The Curse of IMHOTEP - Day One

[Fugazi]

Right, catching up on the conversations. What do we have so far?

Mehmet and Patrick arguing most of the morning. While they have been pro-active as townies should, I find interesting that a few voices were heard clearing them of suspicion on the grounds that no scum would want to attract this much attention on day 1. I wouldn't put it past anyone here to purposefully attract attention in order to reverse psychologise us.

Others have been less than helpful. Mr Leplot, Father Thompson and Mr Ittaq even got votes on the grounds of being mostly silent. Having known some of these people for some time, I can tell that being silent is part of their nature and as infuriating as it may be, it doesn't mean they are cultists.

Ms Farago has shown suspicious behaviour, but also a reasonable rebuttal to the accusations -- as reasonable as anyone could provide, given the lack of condemning evidence but also the absence of a proven record of pro-town deeds given that this ordeal barely started. I can't bring myself to vote for her right now.

Mr Goodenarde's unhelpful comments have also been duly noted, and I hope he will focus more on content in the future -- if he survives the day.

That said, I can't confidently vote for anyone. But I will follow a hunch and vote for someone who I hoped would have been more energetic and pro-active today. He hasn't been silent, nor really helpful, just the right average attitude that wouldn't make his stand out in any way. Perhaps I'm wrong in suspecting him and I hope that he will rise to the challenge of this predicament, there's still plenty of time for that.

Vote: Gordon Bennett (KielDaMan)

[Professor Flitwick]

Baa-haa-haa! Takes me back to the Somme, where the chaps drew up a petition to try and force me over the top. I wanted to have a go at the hun, but I wasn't that desperate!

I am going to vote for Captain Roger Goodenarde, mainly because of his absurd suggestion to vote randomly, to me at least, it seems more logical to vote for people that act suspicious, than for a random person. Since a random sacrifice will have odds against the innocent's favor. His reasoning for suggesting this are very thin it seems, and I would have thought that an experienced man like himself would not make such a mistake if he was innocent. Furthermore, he brought up that I was among the people that didnt comment on the debate, I would like to urge the captain to reconsider what I said, or it could be seen as suspicious activity...

So without further ado, I vote Captain Roger Goodenarde (Professor Flitwick)

Baa-haa-haa, come now my little filly, up until that point all you talked about was your article, and then not voting (which would definitely benefit the cultists; our chances go from ?/24, to 0/24!). Let's not forget, that at the time I suggested it, the shouting match between Fizwilliam and Ackbar was drawing to a close. What would you rather me do, pick a side in an argument that started over spam and lambs, or suggest voting for the quietest person when we were barely a third of the way through the day?

I don't see anyone as being prominently suspicious right now. Mehmet and Fritz Willpatrick seem to just be two dedicated, proactive people who are trying to have a bit of fun. Patrick is suspected for his declarations of innocence; Mehmet was accused of spam posts. Both are allegedly just post made for the sake of joking around. I don't support such behavior in this situation, but it's not something to lynch someone on. There are, however, those who have noticeably acted oddly. The two who's actions have been the oddest to me are Roger and Ophelia. Between those two, I suspect Roger more because his odd action had no relevance to the conversation into which it was interjected, so it to me appears to be one of those statements made to look helpful, but really aren't, and at the same time, it could have been meant to distract. Ophelia's reasoning for her odd action is partially understandable.

I Vote: Captain Roger Goodenarde (Professor Flitwick).

Again, Mr. Nadia, what would you have me of done? As you yourself said, nobody is overly suspicious, and I'd find a random sacrifice to be clearer than voting for man because he's cooking spam, or declaring innocence, or not speaking up much when we weren't a third of the way through the day.

After considering my options, I'm going to

Vote: Roger Goodenarde (Flitwick).

Random voting? Seriously? How is that a plan? Most of what you have said so far has been your own personal eccentricities other than that. Get in the game, man.

It's a plan that has a... 6/24 chance of working (I believe those were the hypothesised statistics, Lieutenant. ), whereas voting for someone who hadn't spoken much at that time (a third of the way through the day!), or for any equally weak reason, would be a worse plan than shelling our own men when they sleep in the trenches! Baa-haa-haa!

Honestly, why would you ever suggest random voting? It's not like anyone will ever actually listen to a bizarre suggestion like that.

Ow, my voice is getting hoarse repeating myself. Look at the above reasons, and you'll see why I suggested it.

