Calanon Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Aaaaaaw, is reading things hard? Yes, I definitely said it was hard. I've had less time than I thought I would and reading through 7+ pages, trying to keep notes on everything, is time consuming. I have been trying to keep up as best as I can, although it isn't good enough.
Hinckley Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 So with eight votes against me, I'll defend myself. Lets take a look at the reasons given for these votes. The first three came in with the fun of the low light comments. Which were true by the way, I do suffer from frequent migraines. Now Bruce unvotes due to the funny comment I made to Simon (this should have keyed everyone on the light hearted situation) Here is what Agnes had to say to all that. Jumping on a perceived bandwagon. Barry comes in next, convinced his case is solid (please all go back and look, I know its a lot of pages but you will see others continuing to post fluff and useless stuff after me) He has no true case against me, usually he gives more solid reasons for lynching someone, why he is trying so hard with no real evidence? I respond to Agnes. Agnes responds to me. Now Clem joins the bandwagon, using only the reasons Barry gave earlier (again with no solid proof My response to Agnes. Agnes responds to me. My response to Agnes. Now we have Chester joining the bandwagon, reasons ?? None given. Here we have Sue, which I expected because it happens every time in every forest.... Using Simon's reasons with the reasons Barry keeps making up, but adding no reasons of her own. And now we have Bobby adding his name to the bandwagon. His reasons are a combination of Hazel's (I am annoying to Hazel), and the rest he made up ( I don't see post quoted to support his claims). And Bobby, I highly doubt with all your participation you have given so far that you actually went back and reread much of my posts from Day 1 and Day 2. I am an Oak. As I stated on Day 1 in that stupid argument with Hazel, I am prepared to do what necessary for my fellow Oaks to continue in the sun. Don't take this as me not wanting to live, because I do. This isn't a defense, it's a play-by-play. And I wouldn't say you have a future in Mafia Game sportscasting... Yes, I definitely said it was hard. I've had less time than I thought I would and reading through 7+ pages, trying to keep notes on everything, is time consuming. I have been trying to keep up as best as I can, although it isn't good enough.
Duvors Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 The same could be said about you. Yes, but I can't vote for myself can I? I am an Oak. As I stated on Day 1 in that stupid argument with Hazel, I am prepared to do what necessary for my fellow Oaks to continue in the sun. Don't take this as me not wanting to live, because I do. Oh wow! That must be true, because you say so! And nobody in this game could possibly have any reason to lie about their allegiance! In other words, it's very nice to say you're Oak, but how do you intend to prove it?
Fugazi Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 And another tactic - use it to claim roles to the stumps (who are KNOWN OAKS). In fact, maybe we should require all players to do this. Then the stumps would have a full list of all the roles everyone is claiming and see if there's any duplicates or other reason to suspect lies. This sounds like a great idea... but I'm not sure how you can make it work, since we can't send potatoes to the stumps.
mostlytechnic Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 This sounds like a great idea... but I'm not sure how you can make it work, since we can't send potatoes to the stumps. No need. Today everyone sends code lists to everyone else. Then tomorrow, once we have trusted stumps who HAVE THOSE CODE LISTS, everyone can claim to the stumps. Then the stumps could state publicly - hey, there's 2 people claiming vig, or whatever, if needed. AND if the stumps decided someone still alive was trusted (such as if one of the stumps was investigator and someone they'd cleared was still alive), they could use that person's code list to say in public that Joe is 13 and Sally is 1 and so forth, so at least someone would know who claimed roles and start talking to them in private.
Hinckley Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 No need. Today everyone sends code lists to everyone else. Then tomorrow, once we have trusted stumps who HAVE THOSE CODE LISTS, everyone can claim to the stumps. Then the stumps could state publicly - hey, there's 2 people claiming vig, or whatever, if needed. AND if the stumps decided someone still alive was trusted (such as if one of the stumps was investigator and someone they'd cleared was still alive), they could use that person's code list to say in public that Joe is 13 and Sally is 1 and so forth, so at least someone would know who claimed roles and start talking to them in private. So, we should each find one person we trust most and send them a codelist, correct?
