WW XCIV Group Therapy - Game Over!

[EagleFan]

vote PurdueBrad

I finally backed off from voting him last game and I see how that ended.

[Poli]

VOTE DANNY

He screwed us that last game more than Abe did.

Wait, is Abe in the game?

If so

VOTE ABE

[lerriuqs]

VOTE Pass

For the record - I'm at a conference tomorrow and going to see Star Trek tomorrow night so you won't hear from me again until after the deadline tomorrow. Let's get a wolf.

[EagleFan]

VOTE Pass

For the record - I'm at a conference tomorrow and going to see Star Trek tomorrow night so you won't hear from me again until after the deadline tomorrow. Let's get a wolf.

Wow, I was going to try to post "in game" with various personalities for awhile. I attempted to disect this post in a Sheldon-like manner (Big Bang Theory). I got exhausted trying to put that post together.

[Danny]

Yeah feel free to have fun with the theme guys, you all are in therapy right now, so some crazy is alright.

[Lathum]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UuOmsGXznHU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UuOmsGXznHU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Lathum]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/iw0owU8DzDg&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/iw0owU8DzDg&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Lathum]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WElvEZj0Ltw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WElvEZj0Ltw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[DaddyTorgo]

checking in

[Abe Sargent]

Lathum is a YouTube whore

[Chief Rum]

Seriously? Six pages already? You guys suck. :D

[Lathum]

videos may not ne safe for work

[Chief Rum]

Hi everyone,

I'm not used to speaking in front of groups. Without my mother present. In spandex....(pause) (pause) (pause)...what was I saying?

Oh, yeah, I mean no one in the group harm. Unless you look like my dad.

[Alan T]

Hi, I'm not crazy, I am just misunderstood.

[Alan T]

Also noting that I must have had some youtube trauma in my youth, so block out all youtube videos from even being able to see them.

(ie: I don't see anything from any of Lathum's posts above, while at work. So if they are actually important or game relevant someone let me know... otherwise I'll miss them)

[hoopsguy]

So, anyone have any thoughts on a Day 1 strategy that we should consider employing today?

I'm not feeling particularly vengeful, wrathful, or any other kind of full so I'm looking to avoid voting based on perceived past injustices.

I try not to play "eeny meeny miney mo!" with my vote, so that probably isn't going to happen.

I'm usually up for "vote off the quiet guy" but I'm willing to listen to alternatives if someone has one that I can get behind.

[Alan T]

So, anyone have any thoughts on a Day 1 strategy that we should consider employing today?

I'm not feeling particularly vengeful, wrathful, or any other kind of full so I'm looking to avoid voting based on perceived past injustices.

I try not to play "eeny meeny miney mo!" with my vote, so that probably isn't going to happen.

I'm usually up for "vote off the quiet guy" but I'm willing to listen to alternatives if someone has one that I can get behind.

Since I do not know anything about any of my fellow patients, combined with my being away from the boards more than normal today.. my plan is just to wait and see how things unwind during the day. I'll likely have to vote late in the day, so I guess I'll see what occurs while I am gone.

[Barkeep49]

I like the voting for a quiet guy strategy.

[PurdueBrad]

vote PurdueBrad

I finally backed off from voting him last game and I see how that ended.

I like the voting for a quiet guy strategy.

EF, I would like you to be more like BK.

[PurdueBrad]

I will

unvote RendeR's puppy

[PurdueBrad]

I'm not feeling particularly vengeful, wrathful, or any other kind of full so I'm looking to avoid voting based on perceived past injustices.


That's really nice and big of you. I mean, to be able to put any past injustices behind you like that, must take a lot of will power and personal strength and confidence. I'll try to do the same thing.

[PurdueBrad]

Nope, didn't work.

vote Hoopsguy

[PurdueBrad]

Alright, I got that out of my system. I realize that consistent day one votes for a person suck. So in all seriousness:

unvote Hoopsguy

[Barkeep49]

Ok so Brad has some kind of voting unvoting requirement.

[Barkeep49]

The question is, does he gain some sort of advantage for it, or does he just get to have fun flipping his votes aroudn?

[claphamsa]

Im hung over :(

[PurdueBrad]

No flip-flop requirement, really just screwing around as I'm bored/annoyed this morning so I was trying to entertain myself. We've been told, and get this, we have to throw out all furniture that is wood or made of materials that are not fire retardant, anything we have plugged in in the building MUST be on a surge protector and, best of all, we aren't allowed to have coffee makers, fridges, etc. in the building except in one centralized location (mind you our school has around 160 staff members).

[claphamsa]

Tomorrow I may work on posting every word in the dictionary that starts with the letter Q.
are you on crack?

[PurdueBrad]

Oh, and we can't have "excess paper or books as they are flammable materials as well."

[claphamsa]

Oh, and we can't have "excess paper or books as they are flammable materials as well."
wow... is Poli your boss?

[claphamsa]

im a good guy dont vote for me.

[DaddyTorgo]

I'm going to employ a strategy of not voting for myself - other than that...hmmm

[Passacaglia]

are you on crack?

Do you mean qrack?

[Passacaglia]

Welcome back(ward), squirrel!


VOTE LERRIUQS

[DaddyTorgo]

Welcome back(ward), squirrel!


VOTE LERRIUQS


lol

[Passacaglia]

All of you slowly walk into the group therapy room, knowing that the time has come to face your inner demons and look inside in order to spur personal growth. There is however an eerie feeling amongst you that there may be some group members who do not want to share me with the rest of the group. Fortunately, all of you are unique and special in your own way and have something to contribute to see about making the group a place where everyone can cooperatively work on the growth of all members of the group.

As you all sit down, the smell of foul Jalapeno fills the small room as Lathum finds the door locked as he tries to quickly leave the area. As he looks back, he notices Passacaglia with a wide grin on his face. All roles are out, let the game begin!

First deadline is tomorrow, Wednesday at 6pm eastern time.


Hmm. So I was realizing that I hadn't even noticed Danny making his post saying the game started -- you know, the one we were all supposed to wait for before posting that we received our role? So I go back to look at it, and turns out, I'm mentioned in it. Anyone have any idea wtf that means?

[Barkeep49]

No. I have chosen to ignore it for now.

[claphamsa]

you guys were talking about jalapeno Doritos earlier.

[Passacaglia]

No flip-flop requirement, really just screwing around as I'm bored/annoyed this morning so I was trying to entertain myself. We've been told, and get this, we have to throw out all furniture that is wood or made of materials that are not fire retardant, anything we have plugged in in the building MUST be on a surge protector and, best of all, we aren't allowed to have coffee makers, fridges, etc. in the building except in one centralized location (mind you our school has around 160 staff members).

Uh -- isn't it raining where you are, too? Just tell them if anything burns, the rain will take care of it!

[Passacaglia]

you guys were talking about jalapeno Doritos earlier.

Ah, got it. I guess that explains why Lathum is here in this asylum -- anyone who doesn't like those must be crazy. But still, wtf am *I* doing in here?

