Octopus Overlords

Chaosraven wrote:

LordMortis wrote:

Chaosraven wrote:Also, assuming the Cabal stays alive and hidden, their info could even be held to discourage spoofing... hmmm

Hey... One of just said that...

Really?

Mine meant: "Cabal holds info BACK until important"

Are you saying I meant something different?

LordMortis wrote:

Chaosraven wrote:

LordMortis wrote:

Chaosraven wrote:Also, assuming the Cabal stays alive and hidden, their info could even be held to discourage spoofing... hmmm

Hey... One of just said that...

Really?

Mine meant: "Cabal holds info BACK until important"

Are you saying I meant something different?

I'm saying I didn't read that from yours

Chaosraven wrote:

Newcastle wrote:

Chaosraven wrote:
By revealing the other 2, rather than spend 3 days playing Tag with a protector, would they not be more likely to go for the other specials amongst the smaller pool of 14?

Sure i can see that...BUT...they will HAVE to start nibbling into the cabal at some point in the next 6 days....why not have them start worrying about it now? Any which way you can throw monkey wrenches and have the wolves think about more things than needed....is a good thing by my book.

Yeah, i'd probably work on the population of 14 initially, but you know in the days to come they will have to deal w/ an outted good 3 block. Thats just too damn powerful to ignore.

my point is with 2 cabal thrown in the mix, that's 2 less chances they hit the other specials.

the difference from 14 & 16 is not that great right now. The seer, hunter and medium still have room to hide. The wolves have about 6-7 days to achieve victory. thats 6-7 night kills...wouldnt you want to at least dictate part of their night kill pattern?

Chaosraven wrote:By coming out, LL has narrowed our search to 19 other players (assuming no selfvoting).
He knows his 2 partners, so to him/them it is 17.

The wolves know themselves (4 of 21)
The wolves know Lagom, leaving 16 players to find their "targets"
As the Cabal are 2/3 expendable, assume they would RATHER kill the other specials.

By revealing the other 2, rather than spend 3 days playing Tag with a protector, would they not be more likely to go for the other specials amongst the smaller pool of 14?

To me that alone is reason to leave them out of it for today.

Stop helping the furry.

This.

Plus with just one known trusted it becomes protection chicken. With three it makes it that much harder on the protector. Not to mention a smaller pool for the bad guys to rip through to find other good specials. Anyone who wants all three to come out now is not fighting for team good.

Day 1 Vote Count
Votes required for lynch - 11

Against triggercut (3) - pr0ner, Scoop20906, theohall
Against redrun (3) - RMC, Bakhtosh, tru1cy
Against Vorret (2) - LordMortis, triggercut
Against Remus (2) - Chaosraven, redrun
Against theohall (1) - El Guapo
Against El Guapo (1) - Lagom Lite
Against Grundbegriff (1) - Newcastle
Against Scoop (1) - Unagi
Against Purge (1) - bb2112

No votes (5) - Purge, Grundbegriff, Qantaga, Remus West, Lassr

There are 17 villagers alive. The deadline for the lynch vote is June 6th at 9pm Eastern time.

swore i had ages ago dropped a vote on

 lassr 
 

tru1cy wrote:I don't get the push to reveal the rest of the cabal, but I am dead set against it.

triggercut wrote:

Newcastle wrote:
Cabal should come out.

No.

Just no.

Chaosraven wrote:Stop helping the furry.

bb2112 wrote: Anyone who wants all three to come out now is not fighting for team good.

These are strong opinions to a question that does not have an absolute advantage on one side or the other.

Let's take a closer look.

There are two predominant reasons that have been cited for the remaining cabal members to remain silent:

Lagom Lite wrote:Calling for the reveal of the other Cabal members is a terrible idea. It narrows down the pool of players that might be the Seer, so the wolves can kill him in the night.

and

bb2112 wrote: With three it makes it that much harder on the protector.

1. Less Room for the Seer to Hide

- If the remaining cabal members reveal, it is true that the Seer (and other specials) would have less room to hide. Let's look at a hypothetical where we lynch a good, non-special today. That would mean that 20 players would advance to night. The wolves would know the four of themselves and three cabal members for a total of seven known and 13 unknown. Thus, they would have a 1 in 13 chance of hitting the Seer (2 in 13 chance of hitting the Seer or the Hunter and a 4 in 13 chance of hitting a good special). A nice side effect of this scenario would be that this would also increase the chances of the wolves killing the Sorcerer.

