jimmynick Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Yes, you made a post after Hazel's self-vote in defense of yourself, and didn't mention her situation at all. Then you switched your vote to her when you knew her lynch was definitely going to happen. Ok. This is another good point, Adelaide. In terms of numbers, Sue voted for Hazel when she already had 9 out of 8 votes required for a lynch.
Bob Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Yes, you made a post after Hazel's self-vote in defense of yourself, and didn't mention her situation at all. Then you switched your vote to her when you knew her lynch was definitely going to happen. Ok. Yes, that is indeed how it happened. I made the post only a few hours afterwards and didn't return until the end of the day. At the time, I still viewed Peter as being scummier. If you look back, there were five votes for Hazel in the span of about an hour, excluding my own. I was only just able to vote in time. This is another good point, Adelaide. In terms of numbers, Sue voted for Hazel when she already had 9 out of 8 votes required for a lynch. As I said before, there were five votes in the span of an hour. That was an extremely fast bandwagon.
Lady K Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Yes, that is indeed how it happened. I made the post only a few hours afterwards and didn't return until the end of the day. At the time, I still viewed Peter as being scummier. If you look back, there were five votes for Hazel in the span of about an hour, excluding my own. I was only just able to vote in time. As I said before, there were five votes in the span of an hour. That was an extremely fast bandwagon. Looking back I see that the final votes rolled in when there was only about 45 minutes left. But your vote still came in after the final vote to seal the lynch. You could have left it on Peter if you felt that strongly. As it was Berty and Adelaide left their votes on Peter. Another thing I have noticed in every day's lynch is that of the trees left, only Simon, Bruce and Sue have voted consistently with the majority. I believe Simon and Bruce to be Oaks, therefore I see Sue as the Maple that has joined the bandwagon every single day. Just a suggestion, but if I could vote I would vote for Sue Sumac. But alas, I am just a stump. An Oak stump.
mostlytechnic Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Since this game's been amazingly short on vote analysis (due to the lack of stumps), I decided to do some. And guess what I found... Vote: Adelaide Apple (TinyPiesRUs) Because... Day 1 - Barry Cherry and Adelaide both essentially hammered Alastair, voting within 2 minutes of each other. Wait, why would a pair of scums hammer another scum? Because, everyone knew someone would switch over to Alastair to get the day 1 lynch, and by throwing a fellow scum under the bus, they'd have a good defense later. I don't think the scum knew the stump and no stump thing was coming any more than we did, so they fully thought they'd have good defense in later days. Day 2 and 3, a wasted vote on Nash and then joined the bandwagon on Larry. Both days were well sealed lynches, so it didn't matter. Day 4, the Peter vs Hazel debacle. He voted Peter fairly early and then stayed there. Voting against a fellow scum again (good defense for later), but also not swapping his vote over to help lynch. Instead, by not moving, he was aiming for a no-lynch since the votes were split between two scum. Day 5, right in the middle of the Berty bandwagon. Basically, when his vote was irrelevant, it was on an oak. When it was more important, it was on scum. No oak could be 100% accurate like that - he must have known alignments! Ok, there's some quick vote analysis. Took me longer to type than to do. So now how about some metagaming? Day 1, he made a whopping 4 posts. In a day that had over 400!!! Talk about staying under the radar! Day 2, stepped it up to 17 out of 470 posts. Day 3, 7 out of 275 Day 4, 10 posts out of 330 made Day 5, 5 of 128. And so far today, 3 of 76. Either lazy or hiding, to be consistently posting so little when there has been SO MUCH to talk about. And now this is where it gets meta. I've been in a very political forest with him before. In that case, he was definitely scum and was similarly very quiet.
Lady K Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Actually, what I find interesting in that between the two of you, Jack and Adelaide, you alternated days on who was on the majority lynch bandwagon except for Day 5 when you both voted with everyone else for Berty. Day 1: Jack votes for Hazel, Adelaide votes for Alistair Day 2: Jack votes for Catarina (me), Adelaide votes for Nash Day 3: Jack votes for jluck, Adelaide votes for Larry Day 4: Jack votes for Hazel, Adelaide votes for Peter Day 5: Jack votes for Berty, Adelaide votes for Berty So on days 2 and 4 Jack votes with the majority, and on days 1 and 3 Adelaide votes with the majority. Day 5 they both vote majority, but it would have looked bad for anyone to not be on that bandwagon for Berty. I also have been tracking daily post counts for everyone.
