CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 We don't even know if he's naive or sane. And someone will be lynched today. 100% Are you kidding me? It's been stated he's the sane investigator, by both himself and Harriet, probably 5 times each.
Quarryman Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 We won't end up with a lynch tonight, but God'll probably just make us vote another night. And if we don't vote off someone we learn nothing, that's an unfortunate truth. So a lynch there must be.
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 And if we don't vote off someone we learn nothing, that's an unfortunate truth. So a lynch there must be. Yes, but we'll learn more in the night, and we won't have to kill anyone with a huge probability it'll be a villager.
Peanuts Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Are you kidding me? It's been stated he's the sane investigator, by both himself and Harriet, probably 5 times each. Are you kidding me? There were two investigation results, and both were village. So how are we supposed to know if he's naive or sane? Tell me. We can't know until he's recieved a scum result.
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Are you kidding me? There were two investigation results, and both were village. So how are we supposed to know if he's naive or sane? Tell me. We can't know until he's recieved a scum result. Then let's vote out one of the people he's investigate and see if he is insane or sane.
Peanuts Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Then let's vote out one of the people he's investigate and see if he is insane or sane. He is not insane, as his results on the count have been confirmed by harriet and seem trustworthy. But he can be naive, and killing randomly his targets won't help, as they might be both villagers and he still isn't confirmed sane. I don't suspect him to be naive, as I have no reason to do, and I don't deny we have a precise investigator, but you just tried to get one of his targets killed.
Sandy Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 And if we don't vote off someone we learn nothing, that's an unfortunate truth. So a lynch there must be. Yes, but we'll learn more in the night But if we lynch, we will learn something during the day AND during the night. Why are you so against this? Isn't this debate exactly like the one you had in Day One? Have you learned nothing since then? Besides, good luck trying to get 18 other people not to vote anybody today, when just one vote can lead into a conviction.
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 He is not insane, as his results on the count have been confirmed by harriet and seem trustworthy. But he can be naive, and killing randomly his targets won't help, as they might be both villagers and he still isn't confirmed sane. I don't suspect him to be naive, as I have no reason to do, and I don't deny we have a precise investigator, but you just tried to get one of his targets killed. Sorry, I meant to say naive. Ok then, I don't see why he can't investigate me. But if we lynch, we will learn something during the day AND during the night. Why are you so against this? Isn't this debate exactly like the one you had in Day One? Have you learned nothing since then? Yes, I have. But this time, we have no apparent slip-ups, no evidence, and the only person with any attention on them seems to be me, but we can all remember the Day 2 screw-up.
Lord Arjay Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 And is it a sin to change a viewpoint? I never said that. While what you say could be true, you must appreciate that if I told you something in private and then completely contradicted it you'd be a bit sceptical, wouldn't you? Charles looks like he's flailing rather a lot, so I'm much more confident in his guilt. Though I'd assume Sebastien is sane, as Gary Coleman has already been revealed as insane. I doubt we'd have both an insane and a naive investigator. That and I know he was correct about me.
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Then let's vote out one of the people he's investigate and see if he is insane or sane. I say we have him investigate you and then kill you tomorrow whatever the result. Or just kill you today. Seriously. Are you suggesting we vote out two confirmed villagers? We know Gary Coleman is an insane investigator. God be damned if we had two insane investigators. And The Baron is a villager and the Blacksmith. We saw him give silver bullets to Dacius Nathans on Day 1. He was trying to help the village by giving silver bullets to someone he believed to be the hunter! He's clearly a villager. And if he's a villager then I suppose the other person Sebastien investigated was too. So which one of our confirmed fellow villagers would you like to see dead? You like the taste of your foot? Would you prefer some applesauce to go with it? Sebastien Vaughn was proven to be a villager when we killed him. He gave us correct results on two villagers. We knew he was testing the second villager, we asked him to, to test him. He's been brought back from the dead by someone who realized it was a mistake to kill him and wants to continue to help the village. We'd be fools to not consider that ressurection and robed chanting is evil, but to take it as far as to suggest we kill a confirmed villager... Off with your head, Charles Synclair. Evil or loyal, you are no help to us. I do think we should investigate Sebastien tonight to make sure he's not a zombie-poo-flinging-space-bunny, but until then nobody should lay a finger on him! He's my baby daddy!
Admiral Ron Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I never said that. While what you say could be true, you must appreciate that if I told you something in private and then completely contradicted it you'd be a bit sceptical, wouldn't you? I suppose that is a fair statement.
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I say we have him investigate you and then kill you tomorrow whatever the result. Or just kill you today. Seriously. Are you suggesting we vote out two confirmed villagers? We know Gary Coleman is an insane investigator. God be damned if we had two insane investigators. And The Baron is a villager and the Blacksmith. We saw him give silver bullets to Dacius Nathans on Day 1. He was trying to help the village by giving silver bullets to someone he believed to be the hunter! He's clearly a villager. And if he's a villager then I suppose the other person Sebastien investigated was too. So which one of our confirmed fellow villagers would you like to see dead? You like the taste of your foot? Would you prefer some applesauce to go with it? Sebastien Vaughn was proven to be a villager when we killed him. He gave us correct results on two villagers. We knew he was testing the second villager, we asked him to, to test him. He's been brought back from the dead by someone who realized it was a mistake to kill him and wants to continue to help the village. We'd be fools to not consider that ressurection and robed chanting is evil, but to take it as far as to suggest we kill a confirmed villager. Off with your head, Charles Synclair. Evil or loyal, you are no help to us. I do think we should investigate Sebastien tonight to make sure he's not a zombie-poo-flinging-space-bunny, but until then nobody should lay a finger on him! He's my baby daddy! I was suggesting that because Mr. Londonpants wasn't so sure whether he was naive or not. And WHAT? Evil or not, I'm no help? Has anyone considered I have a night action? For the town?? Look, here are our 2 main options. Option 1. We vote me out, I'm villager, you just lost an important guy, Sebastien might be evil and continue to hoodwink you all, if not, then woop de doo, you still lost a villager. Option 2. We don't lynch today, we have stricter lynching rules, but Sebastien investigates me as villager, yay, we now have 4 confirmed villagers.
