|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Jan 29, 2014 22:38:50 GMT -8
If it is in fact Night time, I'd love to keep Nights fluffy, but the sad fact is that I have too much going on to guarantee I'll have tons of time to get these thoughts in, so since I've got the time to spare now, you get Bunny bombed. You're right, I hadn't answered that. I had to go look up the situation at the time because it was a while ago, but I was suspicious of Leif, you agreed pretty readily with him, therefore I didn't want you on a mission. The question marks more recently are not intended as a criticism of you, they are to indicate that I don't know what I think. See, I remember when you said I "agreed readily" with Leif. Then I responded to that statement by explaining that I had not "simply agreed with Leif" and then after that you said you were wary of me. So then I asked why. Which is what I was saying you hadn't responded to. I guess perhaps my explanation didn't satisfy you? _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Overall, I just feel very strongly that Furare and Leif are resistance. Mari, Sets, and Joly I'm kind of either/or about, and AL and Bunny I'm inclined to think resistance. If Joly is "either/or" for you, why would you so readily accept a mission she was on? Because if we accept a mission with a spy on it this time, we lose. I think we should only be accepting missions with people we are more than "either/or" about. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Bunny - it seems like Riku has given some explanation of his feelings on Sets in your interaction since you asked. I get why you asked the question. It feels like Riku just put Sets aside...an easier thing for a Spy to do than a Resistance member, I'd say. He could just be coming up with stuff to explain it now. That's one of things that's pulling me in the Spy direction on Riku. Bold mineFor what it's worth, that's not really why I asked the question. It was more like "If riku is a spy, who could he be a spy with? Let's look at his thoughts on others. He still has FOI on Sets for something that happened Day 2, what?" So I asked. So that's more what I was thinking. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ I also think I kind of learned my lesson about being wishy-washy Day 2. I wasn't confident enough, and allowed myself to be swayed into voting accept, and the mission ended up failing. Maybe I'm overcompensating by being more confident toDay, but I also think it's more justified now. Bold mineI have to honestly say that this statement raised some alarm bells for me. Short of an "I trust Leif's judgement" at the end of the post where you accepted, I don't see much evidence of you're being "swayed". It reads to me like a big "don't blame me for the mission fail, I was unsure and I just went along with others". Besides, while we're on the subject, how did you get from this:I would not like to send Leif or AL, for obvious reasons. Although it's a 1/3 chance from an outside perspective, for me it's 1/2, and I don't like those odds. Leif slightly moreso, but partly because I agree with Sets that we should be careful and Leif's first blush of him, AL, Joly, and Aeth worried me a little too much. Also not Aeth, for reasons previously stated. to this:Well, I think Furare and Sets are innocent. I'm not sure on Leif, but I'm more suspicious of AL than him, so I'm leaning towards innocent on him. I realize things happened in the thread, but your own intervening posts give little insight into the flip-flop in your view. Especially the fact that that last linked post is the one where you "trust Leif's judgement". I am interested in Aeth's reply to what you've asked her about "coming up with stuff". Although I think we'll have to just agree to disagree on your "Sets urged caution on Day 2 therefore he's still innocent even though he's not really doing it anymore (or at least wasn't at the beginning of Day 3)". Because I disagree with the basic premise that preaching caution to the thread is something only an innocent would do. Because, hey, Sets is the last person in line to be GM. That in and of itself would be a good reason to encourage the town to reject a few missions. Lets' say for the sake of argument that the Spies are you (the first GM), then Furare, marinated, and Sets (the final three) (I'm aware that you're not going to agree to this premise, I'm using it for the sake of example and because from my perspective, it's entirely possible). In this situation, you've got a long while to wait before you can be in control of the mission selection again, so what do you do? Encouraging caution would be a FABULOUS spy strategy in this situation, and it would also be a FABULOUS spy strategy to suggest that encouraging caution is solely a pro-resistance point of view.