Hinckley Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Looking back I see that the final votes rolled in when there was only about 45 minutes left. But your vote still came in after the final vote to seal the lynch. You could have left it on Peter if you felt that strongly. As it was Berty and Adelaide left their votes on Peter. I'm not saying Sue is Town, by any means, but her vote did actually seal the lynch since Hazel could have un-lynched herself.
jimmynick Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 I'm not saying Sue is Town, by any means, but her vote did actually seal the lynch since Hazel could have un-lynched herself. Sue was the tenth vote.
Hinckley Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Now that I think about it more, I guess Peter was the maple killer, so unless the maples can switch roles amongst themselves (which isn't especially common), seeing who was blocked won't help us find the maples. It could help us find the SK, but not a maple. I thought it was relatively standard to have two or more killers who could switch off. Now why can't you be a useful stump and actually do some work, instead of suggesting that other people should look at patterns? Have you revisited your theories yet? As I said before, there were five votes in the span of an hour. That was an extremely fast bandwagon. The Scummiest thing about you is I was able to defend your vote better than you did. Scratch my earlier post. If she can't answer that herself then it clearly isn't the case. Sue was the tenth vote. Thank you. The thing with n3610 RPMS is getting ridiculous. But if I'm wrong then n4209 might know n4913 Claudio.
MagPiesRUs Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Since this game's been amazingly short on vote analysis (due to the lack of stumps), I decided to do some. And guess what I found... Vote: Adelaide Apple (TinyPiesRUs) Because... Day 1 - Barry Cherry and Adelaide both essentially hammered Alastair, voting within 2 minutes of each other. Wait, why would a pair of scums hammer another scum? Because, everyone knew someone would switch over to Alastair to get the day 1 lynch, and by throwing a fellow scum under the bus, they'd have a good defense later. I don't think the scum knew the stump and no stump thing was coming any more than we did, so they fully thought they'd have good defense in later days. Day 2 and 3, a wasted vote on Nash and then joined the bandwagon on Larry. Both days were well sealed lynches, so it didn't matter. Day 4, the Peter vs Hazel debacle. He voted Peter fairly early and then stayed there. Voting against a fellow scum again (good defense for later), but also not swapping his vote over to help lynch. Instead, by not moving, he was aiming for a no-lynch since the votes were split between two scum. Day 5, right in the middle of the Berty bandwagon. Basically, when his vote was irrelevant, it was on an oak. When it was more important, it was on scum. No oak could be 100% accurate like that - he must have known alignments! Ok, there's some quick vote analysis. Took me longer to type than to do. So now how about some metagaming? Day 1, he made a whopping 4 posts. In a day that had over 400!!! Talk about staying under the radar! Day 2, stepped it up to 17 out of 470 posts. Day 3, 7 out of 275 Day 4, 10 posts out of 330 made Day 5, 5 of 128. And so far today, 3 of 76. Either lazy or hiding, to be consistently posting so little when there has been SO MUCH to talk about. And now this is where it gets meta. I've been in a very political forest with him before. In that case, he was definitely scum and was similarly very quiet. I don't quite follow the logic behind your vote analysis. It seems like you're picking and choosing what was a relevant vote and what wasn't. Was hammering Larry an irrelevant vote? Was voting for Alastair after being hammered relevant? Was voting for Peter on Day 4 a relevant vote? Of course I'm going to be 100% accurate when you're manipulating the vote analysis like that. How was the vote on Nash a wasted vote? Compared to the 4 additional votes that followed the Catarina lynch, I'd say it was more useful. I can't say I was particularly convinced that Catarina was scum, and was happier to vote for someone I was more sure to be a maple. As far as the Hazel lynch goes, I can say I wasn't around for the final 10 hours or so of the day, but I was happy with my vote for Peter when I left. I was still more confident in Peter than Hazel by the end of the day, but I would have probably switched my vote if I was around and if it was needed. I continued to talk with Simon about why I found Peter suspicious after the day was over, and I was hoping he would be the vig target that night. After taking a quick scan, it looks like my post count per day is roughly equal to Sammy's and Bruce's, and more than Lassie's and Sue's. William has also been fairly quiet, only spiking in activity when he was under suspicion. I don't usually post a great deal, but I'd like to think that most of them contribute to the overall discussion. I thought it was relatively standard to have two or more killers who could switch off. Is it? I haven't seen it for a while. I think it's a lot more common to have a single killer.