- If the remaining cabal members remain silent (under the same good, non-special lynch hypothetical), the wolves would have a 1 in 15 chance of hitting the Seer. (2 in 15 chance of hitting the Seer or Hunter and 4 in 15 chance of hitting a good special).

So, they would have a 6.7% chance of hitting the Seer if the cabal stays silent and a 7.7% chance of hitting the Seer if the remaining cabal members reveal.

Now, let's talk about the flip side that has previously been disregarded. Let's consider the plight of the Seer.

The cabal revealing will not only make it easier for the wolves to find the Seer, it will also make it easier for the Seer to find a wolf.

Let's take the same hypothetical as above (good, non-special lynched) from the Seer's perspective:

- With the two remaining cabalists remaining silent, the Seer would know himself, his Night 0 scan, and Lagom (there's even a slight possibility that Lagom was the Seer's Night 0 scan). That means he would be looking for 4 wolves (if he hits the Sorceror, he won't know) in a pool of 17 players.

- With the two remaining cabalists revealing, the Seer would then be looking for 4 wolves in a pool of 15 players.

If the cabal stays silent, the Seer has a 23.5% chance of finding a wolf. If they reveal, he has a 26.7% chance of finding a wolf.

Here's the other burden that the current situation has imposed upon the Seer:

- Without knowledge of the other two cabal members' identities, the Seer could scan one of them. This would in essence be a wasted scan, since the cabal members will presumably reveal themselves eventually anyway.
- Of course, the way for the Seer to avoid scanning a cabal member would be for him to avoid anyone on Lagom's "good guy" list. The problem with that is that the Seer is now handcuffed by Lagom's list. Do we want the Seer to ignore his own instincts and observations and rely on Lagom's Day 1 impressions?

2. More Difficult Protection Choices for the Hunter.

There is a fallacy involved with those claiming that if the remaining cabalists reveal, it will make the Hunter's choices more difficult. The truth is that it will make the Hunter's protection choice easier. The assertion that the cabal revealing will make it harder for the Seer to hide -and- harder for the Hunter to protect is flawed. Those two assertions cannot peacefully coexist.

The consensus objection to the cabalists revealing is that the wolves would then ignore the cabalists and have a smaller pool in which to find the Seer and the other good specials. However, if that is true, why would the Hunter be protecting Lagom or one of the two revealed cabalists? The Hunter would also realize that the wolves would be going after a non-cabalist and would direct his protection accordingly.

If the cabalists remain silent, the Hunter will have a 1 in 18 chance (maybe 1 in 17, depending on his Night 0 protection, or lack thereof) of making the right protection choice. If they reveal, he will have a 1 in 16 chance of making the right protection choice. By revealing, the cabal gives the Hunter an increase from 5.6% to 6.3% of being successful.

Of course, the wolves could consider that and just kill one of the cabalists in the night. But, that would be a worthwhile trade-off. The longevity of the Seer and the Hunter is more valuable than that of the cabalists. (Especially, given that, if the wolves choose that path, it would take the wolves three night kills to be rid of the cabal, giving the Seer four scans in return and giving the Hunter much more information to help decide how to use his shot).

Lagom

Here's the other issue that the cabal must debate. How confident are they of Lagom's read of the game on Day 1?

- If Lagom is very intuitive this game and has listed the majority of wolves/Sorcerer in his "maybe baby" list, then the other cabalists remaining hidden will be a big advantage for us.
- If Lagom's intuition and read of players on Day 1 is off and the majority of wolves/Sorcerer are in his "good guy" list, we are going to be in trouble the longer we abide by it.

In trying to decide whether it is best for the cabal to reveal, we are at a distinct disadvantage to the wolves. We don't know which is the best path. However, the wolves do.

Thus, my contention that there is no absolute best choice in this matter.

Cabal Reveal

The assertion that the other cabalists revealing themselves is only beneficial to the wolves is patently false. Both paths have advantages and disadvantages to each team.

