The Syndicate

Vote DDL Ya'll seem to have a good idea of where to aubergine. Along for the ride until I can get my bearings again.

nijuukyugou wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 5:24 pm

speedchuck wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 5:18 pm I've been gone all weekend. Sorry about that. What are we doing?

So have we. Well, rather, we've had a Syndicate guest all weekend and are now just enjoying the beautiful weather while it lasts before it gets shitty again this week with rain and possible snow (yay, NC!). Anyway, I'm here - I'm going to read a bit (hello, Pikachu Tribe people!), say stuff, and make a vote at some point. I'll likely be a little more apathetic, as I want to sit on the porch and drink beer and relax more than stare at a screen. Join us. Also, dinner. That would be smart.

Anyway, that.

Basically this. Checking in, but I'm also very behind due to these events. Bad timing for all the merge/day kill excitement to happen for me, alas. Will at least skim and make a vote by EOD.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:12 pm What do we all think of marmot's role?

My gut says mafia. I can see it as a blanket civ-protection thing, but it seems like the kind of role that would benefit most from coordination with other powers. And mafia are the ones most likely to have that coordination.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:57 pm hmu with some appropriately representative examples of marmot's gameplay as both civ and mafia, please

Most recent Marmot mafia victory was Mortal Kombat.
Most recent civ victory was Fiddler on the Roof.
Go wild!

Joining the aubergine wagon for now. Vote Marmot.

Scotty wrote: ↑Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:01 pm I would like to make a plea tomorrow that we put as many votes on one person to show those pikachu punks we can reach a decision.

Not to sound like an echo, but Marmot 2018 isn't the worst decision, if only because no one has outright objected to it (or anyone that I have noticed). It's not like he's in here defending himself.

No matter who gets killed tonight, can we all agree that we need to get a lynch across just to see if we can skip the whole NK phase entirely?

I'm starting to agree that, if a merge doesn't happen at this point, a lynch is necessary to resolve game mechanic uncertainties. The more unknowns that get confirmed, the fewer unknowns that apply to reads going forward.

So... are we just going to forget the consensus we had around sig yesterday? Might not matter because colonialbob, but placing a continuation aubergine. Vote sig.

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:31 pm Weeeeee

unvote. Vote sig

If sig is silenced, he would have voted like Wilgy did to let us know.

This is the most effective case to aubergine I've read all game, and it's one line. Vote sig.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: Straw man. Nobody has advocated for voting purely to get a flip or that you should vote for someone you don't suspect. You've got my vote until one of us dies.

Um, you did? At least how I read this with the "vote out anyone."

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:54 pm As long as we don’t actually lynch a player all the way dead and learn an alignment, we are not trading lynches for nightkills. We are giving away free nightkills.

That doesn’t mean there are only a few players we can lynch today. We could vote out anyone but if they have two lives now, we should then vote them out again tomorrow.

Also, what you called Kyle's strawman argument is basically exactly what you said in the post calling it a strawman.
Kyle: "I don't think I'd want to lynch someone purely for the sake of getting a flip out of it unless I was significantly inclined to believe they we're mafia for additional other reasons."
You: "We lynch players just to get flips and because we think they may be mafia every single day of every single game. I’m proposing we do that here, too."

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:55 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:11 pm Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.

As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.

Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?

Isn't Scotty's first role bad?

If you're going to say that INH is good because of his first role, then you have to say Scott is bad because of his first role.

You're the one playing against the mods. You're basically saying "I don't think Golden and Juliets would give this power to a baddie."

I'm playing against INH and Scotty. I'm ignoring their powers and voting based on what they're saying.

I feel like ignoring revealed information is a dangerous approach. While I don't think the mods are necessarily going to give away alignments based on roles, I agree with Spacedaisy and Scotty that those roles can give valuable information and inform alignment probabilities. I think Daisy's analysis of INH is spot-on, and I won't be putting a vote on him today.

