hello again ryan..ryan wrote:Well this is an interesting way to start the game
interesting indeed....Adam, got anything to say about this?
well, it was written by a cop (ryan wrote:CKD: How goes it? I believe we need a little info before we think we've got "an easy first day lynch" I mean it can't be that simple.............can it?
does this tie in?theopor_COD wrote:the face of the Locomotive driver in the saloon that night shook fear into the faces and minds of the community, this was surely only the start.One of the group however intently listened with interest, he'd learnt something very revealing.
it is only "treacherous" if it is trueTwomz wrote: Regardless, one of my eyes is firmly planted upon Adam and i await his response to this treacherous note.
My other eye however is spinning wildly in Day 1 randomness...Vote: Thin_Manbecause he's the only other player whose name starts with T... how scummy is that?
I await the other players activity and wish you all a fun game . (I haven't played for a year, so I may be rusty ).
PS: @ curiouskarmadog Only conclusions I can draw from that are either we have a SK or it's just flavor. I doubt a role would be revealed so easily in the setting though. The SK is my personal opinion of course, or another role that would be by itself.
I see, not sure why any neutral role would post that though....unless it was some sort of hybrid jester, but I doubt that too.Twomz wrote:It's treacherous because we don't know if it's true or not. /shrug
Well, I say SK... but I mean any "singular" role... like any neutral role that wouldn't be aligned with the mafia or town. SK is just the most common neutral role. The quote makes me think of someone that's off to the side... by themselves.
I agree, however, I will be disappointed if a.) we do not get another note or b.) we get a different note that says the same thing. At this particular point, the note does little.Paradoxombie wrote:
I think the best overall action to take with the note is to ignore it until tommorow. If we get another one then we look at what both notes say and compare them for truth.
random vote: pdcakes
I do not actually buy this. I am not saying I think the letter is scummy or noble, but if it is scummy I do not think it is scummy for these reasons. Really the "ploy" would only work once. Lets says we end up lynching Adam one day and he is scum and we fall into this "mafia trap"...the next day the mafia leaves a note with a townie's name on it...we lynch that guy and he turns out town....we would no longer believe the notes...I do not think the mafia would trade one of it's members for just one townie..Twomz wrote:If the notes were dualistic (is that even a word?) in nature than i might agree with...
But, since we don't know if there's just 2 clear cut choices, and since we just have 1 note, there's no reason to test it yet. Even if Adam is scum, that doesn't say that the note(s) are 100% accurate, it may be a scum ploy to sacrifice a player day 1, then they'll say Mafia member #2 is innocent, then random townie 1 is guilty and by that point in the game it may be enough to sway the votes away from the rest of the mafia and give them the 2 or 3 mislynches they need to win.like if it turns out to be false and we killed a townie then at least we would know not to trust the notes.
but if it turns out he is scum then hey we killed scum.
sort of contradicting yourself here...you think that pdcakes is being a cautious mafia, however, you also claim that he hung to an idea long after everyone else dropped it...does that sound like a cautious mafia to you?..seems to me, a cautious mafia might try to blend...might even join a bandwagon without actually placing a vote...that seems pretty cautious to me.Adam The Amazing wrote:Actually, pdcakes, I would have to say that you're at the top of my personal scumlist. I say this because you kept the note suggestion around long after it had been dropped by everyone else, and I got the same feeling as Twomz about your shifting position. Even in context it seems like you're flip-flopping. I just can't shake the feeling that you're not telling the truth in your posts. I could be wrong, but that's what I get from it.
The "if" thing, if nothing else, seems to show that you're being overly cautious about what you say and how you say it... possibly a cautious mafia, as was stated earlier.
Unvote: Thin_Man, FOS: pdcakes. Not the fourth. Not yet.
hmm, well there is three votes on pdcakes, Adam's contradiction, the fact we are on page 6 and still in the random vote stage...ryan wrote:I haven't seen anything that I can jump on yet.curiouskarmadog wrote:ryan, why arent you out there stirring up conversation? The last game we played together you were out there mixing it up at all costs..because "that was your play style"..why so quiet now?
check out my post 126, adam has since commented on it..my point was however, I have played with ryan before when his playstyle would have jumped all over this comment...I was wondering why ryan is not rooting out scum now.GodOfWine wrote:Is this just him saying that the note is false, or did he contradict himself somewhere and I missed it?curiouskarmadog wrote:hmm, well there is three votes on pdcakes,Adam's contradiction,the fact we are on page 6 and still in the random vote stage...
I figured that was the reason...or a reason anyway. But we do not know the outcome of that game...your contribution still could have helped and it could still be considered a win for you.ryan wrote:Exactly the reasons I've bolded. Also to be honest I haven't been able to read a few players who this is the first time I've played with. Ah, I believe my vote is still a random one socuriouskarmadog wrote:she could be contributing now with this question...ryan wrote:I'm sorry Aimee, how have you contributed again?
I have seen you lead the town before (and I remember you being l misynched day 2)....I was just wondering why you werent doing it again this game....
unvote
I'll have a few other tid bits later on today.
what does it matter either way?ryan wrote:Why should anyone propose who goes next? The active people will post and the inactives will either get a prod or get replaced, quite simple I think.Adele wrote:I'll happily go along with the posting of suspects. I propose that when people post their lists, they also get to choose who goes next.
