Werewolf XLV - ROME! (Game over, post 3425)

[hoopsguy]

The only issue I have with that is that I suspect (don't know for sure) that the wealth he has accumulated is lost from the game. If he is a good guy, then we are losing one of the wealthiest among us. And there would be fewer people who could prevent the Tarqs from winning their first choice of services.

It isn't just voting for an UTR - there is more to consider than that.

Is that enough to sway my vote to innocent? Not necessarily, but I'm giving him the benefit of a long leash. I've also got the luxury of knowing I'll be around during the afternoon/evening to make my vote. I understand that isn't an option for some of us.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Huh?

meaning I don;t know how his name was romanized. Was is Bulletus Spongueus? Bullus Etus? No idea, so wheever his "us"'s are supposed to be in his name.

[Chief Rum]

KWhit, you sued or were sued seven times from Day One suits. You won most of them. Did you learnm anything at all from that that wasn't posted in this thread? Just curious if that was addressed, as our original point with the lawsuits was to reveal the treasonous information that lsoing lawsuits might reveal.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

meaning I don;t know how his name was romanized. Was is Bulletus Spongueus? Bullus Etus? No idea, so wheever his "us"'s are supposed to be in his name.

Oh! That went completely over my head.

[st.cronin]

To clarify the wealth factor:

Wealth is strictly a comparative thing. If two people bid on a service, whoever has more money gets the service. Everybody will always have enough money to afford any service, providing they are the richest person bidding for that service.

Money does not leave the game, or enter the game.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

The only issue I have with that is that I suspect (don't know for sure) that the wealth he has accumulated is lost from the game. If he is a good guy, then we are losing one of the wealthiest among us. And there would be fewer people who could prevent the Tarqs from winning their first choice of services.

It isn't just voting for an UTR - there is more to consider than that.

Is that enough to sway my vote to innocent? Not necessarily, but I'm giving him the benefit of a long leash. I've also got the luxury of knowing I'll be around during the afternoon/evening to make my vote. I understand that isn't an option for some of us.

st. cronin probably has a hard and fast number foir all of our wealths, but I doubt it matters in the long run except as it relates to other wealth levels. If we take down bullet, he will be replaced by someone else, it seems, and we will still have the wealthy and the moderately wealthy and the not wealthy and so forth.

[Abe Sargent]

I'm getting sued twice today. I'd like to sue as well, because a brotha needs cash, yo. Howveer, I don;t want to tie up the court system and today has seen a rash of multiple suers. So, I'll eschew the suits and hope that I win the ones against me, as opposed to plugging up the court of the land.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

KWhit, you sued or were sued seven times from Day One suits. You won most of them. Did you learnm anything at all from that that wasn't posted in this thread? Just curious if that was addressed, as our original point with the lawsuits was to reveal the treasonous information that lsoing lawsuits might reveal.

No. I learned nothing. The only information I received about the lawsuits at all is what was posted in this thread. No details about how much money I won in PM or any gut feel I had about any of the people I sued - nothing.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

To clarify the wealth factor:

Wealth is strictly a comparative thing. If two people bid on a service, whoever has more money gets the service. Everybody will always have enough money to afford any service, providing they are the richest person bidding for that service.

Money does not leave the game, or enter the game.

Bullseye

[Poli]

While you're at, clarify the lawyer thing. k, thnx.

[Chief Rum]

BTW,m I haven't checked yet, but was there a change in the wealth lists from the start of the game to the start of Day Two? I would imagine no, since lawsuits weren't heard until the end of Day Two. But I think a list was reposted by st. cronin. I will have to check this out. If there were changes, then that would indicate soemthing did happen on Day One to affect it.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I'm getting sued twice today. I'd like to sue as well, because a brotha needs cash, yo. Howveer, I don;t want to tie up the court system and today has seen a rash of multiple suers. So, I'll eschew the suits and hope that I win the ones against me, as opposed to plugging up the court of the land.

I don't think we have reached the point where we need to be concerned about clogging up the courts. When we do, I will be the first to retract my suits if they are keeping more relevant suits from reaching the docket.

