[Sorrit]

Anomandaris, Emurlahnis, Okaros??, Olar Ethil, Silchas Ruin, Tulas Shorn


alll very quiet up till now...pity

[Atrahal]

Was referring to Sorrit: "Going completely against his own musings", which I don't think is really true.

[Atrahal]

I don't think Tulas has posted either sorrit.

One of the problems with day one. There's really not much to go on-and it's hard to tell if people are being deliberate inconspicious or not. The long modkill timer won't help there.

[Sorrit]

Its kinda crap play to vote somebody off purely based on crappy 3rd party "here-say" type evidence that had nothing to do with that persons actual play!

But then thats exactly what i am supposed to say if i am a symp amirite?

I am stuck between a rock and a hard place, on the one hand i inadvertently landed someone else into the electric chair.
But on the other hand....i dont know if that person is even innocent...so should i even care?
I suppose its just my conscience talking here, i really should be letting you guys just lynch galain.

Then your going to have to lynch me tomorrow no matter what the outcome.
Galain is guilty....then i am his symp
Galain is inno....then i fake symped him.

[Sorrit]

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 11:50 AM, said:

Was referring to Sorrit: "Going completely against his own musings", which I don't think is really true.

come again?

[Atrahal]

Lynching the symp is stupid though. As for other lynches, it's better to decide that when you get there...

[Atrahal]

Sorrit, on 18 August 2010 - 12:02 PM, said:

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 11:50 AM, said:

Was referring to Sorrit: "Going completely against his own musings", which I don't think is really true.

come again?

Was talking to HP

Basically on the D'riss case. You said you didn't like him contradicting. I said I didn't really see him contradicting. HP said what, I didn't say he was contradicting. So that was explaining I was referring to you, not him.

[Galain]

Well, this is just peachy. Would anyone like to vote for me on grounds I can actually defend against?

[Path-Shaper]

It is Day 1, 5 hours and 46 minutes remain.


12 players are left alive. Anomandaris, Atrahal, D'riss, Emurlahnis, Galain, Hood's Path, Kessobahn,
Okaros, Olar Ethil, Silchas Ruin, Sorrit, Tulas Shorn


1 vote Silchas Ruin: Anomandaris
4 votes Galain: Atrahal, D'riss, Kessobahn, Hood's Path
1 vote Olar Ethil: Emurlahnis
3 votes D'riss: Olar Ethil, Galain, Sorrit


Players not voted: Okaros, Silchas Ruin, Tulas Shorn

[Sorrit]

Galain, on 18 August 2010 - 12:19 PM, said:

Well, this is just peachy. Would anyone like to vote for me on grounds I can actually defend against?

ill vote

[Sorrit]

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 12:15 PM, said:

Sorrit, on 18 August 2010 - 12:02 PM, said:

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 11:50 AM, said:

Was referring to Sorrit: "Going completely against his own musings", which I don't think is really true.

come again?

Was talking to HP

Basically on the D'riss case. You said you didn't like him contradicting. I said I didn't really see him contradicting. HP said what, I didn't say he was contradicting. So that was explaining I was referring to you, not him.

Its funny how you dont see the subtle symp like stuff the D'riss' post....but when i make a blatantly obvious symp mistake/fake mistake etc etc ....you go nuts!!!


edit - made it more clear on what i meant

This post has been edited by Sorrit: 18 August 2010 - 12:32 PM

[Atrahal]

Symp clues usually aren't too subtle, since they're trying to signal the masters. Who do you think D'riss is symping?

[Sorrit]

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 12:34 PM, said:

Symp clues usually aren't too subtle, since they're trying to signal the masters. Who do you think D'riss is symping?

haha are you serious?
symp clues BETTER be subtle or the game would not last very long. Look at how you got all crazy over a silly second vote wich is not a symp clue at all

Who would he be symping?....Well, for starters, he could be symping you wouldnt he?

D, on 17 August 2010 - 05:41 PM, said:

I has arrived!

And holy shit, people are serious (or faking seriousnes on a day 1) , did everyone eat from the magic shroom?
I'm not sure what to make of Atrahal. His reasoning sounds alright, after all its better to go after the scum than the symp.
Yet seems willing to grab the game from the horns from day 1 - wifom aside, dangerous play either if inno or scum non the less.
Silchas also trying to maintain his 'cool' , Anomandaris voting for him for being a 'symp' but doesn't tell us who he is symping for though.