[Cecilie]

Seems like votes are flying in many directions, unsurprisingly really, everyone looks suspicious in this first day . But the person with the most unusual behavior the way I see it, is Jennifer with her "I'll vote for whoever gets the first vote". That really doesn't make any sense, and whether it's some crazy cultist plan or something else, I don't know, but the arguments against the other people with votes against them aren't really any better, so I'll Vote: Jennifer Taylor (Sandy) for now.

[WhiteFang]

I think at the end of the day, we want to have a conviction? I believe that is what the majority will like to have, despite of having a higher chances to convict an innocent party.

At the same time, are we going to keep on dividing our votes? I am inclining to vote together with the majority, just not to see our votes broken into many directions. At the very least, we now have multiple headings with possible leads to work on before the time is up.

[Pandora]

Vote Tally

Toulouse LePlot (WhiteFang) 3 (fhomess, Sandy, JimButcher)

Ophelia Balls (fhomess) 2 (Professor Flitwick, CallMePieOrDie)

Ishaq Ettaq (Wuntin) 1 (ADHO15)

Roger Goodenarde (Professor Flitwick) 4 (Scubacarrot, Brickdoctor, CorneliusMurdock, Tamamono)

Penelope Farago (Waterbrick Down) 5 (TinyPiesRUs, Hinckley, Zepher, KielDaMan, def)

Fr Thomas Thomson (Ricecracker) 1 (Waterbrick Down)

Gordon Bennett (KielDaMan) 1 (Fugazi)

Jennifer Taylor (Sandy) 1 (Cecilie)

[Cecilie]

I think at the end of the day, we want to have a conviction? I believe that is what the majority will like to have, despite of having a higher chances to convict an innocent party.

At the same time, are we going to keep on dividing our votes? I am inclining to vote together with the majority, just not to see our votes broken into many directions. At the very least, we now have multiple headings with possible leads to work on before the time is up.

Of course, it would be wise to eventually decide on a conviction instead of spreading the votes too much, but there's still plenty of time to make people sweat a little

[def]

How exactly are they, more than anyone else, going to help us when they're cleared? Just because they like to argue all day?

Mehmet and Patrick arguing most of the morning.

Let's not forget, that at the time I suggested it, the shouting match between Fizwilliam and Ackbar was drawing to a close.

Just to be clear, I don't consider some guy spending the day trolling me for the day a mutual argument. For the most part, I ignored his posts. I certainly wanted to keep the record straight when he tries to make stuff up about me, but I've avoided responding for the most part. Conversely, he replied to most of my posts it seemed, whether regarding him or not.

In the same way, I'm letting you folks know, to keep the record straight... If you can stomach wading through the thread, that's what you'll see

[XimenaPaulina]

That said, I can't confidently vote for anyone. But I will follow a hunch and vote for someone who I hoped would have been more energetic and pro-active today. He hasn't been silent, nor really helpful, just the right average attitude that wouldn't make his stand out in any way. Perhaps I'm wrong in suspecting him and I hope that he will rise to the challenge of this predicament, there's still plenty of time for that.

Vote: Gordon Bennett (KielDaMan)

In all honesty I understand your vote Nicholas, and I have no problems with it whatsoever. I'm actually impressed how you seem to have noticed how less energetic and pro-active I am from usual. (Wait, how did you know how energetic I normally am if we've only met today?) Though I have to admit I'm not as active as I wanted to be, particularly for a couple of reasons:

1.) I've been distracted a bit recently, not only by the beauty of Ms. Stools, but also by a couple of "Friends" I've met while I was day-dreaming (their names are Stephanie & Emma, I'll tell you the detailed story later if you want! ). It may sound as if I'm foolin' around, but what I say is true.

2.) In these early stages of our ordeal without anything to work on, what we could do to move significantly forward is quite limited. Even if I exert a little more effort, what will I do on the first day? Make a list of potential suspects and push around my valid arguments authoritatively? Only the veteran and highly-experienced Mr. Fitzburger can do that. Repeatedly rebutt Fitz's statements every chance I get? That seems to be Mehmet's personal M.O. Suggest random voting? Already done by Prof. Dead Fish Talker. Vote the first one who has been voted? Now I wouldn't want to steal Ms. Taylor's thunder. Test Ms. Taylor's weird voting tactic by voting/unvoting? Nope, only Ms. Myrgatroyd can pull off that seamlessly. Try to talk to everybody privately? That would be suicide on my part.

