Werewolf XLIII - The Big City (Game over)

[Narcizo]

With regards to the lynch vote I don't really want to read too much into it as my impression was that NTN was dead and buried and I didn't really get his hint on first reading. I still think ImTheCrew and Swaggs have a bit of explaining to do though, particularly ImTheCrew. kingfc needs to start talking a bit as well. He's been around a bit and said very little.

[Chief Rum]

As reported, OKLAHOMA STATE showed up to play tonight. Kansas State started behind and never really threatened. I am very disappointed in them. We lost all of the bet money today, so we'll have to try to get back into things tomorrow.

[Chief Rum]

CHIEF RUM'S BETTIN' BONANZA DROPS ITS PRICES!!!

I have decided to drop my commission from 20% to 10%, in honor of fallen police detective ntndeacon. Little known to everyone was the fact that ntndeacon used to shake me up for info whenever there were hints that a junior high touch football game was rigged. Ah the childhood memories. I hope you will all join me in a "bet toast" to ntndeacon's memory, and at bargain 10% prices.

Today's game is...

VILLANOVA AT UCONN

The Big East heavyweights aren't what they usually are, but they will clash in a key game for both tomorrow evening. I am taking bets for this game now.

As with yesterday, if you wish to bet, please "gift" me the bet money through Alan, and then post here who you want to bet on. My commission on winningsa is only 10%. If we lose, I get nothing.

I don't have a consensus yet on which way I would lean here. Hopefully some of our resident college basketball experts will chime in.

I WILL TAKE BETS UNTIL 10 A.M. PDT/1 P.M. EST!!!

This is an earlier time, due to me working both jobs. If you want in on the action, be sure to get it in as soon as possible, as Alan will also need to move the money over to me. If you do it too close to the deadline, Alan may not see the transfer request. And if I don't see the money, your bet won't be added into the pool. So get it in early while you can.

Let's hope for better luck than today.

[Narcizo]

Back from a meeting.

I realise that we only really have hoopsguy's word that he has been hacked not once but twice. There appears to be corroborating information on the UMB but he could easily have engineered that himself. But, again, I don't see a member of the mob requesting police assistance, even if it is to increase people's trust in him. And I don't think he'd think of the idea of being hacked twice. Of course there's a possibility that he made up the first report and then was actually hacked the second time. But using Occum's famous razor, for the moment I'll believe that he's on the level.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Barkeep - Hoops (424), Marathoner (476)

After hoopsguy's tirade about his name yesterday I thought this was funny.

[hoopsguy]

Heh, sometimes it is best not to take me too seriously

[hoopsguy]

I would be very interested in knowing who is making big bets with Rum, but I'm guessing it isn't in his best interest to share that kind of information. But given the cost of the gun, I would expect some people are looking to double their bankrolls to move into a price range for this.

Then again, it does sound like a few people (Blade6119, Anxiety, Barkeep49) started with a bigger nut than I did, so maybe 1K isn't that much money for the J.P. Morgan's of our city.

[hoopsguy]

I've also got thoughts on college basketball, but I'm not sure how much info I want to share as others would stand to make/lose much more money than me. I want the good citizens around here to profit tonight, but I'm concerned that there is more potential for mob money than the rest of us. Looking for feedback on this idea before proceeding ...

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Narcizo

Back from a meeting.

I realise that we only really have hoopsguy's word that he has been hacked not once but twice. There appears to be corroborating information on the UMB but he could easily have engineered that himself. But, again, I don't see a member of the mob requesting police assistance, even if it is to increase people's trust in him. And I don't think he'd think of the idea of being hacked twice. Of course there's a possibility that he made up the first report and then was actually hacked the second time. But using Occum's famous razor, for the moment I'll believe that he's on the level.

Don't be so sure. I wouldn't put it past hoops at all to fake a crime to gain trust. I'm not so quick to give him my vote.

[Narcizo]

I've got 8 people voting Anxiety for judge. If we're to agree with Blade then these people (particularly the early voters) are possible mob members. I have a different take on it and not just for the obvious reason.

Swaggs #244
Narcizo #266
Barkeep #430
Tyrith #432
Anxiety #460
Jonathon #540

After the vote
ImTheCrew #646 - although he stated that he was leaning towards voting for Anxiety before
LoneStarGirl #713

Can't find the 9th voter.

[Lathum]

I voted anxiety for judge but I don't see your logic. I think it would actualy be more beneficial for the mafia for there to not be a judge at all.

