Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

@Thor: How long is left of the dayphase and such?

EDIT: nevermind. just checked your last post/summery thing.

VikingScott wrote:@Thor: How long is left of the dayphase and such?

EDIT: nevermind. just checked your last post/summery thing.

Deadline Countdown

Just for convenience.

Still have quite a lot of time, guys! No need to be piling up so early.

Manchu wrote:@Scott: I hope you are planning to take that vote off of A_F when he responds to the provocation, if he indeed does so. I know you must have read my analysis about this from before A_F's vote against me. So in the meantime, I vote: VikingScott.

I have read it. And eithher I'm missing a point or something else. But depending on a reaction would depend on wheather I remove the vote or not. Mostly it was done to generate town discussion as the game was breaking down a little bit.

But yes, I am slightly more suspicious of him than others here.

Your vote is fair I guess, I have no defence to it. So we must wait.

Manchu wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:General Note: to further vote for me at this point in time would seriously put me at risk, so I ask that you consider it carefully. Furthermore, if I'm lynched quickly, the last voter, second to last voter, or last two voters are likely to be scum.

This bears special emphasis. We're too early in the day and too late in the game for this kind of pile up. To even the odds, I'm following Orkeo's lead. vote: Arctik_Firangi

I'm not actually convinced at this point that either A_F or Orkeo is scum. But in the case that one or the other is, my vote is cast for the sake of balancing the threat. I'm more convinced that the truly quiet players are the suspicious ones.

This is what I wrote when A_F put a vote on Orkeo. I immediately unvoted A_F when he unvoted Orkeo even though he switched his vote to me.

I see only one vote on A_F. Mine. I think we'd notice if several more votes happen.

One vote besides yours? Did I miss another unvote?

EDIT: As far as I can tell, Orkeo is still voting for him.

OCC sorry guuys im kinda sick, but on the bright side i got a new laptop so no more computer troubles

Yes, I'm still voting for Arctik. He seems to have changed, personality wise, and I want to know why that is.

Yes indeed. He hasn't said anything lately.

Sorry, just kidding! But seriously, how do you mean? and if he has changed, what do you think is the reason, Orkosaurus?

He appears to have gone from being a strong, logical promoter of discussion among town (the first two days) to a sort of a fear-monger who doesn't thinks we should vote as soon as possible, and that discussion will only lead to the scum "building trust" among the townsfolk. It's a 180, and I think this new position is far less logical, and more of an appeal to the divisive fear of not knowing who you can trust.

As for the rationale; well, I'm not sure. He was acting pretty normal before. I suppose I'd say that either he's scum, and now that real leads may be starting to surface he doesn't want that option explored, or he suspects Manchu or I of being scum, figured that he was losing popular support, and went a little off the deep end. The later possibility is part of the reason I want him to bring his supposed evidence to light.

I wasn't aware that I had popular support at any point. I've been a constant focus of attention but at this point in the game it is largely a distraction - especially when my arguments are not amounting to anything. None of my arguments are being taken seriously, or are being dismissed out of hand. I have been forming my suspicions based on this 'active' inactivity - there is a lot of talk going on, and little else. I have made my points clearly today, and I will continue to back them up. I can do no less.

Apologies for my absence - RL work, work, work. Tomorrow I'm flat out working and Sunday;s my birthday so I won't be back until Monday after this post, but I will try to cover everything that has been asked of me and raised - please prompt me in the meantime if there is anything I fail to address. I don't feel that even half of my questions or arguments have been addressed, except with contrary statements.

Orkeo, most recently you have stated that I have changed my position. I don't believe that I have. In fact, my form in every day phase to date has been a quick provocative vote followed by a change of direction. This has - you are correct - helped to stimulate conversation so far. If anything you have changed your character. I have constantly mentioned that no one is to be trusted. I have not feigned any alliances. I have not even tried to declare that normal logic can be used in this game. You are being fiercely argumentative today and it's a complete change.