|
|
|
Post by Riku on Jan 29, 2014 22:58:10 GMT -8
I have to honestly say that this statement raised some alarm bells for me. Short of an "I trust Leif's judgement" at the end of the post where you accepted, I don't see much evidence of you're being "swayed". It reads to me like a big "don't blame me for the mission fail, I was unsure and I just went along with others". Swayed by myself, not by others. Basically I talked myself into voting accept when I should have been more confident and stuck with my initial reaction. I realize things happened in the thread, but your own intervening posts give little insight into the flip-flop in your view. Especially the fact that that last linked post is the one where you "trust Leif's judgement". You're right, I didn't post my thought process for that change of heart. This post by AL and Leif's ensuing posts were what changed the tide for me. Leif seemed much more genuinely concerned and... interactive? I guess? Not sure what the right word is. The whole doubting himself and questioning something out of gut reaction made him look more innocent to me. As opposed to AL, who with her post was sort of "playing her own game" (I realize she was coming back from catching up, but still) in a way that to me read more spy. It seemed I guess more formulaic or scripted. Leif's more adaptive reaction seems more genuinely innocent. I know I didn't explain that very well; if you need me to try again I can attempt to put my thoughts into better words tomorrow when I'm more awake. Because I disagree with the basic premise that preaching caution to the thread is something only an innocent would do. That's okay. I'm clearly not going to convince you otherwise at this stage. But the point with the AL thing is that it doesn't matter whether she (or you) disagrees with my basic premise. She recognized that I had one, regardless of if she agreed or not, and now she pretends that I didn't.
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Jan 29, 2014 23:13:01 GMT -8
Then there's the anomaly of firebolt's unexplained vote to accept-out of character, but as a spy why wouldn't she provide a short explanation? But she had literally just said that she thought Aethera was a spy, so why would she vote for a mission that contained her? Are you talking about Firebolt's accept of Leif's mission or yours? Because from the context of the rest of your post is looks like you're talking about the accept of yours, but Aethera wasn't on your mission was she? I thought it was you, Firebolt, Furare, and Joly.
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Jan 29, 2014 23:15:15 GMT -8
But the point with the AL thing is that it doesn't matter whether she (or you) disagrees with my basic premise. She recognized that I had one, regardless of if she agreed or not, and now she pretends that I didn't. And while I'm at it, are you talking about the "Aeth" thing? Because I don't know what the AL thing is if you aren't. NAMES ARE HARD GUYS OK? Especially on a tablet. Apparently, along with Curate, I'm playing with Rikki, Seth, and firefly.
|
|
Furare
Game Moderator
ROMS Encyclopaedia
Posts: 502
|
Post by Furare on Jan 29, 2014 23:20:09 GMT -8
You should mostly make of it that I don't have the energy to deal with this right now. Approaching financial year end at work and NOTHING is as done as it needs to be and I keep trying to make posts and realising that I'm being really rude or offensive and then giving up because that's not who I want to be. I am really sorry but until I can contribute constructively rather than picking fights and snarking, you're just not going to see all that much of me. It would be great if Riku or Furare could point out a time in recent ROMS history when a rogue revealed something so damning just by talking. Like, said "oh when Searmin said X" and it turned out Searmin had only said it in the Rogue Forum or something, and then the town had an AHA and lynched the rogue. I will say that this is super disingenuous and that is entirely not what I meant by "give themselves away". If you think I meant "Let rogues talk for long enough and eventually they'll make an obvious damning mistake" then... then just No. It's a matter of the longer the game goes on the more evidence we have to work on. I don't remember this sort of thing being like you. Given it's Leif's favourite word I'm kinda loath to call it misrepresentation but it sort of is? I guess I'll settle for "uncharacteristic misunderstanding". And no, I'm not choosing my words carefully this time around. I don't have the time nor the energy nor the inclination.
|
|
Furare
Game Moderator
ROMS Encyclopaedia
Posts: 502
|
Post by Furare on Jan 29, 2014 23:21:34 GMT -8
And I missed a few posts so the first bit is a reply to AL trying to figure what to make of me not voting. Although I did think we had another day, honestly.
|
|
|
Post by wrecker15 on Jan 30, 2014 0:03:36 GMT -8
I don't even know, guys. I think I misunderstood a bunch of things. I did mix up the deadlines but it turns out I should have closed the Day anyway because there were 6 reject votes.