[Narcizo]

Which is what I've been saying all along. As soon as Anxiety became the front runner I don't think the mob would risk voting for him. They'd try to sabotage the vote by not voting for him or voting for someone else less likely to succeed.

I don't want to read too much into it but I think it's something that should be born in mind in future. (especially if Anxiety is revealed to be good or bad at any stage).

Hopefully it will encourage the good guys to unify their vote on one candidate and announce that vote today as well.

[LoneStarGirl]

wow, I can't believe the guns are that expensive... I am going to have to start gambling just to get some more money.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Don't be so sure. I wouldn't put it past hoops at all to fake a crime to gain trust. I'm not so quick to give him my vote.

If you want to vote for me, great. If not, that is fine as well. But there would be an awful lot of work involved to put myself in position to fake a crime (could the detective see that it was faked?), have it end up in the newspaper, and post about it on the message board (per others?).

I've got my devious side, no doubt about it, but it isn't in play here. I've seen my systems hacked twice within a two hour span. So at this point I'm guessing there is at least as much information about me out there than anyone else in the game. Given my choice, that would not be the case but it is what it is at this point. I've reported the crimes and we'll see where it goes from there.

[hoopsguy]

I'll give my two cents on whatever candidate is suggested. And will be willing to back some of them with a vote. Anxiety was an acceptable candidate to me yesterday, as was DaddyTorgo. But my vote was on the minority selection, for better or worse.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I'll give my two cents on whatever candidate is suggested. And will be willing to back some of them with a vote. Anxiety was an acceptable candidate to me yesterday, as was DaddyTorgo. But my vote was on the minority selection, for better or worse.

which means you contriibuted to us not having a judge which is the best possible scenerio for the mafia

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Path also took a stance about being agaisnt judges, a villager move to me...wolves would want to seem as normal as possible, and he made a bold move in declaring his views. A first level analysis would be to see him say i dont think we should elect and say hes a big suspect(like you just did). A second level analysis would be to consider that a wolf wouldnt be so stupid(not one as experienced as path at least, i hope) as to put such a target on their back on day one.

Would a third level analysis be to assume that someone is going to make a second level analysis and try to gain trust that way?

"But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me."

[Lathum]

OK, so there was a message on the UMB from one hacker to another asking to join forces and also saying hacking that target wsn't smart. ( I assume hoops) sooooooooooooooooooo, this leads to a few possibilities.

1. There are 3 hackers. I doubt this is true but why would one hacker say hoops was a bad target then go ahead and hack him?

2. There is one hacker messing with us.

3. This is a set up to throw us off.

[st.cronin]

I like the ideas Narcizo is putting out, the way he thinks is similar to the way I think. I'm confused, though - Narcizo, do you consider that list of Anxiety voters to be TRUSTED or SUSPICIOUS?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Lathum

OK, so there was a message on the UMB from one hacker to another asking to join forces and also saying hacking that target wsn't smart. ( I assume hoops) sooooooooooooooooooo, this leads to a few possibilities.

1. There are 3 hackers. I doubt this is true but why would one hacker say hoops was a bad target then go ahead and hack him?

2. There is one hacker messing with us.

3. This is a set up to throw us off.

My guess is two hackers, one good, and one bad. Just a wag, though, nothing to go on.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

which means you contriibuted to us not having a judge which is the best possible scenerio for the mafia

Guilty as charged, although I was up-front about my vote early in the day. If the same scenario unfolds today and a candidate emerges that I didn't vote for I'll switch my vote to him if it doesn't seem to be an asinine choice.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I'll give my two cents on whatever candidate is suggested. And will be willing to back some of them with a vote. Anxiety was an acceptable candidate to me yesterday, as was DaddyTorgo. But my vote was on the minority selection, for better or worse.

You've played quite the game so far hg. First you go viciously after me, such that I agree to drop out of the judge's race, so that we can make sure to get a judge. Looking over things I then thrust my support behind the candidate who you like the best. Enough momentum is built around this guy except we fall one vote short. Jeez.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I like the ideas Narcizo is putting out, the way he thinks is similar to the way I think. I'm confused, though - Narcizo, do you consider that list of Anxiety voters to be TRUSTED or SUSPICIOUS?

Well I'm on it.

I'd say moderately more trusted than the average although it's far from conclusive. Should it turn out that Anxiety is bad then anyone on the list would have to be viewed as suspicious, although we can't all be bad.

