That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
While part of me feels like he's the good scoop that makes you want to pull your hair out, some of the petulance makes me think he's bad scoop and this is all a ruse, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing (but, perhaps, grasping at straws).Lassr wrote:If scoop is a wolf then kudos to him for the brilliant play. He feels like the good scoop that makes you want to pull your hair out.
I do want to comment on this. What petulance have I shown? Are you referring to my self-vote? You really think I did out of petulance?pr0ner wrote:While part of me feels like he's the good scoop that makes you want to pull your hair out, some of the petulance makes me think he's bad scoop and this is all a ruse, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing (but, perhaps, grasping at straws).Lassr wrote:If scoop is a wolf then kudos to him for the brilliant play. He feels like the good scoop that makes you want to pull your hair out.
Scoop20906 wrote:I've nothing further to explain.
ThaT's kinda what's worrying me.El Guapo wrote:I wouldn't say the self-vote was actually petulant since my impression is that it was a game of sorts to evaluate reactions (as opposed to a genuine self-vote, like tru1cy did later).
The refusal to disclose information is a little more baffling. The question is whether he's a villager attempting to draw the night kill, or whether he's a wolf trying to claim special without claiming special.
I just hope that he's not actually a special, and god help us if he's the seer.
Well, we do have information to evaluate what he's doing - that's more or less what I did above (and what others have done). Assuming he's not going to add anything (which appears to be the case), as to how we 'react' - the only question is whether we threaten to lynch him by bringing him close to the brink. Risk: we accidentally out the seer (or the shooter, but I don't consider that much of a risk since I think the shooter should be shooting today anyway). Reward: we force Scoopwolf to add additional information that could bust him (like, he could try to claim special and be countered).Vorret wrote:ThaT's kinda what's worrying me.El Guapo wrote:I wouldn't say the self-vote was actually petulant since my impression is that it was a game of sorts to evaluate reactions (as opposed to a genuine self-vote, like tru1cy did later).
The refusal to disclose information is a little more baffling. The question is whether he's a villager attempting to draw the night kill, or whether he's a wolf trying to claim special without claiming special.
I just hope that he's not actually a special, and god help us if he's the seer.
How are we suppose to react to what he said? We have some info that's worth nothing in making a decision.
Eh bien, nous n'avons pas d'informations pour évaluer ce qu'il fait - c'est plus ou moins ce que j'ai fait ci-dessus (et autres l'ont fait). En supposant qu'il ne va pas ajouter quelque chose (ce qui semble être le cas), quant à comment nous « réagir » - la seule question est que nous risquons de lyncher en lui apportant à proximité du gouffre. Risque : nous sortir accidentellement la voyante (ou le tireur, mais je ne considère pas que beaucoup de risques car je pense que le tireur doit être tir aujourd'hui en tout cas). Récompense : nous forcer Scoopwolf pour ajouter des informations supplémentaires que pourraient lui buste (comme, il pourrait essayer de réclamer spécial et être contrée).Vorret wrote:ThaT's kinda what's worrying me.El Guapo wrote:I wouldn't say the self-vote was actually petulant since my impression is that it was a game of sorts to evaluate reactions (as opposed to a genuine self-vote, like tru1cy did later).
The refusal to disclose information is a little more baffling. The question is whether he's a villager attempting to draw the night kill, or whether he's a wolf trying to claim special without claiming special.
I just hope that he's not actually a special, and god help us if he's the seer.
How are we suppose to react to what he said? We have some info that's worth nothing in making a decision.
Oh myEl Guapo wrote:Eh bien, nous n'avons pas d'informations pour évaluer ce qu'il fait - c'est plus ou moins ce que j'ai fait ci-dessus (et autres l'ont fait). En supposant qu'il ne va pas ajouter quelque chose (ce qui semble être le cas), quant à comment nous « réagir » - la seule question est que nous risquons de lyncher en lui apportant à proximité du gouffre. Risque : nous sortir accidentellement la voyante (ou le tireur, mais je ne considère pas que beaucoup de risques car je pense que le tireur doit être tir aujourd'hui en tout cas). Récompense : nous forcer Scoopwolf pour ajouter des informations supplémentaires que pourraient lui buste (comme, il pourrait essayer de réclamer spécial et être contrée).Vorret wrote:ThaT's kinda what's worrying me.El Guapo wrote:I wouldn't say the self-vote was actually petulant since my impression is that it was a game of sorts to evaluate reactions (as opposed to a genuine self-vote, like tru1cy did later).
