270 replies to this topic

[Darkdragon]

TheBoyWonder, on 03 December 2012 - 05:01 PM, said:

I'm Innocent.

This Lie Detector role claim is strange. Is he faking, or does he really have a one shot action? If so, why claim in public?

Piratedave84, on 03 December 2012 - 05:18 PM, said:

def, on 03 December 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

My first thought was that she's just young, and doesn't really know what it is she can do. On the off-chance that she's telling the truth, I'd like to propose this idea to everyone again , since it was ignored the first time: everyone say "I'm innocent" publicly. Like this: I'm innocent If she has a lie-detector, she'll be able to check any of us anytime. That's the law and order way to do these things. And it's the least you can do while you're not voting. Please.

I'll play along; I'm Innocent

TheBoyWonder, on 03 December 2012 - 05:01 PM, said:

This Lie Detector role claim is strange. Is he faking, or does he really have a one shot action? If so, why claim in public?

Could a test be made? Why not have Trisha test her own role-claim (is that even possible?)?

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

Shadows, on 03 December 2012 - 04:51 PM, said:

As opposed to hanging your hopes on a random guess that the history of games has shown over and over is usually wrong? I'm not saying we shouldn't vote, since it's obviously important that we take action as well as not incur the wrath of the almighty voice, I'm just hoping we can avoid the usual mistake in the process. Sorry if that confused you, and no, I don't know anything because anyone who would actually claim a role at this point would be a complete retard, also based on the past history of games.

What I do see is someone doing exactly what I hoped for, however, and claiming to be able to help already. Shame I think it's the most idiotic claim I've ever seen, as I'm sure you agree. Still, it enlightening and causing conversation, which is something we can look back on later for patterns, so I'm happy to see it.

So, you were hoping to see someone acting like "a complete retard" and claiming their role on Day One? Trisha (who looks an awful lot like Daisy) claimed her Night  Action during the day . You say that's retarded, but it's what you were hoping for. Were you hoping someone would claim their useful Night Action so you and your Scummy friends could find a good kill target for Night One?

So, first you hope someone will give us some info  about who to lynch but then you say you just want someone helpful  to come forward, which Trish has by claiming her Night Action, which you actually believe is a completely retarded  thing for her to do. How has all of this brought us info to base a lynch on? How have we been enlightened? Why were you hoping for someone to act like a complete retard?

Oh geez, another note:

Lady Dolores said:

Dear Oscar,

I know, right? He said he was hoping someone would bring some info during the day but now says he just wanted to know about a night action which he says would be retarded for someone to do. How many sides can he play in one sentence?

Love always,
Lady Dolores

P.S. I'm not a hedgehog.

OK, I know, right? Isn't that exactly what I had already said? And you don't have to sound so accusatory, Lady Dolores. I was only asking Shadell some polite questions out of curiosity. No reason to be such a be-yatch.

Shadows, on 03 December 2012 - 04:51 PM, said:

We only have your word that you can even read, but if you can, I'd have to imagine that your invisible lady is an invisible lady hedgehog writing in hedgehog language, so maybe you'll get lucky.

Oh, that's no concern. We hedgehogs will do anything.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:27 PM, said:

Piratedave84, on 03 December 2012 - 05:18 PM, said:

Could a test be made? Why not have Trisha test her own role-claim (is that even possible?)?

Oh, what a great idea! Let's ask the person making an odd claim to verify herself and then believe the result? What a convenient out for her that would be if she was lying. "Hey everybody! I used my one-shot investigation ability on myself and I'm Innocent! Hooray for me! Isn't that great? Carry on, nothing to worry about here."



I have a better idea. Why don't we just verify everbody by asking them to just tell us what side they're on? Why didn't anyone ever think of that before? OK, ready go! I'm a Townie. Now, everybody else tell us what side you're one and we'll lynch the ones who verify for us that they're Scum or Neutral. Game over! Wow, that was easy.

...

Fruit cake.

Shadows, on 03 December 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

So, you were hoping to see someone acting like "a complete retard" and claiming their role on Day One? Trisha (who looks an awful lot like Daisy) claimed her Night  Action during the day . You say that's retarded, but it's what you were hoping for. Were you hoping someone would claim their useful Night Action so you and your Scummy friends could find a good kill target for Night One?

In case it still isn't getting through, I guess I'll have to be direct. I think she's claimed an utterly ridiculous role and done it in the stupidest way possible. I hope it means she's scum and she's just revealed herself in a panic to try to appear to be a townie when no one had even accused her. At the very least, it's drawn my attention to her and led to discussion, which is one of the biggest things we can get out of a day 1.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

So, first you hope someone will give us some info  about who to lynch but then you say you just want someone helpful  to come forward, which Trish has by claiming her Night Action, which you actually believe is a completely retarded  thing for her to do. How has all of this brought us info to base a lynch on? How have we been enlightened? Why were you hoping for someone to act like a complete retard?

I was hoping someone would come forward with more than "he looks funny" or "he said we instead of them" or some other lame reasoning. It always goes wrong. Instead, we've gotten an interesting claim today, one that seems utterly insane and at least to me indicates that we have someone to be suspicious of today. I never said I was expecting someone to suddenly claim to be an investigator while revealing a scum to us, I wouldn't believe that for a minute, but when someone comes up with what sounds like a ridiculous story and then needs to prove it, we learn something. At this point, our best chance to catch a scum is if they act like a complete retard, so that's what I hoped for and what it looks like we might be getting. Again, however, it's at least causing discussion, though my neck is getting sore talking to a hedgehog, so can you at least sit up here on the table so I can stop looking down at you?

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

OK, I know, right? Isn't that exactly what I had already said? And you don't have to sound so accusatory, Lady Dolores. I was only asking Shadell some polite questions out of curiosity. No reason to be such a be-yatch.

It seems to be a trait inherent in hedgehogs, I never knew they were quite so dim-witted, but I'll add that to the things we're learning today.

You don't see the horses acting like this.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

Oh, that's no concern. We hedgehogs will do anything.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

Oh, what a great idea! Let's ask the person making an odd claim to verify herself and then believe the result? What a convenient out for her that would be if she was lying. "Hey everybody! I used my one-shot investigation ability on myself and I'm Innocent! Hooray for me! Isn't that great? Carry on, nothing to worry about here."

A stupid roleclaim and what looks like a stupid attempt to help her. Are you starting to see what I wanted here?

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

10:55am Hinckley
I agree with you.



No, it's true. I do. Which makes me more worried about you... and should make everyone worried about us. When do we agree with each other?

I'm agreeing with Fred too. What's happening?

Although, Fred seems to be drinking the lie detector kool-aid, so to speak.