jimmynick Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 The thing with n3610 RPMS is getting ridiculous. But if I'm wrong then n4209 might know n4913 Claudio. n3610 RPMS n136 or vice versa? What happened to XESA n7019 SUXT claudio & Conrade n4774 & 6196 n4913? Is it? I haven't seen it for a while. I think it's a lot more common to have a single killer. I've mostly experienced one killer, and the killing action gets passed around when the killer dies. I'm not going to assume that is or isn't the case here, but we can all agree someone who isn't Peter will be doing the scum killing tonight.
Hinckley Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 n3610 RPMS n136 or vice versa? What happened to XESA n7019 SUXT claudio & Conrade n4774 & 6196 n4913? I wish I could just talk to you. just n3610 RPMS, nothing about n136. Yesterday, thought n5174 n2014 and asked if Claudio would do anything about that; but talked about n136 n9138 and n139. That was yesterday. Today, voting pattern n639; and n4913 n4209 As for XESA, we started discussing it. Can't just do it, I don't think. I had these codes generated by a randomizer. Why are yours SEX, PMS, SUX?
fhomess Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 I don't agree with you on Peter's alignment. We don't know how neutral players are treated after death, and Peter has a 50/50 chance to be the SK. Unless you want to argue that he can't be the SK because he hasn't been stumped? So I find it difficult to analyse the Day 4 votes because there's still some doubt regarding Peter's allegiance. If you had read the rest of the discussion you'd see that I am open to the idea of Peter being the SK, however then we have a question of why the scum didn't kill yesterday. If we assume Peter was scum, then we can also consider the possibility that Hazel was the SK and that's why there was no 3rd kill last night. If Hazel wasn't the SK, we've still got an SK problem on our hands that someone ought to have some insight into. I can't imagine either the scum or the SK would've opted not to kill at this stage. As for Jack... Vote: Jack Pine (Mostlytechnic) Smoking gun and all that... a block on a night that was missing a kill seems suspicious. Can someone please explain, though, why it's taken so long to make this public?
Hinckley Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Can someone please explain, though, why it's taken so long to make this public? No.
Dragonfire Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 I do want to look at the voting patterns but I have trouble making this assumption. Hazel was warned about participating after the game was over in her last game and the behavior could be attributed to her as a player, regardless of her alignment. Boo this behavior. I really think it's despicable, even if-by some miracle-she is Town. Would an Elder Tree really give us a game concept where none of the non-Town alignment is revealed to us in the morning...and the Scum can janitor someone? It's possible, but I think an Elder Tree would know that the lynch is the only true power the Town has. It's the only game mechanic that gives us a definite answer. Why devise two ways to confuse the Town about it? I'm not sure a janitor and not revealing any non-Town alignments balances Stumps...though I could be wrong. Either way, Hazel was pretty Scummy and if she was Scum, she manipulated you during the game and is trying to continue to do so. Playing once the rules dictate you should no longer be playing is an indication that you should get in-home care. I guess you're right about it being how she plays. I think that the Scum have a janitor, and have chosen to use the janitor action on all the Scum who have died so far, and Hazel. I think that Barry was definitely scum and that Peter was definitely non-Town. Alastair could go either way, but I think Hazel was an Oak. The reason she gave for messaging me was that she didn't want me to think that she had manipulated me. Probably related to this: Correct. Do the stumps think that a neutral player would also be stumped? If all scum are "janitored", then I believe that the SK would also be "janitored". A neutral survivor (benign neutral) could go either way. But I think that the scum have a janitor action though. I've actually thinking about this before I knew about this Hazel-Berty debacle today, but does anyone find it odd how eager Peter was to follow along with my theory that Hazel was scum for removing her avatar/sig so quickly? I called him out for that yesterday. I found his reasons for voting me the most strange and he seemed almost fanatically defensive of the Hazel = Maple idea.