Ok, to clear things up: I answered Joly's question wrong. If you have 6 reject votes, yes, the Day cycle will end and move on to the next Cycle once I can get into the thread. It's currently not actually Night, because no mission team was sent out. So you guys are in the next Day cycle and Joly can post a mission team whenever
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Jan 30, 2014 6:18:19 GMT -8
Such think. There are 4 spies and they need one spy on the next mission to win the game. They could practically brute force an Accept vote if it would end the game. I'm tempted to think the people on AL's team because why would the spies play cautiously st this point in the game? I realize I voted reject because I have suspicions on some members of the proposed team but that was much more unanimous than I anticipated. I really should make a list from home sometime im too lazy to write much on a phone
|
|
|
Post by Riku on Jan 30, 2014 6:35:20 GMT -8
Sets, could you clarify what you meant by "I'm tempted to think the people on AL's team"?
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on Jan 30, 2014 6:48:24 GMT -8
Your explanation was that you didn't 'simply agree' with Leif, you simply...'agreed' with Leif, with some hedging some thrown in that you remained suspicious of all three of us. And that you came up with the reasoning independently, which is fine, but I was never accusing you of copying wholesale from him in the first place. As a resistance member I would expect you to have been nervous (wary, if you will ) to agree right away with either Leif or riku or me bar something very convincing (which in my eyes, 'riku was mostly likely spy because he was GM' was not) but as a spy, you agreeing with the next GM would increase your odds of getting on his mission proposal if he's innocent, and add fuel to the 'it was riku' fire if he's not. Therefore, I was wary of you. It's not that I didn't accept your explanation, it's that your explanation was just a reiteration of your position. Is that what you're looking for? Because I feel like what you're looking for is either to discredit me, distract me, or for me to endorse your innocence in some way, which I wouldn't do in any case. Geez, sorry, 2 am. I was talking about my mission but looked at Fire's post, saw 'Aethera,' and thought 'Furare.' Apparently at that hour they meld into one being. Lo siento. Time for class.
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Jan 30, 2014 7:18:00 GMT -8
Your explanation was that you didn't 'simply agree' with Leif, you simply...'agreed' with Leif, with some hedging some thrown in that you remained suspicious of all three of us. And that you came up with the reasoning independently, which is fine, but I was never accusing you of copying wholesale from him in the first place. Well we apparently have different definitions of "agree" because to me saying "That's what I thought at first but here's why I'm not so sure anymore," which is the short version of what my position was, is not the same as agreement. Isn't semantics grand? Is that what you're looking for? Because I feel like what you're looking for is either to discredit me, distracts me, or for me to endorse your innocence in some way, which I wouldn't do in any case. No, I was looking for you to clarify the vague suspicion you had on me that I asked about right when you stated it but you never answered. Sorry it ruffled your feathers, but thanks for giving it the worst possible spin. <---SARCASM
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Jan 30, 2014 7:58:49 GMT -8
Sets, could you clarify what you meant by "I'm tempted to think the people on AL's team"? Oops. That was supposed to say I'm tempted to think they are resistance.
|
|
|
Post by Aethera on Jan 30, 2014 11:25:05 GMT -8
Ok so I don't have time to catch up - spent most of yesterday evening and night in the ER with my boyfriend, who screwed up his back really badly, and then taking care of him today since he can't stand up. I'm at work now for a few hours then back home. Just tried to read a bit, got to Riku's post, and gave up.
Riku: You're misunderstanding my use of the word 'it'. I was talking about an explanation for putting Sets aside - the preceeding sentence you seem to have totally missed even though you quoted it. I was talking about your explanation toDay (well I guess Yesterday now), specifically your posts in response to the question from Bunny. "It" was referring to you not changing your mind on Sets, NOT your original view of Sets. I did not mean that you didn't explain your original feeling. And I think your confidence is perhaps leading you to read it here. I didn't say you were definitely putting Sets aside. I said you may have, and when someone asked, when 'oh right, lemme look real quick and come up with a good reason for that'. I have done just that as a Rogue in the past - it's easy to make a case on someone, so that you've commented, set them aside for a while, and then carry that FOS or FOI through subsequent actions. So that was a possible read on the scenario.
