Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[notquitethere]

Hah, still getting used to the terminology! I keep thinking 'loyalist=good guy' 'mutineer=scum' as it's an inversion of the usual associations for the role. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

What I said should obviously have read:

So, I suggest when put forward our votes, we should make clear the three people we think are mutineers and the one person we think is a loyalist. That way we can all take note of who thinks who's what alignment and it should be easier to work out teams that way. Or is there anything obviously wrong with that suggestion?

[notquitethere]

Also, Urist, if you'd paid attention to anything I was writing, you'd see that I was trying to say that just voting people is counterproductive if we put two loyalists on the mission. So perhaps it's best to hold back on our votes until we have three people we trust (perhaps marked out in green, like notquitethere) and one person we don't trust. Unless you have a counterargument, if so I'd like to hear it.

[Urist Imiknorris]

There aren't any hammers, so why should I hold back my vote?

You're just digging yourself deeper. OMGUS~

[Caz]

Also, Urist, if you'd paid attention to anything I was writing, you'd see that I was trying to say that just voting people is counterproductive if we put two loyalists on the mission. So perhaps it's best to hold back on our votes until we have three people we trust (perhaps marked out in green, like notquitethere) and one person we don't trust. Unless you have a counterargument, if so I'd like to hear it.

I agree with the strategy, but we can't really know who to trust on Day1. For the slip though, I'll nominate you as well, notquitethere. I expected you to explain it something like "oh, I'm mutineer and thought I was scum so chose to lie!" but you didn't.

[Caz]

So perhaps it's best to hold back on our votes until we have three people we trust (perhaps marked out in green, like notquitethere) and one person we don't trust.

Cute subtle townclaim, also.

[notquitethere]

Urist, I'm just saying that a vote in isolation is unhelpful and potentially counterproductive and perhaps shows that you haven't really tried to understand the set up beyond a superficial reading. This doesn't fill with me with much confidence, hence the FOS. Also, am I right in assuming that by your omission, you didn't get any of the banned roles?

Caz, if you're going to nominate yourself then actually nominate yourself. Also, everyone trusts themselves regardless of alignment and even if it was a subtle a subtle townclaim there isn't anything wrong with that.

[GlyphGryph]

I've updated the Day Post with further clarification of the format I'd like the votes to come across in.

[Teneb]

Also, Urist, if you'd paid attention to anything I was writing, you'd see that I was trying to say that just voting people is counterproductive if we put two loyalists on the mission. So perhaps it's best to hold back on our votes until we have three people we trust (perhaps marked out in green, like notquitethere) and one person we don't trust. Unless you have a counterargument, if so I'd like to hear it.

I agree with the strategy, but we can't really know who to trust on Day1. For the slip though, I'll nominate you as well, notquitethere. I expected you to explain it something like "oh, I'm mutineer and thought I was scum so chose to lie!" but you didn't.

Could you clarify the bolded statement? Would you believe NQT if he had claimed "oh, I'm mutineer and thought I was scum so chose to lie!" despite this sentence making absolutely no sense?

[Persus13]

No banned role here.

Since no one looks particularly scummy right now, I'm going to random vote four people (excluding Imiknorris)

Notquitethere
TheDarkStar
Dariush
Caz


I choose you four.

Hah, still getting used to the terminology! I keep thinking 'loyalist=good guy' 'mutineer=scum' as it's an inversion of the usual associations for the role. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I had the same problem, so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

[notquitethere]

Sorry Caz, I only saw your second post (your two posts appeared while I was writing my response to Urist). In response:

I agree with the strategy, but we can't really know who to trust on Day1. For the slip though, I'll nominate you as well, notquitethere. I expected you to explain it something like "oh, I'm mutineer and thought I was scum so chose to lie!" but you didn't.

Sure, we have no information. Essentially we should all put forward a team and then make more informed decisions in later days based on who flips and what our powers tell us. As for the loyalist/mutineer thing, this is the first time we've played this game so it's unsurprising that the terms can get transposed.

I'd like to hear from everyone before I start choosing my mission picks, Day 1's been pretty slow so far.

Deathsword, I take it that you didn't get a banned role? Any thoughts on my questions on strategy?

Persus, how long does Imiknorris get a free pass then?

[TheDarkStar]

No banned role here.

Since no one looks particularly scummy right now, I'm going to random vote four people (excluding Imiknorris)

Notquitethere
TheDarkStar
Dariush
Caz


I choose you four.

Hah, still getting used to the terminology! I keep thinking 'loyalist=good guy' 'mutineer=scum' as it's an inversion of the usual associations for the role. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I had the same problem, so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

I also do not have a banned role. Also, in response to your random vote, here's my random vote: Persus13.

[Persus13]

Persus, how long does Imiknorris get a free pass then?

Well, unless Imiknorris is lying, then someone's a priest, and hopefully they'll stay on the ship and inspect people. If I was a priest, then I'd make Imiknorris my first inspect.

If Imiknorris is lying about being Expedition Leader, then the cook will be able to inspect him and find out too.

[Persus13]

No banned role here.

Since no one looks particularly scummy right now, I'm going to random vote four people (excluding Imiknorris)

Notquitethere
TheDarkStar
Dariush
Caz


I choose you four.

Hah, still getting used to the terminology! I keep thinking 'loyalist=good guy' 'mutineer=scum' as it's an inversion of the usual associations for the role. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I had the same problem, so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

I also do not have a banned role. Also, in response to your random vote, here's my random vote: Persus13.

How can a random vote be a response to a random vote?

[TheDarkStar]

No banned role here.

Since no one looks particularly scummy right now, I'm going to random vote four people (excluding Imiknorris)

Notquitethere
TheDarkStar
Dariush
Caz


I choose you four.

Hah, still getting used to the terminology! I keep thinking 'loyalist=good guy' 'mutineer=scum' as it's an inversion of the usual associations for the role. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I had the same problem, so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

I also do not have a banned role. Also, in response to your random vote, here's my random vote: Persus13.

How can a random vote be a response to a random vote?

Good point.


Dariush
Caz
Tiruin
Deathsword

[Teneb]

Deathsword, I take it that you didn't get a banned role? Any thoughts on my questions on strategy?

I think it could work. A lack of deaths on exepeditions would indicate more than one scum, leaving only the business of identifying who. Also, no banned role.

Good point.


Dariush
Caz
Tiruin
Deathsword

So... will you do anything else? Will you comment on NQT's plan and possible slip? Will you tell us wheter or not you got a banned role?