|
Post by Riku on Jan 28, 2014 20:42:19 GMT -8
Riku: you said you've "already explained why you think Sets is innocent" - does this refer to the fact that Sets urged caution after the first failed mission? Which I think was the initial reason you thought he was innocent. Because he's kind of completely reversed that position toDay. So I don't see how you can stick to yesterDay's reason. Then again I may have missed why you think he's innocent today. What? Reasons don't expire at the end of the Day. He did something that I think only an innocent would do in that specific situation. Just because he may be doing something different in a different situation doesn't mean the previous reason is invalidated.
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Jan 28, 2014 20:47:58 GMT -8
But his subsequent behavior made no impression on you, given that it was completely the opposite? I think relying on Day 1 reads regardless of succeeding events makes no sense. Perhaps its a difference of opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Jan 28, 2014 20:51:36 GMT -8
But his subsequent behavior made no impression on you, given that it was completely the opposite? I think relying on Day 1 reads regardless of succeeding events makes no sense. Perhaps its a difference of opinion. Or Day 2 reads rather. Same difference.
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Jan 28, 2014 21:06:52 GMT -8
I don't even know that it's significant, considering I'm slightly leaning resistance on sets, I just don't understand it, and the logic seems inconsistent.
This is how I am computing what you're saying:
"After a failure an innocent would urge caution. Sets urged caution, therefore I believe he's innocent. After two failures, sets no longer urged caution. I've already explained why I find sets innocent"
Am I missing something here? Surely two failures would prompt a need for more caution, not less. So I don't see how the prior reason didn't expire, not with the end of the day, but with the change in the behavior.
|
|
|
Post by Riku on Jan 28, 2014 21:08:02 GMT -8
The point isn't that he was cautious. The point is that he was IMMEDIATELY cautious after the first fail, and came out spreading that sentiment, which is something very anti-spy in that specific situation. His current behavior is irrelevant because whether he is cautious now has much much much less bearing if any on my view of his status.
|
|
|
Post by Riku on Jan 28, 2014 21:09:34 GMT -8
I do agree that he probably should be more cautious now, but the fact that he isn't doesn't in any way detract from what made me think he's innocent.
|
|
|
Post by firebolt153 on Jan 28, 2014 21:09:53 GMT -8
Here, catching up. Stand by
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Jan 28, 2014 21:14:21 GMT -8
I have a sodding earache and this isn't happening tonight. Joly, if you think "slipping up" just means "tells" which are for the most part utter garbage even in ROMS, then you're wrong. If you let people talk for long enough, eventually you can figure out if they're genuine or not. That's not waiting for tells, that's listening to (or in this case reading) what people say. I don't even have printable words to reply to Sets' last post so I'm not going to bother. If I had proper logical reasons for why I feel certain people are more likely to be Spies, I would give them. If I didn't give any, I don't have any. No, I don't think it's just tells. But I really don't know what you consider slipping up in this game. As for genuine or not, that's harder to do without listening. Reading makes it very difficult, especially if you put your own preconceived opinions on first, and then wonder what's between the lines. For example, I can think of several things that "I don't see any particular reason to think Joly isn't a Spy." could mean, ranging from, 'I have no idea' to 'I think she's a Spy' to 'I am a Spy and I'm trying to be deliberately vague so that I have plausible deniability in the future.' Really, it's like saying, "I see no reason to think that coin over there that I can't see isn't heads up.' If you think I'm a Spy, say so. And back it up, please and thank you. If you want people to talk, then you want reasons given, so that you can catch them being disingenuous, right? So we can expect the same from you. There has to be Something that made you think a person was lying or hiding or covering up, else it's all conjecture, and we can't pick a team based on others' gut feels, because it gives us absolutely nothing to consider for our own thoughts. I mean it would be easy for me to pick 4 names from a hat and say I think they're spies, just because. The trickiest part of the game is that there are no direct, seeable actions to base an opinion on. I can't point to a vote for a lynch and say why a Spy would do that. And so far, I haven't seen anything so incredibly illogical to say, "It's THEM!" My own thoughts at the moment: Mission 1: Spy Riku? Well, he was willing to go with the crowd, and name the first 3 GMs as the Mission Team. For Riku the Spy, it wouldn't matter WHO he sent, if he intended to sabotage it. Riku has always seemed to me the type of player who would rather play all his cards than to bluff. Possible. Spy Leif? Risky to sabotage, since it may mean the players do not want to accept his proposed team. However, if they do, he can name 3 resistance members who would now have doubt cast on them, because why would a Spy be so blatant as to fail 2 missions