Piratedave84 Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Not that people should be investigated based on their experience on other subs, but doesn't that just reinforce my suspicions of him? If he knew he was likely to be investigated early, a preemptive miller claim would be a good move for a spy. There's some truth to what you are saying but I'm still more enclined to vote for the attacker than the claimer for the time being; the claim was the right thing to do and your attacking his doing so makes you a better candidate than him, sorry.
mostlytechnic Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Not that people should be investigated based on their experience on other subs, but doesn't that just reinforce my suspicions of him? If he knew he was likely to be investigated early, a preemptive miller claim would be a good move for a spy. There's some truth to what you are saying but I'm still more enclined to vote for the attacker than the claimer for the time being; the claim was the right thing to do and your attacking his doing so makes you a better candidate than him, sorry. Exactly - I have never said I trusted Trev as being loyal, just that if his claim is true, he handled it correctly and therefore I'd not make him my first choice of lynchee. He still has to prove himself one way or the other over time. Anyone seen Boris or Edward around lately? Been pretty quiet from them too... We've still got about 24 hours, but we're a long way from a majority vote on anyone. Edward was around earlier but didn't say anything. Not a whole lot had happened for him to comment on though.
JimBee Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 There's some truth to what you are saying but I'm still more enclined to vote for the attacker than the claimer for the time being; the claim was the right thing to do and your attacking his doing so makes you a better candidate than him, sorry. So... actually providing substance for today is suspicious? Throwing myself out there and being the only one in the crowd to oppose Trevor's claim is scummy? Strange.
Mencot Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 So... actually providing substance for today is suspicious? Throwing myself out there and being the only one in the crowd to oppose Trevor's claim is scummy? Strange. I don´t think your scummy but I am keeping my eyes on you. But I understand your point about Trevor and the miller claim. But have the miller role, it is more wise to claim it immidiately then to claim it after one as been investigated, right? I am not defending him but I believe his claim for now. But as I said before he will have to prove himself useful (what he hasn´t done so far, being away all the time) Well excuse me. Maybe it has been a while since I've experienced a crisis like this, but to me claiming miller on day one is pretty fishy. Saying "hey btw even though I'll come up as scum and may act scummy, I'm not scum. Carry on." and then not saying anything since... Does this not ping any radars for anyone? I guess not. Strange how people are rushing to his defense and accepting his claim without so much as an ounce of doubt. Especially Malcolm. No I don't think you're stupid, but worse has happened to smarter people in crises similar to this. And since you've come under fire with a vote from Spencer and suspicion from others, you seem eager to shift the attention to someone else - me, Claire, Phillip... Find it strange that you pointed be out with "especially"... with pretty much the same words that Spencer used. Not saying you or Spencer is scum but I am keeping my eyes on you two
JimBee Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 I don´t think your scummy but I am keeping my eyes on you. But I understand your point about Trevor and the miller claim. But have the miller role, it is more wise to claim it immidiately then to claim it after one as been investigated, right? I am not defending him but I believe his claim for now. But as I said before he will have to prove himself useful (what he hasn´t done so far, being away all the time) Maybe. But the same goes for a scum claim - either way, Trevor seemed like he thought he was going to be investigated - better to claim now before he is found to be scum. If you don't find me scummy, then why vote for me? You can voice suspicions without convicting someone, though I understand if you were trying to make a statement with your vote. Find it strange that you pointed be out with "especially"... with pretty much the same words that Spencer used. Not saying you or Spencer is scum but I am keeping my eyes on you two Good to know that you're paying attention, but "especially" is a pretty common word in the English language... besides that, if Spencer and I were coordinating our actions I don't think that would coincide with our phrasing.
