Unrest in the Forest, Day 2: Fly By Night

[Duvors]

Today as well.

I thought it was established that people would privately create codes with people they trust and then if they get stumped, then the stumps can throw message each other to decode who had what role, and then communicate in code in-thread to the trusted townie? Did you miss the bit where it was Adelaide who originally proposed the code?

Yes, I concede that point.

That seems unnecessarily complicated, why not just claim to those they trust in private before getting stumped? And it seems I did.

[Hinckley]

That seems unnecessarily complicated, why not just claim to those they trust in private before getting stumped? And it seems I did.

We've already said that too! Are you a poor contributor or poor at pretending to contribute?

[Duvors]

My thinking is that if someone gives a set of codes to someone they trust before they die, they can pass on stump information to the person they trusted. Since the stumps can communicate with each other privately, they can pool their knowledge and pass it all on through code through the day threads without maples understanding.

Here's the post, and My blatant missing of it's existence will probably annoy me for the rest of the game.

I don't think there would be a code master.

I think it would be individual. There should, in fact, not be a code master. Too easy to slip into the wrong hands. Only two people would know each set of codes. Drop it in a PM once and refer to it if needed.

Sorry, I retract my comment.

If it's unlikely then what is the dripping suspicion towards me?

I dislike people who accuse everyone who doesn't agree with them, there was some discussion about this tendency of your's earlier, as well as a rather strange burst of laughter.

We've already said that too! Are you a poor contributor or poor at pretending to contribute?

The former. but if it's already been said then why would Waldorf say;

I thought it was established...

Why would he assume that it had been established if there had been objections raised?

[jluck]

I feel that calling out quiet players never really goes anywhere but i just looked at the post count and, seriously?! Vickie and Maggie have both only posted once! This on the heals of a day when they were both tied for the lowest post count with 4 posts on day 1. Being unengaged may not make you scum, but it really hurts the town by losing your input and distracting us from other suspects. Were over 24 hours in folks...

[Hinckley]

I dislike people who accuse everyone who doesn't agree with them, there was some discussion about this tendency of your's earlier, as well as a rather strange burst of laughter.

You dislike me or suspect me? I dislike Maples. I respect all the people who play this game, regardless of their random assignment of affiliation.

Again, since you didn't read, I accused people whose behavior I found suspicious. I found three people suspicious through their accusations of me. I'm going to point that out whether you like it or not.

I have a new title.

[Duvors]

You dislike me or suspect me? I dislike Maples. I respect all the people who play this game, regardless of their random assignment of affiliation.

Again, since you didn't read, I accused people whose behavior I found suspicious. I found three people suspicious through their accusations of me. I'm going to point that out whether you like it or not.

I have a new title.

Well, suspect would more accurately convey what I mean, As a person I think you are very nice.

Yes, interesting coincidence that.

Funny, but irrelevant.

[Hinckley]

Well, suspect would more accurately convey what I mean, As a person I think you are very nice.

Why do you find me suspicious?

[jimmynick]

Why would he assume that it had been established if there had been objections raised?

Poor turn of phrase; I meant that it looks like lots of people involved in the discussion had agreed on that way of using the code.

I have a new title.

[jluck]

You dislike me or suspect me? I dislike Maples. I respect all the people who play this game, regardless of their random assignment of affiliation.

Again, since you didn't read, I accused people whose behavior I found suspicious. I found three people suspicious through their accusations of me. I'm going to point that out whether you like it or not.

I have a new title.

There's some stuff you've said here that I want to follow up on, but I need to reread some stuff first so it may be tomorrow before I can.

The title however, that needs to be commented on now! What a special accomplishment (I wish I'd thought of it first...stupid, stupid me!)

[jluck]

Ok, you said this...

You dislike me or suspect me? I dislike Maples. I respect all the people who play this game, regardless of their random assignment of affiliation.

Again, since you didn't read, I accused people whose behavior I found suspicious. I found three people suspicious through their accusations of me. I'm going to point that out whether you like it or not.

I have a new title.

I added the bold part for one simple point. You are suspicious of lots of people...like lots...

Can you PM? If so, why wouldn't all the Oaks come claim to you now? You're verified Oak.

