I'm heading off here for a while. Instead of just posting to be posting I think I'd rather play some Drakensang.

Vote PurdueBrad

We need to figure this thing out and get past it.

Probably not any more than any other player. He begged for a scan last night but didn't make a peep about it after Day 1 when he could have made a case for it when I was publicly asking for the seer to scan EF. If they were wolves together then it obviously would have been their preference to have PB scanned instead of EF.

Anyway, look. I'm sorry to anyone I've offended or pissed off but I have to defend myself to the hilt not one, not two, but now the start of a third straight day. Common sense would say that I have likely been scanned by now and no seer has jumped up and down yelling wolf. But even a cleared scan doesn't help me, as Pass is already laying the cunning groundwork.

I've really fought off the urge to just say "I'm a wolf" to get it over with even though I'm not. But so far I'm not. But for defending myself the rest of the day or even defending myself the rest of the game, I'm not. I don't think this is a lay down and die play...I am completely spent of information, what else can I possibly have or know. And frankly, if I do get any info, I'm not even allowed to reveal it.

It's Friday, I should be in a much better mood, these last two and a half days here have ruined that (first time that has really happened from other people, happened once early simply due to me making a stupid play as a villager and costing us a game).

All that, there, I'm sure you care.

I'm not sure I follow.

I'm sorry if I offended you, too -- I'm just playing a game here. But I don't think that there's nothing you can do. If you're a villager, you're in the unique position, well unique for us villagers, of *knowing* that we were villager/wolf last night. Does that information lead you toward anyone? Is that why your vote is on me, rather than purely out of spite?

Pass, at the end of Day 1 I posted in the thread that I though the seer should scan EF so we understood the voting results. Now, in fact D1 was a three horse race, with EF/NTN/PB although PB came up a little further back at the very end. But he was lead vote getter, by a two vote margin I believe, in the late afternoon.

If PB+EF are wolves together, and PB = cunning, then they CLEARLY would want to have PB scanned instead of EF. No one offered any other scan suggestions in the thread during the night phase. I would expect that either PB or one of the other wolves might have suggested "don't forget about PB, he might be a good scan target too!" to at least put another idea out there for the seer.

That did not happen. Because of this, I think it is a little less likely that PB is the cunning wolf who managed to attract a N2 scan and is moving towards trusted status.

Is it possible? Sure, I guess. But I'll play percentages every time on cunning wolf/seer scans. Cleared by seer > not cleared by seer.

And if the seer has not scanned PB by the end of N3 then I don't know what to tell him/her.

I hear ya on that. How was the fact that he begged for a scan on Night 2 involved, though?

No actually, it's what I saw as the illogical flip from saying you felt we were V-V the night before but as soon as EF is a wolf, thinking we must have been W-W. And the intended EF unvote.

As for who I see, my list, which is posted a few times:

Poli, Lathum, Autumn I trust

Saldana, Martin D need a look

Pass, Hoops, Telle, Abe, Jackal are distrust

Hey...I already fucking EXPLAINED why I changed my mind on that. So there. :p

PB, have you even read what I've posted today? I'm probably arguing harder for you than anyone in the room. I also backed you on Day 1.

Sorry you are having a tough game, getting heat, whatever. Guess what - it happens that way sometimes. End the pity party and get back into the game. Oh, and it probably wouldn't hurt to actually check your assumptions at some point instead of operating with "tunnel vision".

I can understand being super-frustrated with a game and wanting to change up the atmosphere.

As a villager, begging for a scan isn't optimal because it keeps the seer from being able to find a wolf. But I honestly don't think that PB has been at his most rational most of this game. In poker terms, I think he is on uber-monkey-tilt.

A lot of people in the thread, but not many interested in chatting.


I know others have said it, but I'm also not seeing the reasoning on the Telle vote. For you guys that are in the thread now -- what do you think of the *voters* on Telle (since I don't expect to get more reasoning on why Telle has been chosen anymore at this point)?

Actually, from a tunnel vision standpoint, I've broadened my horizons from just Telle to Telle and you to Telle and Abe and you and Pass and Jackal. So I'm not really locked in on anybody.

As for pity, no such luck. I would say apathy, or at least an attempt to get to apathy.

Didn't ask you to re-explain anything.

I don't expect to explain something and have you immediately believe it, just don't consistently ask me to repeat the same information a couple dozen times.

Here is the more advanced version of vote analysis from the first two days, based on my interpretations:

1. Claphamsa D1: PackerFanatic D2: Telle Unvotes: PB (D2 early) Timing: throwaway vote late D2 (Telle five back, inside of last 20-30 minutes) rather than voting one of lead dogs.

