[Gnaw]

HiddenOne, on 06 October 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

Well, the CFs are all for town, are you saying that the absence of the disclaimer "unless one of them was the symp" is a scum tell?

Yeah. Having that particular conversation, I would have stuck that in. Of course I'm very fond of weasel words and ymmv.

[HiddenOne]

The Unfound, on 06 October 2014 - 03:24 PM, said:

Khellendros, on 06 October 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

The Unfound, on 06 October 2014 - 01:04 PM, said:

So a quick question on the insane finder. If he tries to re-find will he get the same result or is it randomized again?

Usually, a re-find is randomised once again. So could get the same result, could get a different one. I think it would have been worth a risk for our finders to do that on the first couple of nights - do the same person twice. Obviously if they got the same result it wouldn't have proved anything either way - but there is the 50% chance, if you're the insane finder, that your result will be different, and then you'll know for sure you're insane.

Alas, we still know little that's concrete.

I'm not really here, just popped in. Won't be around properly for another couple of hours. Has game been unfrozen yet?


Edit: Oh yeah, I see the post from Venge.

And this is where I was going with that question. Assuming both reveals are true, it might be beneficial to have one do a refind and lynch someone that is on the others list. It might help to clear thing up a little.

I'm sorry, but I find this post scummy. Feel free to correct me with analytical tomfoolery, anyone, but here are my issues. First, this prevents the finders from widening the matrix of finds on other players, also wasting a night action. Second, it still is a random lynch depending on which way we vote. I guess it could clear things up, but it feels like a stall tactic.

Thoughts?

[Gust Hubb]

Gnaw, on 06 October 2014 - 03:40 PM, said:

So, regardless of whether Venge is the Perfect Mod or not, when Gusty made that statement there was only one way he could know that all the dead are town, no?

Firstly, killers never know their symps. Second, we were discussing finders among the dead not symps. It's kind of a given the symp could be among the dead and we'd never know. to assume as much is dangerous for equally obvious reasons.

[Gust Hubb]

HiddenOne, on 06 October 2014 - 03:48 PM, said:

The Unfound, on 06 October 2014 - 03:24 PM, said:

Khellendros, on 06 October 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

The Unfound, on 06 October 2014 - 01:04 PM, said:

So a quick question on the insane finder. If he tries to re-find will he get the same result or is it randomized again?

Usually, a re-find is randomised once again. So could get the same result, could get a different one. I think it would have been worth a risk for our finders to do that on the first couple of nights - do the same person twice. Obviously if they got the same result it wouldn't have proved anything either way - but there is the 50% chance, if you're the insane finder, that your result will be different, and then you'll know for sure you're insane.

Alas, we still know little that's concrete.

I'm not really here, just popped in. Won't be around properly for another couple of hours. Has game been unfrozen yet?


Edit: Oh yeah, I see the post from Venge.

And this is where I was going with that question. Assuming both reveals are true, it might be beneficial to have one do a refind and lynch someone that is on the others list. It might help to clear thing up a little.

I'm sorry, but I find this post scummy. Feel free to correct me with analytical tomfoolery, anyone, but here are my issues. First, this prevents the finders from widening the matrix of finds on other players, also wasting a night action. Second, it still is a random lynch depending on which way we vote. I guess it could clear things up, but it feels like a stall tactic.

Thoughts?

Really good point HO. I guess the question is, do you implicitly trust our finders and if not, how would you propose testing their authenticity. But you are right to call out this post. Scum have to delay for 2 more days WCS to win.

[HiddenOne]

yes, I know that I will always expect a symp hiding in the crowd unless proven otherwise

[HiddenOne]

Also, I am challenged to trust in this game, and no, I don't have a better suggestion

[The Unfound]

Gust Hubb, on 06 October 2014 - 03:57 PM, said:

HiddenOne, on 06 October 2014 - 03:48 PM, said:

The Unfound, on 06 October 2014 - 03:24 PM, said:

Khellendros, on 06 October 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

The Unfound, on 06 October 2014 - 01:04 PM, said:

So a quick question on the insane finder. If he tries to re-find will he get the same result or is it randomized again?

Usually, a re-find is randomised once again. So could get the same result, could get a different one. I think it would have been worth a risk for our finders to do that on the first couple of nights - do the same person twice. Obviously if they got the same result it wouldn't have proved anything either way - but there is the 50% chance, if you're the insane finder, that your result will be different, and then you'll know for sure you're insane.

Alas, we still know little that's concrete.

I'm not really here, just popped in. Won't be around properly for another couple of hours. Has game been unfrozen yet?


Edit: Oh yeah, I see the post from Venge.

And this is where I was going with that question. Assuming both reveals are true, it might be beneficial to have one do a refind and lynch someone that is on the others list. It might help to clear thing up a little.

I'm sorry, but I find this post scummy. Feel free to correct me with analytical tomfoolery, anyone, but here are my issues. First, this prevents the finders from widening the matrix of finds on other players, also wasting a night action. Second, it still is a random lynch depending on which way we vote. I guess it could clear things up, but it feels like a stall tactic.

Thoughts?