Shadows, on 03 December 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

In case it still isn't getting through, I guess I'll have to be direct. I think she's claimed an utterly ridiculous role and done it in the stupidest way possible. I hope it means she's scum and she's just revealed herself in a panic to try to appear to be a townie when no one had even accused her. At the very least, it's drawn my attention to her and led to discussion, which is one of the biggest things we can get out of a day 1.

Trish and Yippee-Dippee... um, Dave... have certainly put themselves in the spotlight today. Trish is trying hard to please Fred and Dave is making some pretty lame suggestions to possibly save Trish from a bad-joke-turned-worse-roleclaim.

Shadows, on 03 December 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

I was hoping someone would come forward with more than "he looks funny" or "he said we instead of them" or some other lame reasoning. It always goes wrong. Instead, we've gotten an interesting claim today, one that seems utterly insane and at least to me indicates that we have someone to be suspicious of today. I never said I was expecting someone to suddenly claim to be an investigator while revealing a scum to us, I wouldn't believe that for a minute, but when someone comes up with what sounds like a ridiculous story and then needs to prove it, we learn something. At this point, our best chance to catch a scum is if they act like a complete retard, so that's what I hoped for and what it looks like we might be getting. Again, however, it's at least causing discussion, though my neck is getting sore talking to a hedgehog, so can you at least sit up here on the table so I can stop looking down at you?

It doesn't always go wrong. Twice in recent memory, it's been very helpful if not spot-on accurate. Even when we're wrong, the events can give us evidence to work on for days . Does it seem like an insane claim considering it's on mafiawiki? The claim itself and the timing are what's interesting to me. Why claim on Day One, at all? Why not just find some other way to get people to say things that can be proven or wait to see if the person she's suspicious of makes a claim that can be checked? I think one-shots should be used early, but not wasted by not having enough info. But maybe Trish is kind of a noob.

I'll certainly climb up onto a shelf, table, refrigerator, horse's ass, whatever it takes to make it easier to communicate with.

Shadows, on 03 December 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

A stupid roleclaim and what looks like a stupid attempt to help her. Are you starting to see what I wanted here?

Yes, yes. I get it.

Here's another note:

Lady Dolores said:

Dear Oscar,

Do you get it yet?

Shnuggle-wuggums,
Lady Dolores

Geez, yes. I get it.

Still doesn't make complete sense about what Shadell said in the first place about someone coming forward with info  on Day One as if there was some sort of Day Action or something else she knew we could use... But I digress... for now.

Vote: Dave (PirateDave84)

This will probably not lead to a lynch as there's not much to go on, but if he's not Scum, at least we won't have to hear non-helpful suggestions like "Let's have the person with the strange roleclaim verify themselves and then we can trust her" anymore. Anyway, this will also hopefully get these two talking a bit more about this whole lie detector business.

Trish, why  did you feel it necessary to reveal such a potentially important role on the first day?

Bob, on 03 December 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

11:07am Bob
I'm Innocent.

It will be interesting to see the results of this, if there are any. By the way, how could you confuse me with Billie? I know that when you used that combination of "Billie Bob" it makes me sound like a hick, but I'd like to say I'm a sophisticated person.

Shadows, on 03 December 2012 - 06:13 PM, said:

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

I agree with you.



No, it's true. I do. Which makes me more worried about you... and should make everyone worried about us. When do we agree with each other?

That time when ... no, not then. Um. Holy crap.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

Although, Fred seems to be drinking the lie detector kool-aid, so to speak.

The scary thing is we agree again...

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

Trish and Yippee-Dippee... um, Dave... have certainly put themselves in the spotlight today. Trish is trying hard to please Fred and Dave is making some pretty lame suggestions to possibly save Trish from a bad-joke-turned-worse-roleclaim.

This is getting almost into the realm of the impossible.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

Even when we're wrong, the events can give us evidence to work on for days . Does it seem like an insane claim considering it's on mafiawiki? The claim itself and the timing are what's interesting to me. Why claim on Day One, at all?

I agree about it being useful and have said that a few times. The oddity of the role from a noob voice of god combined with the sudden and reckless announcement of it are the primary issues for me, so we agree on part of that and I never  trust day 1 claims. It also may fall in the dumb or scum category, and I've always considered both dangerous.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

I'll certainly climb up onto a shelf, table, refrigerator, horse's ass, whatever it takes to make it easier to communicate with.

Thanks. I'm sure there's some joke here about horse's asses, but I'm still too confused by us agreeing on things to bother finding it.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

Still doesn't make complete sense about what Shadell said in the first place about someone coming forward with info  on Day One as if there was some sort of Day Action or something else she knew we could use... But I digress... for now.

It does, I just think my definition of info is different from yours, and perhaps part of the fault in that confusion was my own, it's just that I prefer to be subtle and hope people will do something stupid, where you seem to like to keep poking at a scab hoping to make it not bleed. That analogy is dead on and makes no sense. Whatever. I think it's safe to say we got some kind of info today, and hopefully that's a good thing.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

Vote: Dave (PirateDave84)

This will probably not lead to a lynch as there's not much to go on, but if he's not Scum, at least we won't have to hear non-helpful suggestions like "Let's have the person with the strange roleclaim verify themselves and then we can trust her" anymore. Anyway, this will also hopefully get these two talking a bit more about this whole lie detector business.

Trish, why  did you feel it necessary to reveal such a potentially important role on the first day?

These are good questions I want to see answered (or avoided) before voting. Hint: avoiding is bad.

CallMePie, on 03 December 2012 - 06:13 PM, said:

I can't say I totally buy this action, (seems more like a case of roleplaying gotten out of hand) but, hell, I'm Innocent .

Cecilie, on 03 December 2012 - 06:13 PM, said:

I don't really want to eat a vomit inducing cookie , but I have nothing to hide:
I'm an innocent townie

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

Shadows, on 03 December 2012 - 06:13 PM, said:

Thanks. I'm sure there's some joke here about horse's asses, but I'm still too confused by us agreeing on things to bother finding it.

I just like to say horse's ass. Plus being able to climb up on one is funny. It's something about shelf height anyway. Look no further for humor. That's where it ends.

Piratedave84, on 03 December 2012 - 06:48 PM, said:

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

Trish and Yippee-Dippee... um, Dave... have certainly put themselves in the spotlight today. Trish is trying hard to please Fred and Dave is making some pretty lame suggestions to possibly save Trish from a bad-joke-turned-worse-roleclaim.