he's been on, right? In the case that they do pin him as the spy, then he's out of any future missions, but could hide a possible fellow spy also on Mission 2 Spy AL? Spy AL would have to hope more suspicion fell on one of the other 2, because she would be GM in Day 3. Possibility of failure to pass a team. Like Riku, AL has been known to play all out, rather than bluff. Has been quiet recently, but seems to be back, will have to watch what she says. Other notes: I really think there is only 1 Spy on Mission 1, but I've been known to be wrong. Not going to WIFOM my instinct however. I just don't see a benefit to risking 2 spies already. Mission 2: Leif, see Mission 1. Aethera/Furare: If one is, I think the other isn't, or they both are resistance. Too head to head in the thread I think for both to be spy. Both seem to want to win for the resistance, not the spies. While butting heads, they seem to be thinking along similar paths. I think Spy teammates would avoid this. Which one, if either, is faking concern? Sets: Sets always has, and always will be an enigma to me. Answers to himself first, although does play well with rogue teammates. Is more willing for the bold maneuvers than the hiding in the shadows. This does not make it easy to decide. Preaching caution now, not full steam ahead. Faked concern, or genuine worry that the resistance is on death's door? Other notes: Furare/Leif: I do not think would be Spies together based on thread interactions. May be one, may be the other, may be neither, but not together. Not Yet Sent: (Virgins. That made me giggle, Aeth.): Honestly, Firebolt is MIA, Marinated is queasy, and Bunny was not here, but is catching up. There isn't terribly much to go on to form an opinion as of yet. Other notes: I agree with caution going forward. I'm just not sure what we're looking to find. That doesn't mean I am not enjoying the search, it's a fascinating look into a different aspect of our ROMs personas. And seriously folks, this is what is written in my notebook, verbatim, from My thoughts onward. I hope you enjoyed your little trip into the clutter of my mind.
|
|
|
Post by firebolt153 on Jan 28, 2014 22:03:57 GMT -8
Okay, after reading through everything and staring at the stats of who did what (I would be so lost without my TextEdit document), this is what I've come up with:
Day 1: FAILED GM: Riku Riku, Leif, AL one is a spy, at least
Accept: Joly, Marinated, Leif, Furare, Sets, AL, Bunny
Day 2: FAILED GM: Leif Leif, Aeth, Sets, Furare one is a spy, at least
Accept: Joly, firebolt, Riku, Furare, Aeth Reject: Mari, AL
In my head, I've got Riku and Aeth down as spies. On Day 1, Riku was likely the spy (still feeling innocent on Leif, will get to AL in a hot second). Day 2, Aeth was the likely spy, with Riku accepting the mission because Aeth was there to fail it (REMEMBER THIS IS ALL CONJECTURE).
Aeth had a post where she mentioned one of AL's bothered her, so I'm disinclined to think that they're spies together, but something is niggling at me in terms of the accept/reject record with that. Can't solidify it, so I'll just leave it here and move on.
Riku's quote here: makes me question their duo though, unless it's a double bluff.
Oh. Furare had the same idea.
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.
In the fluff department, Joly's comment that I'm "most often always quiet" just makes me giggle because it's not a word used to describe me in person. I know what she means (and she's right), it's just a funny thing for me.
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on Jan 28, 2014 22:31:31 GMT -8
Okay, hi again guys. Addressing some of the suspicion of me that I didn't get around to in my last post.
Furare: While I'll cop to being a Zen rogue, I do want to point out before this line of thought spreads that I'm a pretty chill person in general. So please do keep it in mind as a potential rogue tell, but at the same time...it's not necessarily a rogue tell.
Aethera: I guess my question to that is, you seem suspicious of Furare lately. Do you think we are a spy team together? You also seem suspicious of riku, do you think he and I are a team?
Bunny: 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.
For some reason, I felt recently like everyone was FoIing firebolt, which made me want to go back on it, but upon actually rereading, it was only riku first, me, and bunny. Several others have expressed suspicion of her, which is unfortunate because I want her on the team, but also fortunate because I get paranoid when too many people agree with me and now I feel still okay with having FoI on her. Here goes, anyway-let's try this:
Mission Team: AhoyLindsay, Furare, Jolyma, Firebolt
This is essentially my way of: *leaving riku and Leif both off so I don't have to risk choosing wrong between them *leaving marinated off to improve chances of mission passing (and deny spies that potential possible excuse for voting reject) *including people who I think have good odds of being innocent (at least, currently think) *affirming what my thoughts are with action so that people can get accurate information on me *still not liking to have Sets on the team So overall, a balance of my FoI list, politics, educated guessing, and caution. Pass or not, let's see what we can stir up. Questions, comments welcome-I know for certain that not all of the fleeting thoughts that have been going through my head have actually made it into the thread, so the logic could be unclear. Let me know.