Mencot Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Maybe. But the same goes for a scum claim - either way, Trevor seemed like he thought he was going to be investigated - better to claim now before he is found to be scum. If you don't find me scummy, then why vote for me? You can voice suspicions without convicting someone, though I understand if you were trying to make a statement with your vote. Good to know that you're paying attention, but "especially" is a pretty common word in the English language... besides that, if Spencer and I were coordinating our actions I don't think that would coincide with our phrasing. Why I vote for you was to poke you to speak up but now you have so I can... Unvote: Jerry Bergeron (Jimbee) I am ofcourse still keeping my eyes open
Bob Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 As of right now, I believe I'll keep my vote where it is. Anyone seen Boris or Edward around lately? Been pretty quiet from them too... We've still got about 24 hours, but we're a long way from a majority vote on anyone. Edward was around earlier but didn't say anything. Not a whole lot had happened for him to comment on though. Yet again calling people out for being too quiet. This is the post that people make when they want to appear active when in reality it's just calling someone else out and stating the obvious. It's quite clear that we're far away from a majority vote.
Lady K Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Ah, but you DO know how deep we are (and how deep we were), you just aren't sure how to process that data. Technically correct, the very best kind of correct. Now sir, would you like something to eat or drink? We've got a long voyage ahead while we hunt these scum... Very true, crewman. That's why I was clear in my initial vote for her that it was only a poke. Since then, she's gotten another vote against her and a third person threatening to. However, a quick check of the logs shows she hasn't been around since my prodding. Makes me think that first, I should Unvote: Claire Novak (Calanon) and second, that I should keep an eye on Adrienne and Jeremy as potential scum since they seemed to be trying to bandwagon her... I stated my reasons for casting a vote her way. I will stick with my vote for now. I can change it based on an explanation from Claire or other evidence in favor of a better day 1 lynch.
Endgame Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 In regards to the current situation: I still think the Miller claim is well founded, due to a variety of things: being made without pressure or prodding, for starters. Secondly, claiming miller as soon as possible at least helps the town, assuming they're not scum: considering he claimed so early without being poked, I feel as if the odds are slanted in our miller's favor. Finally, since a real miller could easily just nail a false one, it would make claiming a stupid risk for a scum. Is he 100 percent Townie? of course not. But the scales are tipped in his favor. However, Jerry strikes me as odd. His reasoning doesn't seem to be entirely trying to disprove or invalidate Trevor's claim and therefore being scummy, but rather trying to point out several worst case scenarios, and drift blame to those who believe Trevor did what was right. It doesn't strike me as a Townie who thinks someone is Scummy, but rather a Scum trying to cause confusion. Combined with his insufficient logic... Vote: Jerry (Jimbee)
Peanuts Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 I'm not sold on lynching Jerry. His reasoning against Trevor is flawed, there's no reason why we would investigate him or claim to him based on his claim. I'm not saying I believe Trevor's claim, but for the scum it's a high risk, low reward gamble. Still, bad reasoning doesn't necessarily mean scum. At least I'm not more suspicious of him than of everyone else. Someone I noticed is Monty, though: Um, so you let Malcolm off but vote for me for the exact same thing, when I am like this in every single game on the sub too? Seems fishy to me... I personally really don't like the "I am like this in every single game" defense here. If you're aware you're posting fluff without adding anything even beyond the 'first 24 hours of Day One fluff', why not do something about it? Great, so you won't vote. We can unvote as much as we like, so there's no harm in placing votes to see who thinks who is suspicious. In later days, these early votes can show where people's heads were at early on, after they have been revealed as town or scum. Unwillingness to place votes on day one is, in my opinion, unwillingness to help the town. After this, we will have to take a look at the non-participators (at this point, especially Steward and Philip). They too can often be scum. Keep your mouth shut, and hope the town just squabbles among themselves. There's still plenty of time to change, but to poke the sleepyheads, I'm going to Vote: Claire Novak (Calanon) Why? Only one fluffy post but she's been seen around the sub since without saying anything. Philip could have gotten my vote for exactly the same reason, so it's just a coin flip at this point that she got it first. Plenty of time though to change it to Philip if he needs some waking up or anyone else who looks suspicious. I don't think Trevor is deserving of a vote; his claim is too risky to be a likely fake. And Malcolm doesn't seem to be behaving atypically either, so no reason to vote for him yet either. Just when Spencer says "Unwillingness