The capital letters are freaking me out though. Forgive me if I'm missing something here.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

Enough momentum is built around this guy except we fall one vote short. Jeez.

Clearly not enough momentum. I cast a late vote for Anxiety, but I had repeatedly asked for people in thread to tell us who they had voted for. Very few people were willing to do so, and I was worried that I had voted for the wrong guy - that DT was the one with the momentum.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

My guess is two hackers, one good, and one bad. Just a wag, though, nothing to go on.

I have difficulty seeing there being two neutral hackers. I can buy one being in the mob and one being neutral.

There's also the firewall expert guy, who I guess could be a "good hacker" role.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Narcizo

Well I'm on it.

I'd say moderately more trusted than the average although it's far from conclusive. Should it turn out that Anxiety is bad then anyone on the list would have to be viewed as suspicious, although we can't all be bad.

The capital letters are freaking me out though. Forgive me if I'm missing something here.

I use capital letters to EMPHASIZE the IMPORTANT WORDS in a sentence. That way the main idea is more clear - sometimes my grammar is a little opaque.

After your clarification, I think we're on the same page.

[DaddyTorgo]

I thought I had momentum too, so I voted for myself.

If we were all up-front about our judge votes then at least we'd have an idea of who had momentum and how many more votes they needed...

[Narcizo]

With Lathum and St Cronin, that seems to make it 10 people claiming they voted for or were going to vote for Anxiety.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Narcizo

With Lathum and St Cronin, that seems to make it 10 people claiming they voted for or were going to vote for Anxiety.

I was thinking that, too.

[Tyrith]

For today's judge vote I'm pretty ambivalent as to who we elected, excluding a couple of people who I talked about yesterday. Otherwise I'll jump behind the consensus candidate -- hoops, DT, blah blah?

[Barkeep49]

Good so we know at least one person on that list lied.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

For today's judge vote I'm pretty ambivalent as to who we elected, excluding a couple of people who I talked about yesterday. Otherwise I'll jump behind the consensus candidate -- hoops, DT, blah blah?

Several people have already said they are voting for hoops. Barring any sort of revelation marking him as unfit, I think he's our only candidate.

[Narcizo]

I'm more "trusting" of people who stated who they were voting for before the results were announced.

We probably shouldn't get too bogged down in this anyway. I'm off home - I think people need to start committing their judge votes in public and we need to count them just like a lynch count. Just to reiterate that this isn't like a lynch vote though - we're not trying to catch the wolves out somehow by keeping the vote close. We're trying to get a judge.

I've stated that I'm going to be voting for hoopsguy as judge. I haven't cast my vote yet but unless I can be convinced that hoopsguy won't get the 10 votes necessary I will be voting for him.

I've got to go now and won't be back until, erm, around 20-6 = 14:00 EST or later.

[Tyrith]

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and send in my hoops vote now so I don't forget.

[st.cronin]

I'm going to go ahead and put a vote out. We know one of the people claiming to vote for Anxiety is lying. I was the last one to make that claim, fwiw. Lathum was the next to last. If somebody was going to lie about it, I think earlier would be better than later.

Additionally, Swaggs cast a late vote on ntndeacon.

If somebody can think of a better candidate, I'll change my vote.

vote Swaggs

[ImTheCrew]

ill vote for hoops, i'll wait to make sure he remians the leading canidate though

[ImTheCrew]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'm going to go ahead and put a vote out. We know one of the people claiming to vote for Anxiety is lying. I was the last one to make that claim, fwiw. Lathum was the next to last. If somebody was going to lie about it, I think earlier would be better than later.

Additionally, Swaggs cast a late vote on ntndeacon.

If somebody can think of a better candidate, I'll change my vote.

vote Swaggs

is it bad to cast a late vote? i mean i casted a late vote because all day i was catching up, and i just waited to see who all was voting for who/why and i didnt catch or even read NTN "hints" nor did i realize the votes were so close, like i said earlier i would have changed my vote to Bsak if i had known it wouldnt have been a throw away.

[ImTheCrew]

Originally Posted by ImTheCrew

ill vote for hoops, i'll wait to make sure he remians the leading canidate though

For Judge that is

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by ImTheCrew

is it bad to cast a late vote? i mean i casted a late vote because all day i was catching up, and i just waited to see who all was voting for who/why and i didnt catch or even read NTN "hints" nor did i realize the votes were so close, like i said earlier i would have changed my vote to Bsak if i had known it wouldnt have been a throw away.