- The cabalists remaining silent lessens the odds for both the wolves and the good specials to be successful in their goals.
- The cabalists revealing increases the risks and the rewards for both the wolves and the good specials.

Newcastle wrote:swore i had ages ago dropped a vote on

 lassr 
 

Almost, but not quite.

Can anyone understand Tru1cy? I can't. All game day he's been saying that one player is as good as another for the first day lynch and that he really doesn't pay much attention on day one. Many of his posts are careful to say he's going this way, but the other way is just as good in his opinion. Yet, somehow, he's managed to decide that I'm important enough to override Lagom's list of possible evil.

Monday:

tru1cy wrote:Why the train on Qantaga? I guess he's good as anyone else but i'm jumping on it. I might be able to vote for Theohall or Unagi. Will check again when things slow down f
or me

tru1cy wrote:That should read i'm not jumping on it. Stupid android keyboard

Wednesday:

tru1cy wrote:Looks like its going to redrun and qantaga are on deck as the most, so I'll add my voice to  redrun 
 



Just like qantaga, but I guess they are as good as anyone else.

Thursday:

tru1cy wrote:Nice analysis LL, but I can't see it for El Guapo, but I'll freely admit I am not entirely dialed in on this day as I always find day one a tedious.

See no reason for the moment to move my vote from redrun as he is as good as anyone for the first day

Friday:

tru1cy wrote:

Remus West wrote:

Lassr wrote:I agree with Q here. It was the first thing that popped into my head and is the reason why I did not immediately withdraw my vote on redrun. But I also thought that if redrun was cabal then redrun would have come forward instead of LL.

I fully agree with this and have been debating putting my vote back on redrun.

This I agree with  redrun 
 

Tru1cy, Qantaga, Remus. At this point, I'm willing to bet there are at least two wolves among these three.

Qantaga wrote: These are strong opinions to a question that does not have an absolute advantage on one side or the other.

Let's take a closer look.

Why are you pushing so hard on day one for revels? As long as we have a cabel member (that we know and trust) the wolves cannot spoof, so we really do want to protect our cabel members. Also, take all of your logic and add the following to it:
Tonight the hunter protect Lagom - wolves get to attack blindly.
Tonight the mentalist contacts Lagom - becomes proven and extends the power of team cabel (they can send him forth to present to us, and/or use him to avoid cabel spoofing by the wolves).
Tonight the seer will get a second scan.

Did Lagom really do that good of job of sorting out the wolves? I disagree with many of his choices, but am willing to let it run out a day. Between this, the "let's look at Grund" folks, and the "let's go after Redrun" folks I think the wolves are doing what they can to change the parameters - 'cause they really don't like where they are right now.

So, I assume that the mentalist will contact Lagom tonight:

Newcastle wrote:wouldnt you want to at least dictate part of their night kill pattern?

How about forcing the wolves to kill a cabelist every other night for four of the next eight nights?

Night two (tonight), Lagom is protected.
Day three, Lagom shares knowledge.
Night Three, Lagom dies.
Day four, a new cabelist gives out knowledge.
Night four, is protected.
Day five, shares knowledge.
Night five, dies.
Day six, a new cabelist gives out knowledge.
Night six, is protected.
Day seven, gives out knowledge, including the name of the remaining cabelist.
Night seven, neither of the remaining cabelists is protected, one dies.
Day eight, cabelist gives out knowledge.
Night eight, cabelist is protected.
Day nine, cabelist gives out knowledge.
Night nine, cabelist dies.

BTW, it appears to me that those lying bastard cabelists sent out the mentalist as a cabelist on Day four.

tru1cy wrote:

Remus West wrote:

Lassr wrote:I agree with Q here. It was the first thing that popped into my head and is the reason why I did not immediately withdraw my vote on redrun. But I also thought that if redrun was cabal then redrun would have come forward instead of LL.

I fully agree with this and have been debating putting my vote back on redrun.

This I agree with  redrun 
 

Just to list this logic out:

Redrun didn't come out as Cabel at N-5 votes.
Cabel can only talk in private at night.
Lagom did come out as Cabel.
This means Redrun couldn't be cabel, and Lagom knows nothing about Redrun
Am I missing anything?

redrun wrote: Why are you pushing so hard on day one for revels?