Anyone else missing on thread, or basically most of us are here?

vote Galain

for being the most sound case so far.

The underlined part makes a person who is reading this think that he does not trust you much! (there is the distancing)
Yet in the end....he votes with your case regardless. So he really does not want to show any association with you. But wants to support non the less.

That is something scum do when they agree with one another, they dont want to make it so obvious.
So they first make sure to show that they are not sure about the person tey really want to agree with...and then they go for it anyways...subtle symping mate!!
Actually in retrospect this is something i find that happens more between fellow killers.
As a symp can afford to be less subtle if he is bold enough to put attention between himself and his master.

But ofcourse.... you see nothing wrong in this post....
Thats why i find it funny.
Just an observation. Not something i would go all crazy over, just something i would file away for later to see if anything else crops up

[Sorrit]

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 12:34 PM, said:

Symp clues usually aren't too subtle, since they're trying to signal the masters. Who do you think D'riss is symping?

oh....and i was not referring to "symp clues".
but rather symp like behavior.
Actual Symping...not the act of trying to get your boss to know you are the symp.

[Sorrit]

You seem to think that a symps mane objective is to give symp clues to his boss or something?

wow...thats the last thing i do when i am a symp as that can be rather obvious.

Give symp clues by your actions but dont ever directly involve your own boss...that would be silly.
Wich is exaclty what you seem to think has happened...meh

[Atrahal]

It's hardly like we never see symp clues. Usually only day one ofc. And usually rather obvious, since people often ignore them in the spam phase.

As for D'riss symping me, I sort of see what you mean. Agreeing with someone while keeping distance. Obviously I know it's not, since I know I'm inno. It does look a bit wierd though. I mean, it is possible to agree with someones points, but also think they seem a bit shifty. But then D'riss has generally seemed like he's trying to be inconspicious, and it adds to that, by seemng like he's trying to avoid appearing connected witha anyone at all. Which is soomething scum might do, since we often go for people based on a percieved connection.

[Sorrit]

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 01:16 PM, said:

It's hardly like we never see symp clues. Usually only day one ofc. And usually rather obvious, since people often ignore them in the spam phase.

one of the many reasons i hate the spam phase. And try my best to get out of it asap.

[Anomandaris]

Sorrit, on 18 August 2010 - 10:18 AM, said:

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 10:01 AM, said:

Ok, on Sorrits defence. I think it's crap.

Firstly, it's pretty OMGUS.

Sorrit did something blatantly scummy(symp clue). According to him, this was to get a reaction, to find scum. This defence has been used before, and it just doesn't add up. If you do something scummy in order to get a reaction, and someone reacts, how can you use that as evidence that they are scum? If you do something deliberately scummy, you are going to provoke a reaction. However, there is no reason it would be scum.

See ive explained this many times now.

FIRSLTY....i was trying to get the game going.....trying to get Anything going because nothing was happening. Even if it was me who was getting talked about.
SECONDLY... i have explained that i feel, that scum and inno will react differently to what i did. I HAEV EXPLAINED THIS ALREADY!!
Yes!.... inno's will react and yes scum will react. But i think that fundamentally they will react differently. And thats what i wanted to look out for.
You clearly did not bother reading my explanation properly either. And i refuse to repeat myself.

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 10:01 AM, said:

You say you were trying to liven up the thread, and that you knew you would draw heat. Firstly, I fail to see how knowing you would draw heat is meant to make it look lesss scummy. Just makes it looks like you knew what you were doing looked bad, and did it anyhow-making it look like you've got an ulterior motive for wanting to do it anyway. I cannot see how I am meant to somehow be "trapped" here. Because I voted for someone who was looking scummy(on purpose, apparently). That is what the game is about. I saw something that looked scummy. So I voted for it.

As i have explained....i was not trying to TRAP anyone specific FFS.
I was baiting the entire thread, and then i wanted to assess what was said, assess who i think could be inno and who seems scummy.
Excuse me for trying to find scum. Or should i rather jump on any old silly thing people do on day one like you did!
I mean really!...

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 10:01 AM, said:

The defence that it was deliberate makes no sense.
Why would only scum vote something that you say you did deliberately to look scummy?
There was very little else on the thread at the time. It looked, and still looks, like a deliberate symp clue. Your reasoning for why only scum would vote it, is that innos would think more, and see that actually it isn't scummy. Apparently only a gung-ho scum would actually vote on something lthat is scummy.