Question for st. cronin: if we reach the lawsuit max, and have suits left over the limit, do they get held over to lead off the next day's docket? Or do they essentially "disappear" , meaning they have to be made again? And will you provide a list of the lawsuits that were submitted, but not put on the next day's docket (but held over for future days)?

It might be relevant, as if we need to drop some lawsuits, we will need to know what lawsuits have been filed that were beyond the day's max lawsuit number (and thus clogging up the next day'sdocket before it even starts).

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Actually, if you take a look at what you quoted, you'll see that you quoted two previous game points that I made. Then you replied with a quick question about previous game experience. That I thought you referring to the first in teh quote and not the second is merely your bad quoting ability.

This is complete BS. Anyone can see in post #383, there was only one quote, and it was very clear what I was asking. ie:

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I don't know. As a good guy, as a GM, and as a bad guy I've seen villagers waste a day or more in a game because they started t osecond guess a candidate for no real reason other than "we can;t all support a candidate this soon."

I, for one, trust KWhit. I always have, including our little survivor Lupus team. As such, I'm happy to spend my other vote.

Vote to Consul whatever KWhit's nick is.

Originally Posted by Anxiety

You'll note that with over twenty players, it's would be hard to impossible to catch up with a thread, make some comments as your are doing it, and then take off making sure every single time that someone hasn;t asked me something or whatnot before I do between writing some comments and heading off. I have a life. You can either accept that or not, but I;m not going to spend every ten minutes hitting refresh throughout the entire day.

That is all fine and good, except you answered it, with completely unrelated comments and then dropped it when I responded. So you saw the conversation, you replied to it, you just avoided it for who knows what reason.

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Now, it's my turn. This has got to be the cheapest, most worthless attack anyone has ever leveled against me in a WW game. You quoted a post where I referred to two previous game experiences and ask me a question, and when I think you are talking about one you get in a huff because you were secret asking about the other? Seriously? And then the huff continues because I left without really reading your post about nothing but a previous game, and you got secret angry too? Does my answer to previous games really matter to this one?

Does my ass smell really nice? Because it seems you enjoy spending time down there.

Haven't we established previously that you have NO ABEDAR? Now let's move on.

Once again, you are completely wrong, but instead of swearing, using inappropriate comments at me, I will keep it civil and clean. I have not resorted to personal attacks like you have now twice. For the life of me I have no idea why you avoided responding to what appeared to me as a joke comment, and then started becoming so uncivil about it. I guess this is one of those things I'll really be interested in post game in understanding once I know what side you are really on, because until now I had always thought you were against such type of behavior in these games that you are now showing.

[hoopsguy]

Thanks for the clarification, Cronin.

Restating - if Bullet is hurled from the cliff and revealed as a Roman, then we have lost his high standing on the financial food chain. Which would impact how the Tarqs could bid for services - if they have no one who is wealthier than them they get to pick their service which seems likely to be unfavorable for Rome.

I'm the Crew is another among the wealthy here. He is another "UTR" guy. For better or worse, this should be factoring into people's thinking about how to deal with UTR players this game.

UTR is obviously not my playing style. It isn't a style I enjoy playing with/against all that much, but I'm going to try and reach out to these guys a little harder than usual this game because of the wealth ramifications.

Bullet - how hard would it be to actually give information about your actions on Day 1 (what did you bid on? what does it do?) and suggest that you are going to try and help on Day 3?

From a purely random standpoint, we are 20-25% likely (assumes 5-6 starting) to hit a Tarq here. I know the reasons that Bullet was arrested. I know that we should have had two people offering up candidates. But I still am not wild about risking a person who could be an asset to us with these odds.

Also, I hate that I'm having to argue more for a person than they are arguing for themselves.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Thanks for the clarification, Cronin.

Restating - if Bullet is hurled from the cliff and revealed as a Roman, then we have lost his high standing on the financial food chain. Which would impact how the Tarqs could bid for services - if they have no one who is wealthier than them they get to pick their service which seems likely to be unfavorable for Rome.