Hinckley Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 If you had read the rest of the discussion you'd see that I am open to the idea of Peter being the SK, however then we have a question of why the scum didn't kill yesterday. If we assume Peter was scum, then we can also consider the possibility that Hazel was the SK and that's why there was no 3rd kill last night. If Hazel wasn't the SK, we've still got an SK problem on our hands that someone ought to have some insight into. I can't imagine either the scum or the SK would've opted not to kill at this stage. As for Jack... Vote: Jack Pine (Mostlytechnic) Smoking gun and all that... a block on a night that was missing a kill seems suspicious. Can someone please explain, though, why it's taken so long to make this public? Bruce thought that you were a bad lynch. Then he thought if anyone voted for Jack, they were Scum. So then he was contradicting himself. Now he can't help but take my suspicion of you more seriously. Bruce and I may need couples counseling when this is all through. Anyway, why am I suspicious of you, Lassie? Oh, let me count the ways. You average less than 10 posts a day and yet you say so much more in private. Our PM conversation is 124 messages long. I have trouble trusting someone who feels they need to play in private. You spent two days talking to me about Dragonfire's miller claim. Now that we know he's an Oak, that's suspect. Two days undermining a Townie. I thought he was Scum the way he was behaving and your suspicion wouldn't be suspicious if it wasn't coupled with other things. Like yesterday when you said Chester was your greatest suspicion and would we lynch him or would I be targeting him in the night? Fishing for night actions and suspecting another Townie, which made little sense to me since if you thought Hazel and Berty were both Scum I would imagine Chester would be somewhere in the middle range of your suspicion. Why would Hazel and Berty trying to lynch him be enough for the vig to target him? After telling me Chester was your top suspicion you went on to talk about how great the points that Sammy made were about Sue, Nash and Adelaide. However, you dismiss his suspicion of Sue and talk about Nash and Adelaide. The vig thought Nash was suspicious enough to kill him, granted, but there's another Townie you try to build a case against, in private. I found Nash and Berty both to be very Scummy too, but once a person shows up as Oak that would generally mean we can stop suspecting them. But not you. Today, you tried to base a theory off of who Berty said he'd be willing to vote for. Did you forget Berty's alignment had been revealed and you couldn't base things on him being Scum? Then, when I called you out on that, you bring up some theory about any group of four players contains two Scum or at least one. You even wrote it out algebraically. Something like b=u/ll*sh-it2. Your newest fun theory is that Bruce has been converted. Also, you started the day suspecting Sammy whose theories you liked yesterday. Lastly, for now, you keep fishing fishing fishing about the blocker in private and public. Why would an Oak need to know about the timing of me revealing that? That's where my suspicions come from without even reading over our PM conversation to see if there's anything else. I will do that tomorrow as I am up way too late with homework and wanted to make this case before going to bed. Thank you for being so Scummy and causing me to go to bed late. You are the direct cause of my lack of sleep. I seem to remember William complaining that you were PMing him a lot as well. Why are you playing your entire game in Scummy private? vote: Lassie Sassafrass (fhomess) wishy-washy, fishy-fashy, behind-the-scenes, algebraic, megablocks-meter-through-the-roof. Oh, nutty fudgekins. In point 3 above, to clarify, it should read "would we lynch him or would the vig take care of him during the night?". Sorry. I'm tired and I ran two thoughts together. It's Scummy to ask who the vig will be targeting. Especially considering that's who the Scum ended up killing. I have the feeling the Scum thought Chester was the vig and that's why he wasn't getting any bandwagon momentum. By they way, shout out to Chester for playing the bomb perfectly. Fishing for if the vig would be killing Chester is painfully suspicious. Ouch, it hurt me. What the hell am I saying? I need to go to sleep and stop saying things... ZZZzzzzzzzzz
mostlytechnic Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 I don't quite follow the logic behind your vote analysis. It seems like you're picking and choosing what was a relevant vote and what wasn't. Was hammering Larry an irrelevant vote? Was voting for Alastair after being hammered relevant? Was voting for Peter on Day 4 a relevant vote? Of course I'm going to be 100% accurate when you're manipulating the vote analysis like that. How was the vote on Nash a wasted vote? Compared to the 4 additional votes that followed the Catarina lynch, I'd say it was more useful. I can't say I was particularly convinced that Catarina was scum, and was happier to vote for someone I was more sure to be a maple. As far as the Hazel lynch goes, I can say I wasn't around for the final 10 hours or so of the day, but I was happy with my vote for Peter when I left. I was still more confident in Peter than Hazel by the end of the day, but I would have probably switched my vote if I was around and if it was needed. I continued to talk with Simon about why I found Peter suspicious after the day was over, and I was hoping he would be the vig target that night. Voting for alastair after he was hammered (by a scum) was relevant because it was essentially at the same time. Miscommunication in the scumboard as to who would do it? Or like I said, was it that you all realized alastair was doomed so you both threw down what was essentially a double hammer so that you can use it as defense later? Like I said, I am assuming the scum were surprised by the stump thing too, so you assumed you'd be able to point later in the game that "I hammered a scum on day 1, so how could I possibly be a scum?" And since you both posted votes at the same time, you and Barry would BOTH get the same defense at the price of one scum who was getting lynched anyway. The vote on Nash? You placed it when the Catarina bandwagon was well under way and it was pretty clear she'd get lynched that day - but there was still lots of room for you on that wagon. But again, by placing the other vote, you left yourself a defense later (see, I didn't vote for the oaky catarina!) but enough time to switch votes if you needed to. And yes, you were happy with your vote on Peter because it was helping split the vote and you were hoping for a non-lynch!
