Monkey Island [ENDGAME]

[Long Con]

There's a reason why I don't trust Snow Dog.

Bananas are more valuable to baddies than civvies.

Snow Dog. Why bananas over grog? Why not grog someone twice instead of banana lc twice?

Doesn't that have the same net result? Remove votes from one dude, or put votes on the other dude.

[DrWilgy]

There's a reason why I don't trust Snow Dog.

Bananas are more valuable to baddies than civvies.

Snow Dog. Why bananas over grog? Why not grog someone twice instead of banana lc twice?

Doesn't that have the same net result? Remove votes from one dude, or put votes on the other dude.

Nope, it's a survivalist vs activist mindset. A baddie normally takes measures to save themself rather lynch others.

Bananas are more valuable than that to a baddie because they know who to trust and who to save when shit goes bad.

Now I ask, would a civ get bananas and save them for themself or would a civ get grog and nuke who they found suspect?

[Long Con]

There's a reason why I don't trust Snow Dog.

Bananas are more valuable to baddies than civvies.

Snow Dog. Why bananas over grog? Why not grog someone twice instead of banana lc twice?

Doesn't that have the same net result? Remove votes from one dude, or put votes on the other dude.

Nope, it's a survivalist vs activist mindset. A baddie normally takes measures to save themself rather lynch others.

Bananas are more valuable than that to a baddie because they know who to trust and who to save when shit goes bad.

Now I ask, would a civ get bananas and save them for themself or would a civ get grog and nuke who they found suspect?

If I got bananas or grog, I would use them to save myself, generally. Nuking a suspect might happen if I was really sure about it, but otherwise survival is imperative. I would use them at a point where I was in danger of being lynched, to alter the lynch so the other guy gets it. Bananas or grog do the same job in that, the most likely usage situation.

Snow Dog used his for someone else, which was a risk. But it's the same risk whether it's bananas or grog, because you'r using your instincts, your detective work, voting analysis, or whatever else you use to decide who is good and who is bad... and you could be wrong. Saving someone else with bananas, or condemning someone else with grog, it's the exact same risk if you're not 100% sure about the other guy. You could banana a villain, and you could grog a Civ.

If Snow Dog had had two grogs in his possession, and used them both on Mac, would that make you view the situation differently?

[Snow Dog]

There's a reason why I don't trust Snow Dog.

Bananas are more valuable to baddies than civvies.

Snow Dog. Why bananas over grog? Why not grog someone twice instead of banana lc twice?

Doesn't that have the same net result? Remove votes from one dude, or put votes on the other dude.

Nope, it's a survivalist vs activist mindset. A baddie normally takes measures to save themself rather lynch others.

Bananas are more valuable than that to a baddie because they know who to trust and who to save when shit goes bad.

Now I ask, would a civ get bananas and save them for themself or would a civ get grog and nuke who they found suspect?

I don't have grog and never have. The bananas were to save my own ass if needed, I took a risk on saving LC. Now I am defenceless. If LC flips bad at any time, well, I was obviously a fool and maybe I am anyway. It is done now.

[DrWilgy]

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

[Long Con]

@LC yes

The net result is the exact same, so this is 100% about mindset, right? I think maybe we think differently. I don't see grog as a gun and banana as a first aid kit. I see them both as an item that alters the lynch by one vote... I don't have a different mindset toward a positive or negative number.

If a lynch is within one vote of an alternate result, or tied, then the item can alter the lynch as I choose.

If a lynch is two or more votes away from an alternate result, then my item cannot alter the lynch, and is useless during this lynch.

You can sub in grog or banana for the item, or you could introduce a third item, guacamole, that can either add OR subtract a vote from someone... and to me, they're all the same item.

[DrWilgy]

Which is a fine thing to think, but I disagree.

@LC how did you know about this situation before it happened?

I want to lynch Long Con, and our only chance today is if DrWilgy joins me in forcing a tie (and someone has a wonderful item to use).

But I don't like ties either. This lynch is the worst.

I would like to join you but I don't trust Scotty ;__;

Do I vote Snow Dog, Ji-San or Scotty?

It doesn't matter much. If you're not voting Long Con then the lynch is set in stone on myself.