I'm the Crew is another among the wealthy here. He is another "UTR" guy. For better or worse, this should be factoring into people's thinking about how to deal with UTR players this game.

UTR is obviously not my playing style. It isn't a style I enjoy playing with/against all that much, but I'm going to try and reach out to these guys a little harder than usual this game because of the wealth ramifications.

Bullet - how hard would it be to actually give information about your actions on Day 1 (what did you bid on? what does it do?) and suggest that you are going to try and help on Day 3?

From a purely random standpoint, we are 20-25% likely (assumes 5-6 starting) to hit a Tarq here. I know the reasons that Bullet was arrested. I know that we should have had two people offering up candidates. But I still am not wild about risking a person who could be an asset to us with these odds.

Also, I hate that I'm having to argue more for a person than they are arguing for themselves.

What good is having a wealthy good guy in this case if he doesn't use his wealth to help the good? If it stays there dormant, is it really much better than not being there at all?

[Chief Rum]

Question for Coffee Warlord: when you hired Swaggs, was that action submitted Day One or Day Two? If you submitted it Day One, that would suppose you had an inkling you would be arrested. I actually think Alan did a good job of not really revealing who he was going after, so did you have an idea?

If you didn't and made no effort to hire Swaggs on Day One, but did it on Day Two to protect yourself, that would be the first evidence we have that a purchased service could be used on the same day ion which it was purchased. Swaggs was used by Coffee Warlord in his defense at the end of Day Two.

The reason I think that is important is because I am trying to get a handle on how the lawyers may affect the lawsuits. Coffee Warlord had Swaggs' use on Day Two (and likely for Day One lawsuits heard at the end of Day Two). Dodgerchick also claims to have hired ardent for that day. Has anyone else claimed to hire lawyers that day? If not, we can probably figure they are telling the truth about that (st. cronin already pretty much confirmed CW's use actually). No opinion given on if what they said beyond that is the truth (the investigating thing, etc.).

BTW, I attempteds to purchase horse services on both Days One and Two. Day One I was outbid fo Lexus Postus. Day Two I was one of the people who assumed it was the dealers and submitted a stupid Day Two bid with a Day One dealer's name. Since I left for the day, I was unable to change it. st. cronin said he would select one at random for me, and I did not get a PM, so I am guessing I lost (not a shock, I am much closer to the level of the "people" then I am the wealthy).

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Question for st. cronin: if we reach the lawsuit max, and have suits left over the limit, do they get held over to lead off the next day's docket? Or do they essentially "disappear" , meaning they have to be made again? And will you provide a list of the lawsuits that were submitted, but not put on the next day's docket (but held over for future days)?

It might be relevant, as if we need to drop some lawsuits, we will need to know what lawsuits have been filed that were beyond the day's max lawsuit number (and thus clogging up the next day'sdocket before it even starts).

At deadline, the courts will announce what suits they will hear tomorrow. The remaining suits will go into a "pipeline." You may withdraw any suit BEFORE the court schedules its date. So if you have a suit that goes into pipeline, you may withdraw it at any time BEFORE deadline TOMORROW.

I hope that is clear.

[Mustang]

What am I missing with the pile on to bullet?

[Poli]

Clear as mud, cronin. Now about the lawyer thing...

[Tyrith]

Alan beat me to the point I was going to make. If he's not going to use his cash, then it doesn't really matter. If he's not going to fight to save himself, then it doesn't matter. I'm willing to spare him, but he has to show that he'll be of use to the people of Rome.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Alan T

What good is having a wealthy good guy in this case if he doesn't use his wealth to help the good? If it stays there dormant, is it really much better than not being there at all?

Exactly. If bullet and ITC are wealthya nd inactive, that could be bunching some of us people who could be wealthier on a lesser level, and thus more likely to be beta out for services by simialrly-leveled wolves. While there is a chance they will be repalced by wolves when they die, the percentages say it is more likely we will gain an active wealthy person on the side of good.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Exactly. If bullet and ITC are wealthya nd inactive, that could be bunching some of us people who could be wealthier on a lesser level, and thus more likely to be beta out for services by simialrly-leveled wolves. While there is a chance they will be repalced by wolves when they die, the percentages say it is more likely we will gain an active wealthy person on the side of good.

