Werewolf LXX Pleasure Cruise - (GAME OVER)

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

claphamsa has followed Barkeeps vote for at least two days now.

Interesting! Good catch!

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

Ive also voted for you independently on a couple days

Well....

Barkeep votes for Cronin on day 2 in post 674, Claphamsa votes for Cronin on day 2 in post 690.

On day 3, Barkeep is off the boat and can't vote; Claphamsa votes for Cronin in post 1046 before switching to follow the group against Swaggs in post 1087.

Barkeep votes for Cronin on day 4 in post 1555, Claphamsa votes for Cronin in post 1559.

[st.cronin]

VOTE CLAPHAMSA

Not really a good reason, but a collection of minor reasons.

- has voted for me just about every day
- if he turns up guilty, we look hard at Anxiety
- hasn't contributed anything to my understanding of how the game works

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Looking at the flipside, sure, coming out with the info is probably better than not, given the story you claim.

so what you are saying is I was correct in coming out with the info I received but you think I should be lynched anyway for it.

makes perfect sense.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

huh?

Lathum, in post 1596, you quoted Sonic Youth. What post of his are you quoting?

[The Jackal]

I must say, clap would've been an enticing target for conversion after we sort've threw him under the bus on the first day and he was cleared after that.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

so what you are saying is I was correct in coming out with the info I received but you think I should be lynched anyway for it.

makes perfect sense.

No. I'm trying to say that if your scenario is right, there's no call to be pissed off about it.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by mccollins

Well....

Barkeep votes for Cronin on day 2 in post 674, Claphamsa votes for Cronin on day 2 in post 690.

On day 3, Barkeep is off the boat and can't vote; Claphamsa votes for Cronin in post 1046 before switching to follow the group against Swaggs in post 1087.

Barkeep votes for Cronin on day 4 in post 1555, Claphamsa votes for Cronin in post 1559.

Just to play devil's advocate, there's no reason that I can think of for the wolves to want to get my lynched. I'm a vanilla villager, I've got no items, I was completely absent day 2.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'm just curious who you're most suspicious of, if anybody.

probably Path. It seems like he is trying to capitilize on my situation, plus he spent the first night away from the boat unaccounted for.

I may have to vote out of self preservation

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Just to play devil's advocate, there's no reason that I can think of for the wolves to want to get my lynched. I'm a vanilla villager, I've got no items, I was completely absent day 2.

But there's enough people suspicious of you that it'd make sense for a wolf to try and subtly get you voted off.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

No. I'm trying to say that if your scenario is right, there's no call to be pissed off about it.

do you really think I concocted a fake story about the ropes for no reason early in the game?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Sonic Youth

Sharing information is all well and good, but so far, your not seen as reliable. Hence the comments your getting about the information shared. It easily could have been too villagers you had lynched too.

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Lathum, in post 1596, you quoted Sonic Youth. What post of his are you quoting?

not really sure what he means here

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

do you really think I concocted a fake story about the ropes for no reason early in the game?

I think it's possible.

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

Ive also voted for you independently on a couple days

Well....

Barkeep votes for Cronin on day 2 in post 674, Claphamsa votes for Cronin on day 2 in post 690.

On day 3, Barkeep is off the boat and can't vote; Claphamsa votes for Cronin in post 1046 before switching to follow the group against Swaggs in post 1087.

Barkeep votes for Cronin on day 4 in post 1555, Claphamsa votes for Cronin in post 1559.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by The Jackal

But there's enough people suspicious of you that it'd make sense for a wolf to try and subtly get you voted off.

Other than Barkeep and claphamsa, who else has been pushing on me? I guess I see your point, but ... I dunno, I feel like wolves never really have to vote me, the villagers are usually in enough of a hurry to get me out of the game. Right, Alan?

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Okay. So...who's trusted?

No offense, I'm not sure if this is standard protocol, but you've asked this question a few times now and it comes off as a wolf saying "who's the most trusted so I know who to convert next."

Again, I don't necessarily suspect you, but this is what I hear every time you ask this question.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

not really sure what he means here

Now I see it -- I think it was his post 1590. I just couldn't find it at first. I think he means that it could have been worse -- the information could have resulted in two (not too) villagers getting lynched? I dunno.

[mccollins]

Sorry for the double post - my browser said it didn't go.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by mccollins

No offense, I'm not sure if this is standard protocol, but you've asked this question a few times now and it comes off as a wolf saying "who's the most trusted so I know who to convert next."