Did you actually read my post? I'm not pushing for reveals. I'm pushing for clarity and for the cabal to consider all the implications as they make their decisions. I'm pushing against those that claim that reveals only benefit wolves.

redrun wrote:As long as we have a cabel member (that we know and trust) the wolves cannot spoof, so we really do want to protect our cabel members. Also, take all of your logic and add the following to it:
Tonight the hunter protect Lagom - wolves get to attack blindly.
Tonight the mentalist contacts Lagom - becomes proven and extends the power of team cabel (they can send him forth to present to us, and/or use him to avoid cabel spoofing by the wolves).
Tonight the seer will get a second scan.

That is a good plan, but a cabal reveal does not negate that plan in the slightest.

The most curious part of your plan, though, is why you want to direct the Hunter to protect Lagom. The iocane factor alone should cause you to leave that particular directive out of your scenario.

Qantaga wrote:

redrun wrote:As long as we have a cabel member (that we know and trust) the wolves cannot spoof, so we really do want to protect our cabel members. Also, take all of your logic and add the following to it:
Tonight the hunter protect Lagom - wolves get to attack blindly.
Tonight the mentalist contacts Lagom - becomes proven and extends the power of team cabel (they can send him forth to present to us, and/or use him to avoid cabel spoofing by the wolves).
Tonight the seer will get a second scan.

That is a good plan, but a cabal reveal does not negate that plan in the slightest.

The most curious part of your plan, though, is why you want to direct the Hunter to protect Lagom. The iocane factor alone should cause you to leave that particular directive out of your scenario.

What does a revel today do to the idea of using the mentalist to extend the usage of the cabelists? It lets the wolves know which is the mentalist (no power to scan the dead) and which are the cabelists. Whom will the wolves want to kill first? From what I can see, once the mentalist is outed his ability is unimportant.

What Iocane factor? There is one outed special whom the wolves would really like to kill. The Hunter is likely to protect Lagom. Unless I'm the hunter, the wolves know I'm the hunter (impossible), and the wolves know I'm telling the truth when I say to protect Lagom - Iocane doesn't come into play at all. What the hunter does is up to the hunter - but there is no Iocane involved in my statement.

If Lagom were to point you out as a non-cabel member I'd still not vote for you for fear you'd go boom.

Hunter - if it comes to night, and if you are trying to decide to protect Lagom or me (on the basis that the wolves will likely want to kill Lagom, but will go after me as a possible cabel member since you're likely to be protecting Lagom) - protect Lagom. His loss and the resulting next day as fingers are pointed at me would be worse then me dying at night.

That was Iocane.

Lagom Lite wrote:SUSPECTS:

purge?
Newcastle?
LordMortis?
Vorret?

Remus West?
triggercut?

El Guapo
Scoop20906
Chaosraven
Bakhtosh

From Lagom's list, I think the two least likely to contribute and provide ongoing data are purge and  Bakhtosh 
 

redrun wrote: What Iocane factor? There is one outed special whom the wolves would really like to kill.

Yet, the predominant opinion is that the wolves would not only not want to kill a known Lagom, they would not want to kill any of the cabalists should they be revealed. The consensus is that the value of finding the Seer overrides any other proven players at this time. Isn't that the main argument against the rest of the cabal revealing?

So, why wouldn't the Hunter want to try to possibly subvert a Seer kill?

redrun wrote: What does a revel today do to the idea of using the mentalist to extend the usage of the cabelists? It lets the wolves know which is the mentalist (no power to scan the dead) and which are the cabelists. Whom will the wolves want to kill first? From what I can see, once the mentalist is outed his ability is unimportant.

That is true. However, doesn't the mentalist become a de facto cabalist at that point anyway? A Mentalist is bound by whatever the person he is in contact with tells him. He has no way of knowing the truth of what is said. His value is that he can prove himself to another player, not vice versa.

In your example above, you had the Mentalist spoofing a cabalist and dying on Night 5. How does that extend the power of the Mentalist any further than the cabalists confirming tomorrow that the Mentalist is a proven good player?

