Heartlake Heartbreak - Day Two: Flagpole Sitta

[fhomess]

Oscar, how do you know it was Mike that gave you the cookies and do you have any idea why Mike would give you cookies? It just strikes me as silly to give your lunch to someone you have no reason to trust yet. Almost as if Mike is trying to become your friend.

Ah... I have a note from yesterday that Dansmith also claimed not to have brought a lunch. I can't blame him since he has no opposable thumbs, but that would put a minimum of two in the Apple category without lunches.

[Hinckley]

This is a good point. After calling out Mike for his lame vote yesterday he contacted me letting me know that he was engaged and didn't want me to think he was lazy. Since he assumed he would be lynched before long, he said he'd give me his lunch to try and prove that he was working for the Town. Moments later, the cookies came. Yes, this could be a ploy to get me to trust him. No, I have not given him any information I haven't given out in the thread.

[Scubacarrot]

By the way, I got info from someone that someone is looking for their "Bro". I assume good stuff happens if they meet? Contact me, I can get you your "Bro", "Other Bro."

[Hinckley]

I have no siblings. They were all stepped on by horses.

[Scubacarrot]

I have no siblings. They were all stepped on by horses.

Sounds like a motive to me.

[Hinckley]

A motive for what? Killing the two horses that died in the confirmation thread? You think that's how these games work? Give me a break. You're much smarter than that.

[Piratedave84]

I have no siblings. They were all stepped on by horses.

LYNCH THE HORSES!

[Scubacarrot]

A motive for what? Killing the two horses that died in the confirmation thread? You think that's how these games work? Give me a break. You're much smarter than that.

... It was a joke...

[Hinckley]

... It was a joke...

Horses are nice from a distance but I hate them up close. Their feet crush hedgehog brains. Not. Funny.

[CMP]

That all fits, my lunch (ham sandwich) enabled me to steal someone else's lunch, but the person I targeted seems to have eaten theirs.

Daisy being difficult and insulting is to be expected, as much as I'd like to see her stringy, angry little form mashed into the pavement and picked at by attack dogs, I don't think we should condemn her for it, nor for a flavor cop result. It was a pair of black glasses, not a black hat. (This is mostly directed to Matilda. On another note, we need more sausages, spicy Italian, please.) I just wish she could be nicer in trying to help us, rather than this whole 'When Dicks Collide' sideshow we have going on. But, oh well.

Can't say I have many suspects, but Jimmy would have to be the primary one today, for me. Some of what he says earlier in the day doesn't add up well.

[Hinckley]

Matilda, black hat, what?

What about Jimmy doesn't add up well for you?

[Zepher]

Yes, perhaps I should also know what this black hat deal is? I don't recall wearing one... but then again, Daisy didn't know about her glasses. I have so much work to do, I sometimes forget which cloths I own.

Though if you had a steal, are you passing along this information from another? Or are we reading into what should have been a joke?

[Hinckley]

Matilda, you are so fat.

[Zepher]

That's it, no more pennies for you, mister.

[Hinckley]

I don't like many horses but I'm particularly tired of those big black ones that fly under the radar. If it was time to vote I'd gladly place a vote for Wild Dragon (Dragonator). Speaking once, even if you are a horse and aren't used to talking yet, we'd help with that but we fed the vet to the dogs, and not even bothering to vote doesn't help anyone. What's the matter with you? Scum got your tongue?

[CMP]

Matilda, black hat, what?

What about Jimmy doesn't add up well for you?

I was referring to where she thought Daisy was the best suspect for today.

Well, it's mostly the bits from your exchange earlier today:

What makes you assume it's the vig that's been day killing? We obviously didn't have a scum kill (or any kill) last night, so I'm led to assume that the scum killer is a day killer. Unless you know something we don't, Oscar?

He's open to the possibility the day killer is scum here, but thinks it's scum rather than the vig...