The refusal to disclose information is a little more baffling. The question is whether he's a villager attempting to draw the night kill, or whether he's a wolf trying to claim special without claiming special.
I just hope that he's not actually a special, and god help us if he's the seer.
How are we suppose to react to what he said? We have some info that's worth nothing in making a decision.
It's not bad if you know what the topic is, otherwise I'd be really confusedEl Guapo wrote:How'd that turn out? I've actually been somewhat impressed with the Bing Translator that Facebook uses for foreign language posts.
And as a side note, I'm definitely going to call the seer the "voyante" from now on.
Which only shows you can be wrong consistently to.Lassr wrote:So anyone else got a threat list, a vote to throw on someone, anything?
I've got my vote on Remus still.
The "is there a zerker" question is soooo far fetched it's making my eyes bleed. I saw it as a legit question from a few people who were not sure.RMC wrote:I don't think Scoop is a wolf. I also don't think he is the seer or the shooter. I think he is being Scoop, and thinks that based on my not reading the rules correctly, and a few others following he can 'clear' some of us.
I am not sure I like that logic, other than I really did make the mistake of thinking there was a 'zerker. There are some very good players out there that could jump on that and try to also look like a non-wolf.
However, let's flip my little faux pas? Who was around when I was talking about 'zerker that, and 'zerker this, and did not comment on it, that ALWAYS knows the rules? Hmmm.... Might that not tell us something?
I am at work, so can't do that research right now, but will soon.
Since no one has commented, I'll ask. Are wolves told more (in their secret forum) than villagers are when someone dies? For example, if they kill the seer, do they know it?Holman wrote:I'm not sure how anyone can be "pretty sure" of the shooter at this point. There's nothing to go on. Either he's the shooter (and he knows for sure) or he's the seer and has discovered the shooter (and he knows for sure). There is no "pretty sure."
Perhaps wolves are told more in this game than regular villagers are? The rules don't explicitly forbid that as I read them.
Normally no. You usually must have a coroner role to do that.Holman wrote:Since no one has commented, I'll ask. Are wolves told more (in their secret forum) than villagers are when someone dies? For example, if they kill the seer, do they know it?Holman wrote:I'm not sure how anyone can be "pretty sure" of the shooter at this point. There's nothing to go on. Either he's the shooter (and he knows for sure) or he's the seer and has discovered the shooter (and he knows for sure). There is no "pretty sure."
Perhaps wolves are told more in this game than regular villagers are? The rules don't explicitly forbid that as I read them.
Lassr wrote:Normally no. You usually must have a coroner role to do that.Holman wrote: Since no one has commented, I'll ask. Are wolves told more (in their secret forum) than villagers are when someone dies? For example, if they kill the seer, do they know it?
Ask the MOD time.
Aww. Ok, I can see how some could consider this unhelpful but truly as I said before I've given you more information today than anyone else had all game.pr0ner wrote:Scoop20906 wrote:I've nothing further to explain.
You edited your post!Newcastle wrote:Lassr wrote:Normally no. You usually must have a coroner role to do that.Holman wrote: Since no one has commented, I'll ask. Are wolves told more (in their secret forum) than villagers are when someone dies? For example, if they kill the seer, do they know it?
Ask the MOD time.
MOD REPLY
Wolves/Evil Spirits do not get role information from their night kills.
Crap! I just sprayed water all over my phone. LOLEl Guapo wrote:You edited your post!Newcastle wrote:Lassr wrote:Normally no. You usually must have a coroner role to do that.Holman wrote: Since no one has commented, I'll ask. Are wolves told more (in their secret forum) than villagers are when someone dies? For example, if they kill the seer, do they know it?
Ask the MOD time.
MOD REPLY
Wolves/Evil Spirits do not get role information from their night kills.