*snip*

Vote: Dave (PirateDave84)

This will probably not lead to a lynch as there's not much to go on, but if he's not Scum, at least we won't have to hear non-helpful suggestions like "Let's have the person with the strange roleclaim verify themselves and then we can trust her" anymore. Anyway, this will also hopefully get these two talking a bit more about this whole lie detector business.

I ...

I was under the impression that the lie-detector results would be publicized after the action being sent in; upon [s]further  better reading, it turns out they are sent back to the Lie-detector-person ... I misread your initial quotation I apologize!  Based on this, yes my plan is retarded, now had the results been publicaly displayed, my plan was brilliant; should rol-claims not be tested? especially one which could be very useful in the long run.

I assert that I am town, and that attacking me makes me feel all sad inside

I am not trying to defend anyone, let alone crazy-vet-doctor-lie-detector person.

Also yippee-dipee ... not nice! bad hedgehog; my name is Dave!

[Darkdragon]

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 06:55 PM, said:

zakura, on 02 December 2012 - 01:48 PM, said:

The horses's coat has just got to be shiny. By the way, who would be evil enough to kill a horse?

Captain Genaro, on 02 December 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

Who is the heartless monster amongst us who could commit these atrosities? Well, is anyone going to speak up? No? Fine, just delay the inevitable because we will find you sick horse killing monsters!

DarthPotato, on 02 December 2012 - 05:15 PM, said:

Why thank you.
This is terrible, seeing my fellow horses die. I don't want to see anymore of this madness, so let's try our best to end it.

VolcanicPanik, on 02 December 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

This is such a horrendous and sad thing to hear. Let's stop these people!

JackJonespaw, on 03 December 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

I'm still in shock that someone would kill a poor horsie! I hope no other horses will be harmed Maybe we should train them to run fast if they see someone suspicious coming near them!

iamded, on 03 December 2012 - 03:01 AM, said:

My my, this is indeed a tragic turn of events. I'm just thankful my dear Wild Dragon is alright, I have no idea what I'd do if something were to happen to him!
I noticed the fence could do with some fixing up, if nobody minds I can try a bit of repair work. Um, feel free to join me Carl, y'know, if you want. Like old times.

iamded said:

Did someone call for lunch? I'll have sausage rolls!

While sad, it's also interesting that only horses have turned up dead. Do you think a horse killer would target humans? I know the obvious conclusion is 'of course, scummy people like horse killers kill regardless of one's character', but what if it's different? I didn't want to bring this up earlier for fear of being pounced on for having a theory that goes against the norm in situations like these, but it's the only thing on my mind right now worth mentioning.  Except Carl, he's worth mentioning... O h, was that out loud?  Er, back to this fence then...

None of you are being very helpful so far. Yes, horrified that horses have been murdered, got it. Anything else? Any opinions on the other events that have been happening since the day started? Let's hear it, please.

In the case of Amy, I think it's important we all remember that fun ramblings accompanied with smileys and winkies should never be a sufficient defense.

fhomess, on 03 December 2012 - 12:18 AM, said:

You don't think one of the other horses was involved, do you?  I mean, a horse is a horse, of course.  Of course!  And no one can talk to a horse, of course, but we DO have talking horses here, so this is all REALLY weird!  I can't imagine a horse would want to kill another horse, though.  Oh dear, that would just be unthinkable.  I can't imagine it.  It must be one of the others here, but who?

Zepher, on 03 December 2012 - 05:30 AM, said:

Don't we?  That's how I've always seen it done in my dreams!  That one time when there was a talking camel, I knew it was him because he was the only non-human .  Duh!  And look at all the hats he wore.  Of course... in the end, it wasn't him.    I think...

Oh, sorry, to better clarify, I dream about situations where mafia people kill normal people and normal people try to catch them and kill them back.  A dreary life of cooking and cleaning on the farm can lead to some crazy dreams.    The book I read on psychology told me so.  I read a lot of books because I'm bored all the time.  But I of course do my work first!

I'm impressed by all the big words this Hedgehog knows!  Mr. Hedgehog, would you prefer applesauce, or sausages, or perhaps some fried potatoes?  You seem like you need some energy in case you want to put on some plays later.  Hedgehogs are infamous for putting on plays.

As for you grasping at straws... yes, perhaps.  There's rarely anything to go on in the first day of any of my dreams.  You have to hope someone says something silly due to inattention!  There was this one dream I had with some megablock werewolf who said something similar to this on the first day.  So perhaps this warrants follow up at least.  Light a fire under everyone's arses, and I'll light a fire under the pan.  For the aforementioned sausages.  Aforementioned.  Is that an impressive word, Mr. Hedgehog?

Hmmm, a perfectly silly statement from a previously proven-to-be-intelligent person then deflected by the jokings of a joker making jokes about herself. Ping. Ping indeed.

Quote

Come to think of it, we may be able to make better use of these cookies if we can somehow inter-weave everyone's comments, let me break out the ol' pen and paper and see how this would work.

Any luck yet?

Quote

I'm Innocent .

Quote

I'm innocent

Quote

I'm Innocent.

Quote

I'm innocent.

Quote

I'm innocent

Quote

I'm Innocent.

Quote

I'm Innocent

Interesting. As this game...of life seems to have pitted the Scum against the Town, I'm not sure what category the "Innocent" fall under, but perhaps we are better, if the lie detector is even real, to give her something more tangible to work with like: "I am aligned with the Town."

fhomess, on 03 December 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

It sure is good to know that the police and a talking hedgehog have come up with a plan to help us solve this mystery by having us all declare our innocence!  What an amazing place Hearltlake is!  I never thought the big city was THIS different from my ranch.  I'm happy to do my part to help:
I'm aligned with the town.

It sure seems odd that Daisy was all for "helping out" by claiming scum and then when she realised that it didn't work as an opposite-day claim, didn't bother to follow it up with an appropriate correction.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 07:00 PM, said:

Piratedave84, on 03 December 2012 - 06:48 PM, said:

I ...

I was under the impression that the lie-detector results would be publicized after the action being sent in; upon [s]further  better reading, it turns out they are sent back to the Lie-detector-person ... I misread your initial quotation I apologize!  Based on this, yes my plan is retarded, now had the results been publicaly displayed, my plan was brilliant; should rol-claims not be tested? especially one which could be very useful in the long run.

I assert that I am town, and that attacking me makes me feel all sad inside

I am not trying to defend anyone, let alone crazy-vet-doctor-lie-detector person.

Also yippee-dipee ... not nice! bad hedgehog; my name is Dave!