And why would that surprise you? Why have you been assuming that the target was blocked or protected? It's the simplest solution (something about a razor...) to assume that there was a scum day kill.

...but only because it's 'the simplest solution'. Now, I usually go along with the most rational explanation for things, but this would be startlingly unbalanced (even if we have a day protector, the odds of a protector protecting a day kill target are laughable). I'm not saying it's not a possibility, but it's a far cry from 'the simplest solution', there a ton of complexities to consider if the scum's way of winning is this intangible.

I'm not saying that there's no possibility of the day killer being the vig, I just think it's strange that that we had no kill last night. Yes, block/protect/conversion are possibilities, but the likelihood that one of those people chose wisely is very slim. And if it was our blocker, then I hope he or she can come forward with whoever they blocked so we can lynch the killer. Preferably without revealing their role, but results are results...

This scared me a bit. Rarely are blockers actually told if their target did anything last night. If the blocker's not convinced their target was the killer, then keep your mouth shut, it's not worth dying to reveal.

Shadell, I'm not so sure about putting all of our lunches on the table, so to speak. We are at an advantage now, you're correct, but doing what you suggest seems like an easy way for the scum to get all of the info quickly, as well...

It also directly contradicts this.

Don't put words into my mouth, I said I was fairly sure that Jane was scum. And why are you calling me out on this now? I was agreeing with one of your suspects that you told me in private. Heck, I don't even need the private conversation as proof, you said today, right here, that the day killer vig should aim for Jane. What makes me suspicious of Jane? I'll ask you the same question. But since you asked first:

As I said before, Jane's lazy response is an indicator to me of scummy behavior. She literally picked the response before her (which was lazy and didn't add much to the conversation to begin with), and simply said "yeah I agree", and voted. Considering the fact that Trisha was town, I'm more than certain there were at least some scum on the bandwagon yesterday. This response struck me as particularly scummy.

The reasoning is...okay. It's far more likely Jane's just a lazy townie, but it's still fairly scummy.

What I don't like here is that he's using Oscar's own offense as a defense. His defense (I guess it's a bit of a stretch to call it a real 'defense', but she's still defending herself) is that he (Oscar) was suspicious of the same person he's suspecting, so he (Jimmy) shouldn't be seen as suspicious himself. I do doubt Jimmy was as sure of Jane's scuminess as Oscar makes out, but her response to this is even more scummy itself. Agreeing on a suspect with someone doesn't make your automatically innocent in that person's eyes.

I think Oscar responded later saying that even though their reasons for being suspicious were the same, the conclusions they reached were quite different. That sort of ties into this.

I'm insisting that you consider it a possibility. Right now you "refuse to believe" that there's a scum day killer. So you're insisting, as well. I just don't understand the certainty you have about the day killer. Having a theory is one thing, but "refuse to believe"? It make me think that you know something I don't.

I do recognize that others have presented their theories as just that - theories, about the day killer. So my "insisting" is not all-inclusive and pertains more to Oscar and perhaps Dansmith, who seem to be pretty sure that they're right... that's just my sense of it, though.

He wants people to be open to the idea that the day killer could be scum....

Defensive? I was simply answering your question, to elaborate on why I think Jane is scum. Yes, you are latching onto two words, and you still haven't answered why you think Jane is suspicious. After all, you're the one who told the vig to kill her today, so there must be a damn good reason that I apparently have not illustrated yet.

...And suddenly the day killer is now the vig.

It's not much, but it's Day Two, you mostly have to look at people's behavior.

[Waterbrick Down]

Good morning everyone, or is it midday. Sorry I've been slaving away in the stables. So many things to comment on.

Good picks with the blocks/protections whatever to the respective persons (conversion theory aside due to a lack of probability). As for the day kill, as has already been said we'll have to wait and see. I personally think all are options are likely: day-vig, possible but I wonder why they would have chosen to use their power without very much evidence, though we have had instances of compulsive vigilantes before; serial killer, another possible option though this would probably mean they are immune to tracking/watching (unsettling) unless we have people that can do that during the day as well along with hopefully a day-protector; skum killer, possible as we've heard about a day-poisoner as well as someone carrying around an antidote in the past. I guess time will tell, though I'd prefer not to go so quickly.