Lady K Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 But the word "migraine" didn't come out of her mouth until I mentioned it. The original reason was it hurts her eyes. Because I don't have a migraine, yet, I'm trying to avoid one. It does hurt my eyes.
jluck Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 This isn't a defense, it's a play-by-play. And I wouldn't say you have a future in Mafia Game sportscasting... We have our first Lindsay stirling reference of the day...can't believe it took this long. In terms of codes, I'll put some together and send it to someone...reckon it's worth a try.
Lady K Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 No need. Today everyone sends code lists to everyone else. Then tomorrow, once we have trusted stumps who HAVE THOSE CODE LISTS, everyone can claim to the stumps. Then the stumps could state publicly - hey, there's 2 people claiming vig, or whatever, if needed. AND if the stumps decided someone still alive was trusted (such as if one of the stumps was investigator and someone they'd cleared was still alive), they could use that person's code list to say in public that Joe is 13 and Sally is 1 and so forth, so at least someone would know who claimed roles and start talking to them in private. This sounds complicated. If everyone picks one person and sends them a code list, then the maples will have code lists from oaks who mistakenly trust them.
Hinckley Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 This sounds complicated. If everyone picks one person and sends them a code list, then the maples will have code lists from oaks who mistakenly trust them. But it would just be one player's code list...
Lady K Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 But it would just be one player's code list... Yes. But if multiple maples got lists then thats multiple oaks code lists that the maples can manipulate to their advantage.
Calanon Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Because I don't have a migraine, yet, I'm trying to avoid one. It does hurt my eyes. Not trying to tell you what to do or anything, but if you're trying to avoid a migraine wouldn't it be best to send a message to Walter/make a post that you feel a migraine coming on to explain a sudden absence? That seems much healthier than trying to play Mafia whilst trying to avoid a migraine.
Hinckley Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Not trying to tell you what to do or anything, but if you're trying to avoid a migraine wouldn't it be best to send a message to Walter/make a post that you feel a migraine coming on to explain a sudden absence? That seems much healthier than trying to play Mafia whilst trying to avoid a migraine. Or don't type asterisks in low light.
jimmynick Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 I went back to Day 1. On page 9, post 223, I mention that I am trying to choose between, Alister Pear, Hazel Hazelnut, Berty Birch, and Bobby Beech for my vote. At that time none of these four had voiced any suspicion against me. On page 12, post 285 I finally vote for Hazel. Then near the end I switch to Alister Pear for the number 12 vote for the lynch. On Day 1 the only two votes I cast were for my first two maple choices. So please explain how this is casting suspicion only on those that suspect me first. This is the post you're referring to: If Bruce Spruce hadn't just changed his vote to Alister Pear, I might have. As it is, this whole thing with Alister Pear and Hazel Hazelnut, Betty Birch and Bobby Beech has me trying to decide who is the most maple treeish and deserving of my vote. Those four (Alastair, Hazel, Berty and Bobby) were all easy to accuse yesterday - other people had already posted about them, and all you needed to do was to ohoh so easily sheep those accusations. Yet have I really called you or Bruce out since then? No. Why? Because I think you are both Oak. You haven't called me out since then, but up there ^^ you said you might have voted for Alastair had Bruce not immediately done so. It looks like you were still suspicious of Bruce then, though you claim you weren't. Not to mention that, when you gave the list of all the people who voted for you, it looks like you are OMGUSing them (and me).
Yzalirk Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Sorry everyone, I missed out on a lot apparently that I need to reread to get caught up. I am aware though that there is voting as well. Hopefully this shouldn't be of surprise. Vote: Catarina Dogwood (adventurer1) I think it's pretty self-explanatory why I vote her but I'll quickly sum up why I vote for her - She has given weak accusations with merely no evidence besides making assumptions and has overall given weak explanations to try try and defend herself. For example: It takes 12 for a lynch. If need be I will defend myself if the time comes for that. Voting just opened, there is still plenty of time for votes to change. Why should I panic as you suggest? Contrary to what Hazel may have misled you to believe, I didn't flail with two votes and I won't flail with five or more votes either. I know I am an Oak. Anyone can say that but how do we know if she really is? I think if she is, she'd have defended herself way better than she has. She is simply lazy and has overall been of no use to the "town". I should also mention she has said this; I'm prepared to sacrifice myself to save the rest of the oaks in this forest, are you? Oh and you didn't even clarify one thing for me, interesting and noted. She says she's fine with being lynched, on Day One, but isn't prepared today... it seems like? Even if she does turn up to be an Oak, then we'll have a bit less fluff posts and aimless accusations from here. She has been flailing about quite a bit it seems like and if she is really an Oak, I think she'd be trying a bit harder to prove her innocence. Like I said, it just seems like she's lazy and what help is a lazy player? Whoops, meant "her", not "here".