Again, I don't necessarily suspect you, but this is what I hear every time you ask this question.

Actually, in that case, it was just a flip remark to express the futility of clap's plan.

But there is a method to this on my part, and it's along those lines. I think having this data out there helps the village in trying to figure out who the wolves might convert.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I think it's possible.

there have been so many games lately where people think I am lying/ making something up and every game I was telling the truth.

Making that story up at this point would be such a negative play.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Now I see it -- I think it was his post 1590. I just couldn't find it at first. I think he means that it could have been worse -- the information could have resulted in two (not too) villagers getting lynched? I dunno.

how could it have resulted in 2 villagers being lynched?

[Sonic Youth]

Originally Posted by Lathum

huh?

You had a hard-on for me for a time, with no real reason.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

there have been so many games lately where people think I am lying/ making something up and every game I was telling the truth.

Making that story up at this point would be such a negative play.

Right. I'm aware of that angle.

[st.cronin]

I think to make a case against Lathum you have to assume that he didn't think Swaggs would get lynched. I'm going to go look at his posts and see if that makes any sense.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

how could it have resulted in 2 villagers being lynched?

I think it's because you had a hard-on for Sonic Youth for a time, with no real reason.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I think to make a case against Lathum you have to assume that he didn't think Swaggs would get lynched. I'm going to go look at his posts and see if that makes any sense.

That makes sense. But weren't there already a lot of votes on Swaggs at the time? How could he NOT have thought Swaggs would get lynched?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Sonic Youth

You had a hard-on for me for a time, with no real reason.

I've never even voted for you.

there is a big difference between asking some questions and " having a hard on" for you as you so eloquently put it.

You need to understand there is going to be preassure put on you at times.

[Passacaglia]

By a lot, I mean 2-3. A lot given how early it was.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

That makes sense. But weren't there already a lot of votes on Swaggs at the time? How could he NOT have thought Swaggs would get lynched?

nope.

I cast the second vote on Swaggs and if you look back at the time my goal was to vote for someone who stayed on the boat that day.

[Sonic Youth]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I've never even voted for you.

there is a big difference between asking some questions and " having a hard on" for you as you so eloquently put it.

You need to understand there is going to be preassure put on you at times.

I'm aware of that. It went beyond that. It was also the responsible for the run day two. No vote was necessary. Why go for me that hard then?

[nfg22]

Originally Posted by mccollins

Here's what I have for Day 4 excursions:

Shopping (unverifiable): Jackal, Anxiety
Stingrays (all saw each other): Path12, jeheinz72, Hoopsguy, mccollins, Chief Rum
Flightseeing (unverifiable): claphamsa, oliegirl (I think?), Sonic Youth, Qwikshot, and Lathum (like Cronin, I didn't have him listed anywhere before he recently stated)
Turtle (verified by having murder info?): Passacaglia, st. cronin, Raiders Army
Conch Shell House (explicitly 2 people, but I can't recall if they knew who the other was): ntndeacon, TazFTW

I don't have an excursion listed for (I could have just missed noting it down): Nfg22, KWhit

I went kayaking that day but since there wasnt anyone to us the two person kayaks with me I just sat there and went back to the ship.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

nope.

I cast the second vote on Swaggs and if you look back at the time my goal was to vote for someone who stayed on the boat that day.

Right, looking back, yours was the second vote.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by nfg22

I went kayaking that day but since there wasnt anyone to us the two person kayaks with me I just sat there and went back to the ship.

Loser!!!!

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

By a lot, I mean 2-3. A lot given how early it was.

Raiders Army was first to vote for Swaggs in post #1032.
Lathum was second in post #1033.

For whatever that's worth.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

This is just another shot in the dark:

VOTE SWAGGS

I can't remember much help he's been; however, this is a vote without much behind it. Regardless, I probably will not change my vote because I have a pretty busy day.

Originally Posted by Lathum

VOTE SWAGGS

when I said I was hung over I was just saying it in characture, there was never a choice to stay on because I was hung over, I just choose to stay.

This compunded with the fact Swaggs stayed on the boat yesterday and someone had to cut the ropes is enough to get my vote.