P.S. Bunny, I cannot imagine how frustrating it must be for you to be in that situation... I'm sorry! And I hope everything gets sorted out soon. Furare, feel better.
|
|
|
Post by firebolt153 on Jan 28, 2014 22:37:00 GMT -8
Vote: Accept
|
|
Furare
Game Moderator
ROMS Encyclopaedia
Posts: 502
|
Post by Furare on Jan 28, 2014 23:10:44 GMT -8
Also, autocorrect thinks Furare is a curate apparently. Sorry, but this is just the most spectacular autocorrect. Possibly in the history of autocorrect. I'd say more, but I need to go downstairs and eat an egg for breakfast.
|
|
Furare
Game Moderator
ROMS Encyclopaedia
Posts: 502
|
Post by Furare on Jan 28, 2014 23:15:49 GMT -8
Joly, I don't know what to say except that I have in the past been able to identify faked emotional responses in ROMS threads. Yes, in typeface. Starting with TFD in ROMS IX, but there have been several other examples that I'd have to look up to remember exactly.
The thing is that I don't know what I'm looking for yet, I'll only know when I find it. You can't honestly think that forcing people to talk and take positions regarding other people isn't going to be helpful?
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Jan 29, 2014 4:53:18 GMT -8
Vote: Decline
|
|
|
Post by Riku on Jan 29, 2014 6:45:52 GMT -8
Vote: Reject
Because I think AL is a spy.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Jan 29, 2014 7:18:29 GMT -8
O. vote: reject Let's hope that works for phonetasticness.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Jan 29, 2014 8:23:30 GMT -8
Joly, I don't know what to say except that I have in the past been able to identify faked emotional responses in ROMS threads. Yes, in typeface. Starting with TFD in ROMS IX, but there have been several other examples that I'd have to look up to remember exactly. The thing is that I don't know what I'm looking for yet, I'll only know when I find it. You can't honestly think that forcing people to talk and take positions regarding other people isn't going to be helpful? Actually, I've said I'm with you on the talking. But you want to force people to talk, then tell us yours is gut on some. So I'm trying to get you to talk about it. If we're supposed to talk, you should too Basically, your own actions are inconsistent with what you're telling us we need to do, and it's nagging at me. I mean, you're talking, but with only some things is it definite. But some are vague and/or noncommittal, and others we're just supposed to take your word for it that your gut says so. Firebolt, I'm glad you're here, but your post left me with a lot of questions. Mainly, if you're unsure about me, why would you vote accept?
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Jan 29, 2014 8:25:53 GMT -8
Also, I think a lot of people found TFD to be disingenuous. Wasn't IX the 'oh shucks' post by him? (Not verbatim, obviously, but there was a game where someone posted an 'oh shucks' type of post right after a lynched innocent that led to their demise.)