Not so set in stone. Maybe someone will use bananas and/or grog and make me get lynched.

I would totally get revenge on that person.

[Snow Dog]

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

Ok I'm not sure I am allowed to answer that.

[DrWilgy]

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

Ok I'm not sure I am allowed to answer that.

In this case, I'm to assume that you are Stan, Toothrot or a cannibal with Toothrot's Banana picker.

[Snow Dog]

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

Ok I'm not sure I am allowed to answer that.

In this case, I'm to assume that you are Stan, Toothrot or a cannibal with Toothrot's Banana picker.

Makes no sense for me to be a cannibal. Why would I save LC?

[Long Con]

Which is a fine thing to think, but I disagree.

@LC how did you know about this situation before it happened?

I want to lynch Long Con, and our only chance today is if DrWilgy joins me in forcing a tie (and someone has a wonderful item to use).

But I don't like ties either. This lynch is the worst.

I would like to join you but I don't trust Scotty ;__;

Do I vote Snow Dog, Ji-San or Scotty?

It doesn't matter much. If you're not voting Long Con then the lynch is set in stone on myself.

Not so set in stone. Maybe someone will use bananas and/or grog and make me get lynched.

I would totally get revenge on that person.

But I'm not referencing any situations before they happened, because that situation didn't happen. No one used bananas and/or grog to get me lynched.

[DrWilgy]

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

Ok I'm not sure I am allowed to answer that.

In this case, I'm to assume that you are Stan, Toothrot or a cannibal with Toothrot's Banana picker.

Makes no sense for me to be a cannibal. Why would I save LC?

He's your teammate.

Which is a fine thing to think, but I disagree.

@LC how did you know about this situation before it happened?

I want to lynch Long Con, and our only chance today is if DrWilgy joins me in forcing a tie (and someone has a wonderful item to use).

But I don't like ties either. This lynch is the worst.

I would like to join you but I don't trust Scotty ;__;

Do I vote Snow Dog, Ji-San or Scotty?

It doesn't matter much. If you're not voting Long Con then the lynch is set in stone on myself.

Not so set in stone. Maybe someone will use bananas and/or grog and make me get lynched.

I would totally get revenge on that person.

But I'm not referencing any situations before they happened, because that situation didn't happen. No one used bananas and/or grog to get me lynched.

Subject matter is different, but you called Item Shenanigans interacting with your potential death before it happened.

[Snow Dog]

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

Ok I'm not sure I am allowed to answer that.

In this case, I'm to assume that you are Stan, Toothrot or a cannibal with Toothrot's Banana picker.

Makes no sense for me to be a cannibal. Why would I save LC?

He's your teammate.

.

There is no logic to that. If he were my teammate, I'd have saved him without saying anything.

[DrWilgy]

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

Ok I'm not sure I am allowed to answer that.

In this case, I'm to assume that you are Stan, Toothrot or a cannibal with Toothrot's Banana picker.

Makes no sense for me to be a cannibal. Why would I save LC?

He's your teammate.

.

There is no logic to that. If he were my teammate, I'd have saved him without saying anything.

Incorrect, you have only stated "Look I saved a Civ" since it happened. I believe you were going for cred to win this lylo.

[Snow Dog]

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

Ok I'm not sure I am allowed to answer that.

In this case, I'm to assume that you are Stan, Toothrot or a cannibal with Toothrot's Banana picker.

Makes no sense for me to be a cannibal. Why would I save LC?

He's your teammate.

.

There is no logic to that. If he were my teammate, I'd have saved him without saying anything.

Incorrect, you have only stated "Look I saved a Civ" since it happened. I believe you were going for cred to win this lylo.

I haven't said that, because I don't know that LC is civ. I have however helped lynch a pirate. I don't know what lylo is.

[Long Con]

Subject matter is different, but you called Item Shenanigans interacting with your potential death before it happened.

Oh ok. Well, I read the initial posts in the game, and I was aware that these items existed, and that people probably had some in their possession, and that they would be used when it was a very close lynch. I feared my detractors would have them, and skew the lynch against me, but I was fortunate that it was the other way around.

@LC yes

@Snow Dog where'd you get those bananers?