[Alan T]

Hmm. So I was realizing that I hadn't even noticed Danny making his post saying the game started -- you know, the one we were all supposed to wait for before posting that we received our role? So I go back to look at it, and turns out, I'm mentioned in it. Anyone have any idea wtf that means?


My take on it is the following:



Notes

Game write ups may have added flavor to them, but these are in no way hints or revealing of game or player information.



ie: don't read too much into moderator story telling.

[Passacaglia]

Ah, got it. I guess that explains why Lathum is here in this asylum -- anyone who doesn't like those must be crazy. But still, wtf am *I* doing in here?

Oh yeah, I'm compiling a vote count, that's what I'm doing:


saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 EagleFan (251)
Abe Sargent -- 1 Poli (252)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 0
lerriuqs -- 1 Passacaglia (284)

[Passacaglia]

My take on it is the following:



ie: don't read too much into moderator story telling.

Okay, cool. Just adding to the general craziness.

[claphamsa]

Ah, got it. I guess that explains why Lathum is here in this asylum -- anyone who doesn't like those must be crazy. But still, wtf am *I* doing in here?
your crazy, thats why your here :)

[PackerFanatic]

HAI GUSY

[Passacaglia]

your crazy, thats why your here :)

Yes, I suppose I am crazy. Crazy for apostrophes, that is. :p

[claphamsa]

huh?

[Abe Sargent]

Morning all

[Danny]

Hmm. So I was realizing that I hadn't even noticed Danny making his post saying the game started -- you know, the one we were all supposed to wait for before posting that we received our role? So I go back to look at it, and turns out, I'm mentioned in it. Anyone have any idea wtf that means?

Alan already mentioned it, but all that stuff is just added flavor. I had that post written before I even did the role. I am sure I will be name dropping throughout this game, it means nothing in terms of actual game play.

[Passacaglia]

Alan already mentioned it, but all that stuff is just added flavor. I had that post written before I even did the role. I am sure I will be name dropping throughout this game, it means nothing in terms of actual game play.

Got it. While Lathum may disagree, I like the flavor.

[Telle]

So the day's barely started and we already have 5 people with votes on them. This should be interesting.

[claphamsa]

the game flavr or the jalapeno flavr ;)

[Danny]

You all get ready to begin your day after a good night's sleep. Where will the therapy discussion head today? No one knows, but this therapist now knows never to follow Chief Rum in the bathroom ever again.

[saldana]

just checking in at this point...need to fully read the rule set before i wade in too deeply. but then again...dont need to reflect that much in order to do this...

vote dubb

[Telle]

As promised, my day 1 vote (for now)

vote RendeR's puppy

Why are you picking on my puppy? :(

[claphamsa]

Why are you picking on my puppy? :(
hes like that....

[Danny]

saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 EagleFan (251)
Abe Sargent -- 1 Poli (252)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
Dubb -- 1 Saldana (304)
lerriuqs -- 1 Passacaglia (284)

Vote count so far

[Autumn]

Well, I don't have any longlasting rivalry so I don't get to throw out a meaningless vote. I'm cetainly not going to add another person to that list. But I'm not interested in picking which person to start picking on.

My tendency (unless something shows itself today) is to vote on someone who doesn't show up or contribute, without prior warning. Or, if the contenders shrink a little, to keep things close for a more useful voting record.

[Autumn]

It looks like so far MartinD and NtNdeacon are the only to not have checked in yet. I worry that they won't be reaping the rewards of our therapy today.

The fact that there are players with independent win conditions is the only piece of information I've mined so far. It's not particularly helpful at this point though.

[Passacaglia]

Well, I don't have any longlasting rivalry so I don't get to throw out a meaningless vote. I'm cetainly not going to add another person to that list. But I'm not interested in picking which person to start picking on.

My tendency (unless something shows itself today) is to vote on someone who doesn't show up or contribute, without prior warning. Or, if the contenders shrink a little, to keep things close for a more useful voting record.

Too bad you didn't get Spring to show up.

Anyway, my tendency seems pretty much the same as yours, and I'll be looking to consolidate as well at some point.

[Passacaglia]

May or may not be needies with special win conditions.


Autumn, are you referring to this line of the rules, or something else? If it's just he needies, that's interesting. Does that mean that if the needies get their 1:1 ratio, they don't all win -- that one of them has to do something else as well? That might be good for us, if it causes dissention in their ranks.

[claphamsa]

It looks like so far MartinD and NtNdeacon are the only to not have checked in yet. I worry that they won't be reaping the rewards of our therapy today.

The fact that there are players with independent win conditions is the only piece of information I've mined so far. It's not particularly helpful at this point though.
this was mined from where?

[PurdueBrad]

Why are you picking on my puppy? :(

It was a joke from last game where (and I've been guilty of this in a previous game and trying not to let it carry over) people were throwing around the "I'm going to vote you day 1 from now on" threat and RendeR had made a comment about the puppy taking up some of his play time so I made the obvious connection that I needed to vote his puppy on day 1 every game.

[The Jackal]

Hrm. Let's see if we get everyone checked in by midday, I'm not seeing a rush for my vote.

[Danny]

Let me clarify the rules, there may or may not be players or needies with special win conditions. I didn't mean to make that quote specific to needies.

[Autumn]

this was mined from where?

I'm referring to The Jackal last night revealing that he had independent win conditions, and that Barkeep might as well.

[Autumn]

I'm pretty sure he means he has an unlisted role that's a group member but has additional win conditions and can't help or hurt the group. I say this because I have something similar.

Quoted here.

[Barkeep49]

Since Danny said it, I will say it. My win conditions are the same as the Group's. My power just doesn't help either side.

[Lathum]

Ok so Brad has some kind of voting unvoting requirement.

same could be said about me and Poli. Interesting yu would try and draw attention like that to PB.

[Lathum]

It looks like so far MartinD and NtNdeacon are the only to not have checked in yet. I worry that they won't be reaping the rewards of our therapy today.

.

MartinD is in another country and NTN is typicaly very quiet

[claphamsa]

I'm referring to The Jackal last night revealing that he had independent win conditions, and that Barkeep might as well.
oh, ok :)

I guess i need to reread last night....

[Passacaglia]

same could be said about me and Poli. Interesting yu would try and draw attention like that to PB.

I don't know if the same could be said about you. You put your vote on Poli as retaliation, but you didn't know that Poli was going to unvote you.

[EagleFan]

wait, wait, wait, wait.... PB says vote for hoops? must follow PB... not the voices in my head.... "NO!!!! I WON'T VOTE FOR MYSELF!!!!!"


unvote PB

vote hoops

[Barkeep49]

same could be said about me and Poli. Interesting yu would try and draw attention like that to PB.
Your actions seemed entirely to do with out of game stuff. It didn't register for me that it could possibly having to do with the game at all.

[claphamsa]

its tough knowing who to vote for with no heinze :(

[Lathum]

Vote Abe

nothing personal, but we need some consolidation and he could probably use a break after just running what I am sure is a challenging game to run.

[PurdueBrad]

wait, wait, wait, wait.... PB says vote for hoops? must follow PB... not the voices in my head.... "NO!!!! I WON'T VOTE FOR MYSELF!!!!!"



