BloodyC0bblers's Mafia XVI
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
| ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
I'm running as a candidate of the green party, which means that when flower pots get smashed, and bodies start polluting our beautiful waters, I get tough on crime. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
What instead is more important are deviations in posting patterns and word choice. These will lead us more surely to the mafia. This not to say that anyone is or isn't mafia, it's simply a note of caution. We shouldn't go about lynching our most active and productive members, or else who's going to go about finding the clues? The reason I announced my candidacy for sheriff/mayor is that I have the objectivity and patience to not consistently make ridiculous judgments. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
Well what a great day to start. If you really feel I'm the mafia, then very well, feel that way. It's not like this is the first time people started accusing me as mafia due to 2 words in the description and I was actually a townie. But note this, if you fail to get a kill correctly and end up killing an innocent townie who was actually trying to help and be the most active, I can already see the downfall of this game. Of course it's far worse if you killed someone who actually had a significant role within the town, such as DT or a medic, though I'm not giving myself away at the moment. I don't mind dying from the get-go to prove everyone's illogical point that they think they are right about themselves but yet they only end up very wrong; because I can and will foresee that. Get used to seeing this, this is excellent. Taking this in a vacuum, note that outright denial is always deemed suspicious. If this had started with personal attacks against the accuser, and then vehement denials, they'd be headed off the gallows immediately. This post pulls off a clever switch. It acknowledges that the poster could be mafia, in fact it refuses to debate the point entirely. This is clever, because the easiest people to decide to lynch are those who put up the biggest fight. By conceding the point immediately, this post makes it very hard to take issue with his character. But it does, in fact, defend itself. Quite strenuously at that! See how swiftly it moves on to plant the seed of reasonable doubt in the mind of the reader, by lecturing us on the hazards of killing someone who is not mafia. Of course, the chances of randomly killing a mafia are greater than killing the medic or the detective, but since the chance exists, the post abuses the probability of first decision. Moreover, the post actually then outright implies that the poster is a medic or detective, something that (to me, in my experience) seems to almost ludicrously eliminate the poster from occupying either of these roles. Few people would ever be so careless with their positions if they actually were that position. The final point of interest in this post is a corollary to the first clause. I'd call the technique 'martyrdom' because the poster professes to not mind dying if only to prove a point to all the noobs in this game. Of course, there are a mix of veterans and noobs here, and of course, the poster is playing to win. But by offering himself up for sacrifice, the poster knows full well that we will not pick such low hanging fruit. The post then, protects the poster by doing the exact opposite of what you might expect, by actually encouraging critics of the poster. Be wary of these. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 21 2010 10:26 Fulgrim wrote: Ok so first things first, anyone that is blue make sure that you use your actions on the first night! It would be a real waste if our DT's weren't detecting anyone, and our medics weren't protecting anyone. Secondly, as Ian has pointed out that there are a large number of mafia (1/5 people?) in this game, so there are likely mafia among the frequent posters and non-frequent, although losing a more active townie would be a bigger blow then losing someone who just lurks, and rarely checks the thread. (possible bigger reward for taking out active mafia?) So if I'm elected I'm not sure yet who I will lynch, but I'm going to go back and read through most of the posts again, and I may get a clue Thirdly, I doubt that there are any clues in the starting message, in the previous game I read there didn't seem to be any, I would look for clues after the first mafia kill tonight, and what people are posting. Yes, because the vocal mafia members are the ones that screw things up like you wouldn't believe. As for my own candidacy, I promised from the beginning moderation and objectivity. Who would I execute immediately? I don't know. As for who you should vote for; consider that while the chance of any candidate being mafia is essentially even, it would be unwise to elect anyone to whom a (possible) clue may point to. There is a chance that no-re's page 4 analysis is incorrect, but there is also the possibility that elements of it are correct. As such, it would be an idiotic move to elect someone with even a hint of suspicion. That means that dj_crescentia, and Quickstriker are probably the least safe choices, if only by a small amount. My vote was for Fulgrim because I wondered if a first-time player would so quickly grasp the concept of this election, and the importance of mafia infiltration. But of course, I'd like people to vote for me too. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 21 2010 10:48 SagaZ wrote: okay, this is quite an interesting post actually. QS make this post about why should detective stay hidden, it's well explained but it's all comon sense and the conclusions are what anyone should see with a minimal thought process. detective and medics stay hidden to the mafia blablabla. Everything is nice and helps newer player in the case they haven't seen it. Now comes shockeey's post, basically saying how great QS is for saying what should be common sense. That makes me think about three case senarios. 1) QS and shockeey are mafia, they set up behind the scene the act. This goes well with QS's post activity to make people trust him, the intent of this tutorial would then be to try to earn some trust of newer players. Shockeey's post would only be to reinforce this and creat a bandwagon. 2) Shockeey is mafia, QS isn't. Shockeey, seing how QS posts alot wants to try to get in his good side and possibly misslead him. if someone says good things about you, it's harder to say bad things about them. 3) Neither are mafia, Shockeey just didn't saw how blue roles in general should play on his own and is impressed at how a mafia game works. These maybe are very far away from truth of course. About the first lynch, right now, killing the most inactive seems the safest choice, but maybe we could play around with the idea of killing shockeey. You're overthinking yourself. And by that, I don't mean that what you say is all wrong. For all I know, the most elaborate option; #1 could be totally correct. But what I mean is that this conjecture doesn't really help anyone. Because you've essentially presented three (of four) options and said that they're all equally likely. But option #4 is just as likely; #4- QS is mafia, pretending to be a helpful guy, and shockeey is just deceived. So your post doesn't really help us, because it serves to read something into a post that didn't need to be read into. Just to head off any criticism, I broke down a post in a vacuum earlier (Page 8) but I tried not to steer away from conclusions. I wasn't analyzing the writing to make a judgment one way or another, I was simply trying to point out arguments that should not sway you. + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:46 Fulgrim wrote: Ok this is kind of sad, I read the last few pages that I missed and it seemed like the same 4 people were posting for like the whole day.... Where is everyone else? (this could cause major problems, imagine if half of our game was modkilled...) Quick, d3 and tree, you guys have all been posting a ton, and I'm having trouble deciding who to vote for, have you guys all played before? Summer camp! | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 21 2010 10:55 Fulgrim wrote: If we take this last post as true, and the mafia is well organized, then we can assume that the mafia candidate is probably not xelin or man.magic, seeing as they have 0 votes and haven't seemed to post alot. Ridiculous, what if every single mafia member ran for election, and they all agreed to throw support behind the mafia that had managed to get the most votes. If every mafia member ran for election, than surely the chance of a mafia getting elected would be higher, no? Again, it's pointless to posit these 'what if?!' ideas because they're usually wrong, and when they're right, they're still useless, because nobody has any way of really knowing that anyway. Stick to facts and not 'Well if I were mafia, I'd put poison in the wine glass closest to me because you'd suspect something and switch the glasses...." kind of deductions. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 21 2010 12:26 XeliN wrote: Your going to kick yourselves when it turns out im Green You could also be blue, no? tree.hugger I find is a bit of an enigma right now, since he has only made a few long posts and attempted to impersonate a "sage of wisdom" in all of them. I have not yet formed an opinion of him but I am suspicious when people try to tell me how and what I should look out for. I was born in a hidden grove in the Scottish Highlands surrounded by chanting druids- what do you want from me? | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 22 2010 06:31 Fulgrim wrote: + Show Spoiler + On January 22 2010 02:06 dozko wrote: Xelin, I did not quote all of your posts since that post I made was getting enormous. I think people are not too lazy to go a few pages back and read what you have written, so I dont see how you use this as a basis against my argument? In any case I have already put my reasoning up, because thats what I think. People are free to form their own opinion and seeing as how you ignored most of my points and misread the others I do not feel the need to return to that thread of argument. On another more pressing note i put my vote in the other thread for d3_crescentia for mayor. I will now post my reasoning for doing so here. The way I see it there are three main candidates - Fulgrim, tree.hugger and d3_crescentia. I did not vote for Fulgrim, although i tend to agree with a post he made on Quickstriker and Xelin before my analysis. He is the most popular candidate although he has listed the least number of arguments to support his campaign. This I find slightly suspicious. tree.hugger I find is a bit of an enigma right now, since he has only made a few long posts and attempted to impersonate a "sage of wisdom" in all of them. I have not yet formed an opinion of him but I am suspicious when people try to tell me how and what I should look out for. I voted for d3_crescentia because 1) He has made good analysis of the narration and I do not believe that any mafia would go in such details like separating prose from poetry etc. 2) He has a very neutral style of posting, i.e. he does not jump on bandwagons too quickly, and is taking the input of other posters very seriously, even when It is not completely in tune with his own. These I feel are good attributes for a mayor to have and he is the only candidate to actually sort of back up the attributes he claimed he possessed in his campaign with his subsequent posts. 