And oh my god I'm Bill Clinton.
Marinated, if you read Fire's post you know why she voted to accept the mission. She's not really suspicious of any of the people who were on it. Not saying it's good that she's not, but that was clear in her post. I even mentioned it myself.
Just read down to the bottom of Page 9 to make it easier to remember where I am. AL's post doesn't make sense to me on first read, and I don't have time to read it again. Hopefully I can come back later and say more. Might not be til Saturday, honestly.
|
|
Taelac
Officer
Be bold. It makes your enemies hesitate.
Posts: 357
|
Post by Taelac on Jan 30, 2014 12:04:35 GMT -8
Sorry to interrupt, but figured it was fastest to put it here...Joly's internet is out due to ice taking down some lines. It may be Monday before she's back online. I haven't been keeping up with the game, so I don't feel competent to step in for her in the meantime. ETA: She also says she'll try to get on tomorrow at lunch to post a team if she can't be replaced. I can offer to post messages from her, if that's okay with Wrecker.
|
|
|
Post by wrecker15 on Jan 30, 2014 18:13:26 GMT -8
Yes, that's fine. Thanks very much, tae! I appreciate it. Hope Joly and family are ok, if the ice is taking out the land lines it must be heavy!
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Jan 30, 2014 18:33:07 GMT -8
Ice topic: most of Ontario got covered in a sheet of ice in 2nd week of January and then again last Wednesday, I cannot even count the amount of times I've heard the phrase "the pipes froze / cracked / etc." the last few weeks.
gg ice u win
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on Jan 31, 2014 6:32:32 GMT -8
Well, well, well. This is Tae's boldest rogue move yet.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Jan 31, 2014 8:09:34 GMT -8
Hahaha! It's just the internet, and it's where it is connected to my crappy house. So we're warm and safe, just disconnected from the world. I am sneaking on while the kiddos are at centers, so I have NO idea what has been said, but I've been considering who I think is most likely innocent to send along.
I propose: Jolyma, Bunny, Leif and Furare
I have had a lot of downtime to think about things. I think that Leif would not have gone along with being bused, and I think that Furare would not be so aggravated if she was a spy. I think that Bunny is the most likely of the Not Sents to be innocent. If things change, you will see me a lot this weekend.
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on Jan 31, 2014 10:21:41 GMT -8
So, I've been thinking. Mostly, I've been trying to get this (or a post like this) down for a couple days, but haven't been having much luck. I wanted to try and take a somewhat objective look at things. Sort of see if I could get a basis to treat this like a logic puzzle. Obviously, that's not going to work well, but it'll help me order thoughts.
So, we have (probably) one spy of Riku and AL. And probably 1 of Aeth, Sets. and Furare.
Of note, while Riku proposed it, the first grouping was initially suggested by Aethera. Marinated and AL rejected the 2nd group.
And this is where I kinda stop dead attempt to objectify things, and why I've typed the first part of this like 3 times over the last couple of days. So I'm going off mission.
Taking the last question first, Quiz Show style, I'm going to look at Unsents. I'm basically giving Marinated FoI here. From what we've seen, the general spy plan hasn't really admitted to much hesitance, and I think voting against an unsure, given the previous days interactions, mission isn't likely. So that's going 2 rogues of Joly, Bunny, and FB. Yikes!
I'll post looking at the other events later (because I've been working through this all damn morning in my head (I know, unimpressive)), but given that Joly's group includes 2 from a group of 3 that I think is 66% spy, I don't see a good way to accept.
Vote: Reject
|
|
|
Post by Riku on Jan 31, 2014 11:17:48 GMT -8
I still think there's 2 spies in the group of Marinated, Firebolt, Joly, and Bunny. Of those, 2 are in the mission team: Joly and Bunny. For them both to not be spies, the 2 spies in that group would have to be Marinated and Firebolt. At the moment I'd probably say I think Marinated is the most likely spy simply through process of elimination, but I'd also say that Firebolt is the least likely spy. That still leaves 1 spy between Joly and Bunny. Even though, individually, I'm leaning innocent on all four people on the mission, the probabilities tell me that simply can't be the case.
