234 replies to this topic

[CallMePie]

It's not worth me voting at this point. I'm just lost in this complete mess of a day, and this treestump isn't helping at all by distracting everyone.   Shame, about halfway through I thought we were actually getting somewhere.  

[swils]

I'm torn here.  York/Lego would have gotten my vote, but now York/CJP have assuaged at least some of my suspicions through this back-and-forth with the good doctor.  On the other hand, I have been a bit bothered by Burbank as he's been uncharacteristically quiet these last few days, but his transparency here has gone and alleviated some of -that- suspicion.  I don't fault Burbank for pursuing the current York for the actions of the previous -- that was the mantle CJP volunteered to take on, faults and suspicions included.

Tamamono, on 19 July 2012 - 03:31 AM, said:

You know, something about this Burbank bandwagon is incredibly unsettling.

If Burbank flips town, I'd say we should look at darkdragon and Shadows next, as their behavior has been 'egging along' these sorts of hasty decisions and they took a spot on the bandwagon that scum loves to take, but we'll see what he flips first.

However, it appears we're going to have another no-lynch. God, I wonder what the Admiral'll do to us.

I'd hardly call it a bandwagon right now.  Everyone who has voted for him has given some reasons at least.  I'm really confused, though.  You moan that we might reach a no-lynch due to lack of votes, but then accuse the last two people to vote (and not just vote, but say why they're voting) of just jumping on a bandwagon?  That doesn't seem like the best way to encourage folks to step up and vote for someone who you want to see lynched, but hey, what do I know.

[Hinckley]

CallMePie, on 19 July 2012 - 03:52 AM, said:

It's not worth me voting at this point. I'm just lost in this complete mess of a day, and this treestump isn't helping at all by distracting everyone.   Shame, about halfway through I thought we were actually getting somewhere.  

There's diapers in the storage room, you baby.

[CallMePie]

Hinckley, on 19 July 2012 - 04:23 AM, said:

There's diapers in the storage room, you baby.

I know where they are, I happen to be lieutenant of the medbay.   But 3 pages of mushrooms and tree stumps and poop doesn't catch us any Purists.

[Hinckley]

CallMePie, on 19 July 2012 - 04:28 AM, said:

I know where they are, I happen to be lieutenant of the medbay.   But 3 pages of mushrooms and tree stumps and poop doesn't catch us any Purists.

There's also a math book for you to learn how to count and some freakin' tampons for your attitude, you boring piece of shit.

[CallMePie]

I shudder to think who the Admiral's gonna bring back for our second no-lynch.  

[Dragonator]

I don't have a whole lot to add at this point, I made my arguments clear earlier, and am in agreement with the tabled accusations against Burbank. I certainly would not trust him to stick a needle in me at this point, and if you can't rely on your doctor, best to change!

Vote: Julius Burbank 'MD' (Brickdoctor)

Now if you'll please excuse me, I have a rampaging tree stump to incinerate. Weird distractions like that only confuse the less educated ensigns when they are trying to think.

[Hinckley]

"My name's Joshua Wright and I couldn't vote because the stump distracted me! ³"

Really?

Lame. The tree stump says lame! Now I shall poop and make you a magic mushroom...crybaby.

Edited by Hinckley, 19 July 2012 - 04:57 AM.
I had to edit because I was too busy emptying the diaper/tampon bin for Lt. Sissy-Pants

[Brickdoctor]

Dragonator, on 19 July 2012 - 04:56 AM, said:

Now if you'll please excuse me, I have a rampaging tree stump to incinerate. Weird distractions like that only confuse the less educated ensigns when they are trying to think.

Incinerate? I have a better idea.

Does anyone have a shotgun?

[CallMePie]

If I've hurt the inanimate chunk of wood's feelings, I'll vote: Julius Burbank/Brickdoctor, because the controversy and overall mess he's tangled up in can't really be resolved by a single investigation. It'd take two for both him and York to be cleared, and by then we could all easy be slaughtered by the Purists. No time to waste, I suppose. We're a crew of action. Apparently. If we're being punished for not taking action. In any case, it's quite hard to judge York's behavior due to his rampant split-personality disorder, so that's a bit of a muddled lead at the moment.

[Hinckley]

Tree stump has no feelings! Just mushroom poop!

[Scouty]

darkdragon, on 19 July 2012 - 02:22 AM, said:

I haven't seen anyone come forward saying "this person is investigated as town"[...]

In this point, I don't think it helps if everybody is alerted that XX is town, simply because it'll put a target on their back because the scum know we wont lynch them if they're confirmed town. That's a secret best kept....uhm......secret.

Well, it's come to the point where Dr. Burbank has backed himself so far into the corner there's no escape (or he was pushed into that corner, if he ends up town), so it's the best lead and will tell us something about York. Vote: Julius Burbank 'MD' (Brickdoctor)

Hinckley, on 19 July 2012 - 05:30 AM, said:

Tree stump has no feelings! Just mushroom poop!

I hear that makes a fantastic risotto!