Raiders Army put the first vote on Swaggs, Lathum put the second one - about 30 minutes later. At the time, I think the only other outstanding vote was on path12. To me, it looks like Lathum would have known Swaggs was the most likely lynch candidate - and also known that, if Swaggs turned up good, that it would bounce back on Lathum. There are some caveats, but after looking back at the early posts that day, I'm inclined to think Lathum is good.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Lathum

who stayed on the boat today?

Originally Posted by Lathum

dola- I asked because I think a wolf stayed on the boat today

Originally Posted by Lathum

in case I am night killed wanted to get that out there

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Why is that, Lathum?

Originally Posted by Lathum

because all the ropes that tie the boat to the dock were cut.

Had I not discovered it and fixed it the boat would have floated away and caused major problems.

I would imagine a wolf had to stay on the boat to do this.

Originally Posted by Lathum

My vote will probably go to someone who was on the boat yesterday. I have class most of the day today, can anyone refreash that list for me?

Originally Posted by Lathum

VOTE SWAGGS

when I said I was hung over I was just saying it in characture, there was never a choice to stay on because I was hung over, I just choose to stay.

This compunded with the fact Swaggs stayed on the boat yesterday and someone had to cut the ropes is enough to get my vote.

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I'm likely going to be out until after the 3PM deadline, so I'll be putting a vote in now. I'll trust Lathum on his story for the time being and follow his vote on a guy who was on the boat.

VOTE SWAGGS

Originally Posted by mccollins

I'm going to go ahead and get a vote in today rather than wait around like yesterday. If Lathum is making all this up, that's a pretty huge trap he's setting for himself. Thus, like hoops, I'll choose to believe for now.

Swaggs was on the boat (and why did you go Fiesta Boat Partying twice?), but Chief Rum needs to explain some things too.

VOTE SWAGGS

Originally Posted by nfg22

I like Lathum's story. Swaggs you may have messed up.

Vote Swaggs

Do we have the option to leave today or no?

Originally Posted by jeheinz72

It's always nice to come in to work in the morning and see everyone voting for the person you wanted to vote for. Makes a guy feel kinda smart

Vote Swaggs

Originally Posted by path12

It seems a pretty easy vote.

VOTE SWAGGS

Originally Posted by Qwikshot

"So someone gets arrested, and we're stuck here another day? Work might not like that, but I digress....waiter, uhm, garcon,...no that's French...mar-uh, margarita....so this chaos, yes...much like Shiva, you know, god of creation /and/ destruction...which is quite nice...y'know because if you create something, then you don't like it, you can get rid of it...because if you are just the god of creation, then man, where are you going to stick all the rejects...(drink) well...so someone is claiming to have cut the ropes, or tried to....not a very good idea, no...I'm guessing one outing the other...it makes for a rather interesting claim...so I'll follow Mr. Lathum's thinking for this one..."

Vote Swaggs

Originally Posted by claphamsa

tre, but it also makes the vote analaysis less valuable, since people will swithc, just to ensure somethign happens. I dont buy the case agasint swaggs. but.... I got nothing else

unvote cronin
vote swaggs

wish swaggs was aroudn to defned himself

Originally Posted by oliegirl

VOTE SWAGGS

Not overwhelming evidence, but it seems to be all we have right now on anyone.

I'm pretty much out now guys, I will try to check in on my phone but can't make any promises. Alan has my Aim ID in case of emergency.

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Just got caught up. Seems like an easy vote.

Vote Swaggs

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Ok, now I think that Swaggs probably is lying:

VOTE SWAGGS

Originally Posted by Lathum

the problem I have with this is I also chose to drink heavily but received no such message about a hangover, I woke up the next day with seemingly no effect. Everything I said was an attempt to trap someone.

OK, this is how things went down yesterday.

I cast the second vote on Swaggs then left for about 5 hours to go to school.

From the time I cast my vote until the time I came back 10 people voted Swaggs without me saying 1 word about it.

I cast my vote on Swaggs based on the evidence I had and my theory, it's not my fault others chose to follow. Path and Passacaglia are making it out to be I had some crusade against Swaggs or I claimed to have concrete evidence and that just isn't the case.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Raiders Army put the first vote on Swaggs, Lathum put the second one - about 30 minutes later. At the time, I think the only other outstanding vote was on path12. To me, it looks like Lathum would have known Swaggs was the most likely lynch candidate - and also known that, if Swaggs turned up good, that it would bounce back on Lathum. There are some caveats, but after looking back at the early posts that day, I'm inclined to think Lathum is good.