I also feel like discounting the value of first-lynch role reveals is a way for you to bolster your "lynch someone fully to see where it goes" approach, with which I've already expressed my disapproval. It's easy to paint today as a Day One if you don't think those first role flips are valuable.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:54 pm

Marmot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:05 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:53 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:51 pm At this point I do not know what to do or how to react. We're two weeks into Day 1.

We lynch some people twice.

Currently, enemy nks are free (provided mafia isn’t killing themselves).

Let’s end that.

I don't understand this statement. What do you mean that nks are free?

Normally, mafia gets a nightkill and town eliminates a suspect (who is or isn’t guilty).

As long as we don’t actually lynch a player all the way dead and learn an alignment, we are not trading lynches for nightkills. We are giving away free nightkills.

That doesn’t mean there are only a few players we can lynch today. We could vote out anyone but if they have two lives now, we should then vote them out again tomorrow.

This is faulty reasoning. The mafia have to kill a player twice to make a full elimination — they're in exactly the same boat as town. I don't see how we're "giving away" kills by not lynching someone fully.

Marmot wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 3:24 pm

Boomslang wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 2:39 pm

Marmot wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 12:59 pm Boomslang, who're you voting for today?

Why do you require a read on yourself from nijuu?

As for wanting Blooper's read on me? All in good time, my marmot.
linki: There it is! Much obliged.

I'll still take that reason for wanting a read from Blooper that you promised.

It's pretty simple — I was a prime suspect, and I wanted to see if she would take that opportunity to jump on the wagon. I like that she didn't, both for obvious reasons and for the larger reason that she's choosing to engage with the thread beyond the surface level.

Scotty wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:48 pm K. Two viable trains now on wilgy or Boomslang. I won’t be around for the next hour so unless something exciting happens, I’m hoping it lands on one of Boom or Wilgy.

I would petition for boom, since I know he’s been in the thread (I’ve seen him active throughout the day) and he hasn’t really defended himself to my liking nor has he really made a conscious effort to find baddies.

Godspeed. Let’s lynch someone

I've been checking in periodically so I'm not completely screwed when I actually have time to catch up. My real life deadlines have been terrible, and I have to leave in like 5 to cover a forum on school shootings, so please forgive my distraction.

Vote Wilgy aubergine because I'm not going down to Sloonei's thread bullying yet, and unlike INH, I do think he's bad.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:21 pm

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?

Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.

Even if it means our tribe fails to lynch yet again?

Why are you so fixated on this? If people haven't achieved reliable consensus, why force their hand, especially when the other tribe seems to be chugging along just fine? If we go into the merge with most of our tribe, we have that entire background of play to inform our choices in later game.

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 11:13 am
Maybe that self vote was because I wanted to see what the other thread was up to.

What does this even mean? Sloonei is the one who got to see the other thread, and surely you could hold off on your vote until you've had a chance to read his comments.

Scotty wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:57 pm
I cemented the vote for Sloonei because he already had 2 votes and didn’t want, *cough* no offense Wilgy, but other people to start putting their names in. At that point, I didn’t see a need to “talk about it”. I think Sloonei was a good choice but I also think we didn’t need to already have 3 votes out there without consultation. So yeah, I stand by my vote.

You didn't want other people to put their names in? Do you trust Sloonei that completely that you didn't feel any extra discussion or candidates were necessary? And I'm curious why you specifically mention Wilgy here.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 5:13 pm

LoRab wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 4:54 pm
I still don't think Boomslang is bad. And I didn't want to vote on a bandwagon, because I didn't suspect the people with multiple votes on them. So, I gave a vote to a player that I had some suspicion of, knowing that they wouldn't likely be lynched with 1 vote. I'm not sure why you see that as suspicious. (other than the fact that you suspect Boomslang)

What was the basis of your suspicion of me, why have you not mentioned it elsewhere, and why was it preferable to cast a vote that was not going to result in anything happening?