Ok I'm not sure I am allowed to answer that.

In this case, I'm to assume that you are Stan, Toothrot or a cannibal with Toothrot's Banana picker.

Makes no sense for me to be a cannibal. Why would I save LC?

He's your teammate.

No, Wilgy. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, dude.

[a2thezebra]

I don't know what lylo is.

LyLo = Lynch or Lose

[Vompatti]

An inflatable device used in water to get proper brown.

[Long Con]

I'm getting a Lylo and going to the pool.

[Scotty]

just got done visiting a children's hospital for PR. I love seein those kids smile

Zebra can you comment on LC's vote analysis?

Trash.

Well, the facts about who voted for who are not trash, they are facts. So if my analysis was trash, then why don't you use those facts to show us what a proper analysis looks like. Take your time, we seem to have until Friday.

Ok zebra. I'll try harder tomorrow.

In the interest of not splitting the vote, I'll go along with Snow Dog's judgement and vote for Scotty today.

*votes Scotty*

Man, you didn't even wait 12 hours to vote me, didja?

I made a math error in my previous post- I thought there was one more player than there is. I think that with 2 cannibals left we are in LYLO unless there's a successful block or protect. So do not lynch me. We can't afford this.

Snowdog, your choice to save LC will either be one of the worst moves for us this game or a good one. I think you were either swayed by LC (though i don't recall you saying exactly what swayed you) or purposefully saved him because he is your teammate. If we are in LyLo like I now think we are, what do you have to lose in obviously saving your teammate?

That's a scenario.

The other scenario I see is you just fell for LC's appeal at the EoD and he's still sealing the pill hook line and sinker.

But nah. I think you're both bad.

I will vote for whomever the group decides to vote for, but would suggest LC or Snowdog. And if that, I'd suggest LC again.

Because he's obviously bad

[Long Con]

Go ahead and vote for me, if we are in lylo then the Civil will lose. If Wilgy and Vomp don't want to lynch Scotty, then I believe the best course of action would be to vote for zebra. I don't think Snow Dog would have saved me if he were bad, and he didn't make a mistake saving me.

[Scotty]

Go ahead and vote for me, if we are in lylo then the Civil will lose. If Wilgy and Vomp don't want to lynch Scotty, then I believe the best course of action would be to vote for zebra. I don't think Snow Dog would have saved me if he were bad, and he didn't make a mistake saving me.

How many baddies do you think there are left?
And on which team?

[Long Con]

I have been thinking there is 1 from each team left, but maybe one team was completely taken out by night kills. Then I would believe there is only 1 baddie left, and if you're not it, Scotty, then I believe it's zebra. Or Wilgy or Vomp did some really convincing team backstabbing on the polls. I'm Civ and I believe Snow is as well.

[Long Con]

And on which team?

Oh, and Cannibals is most likely.

[a2thezebra]

Based on Day 7 posts and nothing else whatsoever (see what I did there?) I give Scotty a 60% chance of being bad and Long Con a 95% chance.

*votes Long Con*

[a2thezebra]

Users browsing this forum: a2thezebra and 25 guests

Come at me

[Long Con]

Based on Day 7 posts and nothing else whatsoever (see what I did there?) I give Scotty a 60% chance of being bad and Long Con a 95% chance.

*votes Long Con*

Not a surprise.

When Wilgy and Vompatti both have voted for baddies from both teams, when those votes mattered... that is a relevant thing. All the creative arguments in the world can't take away from that. Sure, a baddie can backstab his teammate, but it's far more likely that those two were not teammates of the baddies they helped lynch. I'm not fucking majoring in creative writing here. Right?

[DrWilgy]

Yay! Baddies win!

3 votes placed on 2 civs

[a2thezebra]

Based on Day 7 posts and nothing else whatsoever (see what I did there?) I give Scotty a 60% chance of being bad and Long Con a 95% chance.

*votes Long Con*

Not a surprise.

When Wilgy and Vompatti both have voted for baddies from both teams, when those votes mattered... that is a relevant thing. All the creative arguments in the world can't take away from that. Sure, a baddie can backstab his teammate, but it's far more likely that those two were not teammates of the baddies they helped lynch. I'm not fucking majoring in creative writing here. Right?