I've quoted this twice, sorry. What could the other possibilities be?

Lassie Sassafrass, are you trying too hard to appear like an Oak, you scummy Maple?

After looking at their posts from yesterday, neither one did very much of anything. Lauren rallied a lynch of Alastair. I think that is literally his only contribution outside of telling Buck to vote. And Buck made like 4 posts. If the vig did kill, I would assume they killed Buck and the Scum killed Lauren...for rallying people to lynch Alastair...who was Scum...then they janitored him. I see no other reason to kill Lauren. Unless the vig or a serial killer killed Lauren and the Scum were blocked or their target protected. I'm doing that speculate about every possibility of kill thing. Lauren would even make more sense as a neutral kill because he wasn't likely to be watched or protected. And maybe Buck was killed by a vigilante who prefers to weed out the low posters. Or there's a serial killer taking out low posters. Or Buck or Lauren said something to Scum in private that made them the kill target. Or something to the vig in private that made them think they were Scum I always yell at people for doing this...

My point is, Chester, you seem to be more concerned about the vig. Do you know something we don't? Perhaps you are Scum and you know the Scum killed one of those two and you're trying to figure out if there's a neutral. That's what you sound like to me. Plus, after Day One, you're on my Scum list.

But, why are you even considering a possibility other than janitor? You are trying way too hard to appear like an Oak, you scummy Maple. You're going down.

You're going down too, you Scummy megablocks-kisser. I already said all that.

Trying too hard to not understand a janitor. Also Scum.

This is getting too easy. Scum are lining up to reveal themselves here.

Hi Maple!

Where's your helpful analysis?

Maybe they thought he was likely to be protected. You tell me, Maple!

I'm sorry I'm considering all options. Does that annoy you, Scummy? Bristle bristle bristle bristle.

You co-hosted it. yourself.

Look who knows so much about what the Scum would do! Tell us, Adelaide, then who did they target and why, Miss Maple?

I did answer it, regardless of its nonsensical nature, Scummy McBristlePants.

You are really Scummy. Three of who?

Ok, a few things to take from above. First, some of these posts were more light-hearted and not full out accusations. If you want full context, go back to the timestamps. Don't take them out of context. Secondly, I only went through the first 5(?) pages to compile this list. I wasn't picking and choosing my quotes, I just got tired of skimming Simon's 72(!) posts. Third, this is not a post to state I think Simon is scum, I just wanted Simon to understand that if he accuses constantly, he's going to throw some people off of true scum suspects.

What I'm getting at is this, all these accusations make it hard to focus on what's good analyst and what's just goofy banter. Clearly, you have a strong playing style and it makes the game quite fun, I just wanted to make this note. Hope I don't come acrossed as critical.

[Hinckley]

Ok, you said this...

I added the bold part for one simple point. You are suspicious of lots of people...like lots...

Ok, a few things to take from above. First, some of these posts were more light-hearted and not full out accusations. If you want full context, go back to the timestamps. Don't take them out of context. Secondly, I only went through the first 5(?) pages to compile this list. I wasn't picking and choosing my quotes, I just got tired of skimming Simon's 72(!) posts. Third, this is not a post to state I think Simon is scum, I just wanted Simon to understand that if he accuses constantly, he's going to throw some people off of true scum suspects.

What I'm getting at is this, all these accusations make it hard to focus on what's good analyst and what's just goofy banter. Clearly, you have a strong playing style and it makes the game quite fun, I just wanted to make this note. Hope I don't come acrossed as critical.

Thanks for the Mafia lesson...

[jluck]

Correction: 78 posts...I can't believe I underestimated when I said 72 posts

Thanks for the Mafia lesson...

Maybe my good intentions were ill placed. You clearly have much more experience than I, and I will continue to learn from you. We just differ in playing styles, that's what makes these games unique and enjoyable. I probably shoulda kept my trap shut on that one.

[Hinckley]

Maybe my good intentions were ill placed. You clearly have much more experience than I, and I will continue to learn from you. We just differ in playing styles, that's what makes these games unique and enjoyable. I probably shoulda kept my trap shut on that one.

What else do you have to contribute outside of schooling me on the correct way to play?

[jluck]

What else do you have to contribute outside of schooling me on the correct way to play?