Why is it preferable to lend your vote to a bandwagon you don't agree with for the sheer pleasure of "making something happen?" This reads like frustration about being unable to completely control the thread narrative.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:15 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:24 pm Scotty is my top town read because I get a stronger sense from him than anyone else that he's trying to solce the game. He's here, he's engaged and he's not afraid to state his mind. His previous role is the only slight complication.

I'm not concerned with anyone else's stated case against sig right now. My own thoughts on him havd shifted to a town lean. He looks to me like a player who doesn't care about how he is being perceived, which I take as a good thing.

I'm still not inspired by a single word of any case against spacedaisy.

Your reads seem to be solely driven by emotion. And, as you've shown with your suspicion of Boomslang, you seem to be emotionally favorable towards people attempting to work with you and who also agree with your reads, while being judgmental towards those with whom you disagree.

This response just knocked you down a couple of places on my rainbow list.

Which INH just put far more elegantly than I could.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 1:05 pm

Boomslang wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 4:47 pm Well, I'm not going to immediately NO U Kyle's NO U as a matter of principle. Putting a vote on Wilgy; let's see what happens.
vote DrWilgy aubergine

This line of thinking doesn't totally fly with me. was kyle your top suspect, or was it wilgy? If kyle's your top suspect, why should you avoid voting for him due to behavior which you disapprove of?
but then, if you're scum why would you contort yourself to avoid voting for a player? unless, of course, you and kyle are teammates. THE POINT IS, this post has me narrowing my eyes and scratching my chin.

I was feeling on tilt about Kyle's post, and I wasn't going to let my emotions change my previous plan to vote for Wilgy without taking the time to really analyze him. I didn't have that time when I needed to cast my vote, so I went for Wilgy. This day period should give me the time to better assess Kyle in the context of the whole game.

Scotty wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 11:55 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 11:02 pm I don’t like how quick Sloonei was picked. I mean that strategically speaking.

While I agree that I would have liked to talk about it before just willy nilly throwing votes around, Sloonster already had 2 votes and the longer a person had to spy the better I would say.

I wish we had that enthusiasm for the puzzle solving, but I’m just glad we have something to show for it, and will hopefully reap some sweet sweet intel. I’m assuming key points will be how the other team has voted and if they’re all actually crab people or whatnot

Jack raises a good point, and this response smells fishy to me. Scotty was the one who cast the third vote for Sloonei, so he's directly responsible for that "willy nilly throwing votes around" he's complaining about. He had the chance to talk about it or advise that we talk about it, but he didn't. He then deftly transitions to "I wish we had that enthusiasm for puzzle solving," which aims to give himself civ cred for doing the puzzle.

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 10:25 pm Why the hell would I fake silencing? Would that gain me anything if I was taking silence as a civ or baddie?

As a baddie, faking silence gives you a way to control the narrative about you the next day, which you do literally as soon as the day ends.

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 7:22 pm First thing is first. I think the silencer is amongst those who asked me for a response on my civ JoH read.

2nd thing 2nd. JoH is civilian because of his interactions with bloop day one. I don't think mafia JoH would be on a team that NK'd a civilian bloop. It is plausible if they are on the same team, but I doknt think bloop is bad.

Daisy. Come at me. Fight Me! I love you. Fiiiiight meeee.

I vote for me DrWoogy.

All of this wouldn't happen without your silencing, and then you drop another meaningless self vote out of the gate.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 10:37 pm @Boomslang or someone boomslang adjacent could I please request a link to a representative game where boomslang played as mafia and one where he played civ? thank you

Mafia in Pet Sounds, civ in Felt Mafia 2. Happy reading!