Before I go further, allow me to explain my first day's suspicion. At this point I think it is constructive, because I have at least something to contribute in the way of personal proof.
My town role was presented to me by the GM with associated fluff and a specific character name. This was why Orkeo's post immediately struck me as odd - it seemed made up. I summoned attention and raised the question of if anyone else found this to be odd. No one did, or at least admitted it. So far none of the other town dead have 'dropped names' in their role descriptions so I'm confident that I am unique in this regard, or at least one of few.

I will not immediately expose my role in detail but I am confident to make this declaration because I'm now too clear a threat to the scum to be ignored. Now you don't have to believe me. Maybe I'm lying - in which case it would be prudent for them not to night kill me and keep this suspicion in the air. This merely gives me longer to exercise my night power and at this point, with what I know, I am happy to continue doing so. As long as I'm not lynched today I know I can make a targeted action tonight. On the other hand, if I'm killed, those who have opposed me with such zeal will have even more to worry about on top of my current challenges. I'm comfortable here. I'm surprised to still be alive and as I've been targetted already (this I know to be a fact) it makes perfect sense that Fifty is now dead. If I don't tell what I already know then my role is largely useless anyway - chances are I'm going to be dead tomorrow.

I have not asked anyone to vote randomly - I have not asked anyone to vote at all. Your statement is clearly and deliberately false. Contradiction is not argument. I have merely provoked you, Orkeo, and the result is far more than I expected. Explain your change of character whilst you actually address my previous points.

You have not addressed my claim of the fact that scum intentionally manipulate town players and have good cause to want to garner their trust. There are no allies here, but for our enemies. No one has addressed my final pointed question in my previous post. When I am quoted, the most irrelevant details are picked out whilst the most important are left to fall behind in discussion - I am aware of who is doing this, and the reasons seem obvious. If I'm worth so much attention, I demand that I actually be answered. If the other talkative players here are interested in getting anywhere, I suggest that they actually discuss the matter at hand and not waffle on making irrelevant points and reminding us of how trustworthy they are.

EDIT: Again, Orkeo, what 'popular support' are you afraid of me having? The sort that inspired the scum to try to night-kill right off the bat, perhaps?

A_F: Here's the thing--your rants come off as rants. Your posts contain trains of thought that are especially hard to follow. The fact that you never seem to answer the one straight-up question that nearly everyone has asked you makes it difficult to take your claims of being dodged as anything more than blatant hypocrisy. So I would recommend that you rephrase your recent post into discrete questions that can be answered with discrete answers while you are away this weekend. And happy early birthday.

Manchu, you've already complained about my 'walls of text' - adding quotes will only extend the wall.
Don't try so hard to mystify my posts. I've clearly asked that any specific questions be pointed out in my absence if I have not addressed them.

I'm aware that you haven't exactly been demanding my contributions - although you earlier voted for me simply because I was absent. I'm sure that if you wanted to ask hard questions you would, and that if you wanted to explore my points, you would do so with pleasure. It seems otherwise.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Don't try so hard to mystify my posts.

This requires no effort on my part. If you really are a Townie as you claim, you've been and continue to be your own worst enemy despite claims of others persecuting you.

I dunno, A_F. You seem intentionally uncooperative. Demanding answers while supplying none, dismissing what others have posted and then claiming everyone else dismisses your posts, voting to provoke participation and then criticizing others for doing the same . . . I thought my criticism was constructive but you've taken it as flat-out baiting. As for not dealing with the specific points in your last post, I thought getting you to deal with the format would be the best first step in you getting satisfactory answers. But it looks like I will have to dissect your post as-is.

I was expecting as much. Don't wear yourself out trying to turn my answers into thin air, and have a great weekend everybody!

I concur wiht Manchu

Is this wilful ignorance or can it be rationalised?
I think it's important that we quickly resolve this inability to read and understand sentences in a common language. It wasn't raised as a problem earlier. Something must have triggered this overreaction.