|
|
|
Post by Aethera on Jan 29, 2014 8:33:08 GMT -8
Riku, your tone is more confident than others. Perhaps that's just the way you are. Most of us are saying 'I guess' and 'maybe' and you're not as much. I guess I'll just have to assume every sentence you write has you going up in tone at the end, that would probably help. I saw your 'and assume I'm innocent' at the top of your post, and accounted for it when I was replying to you. It's the "we" can safely assume that gets me. You didn't say "I", you said "we" as in, yep, the entire town agrees on this point. And the information thing just makes no sense to me still. I can understand why you would say the Spies are dumb for failing 2 missions in a row, but I don't get the rest of your reasoning and overreliance on this 'information' note. It seems to be the prism through which you are viewing the entire game. 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. Because that's what it feels like you're both waiting for. Or hoping we'll sit around and wait for. Which is what bugs me most about you both, at this juncture. Riku's insistence on his point of view feels more Towny, though other things he's doing still pull me toward Spy Riku. Sorry Furare, stupid of me to think that "I don't know why" is a request to explain why. (sarcasm) My point is that you're implying I didn't explain why. Saying you don't see my argument is different. To the thread generally: word choice is very significant to me. It's been pointed out to me before in Real Life that perhaps I put too much emphasis on it. But I assume people, especially people I think of as very thoughtful and intelligent like Riku and Furare, choose their words carefully. (And I view all of you as thoughtful and intelligent, by the way, that's not meant as a slight to the town at large.) Perhaps I'm tunneling. 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. It feels like Bunny is looking at the thread in new ways trying to find different paths to find the Spies. I still lean innocent on her. I'm now wondering if Furare is Resistance just because it seems so many others are determined to go "and what Furare said". If Furare is Resistance, she'd be an excellent person for Spies to steal notes from, as she's generally pretty logical. Fire, your notes on why I'm the most likely Spy in Mission 2...clarify? In my head, I've got Riku and Aeth down as spies. On Day 1, Riku was likely the spy (still feeling innocent on Leif, will get to AL in a hot second). Day 2, Aeth was the likely spy, with Riku accepting the mission because Aeth was there to fail it (REMEMBER THIS IS ALL CONJECTURE). I'm the most likely spy because I was there to fail it? All 4 of us were 'there' (well, I suppose Sets less so). You also appeared to just say "Aeth is a spy because Riku is a spy", I think. I get that you may actually be going by process of elimination, based on your later comments about others. So is that what you meant? And if you're not leaning innocent on Sets, why me instead of Sets? AL: I'm suspicious of all 3 of you, yes. I don't think you're all a team together. As I've stated before, I have a few either/or possibilities in my head. One is AL or Riku. One is Furare or Sets. So it could be AL/Sets, or Furare/Riku, or Sets/Riku, or yes, it could be AL/Furare. Do you think Spies wouldn't suspect each other in the thread? Right now I'm leaning more toward you being a spy than Furare, despite my being irritated with her. You're so earnest but your question to me was easily answered by reading my posts from the last 2 days so perhaps it was superficial - just something to ask. You've been questioning quite a bit I think - I'll have to go look at the others. Given that you have both you AND Furare on the mission, which you have proposed, I will Vote: Reject.
Fire accepts so quickly on both Days (I don't really count Day 1, when it was just Accepts). Weird. Then again she just stated she doesn't have suspicions on members of that group. Sorry Bunny, I really am trying to enjoy the game. It's not the format that's getting me, really. I will say that I appreciate Fire giving me something I can actually respond to. I know it's weird to thank someone for suspecting me, but yeah. Honest thank you. I need to try and stop responding to people responding to me and look at other things but I don't have really any more time today. I've already ignored work for too long. Look for me tomorrow. (That's tomorrow, not Tomorrow.) Off topic; Ok, I have no idea how one spends $972 at Marshalls, either. A bunch of purses? I am so sorry hun. I hope your bank refunded it all? If not, new bank needed.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Jan 29, 2014 8:44:55 GMT -8
Ah, I forgot. I
Vote: Reject
so we can take our time with this one. Nothing personal AL. There are still too many ifs, and we can't lose another.
|
|
|
Post by Marinated on Jan 29, 2014 9:16:50 GMT -8
Vote: Reject
@ Firebolt: Can you explain exactly why you accepted that mission?
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on Jan 29, 2014 12:01:04 GMT -8
Vote: Reject
I'm growing more suspicious of AL and I've no idea what to make of Firebolt. I agree her quietness is mostly a null tell.
