Boomslang, part one
Boomslang's name is getting tossed around a lot and I have participated by calling him an orange. Tasty fruit, less-than tasty rainbow position. I'll check his posts out to see if the blank gut read can be given substance.
Here's his Zebra interaction review, which I called "team mate-compatible, but not necessarily team mate-indicative".
Boomslang wrote:MacDougall wrote:Boomslang is bad. Discuss.
Sure am glad you can determine that off of one post. Surprised you haven't retired off of lottery winnings, with psychic powers like that.
Sarcastic response to a Night 0 poop fling from Mac. He engages the accusation without rejecting it. I don't know that this is telling to me, but if there's any credence to the notion that baddies are more proned to awkward avoidance of lying in their answers to "you're bad", then this is seemingly a valid example.
Boomslang wrote:Metalmarsh89 wrote:MacDougall wrote:Boomslang is bad. Discuss.
If everyone agrees to lynch Golden, Boomslang, and Matt on Day 1, do you think the hosts will let us?
But if the "case" against me, as far I understand it, is that I "buddied up" to Tranq as a Mafia defense, why aren't you including him in this list?
MM lists three relatively arbitrary names for lynch candidacy including Boomslang, and Boom offers a somewhat curious response -- insisting that a Tranq connection should exist. This says to me that if Boomslang is mafia-aligned, Tranq is probably not on his team.
Boomslang wrote:Arrrgh there are already three pages. Which is great from an info perspective, bad from a I'm-drinking-Manhattans-and-wasn't-ready-for-this perspective.
But I like this poll. Lots of different interpretations: what roles people liked, which ones they actually think are in the game. Another theory: could this poll actually be determining the role of one player? It could be like a play-in game in the NCAA tournament, as it were. I don't know how closely the roles have been imported, but if they are faithful, that'd seem to hint against Watari, because there were so many role interactions going on in Death Note.
Tranq's slip of calling Finn McMissile mafia (the role was part of a second civ team) is too easily fact-checkable to be intentional, imo.
Boomslang wrote:Anyway, back on topic. I'm going to add my strength to the Watari vote. First reason is sentimental: I was that guy! Second reason is practical: he's a great role. Even on the off chance that this poll does let us determine a role that gets added, I think he's a good choice.
This is a minor inconsistency in his mindset about the Night 0 vote. I didn't place a great deal of significance upon the Night 0 vote (it's a continuing struggle for me to commit myself to that phase, I haven't cared about it in any game yet), so I can't bring myself to be too bothered about this. But the observation is made, so there you go.
Boomslang wrote:Look, Tranq didn't make any other contribution to Night 1, and his only post today is commenting how many pages are up already.If we were actually bad together, I would've encouraged him to post a lot more and engage with my "defense." I, as a civ, was giving him the benefit of the doubt, nothing more.
DH suggested Boom was being too defensive of Tranq on Night 0, and this was Boom's response. The highlighted portion is WIFOM, which isn't inherently a red flag for me. People do this as town often including me. WIFOM must be judged for how realistic it seems within one's perspective of the player employing it. In this case I'd say Boom's claim is mildly believable, but only mildly. My concern is that Boom seems willing to grant here that he still
would defend Tranq in the same way if they're both Mafia, but he'd encourage his team mate to respond to it differently. This means he's assessing Tranq's behavior and not his own -- even assigning responsibility for his own self-meta to the non-contributions of Tranq. I would say this is relatively suspicious.
Boomslang wrote:DharmaHelper wrote:Also, since when is "Indy" synonymous with "Better let this person win the game"
THANK YOU.
Also, been reading over the llama/sig exchange. Sig starts out strong, with some good points about the Vocaroo medium, then devolves into fluff/talking about fluff. I'm kind of surprised Sig hasn't taken other swings at people, instead keeping the conversation primarily about that single jokey post. I'd say that's worth one 
out of three.
Linki @Rico: What makes you say that? There have certainly been indie roles in the games from which this one is drawing.
Linki @Mac: This is a guessing game, but if a role gains power from votes, then it's least powerful at the start. Easier to actually lynch?
This doesn't read well to me. Boom acknowledges that sig started out strong, but allows the focus of his comment to be distinctly and entirely negative by the time the reader has finished it. He criticizes sig's focus upon responding to accusations of fluff, which strikes me as unfair -- sig was being accused and he responded to those accusations. That's what people do in Mafia games regardless of alignment. That he didn't "take other swings at people" is a direct result of his focus upon combating his accusers. That's the nature of defending oneself substantively.
Boomslang wrote:Also, since Mac is around: do you still think I'm bad? Your basis for that was the presumed me-Tranq teamup, IIRC; Tranq has given us no comment on anything of consequence, while I'm calling him out for that.
Linki w/Rico: I don't think you answered the question (unless it was with that shrug, in which case why would you make an unsubstantiated claim?): I asked what made you think there were no indies in the game, not if you wanted them to win.
Second linki w/rico: Mac hasn't added anything to his Lorab suspicion in this phase as far as I can tell. There was a lot of stuff in Night 0, but nothing in Day 1. In fact, the only interaction besides his vote during the day seems to be vaguely jokey/defensive?
MacDougall wrote: Fiend, you are using Lorab's own smiley against her!
ARRGH SO MUCH LINKI
He's engaging suspicion, and his focus remains upon the perceived link with Tranq. He is again asking someone to get a read on him based upon
Tranq's actions. This does not make sense to me, and it strikes me as a contrived approach to alleviating suspicion.
Boomslang wrote:Long Con wrote:I am going to work now, changing my vote from Boomslang to Llama, for a more relevant opinion. I'm totally cool with Blue Eye being lynched though. He just scares me so I'm staying away.
See, now this is interesting. "More relevant opinion." If you believe I'm bad, why aren't you trying to convince more people? You seem like you could have the support of Mac and Zebra, at the very least. Some of these llama votes, particularly yours, feel rather opportunistic.
I think Boom raises a point about LC here that I think could prove rather useful at a later juncture of this game. I think the potential alignments of LC, Boom, and llama can all be checked against this post, because there is an opportunity here to investigate team mate relationships between all three -- particularly given the inclusion of Zebra in Boom's thought process.
[-Mass Effect Mafia banner-]
Fiddler on the Roof
or 
or 