I was of the impression that we are all ranked relatively behind the scenes, even within the classes, but I could be be wrong about this.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I was of the impression that we are all ranked relatively behind the scenes, even within the classes, but I could be be wrong about this.

correct

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

At deadline, the courts will announce what suits they will hear tomorrow. The remaining suits will go into a "pipeline." You may withdraw any suit BEFORE the court schedules its date. So if you have a suit that goes into pipeline, you may withdraw it at any time BEFORE deadline TOMORROW.

I hope that is clear.

Awesome. That is exactly what I hoped would be the case. Thanks for the response, sir.

Will you announce that pipeline as well, or will we have to piece that together ourselves? I am fine either way, but I wanted to know if we needed to be prepared to do that work if you weren't providing a pipeline list of over the limit suits at deadline.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Awesome. That is exactly what I hoped would be the case. Thanks for the response, sir.

Will you announce that pipeline as well, or will we have to piece that together ourselves? I am fine either way, but I wanted to know if we needed to be prepared to do that work if you weren't providing a pipeline list of over the limit suits at deadline.

I'm happy to publish a list of suits that are still active but not scheduled to be heard.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Alan T

What good is having a wealthy good guy in this case if he doesn't use his wealth to help the good? If it stays there dormant, is it really much better than not being there at all?

Bingo. If you're not involved, you're likely not bidding on services or things that can help us. Ergo, your value to the senate drops.

[hoopsguy]

Well, if he is innocent and he has cash then we can make the Tarqs do their own work disposing of him.

Look, I have no idea if he is "good" or "evil". What I'm trying to suggest is that people give this a little more consideration than "he is quiet" or "he is playing his usual game". The structure of the game puts us in a position where I think it is in our best interest to do so.

I would put forth the same argument for a couple of other people who may find themselves in the same position, but Bullet is the one who is in this position today.

By the end of the day I might be sick enough of doing this that I'll vote for him out of spite. But for now I'm trying to take what I consider a rational approach.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'm happy to publish a list of suits that are still active but not scheduled to be heard.

Could you.. I think Rumus sued me.. just making sure.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Well, if he is innocent and he has cash then we can make the Tarqs do their own work disposing of him.

Look, I have no idea if he is "good" or "evil". What I'm trying to suggest is that people give this a little more consideration than "he is quiet" or "he is playing his usual game". The structure of the game puts us in a position where I think it is in our best interest to do so.

I would put forth the same argument for a couple of other people who may find themselves in the same position, but Bullet is the one who is in this position today.

By the end of the day I might be sick enough of doing this that I'll vote for him out of spite. But for now I'm trying to take what I consider a rational approach.

Well I obviously haven't voted for him yet, but its easy to expect unless I hear a good reason not to, that I likely will vote for him. For most of your arguements, we can use for anyone on almost any day 2 of almost any ww game. We don't know if anyone who ever is quiet is good or bad. We don't know if they have an important role, we don't know anything about him... because... he's not been active

[path12]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Well, if he is innocent and he has cash then we can make the Tarqs do their own work disposing of him.

Look, I have no idea if he is "good" or "evil". What I'm trying to suggest is that people give this a little more consideration than "he is quiet" or "he is playing his usual game". The structure of the game puts us in a position where I think it is in our best interest to do so.

I understand your point, and as one who is usually quiet early in games I do not always get/act upon the UTR theory. However, there are a ton of people here, and we have had a meta history lately of quiet wolves being successful. So if it was a smaller game I'd be on your side on this point, but not where there are so many players.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Could you.. I think Rumus sued me.. just making sure.

I haven't actually compiled any votes or suits yet. Let me see if I can while I have time - class starts in about 30 minutes.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'm happy to publish a list of suits that are still active but not scheduled to be heard.

That would be helpful, yes. But it doesn't have to be right now (unless you want to). I'm more concerned with hwo it will look just after deadline, wehn some suits have been successfully entered into the docket (I gather you knew what I meant, but clarifying for others--we don't need our GM to constantly be submitting lawsuit lists throughout the day upon request ).