:lol: The only thing I would make you do is root for my Penguins tonight!

[hoopsguy]

Going to be in and out of meetings today, so not a lot of time to drill through the posts. However, I'm willing to throw a vote back on EF.
1.) He roots for the Eagles, so it always feels kind of good to vote for him.
2.) He had said in past games that he would want to get rid of me as quickly as possible as a wolf. And he has now voted for me.

VOTE EAGLEFAN

[The Jackal]

:lol: The only thing I would make you do is root for my Penguins tonight!

VOTE PB

[PurdueBrad]

HOLY UNFATHOMABLE SITUATIONS BATMAN, EF and Hoops voting for each other, which way do I go, which way do I go?

My head may explode.

Can they tie? If so, please don't make me cast the tie-breaking vote.

[The Jackal]

Yes, I'm still pissed. Therapy might not actually be a bad idea, I think Hartnell's been getting into my head.

[PurdueBrad]

Yes, I'm still pissed. Therapy might not actually be a bad idea, I think Hartnell's been getting into my head.

If it helps calm you at all, I went back and re-read the Battlestar Galactica game. First time I've re-read a game I played in, good times.

[PackerFanatic]

VOTE LERRIUQS

I haven't yet played with Lerriuqs (as far as I know), so this seems fun.

[The Jackal]

If it helps calm you at all, I went back and re-read the Battlestar Galactica game. First time I've re-read a game I played in, good times.

Yeah that really wants to make me vote for you less. ;)

[claphamsa]

vote packernerd

Leriqus has said he wont be around alot today, and i need a reason to vote for someone :)

[Passacaglia]

Going to be in and out of meetings today, so not a lot of time to drill through the posts. However, I'm willing to throw a vote back on EF.
1.) He roots for the Eagles, so it always feels kind of good to vote for him.
2.) He had said in past games that he would want to get rid of me as quickly as possible as a wolf. And he has now voted for me.

VOTE EAGLEFAN

3.) We need a vote on a SEVENTH player, apparently.

[PurdueBrad]

Yeah that really wants to make me vote for you less. ;)

:p

[Passacaglia]

Vote count:


saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 The Jackal (329)
Abe Sargent -- 2 Poli (252) Lathum (326)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 1 EagleFan (323)
lerriuqs -- 2 Passacaglia (284) PurdueBrad (333)
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 1 hoopsguy (328)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)

[PackerFanatic]

That second vote on Lerriuqs was from me, not PB.

[PurdueBrad]

Vote count:


Jesus Pass, for a second there you made me think I really am crazy. No, I didn't vote for lerriuqs, that was PF, not PB.

[Passacaglia]

UNVOTE LERRIUQS
VOTE HOOPSGUY


I'll change it if/when you put a vote on a real contender, or if the person you're voting for becomes a real contender (which I define right now as having a vote on them by someone other than you).

[Passacaglia]

oops:


saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 The Jackal (329)
Abe Sargent -- 2 Poli (252) Lathum (326)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 1 EagleFan (323)
lerriuqs -- 2 Passacaglia (284) PackerFanatic (333)
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 1 hoopsguy (328)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)

[PurdueBrad]

Okay, Pass and EF are going Hoops. I'll then:

vote Eaglefan

[Passacaglia]

Doh, forgot my own vote change:


saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 The Jackal (329)
Abe Sargent -- 2 Poli (252) Lathum (326)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 2 EagleFan (323) Passacaglia (341)
lerriuqs -- 1 PackerFanatic (333)
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 1 hoopsguy (328)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)

[PurdueBrad]

Start narrowing things down. And I get to turn the tables and put a day 1 on EF.

[Passacaglia]

Okay, Pass and EF are going Hoops. I'll then:

vote Eaglefan

Damn, well my conditions for changing my vote off hoops were met pretty quickly.

[b]
UNVOTE HOOPSGUY

[Passacaglia]

UNVOTE HOOPSGUY

[Passacaglia]

Vote count:


saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 The Jackal (329)
Abe Sargent -- 2 Poli (252) Lathum (326)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 1 EagleFan (323)
lerriuqs -- 1 PackerFanatic (333)
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 2 hoopsguy (328) PurdueBrad (343)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)

[Barkeep49]

I hate to throw someone else into the mix, but um, we still have a couple of no shows right? If so I plan on casting my vote that way at lunch.

[Telle]

So we're out to 9 people with votes. Think that's enough yet?

[Lathum]

I hate to throw someone else into the mix, but um, we still have a couple of no shows right? If so I plan on casting my vote that way at lunch.

I would probably follow suit

[Passacaglia]

So we're out to 9 people with votes. Think that's enough yet?

I actually don't have a problem with introducing a no-show now -- it's still early.

[Telle]

I hate to throw someone else into the mix, but um, we still have a couple of no shows right? If so I plan on casting my vote that way at lunch.

That would be Martin D. and ntndeacon.

[Passacaglia]

On the other hand, since it's still early, why get worked up about the fact that they haven't showed up yet?

[claphamsa]

isnt deadline tommorow?

[claphamsa]

no... today is wednesday, got confused :D

[PackerFanatic]

UNVOTE LERRIUQS

We don't need so many people with votes at this point. Time to condense.

[The Jackal]

no... today is wednesday, got confused :D

stop drinking at work

[claphamsa]

UNVOTE LERRIUQS

We don't need so many people with votes at this point. Time to condense.
so you take a vote off of one of the few with multiple votes?

[claphamsa]

stop drinking at work
that would make my job WAY more fun :)

[The Jackal]

so you take a vote off of one of the few with multiple votes?

Yeah.. what's up with that

[DaddyTorgo]

hmmm - yay for d1

[Telle]

so you take a vote off of one of the few with multiple votes?

My records only had the one on him. Passacaglia voted for him earlier but then moved his vote.

[Passacaglia]

so you take a vote off of one of the few with multiple votes?

LERRIUQS did not have multiple votes, since I unvoted him. He now has no votes.


saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 The Jackal (329)
Abe Sargent -- 2 Poli (252) Lathum (326)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 1 EagleFan (323)
lerriuqs -- 0
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 2 hoopsguy (328) PurdueBrad (343)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)

[claphamsa]

oh, well....

[The Jackal]

Good call, I blame clap for misleading me PF.

[Passacaglia]

I don't know why I typed his name in all caps -- I don't even remember doing that.

[claphamsa]

Good call, I blame clap for misleading me PF.
i blame you for misleading me!

[Autumn]

If NTNdeacon's excuse is that he's "usually quiet" I see no reason not to vote him. Quiet only makes it harder for us to flush the wolves.

That said, we need to consolidate, not add more so I'm not voting him unless that becomes a group action.

[Passacaglia]

"Oh I would vote for him if other people do"

"hmm, maybe I should vote for that guy, but don't we have too many?"

"blah blah blah blah"

Man up people!!!


VOTE NTNDEACON


You all want to anyway.

[EagleFan]

:lol: The only thing I would make you do is root for my Penguins tonight!