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Also, I never called your plan retarded. I'm not attacking you, either way. I'm just pointing out that your idea was rather silly. It seems you have vocalized your thought process in the mean time and I can see where you thought God would give us the result. Just for future reference, this is not how Night Actions usually work. That would be a bit unfair as if God were to confirm the result, that would solidly confirm two people. If Trish gives us a result, we still don't know if she is telling the truth and will have to use resources to verify her. See how that game...of life mechanic works? It doesn't really verify anything and leaves it up to us to figure out who is lying? Having play the game...of life before, I'm sure you never saw a host giving Night Action results.

What's this? A note:

Lady Dolores said:

Oscar,

Don't unvote that Dave guy.

Lovey-wuvvums,
Lady Dolores

Don't worry Lady Dolores, I won't.

Cecilie, on 03 December 2012 - 07:02 PM, said:

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 06:55 PM, said:

Interesting. As this game...of life seems to have pitted the Scum against the Town, I'm not sure what category the "Innocent" fall under, but perhaps we are better, if the lie detector is even real, to give her something more tangible to work with like: "I am aligned with the Town."

Yes, I was thinking this too. Innocent of what, exactly?

Scubacarrot, on 03 December 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

I am innocent of being a green sailor. Yeah. Verify that.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 08:08 PM, said:

All we need to do if this Action works the way Trisha says it does is have one person write a list of all players "Trish is aligned with the Town, Amy is aligned with the Town, Oscar is aligned with the Town" and then Trish can take any portion of that statement and check if it's true or not. That way we don't have to have every person claim. Would it work that way? Could I verify someone else's alignment by saying "Shadell is aligned with the Town" and Trish gives that statement to God to see if its true or not?

CallMePie, on 03 December 2012 - 08:13 PM, said:

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 08:08 PM, said:

All we need to do if this Action works the way Trisha says it does is have one person write a list of all players "Trish is aligned with the Town, Amy is aligned with the Town, Oscar is aligned with the Town" and then Trish can take any portion of that statement and check if it's true or not. That way we don't have to have every person claim. Would it work that way? Could I verify someone else's alignment by saying "Shadell is aligned with the Town" and Trish gives that statement to God to see if its true or not?

I don't think that would work. It wouldn't be lying or telling the truth since the person doesn't really know, would it? I'm not sure, it's an odd role I haven't dealt with before.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

TrumpetKing67, on 02 December 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

OK, everyone! Whoever is atrociously horrid enough to kill these sweet, beautiful horses. I brought another expirement. If we feed it to everyone, it should work as a lie detector. A communication-with-the-spirits treat is also in the works. Unfortunately, there is about a 15% chance of both treats working. And my lie detector treats taste very foul, and may cause severe vomiting when eaten. But that's what veterinarians are for! If anyone gets sick, just see me! Humans are animals too, you know.

How has this acorn of horse crap turned into the mountain of bullshit we are now discussing?

You started out the day by claiming that you had to feed a cookie to every one of us to see who is lying and then only having a 15% chance of finding out what truth was being told after that. Then Fred comes along and clarifies your bonko ramblings into a much different action than what you're describing here? Where are you now? Why are you not answering these questions we all have been asking? What on Earth did you mean by this original post if the role that we've posted is supposedly what you really have? How did we get from everyone eating a cookie to what Fred has described and is trying to everyone to participate in? This is getting just a bit too convoluted for my hedgehog tastes here.

Scubacarrot, on 03 December 2012 - 08:23 PM, said:

I'm with "the Hog".

Scubacarrot, on 03 December 2012 - 08:26 PM, said:

Vote: Trisha (TrumpetKing67 )

Maybe this'll get you talking.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 08:41 PM, said:

Let's take an in-depth look at the things that have been said by Trish, and while we're at it, Fred:

TrumpetKing67, on 02 December 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

OK, everyone! Whoever is atrociously horrid enough to kill these sweet, beautiful horses. I brought another expirement. If we feed it to everyone, it should work as a lie detector. A communication-with-the-spirits treat is also in the works. Unfortunately, there is about a 15% chance of both treats working. And my lie detector treats taste very foul, and may cause severe vomiting when eaten. But that's what veterinarians are for! If anyone gets sick, just see me! Humans are animals too, you know.

Ludicrous, ridiculous ramblings. In my hedgehog opinion, this, in no way, can be analagous to any known Night Action in the brilliant novel known as MafiaWiki, which is one of the reading sources. This is just...nuts. And not the type you put on cookies.

TrumpetKing67, on 03 December 2012 - 07:02 AM, said:

Oscar and Dave, I work as a veterinarian. I'm the reason you talk, Oscar, the cute little Intro comic even says so. I have been expirementing some treats, and I mentioned the ones I have brought with me.

This clarification is not a clarification. It's just further enigma. She's been experimenting some treats and mentioned the ones she brought with her. ... What the philly?

def, on 03 December 2012 - 07:07 AM, said:

I think what Trisha might be talking about is a thing called a one-shot lie detector.  How she got her hands on police equipment, I can't say.  If that is what she has, all town should make a statement she can verify.  It's easy, just say this:

I'm innocent.

If that's what she has.  Otherwise, she's just talking crazy.

Quick and convenient explanation. Perhaps this is what Trish was talking about but why couldn't she say so herself when she started rambling? I realize the Scum are forced to work by Potato Message. Maybe it's too risky to do too much of that with the Mafia stalkers in our midst and some coaching must be done in thread and not in private. Or Fred is being his usual analytical self. It is very possible that Fred, who has a great mind for this game, just sees someone acting in a noobish fashion and is doing his best to help and perhaps utilize an important Town tool.

Tool.

TrumpetKing67, on 03 December 2012 - 07:46 AM, said:

Actually, my expirements are just cookies. I bake them, and cover them in specially made Truth Sprinkles that serve as a lie detiector. I call them expirements because they sound more sciency. While the sprinkles only work when the cookie is perfect, and can be vomit-inducing, It works pretty well. So no, noyt crazy, just an aspiring baker!   Actually, I have a batch of non-sprinkled ready right now! Anybody interested?

Oh, no. There's no response to the lie detector clarification from Fred, just more rambling, this time getting crazier. The cookies have truth sprinkles and it has nothing to do with Action, she's just an aspiring baker, something about vomit. Want to eat a cookie? It's not too late to just say you're roleplaying here... It really isn't too late. But ramble on, anyway.

def, on 03 December 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

Actually, right now, I'd like to hear more from Trisha about this supposed lie detector kit.  I'm assuming it's not a trick since it's way too early for scum to be fake claiming... Though this is the first I've heard about Heartlake having one, and it would be unlikely to be duplicated.  Still, this baking story seems just wacky enough to be true.

Fred, are you suggesting that the cookie has to be baked perfectly and the sprinkles, etc? This is making the claim sound more likely to you? Really? At this point, it's not even a claim. It's just nonsensical rambling.

def, on 03 December 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

My first thought was that she's just young, and doesn't really know what it is she can do.

