Print

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

[Elephant Parade]

Probably still the best way for us to figure out our powers, though, unless someone has some sort of "tell this player what their power is" ability.

(If you do, you shouldn't say so, since you'd become a prime target for the Evil role.)

[Starver]

Having recently experienced life as an uninformed minority, I'm willing to assume (for starters, at least) that the Evil knows not much more than the rest of us, save what has been blurted out akready.

The exception to this is if there's a masonic/cultish groupthink already established, but it has been a while since any of that sort of thing.  (But, but, it has been a while, so maybe we're due again?)

Right now, though, I'll happily announce that I am yet still within the uninformed majority, assuming I'm not assuming too much.

(And I don't like one person's vibe, just so you know, but that could just be misunderstanding. Not enough information about myself, even, to conduct a proper fingertip search at the moment.)

[hector13]

Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.

[Elephant Parade]

uninformed minority But it has been a while maybe myself

Some of these italicizations are really weird. Secret message? Action trigger? Probably not, I suppose, but a bunch of this stuff makes no sense to emphasize.

[Starver]

uninformed minority But it has been a while maybe myself

Some of these italicizations are really weird. Secret message? Action trigger? Probably not, I suppose, but a bunch of this stuff makes no sense to emphasize.

Just the way I (thought I) was thinking the phrase emphasising was happening. Re-reading, still makes perfect sense to me. But then I'm quite used to my own internal voice.

There's a secret ('cached' for possible later revelation) message elsewhere, but that was just opportunistic. No action triggers. Whether you believe me or not about any of this.

[hector13]

Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.

Starver: this was an implicit "maybe talk about your suspicions with the rest of us?" byraway.

There's a secret ('cached' for possible later revelation) message elsewhere, but that was just opportunistic. No action triggers. Whether you believe me or not about any of this.

Call me paranoid, but a secret message for later revelation does imply you know something worth sharing. Given the excess of question marks, one does wonder how you came across this information.

[Starver]

Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.

Starver: this was an implicit "maybe talk about your suspicions with the rest of us?" byraway.

Your own "Looks like you're fishing for something there." post doesn't look like what I'd expect someone with question marks knowledge to say.

But there could be something else in it, like you putting forward your own message which I've missed.

Call me paranoid, but a secret message for later revelation does imply you know something worth sharing. Given the excess of question marks, one does wonder how you came across this information.

Nothing worth sharing. I just took the opportunity to guarantee that I could back-reference a future claim, as I was too late to get in there and do a "yeah, me too on the question marks" through the impatience of EP to state publicly what Fallacy was saying.

OTOH, because of that I consider both EP and Fallacy probably allied Townies. Fish could have taken the hint, or really was claiming true.  But that's just noise in the probabilities at this point.

[hector13]

Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.

Starver: this was an implicit "maybe talk about your suspicions with the rest of us?" byraway.

Your own "Looks like you're fishing for something there." post doesn't look like what I'd expect someone with question marks knowledge to say.

But there could be something else in it, like you putting forward your own message which I've missed.

Mostly just worrying that the question marks thing was not a Town-wide thing and limited solely to me, and apparently FoU. I didn't think it was a good idea to reveal to the Evil role that some town didn't know anything about their role, but it's difficult to tell people not to reveal something without revealing what it is they shouldn't tell.

I guess there's nothing to say the Evil role didn't already know about it, but it probably wasn't very clever to reveal it at the opening of the Round.

Call me paranoid, but a secret message for later revelation does imply you know something worth sharing. Given the excess of question marks, one does wonder how you came across this information.

Nothing worth sharing. I just took the opportunity to guarantee that I could back-reference a future claim, as I was too late to get in there and do a "yeah, me too on the question marks" through the impatience of EP to state publicly what Fallacy was saying.

OTOH, because of that I consider both EP and Fallacy probably allied Townies. Fish could have taken the hint, or really was claiming true.  But that's just noise in the probabilities at this point.

A future claim?

You've implied you're in the same boat as everyone else. Setting up a future claim would require knowing now what you need to claim later. These two sentences cannot co-exist. Schroedinger's Starver?