[Waterbrick Down]

Could someone explain to me the benefits of lynching Burbank (aside from if he turns out to be a scum)? I know the theory is centeralized around his list of roles from the simulation, but is that it? Surely there are more profitable theories out there at the moment, also from observing the back and forth between Burbank and York I really don't think they're on the same scum team, but that is just my feeling.

[Rufus]

Waterbrick Down, on 19 July 2012 - 06:30 AM, said:

Could someone explain to me the benefits of lynching Burbank (aside from if he turns out to be a scum)? I know the theory is centeralized around his list of roles from the simulation, but is that it? Surely there are more profitable theories out there at the moment, also from observing the back and forth between Burbank and York I really don't think they're on the same scum team, but that is just my feeling.

Um... actually, if you read, you'll see it's based on the possible scenarios regarding the defence of Burbank by York.  They don't both have to be scum for it to work.   At this stage in the day, it's probably Burbank or no-one, and if the latter, we waste another day.

[Shadows]

Hinckley, on 19 July 2012 - 04:42 AM, said:

There's also a math book for you to learn how to count and some freakin' tampons for your attitude, you boring piece of shit.

THIS. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Now they hate the roleplay. You know, because we're fucking playing roles in a game of life. Oh god, can't have that.

*sits on the stump* At least we understand each other.

Hinckley, on 19 July 2012 - 04:56 AM, said:

"My name's Joshua Wright and I couldn't vote because the stump distracted me! ³"

Sounds like a scum defense if I ever heard one.

swils, on 19 July 2012 - 04:07 AM, said:

I'd hardly call it a bandwagon right now.  Everyone who has voted for him has given some reasons at least.  I'm really confused, though.  You moan that we might reach a no-lynch due to lack of votes, but then accuse the last two people to vote (and not just vote, but say why they're voting) of just jumping on a bandwagon?  That doesn't seem like the best way to encourage folks to step up and vote for someone who you want to see lynched, but hey, what do I know.

Maybe it's exactly the best way to keep people from stepping up and voting for someone he might not actually want voted for?

[Scubacarrot]

I'll vote for Burbank, not a 100% convinced, but frankly, no lynching SURELY does not help. So this is better.

Unvote: Matthew Wilder (Fhomess)

Vote: Julius Burbank (Brickdoctor)

[Rufus]

Scubacarrot, on 19 July 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

I'll vote for Burbank, not a 100% convinced, but frankly, no lynching SURELY does not help. So this is better.

Agreed.  The only people who are 100% convinced either way are the scum team.  

Not lynching is the worst outcome for town.  We learn nothing; we waste a day; we leave someone alive where a reasonable suspicion has been raised, who can distract in the day or kill us at night all they want.  We'll probably end up lynching him tomorrow and waste another day.  What a result that would be for the scum.

Maybe you're worried that we're wrong.  That's always a possibility.  What's the worst that can happen?  We lose a townie who by his own admission doesn't like to talk privately, which - if he is town - makes it very unlikely that he has a power role.  If he did, he'd be trying hard to connect with the others that do.  But, even if we are wrong, we learn something from the day.

If a reasonable suspicion is raised, we have to follow it through and move on.  Frankly, by the reticence of some to vote today, I think we might be onto something.  An easy lynch is often a sign that of a mislynch (where no hard evidence is available).  But, either way, we have to know for sure.

So:  Alison Williams, Robert Holloway, Suzanne Vanderbilt, Richard Francis, Zachary Jones, Donna Willis, and Michelle Wheeler, the ball is in your court.  (That's swils, Waterbrick Down, Fugazi, AwesomeStar, Masked Builder, KingOfTheZempk, Inconspicuous, if you don't know your own names).

Matt Wilder, you could help, too.  But maybe nobody's gonna break-a your stride.  

[KingoftheZempk]

The ball is in my court. I have been very quiet these past days, watching what is happening and talking with people I trust. As said before, we can never be 100% sure, only scum can. We go on vague evidence an shots in the dark (waiter get me some please). The ball is in my court and it must get out. Maybe I'm joining a bandwagon, be it a good one or bad. I've looked at what has been brought forth today an looked over my past notes.

Vote: Julius Burbank (Brickdoctor)

I hope we're on the right path. I know tonight I'll be analysing the lynch.

Now someone get this ball out of here! You're going to break the computers!

[Bob]

Vote Tally

Lieutenant Wheeler / Inconspicuous: 1 (Fhomess )
Lieutenant Commander Burbank / Brickdoctor: 10 (Rufus, Capt.JohnPaul, Tamamono, darkdragon, Shadows, Dragonator, CallMePie, Scouty, Scubacarrot, KingOfTheZempk)
Ensign York / Capt.JohnPaul: 1 (Brickdoctor)

[Waterbrick Down]

Rufus, on 19 July 2012 - 07:13 AM, said:

Um... actually, if you read, you'll see it's based on the possible scenarios regarding the defence of Burbank by York.  They don't both have to be scum for it to work.   At this stage in the day, it's probably Burbank or no-one, and if the latter, we waste another day.