On the off-chance that she's telling the truth, I'd like to propose this idea to everyone again , since it was ignored the first time: everyone say "I'm innocent" publicly.

Like this:
I'm innocent

If she has a lie-detector, she'll be able to check any of us anytime.  That's the law and order way to do these things.  And it's the least you can do while you're not voting.

Please.

Off chance? So, you don't believe her. Good. But, Fred, why do you call it a claim? She hasn't claimed anything yet? Does it seem to you like you could be feeding her a roleclaim? If it's such an "off-chance" that she's telling the truth, why wouldn't we focus more on her crazy bullshit story? Vomit-inducing truth sprinkles. Baked to perfection. Nothing she's described so far sounds like the lie detector action you've fed her.

TrumpetKing67, on 03 December 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

Thank you, Fred. I do have a detector. It is incredibly important for everybody here to give a phrase such as "I'm innocent" to the detector right now in order for it to give us results, though.

Here is everything I was talking about. Although I do suppose that those are my Talking-Apple treats....

So, do you have cookies or a detector?  Which is it? I think you're baking bullshit brownies.

def, on 03 December 2012 - 03:12 PM, said:

The Heartlake lie detector test:


Oscar (Hinckley)
Wild Dragon (Dragonator)
Dansmith IV (Dannylonglegs) claimed
Patty (DarthPotato)
Carl (CallMePie)
Walter (WaterbrickDown)
Dave (Piratedave84)
Fred (def) claimed
Cece (Cecilie)
Daisy (Scubacarrot)
Trisha (TrumpetKing67) claimed lie detector
Ginny (Captain Genaro)
Tammy (Tamamono)
Penny (VolcanicPanik)
Shadell (Shadows)
Billie (badboytje88)
Amy (iamded)
Katie (PsyKater)
Zara (zakura)
Heather (fhomess)
Matilda (Zepher)
Sara (TheBoyWonder)
Jane (JackJonespaw)
Jimmy (JimButcher)
Mike (Bob)

I hope you'll all cooperate.  I'd hate to break out the pepper spray

Good call here. If this is true, having a way for her to have a statement for every player to have a qualitative reading on is brilliant. But, you've gone to suspecting people who won't do exactly what you say. For instance, Billie says "Towniest of Town" and you list it as "won't claim". It's not that he won't (McArthyism) It's simply that he did it wrong on the first try. I know you to be aggressive which works, but I'm just pointing out that it seems to be drawing more attention away from the weird Trish claim. I'm not saying you're Scum or working with Trish here. I'm just ... analyzing, I suppose. I hope you don't take offense to this as I don't mean any.

def, on 03 December 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

The lie detector is usually a one-off ability.  And if in this case it isn't, I'd like Trisha to claim it's a one-off ability .  She won't be able to tell us all if we're true, but it's better to give her the choice of who to check.

TrumpetKing67, on 03 December 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

Well, I meant to say the sprinkles are vomit-inducing, but as you have so kindly pointed out, it may be read a complete;y different way.

That's true, Fred. It is a one-off ability. And I meant to say completely.

Well, I think it'd make more sense for it to be a two-shot, so she can really verify one person or another depending on what she actually gets them to say. I'd like to hear Trish claim that she was mistaken and she double-checked and it is actually a two-shot ability.  

Fred, do you think it's odd that you're doing most of the work on this while Trisha rambles in one post, oddly agrees with you in the next and then disappears while you do the verifying work?

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 08:42 PM, said:

And Trish, how did you cackamamie story go from truth-and-vomit-inducing cookies to "Oh, I have a lie detector?" What the hell are you talking about? I think you should start making sense.

Unvote: Dave (PirateDave84)

Vote: Trish (TrumpetKing67)

fhomess, on 03 December 2012 - 09:05 PM, said:

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 08:08 PM, said:

All we need to do if this Action works the way Trisha says it does is have one person write a list of all players "Trish is aligned with the Town, Amy is aligned with the Town, Oscar is aligned with the Town" and then Trish can take any portion of that statement and check if it's true or not. That way we don't have to have every person claim. Would it work that way? Could I verify someone else's alignment by saying "Shadell is aligned with the Town" and Trish gives that statement to God to see if its true or not?

I don't know how things work in a big city like Heartlake, but where I come from, we judge people by what they say and less based on what other people say about them.  Whether or not the whole truth cookies thing is real or makes any sense, some have been willing to participate and others decidedly not so.  For the innocent among us, there's nothing to hide.  I can't imagine how declaring my innocence would help those scummy horse killers one bit, but some here have been rather loathe to make a similar claim.  It's just as much about the claim as it is about being willing to help.

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 08:42 PM, said:

And Trish, how did you cackamamie story go from truth-and-vomit-inducing cookies to "Oh, I have a lie detector?"  What the hell are you talking about? I think you should start making sense.

It's pretty clear that the original comment from Trisha said "If we feed it to everyone, it should work as a lie detector".  I know you're eager to catch the perpetrators, but let's try to solve this methodically.  I think you've got valid concerns about the claims (she also claimed a communicate with the spirits treat), particularly the part about it being 1-shot or not (feed it to everyone comment).

I look forward to Trisha's explanation

Dannylonglegs, on 03 December 2012 - 09:42 PM, said:

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 06:55 PM, said:

Hmmm, a perfectly silly statement from a previously proven-to-be-intelligent person then deflected by the jokings of a joker making jokes about herself. Ping. Ping indeed.

Wait, Ping is a bad thing?! I got one of those earlier.

fhomess, on 03 December 2012 - 09:05 PM, said:

I don't know how things work in a big city like Heartlake, but where I come from, we judge people by what they say and less based on what other people say about them.  Whether or not the whole truth cookies thing is real or makes any sense, some have been willing to participate and others decidedly not so.  For the innocent among us, there's nothing to hide.  I can't imagine how declaring my innocence would help those scummy horse killers one bit, but some here have been rather loathe to make a similar claim.  It's just as much about the claim as it is about being willing to help.

I agree fully here and find it very odd that Daisy has twice evaded stating her Townyness. Seriously, I like a good joke as much as the next guy,  I'd like to know her reasoning behind her actions. If she hasn't been taking it seriously, then why not, and why not tell us that earlier?