Well, I'm not going to immediately NO U Kyle's NO U as a matter of principle. Putting a vote on Wilgy; let's see what happens.
vote DrWilgy aubergine

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 3:20 pm idk, i've voting for boomslang. he's my bishopdom toga right now and Buggers have to enthrall to work. i have the next two Spacedaisy off so chorea jaundiced get more time to get porringer hands dirty uncivilized

aubergine vote boomslang

Well, this is helpful. I love that you've posted roughly as much while insanified as during the previous two day/night periods combined... I also have trouble seeing this vote is anything other than a "NO U" after I called you out about the Wilgy thing.

linki: Would love to volunteer, but leaving for the evening pretty soon. Don't want another situation like that Scotty called me out for earlier :P

Marmot wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 12:59 pm Boomslang, who're you voting for today?

Why do you require a read on yourself from nijuu?

Still not 100% sure, but I could get behind a Wilgy vote. Based on posting patterns, I'm guessing either that he's bluffing or that Scotty/Blooper got a silence as their second role. I already didn't like his comment about killing himself before Bloops, and his response to my analysis of JoH was weird. He said I'd thought about Jack more than he had, then never responded why he thought Jack was good himself.

Therefore, I think a WIlgy lynch would give us good information. Imo, there's a not insignficant chance that he's bad, and if he's not, then I think we get valuable intel about Scotty/Blooper's targeting thoughts.

As for wanting Blooper's read on me? All in good time, my marmot.
linki: There it is! Much obliged.

All caught up. Thoughts and responses as follow.

My vote for Blooper was primarily an attempt to get a real read of me from her, which she has still yet to provide. I was concerned when she failed to engage with me in her big roundup of suspects (Sloon, Sig, Lorab), given the shade others have been throwing my way in the thread. I also didn't like the little seed she planted about no one being bad in the tribe, which feels demoralizing to those of us actually hunting.

Kyle: Yeah, I do think your Wilgy comment is a baddie ping. It suggests that you've been playing the game opportunistically rather than paying closer analytical attention. If you were really trying to solve the game, you'd be taking stock of all the players in it.

I don't particularly like Scotty's flip-flop on vote spreading. He goes from this:

Scotty wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2018 7:51 pm Hell, if we keep it up spreadin the vote, we may never lynch anyone until the merge.

May not be a bad idea...I would like to at least make the merge with you fine people

To this:

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu Mar 01, 2018 8:17 pm If we ever want to lynch someone we will need more votes than the other tribe, which means more consensus. I’d still treat this as a D1. I hate D1s but someone should go, cause someone be killing and I’m pissed

It's just a sudden about-face. I know you got killed, but is that all that changed your mind?

Just posting as a placeholder and a confirmation I'm not silenced — absolutely slammed with work today. Will contribute either tonight or tomorrow morning.

Vote Nijuukyugou aubergine

Kylemii wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:00 pm
but why was it so frustrating? what was the actual source of frustration for you? was anyone expecting sig or anyone to say whether they'd written a haiku

Um, yes? That was exactly what I expected when I asked "Anyone else willing to make that claim?"

what kind of person would have the forethought to lie about doing a haiku but not have the forethought to have just done a haiku when they signed up in the first place? I also don't necessarily think a civ who hadn't done a haiku would have a good reason to tell the truth about it?

I don't think "forethought" comes into it. We weren't told that haiku gave the lynch-immunity advantage before the game, so if somebody didn't send one in, they could easily have an "oh shit" moment.

nijuukyugou wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:34 pm Hilarious thoughts while I'm reading this (mostly unhelping mudslinging) thread (meaning no offense - it's just mafia as usual):

What if...NO ONE was bad in our tribe? Perish the thought. But it would be funny.

What possible town benefit is there to bringing this up? At best, it's conjecture; at worst, it's planting a seed of doubt that encourages us not to vote, giving baddies a free day.

nijuukyugou wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:12 pm To be fair, this is actually the stuff he gets worked up about IRL

She's not wrong, you know :P Also, in your linki roundup of people, you didn't mention a leading suspect: me. What do you think of me anyway, old sport?