Go Penguins!!! Must root for Penguins!!!!

NO!!!!

The voices are conflicting!!!! Make them Stop!!!!!

[EagleFan]

unvote hoops

Now what to do?

vote PB

because "I am EF" ;)

[Alan T]

Before the day is done, Passacaglia will have voted for everyone at least once.

[PackerFanatic]

Yeah, he only had 1 vote after Pass moved, hence why I moved.

And I think I will follow Pass again :)

VOTE NTNDEACON

*is manning up*

[Passacaglia]

Before the day is done, Passacaglia will have voted for everyone at least once.

Not you dude -- you don't have a vote on you already, so that would be crazy!!!! Oh, wait, I'm supposed to be crazy this game. Hmm....

[Passacaglia]

Yeah, he only had 1 vote after Pass moved, hence why I moved.

And I think I will follow Pass again :)

VOTE NTNDEACON

*is manning up*

I'd watch out if I were you -- the last guy from Wisconsin who followed my vote twice in a row got lynched as a villager the next day. Whatever happened to mauboy, anyway?

[Lathum]

I am really tempted to vote for EF, I hate these stupid standing day 1 votes.

[Alan T]

Not you dude -- you don't have a vote on you already, so that would be crazy!!!! Oh, wait, I'm supposed to be crazy this game. Hmm....


Crazy? I was crazy once.. they locked me in a room with walls... there were rats there... the rats liked cheese .. .cheese makes me crazy... crazy? I was crazy once... they locked me in a room with walls... there were rats there... the rats liked cheese.. cheese makes me crazy... crazy? I was crazy once....

[EagleFan]

Must
ignore
the the
voices voices voices
inside inside inside inside inside
my my my my my my my my
head head head head head head head head head head head head head

[Alan T]

I'd watch out if I were you -- the last guy from Wisconsin who followed my vote twice in a row got lynched as a villager the next day. Whatever happened to mauboy, anyway?

He's busy trying to top my team in FOFC-BBCF as the dominant Mid-Atlantic/North eastern team but not having any success.

[EagleFan]

unvote PB

vote Lathum

[Passacaglia]

He's busy trying to top my team in FOFC-BBCF as the dominant Mid-Atlantic/North eastern team but not having any success.

Heh, I didn't even know he was in that league.

Anyway, PF, the good news for you is that I was a wolf in that game, but not in this one. That was CR's cubicle game, which was a lot of fun, but really cemented the "Pass goes uber aggressive when he's a wolf" theory which BK used so well to duke it to me last game.

[EagleFan]

I am really tempted to vote for EF, I hate these stupid standing day 1 votes.

Please, can someone put me out of my misery...

[claphamsa]

I'd watch out if I were you -- the last guy from Wisconsin who followed my vote twice in a row got lynched as a villager the next day. Whatever happened to mauboy, anyway?
he got a better job, that requires him not to be online all day

[The Jackal]

I don't really know what to think about all this vote-switching from EF, seems like a part of his role and not something a wolf would do, but bothersome.

[Passacaglia]

he got a better job, that requires him not to be online all day

Uh...that sounds like a worse job.

[claphamsa]

$$$?

[Abe Sargent]

I am really tempted to vote for EF, I hate these stupid standing day 1 votes.

We had a wolf hide behind one just two or three games ago.

[Alan T]

I don't really know what to think about all this vote-switching from EF, seems like a part of his role and not something a wolf would do, but bothersome.

Normally I don't see how a good person that knows nothing about others in the game would have a reason to really change around their vote in a day 1, at least earlier in the day and it always is suspicious to me.

The fact that so many people are doing it this game is just crazy... Crazy? I was crazy once... they locked me in a room with walls...

[Abe Sargent]

Vote Abe

nothing personal, but we need some consolidation and he could probably use a break after just running what I am sure is a challenging game to run.

And the fact that this brings my Day One 2+ vote streak up to like 50,000 in a row certainly had nothing to do with it?

[EagleFan]

I was locked in a room with walls once...... once

[Abe Sargent]

For the record, I really trust Barkeep. A lot.

[claphamsa]

For the record, I really trust Barkeep. A lot.
ominous

[Passacaglia]

ominous

Not really. It sounds like he's just saying his role seems similar to 49's. It seems like we're going against the spirit of the game, though -- should we really be following this line of thinking?

[hoopsguy]

For the record, I really trust Barkeep. A lot.

Hmm, this is one of the first interesting statements I've read all day.

[Lathum]

Unvote Abe
Vote EF

this is actualy for a reason.

He wanted to get a run on Hoops early, then switched numerous times finaly landing on PB, who he can claim is his standard day 1 vote.

[PurdueBrad]

I feel a lot like Billy Bibbit. So now I'm worried about my vote on EF, he seems to be playing the role rather than pushing an agenda.

[PurdueBrad]

HEY EF, like the new siggy?

[Lathum]

Unvote Abe
Vote EF

this is actualy for a reason.

He wanted to get a run on Hoops early, then switched numerous times finaly landing on PB, who he can claim is his standard day 1 vote.

before then switching to me of course

[Telle]

Unvote Abe
Vote EF

this is actualy for a reason.

He wanted to get a run on Hoops early, then switched numerous times finaly landing on PB, who he can claim is his standard day 1 vote.

Hmmm.. pulling your vote from someone with two votes, and the first to add a third vote to anybody.

[Passacaglia]

Hmmm.. pulling your vote from someone with two votes, and the first to add a third vote to anybody.

So you don't like it when someone places a first vote, and you don't like when someone places a third vote -- do all votes have to be second votes with you? :p

[Telle]

So you don't like it when someone places a first vote, and you don't like when someone places a third vote -- do all votes have to be second votes with you? :p

I just know that when I'm the first to add on to votes like that I get all jumped on for appearing wolf-ish. So I just wanted to point out someone else in the same situation :)

[Passacaglia]

I just know that when I'm the first to add on to votes like that I get all jumped on for appearing wolf-ish. So I just wanted to point out someone else in the same situation :)

Well then let me say that the fact that you haven't voted yet appears wolf-ish.

[PurdueBrad]

Actually, upon further reflection, I'm much more like Chief Bromden. Only not Indian and not 6'11".

[claphamsa]

huh?

[PurdueBrad]

huh?

You don't have to be confused anymore, we switched games.

[claphamsa]

You don't have to be confused anymore, we switched games.
did you get hold of Poli's crack?

[PurdueBrad]

Do you mean qrack?

[Chief Rum]

Point of interest:

This might be metagaming, but Danny as much as said in the leadup that he was trying to get all of the roles in, and more or less succeeded. It sounded like the one role not there (the "interesting" one or whatever) was a non-essential side role.

This sounds to me like every role in the rules is in the game.

And that means we, for sure, have at least four standing wolves, with an additional sympathizer in this game.

Quick question for Danny: Do players with publically known roles (i.e. roles revealed in the first post of the thread) also have non-essential side roles (the ones that can't be revealed)? Or for the public roles, is that their only role?

[PurdueBrad]

Ahhhh, much better, all by myself, nobody here. Perfect.