You know I wasn't schooling you, I was trying to make a suggestion that I hoped would help clarify who the true suspects are. If your upset, I apologize. I truly didn't mean to offend. If you want my contributions, they are all around you. I built the case on Catarina on day (I case I still stand by), I debated heavily on the stump debate (I stood corrected on that one), I've discussed at length every change in this game. Reread the thread if you need further evidence, I don't need to quote every post I've made.

You're, not your...that'll probably bother someone.

Wait...I have a title?! I have a title!!! And it says...wait, what?!...oh...I have that title...

[Hinckley]

You know I wasn't schooling you, I was trying to make a suggestion that I hoped would help clarify who the true suspects are. If your upset, I apologize. I truly didn't mean to offend. If you want my contributions, they are all around you. I built the case on Catarina on day (I case I still stand by), I debated heavily on the stump debate (I stood corrected on that one), I've discussed at length every change in this game. Reread the thread if you need further evidence, I don't need to quote every post I've made.

My point is that I post (a lot of jackass horseplay, I realize that) a lot because I'm working on theories, poking people and drawing out the Scum. Did any of today's conversation bring you out of your Catarina tunnel to look at any of the many other issues raised today? You can tally my posts instead of reading them, but I think I've brought some issues to the table that are worth discussing.

Wait...I have a title?! I have a title!!! And it says...wait, what?!...oh...I have that title...

How'd that happen?

[jluck]

My point is that I post (a lot of jackass horseplay, I realize that) a lot because I'm working on theories, poking people and drawing out the Scum. Did any of today's conversation bring you out of your Catarina tunnel to look at any of the many other issues raised today? You can tally my posts instead of reading them, but I think I've brought some issues to the table that are worth discussing.

How'd that happen?

You sly dog you!

You've raised many valid points in your posts and in retrospect I see where your gameplay has been beneficial. Heck, when you accuse everyone you're bound to accuse the maples as well! Tunnel vision has been a major problem for me in the past, but it's hard for me to move on when it seems like I've already got a fish on the hook.

I have, however, been following along so I will address other issues. The secret code sounds like a logistical nightmare, but if it could be pulled off, I think this game would become a legendary one! The key is for each player to find a player thry trust to share their code with. Here's my one concern with it, earlier it was shown to me that it's likely the stumps will be uprooted after one day. If this is the case, then the uprooted stumps won't be able to communicate and therein lies an issue with the system. We need to make sure that any code we come up with is built around the assumption that the only stumps that will be available are those that just died.

[Duvors]

Sorry, I was forced to take a break due to circumstances beyond my control.

Why do you find me suspicious?

You are highly accusative of everyone, something I dislike a lot. It smacks of a tree that is desperately trying to appear helpful while simultaneously sowing the seeds of suspicion everywhere.

My attitude towards Catarina is rapidly becoming negative, this tree has only been unhelpful, uncooperative, far too ready to jump to conclusions, seems determined to direct attention away from herself, and just plain annoying. After rereading much of what this tree has said I feel there are sufficient grounds for me to;

Vote: Catarina Dogwood (adventurer1)

[Hinckley]

You are highly accusative of everyone, something I dislike a lot. It smacks of a tree that is desperately trying to appear helpful while simultaneously sowing the seeds of suspicion everywhere.

There's a huge difference between disliking something and being suspicious of. I will point out what I find suspicious. It's not everywhere. I'm sorry if it's too much suspicion for you but I'd rather err on the side of caution than sowing seeds of trust everywhere. I think my seeds of suspicion have garnered some good discussion and reactions we'll be able to look at over the remaining days of the game. Maybe you don't like me pointing out your Scum buddies screwing up all over the place.

[Calanon]

Am I ever going to be able to catch up to what is happening in this thread.

[Mencot]

Am I ever going to be able to catch up to what is happening in this thread.

No, you are screwed.

[Zepher]

Nash stopped by. Didn't say anything.

Some of us have time to watch the thread and see when people stop in, some of us only have time to stop and see there's too much to read at the moment.