jimmynick Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 I am intrigued by how easily Chester sheeped both the Alastair and Catarina votes. She says she's fine with being lynched, on Day One, but isn't prepared today... it seems like? Even if she does turn up to be an Oak, then we'll have a bit less fluff posts and aimless accusations from here. She has been flailing about quite a bit it seems like and if she is really an Oak, I think she'd be trying a bit harder to prove her innocence. Like I said, it just seems like she's lazy and what help is a lazy player? The part you bolded indicates that Catarina is perfectly OK with being lynched today - the exact opposite of what you claim. I'm intrigued by how easily you sheeped the Catarina vote as well. Oops, scratch that, I completely misread the time on the quotation Hazel posted.
Lady K Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Not trying to tell you what to do or anything, but if you're trying to avoid a migraine wouldn't it be best to send a message to Walter/make a post that you feel a migraine coming on to explain a sudden absence? That seems much healthier than trying to play Mafia whilst trying to avoid a migraine. Thank you. I am fine in low light, at night. So I can continue to play. Or don't type asterisks in low light. I've learned my lesson and won't be using anything like that again.
Piratedave84 Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Still worth a try though. If stumps disappear after one day, so be it. Trees who died on the same night will still be able to confer with each other. I'm not sure why anyone would be opposed to doing this. There's nothing to lose. No need. Today everyone sends code lists to everyone else. Then tomorrow, once we have trusted stumps who HAVE THOSE CODE LISTS, everyone can claim to the stumps. Then the stumps could state publicly - hey, there's 2 people claiming vig, or whatever, if needed. AND if the stumps decided someone still alive was trusted (such as if one of the stumps was investigator and someone they'd cleared was still alive), they could use that person's code list to say in public that Joe is 13 and Sally is 1 and so forth, so at least someone would know who claimed roles and start talking to them in private. So, i've been reading a lot of the posts related to the whole code thing and I see a few flaws: 1) Who's to say the person receiving the code is not scum and will use this to screw over town 2) We stumps cannot contact the living and as such the living cannot contact us which means if you get night killed, you cannot pass on your code 3) I think the lynched person does not return as a stump (we'll have to see how that turns out tomorrow) and as such cannot confirm and deny the allegations made by the person having the code. 4) This is an IMO crazy plan that is bound to screw us over seeing that we have a roughly 1 in 5 chance of this falling in scum's hands Yes, when the game has progressed a bit it's gonna be much easier to contribute, rather than waking up to 7 pages more worth of posts. Yes, I definitely said it was hard. I've had less time than I thought I would and reading through 7+ pages, trying to keep notes on everything, is time consuming. I have been trying to keep up as best as I can, although it isn't good enough. Surely you read something ... say something of substance!
Hinckley Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Clumsy tree-fellers! Vote: Ernie (Walter Kovacs) Jokes aside, this is pretty frustrating. What I find especially interesting is that neither of the two Oak "deaths"/now stumps are trees brought into question yesterday. It seem like an Oak vigilante would go for one of the top suspects from yesterday, rather than picking, overall, someone who hasn't done anything particularly maple-y as of yet. My best guess is that whatever happened last night, neither of the two kills were dealt by a vig. Suggesting a few things: 1. The vigilante, if we have one, did not submit a kill last night. 2. There is no vigilante. (Somewhat unlikely) 3. Or, in my mind the least likely, the vig did kill last night, and just made a strange decision. I am intrigued by how easily Chester sheeped both the Alastair and Catarina votes. The part you bolded indicates that Catarina is perfectly OK with being lynched today - the exact opposite of what you claim. I'm intrigued by how easily you sheeped the Catarina vote as well. Oops, scratch that, I completely misread the time on the quotation Hazel posted. Not sure where your scratch leaves your suspicion of Chester, but the above quote from him did ping me as well.