Hinckley, on 03 December 2012 - 08:41 PM, said:

*snip*

Well, thank you for providing perspective on the lie-detector story. It is actually quite interesting to see how this whole thing has evolved. I agree with Heather that we need to hear Trisha explain, in plain English--with none of her ramblings about flavor--what she meant and what her role dictates. I'm still quite confused as to how this role supposedly works. The role as stated is quite conflicting; I don't know if it's a result of her making it up (for whatever reason ) or her just not being able to clearly say it (for whatever reason.) If she honestly has this role, I'd be somewhat annoyed. Trisha, for future reference, stating your role publicly on the first day only  helps the scum. I assure you, if you're not lying, and the scum have a blocker, you'll be blocked. If you publicly prove a person innocent, he/she/you will be killed. You've essentially given the enemy a good look at our cards. That is, unless you're lying, which, after reading mister Hedgehog's an
alysis, seems less unlikely than it did before.

[Scubacarrot]

Hah, I bet you scum thought you'd get away with what you said today, but no sirro!

Has Trisha explained things in private to someone?

[Darkdragon]

Vote Count

Billie (badboytje88) - 1 vote (def)
Trisha (TrumpetKing67) - 2 votes (Scubacarrot, Hinckley)

With 25 players remaining, a majority of 13 is required for a conviction.

There are 45 hours left in the day.

[DarthPotato]

I know there's some suspicion toward Trisha, but I don't see any harm in doing this anyway.
I'm innocent.
Anyway, I'm not voting for Trisha for now because of the chance of her actually having this role (even if it does sound odd) but I do understand why others have voted for her to get her talking. But I'm just hoping Trisha gets on soon so all of this can be straightened out.

[Zepher]

A few thoughts on the past few discussion topics.  Sorry, I've been lost in my books, because I finished breakfast, and now I've got to start lunch.    But I should probably say what I think of the situation first.

Two scum teams - it's very possible, but I'm inclined to agree with Shadell in saying that I think the two horse deaths were just a way of showing that things were unlikely to end, and that maybe there would be more murders.  Or perhaps there is a SK.  I'm not saying there isn't two scum teams, I'm just saying that's flimsy evidence that there is.

I apologize, Mr. Hedgehog, for not being analytical the first or second times that I spoke up.  Nothing wrong with playing games every once in a while before anyone really starts sharing ideas!  BAWK! Oh my, where'd that come from?

On the lie detector... here's my thinking on the topic.  Poppycock.  It's ridiculous.  I think someone else also got caught up playing games and then got lost in themselves.  Trish was probably just making jokes as Trish is apt to do, and then when a spotlight was shone on her, she panicked.  She is fairly young, and panicking is possible.  Or, perhaps she really does have an action, and being young though it best to share with everyone.  Maybe she thought she was "subtly hinting" at an action, and then everyone caught it so she just came out and said it.  Look, being young isn't a GREAT excuse in life for making dumb mistakes... but it's certainly an excuse.  On top of that, if she was scum and tried to pull this move, surely there would be older scummy people who would tell her to not do it!  Don't you think?  This looks like no one told her to not draw a ridiculous amount of attention to herself.  She looks, to me, like a crazy uninformed little girl.

Just to be safe:  I am aligned with the town.

I say we vote off someone who has not actually assisted the town in any way.  Scum often try to fly under the radar early in... my dreams... and worse comes to worse we lose a town member not very devoted to the town.

Vote:  Penny (VolcanicPanik).  I picked someone who has given short responses with little input.  There are many of you, I just picked one.  If she speaks up and offers an opinion, I'll move on to the next of you.  I'm not a huge fan of voting the first day, but I'm a less huge fan of penalty votes, and if we don't vote, we get those.  So I'll use the votes to get some people to speak up.

[CallMePie]

DarthPotato, on 04 December 2012 - 08:26 AM, said:

Anyway, I'm not voting for Trisha for now because of the chance of her actually having this role (even if it does sound odd) but I do understand why others have voted for her to get her talking. But I'm just hoping Trisha gets on soon so all of this can be straightened out.

My thoughts as well. I think people were making assumptions based on (what I think was) a bit of roleplaying, and to avoid denying them, she simply went along with it. Not to defend her, but frankly, Trisha's relatively new to these sorts of games (sick and twisted as they are ) and it's just weird to claim in such a way on Day One, much less a role so odd.

[def]

While it's hard to sort through all that went out last night this afternoon, I read this in Trish's words:

Quote

I bake them, and cover them in specially made Truth Sprinkles that serve as a lie detiector.

That says to me a lie-detector claim.  And, since she's new to Heartlake, she wouldn't know how to approach it.  I find it fully plausible that abilities be given out through items, like with cookies.  I've seen it before a dozen times.  I remember a case some 25 years ago with a crazy German doctor where everything was based on items.

Here's the list.  I get tired of the suspicion that the two most conspicuous people in the town are the possible scum, when law enforcement history has told us this is just about never the case.  Certainly, if one is going down in flames, other, more experienced scum, aren't going to hitch a ride on their wagon, if you know what I mean.

==================================
The Heartlake lie detector test:

Oscar (Hinckley) claimed
Wild Dragon (Dragonator)
Dansmith IV (Dannylonglegs) claimed
Patty (DarthPotato) claimed
Carl (CallMePie) claimed
Walter (WaterbrickDown)
Dave (Piratedave84)
Fred (def) claimed
Cece (Cecilie) claimed
Daisy (Scubacarrot) won't claim
Trisha (TrumpetKing67) claimed lie detector
Ginny (Captain Genaro)
Tammy (Tamamono)
Penny (VolcanicPanik)
Shadell (Shadows) Claimed
Billie (badboytje88)   won't claim
Amy (iamded)
Katie (PsyKater)
Zara (zakura)
Heather (fhomess) claimed
Matilda (Zepher)
Sara (TheBoyWonder) claimed
Jane (JackJonespaw)
Jimmy (JimButcher)
Mike (Bob) claimed

If you guys disagree with the wording of I'm innocent, and want to make it, I'm Town, go ahead.  My experience with the Lie Detector was that "I'm innocent" was good enough to separate the town from the rest.  But, as I said, it's the first time showing up in Heartlake, so maybe it'll work different here.  I'm Town.

You guys decide how you want to work things.  I've given my perspective based on my experience, and the apparent lack of experience Trish has, and frankly I'm surprised at some of the reactions.  You've heard what I had to say, if you have any more questions, I'll be around.

[Scubacarrot]

DarthPotato, on 04 December 2012 - 08:26 AM, said:

I know there's some suspicion toward Trisha, but I don't see any harm in doing this anyway.
I'm innocent.
Anyway, I'm not voting for Trisha for now because of the chance of her actually having this role (even if it does sound odd) but I do understand why others have voted for her to get her talking. But I'm just hoping Trisha gets on soon so all of this can be straightened out.