Walter Kovacs Posted February 25, 2015 Author Posted February 25, 2015 Voting Update: Adelaide Apple (TinyPiesRUs) - 1 (mostlytechnic) Jack Pine (mostlytechnic) - 1 (fhomess) Lassie Sassafrass (fhomess) - 1 (Hinckley) There are 32 Hours remaining in Day 6. It takes 5 votes for a lynch.
Bob Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 The Scummiest thing about you is I was able to defend your vote better than you did. Scratch my earlier post. If she can't answer that herself then it clearly isn't the case. It's because I didn't seal the lynch on Hazel. Nash Ash did. Sue, nothing to add? As a matter of fact, yes I do, even though half of the posts in this day thread have been in various forms of code. Your points against Lassie have been well thought out and explained and I've been rereading them, but I'm also looking at Adelaide. She's been playing as she usually does, not posting quite a lot. I will admit that her posts have been mostly full of substance, she's also been placing quite a few scummy votes that seem to be intent on covering herself. The whole idea of voting for someone that you think is scummier than joining a bandwagon can sometimes be right if the person isn't overtly scummy, but purposefully staying on when we're lynching someone that is very scummy (Hazel) and then the next day coming back with this: Why would you say that? You seemed fairly confident that Hazel was scum yesterday? So why does her being blown up today change your opinion on the "only oaks become stumps" theory? Personally, I find myself agreeing more with the theory today. Does anyone find it odd that Hazel removed her avatar and signature soon after she was lynched? Seems like she wasn't expecting to return to us today... What appears to be a complete and full support of Hazel now being scum and not mentioning Peter again as somebody that she thinks we should watch out for. In fact, she doesn't appear suspicious of Peter for the rest of the day and never mentions him as a possible suspect again. Why? She appeared to be so certain that Peter was scum that she kept her vote on him even when Hazel the writing on the wall appeared with the Hazel vote. Even in the first part of her post she's seemingly accusing Jack Pine for questioning the possibility of Hazel being scum. Then Simon says this: This Scum team has a different challenge. Who do they want to verify as Town? I think that's why they're hitting less active people. Since they can't shut any of us up, they're probably trying to hit lower posters who might be guarding Night Actions. They may also have a rolecop. I thought this is what I said to you when you PMed me yesterday to check if I had told anyone else about Clem or wondered if Lassie was in the town block...and justified your vote for Peter for some reason. Why would Adelaide have to justify her vote for Peter in private before the day even started, as though she already knew that Hazel was going to flip scum and that she needed to defend her vote to Simon, who has been practically appointed as the leader of the town at this point. For me right now it's between Lassie and Adelaide. I'd like to think about this for just a little bit longer and hear replies from both before I rush into it.
jimmynick Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Catarina and I were wondering - what if this is Witch Hunt Mafia Redux?