3) He is one of the most active posters, and this will be good for us if he can continue in such fashion when we have more information. Dozko brings up a few good points about the candidates. I find your analysis of tree.hugger interesting because thats exactly how I see you, you came out of nowhere with several fat posts chalked full of analysis, which made me suspicious at first. Although it seems as though this is the style of some players (tree.hugger and others). I think that people are too caught up on Xelin's and Quickstrikers arguments as they could both be mafia trying to distract us and polarize the town, or neither could be mafia and just both paranoid. Either way I feel too much of the discussion has been focused on that. Also I'm glad to see more people becoming active, which is great. However I am still going to follow through on my plan if you elect me and kill one of the least active people, so get posting. (No voting for me will not guarantee that you will not be lynched if you haven't posted anything at all yet) It's just how I roll. I have my suspicions like the rest of you, but I really don't have much to base anything on. I'm trying to get people to think the right way, before jumping headlong into analysis. The point is to think for yourself at all costs, and constantly check people's language for clues. And of course, don't immediately tip people off that you suspect them of something or another. If you tell people you suspect they're mafia because they don't capitalize their "i's" then mafia or not, they'll start capitalizing their "i's". I've always loved mafia because of the psychology of it all. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 22 2010 13:05 d3_crescentia wrote: To those who have abstained, I gladly encourage your decision to do so if your belief is firm in that none of the candidates are trustworthy enough. To those who are still undecided, you still have about an hour before elections close. At the very least I'd like to see an end to voting so we can get on with the game. It's a terrible decision! The mafia are sure to muster a vote, and the less townies vote, the greater share of the vote belongs to the people who are most dangerous, and yet most motivated to vote! Abstaining is a surer way of electing mafia than voting for one yourself! | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
| ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
The man stood silent, gazing down at his feet. He died as he lived... *** "Lunaticman, you never attended any of our meetings, and we kept hearing weird explosions from your hermitage on the hill, so we just assumed you were up to no good. Guess we were wrong. But what use was your ability when you failed to use it?" | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 22 2010 15:43 ShoCkeyy wrote: Wait a minute... Soon after he becomes major, he lynches the same person he wanted to ninja vote for him. It was a joke, a joke! But I guess lunaticman was on my mind because I had searched earlier for this guy's post in the sign-up thread as well, and hadn't found it. I thought of how ironic it would be if someone who hadn't said a single word yet ran in at the last moment and voted. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 23 2010 06:21 XeliN wrote: Shockey interesting point, and a sound argument (this is sarcasm), but you have tempted me to put forward another interesting little proposition. I will happily consent to being lynched first on one condition, If I am lynched and it turns out I am, as I claim to be, a humble Green Townie, then quickstriker and dozko will be the next people lynched. to add a further condition, say I am lynched first and am a townie, then the town decides to lynch Quickstriker and he is also a townie, then my condition of lynching them both is void and as I would have been wrong on quickstriker in this hypothesis then dozko would not be lynched. So to emphasise, two propositions If the town agree to lynch Quickstriker and Dozko first and one of them is not Mafia, Then I propose that I be the next person to be lynched OR I propose that I be the first person lynched on the one simple condition that If I am innocent then Dozko and Quickstriker will be lynched next I would prefer the first but am completely happy to do the second as well. Dying sucks but i think i would be greatly helping the town by doing so in this instance. We're going to be making judgments based on facts. This idea is counter-productive and distracting, and I would not vote for it. Let's be a little more rational here. I think the suggestions for the DT are quite sound, and hopefully already in practice. It's a little difficult to figure out any kind of mafia-proof formula for the medics to follow, but hopefully they'll have a little luck and a knack of guessing. I'll try to be on a bit, but I just flew to school today and tomorrow I'll be moving back in. But around evening tomorrow, I'll be able to kick the mafia out of our beloved town. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 23 2010 13:15 XeliN wrote: Johnny just a quesiton, if you were mayor and would definately have me Lynched BUT THEN it came back that I was a Green Townie. Theres no need to wait for day 2 clues. Lynch me now so that my innocence can put forward a stronger argument than anything I have posted yet and then take my arguments more seriously. tbh if I was the Mayor I would also Lynch me as if I am innocent you would unfortunately lose a green townie but you would also gain a wealth of information in that you could go over the events in this thread from a new perspective. The perspective that I am a Townie and come to conclusions on other peoples posts based on that. So to conclude I agree that I should be lynched. If I have done my job right then doing so can only help the townies no matter what my role is. We're not going to lynch you because you want us to, now stop being an attention whore. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 24 2010 04:04 ShoCkeyy wrote: :O! Oh my god, WHEN WILL IT BE MORNING? When the sun rises. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
To me the most amount of evidence points to Quickstriker. We've mentioned the repeated references to 'quick' deaths, but what has also interested me is how 'drawing' has appeared (albeit subtly) in both stories. Here's Day 1- the figure drew overtop and Day 2- drawing something technical QS and d3 are the two players in this game (aside from my own picture, which is of the title character from Dr. Seuss's book The Lorax) which have an illustration in their profiles. If the emphasis is on the drawing in Day2, and the figure of speech used in Day1 was used intentionally, then I see Quickstriker as the most logical choice for lynching. Unfortunately, the possible references to QS on Day 2 are in separate murders. Here's what else bothers me; the two shots. It seemed to me from the beginning that this HAS to be a clue. Why two shots, when one would've done just fine. In fact, since neither shot hits anyone, the whole episode with the technical drawing and the two shots seems to be the most overt clue we've gathered yet. I can think of two possible meanings- either the user has "2" in their name (of which there are 2 such users.) or it refers to a name with two parts, such as "tree.hugger", "Quickstriker", or "RoyW". Now to the technical drawing, which has been astutely investigated, with the evidence suggesting Jonoman92 and RoyW, In contrast to everyone else, I found the connection to RoyW the most satisfying, because it seemed to me the right balance between simple to understand and difficult to find. Yet, of my theories of what the number of shots signifies, I find the connection to Jonoman92 much stronger. Then who? Softer is also up for lynching, and although our evidence against him amounts to a single sentence, the explanation for that is sound, and has really never been challenged, although it hasn't really been backed up either. ILoveKT seems also to have strong evidence against him, yet the interest in lynching him has been minimal, probably wisely as he has not really ever posted and therefore is less of a malign influence than another poster would be. *** So what's bothering me at the moment, is that almost all of our choices are based on conjecture (QS) and personality (XeliN) and there's really nothing for me to go on. I'm going to wait a little bit more, hear what more of you have to say (hopefully people will post!), and go to spanish class, and then we'll see where we are. Also, I watched 12 Angry Men last night, and it reminded me of this. Great play, great movie. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
I'm not so sure about Double Lynch. Feels like we could've used it whenever, so here's to hoping we get the right clues in the next day post. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 26 2010 11:59 johnnyspazz wrote: can't wait, im going to try and prove my innocence with the next set of clues just you haters wait You only have to prove your innocence if you're mafia. Spend your time finding good clues and making good arguments, and you won't have to worry about falling under suspicion. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On January 27 2010 13:00 ~OpZ~ wrote: Better question is who knew who the vigi's were.... I now suspect tree.hugger too....Someone consolidate and find all his posts and put them together. I'm currently out of state, on my lap top, hence my no posting yesterday. Proof would be easily obtainable, and sadly, anytime soon, week/month(s), an even sadder proof would be obtainable.... Severe, and sad, family issues. My grandfather has been diagnosed with cancer, so if I don't post often it's because of that. and Mr. Sheriff, plz lock up Xelin or Velkan.... I doubt anyone knew the roles of the Day1 victims. Seems like a lucky coincidence. Sorry to hear about your grandfather. Wish you and your family all the best. I ran searches with my name, and the terms "mafia" and "lynch". Might've missed a post or two, but here's