jimmynick Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 There isn't really much to contribute on Day 1 though... Do you know what I like on my waffles? Maple syrup. Quit waffling and say something substantial then. I am going on a limb here and say that we might need to get down to buisness. We need to root out the evil amoungst us. (Last one) Have your roots run dry of things to say that aren't puns? Sorry if I'm a bit quiet, I've been sleeping for a bit. What can a tree really do if he or she cannot move? But, of course, it's hard to sleep when you have birds and squirrels nesting on you and ants crawling on you. You've already been pointed out but I want people to remember you posted for the sake of posting. The march of the Ents is my favorite part of the Two Towers, and the same probably goes for everytree here. Well so far all us treeple have got done is nothing, and I have nothing to add myself, I'm just speaking to show that I'm paying attention. Ditto. I concur! Bring Alejandro into the light. He/she is acting very suspicious, and I would like to know his/her identity in case we don't have anything left to go on in later days. Fishing much? And, Bruce, what happened to Catarina now that you're officially Alejandro?
Scaevola Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I'm not terribly concerned about why some trees decide to hold private conversations early on. That's not unusual and people respond incredulously every time. Some are more likely to do it than others. The fact is, it can be a useful way of finding out how others feel about things that they may not be willing to contribute publicly. I'd like to hear what it was about William that made Bruce suspicious of him so early. I'd also like to hear Bruce's opinion on how Simon handled the situation. We know you found William's reaction to be rather oaky, but has Simon come across to you as oaky in the situation, too? Yes, I'm no longer very suspicious of Bruce for the PMing either. What I'm not satisfied with is his justifications for suspecting William. However, that's somewhat trivial and we have bigger fish to fry. I'd really like to discuss Berty for the lynch today. He posts once to fish around for roles and then puts up a lackluster defense for his actions. Larch, Pear, and Beech are irksome too. Nothing but fluff and hollow concurrences.
Tamamono Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 What's really classic is how Berty immediately starts trying to think of how many scum there are when we call him out for fishing.
Piratedave84 Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 HAAAAAAAAZZZZZZZEEEEEELLLLLL Where are you?
Hinckley Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 There may not be a lot to go on, but there are already some interesting interactions. For example, Bruce Spruce calling out Catarina Dogwood for... well no apparent reason until Waldorf Walnut responded with one. Bruce had questioned her last statement and Waldorf had mentioned the suspicion before that. Not saying that clears either one of them, but I don't think the connection that you're insinuating is there. In response to the allegations against me, I'd just like to clarify that my post was meant to be a "fluff / banter" post teasing Zepher about his "Oakiest of Oaks" thing. I realise that it could well come across as fishing, and I didn't mean that at all. It came at an unfortunate time. The great tree in the sky had just clarified role PM structure and it seemed like you could've thought that "garden variety" meant Oaks, when it only means vanilla. It struck me as an odd joke and I can now kind of see how it relates to Oakiest of Oaks, but... it's still a ping. As for the number of scum question, I think it is likely that there are 4-6 scum and one Neutral, since Neutrals were mentioned in the rules. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think neutrals are always in the rules, regardless of if they exist. In a game this size, it's likely one exists, but the rule wording doesn't amount to much. Yes, those are the standard Mafia rules and it is typical to leave the instructions for third parties regardless of the addition of third parties. That being said, I would expect a game with this many players to have a neutral, but I think discussing it any further should wait until Day Two when we see some night results come in. All we can do until then is speculate and that will only distract us from doing anything productive about today's decapitation. Or ivisceration, or whatever it would be called when you're cut off from the roots up. Yikes... Typical day one accusations/discussions so far; have we moved passed the "william is maple-y" thing or is this still on the table? Why do you need to ask if someone is suspicious? Do you find them suspicious? If so, then it's still on the table. Do you find William suspicious? How oak-y of him to retract his statement like that! Is it? Or are you joking? I don't see a jokey emoticon. What a way to wake up than to find out that some of the male trees stayed up till all hours of the night (those in different time zones excluded) talking tree trash about the only female tree amongst them. Oh shut up, Catarina. You're not the only female. What do you think Vickory Dickory is? Or Adelaide or Agnes? Hazel, Lauren, Maggie, Sue? Are they just men in drag? Didn't you notice you weren't the only tree in the ladies' room? Even I wear a dress every once in a while. Your fluff is not only excessive, it's inaccurate. I don't understand why we need to protect Alejandro's identity here. I see no reason why someone needs to remain anonymous simply because they claimed that someone else was suspicious in private. This is just complicating things and denying Alejandro the opportunity to explain him/herself. Denying him/her? I didn't lock him up. He can come explain himself whenever he