Point is I can't outtalk Mr. Fitz and Mehmet, nor I could make myself almost as "invisible" as the silent ones. Acting in the so-called "middle-ground" maybe seen as suspicious behavior, but that could be said also of the two other extreme sides of the spectrum. Which means no matter how we all behave in the first freakin' day we're all suspects at the end of the day. Like I said, I understand your vote as I actually feel the same way with Mr. Farago. There's a huge chance I'm wrong with my hunch, but we're forced to make a sacrifice and now I don't see a better alternative. Such is the harsh reality we're currently in. But rest assured I'll try my best to be more "involved" in the coming days if I survive, as working hard is the only asset I have in life.

[Hinckley]

That said, I can't confidently vote for anyone. But I will follow a hunch and vote for someone who I hoped would have been more energetic and pro-active today. He hasn't been silent, nor really helpful, just the right average attitude that wouldn't make his stand out in any way. Perhaps I'm wrong in suspecting him and I hope that he will rise to the challenge of this predicament, there's still plenty of time for that.

Vote: Gordon Bennett (KielDaMan)

This is a valid point and something I had noted as well. He did seem to spend a good time lurking and listening to what we were saying but not really adding anything. His responses have been rather "summarizing" and not proactive as one might suspect from a man of his stature. Interesting...

[CorneliusMurdock]

It's a plan that has a... 6/24 chance of working (I believe those were the hypothesised statistics, Lieutenant. ), whereas voting for someone who hadn't spoken much at that time (a third of the way through the day!), or for any equally weak reason, would be a worse plan than shelling our own men when they sleep in the trenches! Baa-haa-haa!

No one was asking you to vote at that exact second. We would have all had to wait. Instead you suggest we all vote randomly? That's still the dumbest thing I've ever heard. An informed (even first day) vote has to have a much better chance of succeeding than drawing names from a hat or playing hot potato with a grenade. My vote stands for now.

[Hinckley]

or playing hot potato with a grenade.

I hope the music stops while The Kaboominator is holding it.

[badboytje88]

Whow! Votes are really going everywhere! It seems that I missed a lot of the conversation of today, did someone spice up my sherry? I'm going to think this over and then make an educated guess about who I would like to vote for.

[Rick]

But rest assured I'll try my best to be more "involved" in the coming days if I survive, as working hard is the only asset I have in life.

It may not even be your involvement as much as it is your statement that once we investigate either Mr Fitzwhatever or the guy At the bar (wait, we have a bar? ), that they'll be a great asset to 'our cause'. You seem to ignore the possibility of false investigations and conversions somehow. I don't see how investigating any of these two in particular is going to help our cause...

[Hinckley]

Unvote: Mehmet Attabar (Hinckley)

Vote: Penelope Farago (Waterbrick Down)

Tentatively. I still think Mehmet's and Apu's play today has been anti-town, either by accident or by design (my vote goes for the latter), but nobody seems really perturbed at they way they've been mangling the truth... I suppose when you're not the victim of it, it's easier to overlook "First they came…"

Forgive me everyone. I hate to perpetuate the silly argument from earlier in the day. I am certainly over the "pissing match" aspect of it. I can't help but point out something that has started to bug me. Mr. Fitzdef, how did you go from voting for me to voting with me? I find it odd that I go from your top suspect to someone who has the right idea about who to vote out. You vote for Penelope Farago and then immediately say that Apu and I are probably anti-Town, although you are now voting along with both of us. I'm having trouble following your logic. Perhaps you can enlighten me? Perhaps I'm dumb and need a smart person to explain things to me.

[fhomess]

Unvote: Toulouse Leplot (WhiteFang)

I was a bit disappointed at Mr. Leplot's severe reaction to having a vote cast his way simply for quietness, but he was correct in that I didn't have anything convincing to go on. In addition, two people who are more familiar with Mr. Leplot vouched that quietness is nothing out of the ordinary for him. While I think voting for quiet people to draw them more into the conversation is a valid approach, I don't have any strong reason to suspect Mr. Leplot. Given the low vote totals of the leaders, I don't think it's wise to leave my vote with him given the lack of evidence.

I'll submit a new vote in a few hours as I need to review some of my notes on crystals.

[CMP]

Um, everyone knows we don't need a majority amount of votes, right? That whoever has the most votes is going to be sacrificed, majority or not? Sorry if I'm sounding 'out of it' here, but people keep saying they're worried about splitting the votes...

