fhomess

I agree that this interpretation of last night's events makes a fair bit of sense, too, and lines up with everything I experienced. Vote: Ensign Toby Rockford (darkdragon)

I'd just like to say that the lack of people commenting on this situation is disturbing to me. If you have something to say about it, and you're vanilla, I expect you to do it publicly. Silence on this matter will be considered avoidance and raise suspicion. I've spoken to a number of people in private, heck, I've heard a role claim from almost everyone left alive - whether it came directly from you or on your behalf through someone else. Almost all of the vanilla players have said something along the lines of "It's hard to contribute more unless the town core is telling us things." Well, let's have your opinions then!

I really wanted to write a play, but I'm not much of a playwright, and can only do Grover impressions (near..... far!). However, since you all seem so bored, I'll propose a victim for today's lynch. Player X has been very fun to talk with over the past few days, and has shared a lot of insight into which of you are scummy and which aren't based on post analysis. The problem is, Player X hasn't been willing to apply that post analysis consistently across the people he's been telling me. Some people were cleared by posts that struck me as less conclusive in his methodology than others who were not cleared by the same methodology, and vice versa. So for a little while I've been feeding Player X tidbits of truths and untruths to see where they might slip up. After my claim yesterday, I told this player that I was in contact with a protector and a PGO. Neither of which were true at the time. This player has done nothing but pester me in an effort to find out the identity of these roles, and when I did get in contact with the protector, learned that the protector would protect me last night. By this point Player X was in touch with some of the same people, and knew it, too, but still didn't know who the protector was. It seems, however, that some very smart member of the town core allowed Player X to change the town plan and have me not be protected. I nearly cried when Player X told me I was not going to be protected, while Player X and his scum buddies did jumping jacks. As you know, I'm still here. It seems that Player X's request to change the town plan didn't go through after all! Yay! This morning, Player Y contacted me to suggest that I had been saved by the protector after I had unwittingly targetted.... the PGO! Uh, right. Player Y assures me they were the PGO in the prequel (which was undoubtedly da bomb). Anyway, this is all well and good but it sure does seem a bit of an odd coincidence that Player Y suggested PGO to me after I had fabricated that idea to Player X. Are they connected? You be the judge! Anyway, it also seems mighty odd that after spending a large effort into getting the town core to not protect me, that the scum kill didn't go through. For reasons I don't want to get into publicly, I have very little reason to believe the player the town blocker targeted was the scum killer. The protector confirms they protected me. So what that suggests is that the scum went for the obvious protector target after all. Maybe they thought I had been left unprotected? Oh, and Player X keeps asking me questions such as: "Who's the town protector?" "Can you tell me now?" "No?" "How about now?" To clue the rest of you in, player X is Ensign Holloway. Does he seem as scummy to you as he does to me?

I'm a bit disappointed that my kill was unsuccessful, but quite pleased with the fact that we have no scum kill. Hopefully the mechanics of all that failure will come to light. If you saw anything, please do share it. At this point, I would think that silence aids the scum more than anyone.

Wall of text, here we go! Ok, here's the deal everyone... I'm the town Vig. Apologies for my ineffectiveness so far, but I will explain a bit. As for today, I have been quiet since I plugged into the holodeck's camping simulator last night and was off on a weekend campout that was so engaging I didn't realize it was time for breakfast! Funny how in this day and age you have to plug in so that you can unplug! Anyway, I claimed to Commander Gordon on Day 2 due to a poor read of him and soon found myself under the Magic Mushroom's umbrella along with Willis, Gordon, and another player who claims blocker. When Falcon was still alive, he mentioned that he was in talks with a blocker. That day, I had no reason to distrust anyone in the group and the group decided to go ahead and proceed with the killing of Ensign Campbell for his post editing. Made sense given what we knew at the time. BTW, my night 1 kill was indeed Mandel. I don't know why my MO changed from night 1 to night 2, but I think perhaps it was just a glitch. Last night, I went after Wright due to some intelligence from Gordon. So... where does this get us today other than an easy lynch of Gordon now that we've all eaten the pooped mushrooms? If you recall, the core that Falcon built included 5 of us. Along with Falcon, there was Willis, Gordon, myself, and a player who claimed blocker. Now when I went and asked Samantha York for the list of roles, she was happy to reveal the names that everyone else already knows, but she didn't want to share the Vig with me. What a strange thing to do given that I'm the Vig. So I asked the blocker why he claimed vig to York, and he confirmed that he did. Why would you do such a thing, Blocker? According to York, the person who claimed Vig to her has requested that their name not be revealed publicly. But that information is already in the hands of scum through Gordon. Why would you do such a thing, Blocker? If you know that the scum knew your role and mine through Gordon, why did you continue to mislead York? All this said, York is in the clear in my book. I don't see why York would hide the Vig identity from me, and I don't see why the Blocker would be lying to her about stuff the scum already knows unless the Blocker is scum, too. Last thing I'll say is that Lieutenant Daly was Donna Willis' watcher target last night. Read into that what you will. Oh, and Vote: Commander Andrew Gordon (Scubacarrot). Pissed off you were that I told LEGOman that I thought I was being played by a scum role cop, eh? I was right!

