mostlytechnic

Vote: Catarina Dogwood (adventurer1) I've been avoiding that because I thought it was a bandwagony lynch based on an astrisk. Seemed baseless. But now... with her "knowing" she'll be dead tomorrow! That's the biggest one. And the noob "I've never played with a janitor so..." arguments and then claiming you're not playing the noob card.... I've never played with a janitor either (assuming that's what's going on. Could be something else given the stump surprise today.) but I at least could google a little when it came up rather than just waaaaaa-ing. But mostly knowing you'll be gone tomorrow and unable to do anything, as opposed to being a stump. Heck, could be very possible that oaks leave stumps and maples don't. Or could be lynches don't leave stumps, in which case you'll be gone. Or could be.... lots of things, but IF YOU'RE AN OAK YOU DON'T KNOW. (not to mention, if you're an oak you'd want to help the other oaks and you'd send code lists as has been requested over and over and you just keep refusing) Oh, and THAT'S NOT A RULE CHANGE! The current rule 8b is EXACTLY what the original rule 8 was. And it's in every other forest here. That is normal! The stumps being here and able to communicate is the rule change, and something we need to take advantage of!

Nope, Nope, and then yes. Sammy understood. Each person sends a unique code to each other person. Yes, that's a ton of codes. Each of us would be generating 20+ lists and receiving 20+ lists. That's what excel (or google sheets, or whatever you appletree people use) is for. If I only sent a list to 1 person, then it's of zero use until that person is a stump. And if I sent the same list to everyone, then it's useless at keeping secrets. But with so many unique codesets, as soon as we have an oak stump, everyone can publicly say what they are using their unique code. That poor stump then has to compile it all, but it's there. And then each day, it could be repeated if needed (ie if the stumps only last 1 day) to keep the new group of stumps in the know. And a stump could even coordinate night actions by saying "hey joe, you should visit sally, and rick should visit jane" and so forth, "assigning" a visit to everyone, so no one can tell who actually has abilities. Well, scratch that, it'd ID the vig pretty quick :)

No need. Today everyone sends code lists to everyone else. Then tomorrow, once we have trusted stumps who HAVE THOSE CODE LISTS, everyone can claim to the stumps. Then the stumps could state publicly - hey, there's 2 people claiming vig, or whatever, if needed. AND if the stumps decided someone still alive was trusted (such as if one of the stumps was investigator and someone they'd cleared was still alive), they could use that person's code list to say in public that Joe is 13 and Sally is 1 and so forth, so at least someone would know who claimed roles and start talking to them in private.

Thanks for this. I think it's a decent plan. Even if stumps don't stick around (we'll see tomorrow if they do or not), it could be useful. One improvement I might make - sending a code list to SEVERAL different people, using a different code for each person. Then, hopefully when you need to use it, you'll have someone you can trust. Heck, send a code set to every player since you don't know who will die when and who will turn up oak/maple yet. And another tactic - use it to claim roles to the stumps (who are KNOWN OAKS). In fact, maybe we should require all players to do this. Then the stumps would have a full list of all the roles everyone is claiming and see if there's any duplicates or other reason to suspect lies. This times a million billion. Since we have the stumps, you have to assume they've got something equally powerful to balance it. Maybe it's a many-shot janitor, like has been suggested. Or maybe it's something we can't even think of that's a new addition to the forest, like the stumps are. But there's gotta be something so don't trust anyone too quickly!!!

I agree that the defending seems weird, but at the same time I have to wonder, if they were both scum, why say anything in public? That's what the scumboard is for, to keep each other in line in private. Like others have said over and over, why on earth should we trust this? And more importantly, if it's true, I'm VERY worried about the judgement of our investigator! It'd be one thing for them to claim to Bruce after an investigation, but why claim and reveal results to you? (now, I personally am pretty confident that you're an oak - but that doesn't mean I'd come claiming anything to you yet!) I think there's some potential here... but as all the later discussion showed, this is way too vague. Care to explain in detail how it'd work and then let everyone pick their own code words/numbers and who to share their list with? Cause right now my puny little tree brain is struggling. But that also means they are good enough to be a formidable scum opponent too! So why claim to them on day 2?!?! Just curious, did you pick that role in your example because it's so close to an actual mafia role? http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=The_Flying_Pumpkin_That_Shoots_Laser_Beams_Out_Of_Its_Ass Well, eventually enough trees will be cut down that the firehose of posts will slow and we'll both be able to catch up and not need to make excuses anymore because we'll be caught up.

Really, I'm suspicious because I expected something to be handled the normal way that most games handle it? http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Miller - see the first recommendation on how to be a miller? And EVERY SINGLE other forest I've been in here at EB? Now, if Berty (sorry for calling you a she, but darn that sounds like a girl's name to me) wasn't familiar with that role, I'd have assume a quick googling of it would have happened and guess what- the first hit for "mafia miller" is the page I posted above. So yep, when we were most of the way through day 1 I assumed there was no miller around.