[Tyrith]

I'd rather keep up the UTR pressure and actually get some records started than sit around and hope that players will change their minds and start using the game mechanics to swing things our way. We're not going to win by not killing people.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Well, if he is innocent and he has cash then we can make the Tarqs do their own work disposing of him.

Look, I have no idea if he is "good" or "evil". What I'm trying to suggest is that people give this a little more consideration than "he is quiet" or "he is playing his usual game". The structure of the game puts us in a position where I think it is in our best interest to do so.

I would put forth the same argument for a couple of other people who may find themselves in the same position, but Bullet is the one who is in this position today.

By the end of the day I might be sick enough of doing this that I'll vote for him out of spite. But for now I'm trying to take what I consider a rational approach.

I understand what you're driving at amd have considerted it. But I still believe bulletsponge's execution is what best serves the Republic at the moment. For not only the reasons alkready stated, but so we have a "kill" voting record, and so we know for sure what happens when someone is tossed off the rock.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Could you.. I think Rumus sued me.. just making sure.

I did sue you, you replacement player.

Seriously, it is just something I am testing with the lawsuits. No direct reason for targeting you specifically (just yet).

[Abe Sargent]

I am referring to me not seeing your clarification post, not your original post when I say I didn;t see it. Since I responded to your first post, I obviously saw that one.

If you think me referring to my ass is swearing, then you have a more interesting view of swearing thatn I do. I swear all the time in real life, but I was aksed in one of my games by pm because that person's kids read them as they play, and they wanted the game to be a good example. I still honor that request in my games for the most part.

What I have a problem with is personal attacks. My claims in your direction were about your un-leet quoting abillity (which was a joke) and your really bad attack against me, which was true and I stand by. Neither was about you, and you have no reciprocated either, which is good. I hate it when WW turns into "you suck, "you are a lier, " etc. That has not happened here on either of our parts.

And you still have no Abedar. Which I think is a very clever phrase, btw.

Originally Posted by Alan T

That is all fine and good, except you answered it, with completely unrelated comments and then dropped it when I responded. So you saw the conversation, you replied to it, you just avoided it for who knows what reason.




Once again, you are completely wrong, but instead of swearing, using inappropriate comments at me, I will keep it civil and clean. I have not resorted to personal attacks like you have now twice. For the life of me I have no idea why you avoided responding to what appeared to me as a joke comment, and then started becoming so uncivil about it. I guess this is one of those things I'll really be interested in post game in understanding once I know what side you are really on, because until now I had always thought you were against such type of behavior in these games that you are now showing.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I don't think we have reached the point where we need to be concerned about clogging up the courts. When we do, I will be the first to retract my suits if they are keeping more relevant suits from reaching the docket.

Question for st. cronin: if we reach the lawsuit max, and have suits left over the limit, do they get held over to lead off the next day's docket? Or do they essentially "disappear" , meaning they have to be made again? And will you provide a list of the lawsuits that were submitted, but not put on the next day's docket (but held over for future days)?

It might be relevant, as if we need to drop some lawsuits, we will need to know what lawsuits have been filed that were beyond the day's max lawsuit number (and thus clogging up the next day'sdocket before it even starts).

Hmmm. You think so? Alright then, let me pick a target at random, just to get involved.

Abeus Anxietius sueth Schmidityus Schmidityus

He's at a higher bracket than me, and it was at random after that. I rolled a die.

[Mustang]

Making sure I have the lawsuit business in order. It is in the traitors best interest to gather as much wealth as possible, correct? But, at the cost that they could be exposed potentially?

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Making sure I have the lawsuit business in order. It is in the traitors best interest to gather as much wealth as possible, correct? But, at the cost that they could be exposed potentially?

Yes, but a clarification. It is in every player's best interest to gain as much wealth as possible.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Question for Coffee Warlord: when you hired Swaggs, was that action submitted Day One or Day Two? If you submitted it Day One, that would suppose you had an inkling you would be arrested. I actually think Alan did a good job of not really revealing who he was going after, so did you have an idea?