For now.

I wouldn't mind hearing it now, to be honest. I think the case against Burbank is stronger at this point, but I agree that it's possible you're the scum here and not him. I'll keep my vote on Wheeler. Burbank has more than enough votes, and Wheeler hasn't responded to my satisfaction yet. Wheeler's been noticeably quiet since our exchange, and I can't help but wonder why. To piggy back on my request to hear your defense now, Ensign York, your desire to delay your defense for a day seems sketchy. If you're a Loyalist, I see no reason why you wouldn't want to make that clear to everyone as soon as possible. The Purists already know who is and who isn't with them.

I will admit it's possible that scum did not vote for Mandel, but I think it's unlikely. Take a look at the vote tally from Day 1: Note that I added Waterbrick Down to the votes for Willis as it appears the admiral overlooked that vote. I also added the non-voters. The people in green have all been killed one way or another and are now confirmed as Loyalists. In my mind, there are four voting groups: 1. Pewter bandwagon 2. Alternate bandwagon (Mandel voters) 3. Independents (Gordon and Willis voters, Campbell has been unfortunately resolved) 4. Non-voters The only group large enough to contain a standard scum team as well as a townie or two is the Pewter bandwagon (provided you grant me that I'm removing myself from the Mandel voters as I know myself to be loyal, but you don't have to if you don't want to). I don't believe the scum all voted for Pewter. It wouldn't be the most logical behavior for scum. I think they split the vote so as to avoid a lynch and because they knew the primary candidates weren't on their team. So my thought was, pick a group, look at some behaviors out of that group, accuse, and see what happens. I'd be completely unsurprised if there was a scum hiding amongst the independents and/or non-voters. I really hope most of us didn't vote for him for that reason exclusively. That's a terrible reason to vote. Are you completely forgetting the discussion around his scum claim and how people felt that in the light of what happened on Day 1, it was the best evidence we had at the time? If you did it for vote analysis, where is your vote analysis? What has it taught you? This is a more reasonable justification for your turnaround, but aside from Falcon, the others you quote aren't in the clear yet, either.

Great... we've got a tree stump who wants Stumptown. It seems a little bit, though, like he's not the only one who's trying to participate at the level of a tree stump. Too many here are not visibly trying to get to the bottom of things and out these purists. So to get things moving a little bit more, I'm going to go ahead and vote for someone I want to hear more from: Vote: Lieutenant Michelle Wheeler (Inconspicuous) For the following reasons: 1. On Day 1, you easily brushed aside the issue that Pewter claimed scum in PM as a joke. Prior to this, you had already voted for Mandel, although that vote came after the news about Pewter had already been breached. 2. On Day 2, you easily went along with the vote for Pewter despite the vote being on him for the same reason as on Day 1. I'm sure it was a fine plan because you knew he wasn't scum. Unfortunately, this doesn't match your comment from day 1. 3. The two primary candidates for the vote on day 1 were Pewter and Mandel. Both have now been proven Loyalists, which leads me to believe that both received votes by scum. Of the living people who voted for each, there are 7 who voted for Pewter and 5 who voted for Mandel. One of those 5 was me, and I know I'm not scum, so that really just leaves four remaining. Since that's a smaller group to narrow down, I'd like to start there. At this point, you strike me as the scummiest of those four.