Really good point HO. I guess the question is, do you implicitly trust our finders and if not, how would you propose testing their authenticity. But you are right to call out this post. Scum have to delay for 2 more days WCS to win.

Im just laying out options. It seems like a waste of a night action. But regardless of whether or not we even trust the reveals they are pretty much useless anyway as we have no idea what kind of finder they are.

[Messremb]

I'm sure I'll keep my own counsel on who I find tonight, thank you for asking.

[Messremb]

And it is also why I'd have preferred to have no reveals till 3 results were in. That way we could at least be certain who we are rather than out on thread still unsure.

[Gnaw]

Vengeance, on 06 October 2014 - 03:12 PM, said:

Gnaw, on 06 October 2014 - 03:10 PM, said:

Gust Hubb, on 06 October 2014 - 02:56 PM, said:

Messremb, on 06 October 2014 - 02:49 PM, said:

Gust Hubb, on 06 October 2014 - 01:00 PM, said:

I'm saying it's more likely Obdi is who he says he is. being the first to reveal, and to "choose" the reverse finder put him at high risk of a counter reveal (largely because the mechanics of the insane finder seem less compatible with his find results).

I have yet to see a counter-reveal, symp.

Call me symp if u like, but there are 4 townies dead and any one of them could have been a finder. And if u be a symp, it's worth the risk. I mean you back up obdi on one find.

And there you go again. You're being accused of being a symp and counter-accusing. But then you allow no room for the symp to have been one of the 4 dead players. And the only way for you to know that all 4 were town is if you were the one doing the killing.

I am putting Cf's out right? Pretty sure that I am. Goes and doubles checks. Yep Cf's right there.

Ok, I'm slow. Really, really slow.

Are you saying that a finder will CF as a finder?

[Gust Hubb]

Still slow. Take another gander Gnaw. Happy Monday!

[Vengeance]

Gnaw, on 06 October 2014 - 04:10 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 06 October 2014 - 03:12 PM, said:

Gnaw, on 06 October 2014 - 03:10 PM, said:

Gust Hubb, on 06 October 2014 - 02:56 PM, said:

Messremb, on 06 October 2014 - 02:49 PM, said:

Gust Hubb, on 06 October 2014 - 01:00 PM, said:

I'm saying it's more likely Obdi is who he says he is. being the first to reveal, and to "choose" the reverse finder put him at high risk of a counter reveal (largely because the mechanics of the insane finder seem less compatible with his find results).

I have yet to see a counter-reveal, symp.

Call me symp if u like, but there are 4 townies dead and any one of them could have been a finder. And if u be a symp, it's worth the risk. I mean you back up obdi on one find.

And there you go again. You're being accused of being a symp and counter-accusing. But then you allow no room for the symp to have been one of the 4 dead players. And the only way for you to know that all 4 were town is if you were the one doing the killing.

I am putting Cf's out right? Pretty sure that I am. Goes and doubles checks. Yep Cf's right there.

Ok, I'm slow. Really, really slow.

Are you saying that a finder will CF as a finder?

No just that the CF's have been posted.

[Messremb]

Just over 12 hours left?

[Vengeance]

It is now the beginning of day 3.

12 hours and 24 minutes left

8 players alive: A Demon Llama, Gnaw, Gust Hubb, HiddenOne, Khell, Messremb, Obdigore, The unfound

5 votes for a lynch, 4 votes to go to night.

1 vote for Hiddenone (Messremb)
1 vote for GH (Gnaw)

[Khellendros]

Okay.

So we have Obdi and Mess claiming finder. No counter-claims. Other finder(s) could be keeping shtum. Or dead.

They say they've done finds on Khell, Gust, Messremb, and...Gust again.

We know, whatever else they might be, Obdi cannot be a regular finder, because he's found two scum, and the OP says there's one killer (anyone feel like arguing that point?).

Conclusions:

If the healer is still around...well, make your own decision But I know what I would do.

Secondary conclusions:

Lynch Unfound/A Demon Llama?

[Messremb]

Khellendros, on 06 October 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

They say they've done finds on Khell, Gust, Messremb, and...Gust again.

Jealous you only got Found once?

Khellendros, on 06 October 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

If the healer is still around...well, make your own decision But I know what I would do.

I'd rather the Healer didn't heal the Killer, thanks

Khellendros, on 06 October 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

Secondary conclusions:

Lynch Unfound/A Demon Llama?

Why them as oposed to Gnaw/HO?

[Khellendros]

To your last question, just off the top of my head they feel more scummy. But really no more reason than Gnaw/HO. But I would still (possibly foolishly) still put HO last out of those four.


Edit: Changed three to four.

This post has been edited by Khellendros: 06 October 2014 - 06:50 PM

[Gnaw]

Messremb, on 06 October 2014 - 06:37 PM, said:

Khellendros, on 06 October 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

Secondary conclusions:

Lynch Unfound/A Demon Llama?

Why them as oposed to Gnaw/HO?

Why them as opposed to Gusty or Mess?

[Gust Hubb]

Why not Khell or Obdi!

[The Unfound]

So for all intensive purposes why not anyone.