[dubb93]

Catching up.

[Lathum]

So you don't like it when someone places a first vote, and you don't like when someone places a third vote -- do all votes have to be second votes with you? :p

as long as you don't take that second vote off them

I just know that when I'm the first to add on to votes like that I get all jumped on for appearing wolf-ish. So I just wanted to point out someone else in the same situation :)

that line of thinking was in vogue for a while but people don't really apply it anymore but if you want to use that as an excuse to vote me go right ahead.

I honestly had no idea how many votes EF had when I voted him, but his actions I felt warrented a vote.

[Passacaglia]

Vote count:


saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 The Jackal (329)
Abe Sargent -- 1 Poli (252)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 0
lerriuqs -- 0
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 3 hoopsguy (328) PurdueBrad (343) Lathum (396)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)
ntndeacon -- 2 Passacaglia (370) PackerFanatic (374)
Lathum -- 1 EagleFan (381)

[dubb93]

EF had when I voted him, but his actions I felt warrented a vote.

So he votes PB, then Hoops for a while to see if anything happens. Nothing happens so he goes PB again and then jumps off PB to go Lathum. I'm normally a vote changer at heart, but good god what the hell is he doing.

[dubb93]

Everything that I've seen so far today EF looks the worst, almost like he is fishing for votes on some of the top players today.

[dubb93]

Unvote Saldana
Vote EF

[Telle]

Well then let me say that the fact that you haven't voted yet appears wolf-ish.

It's always something, isn't it :) I generally don't vote early on Day 1 because there is so little to go on and I don't like just randomly voting.

[dubb93]

It's always something, isn't it :) I generally don't vote early on Day 1 because there is so little to go on and I don't like just randomly voting.

So how the hell do you vote day 1 then?

[saldana]

its a good thing the theme of this game is mental illness, because i think this is the most F*#ked up thread i have ever seen.

[Barkeep49]

vote ntn

Been quiet this game, is quiet generally and the longer a game goes on the harder it generally is to vote out the quiet ones.

[Telle]

So how the hell do you vote day 1 then?

I throw out something based on gut feeling before I leave from work for the day. Admittedly not that much better :)

Or else I wait until it's a two or three horse race and put my vote where it keeps things slightly even.

[dubb93]

I feel a lot like Billy Bibbit. So now I'm worried about my vote on EF, he seems to be playing the role rather than pushing an agenda.

Could be but what role? Must unvote three times every day? Must move vote with no rhyme or reason? I would get it if there was a reason for all the wackiness, but "just playing the role" is only going to lead to shitty vote analysis as the game goes on.

At some point it has to stop and it seems EF has wasted most of day 1 just moving his vote around for no reason whatsoever.

[dubb93]

vote ntn

Been quiet this game, is quiet generally and the longer a game goes on the harder it generally is to vote out the quiet ones.

Yea, but as was pointed out to me last game that is just what ntn does.

[Telle]

vote ntn

Been quiet this game, is quiet generally and the longer a game goes on the harder it generally is to vote out the quiet ones.

He hasn't been quiet.. he's been absent. He hasn't checked in yet. I think it's a bit disingenuous to make him one of the lead vote getters when he hasn't even had a chance to play yet.

[Abe Sargent]

Vote ntndeacon

This makes it a tie. Let's see what shakes where.

[Barkeep49]

Yea, but as was pointed out to me last game that is just what ntn does.
That's right. It's what he does. If he's a wolf it's a real problem trying to vote him out later in the game. Hence my D1 vote. Plus as Telle points out he's not been quiet, he's been absent.

[Barkeep49]

Vote ntndeacon

This makes it a tie. Let's see what shakes where.
According to pass's vote count that actually puts him ahead a vote.

[Passacaglia]

He hasn't been quiet.. he's been absent. He hasn't checked in yet. I think it's a bit disingenuous to make him one of the lead vote getters when he hasn't even had a chance to play yet.

But that's the thing. He's usually this quiet. So you can wait for him to have a chance to play, but when he does, you'll probably be disappointed. I think 49 hit the nail on the head, that it gets harder to vote for the quiet folk later in the game -- because by then, we've all got our own pet theories based on what the less quiet folk have said.

[claphamsa]

Yea, but as was pointed out to me last game that is just what ntn does.

doesnt mean you shouldnt vote for him.

[Passacaglia]

According to pass's vote count that actually puts him ahead a vote.

I think you're missing dubb's vote.


saldana -- 0
PurdueBrad -- 1 The Jackal (329)
Abe Sargent -- 1 Poli (252)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 0
lerriuqs -- 0
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 4 hoopsguy (328) PurdueBrad (343) Lathum (396) dubb93 (416)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)
ntndeacon -- 4 Passacaglia (370) PackerFanatic (374) Barkeep49 (420) Abe Sargent (425)
Lathum -- 1 EagleFan (381)

[Telle]

According to pass's vote count that actually puts him ahead a vote.

I've got four on each. Did you miss Dubb voting for EagleFan?

[dubb93]

doesnt mean you shouldnt vote for him.

True, however if read through last game my vote for him was shit on for that same reason. Just thought I should get that out there as it was pointed out to me.

[Barkeep49]

I've got four on each. Did you miss Dubb voting for EagleFan?
Yes.

[Danny]

Just remember, you are voting for who you think no longer needs therapy. I think some of the candidates, maybe all of them, clearly do!

[Telle]

Just remember, you are voting for who you think no longer needs therapy. I think some of the candidates, maybe all of them, clearly do!

You think there's a person in this game who doesn't need therapy? ;)

[Alan T]

Just remember, you are voting for who you think no longer needs therapy. I think some of the candidates, maybe all of them, clearly do!

You post that as if encouraging a no lynch vote.. Is that even possible this game? If so, what is the mechanic for that? Just out of curiosity.

[dubb93]

Just remember, you are voting for who you think no longer needs therapy. I think some of the candidates, maybe all of them, clearly do!

:D

[claphamsa]

You think there's a person in this game who doesn't need therapy? ;)
me :)

[dubb93]

You post that as if encouraging a no lynch vote.. Is that even possible this game? If so, what is the mechanic for that? Just out of curiosity.

I think it was just a joke. The story relates to making someone leave therapy even though the werewolf mechanic is to vote out needies.

[Danny]

You post that as if encouraging a no lynch vote.. Is that even possible this game? If so, what is the mechanic for that? Just out of curiosity.

Like Dubb said, it was just a joke. Moderators need to have fun too. What happens in a tie is not known to the group. So, you can vote no lynch and what not, but you won't know what happens for sure.

[Telle]

me :)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Alan T]

I think it was just a joke. The story relates to making someone leave therapy even though the werewolf mechanic is to vote out needies.

My lack of getting the joke might suggest that I suffer from "Paranoid personality disorders"

[Passacaglia]

UNVOTE NTNDEACON
VOTE NO LYNCH


If all the villagers have some sort of role, I think the risk of getting rid of one is just too great.

[Barkeep49]

Pass: I don't read Danny's message as suggesting there is a no lynch option at all. Merely we can try and see if there is one, but there's no promise about what will happen if we go that route.