My private talk with Simon had nothing to do with the miller claim - it was well before Berty claimed anything. We were talking about the game in general and started throwing out some complicated conspiracy ideas (framers, etc). I said I assume there's some non-standard roles since this isn't a school game and there's a lot of players. I mentioned masons, millers, and said I assume there's no miller since no one's claimed. This was about 15 hours before the public claim by Berty. My questioning of the situation/claim is mostly based on the fact that it was claimed in private first. Why? Public immediate claims is the normal way to handle that role.

Dang, forgot all about that! So.... looking back, there wasn't much time to discuss it day 1 since Berty Birch claimed publicly just over an hour before the end of the day. The odd thing to me was that she claimed she roleclaimed in PM to someone and then brought it out publicly after they suggested it. I agree that claiming miller in public was right - but why claim in private? I can't think of anyone that I would have trusted enough to claim even miller to on day 1! And Berty also said the reason for claiming publicly was she assumed she'd be investigated that night. Really, out of 25 trees, you think you're at the top of the heap? And apparently no one cares about the miller claim, since after you (Vicky) reminded us, there were 9 posts about other things while I reread the appropriate parts of yesterday.

Thanks for the link - but I noticed something. Page 24 of it shows a plate in a clip as an illegal connection, but isn't that what they're using as the computer screens in the new Helicarrier set? Looking a little more, I see that the presentation shows a 2x2 plate where the helicarrier is putting a tile in the clip. Are the tiles slightly thinner perhaps? Or has the clip been redesigned since that presentation?

I'd agree that it's not an automatic "no stump for the lynched" since there's nothing in the rules, even now, suggesting such a thing. In fact, just the opposite! Rule 4 STILL says that the alignment of lynched will be revealed the next day. So there's gotta be a power role doing this. So yes, we still need to think carefully and logically about votes so we can learn from the vote history in future days like any other foresty game.

Except you're making one BIG assumption - that the stumps will always be here and able to talk. Just like we were surprised to have them around today, how do you know they won't get removed or silenced or otherwise unable to share later.

Oh, so then you're ok with the vig claiming in public so the maples can kill him tonight? What's your experience with janitors? 1 shot usually? 5 shots? unlimited? What's common? (not experienced with them myself) Don't forget the crazy option that'd be similar to a story I heard about a legislature, where the vig was killed night 1. It's POSSIBLE (but unlikely) that one of our stumps is a vig who was killed by either the scum or SK before getting a kill of his own (since it's likely that our vig didn't kill night 1 since there's so little evidence to go on). Personally, I think the most likely is #1, that the vig didn't kill and we do have a serial killer in our midst, but even if that's the case, it's possible our vig is dead. If either of our stumps WAS a vig I'd think they'd claim it so we know for sure to look for a SK. And just how would that do that? We'd know the stump was a maple and just ignore everything they said. Sure, I suppose they could LITERALLY spam the day threads with hundreds of nonsense messages, but that would be poor sportsmanship IMHO. Because janitoring is meant to obscure if the lynched was scum or not, and killing the main opposition to the lynched would make it more obvious that the lynched one IS scum... at least that makes sense to me. Thanks for holding off then - I was suspecting such a thing since having PM ability would make the game almost over. All the town PRs could just claim to you in private and then you could make sure there's no dups or other evidence of scum infiltration and act like the town block leader and we'd wipe the maples out in a hurry.

Oh my. The no stump is a bummer, but I think that'll over time be balanced by having the stumps around to talk AND the fact that they'll be able to tell any confirmed Oaks about what they HAVE done in the past (their roles, anything they learned before being felled, etc). Interesting twists in this here forest for sure!

Correction to the vote count - there's 14 names after Alastair, so he has enough to lynch right now. I thought he'd been hammered already so when I saw the 12 on the count I double-checked it :)

I just meant leader in that if you jumped off the bandwagon first, others would play follow the leader. Who knows who the town "leader" will be since that usually takes days and investigations and stuff to come out. I've heard of forests where there's extra voting to pick spokespersons and stuff, but none of that here. No, it mostly tells who lives in the right time zone to be online after the first person jumped.

Let's assume that's true - what would you determine from it? Would the maples jump off the wagon first? Or would those changing votes to follow the leader be lazy oaks? I agree, which is why I called it a crazy conspiracy idea and then pointed out the flaws in thinking this is a scum move.