wants. Does Alejandro not like the sun? Seems pretty weird to me! I like to do my accusing out in the open, like a normal oaky tree. Shady dealings are not my style, and to be honest I don't trust them! I don't want Hickory to reveal who Alejandro is, I'd really prefer that Alejandro just came out and told us like the friendly and honest tree I'm sure he is! And maybe explain the the heck was mapley on that first page! Not Hickory, Simon! Why can't you tell us apart. syrup is for icecream You're on my bad side now. I'm Alejandro. Simon and I were having a little chat and throwing around various suspicions; William was one of mine. I don't know why he decided to PM William about it, but his reaction to it was Oaky, so that's good. I have to admit, I have no idea why I'm being held in scrutiny for this, though. Since when it is uncommon to share suspicions in private? What's more, if I was scum, I wouldn't bother doing even that, and would instead waste everyone's time by saying "Oh, there's gotta be 6 scum" or something like that in the thread. See? Here he is. The concern of contacting someone so early is that you might be trying to establish contact to get Townies to trust you. Some players may expect Scum to avoid private contact unless approached and being proactive can help throw people off your trail. Not saying that's what you're doing, but that's the average trick of figuring out people who contact you on page 1 of Day 1. Yup. Saying "garden variety" seems darn fishy fishing to me. Lots of ways to banter that wouldn't have made the Alder step in. Maybe I'm wrong, but the ping for me was that he seemed like he was trying to call Nash out for a scum-slip. Perhaps I'm over-pinging on it. And if Hickory hadn't brought it to our attention, we'd have no discussion! Hopefully that's in detail enough, would love to hear your reasoning fellow tree! I'm not Hickory Dickory Dock! I'm Simon. Get it right! Are you saying we all look alike to you??
Piratedave84 Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Why do you need to ask if someone is suspicious? Do you find them suspicious? If so, then it's still on the table. Do you find William suspicious? Not really, this was in the optic that people were still discussing game mechanics and making puns and all that irrelevant stuff Is it? Or are you joking? I don't see a jokey emoticon. It was meant as sarcasm; you know how when you retract yourself, it can be perceived as maple-y
Brickelodeon Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I wasn't fishing. I just figured that it might be useful information to remember later in the game.
Lady K Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 She's still a maple. And how do you figure that?
Brickelodeon Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I'm honestly doubting the maple-ness of Bruce right now as maples usually don't want to bring attention to themselves. I think he's probably just an oak who wants to be important.
Dragonfire Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 So it seems I am under quite some suspicion at this point. I can definitely see how my actions look like fishing, but I genuinely assumed that all Oaks were Garden Variety, and it was meant as a response to Zepher's statement. There's really nothing much more I can say, so I don't know why Clem is accusing me of making a lacklustre defence;; I was called out for fishing; I clearly stated why I made the comment, and that was that. How could I be expected to make any more? Besides, I can't be expected to post every hour; I have a rather busy schedule but I can definitely post at least once a day. As for the Alejandro business, I don't really see Bruce as overly suspicious at this point; I don't see why a Maple would immediately message another player claiming to be suspicious of someone else. I see it more as a townie with bad gut vibes.
Zepher Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I'm not Hickory Dickory Dock! I'm Simon. Get it right! Are you saying we all look alike to you?? I honestly didn't even check what you were named, Simon, because, come on, why would your name not be Hickory.
Tamamono Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I wasn't fishing. I just figured that it might be useful information to remember later in the game. When did I say you were fishing? And useful for when? Why not useful now? Why are you thinking about the endgame now when were in day one ?
Hinckley Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 but I genuinely assumed that all Oaks were Garden Variety, This is what I thought you were assuming and that is what is pinging me about you. I honestly didn't even check what you were named, Simon, because, come on, why would your name not be Hickory. I was very jealous of Hickory Dickory Dock because that is clearly my name, but no I am Simon, so there.
Brickelodeon Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 @Bruce Waldorf said: Brickelodeon, on 28 January 2015 - 07:59 AM, said: I concur! Bring Alejandro into the light. He/she is acting very suspicious, and I would like to know his/her identity in case we don't have anything left to go on in later days. Fishing much? And I figured it would be useful after some of the people involved in the PM had been proven Oak or Maple. It could give us a clue as to who is loyal or not.
Hinckley Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 @Bruce Waldorf said: Brickelodeon, on 28 January 2015 - 07:59 AM, said: I concur! Bring Alejandro into the light. He/she is acting very suspicious, and I would like to know his/her identity in case we don't have anything left to go on in later days. Fishing much? And I figured it would be useful after some of the people involved in the PM had been proven Oak or Maple. It could give us a clue as to who is loyal or not. Do you have some trouble using the quote button?