Vote: Reject
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on Jan 31, 2014 12:37:00 GMT -8
Bunny:That's not what I took from your post at all. It reads to me a lot more like "I agree, here's some theories that support this. But, WIFOM." (actual wording of last part: "...Then again, there's WIFOM there because if Leif or AL (or both) are spies I'm confident that they would have worked that out"). 'The spies could have known that' is an argument that can be attached to roughly any assertion to make you seem less sure; tossing it at the end of a post isn't the same as actually disagreeing with something. You're welcome. Anyway, I have to Vote: Reject. (Reject ALL the missions). I'm not thrilled about Bunny on a team at the moment, and we need to get all 4 right to make things work for us. Happy weekend everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Jan 31, 2014 17:13:21 GMT -8
Those are fair reasons to reject me.
Anyways, Century Link made it out right under their repairman's wire, and we're back on! Yay! Much faster than Time Warner was when we had a similar problem (basically it was out where it comes into the house and they had to make a house call to fix it, rather than toggle switches).
My reasoning on 2 NotSents was basically because too many of the Sents make me worried that they're fooling me. Well, really, I was only going for which Notsent other than myself. Marinated and Firebolt have both been so quiet, it makes it hard for me to decide what to think about them, and that left Bunny. Up to the last point I read before No Internet, she had been reading more resistance than spy to me.
I also figured we'd be discussing and talking still, but I felt that my proposal would be helpful for that. I'll be working on catching up of the next 24 hours.
And Wrecker, Happy Birthday!!
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Feb 1, 2014 8:26:27 GMT -8
Jolyma's reject: accompanied by a 'nothing personal', which while sweet, does let her avoid a hard stance on the actual people on the mission (by saying the reject is due to 'caution,' which is in and of itself noteworthy since her debate with Furare is about whether it's worthwhile to draw out the game so the spies slip up). More manana. (catching up, as I promised, so this may be old hat by now...) No ma'am. My debate with Furare was not about it being worthwhile, I've said a couple times now that I agree caution is best. It was about her wanting people to talk in hopes of catching a slip up, but then she wouldn't really explain how that would happen in this game, except catching people not being genuine. It was also about her trying to press people for more, while giving 'gut is all I have' on a few people, and some noncommittal statements elsewhere. Now as to the people you proposed, you were on Failed Mission 1 and I feel that more people than the number of Spies think that you were the Spy on that mission. I am leaning slightly more towards Riku than you at the moment as to being the Mission 1 Spy, but it's all about opinions on how you and he would differ on strategy. I've been rogue with Riku recently (in game terms), so I think I have a better feel for him, but I can't forget that you've pulled off some bold moves in the past successfully. At that time, Furare was making me nervous with her gut reasonings. (I've since reconsidered things regarding her) Firebolt was a complete unknown. I'm not sure why you would have put her on a team, having seen basically nothing from her until just before your proposal post, and I'm going to go out on a limb here, and assume you already had your team in mind when you started that post. It made me wonder if you were indeed Mission 1's Spy and Firebolt is on your team. Or even if you are innocent and Firebolt is a Spy, because she so quickly voted to accept that team.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Feb 1, 2014 8:41:37 GMT -8
Ok. I need to reply to AL's misunderstanding about my debate with Furare. (I had this all typed out and quoted, and all, but I went to open a new tab to check something elsewhere in the thread, and accidentally closed my already open tab. Poof, goodbye post.)
I've said a couple times in my discussion with Furare that I agreed caution is best. Most of the discussion was me trying to get more information out of Furare other than her gut. She had used that on a couple people as reasons for thinking the way she did, and had made a noncommittal statement or two that was bothering me. So, following her plan of trying to get people to slip up, I was pressing her to follow through with what she says the rest of us should be doing.
In regards to your team, I was not entirely comfortable with you on it, since you have at least a 1 in 3 shot of being a Spy. I also was concerned about your choice of Firebolt, who up to half an hour before your proposal, was pretty much a complete unknown to the game, and I'm betting you had your team planned in advance of your post, most likely even before her post.