That was submitted Day 1. You cannot bid on services while in prison. And no, while I wasn't surprised by being imprisoned, I hired the lawyer specifically to give me an edge in the lawsuit.

[st.cronin]

The list so far:

Bulletus Spongeous sues Kayus Whitus
Ardent sues Coffee Warlord
Alanus Teeus sues Grammus Atticus
Alanus Teeus sues Abeus Anxietus
Ardent Enthusiast sues Kwhit for suing me yesterday
Narcizo sues LoneStarGirl
Narcizo sues DaddyTorgo
Ardent Enthusiast sues Alan T
Pathus Twelvus sues Antus Meisterus
Pathus Twelvus sues Autumnus Leavus
Pathus Twelvus sues Tyrus Ithus
Pathus Twelvus sues Chiefus Rumus
KAYUS WHITUS SUES Abeus Anxietus
KAYUS WHITUS SUES Antus Meisterus
KAYUS WHITUS SUES Autumnus Leavus
KAYUS WHITUS SUES Barkeepus Valerius Fortynineus
KAYUS WHITUS SUES Narcizus Lispus
KAYUS WHITUS SUES Pathus Twelveus
KAYUS WHITUS SUES Peregrinus Barbarus
CHIEFUS RUMUS SUES SALDANUS LATHUMUS
CHIEFUS RUMUS SUES DODGUS ERCHICKUS
CHIEFUS RUMUS SUES NARCIZUS LISPIS
CHIEFUS RUMUS SUES PEREGRINUS BARBARUS
CHIEFUS RUMUS SUES DADDYUS TORGOUS
CHIEFUS RUMUS SUES MUSTANGUS SALLUS
Abeus Anxietius sueth Schmidityus Schmidityus

I haven't scanned that for duplicates, but each player is only allowed to sue each player once per day. So you can make no more than 25 different lawsuits today.

10 votes to execute (14 needed) - Tyrith (624), Narcizo (639), Grammaticus (642), ardent (653), Imthecrew (661), Barkeep (734), saldana (757), path12 (786), KWhit (798), Chief Rum (799)

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Well, if he is innocent and he has cash then we can make the Tarqs do their own work disposing of him.

Look, I have no idea if he is "good" or "evil". What I'm trying to suggest is that people give this a little more consideration than "he is quiet" or "he is playing his usual game". The structure of the game puts us in a position where I think it is in our best interest to do so.

I'm briefly here and have read through. To be honest hoops I agree with you but I think we have to accept the fact that BS just isn't going to make a convincing case for himself. I'll admit that I've allowed my experience in the Cold War game to influence me (he was the bodyguard and didn't make the slightest effort to save himself despite several promptings). That so hacked me off that if given the opportunity I'm going to be voting on him early until he changes his style of play. This is meta-level but the game as a whole just doesn't need players who are only going to make an effort when they're wolves.

So he might be a villager and we're giving the wolves a financial boost. On the other hand he might be a wolf and we're taking out the guy who's going to get them their choice of service every time. My gut feeling is that he's a villager as I'd expect him to be more interested if he was bad and had the chance to kill people and feel important. But I'm 95% sure he's not going to make any sort of reasonable defence. It sucks that he got given an important role (wealth seems to be very important in the game) but I don't think it's a killer for us. And I, for one, have a hard time imagining that he is going to use the opportunity wealth has given to him very responsibly even if we give him a break.

[/rant]

That said I would like to see a fairly close vote, although not that close as it's possible that we're going to need 17-8 votes to execute. The rationale part of me is wary of the pile-on that seems to have taken place. But I'm going to let my heart sway my head on this one.

Crikey! Is that the time? I've got to go again.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

That was submitted Day 1. You cannot bid on services while in prison. And no, while I wasn't surprised by being imprisoned, I hired the lawyer specifically to give me an edge in the lawsuit.

Well, that certainly turned out well for you (and good foresight). Of course, you weren't close to getting tossed off the rock, but good work nonetheless.