[Barkeep49]

Pass: I don't read Danny's message as saying there is a no lynch option at all. Merely we can try and see if there is one, but there's no promise about what will happen if we go that route.

Fixed.

[dubb93]

UNVOTE NTNDEACON
VOTE NO LYNCH


If all the villagers have some sort of role, I think the risk of getting rid of one is just too great.

How do we vote out needies if we are too afraid to lynch villagers? How do we get information that leads to the lynching of needies if we are afraid to lynch villagers? I do not think this is a good idea Pass.

[Autumn]

I'm wary of anyone who has a run on them this early, so I'd like to introduce a third person to the mix.

I'm kind of stuck on the ntndeacon issue. I'm all for getting rid of quiet players, if only for a long-term deterrent. However, it's an easy vote for wolves to hide behind, or argue against. I'm thinking something more random is more likely to rile the Needies up.

[Telle]

UNVOTE NTNDEACON
VOTE NO LYNCH


If all the villagers have some sort of role, I think the risk of getting rid of one is just too great.

As less-than-enthusiastic as I am about our current vote-getters, I don't like the idea of no lynch. Plus from the way Danny phrased things I'm guessing that somebody's getting lynched regardless and we just don't know who.

[Passacaglia]

Pass: I don't read Danny's message as suggesting there is a no lynch option at all. Merely we can try and see if there is one, but there's no promise about what will happen if we go that route.

I just popped him an email to ask. I read it the same way you did, but I also read what Abe said last game the same way, so I thought it was just me.

[Barkeep49]

BTW, I think it's time for our absolute ban on editing to come to an end. Back in the old days we use to be able to do an immeadiate for punctuation, spelling, missed word, etc. This was, to my knowledge, never abused. I liked it.

[Passacaglia]

As less-than-enthusiastic as I am about our current vote-getters, I don't like the idea of no lynch. Plus from the way Danny phrased things I'm guessing that somebody's getting lynched regardless and we just don't know who.

It's okay, I wasn't telling you to vote for it.

[EagleFan]

HEY EF, like the new siggy?

:rant:

unvote Lathum

vote PB

:devil:

[Danny]

Pass: I don't read Danny's message as suggesting there is a no lynch option at all. Merely we can try and see if there is one, but there's no promise about what will happen if we go that route.

This is correct. You guys do not know what will happen, but you do have the option to vote no lynch if you want.

[DaddyTorgo]

hmmmm

[Autumn]

I'm going to pick Purdue out of a hat. I'd rather not vote off someone who hasn't been able to play yet. In addition, he's at least someone involved in the two villager showdown.

<B>vote PURDUEBRAD</b>

[Autumn]

dola

I didn't see eaglefan's vote when I did that. Oh well, that makes it three way all the quicker.

[Telle]

I'm wary of anyone who has a run on them this early, so I'd like to introduce a third person to the mix.

I'm kind of stuck on the ntndeacon issue. I'm all for getting rid of quiet players, if only for a long-term deterrent. However, it's an easy vote for wolves to hide behind, or argue against. I'm thinking something more random is more likely to rile the Needies up.

I'm with you on this. I don't like the idea of just voting for the guy that you don't like the play style of.. that discourages people from playing at all. So I'm going to vote for the person that last voted for ntndeacon, especially since he already has one vote on him.

VOTE ABE

[Danny]

BTW, I think it's time for our absolute ban on editing to come to an end. Back in the old days we use to be able to do an immediate for punctuation, spelling, missed word, etc. This was, to my knowledge, never abused. I liked it.

I think so too, especially since half my posts usually have a typo.

[Telle]

dola

I didn't see eaglefan's vote when I did that. Oh well, that makes it three way all the quicker.

And I didn't see either of yours. I'm sure we'll get consolidated eventually though.

[Passacaglia]

This is correct. You guys do not know what will happen, but you do have the option to vote no lynch if you want.

I don't get it. Either voting for No Lynch is an option or it isn't. If we're allowed to vote for No Lynch, there should be no lynch. It's fine if voting No Lynch causes "something to happen" but if it's a viable vote, it should mean no one is lynched, otherwise it's not a "No Lynch" vote, it's a "make something random happen" vote.

[Passacaglia]

Vote count:


saldana -- 0
PurdueBrad -- 3 The Jackal (329) EagleFan (452) Autumn (455)
Abe Sargent -- 2 Poli (252) Telle (457)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 0
lerriuqs -- 0
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 4 hoopsguy (328) PurdueBrad (343) Lathum (396) dubb93 (416)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)
ntndeacon -- 3 PackerFanatic (374) Barkeep49 (420) Abe Sargent (425)
Lathum -- 0
No Lynch -- 1 Passacaglia (443)

[PackerFanatic]

Day 1 is always such a crapshoot as it is - everyone just looking way too into what everyone else is saying. I will stick with ntn for now and see what shakes out.

[Danny]

There is no randomness. Since there is some confusion I will reveal that the only way that a no lynch vote would win is if everyone voted that way. If there is someone with votes on them, then the no lynch votes are wasted, even if they are the majority. I'll update the rules with this option.

[Autumn]

I'm with you on this. I don't like the idea of just voting for the guy that you don't like the play style of.. that discourages people from playing at all. So I'm going to vote for the person that last voted for ntndeacon, especially since he already has one vote on him.

VOTE ABE

I'd like to clarify that I *do* believe in voting against play style, if the style is hurtful for the villagers, as I think a quiet player is.

My issue is I think that kind of vote is too easy, on day one, for the wolves to take advantage of. So, I'm going to shy away from it for now.

[Passacaglia]

There is no randomness. Since there is some confusion I will reveal that the only way that a no lynch vote would win is if everyone voted that way. If there is someone with votes on them, then the no lynch votes are wasted, even if they are the majority. I'll update the rules with this option.

Thanks, that helps clear it up. Sounds unlikely to happen.


UNVOTE NO LYNCH

[EagleFan]

So he votes PB, then Hoops for a while to see if anything happens. Nothing happens so he goes PB again and then jumps off PB to go Lathum. I'm normally a vote changer at heart, but good god what the hell is he doing.

It's day one in a game where we are in a mental ward. Just having fun with the theme. The number one rule of these games is to have fun (or it should be) and that's what I'm trying to do.

If that looks bad, so be it.



The way I see it day one logic goes like this:

Make a vote on someone with no votes - you are a wolf trying to hide your vote
Make a second or third vote on someone - you are a wolf trying to put a villager in the lead
Keep your vote on one person - you are a wolf hopeing to not be noticed
Move your vote around - you are a wolf trying to create confusion
Try to create a tie - you are a wolf trying to create confusion
Cast a deciding vote - you are a wolf lynching a villager
Cast a self defense vote - you are a wolf using self defense as an excuse
Don't move your vote into the middle of a tight race - you are a wolf trying to hide your vote
Move you vote into the middle of a tight race - you are a wolf trying to save a wolf
Don't vote - you are a wolf afraid of revealing yourself with your vote
Vote first - You are a wolf trying to get in early
Vote last - you are a wolf waiting to see what villager to lynch
Vote in the middle of the daye - you are a wolf trying to hide
Have a normal day one vote - you are a wolf using an excuse
Use some random theory to vote - you are a wolf using an excuse
Leave no comment with your vote - you are a wolf trying to hit and run
Leave a comment with your vote - you are a wolf using an excuse
Post a lot - you are a wolf
Post very little - you are wolf going UTR


I think that about covers most of the main day one voting theories.