Fugazi Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 If I understand correctly, each tree sends a different code list to each living tree. Then he uses the appropriate and specific code to claim to the stump (ex-living player), so that no one else but the stump can understand the meaning of the code. I think it can work. In other words, there's a specific code between each pair of living players.
Scubacarrot Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Can someone please come forward and say: "Gotcha! The Catarina lynch idea was just a way to catch all the sheep and the bandwagoning scum! Wahaha!..." No? Okay then. I think the reasons where Catarina is being persecuted for are silly. So she has a problem with strong light in darkness. This is a thing that people do. Asterisks are a common thing to emphasize something on the internet. Don't get me wrong, I think Catarina is completely unhelpful in every way, but is that a good enough reason to lynch? Actually, it is. Hm. I still want to vote for Maggie though, because I want him to talk way more. Vote: Maggie Magnolia (Calanon) And yes, I totally assume Maggie is a guy's name.
Calanon Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Okay, after going through the full thread, Chester has been the one who has given me the strongest scum vibe. What I find especially interesting is that neither of the two Oak "deaths"/now stumps are trees brought into question yesterday. It seem like an Oak vigilante would go for one of the top suspects from yesterday, rather than picking, overall, someone who hasn't done anything particularly maple-y as of yet. My best guess is that whatever happened last night, neither of the two kills were dealt by a vig. Suggesting a few things: 1. The vigilante, if we have one, did not submit a kill last night. 2. There is no vigilante. (Somewhat unlikely) 3. Or, in my mind the least likely, the vig did kill last night, and just made a strange decision. Completely ignoring the possibility that the vig didn't kill and there there is a serial killer. Agreed. Why the maples would even janitor on night one at all in the first place perplexes me. It seems like it would just be too obvious to the oaks and they'd want to keep it a secret until later in the game. Very odd decision on their part. You said that it would be too obvious, but clearly it wasn't (yes, hindsight is 20/20 but still). It created confusion and I would say this post is trying to either stir more confusion, or direct the discussion of it away. 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) Saying "obvious reasons" when the reasons given have largely hinged around the asterisk use? Not giving anything substantial here really, at least other people actually said something more. Vote: Chester Chestnut (Lego Spy)
Hinckley Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 If I understand correctly, each tree sends a different code list to each living tree. Then he uses the appropriate and specific code to claim to the stump (ex-living player), so that no one else but the stump can understand the meaning of the code. I think it can work. That's the way I understand it as well. I think the reasons where Catarina is being persecuted for are silly. So she has a problem with strong light in darkness. This is a thing that people do. Asterisks are a common thing to emphasize something on the internet. It's not so much that. Her defense to the asterisks was that she was reading in low light and therefore the asterisks looked good. Then she asked why asterisks were a problem. Then I apologized and said I get migraines from staring at a screen for too long (clearly when playing Mafia) and only then she mentioned it was because of migraines that she keeps the brightness on her monitor down. We've gotten a lot of info out of her about lights and typewriters and neurological sensitivies that might induce migraines, but not near so much content for the game. This, coupled with her accusing everyone who accuses her and other odd behavior people have pointed out make me think she is a good lynch for today, though I have no evidence of it from my PM conversations and roleclaims. There's still at least 24 hours left if a better option comes up. I think we have options that are as strong as the case we have against Catarina. It's worth continuing discussion despite people's protests about there being ever so many words to read.
Piratedave84 Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 If I understand correctly, each tree sends a different code list to each living tree. Then he uses the appropriate and specific code to claim to the stump (ex-living player), so that no one else but the stump can understand the meaning of the code. I think it can work. In other words, there's a specific code between each pair of living players. So the stump would then need to pass this along to the next stump (providing we are only stumps for a day)?
Recommended Posts