all the posts I found. Examine them all, but when the next day's clues come out, and still not a single clue comes out pointing to me, then it's time we look elsewhere for our mafia. + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 02:15 tree.hugger wrote: In games of Mafia, there are degrees of activity. These degrees of activity would persist no matter what roles people got, and since roles were randomly assigned, suggesting that 'Poster A' is mafia because he posts too much is ignoring the fact that 'Poster A' would've contributed significantly anyway, as they're experienced with games of mafia, and comfortable playing any role. What instead is more important are deviations in posting patterns and word choice. These will lead us more surely to the mafia. This not to say that anyone is or isn't mafia, it's simply a note of caution. We shouldn't go about lynching our most active and productive members, or else who's going to go about finding the clues? The reason I announced my candidacy for sheriff/mayor is that I have the objectivity and patience to not consistently make ridiculous judgments. On January 21 2010 02:30 tree.hugger wrote: Get used to seeing this, this is excellent. Taking this in a vacuum, note that outright denial is always deemed suspicious. If this had started with personal attacks against the accuser, and then vehement denials, they'd be headed off the gallows immediately. This post pulls off a clever switch. It acknowledges that the poster could be mafia, in fact it refuses to debate the point entirely. This is clever, because the easiest people to decide to lynch are those who put up the biggest fight. By conceding the point immediately, this post makes it very hard to take issue with his character. But it does, in fact, defend itself. Quite strenuously at that! See how swiftly it moves on to plant the seed of reasonable doubt in the mind of the reader, by lecturing us on the hazards of killing someone who is not mafia. Of course, the chances of randomly killing a mafia are greater than killing the medic or the detective, but since the chance exists, the post abuses the probability of first decision. Moreover, the post actually then outright implies that the poster is a medic or detective, something that (to me, in my experience) seems to almost ludicrously eliminate the poster from occupying either of these roles. Few people would ever be so careless with their positions if they actually were that position. The final point of interest in this post is a corollary to the first clause. I'd call the technique 'martyrdom' because the poster professes to not mind dying if only to prove a point to all the noobs in this game. Of course, there are a mix of veterans and noobs here, and of course, the poster is playing to win. But by offering himself up for sacrifice, the poster knows full well that we will not pick such low hanging fruit. The post then, protects the poster by doing the exact opposite of what you might expect, by actually encouraging critics of the poster. Be wary of these. On January 21 2010 10:38 tree.hugger wrote: Yes, because the vocal mafia members are the ones that screw things up like you wouldn't believe. As for my own candidacy, I promised from the beginning moderation and objectivity. Who would I execute immediately? I don't know. As for who you should vote for; consider that while the chance of any candidate being mafia is essentially even, it would be unwise to elect anyone to whom a (possible) clue may point to. There is a chance that no-re's page 4 analysis is incorrect, but there is also the possibility that elements of it are correct. As such, it would be an idiotic move to elect someone with even a hint of suspicion. That means that dj_crescentia, and Quickstriker are probably the least safe choices, if only by a small amount. My vote was for Fulgrim because I wondered if a first-time player would so quickly grasp the concept of this election, and the importance of mafia infiltration. But of course, I'd like people to vote for me too. On January 21 2010 10:57 tree.hugger wrote: You're overthinking yourself. And by that, I don't mean that what you say is all wrong. For all I know, the most elaborate option; #1 could be totally correct. But what I mean is that this conjecture doesn't really help anyone. Because you've essentially presented three (of four) options and said that they're all equally likely. But option #4 is just as likely; So your post doesn't really help us, because it serves to read something into a post that didn't need to be read into. Just to head off any criticism, I broke down a post in a vacuum earlier (Page 8) but I tried not to steer away from conclusions. I wasn't analyzing the writing to make a judgment one way or another, I was simply trying to point out arguments that should not sway you. + Show Spoiler + On January 21 2010 10:46 Fulgrim wrote: Ok this is kind of sad, I read the last few pages that I missed and it seemed like the same 4 people were posting for like the whole day.... Where is everyone else? (this could cause major problems, imagine if half of our game was modkilled...) Quick, d3 and tree, you guys have all been posting a ton, and I'm having trouble deciding who to vote for, have you guys all played before? Summer camp! On January 21 2010 11:01 tree.hugger wrote: Ridiculous, what if every single mafia member ran for election, and they all agreed to throw support behind