|
|
|
Post by Marinated on Jan 29, 2014 14:59:27 GMT -8
Marinated, would changing the default font for whatever skin it is you use help with your forum difficulties, do you think? It's 10pt Verdana at the moment, which isn't the nicest font but it's what the forum comes with as standard. I could easily alter it for all skins or just the one you use. I'm not so sure it's the font so much (although I find Times new roman easier to read) as the solid blocks of text, especially when they're on a near white background. It doesn't seem quite so bad when it's on the coloured background (I'm using the green one). But in fact it hasn't been so bad anyway today so it may just have been me not feeling so good yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by Riku on Jan 29, 2014 16:55:40 GMT -8
Riku, your tone is more confident than others. I believe that in this game mode we have to be more confident. Almost half the people in the thread are spies, and there isn't a whole lot to go on. I urge caution in sending missions, but not caution in making your opinion clear and stating who you think is a spy. It's desirable if not necessary to analyze the situation from your perspective and decide who the most likely spies are. There's a lot of if this then this here as compared to ROMS. I think the issue you're having stems from the fact that I'm seeing which first 'if' I think is most likely, and then following through to all of the 'then's. 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. It's the "we" can safely assume that gets me. You didn't say "I", you said "we" as in, yep, the entire town agrees on this point. Well, yeah, for that one point. I thought everyone agreed that there was almost definitely 1 and only 1 spy on the first mission. If I'm wrong and it isn't true that everyone agreed, then no, I guess we can't safely assume that. 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. Hold on. I was fine with your post up until here. There's no way "coming up with stuff to explain it now" is anywhere remotely close to a valid conclusion, because I explained why I think Sets is innocent as soon as I said I thought he was innocent and my reasoning has not changed in the slightest. Sure, I've had to repeat myself several times, but my reasoning has always been the same. You want examples of rogues revealing something damning just by talking? Here's a perfect one. You know that what you just suggested ("He could just be coming up with stuff to explain it now") cannot be true. You responded to my initial FOI on Sets when you asked for clarification, so you know that my reasoning has been present and consistent since the beginning. It is demonstrably true that my explanation has existed since the beginning. Even if you disagree with it or don't understand my reasoning, there is not at all a valid leap from that to "He's making up his explanation now" when you are well aware I stated my explanation a long time ago. There are no mental contortions you could go through to reach that conclusion, so the only possible explanation is that you know what you said cannot be true. Possible reasons for Aeth to suggest something she knows is untrue? If she's a spy: Insidious. Suggests an idea, people read it, and even if they don't immediately agree it plants the thought in their head. Discredits what I said while conveniently not requiring any factual backup. Also in the middle of a section addressed to someone else, spreading her idea and perhaps hoping I'm less likely to call her out on it. If she's innocent: She has a very short memory, and doesn't fact-check what she says? Doesn't sound like Aeth. She didn't choose her words very carefully? That would be a reasonable explanation, if she didn't write a paragraph in the very same post explaining how word choice is "very significant" to her.
|
|
|
Post by wrecker15 on Jan 29, 2014 19:13:24 GMT -8
Urg sorry guys.
Due to not having enough votes Due to having a majority of reject votes, this mission is passed. You still need 4 people to go on Mission 3.
Your next GM is Jolyma and your next deadline is 7pm Sunday PST, or 11am Monday for me.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Jan 29, 2014 19:27:52 GMT -8
Oh. For some reason I was thinking that Day ended early only if there was enough votes to Accept. Should we try to keep from ending early so we have more time to discuss the ramifications and the who's who of the suggested team? What happens if we get to the end of the list, do we just start over with Riku or is the game over?
|
|
|
Post by wrecker15 on Jan 29, 2014 19:31:40 GMT -8
That was the scheduled Day end, it's not early. If you get to the end of the list you start from Riku again.
EDIT: Day ended because there were 6 reject votes.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Jan 29, 2014 20:39:45 GMT -8
Oh lol. I was thinking we had another day. I really need to have a normal schedule, please Mother Nature?
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Jan 29, 2014 21:29:06 GMT -8
Mission Failed. Your next deadline is Friday 10am my time, or 6pm on Thursday (PST). Current GM: AhoyLindsay It's quite possible that I've lost a day somewhere, but isn't today Wednesday? I'd have voted reject for what it's worth. Although with the number of rejects that did happen, if AL is a spy she's got bus-sized tire tracks on her back...
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on Jan 29, 2014 22:30:27 GMT -8
Well that was roundly rejected. Interesting interesting. The first 2 rejects were people not on the mission, later followed up by rejects from people who were on the mission. 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? That's actually quite odd, unless it was an attempt to draw out the spies in some way. If so, it didn't work-does that mean an innocent team or merely cautious spies? Leaning towards the latter-tbh unlikely I picked people correctly given ratios and history. Or firebolt's a spy who didn't think she'd have to end up explaining herself. Either is possible. Furare's the person on the mission who didn't vote. Will figure out what if anything to make of that. First two rejects were riku and Sets. Riku expresses suspicion of me-but not (then) of Jolyma and Aethera, the next two GMs up. As a spy with them as innocents, he'd want to set himself up to be able to suspect their missions too, and the fact that he didn't suggests that either riku's not a spy and their statuses are unknown, or they're spies together, which currently seems unlikely at least for riku and Aethera due to how they are interacting (I don't think it's unlikely because of the argument spy!riku would accept a mission with spies on it, since we don't know if he could have been planning to switch if accept took off). 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.
|
|