That is really easy to ask after you know the results of the lynch. We learn through lynches. Of course we'd be happy if we never lynched villagers, but that just isn't possible.

This is a fair point, but what I (and others) were saying during the day is that there never was a good reason to vote for Chief Rum. One of the benefits to putting votes on somebody is to see how they defend themselves. We all knew that CR was not going to be around to do so. So, the lynch vote became based on lynching somebody, instead of trying out an actual theory.

true. which is why i advocated a switch to lathum, although there wasn't really enough time to even learn anything from him defending himself due to damm RL getting in my way.

Ok, that I won't argue with. CR was not around to defend himself. Of course there is always the chance of others on his team (if he was bad) to push a little harder for another candidate. Had he turned out bad, we could have seen who was trying to get people to look places other than him. I will agree, though, that it would have been better if CR had been around to defend himself.

It would have been far better if people had voted for who they had wanted to vote for rather than getting sucked into the "we need to lynch SOMEBODY" mentality, which is just complete bs.

Eventually someone will need to die so we can understand how to evaluate those votes. As we go along in this game, we will probably start to learn something from those who chose to vote for people they thought were guilty, and those who were piling on to get a majority.

You act like EVERYONE voted for him. Just under half did not vote CR. You do have something to evaluate. Plus we have a higher percentage chance of hitting a bad guy in tomorrows lynch. That is the basic mechanic of the game.

Point me to one post where somebody other than Alan gave a reason for voting for Chief Rum, other than "have to make sure there's a majority." That means ELEVEN people voted for somebody they were unwilling to say was bad. So, you try to figure out what that means.

It means failing to lynch ENSURES you cannot eliminate a bad guy. Even lynching someone randomly gives you a better chance to win the game. As the good guys, we have more players to offset the fact we have little information to make the lynch. This allows more good guys than bad guys to die in order for the good guys to win.

This is actually a tired argument. Just vote whoever you think is bad. Next time don't wait until the lynch is over to declare yourself RIGHT AGAIN. I guess that means you KNOW Lathum is bad, since that is where your vote was. As someone else pointed out, you posted you were not sure. Actually until Lathum dies, we don't really know if you were RIGHT or not, do we?

What I was right about was that we were headed towards a bad lynch - one where not only did we lose a villager, but we learned absolutely nothing. I was far from the only one who pointed this out. There were several others who said the same thing. Really, it should have been obvious to any experienced player.

Post 719 is where I told you I voted for him because he was UTR versus Lathum. I had a good feeling about Lathum. His post about a conversion possibly failing was odd, but not a big enough issue to offset the pro village posts from Lathum up to that point. CR usually posts a bit in games and he has been really quite. I had no pro village feel about him. Unfortunatley we lynched a good guy and I'm not happy about that.

So shouldnt that make you take a closer look at those that started the votes? Lathum didnt come on until after 2-3 other vets...

You obviously have him confused with somebody else. :confused:

An experienced player should know our chances of lynching a bad guy in CR were low, but still better than zero percent that goes with a "no-lynch".

Hind sight is 20/20. If I am still alive when Lathum dies, I'll tell you if I was "right again". Then if he turns out bad, I'll tell you I was "wrong again". We have all been both right and wrong before.

He was quite the chatty kathy in the tombstone game. I'm pretty sure he has been pretty talkative in other recent games too.

I voted for Lathum, partly based on what st. cronin said in post #705 and partly because I was interested in how each reacted. At that time, however, I could see how people were voting for CR. I think it's a similar situation to yesterday, in that CR wasn't here to defend himself. It was different in that we knew CR was playing, but I feel that it made it very easy for ppl to pile onto him knowing there would be no resistance. Maybe it wasn't the best vote, but probably the easiest.

Lathum I believe was the second vote for Chief Rum. Second or third, and anyway, that vote had nothing to do with why I voted for him.

I am fine voting for somebody else, but I have not seen anybody other than myself post a circle of trust, or lay out any kind of indictment that I find meaningful.

Basically, Blade thinks Al is bad, and Al thinks Blade is bad, because of stuff that happened on Day 1, which day 1 is almost never meaningful - as I say in every game, bad guys don't slip up, and especially they don't call attention to themselves, on day 1. So other than the Blade-Alan peeing contest, what do we have to go on? Had people voted for people they were willing to accuse, then we could have looked at what happens tonight, and added that to the impressions people had during today, and there would have been a LOT more data.

What's to say that Blade didn't go overboard just so he could say "If I was bad, why would I draw attention to myself"?

Here is vote order. I was second vote on Chief Rum.

