I don't like that line of thought at all -- at least the part in bold. It would be a bold wolf move to criticize one of their own when he had a lot of votes on him the day before. But EagleFan is bold enough to try that, IMO.

But thinking of EF, we should probably try to find out if we think we weer v/v/v last night or v/v/w or v/w/w even. I need to get some work done before I can devote myself to finishing the work hoops did documenting all the vote changes, though.

Danny- is nightfall available?

I don't feel like you "lathumed" me into a long post. But when you ask for more details on the thought process I can either give them or clam up. In this case, I chose to give them.

Pass, I can finish the vote change stuff this morning. I just figured if there was conversation going on here and now I would take part in it rather than going back into the old posts again.

That makes total sense, and follows my own thinking, that if there was a conversation here, I might as well take part now, and catch up on my work later. :)

I just don't know what to make of this. You stand by your vote for him for reasons you can't share, but you're not going to actively encourage others to vote for him, and you've actually questioned those who voted for him along with you.

You'd think that if whatever secret knowledge it is that you have makes you believe that voting off PB would be good for the village, then you'd want the rest of the village to join you in voting for him. This luke-warm "I'm voting for him but do what you want" is puzzling.

What I'm trying to illuminate is the Needies' thought process. Why would they criticize a top vote getter? Doing so makes a case (a weak one, but one) for him being a regular patient. If he is a regular patient why would they do that and possibly give us a bit more information? Either because he's really a Needie, as you posit, or because they want us to focus on PurdueBrad for some reason.

It just strikes me as odd that they wouldn't criticize elsewhere, and try to limit what we have to work with.

I have a good guess as to what is going on with Lathum. Essentially imagine that he has acquired a piece of information that does not tell him that PB is bad, but gives him perhaps 50/50 odds that PB versus another player is bad. Therefore, he's targeting his vote on those good odds, while watching to see what the rest of us do. He can't say for sure that it's the right vote, in that case, but is a better possibility than a random target.

Addendum to my previous post: I also think EF needs to be checked out. After no real scrutiny came to anyone we arrested last game, criticizing a wolf might buy that same security. PLUS, not voting today allows him not to have to give any voting data to be scrutinized. I'm not saying vote him, somebody with some sort of ability should check him out.

Ahh.. I see. But that line of thinking also leaves him quite a bit of wiggle room if he's actually a wolf doing a gutsy move. If PB comes back good, he can say "Well I wasn't totally sure.. and never told anyone to vote with me."

And I am very, very afraid of that happening. Although Danny's post about not getting back to him makes me think, from a meta-gaming standpoint, that Lathum is likely good as well.

I'm not voting a nightfall even if everyone else does. I think there can be some discussion today and I'm interested in seeing how much of a runaway people make this. I actually am very eager to see how people play this one.

I agree that your death is going to answer some questions, but I haven't liked how this run away has gone. I'm just going to see how people play it I guess.

PB, can you quote "Danny's post" or are you talking about something Lathum posted that he says is from Danny?

c'mon Clap, you gotta realize there is more to it then that.


Huh?

This stinks to me, wolves do analysis? Last I checked the wolves know who the patients are and really don't need to be dependant on analysis.

Alan, what are your thoughts on PB accepting his death, asking for Nightfall, etc? Does it skew more villager or wolf to you?

#877

No way I vote nightfall on Day 2

Which I think is going to be the hallmark of this game. Everyone having a private role they can't discuss is going to lead to a lot of this. I don't think anyone should feel compelled to follow his vote, perhaps someone else will have been led to a hunch last night.

FWIW, I've gotten questions about different things from lots of people, so from a meta gaming standpoint, that doesn't mean anything.

My thoughts on him haven't really changed much from yesterday afternoon late. I asked him questions, he answered them and the most important thing to me about yesterday was even though he made some moves that I felt were pointless, I didn't necessarily see an agenda there as I did with others (even if that was mistaken on my part).

He just is continuing that today, he seems like he doesn't have much more that he is going to say beyond what I asked him yesterday. Whether that is because he has a villager role that was instructed that he can't tell anyone of his role, or any information from actions that he did.. or it could be because he is a wolf feeling that is the best way off the hook.

I guess if he is a wolf, I just haven't seen it yet. Of course I've been wrong before, I'm just having a tough time swallowing how easy it has been for others to just accept it though.

PurdueBrad, rather than just accepting your fate so blindly, it would be nice to hear some analysis from you. Who are you going to vote today?

it is day 2 - the common sense rules do say that if lathum is alive tomorrow we should vote him anyways hmm?

I gotta lot of shit last night for arguing to stay alive during baby bath time (which just so happens to be from 6:30-7:00 CST, middle of hockey game, middle of deadline) that I'm just not putting that effort in again. I laid all my cards that I'm allowed to lay on the table all ready.