Now, to more recent thoughts, I'm going to walk you through an epiphany I had today, and I would like to see if people think it makes sense to them, too.
There are 4 Spies. That means we have 6 Resistance. If a Spy proposes a team, they need 2 of the Resistance to vote accept in order to be able to force the Mission to go through. If, however, a Resistance proposes a team, they only need ONE Resistance to vote accept in order for the Spies to be able to force the Mission to go through. Since AL proposed the team and Firebolt voted accept, and the Mission wasn't forced through, or even attempted to force through, then at least one of AL or Firebolt is a Spy!
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Feb 1, 2014 8:48:00 GMT -8
I swear one of those posts disappeared. Oh well. NOw you get the original, the condensed AND the epiphany I had while catching up. And, I had one more thing I wanted to say anyways. And oh my god I'm Bill Clinton. Does that mean you did not have sex with that woman?
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Feb 1, 2014 10:34:24 GMT -8
This is another busy weekend for me (last weekend I went to visit parents, this weekend I'm at friends' for Chinese New Years). I've read the thread but not as thoroughly as I'd like over the last 20-30 posts. As such, I will be refraining from voting this round as I'm not sure if new information that I haven't fully comprehended would sway my vote one way or the other due to opinion changes of the mission members.
My initial instinct is vote reject due to the opinions I had previously.
Frankly, I think a full re-read is in order for me when I have time Monday night. (My bus home is at 10:25 tomorrow so I'll get home at 1 am and get to get up at 6:30 for work WOOHOO!)
|
|
|
Post by Marinated on Feb 1, 2014 16:41:36 GMT -8
Vote: Reject
I'm still thinking the spies are Firebolt, Aethera, Riku and Leif, although Furare's posts at the end of Day 2 make me wonder if she should be in there too, instead of either Riku or Leif, but otherwise I'm inclined to think she's innocent.
@ Aethera: Why didn't you like me asking Firebolt a question? And no, the answer to my question was not in her reads post.
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on Feb 1, 2014 21:26:17 GMT -8
Jolyma:Doesn't mean they're right. Most people in the thread have vacillated between me, riku, and Leif as the spy from mission one, enough so that I'm sure all of us have been suspected by both spies and resistance members.I had a shortlist that I planned to narrow down, yes. But I'd read firebolt's post before selecting my team. Interesting that you bring me, firebolt, and that team up, given your epiphany. The logic there looks good... But it assumes there was a spy on that team. No possibility of 4 innocents being chosen, in which cases the spies wouldn't want to hammer it through. So what's the deal? From my perspective, either firebolt is a spy, or my team was good, or there could be some other spy on the team but spies had organizational difficulties of some kind that prevented them from hammering the vote. Implications? Firebolt innocent-->whole team innocent (otherwise spies would have hammered)-->Jolyma should propose it again Firebolt spy-->there was a spy on the mission (her)-->they waited for a second resistance vote (on top of mine) which never came. Suggests that spies would hang back before rejecting, so the earlier rejects (Setsusa and riku) would be more likely resistance. Not sure if all my logic is perfect here. But thank you Jolyma for sparking some very interesting thoughts! *snort*
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on Feb 1, 2014 22:35:53 GMT -8
By "Jolyma should propose it again" I meant Aethera (next GM), incidentally. Hi, I'm a space cadet...
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Feb 1, 2014 23:14:41 GMT -8
Blerg. Good point about all being innocent. I thought I was on to something. It's still plausible though. And yes, there has been some vacillation (nice word, I'm borrowing it), but it doesn't change the fact that in Mission 1, you all have at least a 1 in 3 chance of being Spy, and those odds are a little high for a do or die mission.
I think, if I am right about the epiphany of a Spy in either you or Firebolt, it is more likely Firebolt. I've been tossing it back and forth today while waiting on replies and it makes sense for a Spy hoping to force through a Mission to try to get the ball rolling on a Resistance proposed team. I find it less likely for a Resistance member to vote accept, given the position we are in with the Spies up 2-0. WIFOM of the evening: Why would a Spy stick their neck out, unless it is to try to get a Resistance to hop on the wagon?
|
|