I can confirm that the conversations that have been posted are accurate from what I was privy to. I didn't know anything about this sting of Falcon and Pewter's, so when I saw that Pewter was fishing for scum I figured I might be able to find who his partner was. There was nothing in Pewter's responses to make me think he wasn't genuine, and the best way to find out more information was to be coy about my intentions. I honestly think that if I was scum and had recieved a message like that in private that I'd have seriously considered taking him up on the offer. You'll notice that I used the phrase "Who all is invovled here?" to try to get more info out of him. I'm not sure how knowing that would've helped me if I was scum. If I was scum, I'd have figured that out as soon as we joined. You asked for Burbank to be investigated rather than have us pursue the argument further, and then you jumped up to defend Burbank when I suggested that if you really thought he might be scummy that we should pursue the lynch. Your reaction has been nothing but defense of Burbank and I can't figure out where that defense is coming from. I will not respond to that last question. If I know who has any PR's, then I surely am not going to share information with someone I suspected from the moment you argued for Burbank. I don't much care about Burbank, you could replace Burbank with anyone here. What I care about is why you were so quick to defend Burbank unsolicited.

Sorry, I thought you were trying to suggest we've got too few killers for the MO's that we've seen, so we should disregard the MO's. I've just not seen that before. Pewter was the lynch candidate, so his death, however it happened, is unsurprising. I think perhaps we're just confusing what each other is saying. At any rate, I'm frustrated by the lack of discussion today. It seems that we ought to have some more evidence to go on by now. Perhaps some people have been cleared that I'm unaware of. Some of those who said very little during the first couple of days have again said very little today as well. Yes, it's still not even lunchtime yet, but we're not going to catch the purists by waiting for them to tell us they're scum. With loyalists making mistakes like the ones Pewter and Campbell have made, we're not in good shape.

You know, if you're a Loyalist, you need to pay closer attention. There have been 4 kills and 3 different MO's. None of the theories that have been posited about the MO's are all that far out there. I can't understand why someone would suggest that the different MO's would belong to the same killer at this point unless you happen to know that's true. What have you observed so far, Lieutenant Harper? I've observed you casting no vote on Day 1, and the first vote for Ensign Pewter on Day 2, all while not contributing any original thought to the conversation to this point.

I don't see a whole lot of sense in claiming to be a Fanon at this point if he isn't one. He's already been lynched and claiming Fanon isn't going to cause people to unvote him. If he's revealed to be a Purist tomorrow, then all he's done is cause some of us to think about additional possibilities overnight. We'll stop thinking about those as soon as he is revealed tomorrow. I will say that if he does turn out to be a Fanon, then I don't think we learn nearly as much from the voting patterns of Day 1, which is unfortunate. Of course, there's nothing to be learned from those voting patterns until the result is actually revealed on him. If there are two teams, we can assume them to be joint as of tomorrow. Vote: Ensign Brian Pewter (Palathadric) The key vote was the 11th as that was the hammer vote. Any vote beyond that point, including the ones since the Fanon reveal should be scrutinized at the same level. That said, I think Pewter's lynch today was a pretty clear bandwagon from early on. By the way, it's getting chilly in here... did someone leave the Fanon?

Well, there's been quite a bit of chatter since I was last here to comment. I'm in agreement with those that can't see Campbell's post edit as anything other than decidedly non-townie. The interesting thing about it to me is that his edit tied the death of Mandel to framing him, when there was nothing related to Mandel that would implicate him in anyway. Oh, he meant Robbins? I'm sorry, getting caught editing is one thing, but getting caught doing it poorly is quite another. I don't have any problem with voting off Ensign Pewter, either. One thing that I find interesting in the whole conversation is Lieutenant McAndrews comments. I can get behind this. As long as Dakar dies too, I'm happy. However, they might have a protector, so I'd really like it if we could lynch the scummier of the two today, but yeah, this is the best plan. Who knows, maybe we'll get lucky and this mythical blocker of yours will block their protector. Something about this strikes me as awfully convenient for McAndrews, like he already knew what Pewter would claim. Maybe I'm reading too much into it. How does this make sense?

