Open 81 - The New C9 - Game Over

silence · Post Post #168 (isolation #0) » Tue Jul 01, 2008 9:15 pm

Hi.

To the old question about strife/armlx: neither had done anything to seem scummy, Iron Man was acting strangely.

I don't think armlx's 'why' was rolefishing, don't make unjustifiable claims like 'obv town' if you don't want them questioned.

Masons claiming was ok, I think, but it should have been analyzed before acting. Anyway, I think for now we can assume they very probably are masons (and try to validate it by finding three other scum

). StrangerCoug: can you elaborate what your FoS/HoS means?

silence · Post Post #320 (isolation #1) » Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:47 pm

Hi. Prod received. At work now but will read and post later today.

silence · Post Post #353 (isolation #2) » Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:00 pm

StrangerCoug never answered about the meaning of his FoSing roflcopter after the mason claim, which I still find strange. Scum fakeclaiming masons is hugely unlikely especially as they claimed only after it was suggested, how did they guess that someone will suggest masons coming out...

So far, I haven't found anyone doing anything that I would find clearly scummy (especially if there is a reasonable explanation for StrangerCougs FoS). Anyway, I don't know if it is even possible to obtain a better-than-random lynch D1. Therefore, at this point, I would go for forbiddanlight who is a claimed vanilla. Another candidates are BlakAdder who wants to rely on unexplained intuition and Vamparific who seems to have disappeared.

silence · Post Post #387 (isolation #3) » Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:07 pm

iamausername wrote: Wow, silence. Are you really suggesting we should lynch fl just because she isn't a power role, or do you actually think she's done anything suspicious?

I didn't suggest lynching her. I just stated that might be what I would do if I had to decide now, as I haven't been convinced about anyone to be likely to be scum. After re-reading I'm further convinced that Vamparific's actions don't make sense and would probably lynch him rather than forbiddanlight.

About the discussion about directing the vig. I don't see any reason why that would be harmful to town. The vigilante is not forced to obey, anyway, it can only help him to have informed opinions. And the vig does not have to state his truthful opinion during the day, so stated opinions about vig-kills don't have to give away information about who the vig is.

On the other hand I don't understand the point about Vamparific-kill being 'non-polarising' and thus it being better to vig him rather than lynch. I'd think D1-opinions about the player who gets vig-killed can be analyzed as well as D1-opinions about the player who gets lynched. If Vamparific seems scummy, we should lynch him and let the vig choose his 'second-best' candidate anyway.

silence · Post Post #447 (isolation #4) » Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:54 pm

strife220 wrote:Whether or not it's pro-town to direct the vig is becoming one of those 'my god take it to MD' topics.

I don't understand this (this is not the only post that includes this kind of complaints). The discussion about whether it is protown affects
- whether the vig will be directed in this game
- whether the directers/anti-directers have been trying to harm the town

If discussion about how this game should be played and has so far been played is forbidden, what IS ok to be posted? Claims, votes, that's it?

silence · Post Post #498 (isolation #5) » Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:16 pm

armlx wrote:
How do we know killa seven was SK'd?
Knife = more SK MO then bludgeon.

I don't think (especially in an open game) the mod gives any hints like this. Or at least shouldn't give. The flavor text should be independent of actual game events so that guessing the mod's intentions is not part of gameplay. (Please correct if I'm wrong about this)

silence · Post Post #574 (isolation #6) » Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:02 pm

The masons aren't completely cleared, there is a _small_ possibility of a fakeclaim: high risk of losing 2 scummies but also a high reward.

However, vigging/lynching them now doesn't make any sense. We can do that later, there is the possibility that we get lucky and confirm them by lynch three scummies early. And if we have a cop (or two), he can test them tonight or later. Also, the argument of using the vig kill so that 'we don't have to waste a lynch' is bad, wasting a vig kill is as bad (or worse) as wasting a lynch.

If the claimed masons are real, we obviously want to keep them alive as long as possible. If scum and SK want to kill non-masons, they are more likely to hit each other. If they for some reason want to kill masons, they are more likely to hit the same person so that we get one more townie to survive the day.

Muerrto wrote:As for the masons, having a different opinion isn't scummy. If we don't test the masons, we'll regret it later, all I'm going to say about that since I'm in the minority. But I will be sure to say I told you so when it comes up.