Also, side note Alan, if I came off snippy at all, the above may also be why.

u bathe the baby for an hour? that is trez wierd!

well 30 min is wierd too :)

Hey Autumn, my vote should still be pretty obvious from last night but that'll only throw one more person on my heap so right now I'll probably just vote for somebody that is already on me to try to avoid adding to the human pile on.

I also think if you looked above at two of my posts, I laid out all the analysis I have. Telle-suspicious, Martin D's reasoning for voting for me sounded of wolf setting up a defense for later, EF needs looked at, and I think there has to be a wolf somewhere in that first run on me.

why so cut and dry?

What if I am alive tomorrow and there is no night kill?

What then?

No, the wife is a lunatic and it's these freaking process it doesn't need to be (particularly during the Pens game). GUH, don't get me started.

Heh, yeah, like when I asked you if there was a 'mechanic' role. :p

Oh, and I may return to my standard vote as well because I'm usually the stubborn/tunnel-visioned one of the two of us, not him, and I'm getting that feeling a bit here.

Time to check your math ;-)

sorry, i failed to put a ;) in that post above.

twas a joke man.

I don't know what to make of all this

PB, that's not the best idea. Personally, I'm interested in making this so that it's not a runaway, and I think Alan is also. At this point, however, I'm not very sure who to vote for to try to get this to be a two-person race. You could really help the village out by picking someone, and giving some reason for it, other than, "well it's my standard vote"

Okay, I'll commit to one of the following three:

Telle- As I've stated again and again, the moves to seemingly protect ntn, particularly on day 1, struck me as odd.

Martin D- The explanation for his vote, of all the votes I got, seemed to already set forth a defense for being wrong.

Hoopsguy- Showing a bit of tunnel-vision here that I don't normally catch from him. We ARE always on opposite teams, which means that I should probably vote him. And he jumped on quick in the run that I'm convinced has a wolf pushing it.

So it'll be one of those three Pass.

Corrected/clarified a bit.

Well PB, I stated numerous times why I didn't want to vote for ntn. I personally think it's shitty to vote for someone just because you don't like their playing style. So that left you and EagleFan. I didn't feel good about the case against him.. it seemed to me like people were using his playing around as an excuse to vote for him and that seemed like a good way for wolves to hide votes. So that just left you. And yeah I do think you were the unfortunate victim of a random run at that point.. but you were also as good a target as anyone else.

Which is why I don't fault your vote Telle, just on day 1 the defense of anybody, regardless of reason, doesn't make much sense.

Telle, who are you going to vote for today?

Oops, hit the button too soon. But if he had come out bad, then you just tied your rope to an unknown entity that then screws you for the short remainder of your game. That's all. So your vote for me, I don't mind.

Honestly, there's no need to start a pity party for ntn. I don't think he gets voted for on Day 1 more often than anyone else.

Out for lunch duty. Should stop by later.

Concur on NTN - I would guess he lasts longer, on average, in WW games than just about any other player out there.

PB, when you get back can you explain why you think that I have "tunnel vision" today? I think I've laid out my thought processes, on both Days 1 and 2, as explicitly as anyone.

I would understand that you don't like where my Day 2 vote is compared to Day 1, when I was actually in a position of defending you compared to EF/NTN (thought there was a run to protect one of those two) but I don't get the "tunnel vision" comment at all.

I wasn't defending ntn.. I was just against the reason that people were using for voting for him. I know there are games where I'm quiet.. mainly because of some mental health issues that sometimes make it difficult for me to interact with others (irony of bringing that up in this game...). So it kind of felt to me like if he's not welcome because he's often quiet, then maybe I wouldn't be welcome either when I'm not feeling my best. So it touched on a personal note for me.

It's interesting that no other votes have come out so far today. I'm inclined to follow Lathum's lead, in one sense. My other thoughts noted above make me wonder if we shouldn't be pursuing EagleFan, and whether this criticism was meant as cover for him.

I honestly don't know. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to lynch PurdueBrad.. because otherwise we'll just be debating the Lathum vs PB thing for who knows how long. But at the same time I don't wan to just hop on a bandwagon.

Passacaglia.. any reason for all your vote hopping yesterday? EagleFan said that he was just messing around with the whole "being crazy" theme, but you never offered up an explanation of your actions.

Thanks for doing this, PB. So you're not looking for people who voted for ntn -- in fact, you're looking exclusively at people who voted to SAVE ntn?

The focus on PB has been due to Lathum's early vote on him, not because EF was blocked from voting. Unless Lathum is a wolf, the wolves could not have known when they submitted their action on EF that Lathum would come after PB right after results were published.

Or am I missing something in the above point?