Anyone else thinks this sounds suspiciously like a scum covering her buddy. Seriously.

[DarthPotato]

Scubacarrot, on 04 December 2012 - 08:39 AM, said:

Anyone else thinks this sounds suspiciously like a scum covering her buddy. Seriously.

It's just that we can't ignore the chance of Trisha actually having this role. Yeah, I know, it's a ridiculous claim, but I don't think we should vote her off just yet. If she really does have a lie-detector role, the scum would jump at the chance to get rid of her. But like I said, I don't completely believe it yet either, I just don't think we should vote her off right away.

[CallMePie]

Scubacarrot, on 04 December 2012 - 08:39 AM, said:

Anyone else thinks this sounds suspiciously like a scum covering her buddy. Seriously.

Not really. It sounds to me like she's stating her stance on this issue.

[def]

It's come to my attention from Trisha that I have no idea what she's talking about, and didn't really have a lie detector, or something.  I don't know.

It seems I mistakenly thought when she had something that served as a lie detector that she had something that worked as a lie detector

trisha said:

I bake them, and cover them in specially made Truth Sprinkles that serve as a lie detiector.

She has now asked me in private if I gave her a lie detector   No, I didn't, and never offered to.  Now I want to know what the heck she was talking about.  Sorry, I've been baffled by a n00b vet.

Why did you say you had something that worked as a lie detector in the first place?

[Zepher]

Well, that certainly sets us back on actions for the first day... but at least it got people talking.

[Cecilie]

Right, can't say I'm all that surprised... It was still interesting to see who was refusing to claim, and who has just been ignoring the request to claim all together though.

[def]

Cecilie, on 04 December 2012 - 09:10 AM, said:

Right, can't say I'm all that surprised... It was still interesting to see who was refusing to claim, and who has just been ignoring the request to claim all together though.

Yes, it's almost worth it for a Townie to lie about it.  Daisy was certainly unreasonably stubborn about the whole thing.  Even when faced with the fact that it is a legitimate role for town.  Daisy, Daisy, what are we gonna do about that...
http://wiki.mafiascu...le=Lie_Detector

I'm fine with my vote on Billie right now.  She hasn't done anything to show she's interested in getting anything done.

[PsyKater]

Phew, I am lost in all this discussion. How can a cookie be a lie detector? I heard they are vomit-inducing? So does she want to read the truth in my poop? Strange doctor. Well, just that you know, I am innocent as well.

But I think this is weird. Just as this cute little hedgehog said, it started somewhere completely different and then it became this lie-dectector one-use cookie thing somehow. Maybe because this little hedgehog has read too many stories on his computer.

However, I will

vote: Trisha (TrumpetKing67)

for now, because I want you to clarify this whole thing. Your claim does not work out properly, if you understand what I mean. Maybe start again from the beginning. Or admit that it was just a joke. Give us something. If you can convince me about your action, then I will retract my vote, as I do not want to sacrifice such a (possibly) important role for our town. But now you just seem to try to make yourself important for the town to save you from lunch lynch. Pretty scummy, don't you think?

---

Scratch that. While I was thinking what I was about to say, this police officer came with doubts about this lie detector thing himself. I have to think about it again. My vote still stands as I still want Trish to clarify (more then ever).

Something that came to my mind and I think it was mentioned before, is that this whole thing could be made up. It is just a thought and I want it to put into the room so that we can discuss over that. My point is that the scum could have made arrangements to claim this whole lie detector thing. So Trisha and the police officer (what was his name?) could have tried to appear helpful for the town. As it did not work, they try to retract now.

I will think about it and come back later with my thoughts. I am curious what the discussion will bring up until then.

[Zakura]

vote: Trisha (TrumpetKing67)

When you say that your cookies are baked in truth sprinkles that act as a lie detector, what does that mean ? I've never heard of any lie detectors if that's your claim. The sound of a one shot "lie detector" ability sounds just ridiclous.

[JackJonespaw]

zakura, on 04 December 2012 - 11:24 AM, said:

When you say that your cookies are baked in truth sprinkles that act as a lie detector, what does that mean ? I've never heard of any lie detectors if that's your claim. The sound of a one shot "lie detector" ability sounds just ridiculous.

I've been trying to follow this conversation as best I can, and what Zara has said makes the most sense in the shortest time. To me, it seems that Trisha is trying too hard with ridiculous stories about "inventions" so that she can remain seen as innocent.

Vote: Trisha (TrumpetKing67)

I think this cookie deal has gone on a bit too long, and gotten a bit too much out of hand.

[Scubacarrot]

def, on 04 December 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

Yes, it's almost worth it for a Townie to lie about it.  Daisy was certainly unreasonably stubborn about the whole thing.  Even when faced with the fact that it is a legitimate role for town.  Daisy, Daisy, what are we gonna do about that...
http://wiki.mafiascu...le=Lie_Detector

I'm fine with my vote on Billie right now.  She hasn't done anything to show she's interested in getting anything done.

Look. I will tell you what I told someone else: Just because something is possible, it does not mean it's likely. Such an action is, while entirely possible such an action could have been used somewhere in a situation like this somewhere, still ridiculous. It would not be a good idea, in fact it would be a very stupid idea. Add the fact that Trisha herself seemed to be unsure of what was going on, and I said: NOPE! Unreasonably stubborn, or damn right? I like the fact you are trying to use this against me. I remember you calling yourself and Trisha the most conspicuous townies earlier. Pfff.

CallMePie, on 04 December 2012 - 08:44 AM, said:

Not really. It sounds to me like she's stating her stance on this issue.

"I see you are suspicious, but I will not lay a vote yet, to be safe." Why would you be safe? Are we in immediate danger if we make the wrong choice? Would her living or dying be vital to the town? Or safe in the matter of not being called out later.

[def]

zakura, on 04 December 2012 - 11:24 AM, said:

vote: Trisha (TrumpetKing67)

When you say that your cookies are baked in truth sprinkles that act as a lie detector, what does that mean ? I've never heard of any lie detectors if that's your claim. The sound of a one shot "lie detector" ability sounds just ridiclous.

Huh?  I linked to it twice. http://wiki.mafiascu...le=Lie_Detector Read it.  It's usually a one-shot move.  Whether Trisha has one or not, your reason to vote is terrible.  Noted.

Scubacarrot, on 04 December 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

Look. I will tell you what I told someone else: Just because something is possible, it does not mean it's likely. Such an action is, while entirely possible such an action could have been used somewhere in a situation like this somewhere, still ridiculous. It would not be a good idea, in fact it would be a very stupid idea. Add the fact that Trisha herself seemed to be unsure of what was going on, and I said: NOPE! Unreasonably stubborn, or damn right? I like the fact you are trying to use this against me. I remember you calling yourself and Trisha the most conspicuous townies earlier. Pfff.