2. EagleFan - Evil Information Collector, Lynched Day 2

3. Barkeep D1: NTN D2: Telle Unvotes: Hoops (D2), PB (D2 late) Timing: PB move in last hour, moving vote from 8-7 PB to 7-7 PB/EF. This is marginally better than I recall last night, as it indirectly increased pressure on EF.

4. The Jackal D1: NTN D2: PB Unvotes: EF Timing: middle of D3, changes to PB 3 posts later and margin goes from 5EF - 4PB to 4EF - 5PB. He looks worse now than I recalled last night with no end votes on EF and an unvote on EF yesterday.

5. Abe D1: NTN D2: PB Unvotes: None Timing: D2 vote tied up PB with EF at 4-4. Links himself through trust to BK at least twice in thread.

6. PackerFanatic D1: NTN D2: EF Unvotes: Lerriuqs (D1) Timing: no real meaning to discern from D1 vote change. D2 vote on EF was meaningful (7-6 margin).

7. Hoopsguy D1: EF D2: PB Unvotes: None Timing: both pretty early votes, no moves to save EF on D1, no moves to hang EF on D2.

8. PurdueBrad D1: NTN D2: EF Unvotes: Hoops (D1, D2), EF (D1, D2), NTN (D1), Telle (D1) Timing: all kind of late vote changes, not always optimal for survival until last five minutes. Can certainly make a case that he was trying to help EF based on D1 NTN late call and D2 late movement away from EF to anyone offered as an option

9. Lathum D1: EF D2: PB Unvotes: Poli (D1), Abe (D1) Timing: pretty insignificant vote moves, early in day. Erratic play on D2 hard to understand, but suggests alternate win conditions

10. Martin D D1: PB D2: EF Unvotes: None Timing: D2 vote on EF was meaningful.

11. Poli D1: Abe D2: EF Unvotes: Lathum (D1), Telle (D1, D2), PB (D2) Timing: had multiple chances to put vote on EF on Day 2, did not until very end of day. This looks like one of the worst voting records of the people who have an EF final vote to their name.

12. Passacaglia D1: NTN D2: EF Unvotes: Lerriuqs (D1), Hoops (D1 + D2), EF (D2 - sort of) Timing; NTN votes on D1 tied it back up at 4-4 (he had voted No Lynch, then put vote back where it was when learning it was not a good option). His EF vote on D2 is muted by the fact that he illegally attempted to move his vote, failing to unvote when casting a vote for Telle. Another one of the weaker voting records with a EF vote to their name.

13. Lerriuqs D1: Pass D2: no vote Unvotes: None Timing: Day 2 vote on PB tied it at 7-7, not a good vote based on current information. Day 1 vote cast early, never revisited.

14. Dubb93 D1: EF D2: EF Unvotes: Saldana (D1), PB (D2) Timing: both unvotes came pretty early, both votes on EF were meaningful based on timing, no unvotes down stretch to help EF either time. Very good vote history.

15. Autumn D1: Telle D2: EF Unvotes: PB (D1) Timing: D2 vote on EF is strong, helping create two man race with PB. D1 unvote was very PB-friendly, moving him out of 2 vote lead to throw vote on distant candidate. One of drivers of potential 3rd candidate on Day 1.

16. Chief Rum D1: EF D2: PB Unvotes: None Timing: D1 vote was a big one against EF, D2 vote was a big one for EF. Has floated a couple of theories this game that have been dubious (EF/NTN voters with one wolf each early on, wolves would not block their own which was false on D2)

17. NTNDeacon - The Talker, Lynched Day 1

18. Telle D1: PB D2: PB Unvotes: Abe (D1) Timing: 2nd driver (w/Autumn) of 3rd candidate on D1 when there was a wolf in the mix. No good votes to help cause. Her votes have been early enough to not be magnified.

19. DaddyTorgo D1: no vote D2: EF Unvotes: PB (D2) Timing: Vote change on D2 looks good, but felt like he was looking for excessive credit for doing so when others were initial movers and shakers on EF.

20. AlanT - The Arbitrator, Night kill Day 2

21. Saldana D1: Dubb D2: Hoops Unvotes: EF (D2) Timing: pretty late unvote on EF brought race back to an 8-8 tie. D1 vote was more or less throwaway on likely villager.

No case to be made, I admit to trying to help him. Completely misguided but I tried 110% to help him.

And before it is asked again, I did it because I was trying to be more open-minded towards people I typically have a bias against and, again, I had a read, perceived or other-wise, on a Telle-ntn save dynamic.