It is definitely worth discussion. IF he's scum, I would indeed think any scum who voted for him are in trouble now, since being the first to jump off would paint a target on them. But then, if we wanna go crazy conspiracy, maybe BOTH of them are scum and did this whole fake PM thing to justify unvoting, but since several of us didn't support it they're still stuck and now looking for a new way off the wagon. But the flaw in that thought that he's scum - surely it'd be easier to pick a new day 1 victim and start a new bandwagon on flimsy evidence than go through all this to try to unvote him. It's gotta be easier to make a new target than to just remove a target.

You said it right, it's style. Conversational English, where you write similar to how you'd talk in person. People leave out nouns all the time when it's freakin' obvious what is meant. In this case, since I quoted you, I thought it was clear who I was directing it to. And as for typos, I believe you mean "style OF English" there, not ON English. So.... (and to be ENTIRELY clear, I'm not at all upset or mad or whatever at you Hazel... Just playing the game.) (but to be clear again, I didn't vote for Hazel due to typos. I voted Hazel due to being too lazy to care about typos. Or who to vote for. Or much else)

Ok, I'm going to Vote: Hazel Hazelnut (goliath) Why? Lazy. Wanted to random vote, says here too lazy to reread before posting (sometimes that leads to simple typos, sometimes to bigger errors). And seems like most of Hazel's suspicions are based on previous adventures instead of paying attention here.

Hm. I see what you and Simon are saying about it being scummy to ask for help, but at the risk of wifom-ing, I think it sounds legit. Yeah, an oak should be fighting hard to save themselves right now. We have no ACTUAL information to help find the maples, so the next best thing is save oak lives and since the only person any of us knows about for sure is ourselves (maples obviously excluded), to any oak the worst possible lynch is themselves. And yeah, any trees that have been around a while have seen that there's usually a tree that starts to lead the forest. Whether that's you, time will tell. But why WOULDN'T an oak come asking for help? He's right - day 1 lynches are like a car wreck on ice - just keeps piling on. But if you can move a car out of the way, maybe the pileup can be avoided. The flaw in his logic is that why on earth would you (or anyone else he might ask for help) trust him? Sure, you unvoting might well save him, but you have no way to know that he's oak and not a maple. Conclusion - I don't think asking is a scummy thing, but I also don't see a reason for you to help him out.

Ok, fine, you were trying to start an easy lynch and gave up when it failed. Better?

Alright, finally through all the pages. Some of these comments have been made by others, but if it's true it's worth repeating. Yeah, lots of talk about this. I don't think an edit mistake is particularly suspicious, I think you're trying to start an easy lynch since someone has a bunch of penalty votes. Another topic that's been beaten to death, so my final thoughts are that Hazel didn't earn the un-poke at all yet (when this comment was made and unvoted). If the poke was to get her talking, she'd only said "hey I've been gone and I'm back." You should have at LEAST waited for some substance to come from Hazel's holes [we don't have mouths, so I assume we talk from the holes that trees always seem to have] before unvoting. So, scumbuddies? I mean, I've poked and unpoked in other woodland hunts, but the poke-ee has to earn the unpoke at least a little. This was a welfare check. Yeah, this and the random vote comment. Yep, odds are an oak will be lynched by mistake today and it'll be for some dumb reason. But at least we can then look over everyone's comments and voting to try to detect the mapley ones. If you're openly just voting randomly, there's nothing we can learn there. So that is a very un-oaky attitude. Pick someone worth voting for and give a reason so we can analyze it later when you or they have been cut down. Meh, it's legit to not have access for a while, sorry. Many workplaces don't ahve wifi, cell doesn't work everywhere, etc. Now, the lack of much followup now that Hazel's had time is a different story, but voting her for THIS reason seems poor to me.

Credit where it's due, you got 1 point on my hardwood scale for coming forward (that's hardwood scale, not morning wood scale, whole different topic there). It's something, but you need like a bajillion points to be considered trustworthy. So don't get too excited (see, morning wood pun for you there )

Given that we're 6 pages into a very talkative day 1, care to quote when you make comments like that? And speaking of, as a tree, I'm very glad that this is electronic pages only here. Paper scares me. Yup. Saying "garden variety" seems darn fishy fishing to me. Lots of ways to banter that wouldn't have made the Alder step in. Ice cream gets CHOCOLATE or marshmallow syrup. Maple is strictly for pancakes, waffles, and french toast.

Dang, that's some deja vu you're bringing up. But how? I've lived a long time and I don't THINK I had any lives before this. Ok. 1. You're weird. Yogurt on pancakes? That's just wrong. Maple syrup (the real stuff, not fake) is the only way to go. And some butter. 2. Yes, the "garden variety" comment bugged me too, especially after our Elder Alder made a clarification on that topic. Seemed like fishing to me. Love the birds, they sing pretty. Squirrels tickle, but they're ok. Ants, HATE them! The only thing worse is termites. Oh, and woodpeckers. Those are the exception to loving birds.