to place votes on day one is, in my opinion, unwillingness to help the town" he throws a vote. For one of the two people Spencer called out for not participating. While stating he might change his vote to the other one. My problem is not that he's voting, other people did that too. I'm just getting the impression he's voting just to appear like he's doing something, right after Spencer states what might be read as "Good townies vote". He also goes out of his way not to commit to his vote even while posting it, making clear it's just "to poke the sleepyheads". Voting for non-participants on the first day is, as I have learnt from experience, a rather bad idea. Why choose silence over irrational talk? Very true, crewman. That's why I was clear in my initial vote for her that it was only a poke. Since then, she's gotten another vote against her and a third person threatening to. However, a quick check of the logs shows she hasn't been around since my prodding. Makes me think that first, I should Unvote: Claire Novak (Calanon) and second, that I should keep an eye on Adrienne and Jeremy as potential scum since they seemed to be trying to bandwagon her... So, "a quick check of the logs shows she hasn't been around since my prodding". Which is why you unvote? That doesn't make any sense. He's asked why he votes for someone inactive, and reacts by unvoting. He likes to call people out for being inactive, or to just keep his eyes on them. But he's not at all willing to commit to his vote, even though his stated goal, to "prod" Claire, has not been attained since she wasn't even active. If I'm correct, we still have more than 20 hours left before we have to reach a conclusion, so for now I'll vote: Monty Thornton (Mostlytechnic)
jluck Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 I'm not sold on lynching Jerry. His reasoning against Trevor is flawed, there's no reason why we would investigate him or claim to him based on his claim. I'm not saying I believe Trevor's claim, but for the scum it's a high risk, low reward gamble. Still, bad reasoning doesn't necessarily mean scum. At least I'm not more suspicious of him than of everyone else. Someone I noticed is Monty, though: I personally really don't like the "I am like this in every single game" defense here. If you're aware you're posting fluff without adding anything even beyond the 'first 24 hours of Day One fluff', why not do something about it? Just when Spencer says "Unwillingness to place votes on day one is, in my opinion, unwillingness to help the town" he throws a vote. For one of the two people Spencer called out for not participating. While stating he might change his vote to the other one. My problem is not that he's voting, other people did that too. I'm just getting the impression he's voting just to appear like he's doing something, right after Spencer states what might be read as "Good townies vote". He also goes out of his way not to commit to his vote even while posting it, making clear it's just "to poke the sleepyheads". So, "a quick check of the logs shows she hasn't been around since my prodding". Which is why you unvote? That doesn't make any sense. He's asked why he votes for someone inactive, and reacts by unvoting. He likes to call people out for being inactive, or to just keep his eyes on them. But he's not at all willing to commit to his vote, even though his stated goal, to "prod" Claire, has not been attained since she wasn't even active. If I'm correct, we still have more than 20 hours left before we have to reach a conclusion, so for now I'll vote: Monty Thornton (Mostlytechnic) I am still unhappy with the lack of peoples participation, but I do accept the logic that being quiet doesn't equal being scum. Jerry did come off as odd, but honestly my first reaction to the miller claim was similar. As of right now, I feel the case against Jerry is more of the first day grasping for anything argument. While his oddities have been noted, I'm not ready to hang him this second. On the other hand, the logic Patrick used in his argument seems very sound to me. Monty seems to be playing delicately, attempting to avoid suspicious and riding the fence on each argument. I know suspicions fly the first day, but this is the most logic I've seen so far, therefore: vote: Monty Thornton (Mostlytechnic) I am open to any argument and will consider a vote change if I see a better case elsewhere, but for now this is my best shot.
Piratedave84 Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 I'm having connectivity issues; see confirmation thread. Sorry!
def Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 I don´t think your scummy but I am keeping my eyes on you. But I understand your point about Trevor and the miller claim. You don't think Jerry is scummy but you voted for him? Then you take the vote off the moment you're called out for it? Personally, I don't think you are scum per se, but I at least think you're scummy. If you though you weren't scummy, I wouldn't want to poke you. That's bad acting, bad reasoning... Find it strange that you pointed be out with "especially"... with pretty much the same words that Spencer used. Not saying you or Spencer is scum but I am keeping my eyes on you two Great that you're keeping an eye on me. And on Jerry who thinks you're scummy. That old 'he thinks I'm scummy therefore he is scummy,' strategy. AKA the badboy technique. If only we can get all the scum to call you scummy, you'll have this wrapped up in no time flat!