Not neccesarily, it depends on the context.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

I would certainly look at ITC and Swaggs tomorrow after I am gone. For those late votes after I said what I said earlier.

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

That's two games in a row where you've voted without giving a reason. It looks like ntn is gone, so this vote won't really amount to much, but here it is:

VOTE IMTHECREW

Some additional things to highlight from yesterday's action.

[hoopsguy]

Agreed - early or late vote is not, in and of itself, a value call. It is the context around the vote that starts to matter.

Yesterday when it turns out that the person who was killed had an important City role, and there were posts that could be construed as clues, then a late vote on the detective without explanation warrants further conversation more than an early vote on him like the one cast by SnDvls (to pick an example). Make sense?

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'm going to go ahead and put a vote out. We know one of the people claiming to vote for Anxiety is lying. I was the last one to make that claim, fwiw. Lathum was the next to last. If somebody was going to lie about it, I think earlier would be better than later.

Additionally, Swaggs cast a late vote on ntndeacon.

If somebody can think of a better candidate, I'll change my vote.

vote Swaggs

I did vote for Anxiety and my vote was one of the few in the edition of the newspaper that first revealed the early results. I have also said that I will vote for hoopsguy if we can build a consensus on him. I absolutely believe we need a judge in office and spent most of my few posts yesterday saying as much.

I will type this nice and big, so people can stop fixating on my late votes:

I work until after 7 PM EST during the week. I do not get home until nearly 8 PM EST. I rarely, if ever, have computer access while at work, because I am working in one-on-one situations with clients. If I am to participate in these WW games, I either have to cast an early vote, before I leave for work, or a late vote (after 8 PM EST + however much time it takes me to catch up).

I think it is silly and suspicious that a few of you are continually fixating on my late voting. You all know that I have played quite a few games of WW and would hope that, even if you don't like me, you would think that I am a decent enough player that I would not post a late vote nearly simultaneously with another player, voting for the same target, if I were doing anything devious.

I have a fairly useless blue collar job and $200 in the bank. I have tried to help identify the pros and cons of the judge position and urged everyone to claim their vote, early in the day yesterday and again today. If you think I am a good candidate, maybe I need to look a lot closer at you. And perhaps you can tell us a little more about what it is that you do?

[st.cronin]

Its not the late vote, per se, Swaggs. I don't think there's ever been a game where I was suspicious of you, for that or any other reason - I'm not your nemesis. And like you I have a busy day ahead of me, so I wanted to get a vote in. I'm perfectly happy to move it to a better candidate. I'm simply using occam's razor - we know one (at a minimum) of the people claiming to vote for Anxiety is lying.

For now, I think you and ITC are the best candidates.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Its not the late vote, per se, Swaggs. I don't think there's ever been a game where I was suspicious of you, for that or any other reason - I'm not your nemesis. And like you I have a busy day ahead of me, so I wanted to get a vote in. I'm perfectly happy to move it to a better candidate. I'm simply using occam's razor - we know one (at a minimum) of the people claiming to vote for Anxiety is lying.

For now, I think you and ITC are the best candidates.

I think it is foolish to think that I, as a veteran player, would vote at the exact same time for the exact same person with another player. Don't you think I have been a wolf often enough to have that better coordinated?

Also, what is it that you do, exactly? (in case you missed that question in the first go-around)

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I think it is foolish to think that I, as a veteran player, would vote at the exact same time for the exact same person with another player. Don't you think I have been a wolf often enough to have that better coordinated?

Also, what is it that you do, exactly? (in case you missed that question in the first go-around)

Sorry, I'm not revealing my role at this time. It's foolish to think that I, as a veteran player, would make things so easy for the wolves. You've only got one vote on you, and I've said its not a vote I'm married to. Do you think ITC is a better candidate? Who else pings your radar? Give me something to go on, other than being all defensive.

[ImTheCrew]

how many people didnt vote for lynch, was it just king?

[st.cronin]

I think everybody voted for lynch - king said he didn't vote for a judge (iirc). There were 2 others who also didn't vote for a judge (again, iirc).

[hoopsguy]

Yeah, King was the only non-vote for lynch. There were three non-votes for judge, although we have no way of verifying who those were.

[ImTheCrew]

st cronin are you going with hoopsguy for judge?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by ImTheCrew

st cronin are you going with hoopsguy for judge?

yep