What about that is ridiculous?  Nothing at all.  And why would using it be a bad idea?  Bad idea to catch scum lying?  Even if it were wrong, what would the harm be in making a claim of innocence on the slight chance she was telling the truth?  Well, it's a Pfff idea if you're scummy.  For a townie, it's an easy shot in the dark.  A very easy one.  That you repeatedly refused to do.  Noted.

And as for what I said about us being conspicuous townies?  I said what?  Oh, you just made that up.    No, I said we were the most conspicuous people, which made us unlikely scum, since scum don't like to get out front.  If you want to put out the hypothesis that scum usually like to be front and center day one, by all means, illuminate us.   So, you're claim here is about as lame as, the one I quoted before who has no name or face and might well not even be playing   If you want to make claims, for the sake of the town, make them accurate ones.  But, yeah, I've seen your stubbornness since the day began, and I'm starting to realise I'm wasting my time being reasonable with you.

[Shadows]

def, on 04 December 2012 - 08:59 AM, said:

It's come to my attention from Trisha that I have no idea what she's talking about, and didn't really have a lie detector, or something.  I don't know.

It seems I mistakenly thought when she had something that served as a lie detector that she had something that worked as a lie detector

She has now asked me in private if I gave her a lie detector   No, I didn't, and never offered to.  Now I want to know what the heck she was talking about.  Sorry, I've been baffled by a n00b vet.

Why did you say you had something that worked as a lie detector in the first place?

Assuming this is all true, and at this point I see no reason to doubt it, there are a lot of questions to be answered, questions that have already been asked and not answered in any logical way. That's enough for me to cast a vote. It doesn't mean I won't reconsider if given reason, but everything just keeps doing the exact opposite for me. It would be one thing not to know anything helpful, I can fully understand that, but to claim something suddenly, then keep changing the story until you finally back away from it completely? Not good.

Vote: Trisha (TrumpetKing67)

You have time to defend yourself, or even to just try to explain what all this was about. If you're a townie, please use it to save yourself. If you're scum, make some cookies and then die.

[def]

I'd like to turn this lynch around and focus on Daisy (and woe be me if Daisy is town and Trisha scum)....

Here is my day one so far...

I have a thing called "lunch".  It gives me a one off ability, a weak ability, but it's a one-off ability all the same (town won't win with it, so scum, feel free to make me your night one kill ).  So when Trisha claimed to have food that gave her a lie-detector, I assumed she knew what the Hell she was talking about, since I have a one-off food based ability of my own.  Shortly thereafter, Daisy asked if people were having lunch.

I saw this and realised Daisy had something.  So I contacted her and asked her not to mention it in thread, nor tell people what the action was, since scum would eventually get clued in.  I further didn't dig for details, saying that if God is fair, scum might have "lunch" too.  That would be fair.  I then explained all I knew about the Lie Detector, and after that, that's when Scumba Daisy started getting real uppity about the possibility of a Lie Detector.  So I sent her info about my own personal history using one, and she got more uppity.  Around this point, Trisha independently told me she had "lunch" too in her off her rocker way (I suspect she has partaken the ketamine).

That was the thing that set a trigger off for me.  I suspect a lot of us have "lunch"... and if God is fair, then the scum do too.  Of all the people in Heartlake who should trust me, Daisy should, and she's just gotten worse.  I approached her asking nothing of her, and urged her to hold her info.  Then, I gave her more info on the lie detector than I gave anyone publicly.  With that, she thought saying anything to be lie-detected ridiculous.  Why?  Because she believed me more than the rest of you.  Either that or she has no understanding of how this situation should be handled, which is a definite possibility.  But I think it's best to put our eggs in Daisy's basket.  Daisy for lynch!

Unvote: Billie (hey, try showing up!)
Vote: Daisy (Scuba)

I'm around for another hour or two before my evening nap, so drill me if you need to!

[Dannylonglegs]

Well, jeez. I'm not sure whether I'm surprised, or not at all.   I'm fairly certain this makes her a townie... about 60% sure which is more than I can say for everyone else. I can't believe the scum would even allow Trisha to screw up so badly; unless she's not listening to her team at all (which is possible considering her age--note the 40%.) That said, while she has done very little for the town by lying or Idon'tevenknowing about a role, the conversation she started was unprecedented for a day one in this sort of circumstance. Also, I really still want clarification from the horse's mouth, so to speak. She really has to explain what happened and what was going through her head. Did she even understand she claimed?

Scubacarrot, on 04 December 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

Look. I will tell you what I told someone else: Just because something is possible, it does not mean it's likely. Such an action is, while entirely possible such an action could have been used somewhere in a situation like this somewhere, still ridiculous. It would not be a good idea, in fact it would be a very stupid idea. Add the fact that Trisha herself seemed to be unsure of what was going on, and I said: NOPE! Unreasonably stubborn, or damn right? I like the fact you are trying to use this against me. I remember you calling yourself and Trisha the most conspicuous townies earlier. Pfff.

If you thought that, why didn't you say that at the time instead of "I'm totally scum.  Use it on me! ." I didn't believe it was real at the time either, but I went along with it. A real townie would not have any reason not to entertain the possibility that she was not lying. You never once said anything that could have been reliably tested. In fact, you intentionally did the opposite twice, both times passing it off as a joke when many others were at least willing to try and help. Whether you're "right" or not (I don't believe you seriously voiced your opinions earlier. ) your actions hindered the town, and were, yes, unreasonably stubborn.

Vote: Daisy (Scuba)

You're a better candidate than anyone else put forward.

[TrumpetKing]

You know what, I was just completely joking at the beginning, like mostly everyone does on the first day of  a lockdown. And this entire thing angers me because one person started this. Someone contacted me thinking I had a Lie Detector, sounding like they were giving me one. All of this crazy crap happened, and now I am here, on the verge of being lynched. I really don't have a lie detector. At the beginning, I was completely just joking. If you want to hear something else from me, just say so, but I have  to leave and will not be back  for a while.

So I think, (no matter how scummy this seems) that I will
Vote: Daisy (Scuba)

The points against her are pretty strong.

[badboytje88]

def, on 04 December 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

Billie (badboytje88)   won't claim

I most certainly did claim! I claimed to be innocent, which I am.

def, on 04 December 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

Unvote: Billie (hey, try showing up!)

I had a worked two shifts last night in the stable and by the time I got back to you guys you were no where to be found (site down). So sorry for being not so talkative during the past day. I'll look back on what has been said so far and base my vote on that.