[Autumn]

Nice, that should be stored in a thread somewhere on WW rules lol

[PackerFanatic]

But wait, there's...oh I see what you did there...

[Chief Rum]

I have a pet theory that when the vote counts were tied between EF and ntndeacon at 4-4, that there was one wolf, and just one wolf, in each grouping. This is based on the assumption that both EF and ntn are villagers (likely, based straight on numbers) and standard wolf logic (bury your vote, bury it early enough to not be a late deciding vote, do not vote together with another wolf).

By that standard, one of each of the following four would be a wolf:

EagleFan -- 4 hoopsguy (328) PurdueBrad (343) Lathum (396) dubb93 (416)

ntndeacon -- 4 Passacaglia (370) PackerFanatic (374) Barkeep49 (420) Abe Sargent (425)

Completely an unfounded pet theory on which no votes should be based, but I will be interested in the long run if I am right. If I am, there is one wolf in each group and the rest are villagers (although any of the "villagers" could be the Sympathizer).

[Passacaglia]

So CR, if you're thinking we're likely villager/villager now -- what should we do about it?

[Lathum]

How do we vote out needies if we are too afraid to lynch villagers? How do we get information that leads to the lynching of needies if we are afraid to lynch villagers? I do not think this is a good idea Pass.

+1

[Lathum]

I have a pet theory that when the vote counts were tied between EF and ntndeacon at 4-4, that there was one wolf, and just one wolf, in each grouping. This is based on the assumption that both EF and ntn are villagers (likely, based straight on numbers) and standard wolf logic (bury your vote, bury it early enough to not be a late deciding vote, do not vote together with another wolf).

By that standard, one of each of the following four would be a wolf:

EagleFan -- 4 hoopsguy (328) PurdueBrad (343) Lathum (396) dubb93 (416)

ntndeacon -- 4 Passacaglia (370) PackerFanatic (374) Barkeep49 (420) Abe Sargent (425)

Completely an unfounded pet theory on which no votes should be based, but I will be interested in the long run if I am right. If I am, there is one wolf in each group and the rest are villagers (although any of the "villagers" could be the Sympathizer).

I like how your "pet theory" vindicates you.

[Alan T]

The interesting thing about day 1 votes are that you have one of three scenarios:

1) Villager vs Villager (most common)
2) Villager vs Wolf (happens sometimes, not necessarily uncommon, but not regular)
3) Wolf vs Wolf (happens rarely but has occured before).

The issue is that you don't learn which the case is until day 3,4 or 5 usually. In the case of #3, it can actually throw people for a loop when the first one is figured out to be a wolf as it then leaves the other one off the hook for a while (even though I am sure that is not an optimal wolf play to gain trust on day 1).

With case #1, you end up having one of them voted out, and all of the questions rise regarding the other candidate, and often times the next day is led to a witch hunt regarding that person, or sometimes people decide to go a different direction in which the day 1 vote ends up being utterly meaningless for a while.

What I find more interesting is what happens to lead people to the matchup situation on day 1. When you have 9 different people with votes, the chances are much greater that there has to be at least a wolf included in there somewhere. It is in the wolf's interest to try to shape the conversation to a run off between two non-wolves.. Who are the ones instrumental in that conversation? I am guessing that once upon a time that is what led to the thinking "The second vote must be a wolf" as at some point it might have likely been the case often.

Over time the wolves here have become more crafty then that and instead of placing the second vote on someone, they try to manipulate the vote via discussion instead. So that part of the day has passed already and I guess it is interesting to go back and see who might have been a part of that.

Plus with all of the ntn momentum, now that he is here in this thread, do those voters move to Martin, or do they go elsewhere? That is the problem with voting for someone who hasn't shown up after only 2-3 hours of some people's work day (considering many people like myself did not see the game start until this morning).

Just random thoughts (or maybe not so random)

[Autumn]

I think when voting for a quiet person,the votes stay on until they've scared the player into contributing. That's a net positive.

[DaddyTorgo]

I <3 AlanT

We missed you!

Such eloquent logic - such crafty 3rd-level thinking.

*cheers from the populace*

[Autumn]

I'm not sure what to make about Abe's comment about Barkeep, but it makes me a bit curious about the two still voting Abe, in particular Telle who put his vote on late.

[DaddyTorgo]

Telle's a her. RendeR's going to whup your ass for insinuating he sleeps with a man.

[saldana]

I like how your "pet theory" vindicates you.

it has been my experience that people with theories that immediately take them out of the spotlight are usually wolves.

[Passacaglia]

I agree that villager/villager is most common, but I think it's strange that that's well noted, but when someone tries to fight against that by switching around, they're called out as suspicious.

[Telle]

I'm not sure what to make about Abe's comment about Barkeep, but it makes me a bit curious about the two still voting Abe, in particular Telle who put his vote on late.

Well I had already stated my thoughts on why I didn't want to vote for ntndeacon. And just like you, I thought perhaps it would be best to start a third candidate. I just didn't see you and EagleFan put votes on PurdueBrad before I voted.

Right now I'm just waiting to see how things move forward choosing one of the likely candidates.

[DaddyTorgo]

it has been my experience that people with theories that immediately take them out of the spotlight are usually wolves.


It's been my experience that people whose username's end in vowels are usually wolves

errrr...wait...nevermind :D

[Telle]

Well I had already stated my thoughts on why I didn't want to vote for ntndeacon. And just like you, I thought perhaps it would be best to start a third candidate. I just didn't see you and EagleFan put votes on PurdueBrad before I voted.

Right now I'm just waiting to see how things move forward BEFORE choosing one of the likely candidates.

Fixed.

[Autumn]

Telle's a her. RendeR's going to whup your ass for insinuating he sleeps with a man.

My apologies. My unfortunate neurological condition prevents me from being able to distinguish between genders in our therapy group.

[Alan T]

I agree that villager/villager is most common, but I think it's strange that that's well noted, but when someone tries to fight against that by switching around, they're called out as suspicious.


Villager/Villager is most common due to percentages involved. I would guess switching is suspicious would be what reason do you have to switch? As a good person on day 1, you most often know very little about the majority of others, so what in your mind would weigh more about one player than the other. So you switch from one villager/villager matchup to another? Why is that one any better than the first? It does make it look like you are trying to save someone even if in your mind you have some other reason for it.

As for all of the random switching throughout the day.. I actually have no idea what that means.. I think too many people didn't get their medication this morning :)

[DaddyTorgo]

My apologies. My unfortunate neurological condition prevents me from being able to distinguish between genders in our therapy group.