[Eskallon]

Hmm, okay megabluck it I am at a loss, theres what... 8 people on the vote tally and its day one. Well I am suspicious of Captain Goodenarde, but not enough to vote him at the moment, I think he is stupid but not scum. Oh and don't any of you clever arses go on the stupid vs scum argument...

So whats the point of me posting now, I don't know, but I feel lost and at the moment I am considering just not voting. It depends how the day turns out but I will have a read over, during the next few hours and see if I can find anything.

[Tamamono]

Moving on, a few things have been brought to light, that I don't think should be forgotten. First, I'd briefly like to inquire as to Ms. Suxsumb constant flip flop early on between not voting and voting. I believe we all know that the gravity of our situation afords no room for the latter and I would have expected more of this feeling coming from Ms. Suxsumb.

Once again, the possibility of not voting is not something you'd expect to see in a situation like ours, so I wanted to explore that possibility a bit. I personally think that not voting would have been a better option than voting for someone we aren't confident is scum, or, like Mr. Goodenarde suggested, random voting. Luckily, there's been plenty of healthy discussion today, and now with votes for eight different people, there's defiantly definitely no shortage of suspects.

Again, Mr. Nadia, what would you have me of done? As you yourself said, nobody is overly suspicious, and I'd find a random sacrifice to be clearer than voting for man because he's cooking spam, or declaring innocence, or not speaking up much when we weren't a third of the way through the day.

No it wouldn't be. If we can't find a good option for voting, then we shouldn't vote at all. It's that simple. A random vote is just asking for trouble. That way you have just as good a chance of pulling the name of a hardworking and proactive townie (or even worse, a Nocturnal Skiller) as you do a chance of pulling the name of someone inactive and useless.

It's a plan that has a... 6/24 chance of working (I believe those were the hypothesised statistics, Lieutenant. ), whereas voting for someone who hadn't spoken much at that time (a third of the way through the day!), or for any equally weak reason, would be a worse plan than shelling our own men when they sleep in the trenches! Baa-haa-haa!

You know, captain, that was pretty early on in the day, and there was no need for you to actually accuse someone at that point. You make it sound like the only options were A. responding to the ego war between Mehmet and Patrick, B. Suggesting a vote on someone for a trivial reason, or C. suggesting a random vote. This is not true. There were plenty of other things you could have added to the discussion. Take, for instance, the discussion of the cultists' goal by William and Ophelia. You could tried to add something to that discussion. Or, if need be, you could have just said nothing, like many others were doing at the time. If you don't have anything useful to say, don't say anything at all.

[Brickdoctor]

Again, Mr. Nadia, what would you have me of done? As you yourself said, nobody is overly suspicious, and I'd find a random sacrifice to be clearer than voting for man because he's cooking spam, or declaring innocence, or not speaking up much when we weren't a third of the way through the day.

You must have some sort of opinion concerning the other suspects, and one little gut feeling of an opinion is always better than a random vote. Unless, of course, you're Scum and don't have an opinion because you already know who's Scum.

[def]

Um, everyone knows we don't need a majority amount of votes, right? That whoever has the most votes is going to be sacrificed, majority or not? Sorry if I'm sounding 'out of it' here, but people keep saying they're worried about splitting the votes...

Really? That's been the issue today? Split votes? You must be stuck in a different godforsaken valley than I am. A totally bizarre comment, but I'm inclined to think that after your last incarnation as Bastet, you'd be inclined to keep your mouth totally shut if you were scum

So whats the point of me posting now, I don't know, but I feel lost and at the moment I am considering just not voting. It depends how the day turns out but I will have a read over, during the next few hours and see if I can find anything.

No help here. None at all. Someone is being sacrificed today, and you avoid any culpability, for better or worse

Methinks the classic strategy has returned

Anyway, I'm only so-so convinced about Penelope Farago, and while she has made a very weak defense, I'm not convinced that she is scum. My initial finger-of-shaming at Memhet was fully reasoned, and I shouldn't condemn her to death simply for being the sole person to see the fully formed logic of my words

Unvote: Penelope Farago (Waterbrick Down)

Rather, I will point yet another finger at the lolly-gagger, Hugh Janus. Really, we are all having a bit of fun here, and the only way for us to have anything to work with in upcoming days is for us all to participate, and he is preparing to not participate There are two motives for this; 1. He is concerned about a theoretical "Survivor's list", 2. He is scum playing conservative in order to highlight that he didn't convict a townie early on. Either possibility is equally unappealing in my opinion, and does little to help our situation.