Perhaps you'd like to expand, or are you more worried about the state of the cat? /rhetorical flourish

[Starver]

You've implied you're in the same boat as everyone else. Setting up a future claim would require knowing now what you need to claim later. These two sentences cannot co-exist. Schroedinger's Starver?

It's an educated guess. If I hadn't been pre-empted I might have said that "I have many question marks about, my role". I did write something very similar, got ninjaed by EP's explicit post at the PPE stage, and it now looked like I was opportunisticaly flash-claiming, so I aborted and waited and considered and went with the alternative way of laying groundwork to prove that the next thing I might reveal isn't seen as a "me too!" thing.

It's probably overthought. It's probably not going to be so ground-shakingly useful. It's enough, if not too much, just to mention it as having been done. It's also intetesting to see who seems most incensed by the concept, and now I'm left to theorising why.

[hector13]

Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?

What do you mean "interesting to see who is most incensed by the concept"? Are you alluding to someone in particular?

If so, instead of theorizing on your own, why not ask the person you allude to why they seem "incensed", and in doing so maybe generate contents eryone else can use in their own deliberations? It is a team game, after all.

[Starver]

Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?

I'm answering your questions... Because I apparently missed when you previously asked me a question.

At some point "town" might be stating what they think of me.. Right now, only you are asking, and I'm quite clearly doubtful of your motives. Giving you benefit of the doubt, still, but...

Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.

[hector13]

Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?

I'm answering your questions... Because I apparently missed when you previously asked me a question.

This doesn't make sense as a response to the question I asked.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

You've implied you're in the same boat as everyone else. Setting up a future claim would require knowing now what you need to claim later. These two sentences cannot co-exist. Schroedinger's Starver?

It's an educated guess. If I hadn't been pre-empted I might have said that "I have many question marks about, my role". I did write something very similar, got ninjaed by EP's explicit post at the PPE stage, and it now looked like I was opportunisticaly flash-claiming, so I aborted and waited and considered and went with the alternative way of laying groundwork to prove that the next thing I might reveal isn't seen as a "me too!" thing.

Like... town shouldn't be worrying about how they come across so much. It's a bit more of an issue in a smaller game like this, but even then, mistakes can be afforded because town outnumber scum, presumably by at least 3-1. Scum need to at least even the number (traditionally, there might be slightly different victory conditions in a BM) so that means that at least two mistakes can be made, from each of which town can look back and analyse what happened. Not ideal, but the perfect Town game is not something that is going to happen every time.

Thus, your unwillingness to stand out as a motivation for not doing anything useful does not sit well with me, particularly when you say shortly thereafter you're breadcrumbing. That kinda defeats the purpose.

It's probably overthought. It's probably not going to be so ground-shakingly useful. It's enough, if not too much, just to mention it as having been done. It's also intetesting to see who seems most incensed by the concept, and now I'm left to theorising why.

This bit is also silly, for aforementioned reasons of "suspicions don't do much good unvoiced, man."

At some point "town" might be stating what they think of me.. Right now, only you are asking, and I'm quite clearly doubtful of your motives. Giving you benefit of the doubt, still, but...

Clearly, and I'm doubtful of your own. Which is why I'm asking the questions... I don't like having doubts.

Why are you not doing the same? Normally I would think it was because you prefer to rely on the night game, but that doesn't work as an excuse in this one. Reliance on something you claim ignorance of seems a pretty stupid idea.

Why did you not respond to the rest of my post?

What do you mean "interesting to see who is most incensed by the concept"? Are you alluding to someone in particular?

If so, instead of theorizing on your own, why not ask the person you allude to why they seem "incensed", and in doing so maybe generate contents eryone else can use in their own deliberations? It is a team game, after all.

[Starver]

Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?

("I'm answering your questions.")

This doesn't make sense as a response to the question I asked.

It does to me. If you want to get meta, look at the last round, not that that should have any bearing.

Like... town shouldn't be worrying about how they come across so much.

Right now, I'm not worried. Later on it might be critical.

Thus, your unwillingness to stand out as a motivation for not doing anything useful does not sit well with me, particularly when you say shortly thereafter you're breadcrumbing. That kinda defeats the purpose.