El Guapo wrote:You edited your post!Newcastle wrote:Lassr wrote:Normally no. You usually must have a coroner role to do that.Holman wrote: Since no one has commented, I'll ask. Are wolves told more (in their secret forum) than villagers are when someone dies? For example, if they kill the seer, do they know it?
Ask the MOD time.
MOD REPLY
Wolves/Evil Spirits do not get role information from their night kills.
Yes. I do think the possibility exists that you're faking a role. You've done it before and gotten yourself shot over it. I wouldn't put it past you to do it again.Scoop20906 wrote: Now, pr0ner, you are probably saying that the wolves will probably ignore me again thinking I am faking a role. Well, wouldn't that be convenient for me tomorrow? Do you think I am faking a role? I've yet to claim anything. I've just said that I am "pretty sure" the shooter still lives and positive the shooter should not use the shot today.
Scoop20906 wrote: Updated Unknown
5. Mr. Bubbles
6. Lagom Lite
11. El Guapo
14. Proner
I'm interested in testing Lagom LiteLassr wrote:2. Remus West
6. Lagom Lite
11. El Guapo
13. Vorret
My opinion at this moment is the 3 wolves are in this group.
Scoop20906 wrote:Scoop20906 wrote: Updated Unknown
5. Mr. Bubbles
6. Lagom Lite
11. El Guapo
14. PronerI'm interested in testing Lagom LiteLassr wrote:2. Remus West
6. Lagom Lite
11. El Guapo
13. Vorret
My opinion at this moment is the 3 wolves are in this group.
Remus never made it to Scoop's most recent threat list after he did his voting analysis.Lassr wrote:You took Remus off your list?
Pr0ner is correct.pr0ner wrote:Remus never made it to Scoop's most recent threat list after he did his voting analysis.Lassr wrote:You took Remus off your list?
Pr0ner, I'm not faking anything.pr0ner wrote:Yes. I do think the possibility exists that you're faking a role. You've done it before and gotten yourself shot over it. I wouldn't put it past you to do it again.Scoop20906 wrote: Now, pr0ner, you are probably saying that the wolves will probably ignore me again thinking I am faking a role. Well, wouldn't that be convenient for me tomorrow? Do you think I am faking a role? I've yet to claim anything. I've just said that I am "pretty sure" the shooter still lives and positive the shooter should not use the shot today.
I think that is part of the issue folks have with your play. If you die tonight (and there is no protector so there is nothing to stop them) then all knowledge of your role (if any) goes with you and thus opens it up for the wolves to spoof later. That is what, imo, folks are worried about.Scoop20906 wrote:Pr0ner, I'm not faking anything.pr0ner wrote:Yes. I do think the possibility exists that you're faking a role. You've done it before and gotten yourself shot over it. I wouldn't put it past you to do it again.Scoop20906 wrote: Now, pr0ner, you are probably saying that the wolves will probably ignore me again thinking I am faking a role. Well, wouldn't that be convenient for me tomorrow? Do you think I am faking a role? I've yet to claim anything. I've just said that I am "pretty sure" the shooter still lives and positive the shooter should not use the shot today.
Seriously. Remus hits the nail on the head here about Scoop's play.Remus West wrote:I think that is part of the issue folks have with your play. If you die tonight (and there is no protector so there is nothing to stop them) then all knowledge of your role (if any) goes with you and thus opens it up for the wolves to spoof later. That is what, imo, folks are worried about.Scoop20906 wrote:Pr0ner, I'm not faking anything.pr0ner wrote:Yes. I do think the possibility exists that you're faking a role. You've done it before and gotten yourself shot over it. I wouldn't put it past you to do it again.Scoop20906 wrote: Now, pr0ner, you are probably saying that the wolves will probably ignore me again thinking I am faking a role. Well, wouldn't that be convenient for me tomorrow? Do you think I am faking a role? I've yet to claim anything. I've just said that I am "pretty sure" the shooter still lives and positive the shooter should not use the shot today.
As for Lagom, he would be on my short list but below Vorret and with Vorret seeming happy to vote there I need to reread before I decide if I feel good about joining the vote.
They are my top two though with 3 and 4 being a fair distance behind them.