Trisha is indeed a loss, as is every townie that turns up dead. It was a hard way, to put to rest some of the confusion surrounding her, but I think we can and have pull/pulled out some semblence of reason from her ravings the other day.

Daisy and Fred seemed to have quieted down at long last, but I believe we have learned some valuable information from it. I've still got my lunch and can at least give credence to Daisy's claim, so it would seem that are a limited number of "types" of lunches that we have at our disposal.

As to the glasses, I also have a hard time believing that these clues would give a hint to someone's affiliation and from the wording of the particular lunch in question I think it has something to do more with occupation. That being said, there's not alot of conclusions that can be drawn aside from those already stated. Daisy's denying the watcher roles and is even claiming to have no action, that doesn't leave us with very many other options.

[Dannylonglegs]

Ah... I have a note from yesterday that Dansmith also claimed not to have brought a lunch. I can't blame him since he has no opposable thumbs, but that would put a minimum of two in the Apple category without lunches.

I don't know if I said that directly, but it's not true. I was unsure yesterday how important Lunches would be so I tried to keep mine secret. From what I can tell, Daisy's analysis checks out quite nicely.

[Cecilie]

Wow, I didn't see that coming. There's actually a simple distribution key to the lunches. Well done cracking that code. So I guess this means there are only three types of lunches out there, so if anyone has heard anyone claim a lunch that doesn't fit this pattern, they're probably lying.

[fhomess]

Oh my I am going to have a lot of catching up to do... Better get started!

How's it going?

*snip*

Thanks for summarizing the day for us!

I don't know if I said that directly, but it's not true. I was unsure yesterday how important Lunches would be so I tried to keep mine secret. From what I can tell, Daisy's analysis checks out quite nicely.

Hmm... not sure how I got that then. I can't find it now, either.

Wow, I didn't see that coming. There's actually a simple distribution key to the lunches. Well done cracking that code. So I guess this means there are only three types of lunches out there, so if anyone has heard anyone claim a lunch that doesn't fit this pattern, they're probably lying.

Or they're Trisha.

[Dannylonglegs]

Hmm... not sure how I got that then. I can't find it now, either.

Well, I think you're right in that I may have insinuated it, but I don't think I ever flat out said I didn't have a lunch.

[Hinckley]

I was referring to where she thought Daisy was the best suspect for today.

...

It's not much, but it's Day Two, you mostly have to look at people's behavior.

Good analysis. Something feels way off on Jimmy. It's been the reactions and defensiveness that have seemed really out of place. All based off of that little "pretty sure" in the private communication. Just a seed of doubt, but Jimmy has watered it into a little sapling for us to consider our vote over...

Good morning everyone, ...

As to the glasses, I also have a hard time believing that these clues would give a hint to someone's affiliation and from the wording of the particular lunch in question I think it has something to do more with occupation. That being said, there's not alot of conclusions that can be drawn aside from those already stated. Daisy's denying the watcher roles and is even claiming to have no action, that doesn't leave us with very many other options.

Way to summarize. After yesterday's lackluster "I'll find a way for the lie detector to test everyone at once, where's my pen? Oh, I spent some time and it wouldn't really work" tactic, you've come in today to tell us what happened. That's real helpful for the lazy Townies who don't like to read, but outside of your character a bit. Did Daisy deny the watcher role? Where? And what "occupation" are you referring to? Did you come to these conclusions yourself because they've been discussed at length already and been brought to much stronger conclusions than the half-hearted analysis you just gave us. Not behavior I would expect from one of the most analytical brains here. Ping. Ping from you. Another one. That's like three.