I have less idea how useful I am than Fish claims for themself. I think I'm not a not-useful character, though. So, as and when I'm made aware, I have a call-back. I also announced the breadcrumb partly so that the I could not be accused of speculatively false-breadcrumbing in secret and only revealing if it became something still claimable.  I can take the doubt, in the meantime. And the probability that the Big Bad has decoded my breadcrumbs and playing dumb to their own advantage.

This bit is also silly, for aforementioned reasons of "suspicions don't do much good unvoiced, man."

It wasn't intended to be, but this discussion turns out to be a bit of a bellwether. Well over 24 hours with only me saying little but saying that I'm saying little and you saying little about yourself but demanding more from me. As a third party to this, I'd most likely be betting that one of us is being evasive for the wrong reasons. (Or else wondering which of us two to frame for their own misdeeds, without being too obvious.)

As me, I know where I stand, which means I have you as the most odd guest to the party, but the chances of, say, Fish (or Round Mechanics!) being the actual bad cog in the works are enough to wait for another voice from rhe wilderness to chip in. Until then, I find no need to guild the lilly. Let it stand, as is, come hell or high-water.

Why did you not respond to the rest of my post?

Already answered enough. More than. This needs to stop being a repetitious dialogue.

[hector13]

Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?

("I'm answering your questions.")

Does anyone else see how this is a reasonable response to my question? You guys are being very quiet, and I find that very unreasonable given y'all have claimed you have no idea wtf your night actions do.

Does anyone have anything to say at all, or is it just me?

This doesn't make sense as a response to the question I asked.

It does to me. If you want to get meta, look at the last round, not that that should have any bearing.

Why suggest something then immediately say that something will be pointless? I don't want meta, I want(ed) a direct answer to my question.

Like... town shouldn't be worrying about how they come across so much.

Right now, I'm not worried. Later on it might be critical.

Then why did you imply you were worried you'd come across as "opportunistically flash-claiming", so you tried to set-up a breadcrumb trail to another "claim" even earlier than now?

Thus, your unwillingness to stand out as a motivation for not doing anything useful does not sit well with me, particularly when you say shortly thereafter you're breadcrumbing. That kinda defeats the purpose.

I have less idea how useful I am than Fish claims for themself. I think I'm not a not-useful character, though. So, as and when I'm made aware, I have a call-back. I also announced the breadcrumb partly so that the I could not be accused of speculatively false-breadcrumbing in secret and only revealing if it became something still claimable.  I can take the doubt, in the meantime. And the probability that the Big Bad has decoded my breadcrumbs and playing dumb to their own advantage.

Here as well.

This bit is also silly, for aforementioned reasons of "suspicions don't do much good unvoiced, man."

It wasn't intended to be, but this discussion turns out to be a bit of a bellwether. Well over 24 hours with only me saying little but saying that I'm saying little and you saying little about yourself but demanding more from me. As a third party to this, I'd most likely be betting that one of us is being evasive for the wrong reasons. (Or else wondering which of us two to frame for their own misdeeds, without being too obvious.)

What am I supposed to say about myself? You refuse to ask questions. I have told you I want you to voice your suspicions, which you did, but you've done nothing to confirm or reject them. I find it hard to believe you're waiting to confirm or reject them during the night, since you've claimed ignorance of what it is you do.

I am pretty much standing still and asking you to hit me with your best shot at this point. Why not take the opportunity?

As me, I know where I stand, which means I have you as the most odd guest to the party, but the chances of, say, Fish (or Round Mechanics!) being the actual bad cog in the works are enough to wait for another voice from rhe wilderness to chip in. Until then, I find no need to guild the lilly. Let it stand, as is, come hell or high-water.

As part of everyone else, I don't know where you stand, beyond having suspicions about me and my motivations, which I'm pretty sure everyone else has regarding everyone else too.

Why did you not respond to the rest of my post?

Already answered enough. More than. This needs to stop being a repetitious dialogue.

Clearly. You are a shining example of openness and cooperation. /s

[TheBiggerFish]

I don't even.