I don't know, are you? I didn't mention Wilgy or Vompatti in the post you're quoting so I don't get the point you're making.

[a2thezebra]

Yay! Baddies win!

3 votes placed on 2 civs

Who is bad?

[Long Con]

Yay! Baddies win!

3 votes placed on 2 civs

It's not too late to change that, if that's what you believe.

Do you agree that zebra is likely a baddie then? Or do you believe that Snow Dog and I are teammates? Because if you still think that, I'm sure that an analysis of game interactions and such would only point to the truth: that he's just a Civ that believed another guy was Civ. And if you can just see what he saw in my posts... Wilgy, I am Civ. Even if you don't think I am Civ, I just don't see how Snow Dog's banana usage makes sense if he's a baddie. Either save me (his baddie teammate) without telling everyone, so that a later lynch of me doesn't incriminate him... Or if he's a baddie saving a Civ..like what?? In what universe does it make sense for a baddie to save a Civ, using up the ability to save themselves?? It's not like I was Mr 100% Trusted Civ that a baddie would seek to attach themselves to. It just absolutely doesn't make sense to me for Snow to be bad.

Also, I'm not either.

[Long Con]

Based on Day 7 posts and nothing else whatsoever (see what I did there?) I give Scotty a 60% chance of being bad and Long Con a 95% chance.

*votes Long Con*

Not a surprise.

When Wilgy and Vompatti both have voted for baddies from both teams, when those votes mattered... that is a relevant thing. All the creative arguments in the world can't take away from that. Sure, a baddie can backstab his teammate, but it's far more likely that those two were not teammates of the baddies they helped lynch. I'm not fucking majoring in creative writing here. Right?

I don't know, are you? I didn't mention Wilgy or Vompatti in the post you're quoting so I don't get the point you're making.

Ok, I will clarify the point further.

You called my voting analysis trash, and proceeded to have a tirade (is that fair?) about how looking at any factor in isolation was worthless. I just want you to acknowledge that that analysis of Wilgy's and Vompatti's voting records has some undeniable value when considering whether or not they're bad, which, I understand, would be in direct contradiction to your earlier "tirade".

[a2thezebra]

Based on Day 7 posts and nothing else whatsoever (see what I did there?) I give Scotty a 60% chance of being bad and Long Con a 95% chance.

*votes Long Con*

Not a surprise.

When Wilgy and Vompatti both have voted for baddies from both teams, when those votes mattered... that is a relevant thing. All the creative arguments in the world can't take away from that. Sure, a baddie can backstab his teammate, but it's far more likely that those two were not teammates of the baddies they helped lynch. I'm not fucking majoring in creative writing here. Right?

I don't know, are you? I didn't mention Wilgy or Vompatti in the post you're quoting so I don't get the point you're making.

Ok, I will clarify the point further.

You called my voting analysis trash, and proceeded to have a tirade (is that fair?) about how looking at any factor in isolation was worthless. I just want you to acknowledge that that analysis of Wilgy's and Vompatti's voting records has some undeniable value when considering whether or not they're bad, which, I understand, would be in direct contradiction to your earlier "tirade".

Nothing has value in a vacuum.

[a2thezebra]

Stop going out of your way to miss the point.

[Golden]

Nothing has value in a vacuum.

You've obviously never gone digging through that bag of dust for the money you just accidentally sucked up.

[Golden]

Oh, sorry, you probably call that a Hoover.

[Long Con]

Oh, sorry, you probably call that a Hoover.

I call it a vacuum. Who calls it a Hoover? That's just a brand of vacuum. We have central vac in our house, and it rocks my world.

Nothing has value in a vacuum.

What vacuum? What kind of information would I have to introduce in order to make voting records have value? I did analyze them with game-related information. As in, the timing of their votes, and how much they mattered / were influential to the baddie getting lynched. I don't understand what logic you're using to just disregard voting records. Tell me what it would take to make voting records a more valid source of information to you!

Stop going out of your way to miss the point.

I don't understand what you mean. There is no deliberate misunderstanding or deception in a single thing I have said to you.