So the issue is that you don't believe me? I had to change to something when EF died, since believing that we were villager/villager afterward would not have been wise. It seems more like you are taking issue with what I changed my thought to.

From there, here is my trust list right now. I think you can take this to suggest I'm not wild about the current vote count.

Trust:
Dubb, Autumn, MartinD, PackerFanatic

Slight Above Norm:
Lathum

Neutral:
Chief Rum, Pass, PurdueBrad, MommyTorgo

Nervous:
Telle, Poli, Abe

Distrust:
Saldana, Jackal, Clap

Need more from:
Lerriuqs, Barkeep

I don't know what the logical answer to not being VV is that we must have been WW. But frankly.

unvote pass

All right, we are talking around some circles here. Let's move some stuff around:


UNVOTE PURDUEBRAD
VOTE SALDANA

VOTE THE JACKAL

I'll almost certainly move this to another candidate if we can't get some momentum going but I really would prefer not to see PB voted out today. Tomorrow? Maybe.

That should read:

I don't why the logical answer...

PB, here's post 1587, where I explained my reasoning about why I went from thinking we were v/v to thinking we're w/w. If you have any questions about it, let me know.

anyone have a vote count?

I'm to dense to do one

Appreciated Pass, remembered the explanation, just doesn't mean I agree.

Telle - Clap (1532), Autumn (1535), BK (1566), Saldana (1616), Poli (1633)
PB - Lathum (1554), PF (1661), Abe (1702)
PF - Jackal (1637)
Lerriuqs - MartinD (1652)
Saldana - Dubb (1684), Pass (1722)
Jackal - Hoops (1723)
1532 - Clap votes Telle 1-0
1535 - Autumn votes Telle 2-0
1548 - Pass votes PB 2-1 Telle over PB
1554 - Lathum votes PB 2-2 Telle/PB
1566 - BK votes Telle 3-2 Telle over PB
1578 - PB votes Pass 3-2-1 Telle over PB over Pass
1616 - Saldana votes Telle 4-2-1 Telle over PB over Pass
1633 - Poli votes Telle 5-2-1 Telle over PB over Pass
1637 - Jackal votes PF 5-2-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF
1652 - MartinD votes Lerriuqs 5-2-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF/Lerriuqs
1661 - PF votes PB 5-3-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF/Lerriuqs
1684 - Dubb votes Saldana 5-3-1-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF/Lerriuqs/Saldana
1702 - Abe votes PB 5-4-1-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF/Lerriuqs/Saldana
1721 - PB unvotes Pass 5-4-1-1-1 Telle over PB over PF/Lerriuqs/Saldana
1722 - Pass unvotes PB, votes Saldana 5-3-2-1-1 Telle over PB over Saldana over PF/Lerriuqs
1723 - Hoops votes Jackal 5-3-2-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Saldana over PF/Lerri/Jackal

And why do you think I rarely do one.

That's cool -- since you said you didn't know why that was the logical answer, I just figured I'd remind you. :) So...if you don't agree, who do you think was trying to save EF and get you lynched instead? And if no one, why do you think the wolves just sat there and did nothing while EF was lynched?

Ugh, forgot to put in line breaks. Lets try that again. As of Post #1728:

5 Telle - Clap (1532), Autumn (1535), BK (1566), Saldana (1616), Poli (1633)
3 PB - Lathum (1554), PF (1661), Abe (1702)
1 PF - Jackal (1637)
1 Lerriuqs - MartinD (1652)
2 Saldana - Dubb (1684), Pass (1722)
1 Jackal - Hoops (1723)

1532 - Clap votes Telle 1-0
1535 - Autumn votes Telle 2-0
1548 - Pass votes PB 2-1 Telle over PB
1554 - Lathum votes PB 2-2 Telle/PB
1566 - BK votes Telle 3-2 Telle over PB
1578 - PB votes Pass 3-2-1 Telle over PB over Pass
1616 - Saldana votes Telle 4-2-1 Telle over PB over Pass
1633 - Poli votes Telle 5-2-1 Telle over PB over Pass
1637 - Jackal votes PF 5-2-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF
1652 - MartinD votes Lerriuqs 5-2-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF/Lerriuqs
1661 - PF votes PB 5-3-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF/Lerriuqs
1684 - Dubb votes Saldana 5-3-1-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF/Lerriuqs/Saldana
1702 - Abe votes PB 5-4-1-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Pass/PF/Lerriuqs/Saldana
1721 - PB unvotes Pass 5-4-1-1-1 Telle over PB over PF/Lerriuqs/Saldana
1722 - Pass unvotes PB, votes Saldana 5-3-2-1-1 Telle over PB over Saldana over PF/Lerriuqs
1723 - Hoops votes Jackal 5-3-2-1-1-1 Telle over PB over Saldana over PF/Lerri/Jackal

Since most of the people on my distrust list were already on me, I would guess that that is why. Or maybe it was Poli or BK who tried to distract with a third party knowing that I had shown I would go for it. I doubt it, but possible. You guys realize you're trying to get somebody who's voting record is the worst this game.

maybe its a freudian slip and there is an admission of me being a wolf.