But what if Lathum thought that Swaggs would be removed, rather than lynched, with no role reveal? Check out post 1028.

[st.cronin]

And then Lathum completely undermines my defense of him.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Sonic Youth

I'm aware of that. It went beyond that. It was also the responsible for the run day two. No vote was necessary. Why go for me that hard then?

trust me, I didn't go after you hard, I merely pointed out it was possible you werent being truthfull.

You were the one who over reacted to some minor questioning/ preassure.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

But what if Lathum thought that Swaggs would be removed, rather than lynched, with no role reveal? Check out post 1028.

Right, that's one of the caveats.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

OK, this is how things went down yesterday.

I cast the second vote on Swaggs then left for about 5 hours to go to school.

From the time I cast my vote until the time I came back 10 people voted Swaggs without me saying 1 word about it.

I cast my vote on Swaggs based on the evidence I had and my theory, it's not my fault others chose to follow. Path and Passacaglia are making it out to be I had some crusade against Swaggs or I claimed to have concrete evidence and that just isn't the case.

That's not what I'm doing at all. I said you were my best bet, and you've jumped all over that. I haven't said that you've done anything more than you have:

when I said I was hung over I was just saying it in characture, there was never a choice to stay on because I was hung over, I just choose to stay.

This compunded with the fact Swaggs stayed on the boat yesterday and someone had to cut the ropes is enough to get my vote.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

And then Lathum completely undermines my defense of him.

I'm not sure how I underminded anything.

There is no way at 8:30AM when I cast the second vote on swaggs I could have assumed he would be lynched when there are still 20 other poeple left to vote.

[claphamsa]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Actually, in that case, it was just a flip remark to express the futility of clap's plan.

But there is a method to this on my part, and it's along those lines. I think having this data out there helps the village in trying to figure out who the wolves might convert.

I am not smart enough to have a plan!

[nfg22]

I voted for Anxiety earlier in game. Then he got this item. I trusted him then because I didnt think the item would be given to a wolf. Yet now he claims to have rejected the wolves and found no consequences but that they took his item and used it? Bullcrap. You didnt reject them. You accepted.

Vote Anxiety

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

That's not what I'm doing at all. I said you were my best bet, and you've jumped all over that. I haven't said that you've done anything more than you have:

PAss, you know as well as I do how things work around here, I guarentee if I have 3 early votes I'll be lynched.

A few games ago I got shit for saying as much then being lynched anyway proving myself correct, I thought I would try and be a little more pro active in my defense this time.

although I need to write an english paper and this is seriously cutting into my study time.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I'm not sure how I underminded anything.

There is no way at 8:30AM when I cast the second vote on swaggs I could have assumed he would be lynched when there are still 20 other poeple left to vote.

My point is that argument makes you look guilty, whereas if I assume that when you voted Swaggs you believed that he would be lynched, that makes you look like a villager.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

My point is that argument makes you look guilty, whereas if I assume that when you voted Swaggs you believed that he would be lynched, that makes you look like a villager.

i don't understand this?

I generaly don't vote for a player unless I want them lynched.

Now there was no way I could have known Swaggs would be lynched, but if I didn't want him lynched I wouldn't have voted for him in the first place.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

You missed a great game - although, not so great for Michigan fans.

The Notre Dame grad in the cube next to me just handed me an article about it.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Lathum

i don't understand this?

I generaly don't vote for a player unless I want them lynched.

Now there was no way I could have known Swaggs would be lynched, but if I didn't want him lynched I wouldn't have voted for him in the first place.

Pass seems to understand it, I'm not sure I can explain it any better than I already have. Maybe like this:

Assume Lathum is wolf - Lathum does not want the player he votes for to get lynched, even if there is a fake reveal behind his vote.

Assume Lathum is a villager (and is thus telling the truth about the ropes): Lathum wants the player he votes for to get lynched, even if said player is then revealed as a villager.

So my point is that if you thought Swaggs was going to get lynched, that makes me think you're a villager.

[Passacaglia]

This just made me blink a couple times. Lathum, you said that if you three early votes guarantees you being lynched, but with your second early vote on Swaggs, there was no way you could have known he would be lynched? Also, it seems like you're arguing against the argument cronin made to defend you -- I thought he was saying that if you DID know Swaggs would be lynched, that means you're more likely to be good, since the play is definitely more negative when Swaggs turned up villager.