So far I have seen outright lies - for example, pinning me as uncooperative when I been perfectly forthcoming. Orkeo's designation of my behaviour today as a '180' when it is essentially the same. Claims that I am ignoring other posters.
Who have I criticised for performing a provoking vote?Something that serious really does need to be backed up.

This still sounds to me like nonsense and distraction. It's either panicking scum or an unfortunate argument that is distracting everyone involved.

So far it reads as wholly manipulative to me. If you suspect me of something, make it clear. Criticising the way I post and inventing facts are simply the scummiest things I can imagine. It's just too obvious to ignore. What exactly are you trying to achieve?

I will certainly return to this thread by reposting the clear questions that I want answered, and at that point we will have about six days left in the phase. If you would like to show some real constructive initiative in the mean time, read the posts and reply to them instead of rejecting them.
This wasn't a problem before so what are you afraid of?

It seems to me that you seem to be calling us all scum more than anything else. I ould be barking up the wrong tree but thats how it seems to me.

Arctik:

I said you had done a complete 180 because you seemed to have gone from very supportive of discussion - hence your "provoking" votes, and your criticism of those who refrained from posting - to being hostile towards discussion, with your accusation of "misdirection" being levied against people who try to talk, and you apologies for activities (early bandwagoning) that would, at best, reduce the amount of time we have to discuss things, and at worst allow the scum to get an easy lynch. Furthermore, hostility to voting based on logic discussion amounts to a request to have votes done randomly, or to have none cast at all, which will kill us anyways.

Regarding your accusations of a change in my personality: this, I will concede, is true to an extent. We have more information than we did before, we have fewer players than we did before, and with so many of us dead, the stakes are significantly higher than they were before. I feel that I have sufficient reason to be more assertive, more supportive of discussion, and generally more involved. However, I also feel that you have become, if anything, less supportive of discussion, and that it's a change contrary to the town's best interest.

Regarding the fact that scum manipulates the town to try and get its way: that doesn't need to be said, it's universally acknowledged, and it's a prerequisite for my accusations against you. I believe I said early on that the "random voting" wasn't truly random, due to scum influence, and so people should be aware of that fact. However, the town needs discussion to win, and the only real implication I can see for you "don't trust anyone" rhetoric is to reduce the total amount of discussion. We don't know who the scum is, which is why saying that we can't trust them isn't helpful.

You're saying you have a role, and that its use is dependent on communication with the rest of town. You're also saying that you don't want to reveal what it is, even though you expect to die tonight; why? If you have an information-gathering role, then I'm a bit confused, as I haven't seen make any definitive statements (besides the statement made just now that you knew you were targeted on the first turn).

I would like to know what the name/title of your role is, and as much about the power you have as you can say without jeopardizing that power's effectiveness. If you really do think you will die tonight, as you say, then you have nothing to lose by coming out in the open now, I should think.

@A_F: You are the one who is misleading people.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:So far I have seen outright lies - for example, pinning me as uncooperative when I been perfectly forthcoming.

Artik_Firangi wrote:Claims that I am ignoring other posters.

See:

Orkeosaurus wrote:What is it that you were previously saying constituted evidence against me, but that you could not reveal until a later date?

VikingScott wrote:I would like to hear evidence also. We need a scum lynch.

Manchu wrote:Following Orkeosaurus, I will reiterate my own call from yesterday that A_F reveal his "evidence" against him.

Gathering Storm wrote:So c'mon, Arctik_Firangi, show us what you're evidence is.

Lord of battles wrote:Watcha got Firangi?

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:I'm minorly intrigued as well.

Did he mention more about it after page two? I swore he did, but I can't seem to find it.

Gathering Storm wrote:From what I can deduce (guess) the "evidence" is:
-something to do with Orkeosaurus' wolf name.
-something related to another comment or post Orkeo made.
-some information on a 'scum' agent/player

As to how relevant, useful or genuine this 'evidence' is, is anyone's guess.

And:

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Who have I criticised for performing a provoking vote?Something that serious really does need to be backed up.