Aimee wrote:
This is absurd. You could quite as easily say it gives the town theParadoxombie wrote:Then it also helps scum choose their nightkill, find powerroles, and form effective bandwagons and mislynches.directionto continue.
I'm at a loss conceptualising how it can be argued that scum can do all this from just a scum list.
ryan wrote:
What would you like me to contribute? I posted my top three (as asked) and my bottom three. Either of the top three I posted I'd be happy to see lynched.
where have you helped this town, when you havent said anything?ryan wrote:Good deal, now we have narrow minded accusations with no base, I'll enjoy this. PLEASE state where I've been scummy Thin_Man IF I haven't said anything?
you were pressured to post one...when people asked you to elaborate, you jumped all over them...all I want you to do is go into more detail.ryan wrote:
I’m also not feeling ckd at the moment. I was never PUSHED to provide a list. I posted one and than got jumped for it. You are awfully quick to throw suspicion on other’s lists when it’s exactly what you asked people to do. Make up your mind son.
interesing you posted this game..gave it a look over, you were quite active from the start...ryan wrote:I am withdrawing Aimee from my list for the reason I posted earlier, I checked back and the game I was talking about she was actually town. Not to say I'm not still watching her but my reasoning above is not correct.
viewtopic.php?t=5558&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0
but even though you have been lynched (and I can verify that he is correct) wasnt your contributions helping in the big picture and ultimately leading the town (and you) to a win?ryan wrote:Because the last few games when I've been active and aggressive I got lynched, so I'm taking the "Don't overthink characteristics on posters" approach.
ummm, this seems a bit like an over reaction (considering that I just unvoted you)...I am not "ripping" you apart...it is called pressure...I applied it...did me saying that I was going to review the link YOU provided upset you?ryan wrote:What else do you want CKD? You're ripping me apart for my lack of contribution yet I can name at least 3 others who haven't done squat in this game. (where's your pressure on them?) I gave my list, I explained my suspicions, I talked about my lack of activity (in your eyes) WHAT else do I need to do to explain myself in this setup? I've placed a vote on Simenon so we can find out if the note means anything and you still persist.curiouskarmadog wrote:fair enough for now.
unvote
going to look over your (scum) game a bit
as far as we know lynching is the only way we can kill scum. I imagine as we get closer to deadline we might see A flurry of votes. Maybe. i have to ask you why you would prefer a no lynch over someone who has 2-3 votes on them? As i see it, if we dont lynch, we are going to have a day 1.5..we give mafia a free kill...Twomz wrote:I do not agree... what is the point of lynching someone who has at most 3 votes on them? And if we decide not to lynch them, it goes to the guy with JUST TWO VOTES OUT OF TWELEVE ON THEM. If you really do not want a no lynch, provide enough evidence on someone to get a good number of votes on them.curiouskarmadog wrote:do we have a currently vote count? I am leaning toward pdcakes is town...also against a no lynch, as everyone should be.
I personally would prefer a no lynch to a lynch of someone with 2 or 3 votes on them... unless there are less than 6 players left and we have a whole game of data to draw from.
I think pdcakes is...Para, not sure either wayryan wrote:So you believe Para and pdcakes to be townies than?curiouskarmadog wrote:what?...that really sound ridiculous. You think everything will remain constant for the next 26 hours? Not buying, what you are selling here. Matter of fact, I dont know why you are selling it. No lynches never help the town hit scum...I am not about to have Day 1 all over again.
vote twomz
you are a one shot doc?Twomz wrote:I would prefer not to but I agree that it is for the best.Thin_Man wrote:I suggest you claim before you leave, Twomz.I agree with Gorgon regarding this.Actually to be honest I'm considering voting Aimee at this point and I'm not afraid of being ripped on for doing a bandwagon. She comes back after obviously lurking (notice how she immediately got to her play analysis just hours before a deadline?) I don't trust it one bit and as you noticed, her vote turned us back to a no lynch again, and I 100% disagree with a no lynch on Day 1.
1 shot doc. I dunno if I will use it tonight or not >.> <.<
/sigh I completely forgot that I always end up claiming Day 1 as Doc, have not played in too long.
@ CKD: The only thing my lynch will prove is that I am willing to no lynch as town. This was proven in several of my older games (doubt I would be able to find a good example) already, so it is a moot point.
because I dont think she has done anything worth lynching..if you metagame, you can tell she has been absent all of her games..you dont have a case but you are pushing one...I find that scummyryan wrote:Vote: Aimee
Why are you so dead set against Aimee being voted CKD? I feel as though she rushed through her big player breakdown, she's lurked the entire game EVEN when she called me out on not participating. If Twonz is who he says he is I'm guessing the mafia take him out tonight, Para's move was pro town with the unvote and I just have trouble thinking he'd do it if he's scum. Aimee's lynch will tell us alot about the game. BTW, PAGING PDCAKES AND SIMENON, your contribution or lack there of before deadline is NOT going unnoticed.