I will have to take Bruce's oakiness as relative truth for now, I suppose. It's still possible that he's maple, of course - Simon could be lying or the investigator could be lying (things I find unlikely as I don't think maples would have a need to out themselves through assistance at this point). Godfather is also possible. But, for the sake of not chasing the same tree the whole time, I may as well give up that chase for the time being. There are probably six maples to catch, I can return to Bruce if need be. That being said, if he is an oak, I find his play style shockingly ill-advised. But, hey, to each their own! You enjoy your sun, I'll enjoy mine!!

As for the vote against me, it is what it is. I found Bruce's game to be full of loud fluff and asserting he's oak, but in a joking "oh, just kidding not kidding just kidding look at me be goofy and town-like blah blah blah". I still feel that way, and will probably feel that way at the end of the day too. If someone else feeling that way as well before me warrants a vote, there's not much I can do about that!

Our inability to know Alastair's allegiance does make this a pretty shot in the dark sort of day for those of us who aren't Simon!

I don't understand the argument against Catarina. Her defenses are measly and not even a little bit as much fun as her initial response, I'll grant you that, but are we just voting for her because of asterisk and low lighting? I don't trust anyone who doesn't love the sun, but I sure can't lynch someone off of those two things alone!

I'll go ahead and vote Chester Chesnut (Lego Spy). He did little yesterday except wobble back and forth on silly accusations... and just look at how he "accuses" people at the beginning of two potential bandwagons:

Right now, the current evidence is tipping me toward Alastair, but I get this bad feeling that if I do vote for him I'm going to get reactions somewhere along the lines of "Bandwagonre! Mapl!" pretty much instantaneously.

(He votes for Alastair in the next post).

Sorry I haven't been saying anything. This is mainly because I wasn't on a device powerful enough to post things properly, and because I wanted to see how things played out. And they certainly have.

Without a doubt, my vote for now is going to Catarina, the asterisk using Groot that lives in low-light, for obvious reasons.

Vote: Catarina Dogwood (adventurer1)

Seems very crowd following to me! In a way where he's trying to not seem like he's following the crowd, and like he's not responsible if things go south! What are people's thoughts. And maybe someone can explain the case against Catarina better to me, because it's totally possible I missed it between talks of codes!

[Scubacarrot]

Am I ever going to be able to catch up to what is happening in this thread.

At some point, that excuse is not going to be enough anymore.

[Mencot]

Some of us have time to watch the thread and see when people stop in, some of us only have time to stop and see there's too much to read at the moment.

People what people, no people here. We are TREEES, repeat after me

Or atleast you are, me and Lauren are just Stumps

[Mencot]

I will have to take Bruce's oakiness as relative truth for now, I suppose. It's still possible that he's maple, of course - Simon could be lying or the investigator could be lying (things I find unlikely as I don't think maples would have a need to out themselves through assistance at this point). Godfather is also possible. But, for the sake of not chasing the same tree the whole time, I may as well give up that chase for the time being. There are probably six maples to catch, I can return to Bruce if need be. That being said, if he is an oak, I find his play style shockingly ill-advised. But, hey, to each their own! You enjoy your sun, I'll enjoy mine!!

As for the vote against me, it is what it is. I found Bruce's game to be full of loud fluff and asserting he's oak, but in a joking "oh, just kidding not kidding just kidding look at me be goofy and town-like blah blah blah". I still feel that way, and will probably feel that way at the end of the day too. If someone else feeling that way as well before me warrants a vote, there's not much I can do about that!

Because I am a stump that wont be around for long, I will say that I don´t by that investigator result but I don´t really have any evidence to prove any different either.

But I don´t like how Paris has acted and how he acted after the result was out.

Oh and did I say Paris... I meant Bruce

[MagPiesRUs]

Seems very crowd following to me! In a way where he's trying to not seem like he's following the crowd, and like he's not responsible if things go south! What are people's thoughts. And maybe someone can explain the case against Catarina better to me, because it's totally possible I missed it between talks of codes!

I thought that post was odd, but I forgot to comment on it...

Without a doubt, my vote for now is going to Catarina, the asterisk using Groot that lives in low-light, for obvious reasons.

Vote: Catarina Dogwood (adventurer1)

What obvious reasons are those? This is the first time you've even mentioned Catarina as a suspect. Now you have no doubt (for now) that she's the best vote candidate?