Qantaga wrote:

redrun wrote: What Iocane factor? There is one outed special whom the wolves would really like to kill.

Yet, the predominant opinion is that the wolves would not only not want to kill a known Lagom, they would not want to kill any of the cabalists should they be revealed. The consensus is that the value of finding the Seer overrides any other proven players at this time. Isn't that the main argument against the rest of the cabal revealing?

So, why wouldn't the Hunter want to try to possibly subvert a Seer kill?

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Especially since the bird in hand will weaken the Cabel and might make it possible to spoof at end of game.

redrun wrote:Especially since the bird in hand will weaken the Cabel and might make it possible to spoof at end of game.

I can't imagine a scenario where the wolves will be able to spoof a cabalist at the end of the game, unless the cabalists fall asleep at the wheel. Once the first cabalist is killed, it is incumbent on the other two to immediately come forward and confirm each other's identity. Chaos pointed that out earlier:

Chaosraven wrote: In the event Lagom dies, a second member should appear and continue.
In the event THAT player dies (or a member dies before Lagom) we will be unable to trust a third claim of a solo Cabal.

The cabalists must confirm each other while two of them are still alive. If they fail to do so, any end game cabalist-spoofing will fall squarely on their shoulders.

Qantaga wrote:

redrun wrote:Especially since the bird in hand will weaken the Cabel and might make it possible to spoof at end of game.

I can't imagine a scenario where the wolves will be able to spoof a cabalist at the end of the game, unless the cabalists fall asleep at the wheel.

So cabalists are the only possible spoof? As long as there is a known cabalist the wolves are going to be very hesitant to spoof any role. As you can see from my earlier posting, I'm looking for ways to keep Cabalists available as long as possible.

A question.

Let's say we decide to vote off a silent. Can we, as a group, have the balls for once to just make it happen? Or are we going to get someone to N-2 or N-1 and let the game grind to a halt while we wait for the silent to "have his say"?

redrun wrote: So cabalists are the only possible spoof? As long as there is a known cabalist the wolves are going to be very hesitant to spoof any role. As you can see from my earlier posting, I'm looking for ways to keep Cabalists available as long as possible.

I understand what you are saying on a theoretical level. However, let's look at it practically:

- Medium. Unless I'm missing something, the Medium cannot be spoofed. The Medium must be alive and participate in a seance vote for the seance to occur. A wolf might claim Medium, but they would be immediately countered or they would not be able to deliver on the seance.

- Mentalist. At the moment, Lagom is proven. Once the Mentalist makes contact with Lagom tonight or another cabalist if/when the other cabalists are proven, the Mentalist will not be able to be spoofed.

- Cabalist. The Cabalists could be spoofed if two die before the third is revealed and if the wolves kill the third Cabalist at night. That is why I said it is incumbent on two Cabalists to confirm each other.

- Werewolf Hunter. With the Hunter possessing a shot and with the Hunter's identity being revealed upon that shot, it would be foolish for a wolf to even attempt to spoof the Hunter.

- Seer. That leaves us with the only dangerous role for a wolf to spoof. With three cabalists alive, the wolves would have to kill each of the cabalists on three consecutive nights to take away their ability to scan the dead. However, if the wolves elect to do that and leave the Seer alone for those three nights, the Seer will then possess four scans. At that time (assuming no Hunter shot has been fired or the Zerker has not detonated), there will be 15 players in the game and the Seer will have knowledge of four players. Four scans is more than most Seers can hope for in any game. At that time, the Seer could come forward with that data and unless Holman is the Seer (which the Cabal would have already told us), we would know that they were telling the truth unless they were immediately countered. Then, the Hunter (again, unless it's Holman) would still be alive and could protect the Seer for one more night, giving the Seer 5 scans.

The next day would dawn with 13 players, a proven Seer, and 5 scans. Even if the Seer should die that night, it is very likely that the Medium would still be alive (again, unless Holman) and could conjure a seance to get the Seer's 6th scan. Reading stess' turn order, the Seer gets their scan data before the wolves kill. Meaning that day, there would be 11 players, a proven Medium and 6 Seer scans of information.

Unless the Seer tries to really press their luck and hold out for an additional, dangerous scan, I don't see any practical way that the Seer can be spoofed, either.

pr0ner wrote:A question.