Dragonfire Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 If you had read the rest of the discussion you'd see that I am open to the idea of Peter being the SK, however then we have a question of why the scum didn't kill yesterday. If we assume Peter was scum, then we can also consider the possibility that Hazel was the SK and that's why there was no 3rd kill last night. If Hazel wasn't the SK, we've still got an SK problem on our hands that someone ought to have some insight into. I can't imagine either the scum or the SK would've opted not to kill at this stage. If Peter was the SK, then who did the Scum kill last night? Or were they blocked? You spent two days talking to me about Dragonfire's miller claim. Now that we know he's an Oak, that's suspect. Two days undermining a Townie. I thought he was Scum the way he was behaving and your suspicion wouldn't be suspicious if it wasn't coupled with other things. He told me that he believed my claim. It's odd that he spent this amount of time undermining me. Scum must have really wanted me gone (they even janitored Hazel to frame me) I found Nash and Berty both to be very Scummy too, but once a person shows up as Oak that would generally mean we can stop suspecting them. But not you. Today, you tried to base a theory off of who Berty said he'd be willing to vote for. Did you forget Berty's alignment had been revealed and you couldn't base things on him being Scum? Then, when I called you out on that, you bring up some theory about any group of four players contains two Scum or at least one. You even wrote it out algebraically. Something like b=u/ll*sh-it2. This is similar to Sammy's vote analysis yesterday, where he included me as Scum. Whereas Sammy's action was more presumptious and cocksure than scummy, Lassie's could come across as a slip. By they way, shout out to Chester for playing the bomb perfectly. Ditto. Simon's case has made me look at Lassie's posts in a new way. She's joined Sue up there on the Scum list.
Hinckley Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Catarina and I were wondering - what if this is Witch Hunt Mafia Redux? There was only one killer. Fear. No, wait. It was Quarryman. And the megablocks killed me. I doubt any host wants to tarnish their name by repeating an atrocity like Witch Hunt. Just kidding, Adelaide. I loved that game. Classic. Jerk. He told me that he believed my claim. It's odd that he spent this amount of time undermining me. Scum must have really wanted me gone (they even janitored Hazel to frame me) That is strange. Speaking of you and your belief in a janitor, that reminds me of some other Scummy Lassie moves. He is the one that pointed out Barry must've known who was killed at night since he switched back and forth between saying he'd kill Bobby or Clem. Then when we all (mostly all) started believing that Scum were just removed and not stumped, I pointed out that his theory no longer made sense and he brushed it off with "Once the game is over, I look forward to hearing the explanation of Barry's actions that night." And, in private, he was promoting your dumb idea that Hazel was an Oak. Anyone who believes that is suspect. With the special exception of Berty. Has there been one body non-stumped every night except for Night Two??
Dragonfire Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 That is strange. Speaking of you and your belief in a janitor, that reminds me of some other Scummy Lassie moves. He is the one that pointed out Barry must've known who was killed at night since he switched back and forth between saying he'd kill Bobby or Clem. Then when we all (mostly all) started believing that Scum were just removed and not stumped, I pointed out that his theory no longer made sense and he brushed it off with "Once the game is over, I look forward to hearing the explanation of Barry's actions that night." And, in private, he was promoting your dumb idea that Hazel was an Oak. Anyone who believes that is suspect. With the special exception of Berty. Even scummier. Well, I am pretty sure that Hazel was an Oak. The ancient rules of the forest are preventing me from being any more than "pretty sure". I'll just say that if Hazel was a Maple, she is the most despicably manipulative player I have ever played with -- more manipulative than you would be if you turned out to be Scum fooling us all (exceedingly unlikely). She struck me as genuine, but confused. Simon, the codes you gave me only covered the players' names and a few role names. You never sent me any role codes. Can you please use the role codes that I sent you in post 4 of page 3 of our PM ???
Hinckley Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Simon, the codes you gave me only covered the players' names and a few role names. You never sent me any role codes. Can you please use the role codes that I sent you in post 4 of page 3 of our PM ??? You must have sent first. So, Jack Pine was blocked on Night Two and it's the only night we haven't seen a stump removed... While I like the idea that only Oaks are stumped, it's worth considering the other possibility.
Dragonfire Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 You must have sent first. So, Jack Pine was blocked on Night Two and it's the only night we haven't seen a stump removed... While I like the idea that only Oaks are stumped, it's worth considering the other possibility. Simon, can you re-send your codes using the role codes on post 4 of page 3 of our PM ??? Besides, just for your information, n4888 326.
Recommended Posts