(446) Chief rum votes Saldana (1)
(482) Saldana votes Chief Rum (1)
(484) Izulde votes Blade (1)
(501) Jonathan Ezarik votes Daddy Torgo (1)
(504) Alan votes Chief Rum (2)
(532) Sndvls votes St.Cronin (1)
(552) Schmidty votes Chief Rum (3)
(554) BrianD votes Spleen (1)
(555) Lathum votes Chief Rum (4)
(557) St.Cronin votes Lathum (1)
(565) Tyrith votes Lathum (2)
(574) Blade votes Chief Rum (5)
(577) Jonathan Ezarik UNVOTES Daddy Torgo (0) ***
(577) Jonathan Ezarik votes Chief Rum (6)
(583) Mr.Wednesday votes Lathum (3)
(585) Thomkal votes Chief Rum (7)
(593) Grammaticus votes Chief Rum (8)
(594) Swaggs votes Lathum (4)
(595) Ntndeacon votes Lathum (5)
(607) Kwhit votes Lathum (6)
(611) Blade UNVOTES Chief RUm (7) ***
(611) Blade votes Alan (1)
(616) Sublime votes Lathum (7)
(625) Spleen votes Chief Rum (8)
(700) Lonestargirl votes Chief Rum (9)
(704) Tyrith UNVOTES Lathum (6) ***
(704) Tyrith votes Swaggs (1)
(707) BrianD UNVOTES Spleen (0) ***
(707) BrianD votes Lathum (7)
(708) Mr.Wednesday UNVOTES Lathum (6) ***
(708) Mr.Wednesday votes Chief Rum (10)
(712) DaddyTorgo votes Lathum (7)
(738) Izulde UNVOTES Blade (0) ***
(738) Izulde votes Chief Rum (11)
(752) Dodgerchick votes Chief Rum (12)
(758) Kwhit UNVOTES Lathum (6) ***
(758) Kwhit votes Chief Rum (13)
(765) Kwhit UNVOTES Chief Rum (12) ***
(765) Kwhit votes Lathum (7)

Well, shoot. I guess I get one post to say goodbye.

After reading through all of this today, all I can say is, more than half of you are complete doofuses (doofi?) and deserve to lose if you're good (and applauded if you're bad, since, of course, you would want me dead).

This must be how the mob mentality works--get something so flimsy as to be as transparant as glass, and then all the sheep jump on to "make sure we get a lynch."

The one guy who stated a "reason" was Alan, and even he screwed it up, confusing my post questioning saldana's motives as somehow support for him. One does not equal the other, Alan.

Oh well, I'm rooting for evil, in which ever way it comes. Good did me no good.

Toodles, kiddos.

Sorry you had to go chief, i wish you had been around to help defend yourself. Have a good one

Schmidty, Lathum, and Izulde stood out as potentially wolfish votes, to me at least.

Dola, i do find it odd that the two sides of the alan/chief and blade/saldana debate ended up disjointed today.

Salanda and Alan being the first two votes on chief(and the reason most followed), while i said i thought he was good, and chief obviously would have supported that view.

Just ironic

st.cronin,

I know you have LoneStarGirl in your circle of truth, but is there a reason for that other than her early vote against Scoobz?

no

Why put faith in a random selection like that?

As I said, it's just a starting point. There are some other people I have varying degrees of trust in, based on things they have said or done. Right now nobody is ironclad in my circle, and I'm not willing to bet the house that anybody is bad.

Why? Because my personal philosophy is it's better to get a lynch and have a percentage chance, however low, that we hit a bad guy like we did on Day One than completely give the bad guys a pass?

Like I said, the chance of potentially getting another bad guy with a lynch that's the only reason I switched off of Blade.

Low % > 0%

A clear night sky turns into a clear dawn as the cock crows. Some of you begin to awaken and dress yourselves. As you are on the way to break the evening fast, you hear a scream come from a side road near the Inn of the Dancing Pony.

You all head in the direction of the scream, and come across the body of Antalia Daverheft. Her body is lying in the dirt face down, with around a dozen stab wounds on her lower back. The mess looks a little less messy then yesterday’s overkill. Is the killer getting better at the job or is this the work of a new villain?

You gather together before breakfast at a hole dug for a new post. You decide to use it as a quick burial location and say a few words. With little taste for food you head back to her room at the Inn of the Dancing Pony. Here you discover a variety of tools and equipment.

A local maid is there cleaning up the room, and after some questioning, you find that Antalia was rather open with the maid. Apparently, Antalia was an adventurer that had come here to explore and find rewards in the Barrow Downs. You can find nothing that relates her to any faction, an in fact, there is no appearance that she even belonged to a side.

After having done a lot of work for the morn, you fill yourselves with food and reassemble to begin a new day of deliberations.

SnDvls has been killed

Day Three has begun and will end at 10:00 pm EST Wednesday Evening.



-Anxiety

"shoot" we lost another one! grrrrr.