mostlytechnic Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Well, now that I'm done cooking dinner for you all, guess I need to defend myself a little here since you (Jeremy, Patrick) misunderstood what I did. Yes, I made a weak, tentative vote against Claire for being quiet. It was one of the people mentioned by someone else because THOSE WERE THE TWO QUIETEST PEOPLE. And it was a weak, "it's just a poke" vote because that's exactly what it was. I was just trying to get someone to talk who had been around without saying anything. I later unvoted her because it felt like a bit of a bandwagon might be forming. Adrienne voted against Claire as well, another was thinking about it, and I didn't want that. I had no real suspicion of her so I unvoted to derail anything from happening without cause. That's all. And I explained that I didn't want others piling on her for still being quiet because she hadn't been around. It's one thing to poke someone who's around but not speaking, another to keep adding votes against someone who hasn't been around to say anything. I responded to Philip's legimate concern that voting for inactive people is not a great strategy by unvoting. Clear enough? Oh, and Patrick, you seem so concerned about my fluff? Go back and check the logs - yes, I've been one of the most frequent posters. But after the day 1 fluff, I made one further fluffy post poking our commander for using meters in the US Navy. After that it was helping Jeremy understand the miller claim, discussing suspicions, and other things trying to move things along here. Day 1 always sucks because there's not much to go on, so I'm trying to get any discussion moving that I can.
def Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 Half the place isn't voting, isn't playing. Should we just hand it over to the scum now?
JimBee Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 In regards to the current situation: I still think the Miller claim is well founded, due to a variety of things: being made without pressure or prodding, for starters. Secondly, claiming miller as soon as possible at least helps the town, assuming they're not scum: considering he claimed so early without being poked, I feel as if the odds are slanted in our miller's favor. Finally, since a real miller could easily just nail a false one, it would make claiming a stupid risk for a scum. Is he 100 percent Townie? of course not. But the scales are tipped in his favor. However, Jerry strikes me as odd. His reasoning doesn't seem to be entirely trying to disprove or invalidate Trevor's claim and therefore being scummy, but rather trying to point out several worst case scenarios, and drift blame to those who believe Trevor did what was right. It doesn't strike me as a Townie who thinks someone is Scummy, but rather a Scum trying to cause confusion. Combined with his insufficient logic... Vote: Jerry (Jimbee) How are the odds in any way tipped in his favor? He could just as easily be lying as telling the truth. The fact that you think any differently is scummy. You've been defending Trevor since he made the claim. Why would I try to create confusion on Day 1? If I were a spy, I could easily sit back and watch someone who's not even saying anything get lynched. I'd also like to indicate that Trevor still has not spoken since his claim. My vote stands, and I'd like to hear from Trevor, but Edward strikes me as suspicious.
jluck Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 Half the place isn't voting, isn't playing. Should we just hand it over to the scum now? It's showing we have 5 people on this topic, but it looks like all the same people that have posted on this page. Well, now that I'm done cooking dinner for you all, guess I need to defend myself a little here since you (Jeremy, Patrick) misunderstood what I did. Yes, I made a weak, tentative vote against Claire for being quiet. It was one of the people mentioned by someone else because THOSE WERE THE TWO QUIETEST PEOPLE. And it was a weak, "it's just a poke" vote because that's exactly what it was. I was just trying to get someone to talk who had been around without saying anything. I later unvoted her because it felt like a bit of a bandwagon might be forming. Adrienne voted against Claire as well, another was thinking about it, and I didn't want that. I had no real suspicion of her so I unvoted to derail anything from happening without cause. That's all. And I explained that I didn't want others piling on her for still being quiet because she hadn't been around. It's one thing to poke someone who's around but not speaking, another to keep adding votes against someone who hasn't been around to say anything. I responded to Philip's legimate concern that voting for inactive people is not a great strategy by unvoting. Clear enough? Oh, and Patrick, you seem so concerned about my fluff? Go back and check the logs - yes, I've been one of the most frequent posters. But after the day 1 fluff, I made one further fluffy post poking our commander for using meters in the US Navy. After that it was helping Jeremy understand the miller claim, discussing suspicions, and other things trying to move things along here. Day 1 always sucks because there's not much to go on, so I'm trying to get any discussion moving that I can. I don't think you've posted any more fluff than anyone else, but it's not about that. I just feel you've road the fence, trying to stay out in front of any controversy, backing down in the wake of any accusations. With the lack of any strong evidence, you stand out the most.