Kylemii wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:30 pm I didn't know Wilgy was in our tribe???

Have you been paying more attention to the thread or to baddie BTSC?

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2018 8:17 pm Mainly because I don't like killing my friends, plus Bloops avatar makes me happy.

You thought about JoH being Civ more than me clearly.

You don't like killing your friends more than you don't like killing yourself? This doesn't feel like a real answer. What's behind the "mainly" here?

And if I've thought about JoH more, I'm curious to hear your answer to your own question. Or were you just trying to stir discussion without actually believing JoH was civ?

Kylemii wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:58 pm boomslang has relatively fewer posts, though they're longer and contain a decent amount of reads. biggest complaint? I don't like the fixation on the 70% thing re: sig, and this post looks weird to me:

Boomslang wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:48 pm

sig wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:36 pm Plus I'm about 70% sure I submitted a haiku and it's very disappointing nobody followed up and answered when I asked if they did.

Ok, what's this "70% sure" crap? You either did or you didn't, and you should be able to check your PMs to verify either way. Also, I must not count as anybody, because I definitely responded in the affirmative about the haiku.

the emotions represented in this post don't make sense to me in response to the post they're in response to.

What does that even mean? I think it's natural to be frustrated over someone refusing to give a straight answer on simple yes or no information.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:41 pm

Boomslang wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:17 pmWhy does me wanting others to claim or deny haikus make me seem bad to you? Even if everyone claims to send one in, we'll produce a bunch of lie-checkable statements that someone could use to confirm suspicion of suspects come later in the game.

how?

In other news, Jack coming out swinging is a good look, although I don't get his statement about wanting to lynch himself if he was the button role (didn't play that game).

did jack say this? about the lynch thing

In retrospect, my thought process on that might have been dumb. My idea was that Mafia would have more incentive to lie if they hadn't sent in a haiku, so if someone suspected a player as Mafia, they could lie-check the haiku thing as a barometer of trustworthiness. I think that thought process stemmed from my frustration over sig.

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2018 2:08 pm

sig wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:07 am A really ballsy/crazy scum team would. So like wilgy, mac, marmot, but i don't think a more traditional team would

If bloops was on my team, I would've opted to kill either myself or another teammate before her.

Can you give any reason for this, other than a flat denial of the possibility?

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2018 6:32 pm JoH is civilian. Tell me why I think this.

Because he's done some really good comparative analysis to suggest a w/w connection between Sig and Sloonei? Also, despite admitting that he can "tunnel good Sloonei" early in the game, he's choosing to take the risk and put opinions out there. I don't see him going this deep down the tunnel unless he really believes his case.

Ok, all caught up. I don't like Sig's explanation of the haiku confusion on a personal level, but I guess that's a playstyle disagreement. Not going to push it when we have juicy nightkill responses to make.

I wasn't involved in killing Blooper, but I strongly suspect that whoever did kill her is laughing their asses off at the WIFOM they just created. I'm betting it's one of the older players who understands the couples meta. Coupled with sig's good point about a ballsy scum team being willing to NK their own for the wifom...

Marmot needs to show up and give us something to chew on. Wilgy has also been super blendy so far. About the only thing we've gotten from him is some gentle needling of Sloonei based on a point made by Scotty. And a cryptic comment about Kyle — why is he a "hero and patriot" for voting Blooper?

I also have an eyeball on Lorab right now. "Ugh. I have no idea where to vote. I don't actually suspect anyone" at the end of Day 1 is so noncommittal, then she votes Sloonei for "peer pressure" and the active voices in the thread don't really get on her for that lack of reasoning. She then jumps in, first post of Day 2, to begin the WIFOM about me and the Blooper kill.

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 6:37 pm
I am bothered by to think we fac you put INH pushing discussion of the haiku submission as pro civ. I see it as something that would not be in INH's favor. It looks more like looking civ by generating discussion without actually helping the civs at all. No mafia member is going to say, yeah I didn't send one in! Because why would they do that? It just seems like it would only result in muddying the waters, give the baddies something to hide behind.