Having a different opinion is scummy if that opinion is clearly harmful to town.

FoS: Muerrto

Another suspect is strife220. Trying to ban discussion about strategic issues as a 'matter of opinion' and then attacking Lowell based on the mason plan suggestion.

silence · Post Post #643 (isolation #7) » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:13 am

Prod received. Will read and post later today.

silence · Post Post #694 (isolation #8) » Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:49 pm

Hi.
I'm on holiday now and our Internet connection is broken, therefore couldn't post tuesday. This is what I meant to post then, will read and post more on Sunday when I return.

To strife: no, I don't think Lowell's mason request was 'indistiputably anti-town', rather I'm still convinced it was likely good for town. Care to provide your indistiputable proof that the town's probability of winning decreases when masons come out?

Wanting to lynch/vig a mason for the reason that he is not a powerrole makes no sense. If we want to avoid powerroles might as well no-lynch. Besides, we have a claimed vanilla (also a non-powerrole, and higher chance of being scum).

vote: Muerrto

silence · Post Post #722 (isolation #9) » Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:55 pm

Muerrto wrote:How do I even respond to someone who lurks then comes back and doesn't read the thread?

Try again and I'll attempt to respond to you =p

What should I want you to 'respond' to? Based on your pushing for anti-town strategies I consider you more likely to be scum than other players. I don't know how something said by you would change that.

Anyway, I think BlakAdder is an ok lynch (if for nothing else, at least to avoid outing further power roles).

silence · Post Post #811 (isolation #10) » Sun Aug 03, 2008 11:55 pm

Rogueben wrote:Evidently the local serial killer Sun Tzu decided that iamusername looked like someone who was easy prey. Having stabbed him in the back iamusername turned around and clobbered Sun Tzu in the head with a leadpipe.

Is this just flavor or does the mod give away who killed who?

silence · Post Post #886 (isolation #11) » Wed Aug 06, 2008 7:27 am

Still waiting for someone to confirm whether the mod told us who killed who or not.

Muerrto wrote:EBWOP: I've also asked multiple times for some type of case on ME. Yes I have the same role as Vamp but you just asked me for a defense. How exactly do I defend when there's no case on ME?

Only way to 'defend' is to explain why we should think that you are not likely to be scum. If Vamparific's behavior looks like probable scum, of course we want to lynch him. It's not like cases are some kind of magic.

Nothing today has made me change my opinion on Muerrto. Let's just lynch him?

silence · Post Post #888 (isolation #12) » Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:57 am

Argh, my point was not necessarily that I want to know who killed who, but that I think an open game should not be guess-the-mod, so that we should either know certainly and get no flavor hints (and thus wanted to know whether we got the information or was the stuff completely random). Not that there was any reason for this to be relevant but I wanted to know (perhaps know that we don't know) before it for some reason becomes.

silence · Post Post #978 (isolation #13) » Wed Aug 13, 2008 2:20 am

Muerrto wrote:And third, can you please post your OWN case on Vamp since he was 'proable scum'?

My point was not that I thought Vamp to be probable scum, but that if he is, then you are, and thus a 'case on Vamp' is a 'case on Muerrto' and there is no reason why we should care whether you 'were screwed before you read the thread'. That you used

Muerrto wrote:My point was that there's no way in hell I'd call out my partner like that protecting him. That's not WIFOM that's fact.

How do we know it is a fact that you would never something? Previous games etc. do not show anything as one can decide to play differently than before. I think that is why armlx called self meta the ultimate WIFOM.

silence · Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:20 am

Korts wrote:Well then, it seems we have a second doctor.

Or that scum targeted armlx, too.

silence · Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:45 pm

Toaster: what makes you think one of those who iamausername voted is scum?

Does anyone have good reasons to why would scum have tried to kill armlx (which is what happened if we don't have a doc)?

silence · Post Post #1154 (isolation #16) » Thu Sep 11, 2008 9:31 am

orangepenguin wrote:Like I kind of said, I've been lazy. But I do need to re-read, because I haven't in a while, and if I find a case worth exploring, I will do.

Orangepenguin has been continuously promising activity today without doing anything, and to me these don't sound genuine.

Vote: orangepenguin