EVERYBODY TAKE NOTE OF THIS...NOBODY DROP THE SOAP AROUND AUTUMN OR YOU ARE IN FOR A NASTY SURPRISE!!

[hoopsguy]

I'll run some math on the first part of Chief's pet theory: "Two people at random are likely to be villager/villager"

In a vacuum, if you assume 4 wolves + 1 sympathizer, then there are 16 "good" and 5 "bad" votes at this point.

16/21 * 15/20 = 240/420 = 57.1%
OK, this part does hold up although it is not much of a margin. If there are 6 "bad" votes then it doesn't hold up (exactly 50%).

The initial thing that tweaked me on this was the idea that we had to be villager/villager. I understand that the wolves like to shape the conversation, which shifts the probability from where it would be in a vacuum. But the wolf assignments are random. There isn't much they can do about "quiet player backlash" if NTN is a wolf, just to give one example. I've been a wolf a number of times on Day 1 where I've been stuck in cross-fires with another wolf and had to work like hell in mid/late day to generate movement away from me and my partners.

Also, the communication patterns of the wolves may make it difficult for them to shake out the votes just so (1 for each of two leaders) this early in the day.

I agree with Lathum that it is somewhat convenient to come up with a Day 1 theory that puts himself in the clear, clears two more players (the guys with votes) and creates discussion around 8 people.

If it in fact turns out that Chief was right then at the end of the game I will tip my cap to him (assuming he is not a wolf with inside info) but this feels a little too neat to me.

[Passacaglia]

vowels and wolves are anagrams

[dubb93]

Villager/Villager is most common due to percentages involved. I would guess switching is suspicious would be what reason do you have to switch? As a good person on day 1, you most often know very little about the majority of others, so what in your mind would weigh more about one player than the other. So you switch from one villager/villager matchup to another? Why is that one any better than the first? It does make it look like you are trying to save someone even if in your mind you have some other reason for it.

As for all of the random switching throughout the day.. I actually have no idea what that means.. I think too many people didn't get their medication this morning :)

Well I threw out my standard vote for Saldana early in the day(last night), and then as I normally do as the day goes on I move away from Saldana and onto someone I suspect for one reason or the other. It doesn't make Sal any more or less likely to be a wolf just as it doesn't do that for EF either, I just didn't like the way EF's vote was moving around like candy from PB to Hoops to PB to Lathum. Alot of vets in there that a wolf would be all too happy to eliminate.

[hoopsguy]

Dola,

good = villager
bad = wolves

Which would actually invert it, in terms of the quality of the vote, from a villager perspective. But upon a re-read I thought this was a little confusing.

Bottom line = villager/villager is not as likely as people seem to assume, from a math standpoint.

[dubb93]

Silly math.

[Passacaglia]

I'll run some math on the first part of Chief's pet theory: "Two people at random are likely to be villager/villager"

In a vacuum, if you assume 4 wolves + 1 sympathizer, then there are 16 "good" and 5 "bad" votes at this point.

16/21 * 15/20 = 240/420 = 57.1%
OK, this part does hold up although it is not much of a margin. If there are 6 "bad" votes then it doesn't hold up (exactly 50%).

The initial thing that tweaked me on this was the idea that we had to be villager/villager. I understand that the wolves like to shape the conversation, which shifts the probability from where it would be in a vacuum. But the wolf assignments are random. There isn't much they can do about "quiet player backlash" if NTN is a wolf, just to give one example. I've been a wolf a number of times on Day 1 where I've been stuck in cross-fires with another wolf and had to work like hell in mid/late day to generate movement away from me and my partners.

Also, the communication patterns of the wolves may make it difficult for them to shake out the votes just so (1 for each of two leaders) this early in the day.

I agree with Lathum that it is somewhat convenient to come up with a Day 1 theory that puts himself in the clear, clears two more players (the guys with votes) and creates discussion around 8 people.

If it in fact turns out that Chief was right then at the end of the game I will tip my cap to him (assuming he is not a wolf with inside info) but this feels a little too neat to me.

I'm not sure if your bolded part is true.

[Autumn]

STill, I think if we get a 3-way or 4-way vote, we get a better idea as there's a good chance there's a wolf in that mix. It may be only 57%, but 57% chance of the wolves being able to stay out of the vote is a bad thing.

[Passacaglia]

How does CR's theory even put himself in the clear, anyway? He theorizes one wolf in one group of four, another group in another group of 4, and two more left out there? So we've got wolves in all the groups he's made.

[Passacaglia]

Well I had already stated my thoughts on why I didn't want to vote for ntndeacon. And just like you, I thought perhaps it would be best to start a third candidate. I just didn't see you and EagleFan put votes on PurdueBrad before I voted.

Right now I'm just waiting to see how things move forward choosing one of the likely candidates.

I think Autumn was talking about the fact that you voted Abe, rather than the fact that you voted for a third person.

[DaddyTorgo]

so what you're saying hoops is that we should lynch chief rum to find out about the other two who were on the block?

or is that your way of working like hell because you're a wolf and so are one/both of them so we should lynch YOU?

[Passacaglia]

Villager/Villager is most common due to percentages involved. I would guess switching is suspicious would be what reason do you have to switch? As a good person on day 1, you most often know very little about the majority of others, so what in your mind would weigh more about one player than the other. So you switch from one villager/villager matchup to another? Why is that one any better than the first? It does make it look like you are trying to save someone even if in your mind you have some other reason for it.

As for all of the random switching throughout the day.. I actually have no idea what that means.. I think too many people didn't get their medication this morning :)

I guess I would think the developing vote count gives you reason to switch. On Day 1, we don't have anything to go on, so every little bit of information changes what you know drastically. This is different from Day 2, when you have a completed vote count, results, and a night-kill.

[Autumn]

I think Autumn was talking about the fact that you voted Abe, rather than the fact that you voted for a third person.

Yes, thank you. A vote on Abe out of all these suspicious characters at this moment seems a poor choice at best.

[Telle]

I think Autumn was talking about the fact that you voted Abe, rather than the fact that you voted for a third person.

Ah, well in that case I already stated why I voted for Abe. He was the last one to add a vote to ntndeacon, and he already had a vote so I wasn't spreading out the field further.

I'll most likely be moving my vote at some point since we have three people with three+ votes and there doesn't appear to be any movement on Abe. Problem is it's Day 1 and there's not much reason to vote for one of those three over the other two. I don't like the idea of voting for ntndeacon for reasons previously stated. I think EagleFan was just playing around and don't see his vote hopping as suspect. And I think PurdueBrad just got an unfortunate run on him without much real reason.

[Telle]

Yes, thank you. A vote on Abe out of all these suspicious characters at this moment seems a poor choice at best.

You do recall that you actually stated that you picked PurdueBrad's name "out of a hat". I at least had some plausible reason for picking who I did for a third candidate.

[Autumn]

Well, I think your reason wasn't much more than picking out of a hat, frankly, though yes you did offer a rationale. My worry is that there may be a deeper reason for you targeting Abe, not that you didn't give a reason at all. Clearly no one except the wolves have a real reason at this point.