The fact your see it so differently gives never pause. And in fact you want others to claim too. I dunno Boom. I think I'm putting my vote on you today.

Why does me wanting others to claim or deny haikus make me seem bad to you? Even if everyone claims to send one in, we'll produce a bunch of lie-checkable statements that someone could use to confirm suspicion of suspects come later in the game. I see nothing bad about wanting that information in the thread. Sure, it's not tremendously helpful if that's the only thing we talk about. But I think a discussion of this mechanic plays a welcome complement to other happenings.

In other news, Jack coming out swinging is a good look, although I don't get his statement about wanting to lynch himself if he was the button role (didn't play that game).

Also, bewbs.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 6:32 pm Um... I've been throwing up all day and thought the thing ended later.

I don't have time to read, please tell me the cases on sig and jack

Jack hasn't checked in at all. Sig cast a self-vote to tie out of "boredom," failed to provide actionable information about his haiku submission, and ignored my own claim of haiku submission. I don't like any of those things.

Running out of time. Sig hasn't changed his self-vote and hasn't explained that cryptic 70% comment. Although he hasn't shown up, Jack also isn't creating confusion in thread. So voting sig. [VOTE: Sig] aubergine

sig wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:36 pm Plus I'm about 70% sure I submitted a haiku and it's very disappointing nobody followed up and answered when I asked if they did.

Ok, what's this "70% sure" crap? You either did or you didn't, and you should be able to check your PMs to verify either way. Also, I must not count as anybody, because I definitely responded in the affirmative about the haiku.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 3:00 pm @Boomslang G-man is not playing.

I'm also not sure what your comment about my attitude toward the button means. You express agreement with me that whoever has it should not hesitate to push it, but then you seem to criticize me for it. What gives?

And this game is business as usual for me, yeah. Some players may have built in immunity today. That shouldn't stand in the way of Day 1 scumhunting. I care about it very little as far as my approach to the game is concerned. I don't discourage conversation about it.

Derp re: G-Man. Reading too much in the thread, didn't even register that he wasn't on the player list!

What I mean about the button is this: if we're going to press it, we should press it NOW to mitigate its impact on our reads. I interpreted you as saying that we could press it whenever and it wouldn't matter.

Marmot wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 12:59 pm

Boomslang wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 8:09 pm Checking in. Visiting with Blooper's parents, so will give this the attention it deserves tomorrow.

What sort of attention does a game of this magnitude with themes and roles and intricacies from the entire year leading up to this point deserve?

The sort of attention that begins with a read of the thread and a consideration of the mechanics. That leads me to like INH and dislike Sloonei right off the bat: INH is willing to entertain that we should reconsider Day 1 play because of the haiku, while Sloonei just wants to charge ahead with business as usual.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 12:49 am ]I don't care about who we may or may not be able to lynch. Today should be pursued just the same as any other Day 1. This is not something I will worry about today.

I also find Sloonei's attitude toward the button rather cavalier. If the button behaves the same way as in the original game and redistributes all roles, I would think the towniest approach would be to press it immediately, rather than at some random time later in the game. That way we remove the possibility of role shuffling early; if roles shuffle after we do a bunch of reading work, then all that progress gets cast aside.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2018 10:50 pm I was the original Button Pusher in CC-123. It redistributed all the roles in the game. Pushing the button is a good idea any time, anywhere. Push it real good.

Other than that, Scotty reads good to me based on general helpfulness and inquisitiveness. I gut like sig because his thoughts on the button and haiku posting agree with my own. Mildly concerned about G-man given his one post with no effort to either contribute or explain an absence.

I'm going to go ahead and say for the record — I sent in a haiku. Anyone else willing to make that claim?

Checking in. Visiting with Blooper's parents, so will give this the attention it deserves tomorrow.