*bedtime*

It says she wasn't on either side, so am I to take that SnDvls was a person with his own victory conditions?

That is what it looks like.

From the rules post:


Anxiety, what do the different colors on the roster mean?

dola,

To add to that, it does not say SnDvls was on the side of light or the town. That indicates SnDvls does not count for light in the overwhelm ratio. So DaddyTorgo, I'm not sure we lost another one. This may have been one of the best things that could happen on a night kill, short of one bad faction killing the other.

From what I can tell it looks like the colors signify either what side or what faction that they belong to. This takes us back to the discussion from yesterday and muddies the waters a bit more I think as for what allegiance Scoobz was. It very clearly seems to show that Sndvls was his own individual, he was not on the side of light or dark. So that then makes me wonder again about Scoobz.

Either people can have allegiances to light or dark that are independant of being in a faction (ie: alignment), or Scoobz was in a faction and when deaths occur to people in say Saruman's faction their death is spelled out a bit differently.

It appears that Sndvls was indeed completely neutral and independant, whereas Scoobz at the least had an alignment.

of course I do, I know I am a simple villegar.

I'm off to work but will be back long before deadline.

If St.Cronin and Tyrith want to continue to lead the charge against me thats fine but the only thing you will get is voting records.

I am just a normal villegar and have no defense or exciting role reveal.

This is a downright insult. I'm so sick of people saying no-lynch is better than lynching a villager but how in god's green earth can we find out whose bad until we get a lynch? With that mentality, we'll never lynch anyone until a seer comes out and posts a list of who they scanned, by then, it's game over, villagers lose.

Fine, if that's what ya'll want, then so be it.

vote schmidty



His vote on CR was suspicious as he only voted with no explanation and hasn't posted since. Now that we find out CR was good, we have something to go off of.

I'm off for a few hours.

I should add that I wanted to vote for Schmidty yesterday but the way the votes were towards the end, I felt I HAD to vote for CR so as to get some info. Hope CR's death comes to our benefit.

damn I I keep getting night killed
I hope it's a respect thing, but dying by night 2 is really starting to suck

vote Lathum

I hope somebody has something better.

Good morning all.

Yeah it sucks that we didn't get a bad guy in the lynch, but for me at least we had next to nothing to go on with either Lathum or Chief Rum yesterday, or anyone else for that matter. Thus it was much like a day 1 vote for me.

At first I thought St. Cronin had brought up some interesting points about Lathum, but as the day passed I just saw Lathum as a villager more and more. I would have voted for Lathum had he been the one in the lead at the time of my vote though because that's all it was-a feeling. I had no definite proof he was a villager. Same with Chief Rum. Hopefully some one will come forward with some evidence or info we can use in the vote today.

i feel your pain

dude....its werewolf.....people die.....you dont get to live to the end of every game....if i cried everytime i got killed, i would spend more time whining than i did playing....get over it, or dont play.

I believe several people have specifically said that they thought Lathum was acting like a villager. I would be interested in specifics.

I don't have any specifics for you. It was just his general tone and the way he defended himself as the day wore on that made me feel he might be a villager. Just the feeling I got from reading his responses. I could be wrong, wouldnt be the first time, won't be the last. :)

Blade mentioned that this isn't what Lathum acts like when he's bad, this is how he acts when he and Lathum get into villager/villager fights. That said, Lathum has been bad so much now that it wouldn't surprise me if he's learned new tricks, especially since the last game went poorly for him.

My main deal with Lathum is that you can't take every argument made against you as wolfish if you're just a vanilla. Some of them have logic behind them. Some of them don't. Attack the content of the argument, not the fact that the argument exists, because just blaming people because they're voting for you gets nowhere.

All this said, I'm not voting early. We're giving the bad guys a nice, easy way to not have to show any kind independent thought and get caught. Let someone else make the wake today and see if it changes things.

How so? In terms of how the vote was cast, or when it was cast?

I disagree on Lathum, FWIW, because even at the point where he voted, he was picking up votes and looking like the alternate candidate to Chief Rum. I think you're seeing what you want to see there.

In terms of when the vote was cast, I would also throw out Thomkal as one who cast a middle-of-the-pack vote on Chief Rum.

I just woke up, and I won't have time to catch up on things until later this morning (about 2 hours or so from now).

Before I go for ahwile, I need to make sure you all know (especially Dodgerchick), that any vote for me is a total and utter waste. Not just because of the obvious fact that I'm good guy, but also for another, MUCH more important reason.

Comments like this would make me think one would attract all kinds of attention from the people you don't want attention from. If you are good, comments like this will have the bad guys looking into you at night and if you are bad, comments like this will have the good guys wondering what in the world you mean and probably put pressure on you.

In a game like this with multiple factions, I forsee you getting a bit of both.