Lord Arjay Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 night action[/b]? For the town?? Such as..? Zed claimed to have a night action, so I don't think tht should be proof of your innocence.
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Such as..? Zed claimed to have a night action, so I don't think tht should be proof of your innocence. I'm not saying it is, I'm saying have you considered it? Can't we all wait 1 day? Or do you all want to kill me today and lose a villager? No? Then let's wait for tonight and for tomorrow's Sebastien's investigation result. And I'm not revealing my night action. But I'm not denying I don't have one.
Sandy Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Ok then, I don't see why he can't investigate me. The unfortunate bottom line is that we have to make a conviction today, and you're currently the best bet at least for me. But this time, we have no apparent slip-ups, no evidence, and the only person with any attention on them seems to be me, but we can all remember the Day 2 screw-up. The majority of us agreed that it was Adam Sokern's own fault for standing up to a werewolf so vigorously. It was very unfortunate, yes, but he dug his own grave. As you are digging your own as we speak, in my eyes.
Peanuts Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I was suggesting that because Mr. Londonpants wasn't so sure whether he was naive or not. And WHAT? Evil or not, I'm no help? Has anyone considered I have a night action? For the town?? Don't you think we already have enough night actions? But okay, if you had one, I'll be sorry. Honestly. And I'm never sure about nothing. That's why I'm a incredibly great detective. Because I question things. And we don't know for sure he is sane. God would act a bit unfair to give us two non-sane investigators, but at least we get 4 protectors and a reviver. And I'm just confused by all this night action mess. Oh, what's your night action by the way? The flying pumpkin shooting laser beam out of his butt? I wouldn't be surprised if there was one.
Rick Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 And you didn't trust Sebastien? But you do trust him to clear you tonight? Why don't you go to our night action coordinator (*points at Harriet*) and tell her in private? Be sure to also tell her how you've been helping us over the past three nights.
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 The unfortunate bottom line is that we have to make a conviction today, and you're currently the best bet at least for me. No. We. Don't! He said there'd be consequences, which is 90% probably stricter lynching rules. If he requires someone to die if we don't lynch, then by all means, let it be me.
Professor Flitwick Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Can't we all wait 1 day? Or do you all want to kill me today and lose a villager? No? Then let's wait for tonight and for tomorrow's Sebastien's investigation result. We could, but at the same time you could be the Axe wielding Rouge, and could end up killing another innocent. And if you did have a night action, I'm sure you would've told Harriet, been in one of her plays, and have your innocence backed by her.
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 We could, but at the same time you could be the Axe wielding Rouge, and could end up killing another innocent. And if you did have a night action, I'm sure you would've told Harriet, been in one of her plays, and have your innocence backed by her. Then have me blocked! I don't have a real target tonight anyway. And no, I saw no reason to trust someone by default. But sure, I'll do it now, since my life seems to depend on it.
Sandy Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 And I'm not revealing my night action. But I'm not denying I don't have one. Obviously you are not one of the known investigators, protectors or inventors we already have on our side, since Harriet isn't defending you, so what might you be that is so helpful? You can't be the reviver either, since you claim he or she might be evil. I can't think of anything else that might benefit the town so greatly that we'd give a potential scumster a chance to slip away. You could do a great harm to our cause in just one night.
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Obviously you are not one of the known investigators, protectors or inventors we already have on our side, since Harriet isn't defending you, so what might you be that is so helpful? You can't be the reviver either, since you claim he or she might be evil. I can't think of anything else that might benefit the town so greatly that we'd give a potential scumster a chance to slip away. You could do a great harm to our cause in just one night. Let's say it again. Have me blocked. No, it's not any of those actions. But what I do does benefit the town.
Peanuts Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Let's say it again. Have me blocked. No, it's not any of those actions. But what I do does benefit the town. Do we even have a blocker? Would be bad if not.
Sandy Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 No. We. Don't! Yes. We. Do. Remember it only takes one vote to convict, and I'm sure there's always one or two who will vote despite any agreements we make. Besides, voting is the town's greatest weapon, and we need to use it in order to get rid of the scum. We might go wrong with it, but at least then we can take responsibility for our mistakes.
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Let's say it again. Have me blocked. No, it's not any of those actions. But what I do does benefit the town. Charles, dear. Ignore them for now. Let's have a focused talk in private. I'll help you relax and we can figure this whole thing out. Charles is a devilishly fiendish man with incredibly busy hands that found their way to my unmentionable areas...but in a good way. I believe Charles means to be a true help to our village. He may not be the best at strategy or at making friends, or have any fashion sense, but he does mean well. How do you like that? It's a good thing I'm already pregnant. We'll definitely talk later Charles, over some cock.
Recommended Posts