Essentially the defence relies on claiming that it was deliberately scummy, and that no inno would vote it(even though it is deliberate).

After that, i'm definetely happy with my vote.

You are all making it out to be MUCH more elaborate than what it really was.
I was not looking for any definite answers.
I was looking for a place to start. Nothign much happened except for you picking up on it, and i gave up the goat then and there before i left for the day.
Then only after did it start getting interesting.
You made the case bigger and started pushing, some others found it interesting. and yet others though it was silly.
THAT was where i feel the info came in. You were more than looking like you were pushing for an easy lynch. thats when i felt a proper explanantion was due.

Sorrit, on 18 August 2010 - 08:57 AM, said:

Hood, on 18 August 2010 - 08:29 AM, said:

Hrm, action, votes, discussion! Oh the glory of it all.

I honestly think that the case against D'riss is quite worthy, and it's got a bit of momentum now with the time left. But at the same time...laying a trap, Sorrit? That's an interesting play on day one - though I appreciate your position of trying to cover your actions and then people calling you on it later - and something that's highly likely to be either a scum tactic when they get called on something, or a rather pointless inno play, isn't it? I mean, what are you going to bring out: people who jump on a day one train. Wooo, like that's not going to get some bites. Alternatively, you're going to get jumped on for ass-covering and follow-up votes (basically what you were hoping to catch other people on) and then claim you were laying a trap to get out of your train-pushing. Bad play, Sorrit.

Yes HP, i purposefully put a second vote on someone to elicit some sort of thread reaction so i could get a better read on players. I even hinted as much in that very post.
Laying a trap?....no not really. More like laying the foundations to get some sort of info. I was not setting out to TRAP, i was setting out to see how people reacted.
I didnt expect such a huge reaction...but yea.


The thread was dead. I wanted to make something happen and see who would actually think things through and who would jump at the opportunity.
"Bad play"?... for you maybe it is but for myself...no...i get a feel for the players.
You on the other hand are standing on the outside with no reference so cant judge my play...sorry.

Its not fool proof by any means, but it DID get the thread going and there WAS people who jumped at the opportunity and there was others that were cautious.
Its very revealing...well, to me its revealing at least. Its up to you weather you believe me or not.
I could just as easily done sweet fuckall and watched everyone settle for a random lynch.
But im trying, as always to be pro active.

I actually came out today just to explaining my actions. Not to defend myslef.
If you think i was signaling somehow then vote me or whoever i was supposed to be signaling im not going to argue the point as its WIFOM.

Was a second vote on someone THAT bad?....no not in my opinion.
But i feel that Atrahals slight over reaction to said post is a good place for me to start looking.

Note that Sorrit, the erratic defender of himself in all manner of un-gentlemanlike conduct and raging apoplexy, has capitalized the word TRAP whenever he hath used it.

Olar Ethil, on 17 August 2010 - 07:33 PM, said:

I rest my case.

Remove Vote
Vote Olar Ethil

[Anomandaris]

Atrahal, on 18 August 2010 - 01:16 PM, said:

It's hardly like we never see symp clues. Usually only day one ofc. And usually rather obvious, since people often ignore them in the spam phase.

As for D'riss symping me, I sort of see what you mean. Agreeing with someone while keeping distance. Obviously I know it's not, since I know I'm inno. It does look a bit wierd though. I mean, it is possible to agree with someones points, but also think they seem a bit shifty. But then D'riss has generally seemed like he's trying to be inconspicious, and it adds to that, by seemng like he's trying to avoid appearing connected witha anyone at all. Which is soomething scum might do, since we often go for people based on a percieved connection.

People on day 1 always include a bit saing they find someone a bit shifty, even when agreeing with them and voting with them. That's because if someone outright agrees with someone else on day 1 we have a tendency to think they're a symp and vote off the agreed-with person.

[Sorrit]

Anomandaris, on 18 August 2010 - 01:23 PM, said:

Note that Sorrit, the erratic defender of himself in all manner of un-gentlemanlike conduct and raging apoplexy, has capitalized the word TRAP whenever he hath used it.

Olar Ethil, on 17 August 2010 - 07:33 PM, said:

I rest my case.

Remove Vote
Vote Olar Ethil

IF you say so... ANO