Lady K Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 Well, we have a few more hours till this day ends so hopefully more people will speak up. With just the same people adding to the game there isn't much to go on.
def Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 I'm tempted to switch my vote. Malcolm is scummy (as is Jerry, but I doubt both are scum) but I'd be happy to get rid of a non-participator like Claire. In my experience, they are scum about 50% of the time. In fact, last time we had one of these situations, the two lowest participators on day one were scum. If the town is fighting amongst themselves (since not everybody being accused so far can be scum), there is little motive to get caught up in the discussion. Actually, I've convinced myself. Unvote: Malcolm Vote: Claire (Calanon)
mostlytechnic Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 Alright, something needs stirred in this pot. So, I'm going to Vote: Christopher Milton Poindexter (CallMePie) Why? He's made just 4 comments today. Three were normal fluff, and then jumped in once to place a vote on Jerry. He did use solid logic and reasoning behind the vote, which makes me wonder, but his was the third vote against Jerry. Easy place to hide as a scum - just repeating the legitimate logic that others have used against Jerry. The first two votes were pretty quick together, so even is Jerry really is a spy, I can see an experienced spy jumping in against him to try to shore up his own defense for later. And since making that vote, he's been around plenty but completely silent. I don't like that. So this vote isn't just a poke, it's stronger, more like a prod. Maybe a push.
def Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 So Monty, you definitely don't want a lynch today. Noted.
mostlytechnic Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 Uh, no. Nope. Not at all. Your vote on claire came in while I was placing my vote, and there's still plenty of time to change my vote any direction needed to get rid of someone. But as of now, the leading vote-getters are myself and Jerry. I don't like the way Jerry has gone after Trevor, but I'm not ready to jump on that train yet. I think it's more important to TRY to get people active in here. I though sailors were vigorous, active, aggressive types. Instead we've got a bunch of lazy bums around here. Right now that scares me more than Jerry does. (and for the record, I see Christopher reading up on all this right now... so curious if he'll actually SAY SOMETHING for once now that I've pushed a little) (and to be clear, when I said nope, I mean nope, I don't NOT want a lynch today. Aka I DO want a lynch because we've got to find those scummy spies)
JimBee Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 So Monty, you definitely don't want a lynch today. Noted. Why? Just because he's not voting with you? If Claire is completely silent, won't the captain take matters into his own hands? I seem to remember that he doesn't like quiet people like that. I see a few potential candidates for a lynch today, but Trevor still hasn't said anything. Yes, still. None of you find that that a tad suspicious? Is he consorting with his spy buddies, too scared to speak up, or just sitting back and letting other accusations fly?
CMP Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 So this vote isn't just a poke, it's stronger, more like a prod. Maybe a push. Looks more like a prick than anything... I can see where you're coming from. It's been a surprisingly talkative first day, so I don't feel the need to prodding people for reactions. Everyone's being quite reactive anyway. I'm comfortable just taking note of them. I notice for example you're quick to label your votes prods but unvote before even waiting for a response to said prod. And also that Adrienne is just stating the most generic observations possible.
def Posted September 3, 2014 Posted September 3, 2014 Starting a new lynch on Christopher this late in the day is throwing your vote in the garbage. There can't be a lynch on him now without very strong reasons to motivate everyone. If you think he's scummy, saying so will give him the push he needs. No reason to waste your vote doing so. I haven't seen a tally for a while (at work, on my phone, so I can't research much), but I think a vote not for Claire, Jerry, or Monty (they are the vote leaders, if I recall correctly) is a kind of non-vote. Why? Just because he's not voting with you? No, because he's starting a new lynch at a late point in the day. It's a guaranteed non-lynch. I know you've gotten rusty at these things, but is there any chance of a Christopher lynching today?
Recommended Posts