Looks like a crappy slow Friday. Sigh. Votes through Post #1733:

Telle - Clap (1532), Autumn (1535), BK (1566), Saldana (1616), Poli (1633)
PB - Lathum (1554), PF (1661), Abe (1702)
PF - Jackal (1637)
Lerriuqs - MartinD (1652)
Saldana - Dubb (1684), Pass (1722)
Jackal - Hoops (1723)

No votes: Lerriuqs, Chief Rum, Telle, MommyTorgo, Eeyore (er, PurdueBrad)

VOTE Saldana

I'm not sold on Telle or PB at this point.

This comment is merely my opinion as a player and is not meant with any mod authority

I would say yes you do. As a teacher, if you have a kid who is trying to learn something, is genuinely curious, you're not going to leave them out to dry, I hope. You might point them to a resource where they can get their question answered, the analogy here being to simply post a quote of what you've answered before. You don't need to come up with a new way to answer a question, but I think in WW, especially one with this many posts, it's not unreasonable at all to expect people to answer a question that is important to the overall flow of the game. Just quote yourself, and you can, if you feel peevish, even make a little snide remark about it. But answering inquiry just seems like a fundamental part of the game and not something that people should be surprised or offended by.

I explained my vote quite thoroughly. I wanted to vote for EF but if PB had been lynched and turned up bad and I wasn't on him I would've looked awful. Not knowing whether either of them were bad, I went with Lathum, though that seems to not have much to do with PB being good or bad.

Several times I argued for the case against EF, also. I know hoops is the only vote on me but I want to make sure people see this explained again.

Well, it seems that you "look awful" now for not voting EF - kind of cuts both ways, doesn't it? But this vote is a combination of D1/D2/D3, not just the showdown yesterday as there were plenty of people on the wrong horse there (me included).

Unvote telle

Her vouching for NTN with EF under pressure is indeed something that should gain her trust. Help me understand the saldana thoughts.

I wouldn't say I look awful for not voting EF since I wanted to and was questioning others (specifically CR) when they questioned the case against him.

I don't know why you have PF on your trusted list at all.

Well, I've got PB neutral now but I will be moving him up to trusted for Day 4, barring a seer coming out gunning for him. I think that he has either been scanned or will be the next scan if still alive.

I wouldn't have said you look awful for a vote on D2, one way or the other, in a vacuum. But you had an unvote on EF and swung over to PB when they were tied 4-4 (minus your vote). Couple that with a NTN vote instead of EF on Day 1 and a vote for someone I trust today and I think you look more wolfy than most right about now.

Hoops, didn't I vote Telle on day 1?

Haven't you always said as seer you don't want to scan the controversial people figuring they'd be dead anyway? So why couldn't the seer have followed your lead?

Agree to a degree, of course the rule from our special ed. district program is that if you consistently have to re-explain the same thing five or more times, you recommend the student for mandatory special education testing.

I gotta be honest and I know I purposely chopped off part of your quotation but at this point youve all got to either decide bad or good. If youve got me neutral still then just assume Im bad. Abe has the right idea.

BK, I don't think I've "always said" anything in regards to seer scan choices. I really don't think there is a absolute right in terms of how to play that role.

However, they certainly could choose not to scan PB. And that would end up putting me in a bad spot with my assumptions if PB is in fact a wolf. I'm willing to take that chance for a day or two, I think.

But has it been the same person asking over and over again or has it been different people? Seems to me it's been a variety of people. Hence the referring the class to the resources you've already provided analogy. It's not that you didn't teach it, it was that they were too dim to learn it. You don't have to reteach it so much as provide the resources. Hence the suggestion of quoting of your own posts.

I'll have you slotted, for better or worse, for the start of Day 4 based on the assumptions I've already laid out. For today, you are neutral because I haven't seen anyone I think is the seer gunning for you.

Which may also explain our high special education numbers. This also may explain our 8.5% Special Ed. population.