Oh, a note:

Dearest Oscar-Woscar, Kissy-Wissums,

I love you. Don't forget that Wild Dragon and although you may want to play nice with Shadell the sweeping generalizations and "Rah rah, let's band the Town together" are her Scum game, not her Town mode at all.

Love deeply and always,

Lady Dolores

Lady Dolores, that is uncalled for metagaming. Don't start this shit. We're trying to play nice for once. So what if Shadell is super Scummy. Play nice. Honestly.

Sorry Shadell, my invisible human girlfriend is kind of rude sometimes...Scumbag.

Ah... I have a note from yesterday that Dansmith also claimed not to have brought a lunch. I can't blame him since he has no opposable thumbs, but that would put a minimum of two in the Apple category without lunches.

Was this in private or in the thread?

[Dannylonglegs]

Good analysis. Something feels way off on Jimmy. It's been the reactions and defensiveness that have seemed really out of place. All based off of that little "pretty sure" in the private communication. Just a seed of doubt, but Jimmy has watered it into a little sapling for us to consider our vote over...

Way to summarize. After yesterday's lackluster "I'll find a way for the lie detector to test everyone at once, where's my pen? Oh, I spent some time and it wouldn't really work" tactic, you've come in today to tell us what happened. That's real helpful for the lazy Townies who don't like to read, but outside of your character a bit. Did Daisy deny the watcher role? Where? And what "occupation" are you referring to? Did you come to these conclusions yourself because they've been discussed at length already and been brought to much stronger conclusions than the half-hearted analysis you just gave us. Not behavior I would expect from one of the most analytical brains here. Ping. Ping from you. Another one. That's like three.

Oh, a note:

Lady Dolores, that is uncalled for metagaming. Don't start this shit. We're trying to play nice for once. So what if Shadell is super Scummy. Play nice. Honestly.

Sorry Shadell, my invisible human girlfriend is kind of rude sometimes...Scumbag.

Was this in private or in the thread?

I assume she must be referencing what I said in thread yesterday, but as I pointed out, I believe she may be misremembering. I did make it a point to suggest I had no lunch, but I never actually denied it. I played like I didn't exactly know what they were so as to conceal the fact that I had one myself. Also I didn't talk with her or anyone the entirety of day one, so I'd be rather surprised if she heard that from me in private.

[Hinckley]

Another note!

Oscar,

I'm a ghost and I see things. I was out and about last night and saw that Walter (WaterbrickDown) was blocked.

Love,

Lady Dolores

Did you guys read that? Walter (WaterbrickDown) professional summarizer and lame lie detector plan setter was blocked last night. No Scum kill, Scummy hedgehog-hating Walter blocked. Hmmmm....

[Waterbrick Down]

Way to summarize. After yesterday's lackluster "I'll find a way for the lie detector to test everyone at once, where's my pen? Oh, I spent some time and it wouldn't really work" tactic, you've come in today to tell us what happened. That's real helpful for the lazy Townies who don't like to read, but outside of your character a bit. Did Daisy deny the watcher role? Where? And what "occupation" are you referring to? Did you come to these conclusions yourself because they've been discussed at length already and been brought to much stronger conclusions than the half-hearted analysis you just gave us. Not behavior I would expect from one of the most analytical brains here. Ping. Ping from you. Another one. That's like three.

I was honestly convinced about being able to lie-detector our way out of this mess and you should know that I'm more than willing to try solving these puzzles in more outside the box ways. As to summerizing, if agreeing is summerizing then you caught me and a dozen other people red-handed.

I don't have a night action, I said that before, not that I would feel the need to claim at this point otherwise, where do you get that from?! You're just making stuff up now.

This is what I took as her deny the watcher role or any for that matter.

Occupations/Job/Role-in-this-entire-affair, i.e. something distinctly different from a "lunch". Could you clarify on your conclusions question? Almost all of us are in the dark, so hard set conclusions are difficult to make, however as time goes on and conversations progress we are able to cement our understanding and move forward.