[a2thezebra]

Nothing has value in a vacuum.

You've obviously never gone digging through that bag of dust for the money you just accidentally sucked up.

Uh maybe I don't vacuum? Ruuuuude

[a2thezebra]

Oh, sorry, you probably call that a Hoover.

I call it a vacuum. Who calls it a Hoover? That's just a brand of vacuum. We have central vac in our house, and it rocks my world.

Nothing has value in a vacuum.

What vacuum? What kind of information would I have to introduce in order to make voting records have value? I did analyze them with game-related information. As in, the timing of their votes, and how much they mattered / were influential to the baddie getting lynched. I don't understand what logic you're using to just disregard voting records. Tell me what it would take to make voting records a more valid source of information to you!

Stop going out of your way to miss the point.

I don't understand what you mean. There is no deliberate misunderstanding or deception in a single thing I have said to you.

Using any one element of the game to justify reads while excluding other elements goes directly against town's interests. I don't know how many times in how many different ways I have to say this for you to stop pretending that you don't get it.

[Long Con]

Oh, sorry, you probably call that a Hoover.

I call it a vacuum. Who calls it a Hoover? That's just a brand of vacuum. We have central vac in our house, and it rocks my world.

Nothing has value in a vacuum.

What vacuum? What kind of information would I have to introduce in order to make voting records have value? I did analyze them with game-related information. As in, the timing of their votes, and how much they mattered / were influential to the baddie getting lynched. I don't understand what logic you're using to just disregard voting records. Tell me what it would take to make voting records a more valid source of information to you!

Stop going out of your way to miss the point.

I don't understand what you mean. There is no deliberate misunderstanding or deception in a single thing I have said to you.

Using any one element of the game to justify reads while excluding other elements goes directly against town's interests. I don't know how many times in how many different ways I have to say this for you to stop pretending that you don't get it.

Uhhh, how does this sentence not indicate that I get it, and I'm asking you for MORE clarity...

What kind of information would I have to introduce in order to make voting records have value? I did analyze them with game-related information. As in, the timing of their votes, and how much they mattered / were influential to the baddie getting lynched. I don't understand what logic you're using to just disregard voting records. Tell me what it would take to make voting records a more valid source of information to you!

...not the same level of clarity. MORE clarity. I have been sufficiently clear with what I mean by that, you just have to read all the words.

[a2thezebra]

I don't understand what you mean.

Uhhh, how does this sentence not indicate that I get it

I don't understand what you mean.

Uhhh, how does this sentence not indicate that I get it

I don't understand what you mean.

Uhhh, how does this sentence not indicate that I get it

I don't understand what you mean.

[a2thezebra]

Try harder.

[Long Con]

That is a good example of taking things in a vacuum. You deliberately sucked out all the context in order to make that completely meaningless post.

[a2thezebra]

Try harder.

[a2thezebra]

I just want MORE clarity, LC.

[Long Con]

And just as a fun exercise, here's your post with the OTHER half of that sentence inserted:

I don't understand what you mean.

I'm asking you for MORE clarity

I don't understand what you mean.

I'm asking you for MORE clarity

I don't understand what you mean.

I'm asking you for MORE clarity

I don't understand what you mean.

[Long Con]

I just want MORE clarity, LC.

You're not even trying to make sense or make a real point. I'm just going along with it to let you show everyone else reading this your true colours.

[DrWilgy]

I'm just waitin for another vote and a half LC. No worries.

[Scotty]

Yay! Baddies win!

3 votes placed on 2 civs

Wtf are you talking about.

I'm just waitin for another vote and a half LC. No worries.

Guys Wilgy just claimed baddie and no one is calling out his shit.

Vomps, I want you and I to vote him and someone throw some grog on me. He played his cards too early

[Scotty]

Yay! Baddies win!

3 votes placed on 2 civs

Wtf are you talking about.

I'm just waitin for another vote and a half LC. No worries.

Guys Wilgy just claimed baddie and no one is calling out his shit.

Vomps, I want you and I to vote him and someone throw some grog on me. He played his cards too early

Not grog- banana. You know, the one that eliminates a lynch vote. We need to lynch Wilgy.

Mac, while bad, may have been distancing