Let's think about this one by one: 1. Scum killer - only reason not to use the kill would be to convert. 2. Vigilante - seems like a good choice to not make a kill given how little information seemed certain yesterday, but not all vig's are given a choice in whether or not to use their action. 3. Serial killer - I can't think of a reason for an SK not to use their kill I tend to lean towards only two killers given our numbers on the ship, but I realize that's not necessarily true. I don't think Mandel makes a lot of sense from a scum standpoint given his divisiveness yesterday. This is especially true if Campbell is scum, as Mandel was the one to be close in terms of voting. I also think he would've been too high profile for an SK, so I tend to think Mandel was the vig kill. Sorry, I meant to say Pewter rather than Campbell. The training session has me all mixed up!

I can get behind this. I'm surprised you're so sure of this. Mandel seems a strange scum kill given he was a divisive figure yesterday. I know he spent a fair amount of time trying to convince people after the day ended that he was town - he spoke to me quite a bit about it as I had voted him late. I didn't have the same reaction that Lieutenant Wheeler did, though, and actually became more suspicious of him.

This isn't really true. The objective of town is to discern the truth about people's allegiances so that they can eliminate the scum. The objective of scum is to sow confusion so that town can't meet their objective. Scum already know the truth about most people's allegiances (allowing for neutrals and any other factions). Bandwagons may be a part of either of those, but if you define a bandwagon to be "people voting because that's what everyone else is doing" rather than everyone voting together because they truly believe the person is scum, then it really benefits scum more in the immediate term. Longer term, there are town benefits that can be determined from voting patterns, but those are sometimes hard to discern. Anyway, that's how I think about it. As for me, I'm going to go ahead and vote for you for the following reasons: 1. I believe your vote flip flopping to have been a mistake earlier 2. I believe your responses to it have been scummy enough to warrant strong consideration 3. I believe you are doing many of the things you suggest scum would do in the situation you are in, all while trying to tell us you aren't Vote: Ensign Timothy Mandel (Dannylonglegs)

I wasn't among them, but I believe they had a blocker and a megablocker.

So what you're suggesting instead of Commander Gordon putting a little pressure on someone who's not adding anything to the conversation is that we instead all continue to play nicely and throw furniture at the doors and walls? Perhaps we can throw them at Ensign Falcon instead. He needs a ride in the Waaahmbulance. I understand your point, that small hints like that are ways to try to convince any pro-loyalist killer to target someone, but if that's the case, at what point is it ok to actually start accusing someone of being scummy? We don't have much to go on this early. If we're going to start rooting out the evil among us, we need to put some pressure on people and see how they respond. We can't go around thinking that every accuser is scum because only scum would want to plant bad thoughts about others in the mind of townies. Commander Gordon isn't yet acting any differently than I would expect him to.

We need to do something about those mutant roses that grow out of all the corpses on this ship.

His teeth appear to be quite yellowed...

I would like to request that da bomb not go off in my face again so as to cause my hair to be charred blank (I'm a natural red head) and to stand up in such horrific fashion.

Chief Engineer Lieutenant Commander Colonel Excellence Highness Almighty Matthew Wilder MD PhD JD DS reporting for duty, Sir!

I have to disagree with this. Scum can go ahead and claim whatever they want, and if you look at past games, you can see that people skip over details and base decisions on information that they clearly should have known wasn't accurate. Yes, it was a bad roleclaim because it shouldn't have been believed, and of course it wasn't. As soon as Flipz told me about it I knew he was full of it. But that's not to say that scum haven't gotten away with that type of thing in the past. Just because the host says something, it doesn't mean that scum can't try to convince us contrary to that. Flipz didn't need to convince everyone, just enough people to avoid the lynch. It obviously wasn't there, and the vote was decided by the time Bob's statement came out, so he should've just accepted that fact, but it is true that people change their minds sometimes even in the face of what others accurately perceive to be blatant lies.

The change from a free service to a paid service is very recent. I've found that you can reuse a writeboard if you don't mind trashing all the old comments and creating a new version.