That clears some things up, too, that will allow me to tweak my "lawsuit standings". Thanks.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Narcizo

I'm briefly here and have read through. To be honest hoops I agree with you but I think we have to accept the fact that BS just isn't going to make a convincing case for himself. I'll admit that I've allowed my experience in the Cold War game to influence me (he was the bodyguard and didn't make the slightest effort to save himself despite several promptings). That so hacked me off that if given the opportunity I'm going to be voting on him early until he changes his style of play. This is meta-level but the game as a whole just doesn't need players who are only going to make an effort when they're wolves.

So he might be a villager and we're giving the wolves a financial boost. On the other hand he might be a wolf and we're taking out the guy who's going to get them their choice of service every time. My gut feeling is that he's a villager as I'd expect him to be more interested if he was bad and had the chance to kill people and feel important. But I'm 95% sure he's not going to make any sort of reasonable defence. It sucks that he got given an important role (wealth seems to be very important in the game) but I don't think it's a killer for us. And I, for one, have a hard time imagining that he is going to use the opportunity wealth has given to him very responsibly even if we give him a break.

[/rant]

That said I would like to see a fairly close vote, although not that close as it's possible that we're going to need 17-8 votes to execute. The rationale part of me is wary of the pile-on that seems to have taken place. But I'm going to let my heart sway my head on this one.

Crikey! Is that the time? I've got to go again.

Crikey! You're showing your Britsihness.

Don't we in effect have a close vote? Right now, we're most of the way through the day, and we have only 10 execute votes. To me, that says 10 votes to execute, 16 (or whatever number is left) to not execute. Until a vote is submitted, it has to be considered a vote to not kill. At the risk of lumping inactives with those who actively wish not to have a kill, I think we can view it that way.

[Lorena]

Looks like I have quite a bit of catching up to do. Some quick thoughts following my post from last night:

Originally Posted by Autumn

So, is this to suggest that Ardentus Enthusiastus was hired, and his special services used, but he has no knowledge of it? I suppose there was no public record because he was not used in court.

By AE's reaction (and his pleading for bids on his services) he was completely unaware that I hired him so this seems to be right.

Originally Posted by Ironhead

I kinda have to challenge the thinking behind this list. The lawyers apparently have no knowledge of what actions they are taking for their clients. How are we to take your word that AlanT was actually scanned? And why did you scan AlanT given that he was backing you for Consul? Did his vote for you inspire some level of distrust? There seems to be an awful lot of fake reveal potential to these lawyer scans as they cannot be verified. Anyone who has enough money to hire them has the ability to be a fake seer unless someone takes the time to "rescan" someone.

The fact that Coffee Warlord has said he also scanned someone in no way proves his innocence. All it proves to me is that he did actually hire a lawyer, which was confirmed in the public record. He even chose to scan a player that more than half of the board felt was trustworthy enough to vote as Consul. He could definitely be good, but I think it is dangerous to place him on such a high level of trust on the 3rd day.

Yeah, that's fine; I don't expect people to believe what I said, I put it out there so ya'll can have a bit more information and come up with your own conclusions. All I know is that there is no evidence of AlanT doing anything wrong. Since Coffee Warlord admitted Swaggs did the same for him, I'm going with that.

So why Alan? He plays the helpful villager very very well when he's a baddie so I had to know for sure. And yes you're right, Coffee WArlord may in fact be a baddie, we don't know for sure unless he gets scanned, but so far I'm willing to trust him and Kwhit above most of the players on the board unless something comes up.

Like I mentioned earlier, I have quite a bit of catching up to so I'll cya guys in a bit.

[Chief Rum]

How weird. We were all posting demons as recently as a half hour ago (admittedly me more than anyone else). But now none of us are saying anything. Did you all go to lunch?

[Chief Rum]

And right before I posted that, DC comes in with a post. I jinxed it.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

How weird. We were all posting demons as recently as a half hour ago (admittedly me more than anyone else). But now none of us are saying anything. Did you all go to lunch?

I love you very much!

[KWhit]

I'm here. And I just sent in my arrest action.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I love you very much!

Are you hitting on me?