Scaevola Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 So it seems I am under quite some suspicion at this point. I can definitely see how my actions look like fishing, but I genuinely assumed that all Oaks were Garden Variety, and it was meant as a response to Zepher's statement. There's really nothing much more I can say, so I don't know why Clem is accusing me of making a lacklustre defence;; I was called out for fishing; I clearly stated why I made the comment, and that was that. How could I be expected to make any more? Besides, I can't be expected to post every hour; I have a rather busy schedule but I can definitely post at least once a day. As for the Alejandro business, I don't really see Bruce as overly suspicious at this point; I don't see why a Maple would immediately message another player claiming to be suspicious of someone else. I see it more as a townie with bad gut vibes. What happened to your comment being fluff/common banter? You're contradicting yourself. Floundering even. You're caught in quite a predicament and it will be difficult to rebut the accusations against you. Your rebuttals are less lackluster than lacking sufficient justification. I'm honestly doubting the maple-ness of Bruce right now as maples usually don't want to bring attention to themselves. I think he's probably just an oak who wants to be important. "I'm in deep s**t now so I'll rescind everything I said. Ok?"
Duvors Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Treesonly I can't find anything about Catarina that says "MAPLE!", but she hasn't done anything really helpful. On a related note, am I the only tree here who noticed how aggressively Lassie Sassafras went after Catarina earlier? And useful for when? Why not useful now? Why are you thinking about the endgame now when were in day one ? Maybe because he isn't very good at this?But quite frankly it does seem silly to me, as may people have said, why not post about your day one suspicions in public? It's actually more helpful that way then to keep them back for a later date, for the reason that, if the guy turns out to be a Maple with a special role and night actions and stuff lynching him on the first day would not only be helpful but a grievous blow to the Maples. In fact getting even a normal Maple on day one would be awesome! So if you have any suspicions on day one, Tell us! Just sending PM's about it to random folks about them makes you look like an evil Maple-y Maplebag McMapleton. Sadly, I have no suspicions, at all, so that whole thing wasn't really very helpful, was it? This is what I thought you were assuming and that is what is pinging me about you. I was very jealous of Hickory Dickory Dock because that is clearly my name, but no I am Simon, so there. Hikory Dicork Dock Persimmon, bit of a mouthful.But seriously, I must have missed something, why would such an assumption be bad exactly? What happened to your comment being fluff/common banter? You're contradicting yourself. Floundering even. You're caught in quite a predicament and it will be difficult to rebut the accusations against you. Your rebuttals are less lackluster than lacking sufficient justification. "I'm in deep s**t now so I'll rescind everything I said. Ok?" Woah mate, this is only day one, the spanish inquisition isn't supposed to start until day two.Arrrghh! Why do I alway forget that there's a rule against editing your posts!? Edited January 28, 2015 by Lord Duvors
Brickelodeon Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 "I'm in deep s**t now so I'll rescind everything I said. Ok?" Excuse me, but I am hardly in "deep s**t". Bruce thinks I'm maple-y, but only because he doesn't understand what I'm saying. I never said I thought he was a maple, I just said that I would like to know who the person was who was PMing all of that stuff. I'm not even going back on anything I said before. You are trying to make me look maple-y without me actually being maple-y.
Hinckley Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 But seriously, I must have missed something, why would such an assumption be bad exactly? Well, Mr. Dicork-post-editor, It's possible a Maple would assume that all Oaks are Garden Variety without understanding what it was that the great elder clarified for us.
Duvors Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Well, Mr. Dicork-post-editor, It's possible a Maple would assume that all Oaks are Garden Variety without understanding what it was that the great elder clarified for us. That was an accident. And it is entirely possible that an Oak would make the same assumption.
Hinckley Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 That was an accident. And it is entirely possible that an Oak would make the same assumption. True, but it still pinged me. Is there any reason you find the need to defend Berty?
Walter Kovacs Posted January 28, 2015 Author Posted January 28, 2015 Alden the Elder Alder speaks (at last): "Voting is now open. Bobby Beech (Lord Duvors) has incurred a 5 vote penalty for editing a post. Voting Tally: Bobby Beech (Lord Duvors) - 5 (Penalty, Penalty, Penalty, Penalty, Penalty) With 25 players, it takes 13 votes to lynch. Voting will close in 48 hours."
Brickelodeon Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I know that someone will get mad at me for this fluff, but I have to say it. "Wow, penalty sure does hate Bobby!"
Duvors Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 True, but it still pinged me. Is there any reason you find the need to defend Berty? Nope, just pointing out the possibilities.
Recommended Posts