See:

Arctik_Firangi wrote:I'm aware that you haven't exactly been demanding my contributions - although you earlier voted for me simply because I was absent. I'm sure that if you wanted to ask hard questions you would, and that if you wanted to explore my points, you would do so with pleasure. It seems otherwise.

Vote Count 3.2 - "As good as my word"

1 - Manchu (Arctik_Firangi )
0 - Lord of battles
2 - Arctik_Firangi (Orkeosaurus VikingScott)
0 - Dastardly Dave
0 - Paul Atreides
1 - VikingScott (Manchu )
0 - Inquisitor_Syphonious
0 - Gathering Storm
1 - Orkeosaurus ( Gathering Storm)



Not Voting

Dastardly Dave
Inquisitor_Syphonious
Lord of battles
Paul Atreides



With 9 alive it is 5 to lynch.

Deadline Countdown

@Thor: I believe I am currently voting for Viking Scott. Ha, nevermind. I misread it as me voting for A_F. Which I am actually tempted to do after today's episode. I still think it's too far from the deadline, however.

Remember rule #! - I am infallible.

Edit: Oh, and as a head's up to everyone. After some review and consideration all of the Night Phases in the game are being extended to 72 hours from 48 in order to make it a little less frenetic - especially if we en up going to night on a weekend.

Ah, thanks for that. We still have quite a bit of discussion to do here, in my opinion.

:EDIT: Oops, you extended the nights, not the days. We still need to act!

And now that discussion time is over, I take it?

Do we just pick a lynch at random as earlier, or can anyone think of a smarter options?

We still have three days so descussion time is not over but we beed to get the ball rolling..... so
Vote Arctik_Firangi

Since we only have three days left, it's no longer appropriate for me to vote against Scott simply because he's voting for A_F. I therefore unvote: Viking Scott. Still, I would urge caution here. We still have three days and we ought to use every one of them. Apparently for IRL reasons, A_F has not had a chance to explain himself regarding his alleged evidence against Orkeo and what seemingly most of us agree is supicious behavior. I am not convinced that he is scum, however, and see this pile up against him as just a bit too convenient. I ask that other also stay their votes against him at least until he has a chance to say more, as he promised before the weekend.

In the meantime, I'd like to see more substantive contributions from Dastardly Dave, Inquisitor_Syphonious, Lord of battles, Paul Atreides, and Gathering Storm. As I have often said, their persistent silence is far more suspicious to my mind than A_F's increasingly hostile and paranoid rantings.

To that end,

Unvote: Arctik_Firangi

Vote: Dastardly Dave

I should note that I don't have any hot tip on DD in particular.

Dasterdly Dave was in London for the weekend. So thier is you explaination for that. (He's the gm in a RP I am involved in if you wonder why I know)

I agree Manchu, I have gotten of way to easily this game regarding my silence. But Arctic firangi has already revealed his 'evidence', or rather, his lead. This quote is dissected from a larger post further up this very page. (Arctic, if the evidence you had in mind was something else entirely and I am just way of, a thousand apolegies).

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Before I go further, allow me to explain my first day's suspicion. At this point I think it is constructive, because I have at least something to contribute in the way of personal proof.
My town role was presented to me by the GM with associated fluff and a specific character name. This was why Orkeo's post immediately struck me as odd - it seemed made up. I summoned attention and raised the question of if anyone else found this to be odd. No one did, or at least admitted it. So far none of the other town dead have 'dropped names' in their role descriptions so I'm confident that I am unique in this regard, or at least one of few.

I will admit, when Arctic posted this question during day one I didn't find it strange, but now that he pointed this out, I think this could definately be... something. Not evidence, just something to keep in mind. The_ferret and not_u were named characters, I remember that. Thervadam and fifty were named after unit types (Were any more elaborate names revealed for them? If so they escape me (perhaps you could shed some light on this, Thor?)).

I take it that you don't think this argument holds any water, Manchu, by how you haven't responded to arctic regarding the matter. That, or you didn't read it very attentively.