Really, he has about a one in four chance of being one of the despicable, detestable Cultists of which we seek, and about as much as the "educated" guesses we have already before us.

For day one though, I'd like to hone in on the driftwood, the detritus, if you will, in our group, who aren't bothering to place themselves on the line. It worked for Boba Fett, so why not us?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7A5OVn3DRI

For day one, I Vote: Hugh Janus (Eskallon)

Nobody is guiltier than anyone else at this point, but people sitting on the sidelines aren't making it any easier

Oh, also, the scum have to kill a select portion of us townies to win. It's not a standard 'outnumber townies' game. I'll just put that officially on the record now, just so I can have bragging rights while me and the rest of the spiritually pure ride in Ra's boat in the afterlife. All that European crap about St.Peter and water turning into wine is a crock. On the other hand, Osirus' cock being eaten by a catfish is the truth; the word of Ra.

Point being, the scum are hunting for certain among us, and not merely trying to outnumber us. How do I know? Oh, let's just say Ra told me

[Hinckley]

Point being, the scum are hunting for certain among us, and not merely trying to outnumber us. How do I know? Oh, let's just say Ra told me

Interesting. Odd that Ra would speak only to you. Did you figure out some game mechanic? Like how to address IMHOTEP? Did he give you the answer?

[Cecilie]

Oh, also, the scum have to kill a select portion of us townies to win. It's not a standard 'outnumber townies' game. I'll just put that officially on the record now, just so I can have bragging rights while me and the rest of the spiritually pure ride in Ra's boat in the afterlife. All that European crap about St.Peter and water turning into wine is a crock. On the other hand, Osirus' cock being eaten by a catfish is the truth; the word of Ra.

Point being, the scum are hunting for certain among us, and not merely trying to outnumber us. How do I know? Oh, let's just say Ra told me

Wait, what? Saying that just made you look suspicious... Was that your intention?

[CMP]

Really? That's been the issue today? Split votes? You must be stuck in a different godforsaken valley than I am. A totally bizarre comment, but I'm inclined to think that after your last incarnation as Bastet, you'd be inclined to keep your mouth totally shut if you were scum

I'd think that after your last incarnation as Amun that you'd be inclined to lead everybody to a flawless victory instead of pissing them all off, should you be town. As it turns out, you learn every reincarnation.

[def]

Wait, what? Saying that just made you look suspicious... Was that your intention?

Oh, sorry. Helping explain our situation is suspicious. I forgot this was EB

[Eskallon]

Rather, I will point yet another finger at the lolly-gagger, Hugh Janus. Really, we are all having a bit of fun here, and the only way for us to have anything to work with in upcoming days is for us all to participate, and he is preparing to not participate There are two motives for this; 1. He is concerned about a theoretical "Survivor's list", 2. He is scum playing conservative in order to highlight that he didn't convict a townie early on. Either possibility is equally unappealing in my opinion, and does little to help our situation.

Really, he has about a one in four chance of being one of the despicable, detestable Cultists of which we seek, and about as much as the "educated" guesses we have already before us.

For day one though, I'd like to hone in on the driftwood, the detritus, if you will, in our group, who aren't bothering to place themselves on the line. It worked for Boba Fett, so why not us?

For day one, I Vote: Hugh Janus (Eskallon)

Nobody is guiltier than anyone else at this point, but people sitting on the sidelines aren't making it any easier

Okay dipshit, heres how it works. I admit I haven't participated much and thats that, but let me clarify something. What I have done idiot is that I was the first one to pick up on our Captain today, I was the first to comment on what he said in the midst of a full blown argument. So since your weak puny little mind cant remember that why dont you take another look:

It might just be me looking into it, but I don't like what my Captain here has said. It seems to me that in the middle of investigating a lead on Patrick he randomly suggested that we do it randomly, now maybe if he had said this earlier before the lengthy conversation started I would look over it. However this suggestion is suspicious to me. Now its not so much the suggestion itself, but the timing, why then, did you simply forget to listen for the past few hours captain as to whats been going on?

I dont know if you were born on Mars or something, but if that seems like me not doing anything then you truly are stupid. I have no more bloody clue than anyone else here, Im sorry that I don't know who to vote for but if you wanna accuse me then go ahead, but good luck with taking me down bitch!