Let's say we decide to vote off a silent. Can we, as a group, have the balls for once to just make it happen? Or are we going to get someone to N-2 or N-1 and let the game grind to a halt while we wait for the silent to "have his say"?

I would. The only truly silent player has been Grund though and I won't go against LL request.

The next in line for relatively silent IMO would Bakhtosh and the Purge. I still prefer my vote on Vorret but I wouldn't hesitate to move either of these other two toward lynching, especially as the 6th grows closer.

That said I see the most problems with:

Purge, Grundbegriff, Qantaga, Remus West, Lassr

Against redrun (3) - RMC, Bakhtosh, tru1cy

Against theohall (1) - El Guapo

Against Grundbegriff (1) - Newcastle

So while my gut says vorret

Q has finally moved so he can come off
Newcastle has moved and even gets more leniency because that was apparently his intention before.

So for me it Vorret or

Purge
Remus West
RMC
Bakhtosh
El Guapo

And I hate giving grund a pass.
I'm not real thrilled about giving Tru1cy or Lassr a pass either.

pr0ner wrote:A question.

Let's say we decide to vote off a silent. Can we, as a group, have the balls for once to just make it happen? Or are we going to get someone to N-2 or N-1 and let the game grind to a halt while we wait for the silent to "have his say"?

I'll cast the last vote (if capable).

Scoop20906 wrote:

pr0ner wrote:A question.

Let's say we decide to vote off a silent. Can we, as a group, have the balls for once to just make it happen? Or are we going to get someone to N-2 or N-1 and let the game grind to a halt while we wait for the silent to "have his say"?

I'll cast the last vote (if capable).

I think maybe I should be the one to do it. I don't want to drive this vote if it's to carry any meaning in the days to come.

 withdraw El Guapo 
 
for now anyway.

Lagom Lite wrote:

Scoop20906 wrote:

pr0ner wrote:A question.

Let's say we decide to vote off a silent. Can we, as a group, have the balls for once to just make it happen? Or are we going to get someone to N-2 or N-1 and let the game grind to a halt while we wait for the silent to "have his say"?

I'll cast the last vote (if capable).

I think maybe I should be the one to do it. I don't want to drive this vote if it's to carry any meaning in the days to come.

 withdraw El Guapo 
 
for now anyway.

Yeah, that makes sense but I think pr0ner's point is we want to make it snappy.

Scoop20906 wrote:

Lagom Lite wrote:

Scoop20906 wrote:

pr0ner wrote:A question.

Let's say we decide to vote off a silent. Can we, as a group, have the balls for once to just make it happen? Or are we going to get someone to N-2 or N-1 and let the game grind to a halt while we wait for the silent to "have his say"?

I'll cast the last vote (if capable).

I think maybe I should be the one to do it. I don't want to drive this vote if it's to carry any meaning in the days to come.

 withdraw El Guapo 
 
for now anyway.

Yeah, that makes sense but I think pr0ner's point is we want to make it snappy.

Do you agree with him?

pr0ner wrote:A question.

Let's say we decide to vote off a silent. Can we, as a group, have the balls for once to just make it happen? Or are we going to get someone to N-2 or N-1 and let the game grind to a halt while we wait for the silent to "have his say"?

Then stop the chatter and place your vote on Purge.

LordMortis wrote: So for me it Vorret or

Purge
Remus West
RMC
Bakhtosh
El Guapo

There you go. Put your vote where your mouth is.

Qantaga wrote:

Lagom Lite wrote:SUSPECTS:

purge?
Newcastle?
LordMortis?
Vorret?

Remus West?
triggercut?

El Guapo
Scoop20906
Chaosraven
Bakhtosh

From Lagom's list, I think the two least likely to contribute and provide ongoing data are purge and  Bakhtosh 
 

I would still prefer to vote for you, but that being said, put a vote on your wolf buddy Purge and garner some in game capital.

Unagi wrote:

LordMortis wrote:

Newcastle wrote:and since i am pausing the haiku's.....what's up w/ Grund? He's made 1 poem thingy, and then disappeared. Is he going to be too busy to participate? I'd consider offing him. hate for him to pull a Cr from last game.