the mafia that had managed to get the most votes. If every mafia member ran for election, than surely the chance of a mafia getting elected would be higher, no? Again, it's pointless to posit these 'what if?!' ideas because they're usually wrong, and when they're right, they're still useless, because nobody has any way of really knowing that anyway. Stick to facts and not 'Well if I were mafia, I'd put poison in the wine glass closest to me because you'd suspect something and switch the glasses...." kind of deductions. On January 22 2010 07:24 tree.hugger wrote: It's just how I roll. I have my suspicions like the rest of you, but I really don't have much to base anything on. I'm trying to get people to think the right way, before jumping headlong into analysis. The point is to think for yourself at all costs, and constantly check people's language for clues. And of course, don't immediately tip people off that you suspect them of something or another. If you tell people you suspect they're mafia because they don't capitalize their "i's" then mafia or not, they'll start capitalizing their "i's". I've always loved mafia because of the psychology of it all. On January 22 2010 21:14 tree.hugger wrote: It was a joke, a joke! But I guess lunaticman was on my mind because I had searched earlier for this guy's post in the sign-up thread as well, and hadn't found it. I thought of how ironic it would be if someone who hadn't said a single word yet ran in at the last moment and voted. On January 23 2010 08:20 tree.hugger wrote: We're going to be making judgments based on facts. This idea is counter-productive and distracting, and I would not vote for it. Let's be a little more rational here. I think the suggestions for the DT are quite sound, and hopefully already in practice. It's a little difficult to figure out any kind of mafia-proof formula for the medics to follow, but hopefully they'll have a little luck and a knack of guessing. I'll try to be on a bit, but I just flew to school today and tomorrow I'll be moving back in. But around evening tomorrow, I'll be able to kick the mafia out of our beloved town. On January 23 2010 13:26 tree.hugger wrote: We're not going to lynch you because you want us to, now stop being an attention whore. On January 26 2010 01:20 tree.hugger wrote: It's difficult to see such a lack of consensus on this first day of voting. But at some point I need to cast a vote, so let me write through my thinking and maybe I can make up my mind en route. To me the most amount of evidence points to Quickstriker. We've mentioned the repeated references to 'quick' deaths, but what has also interested me is how 'drawing' has appeared (albeit subtly) in both stories. Here's Day 1- and Day 2- QS and d3 are the two players in this game (aside from my own picture, which is of the title character from Dr. Seuss's book The Lorax) which have an illustration in their profiles. If the emphasis is on the drawing in Day2, and the figure of speech used in Day1 was used intentionally, then I see Quickstriker as the most logical choice for lynching. Unfortunately, the possible references to QS on Day 2 are in separate murders. Here's what else bothers me; the two shots. It seemed to me from the beginning that this HAS to be a clue. Why two shots, when one would've done just fine. In fact, since neither shot hits anyone, the whole episode with the technical drawing and the two shots seems to be the most overt clue we've gathered yet. I can think of two possible meanings- either the user has "2" in their name (of which there are 2 such users.) or it refers to a name with two parts, such as "tree.hugger", "Quickstriker", or "RoyW". Now to the technical drawing, which has been astutely investigated, with the evidence suggesting Jonoman92 and RoyW, In contrast to everyone else, I found the connection to RoyW the most satisfying, because it seemed to me the right balance between simple to understand and difficult to find. Yet, of my theories of what the number of shots signifies, I find the connection to Jonoman92 much stronger. Then who? Softer is also up for lynching, and although our evidence against him amounts to a single sentence, the explanation for that is sound, and has really never been challenged, although it hasn't really been backed up either. ILoveKT seems also to have strong evidence against him, yet the interest in lynching him has been minimal, probably wisely as he has not really ever posted and therefore is less of a malign influence than another poster would be. *** So what's bothering me at the moment, is that almost all of our choices are based on conjecture (QS) and personality (XeliN) and there's really nothing for me to go on. I'm going to wait a little bit more, hear what more of you have to say (hopefully people will post!), and go to spanish class, and then we'll see where we are. Also, I watched 12 Angry Men last night, and it reminded me of this. Great play, great movie. On January 26 2010 07:20 tree.hugger wrote: Hmmm. Could've been worse, I guess. Could've been much better. I'm not so sure about Double Lynch. Feels like we could've used it whenever, so here's to hoping we get the right clues in the next day post. On January 26 2010 12:18 tree.hugger wrote: You only have to prove your innocence if you're mafia. Spend your time finding good clues and making good arguments, and you won't have to worry about falling under suspicion. | ||
| ||