Scenario 1 requires both of them being scum and from all the above back and forth between them, York is definately not on the same page as Burbank so I doubt the validity of this setup. Scenario 3 uses the reasoning concerning York in Scenario 2, which stated that we don't know why a townie (York) would defend a scum (Burbank) with such certainty, I hardly see this as evidence. The rest of your scenario is based on judging Burbank's actions i.e. he would ignore York's defence of himself, however this is not the only option, if I was a townie and someone whom I've had no prior contact with before comes out and starts defending me I'd be pretty suspicious of them and may even vote for them. Now none of this disproves that Burbank is scum, however I think the reasoning behind the current lynch is rather flimsy. That saying, it is the only thing we currently have and I don't see us gaining any information from a no-lynch thus vote: Julius Burbank (Brickdoctor)

[Hinckley]

Shadows, on 19 July 2012 - 07:18 AM, said:

*sits on the stump*

Yay!

Hurry up and finish your turn. There are other people in line.

I'm glad my mushroom poop hasn't disctracted any more morons from placing a vote.

[AwesomeStar]

I am also of the mind that no-lynch does us no good. And I agree with the case put against Dr. Burbank, int hat this may be our first worthwhile lynch.

Vote: Dr. Julius Burbank (BrickDoctor)

[Fugazi]

Rufus, on 18 July 2012 - 09:35 PM, said:

Scenario 1: Burbank and York are both scum. York uses his accusation of Wilder to defend Burbank. In this scenario, of course Burbank will instantly distance himself from that obvious link. The scum all accuse York of being a moron. York stomps off into the airlock without a space suit.

Scenario 2: Burbank and York are both town. Why then is York so sure Burbank is town? Is he aware of something? Why doesn't he say what it is, or at least just say 'I've spoken to Burbank and I think he's town?' In this scenario, Burbank would most likely ignore the defence altogether.

Scenario 3: Burbank is scum, York is town. The same questions apply to York as in scenario 2, except this time Burbank would definitely distance himself straight away.

Scenario 4: Burbank is town, York is scum. Now York's defence of Burbank could only be a deliberate attempt to turn the spotlight onto Burbank. But Burbank isn't really under pressure; York is at the same time accusing Wilder, and it's difficult to see what this achieves other than to make York look suspicious.

Given the conversations taking place since this theory was proposed, I think that scenario 1 is unlikely. It was an attractive one at first, but Burbank and York have done a good job fighting in what seems to me like a genuine argument. I don't think that they could fake this kind of argument convincingly.

Scenario 3 seems plausible, hence my vote goes for vote: Julius Burbank (Brickdoctor)

But I wouldn't dismiss scenario 4 so readily. Scum could try to defend a townie just because they know they're townie, and it would look good on their record later on. Look at it this way: Burbank was not under pressure, so York defending him wasn't going to spoil a lynch. Besides, York's intervention alone wouldn't have saved Burbank from a lynch. However, York could have used his defence of Burbank to a) show his unwillingness to jump on just any bait; and b) get in touch with Burbank and try to extract information from him -- which is what actually happened. Looking back at that conversation between Burbank and York, York looks just as scummy as Burbank. So although I support this lynch as a means to gather information, we shouldn't dismiss scenario 4 if Burbank happens to be innocent.

This may perhaps not be the best scum strategy, but York is not the most experienced crew member either, as he mentioned himself. York's defence of Burbank is the kind of small slip that even the most experienced scum team as a back-up won't be able to control.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

Fugazi, on 19 July 2012 - 03:04 PM, said:

This may perhaps not be the best scum strategy, but York is not the most experienced crew member either, as he mentioned himself. York's defence of Burbank is the kind of small slip that even the most experienced scum team as a back-up won't be able to control.

Remember, I didn't defend Burbank. That was a nooby mistake of my alter-ego pesonality which is now in a chamber asylum. Though if Burbank turns innocent (I don't think he will, he's just perhaps a deceptive scum.) I'll provide my full defense tomorrow.

[swils]

Rufus, on 19 July 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

Not lynching is the worst outcome for town.  We learn nothing; we waste a day; we leave someone alive where a reasonable suspicion has been raised, who can distract in the day or kill us at night all they want.  We'll probably end up lynching him tomorrow and waste another day.  What a result that would be for the scum.

Maybe you're worried that we're wrong.  That's always a possibility.  What's the worst that can happen?  We lose a townie who by his own admission doesn't like to talk privately, which - if he is town - makes it very unlikely that he has a power role.  If he did, he'd be trying hard to connect with the others that do.  But, even if we are wrong, we learn something from the day.

Urgh, fine, fine.  You raise good points, and having a second no-lynch won't do us any good.  Guess it's the bandwagon for me.  Vote: Julius Burbank (Brickdoctor).  I know I'm going to catch flak for being a late voter, but worse things have happened.

Capt.JohnPaul, on 19 July 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Remember, I didn't defend Burbank. That was a nooby mistake of my alter-ego pesonality which is now in a chamber asylum. Though if Burbank turns innocent (I don't think he will, he's just perhaps a deceptive scum.) I'll provide my full defense tomorrow.

Yes, you did.  You might not have, but you did.  You volunteered, you took on the role with all the positives and negatives attached.  If it truly was a nooby mistake of a previous alter ego, then it is your job to make up for that mistake and convince us otherwise, not just brush it aside as if it didn't happen.