That's why I respect your move, dislike the others withdrawal from Grund, and I'd have moved to join you if I thought there a chance at lynching him (and was debating joining you in protest).

I'm endlessly frustrated by this too. Not really sure what to say about it, other than it seems we are (collectively) unwilling to taint the "fun of the game" by punishing a non-participating player, and hence we are forced to live with the level of fun that leaves us. And it sucks.

Ok, then you can vote for Purge too. He is barely more of a participant than Grund.

triggercut wrote:

Unagi wrote:

LordMortis wrote:

Newcastle wrote:and since i am pausing the haiku's.....what's up w/ Grund? He's made 1 poem thingy, and then disappeared. Is he going to be too busy to participate? I'd consider offing him. hate for him to pull a Cr from last game.

That's why I respect your move, dislike the others withdrawal from Grund, and I'd have moved to join you if I thought there a chance at lynching him (and was debating joining you in protest).

I'm endlessly frustrated by this too. Not really sure what to say about it, other than it seems we are (collectively) unwilling to taint the "fun of the game" by punishing a non-participating player, and hence we are forced to live with the level of fun that leaves us. And it sucks.

I'm ok with "punishing" (note the quotes) that play style by voting.

Looks like another vote for non-participating. You can vote Purge too.

El Guapo wrote:

Vorret wrote:I kinda dislike player that are AFK most of the game BUT it's day one and we have 22 players so I think we can let it slip for the first day... starting tomorrow (game day) there's no excuse.

I dunno, if we're going to punish it, then I think day 1 is the ideal day to do it, as the village is probably going to miss on day 1 anyways. Each successive day the village gets more info, so voting based solely on silence is giving up a progressively more informed village vote each day.

Another possible vote for Purge?

bb2112 wrote:Wow, that was a crap load of stuff to read and digest. I hate the reveal btw. In my head I already pushed LL to leaning good and it seemed very unlikely that he was going to get lynched. The only good thing I see is that the wolves probably have a harder time figuring out what to do with that info than the village. The bad is LL is pushing us into a limited vote by ignoring his leaning good players, which being day one, is as likely to harbor wolves as not.

I guess if we are to play along, I would prefer  Purge 
 
.

He seems too quiet and doesn't seem to be stirring the pot like normal.

Just in case why you are wondering why I'm pushing for Purge. The only time I've seen him silent is when he is evil. Not much to go on, but for day one, do you have better?

If all the above people put their votes where there rhetoric is, that would be 7 votes for Purge. Then if Scoop and LL join in on capping like they said they would, we would be up to 9. So we would just have to find 2 other like minded induhviduals to finish this.

I would rather we get a train going now than last minute. If Purge is a good special, (which I highly doubt because then his participation is off the chart) then that would give him time to come out and for us to go to a plan B without scrambling.

This series of posts by bb2112 smells like the lynch process applied to Chaosraven on the spaceship recently.

"Vote for purge" screamed the wolves.

I explained my thoughts on why this is different. Purge doesn't shut up when he is a good special. He disappears when he is evil. If I'm wrong, then what did we lose? Although I explain my reasoning again, I really don't expect you, or anyone else really, to follow it. Do what you want, Theo.

Rush toward the river's edge
Down in the ravine.
Let voices lead you there,
Where you've never been.
Breathe deeply and forget
Everything you've seen.

bb2112 wrote:I explained my thoughts on why this is different. Purge doesn't shut up when he is a good special. He disappears when he is evil. If I'm wrong, then what did we lose? Although I explain my reasoning again, I really don't expect you, or anyone else really, to follow it. Do what you want, Theo.

I will, especially when you write stuff similar to what purge and tru1cy wrote on the spaceship.
 withdraw triggercut

bb2112 
 

Theo, your post bugged me, so I went back and did some checking. There were only 2 wolves on the CR vote. Tru1cy at vote 2 and Scoop at vote 6. The other 7 that voted for CR were good. And Tru1cy and Scoop were not leading the charge on CR, so your wolves leading us to our doom assertion is false. Also, we were boxed in to a last second decision because Scoop spoofed seer and we didn't get a counter. Another reason why to push for someone earlier rather than waiting for the deadline.