response, zimmah instead changes the focus and moves onto another topic. Not only does he change the subject without further discussion, but he merely highlights a quote and then leaves it at that. Just pointing to a quote and assuming everyone will arrive at the same conclusion does not help the investigation.

Spiesr's quote re: the wildwilliam spews many words only to confess that it's a vote for the sake of bandwagoning. It could very well be a scumslip, but it's hard to say at this point. It just seems like zimmah was perhaps trying to direct the spotlight away from slowreactor.

none of all that, i just quoted something i stumbled upon while re-reading the tread, i thought it was interesting enough to point out, but not necessarily interesting enough to build a case around. just for future reference. see it as a FOS. either way, seems like you are trying to direct attention to me, even after the rest already understood what was trying to say, accepted it, and moved on. besides, even if i for some reason had to protect slowreactor, why would i do it now? he's not anywhere near danger at all, he only has 3 votes, none of them are really strong, and there isn't much action. i don't see why anyone should panic about it.

ye, i made a mistake by lynching mr. mackey, but then again, he did make himself look a little suspicious, and it has happened before that someone fake claimed using a PR from the start. maybe we should have given him a little more time to proof his innocence but what has been done has been done. i'll be a little bit more careful with who to vote on from now on.

not sure if we have any leads to follow atm anyway.

I actually posted on Monday which was this current "day" Drunk. Granted it wasn't much of a post other than agreeing with what Spiesr stated. Personally I'm not worried about jesters in a game because generally the mod will continue the game even if a Jester "wins" unless it is near the end of the game. I'll need to reread this, but won't be able to really talk more about it until tomorrow or else Friday at some point.

Vote Count
slowreactor (2) - spiesr, drunkmonkey
drunkmonkey (1) - usAir
zimmah (1) Epitaph1

With 12 alive, 7 Votes are required to lynch.
I'm also sending out a mass-prod, and setting the deadline to November 24th (One week from today), it won't be enforced until sometime late-night though.

I am certainly here, I thought looked really scummy at first, than someone brought up that the quotes used in the case were misleading. I am sorry I haven't had time to decide for myself which case I like better.

Blake, you have Slow as having 3 votes, but only 2 voters, is the vote count correct?

EBWOP

MoB Deadly wrote:I am certainly here, I thought slowreactor looked really scummy at first, than someone brought up that the quotes used in the case were misleading. I am sorry I haven't had time to decide for myself which case I like better.

Blake, you have Slow as having 3 votes, but only 2 voters, is the vote count correct?

MoB Deadly wrote:EBWOP

MoB Deadly wrote:I am certainly here, I thought slowreactor looked really scummy at first, than someone brought up that the quotes used in the case were misleading. I am sorry I haven't had time to decide for myself which case I like better.

Blake, you have Slow as having 3 votes, but only 2 voters, is the vote count correct?

maybe there's a doublevoter.

i'm active btw.

zimmah wrote:

MoB Deadly wrote:EBWOP

MoB Deadly wrote:I am certainly here, I thought slowreactor looked really scummy at first, than someone brought up that the quotes used in the case were misleading. I am sorry I haven't had time to decide for myself which case I like better.

Blake, you have Slow as having 3 votes, but only 2 voters, is the vote count correct?

maybe there's a doublevoter.

i'm active btw.

I thought so, thats why I just want him to verify that the vote count is correct before i jump to conclusions

MoB Deadly wrote:

zimmah wrote:

MoB Deadly wrote:EBWOP

MoB Deadly wrote:I am certainly here, I thought slowreactor looked really scummy at first, than someone brought up that the quotes used in the case were misleading. I am sorry I haven't had time to decide for myself which case I like better.

Blake, you have Slow as having 3 votes, but only 2 voters, is the vote count correct?

maybe there's a doublevoter.

i'm active btw.

I thought so, thats why I just want him to verify that the vote count is correct before i jump to conclusions

Wouldn't that be kinda weird to reveal it in the vote count? and it would then give away some information people would probably want to keep to themselves as long as they could.