WW26: The Masquerade [Game Thread]

[Short Richard]

But who cares. Why do you want to debate it?

Curiosity.

Expanding on this, it seems any last names are tied to our roles. We are all called by our first name, nick name, or both. Any last name received would be interchangeable, and they were received specifically in a role-PM. Last names might yet play a part in this game. They might be used by a role or multiple roles, or they could be part of other gameplay at some point. Whatever it is, there's no need to start guessing. Unless someone has more information, they are no help to us, and should be ignored.

I don't like the way Muriel states the obvious in this post either.

The 'last name = role?' connection didn't feel obvious to me. I'm willing to cut Muriel some slack, the post has a bit of a condescending attitude but it does its job as a warning.

Fat Rose's Post #58 feels like he's reading too far into absolutely nothing. 'This list of people who haven't voted is evidence of metagaming and therefore scumminess!' Though it could be an overactive villager...

Now to my vote. Rob, you are very eager to attack someone only a few hours into the game. While I find it hard to believe that a wolf would rather go on an attack like that than stay low, I find it even harder to believe that a villager would be so convinced of someone's guiltiness right off the bat that they would go on such an attack. Especially when I know that the person you are attacking is a villager, and one of the few contributors so far. It's also odd how you describe that my post had an aura of innocence, yet you take this as a reason to lynch me? What kind of screwed up logic is that, to lynch those who you feel are villagers? Yes, a wolf could play you so that you believe it to be a villager, but for gods sake man there's a thing called Occam's razor maybe you should look it up.

Overdefensive, Muriel?

[Muriel The Slow]

This is bad justification for a revenge vote. Villagers do attack people at the start of day 1, that is perfectly normal behaviour. It's not like Rob made a massive wall of text case. It was a vote with a one line explanation. Rob didn't say he thought you actually had an aura of innocence either, he accused you of trying to falsely project one.

I partly agree with you, which is why I did not place a vote on him. What was strangest about the attack was that in both of his attack posts against me, he lied about the contents of my posts. He said my post was a wall of text, when it was just two short paragraphs. He said it says nothing, when it clearly does. He says I create paranoia, when I'm doing the exact opposite by saying that we shouldn't meta. He could just be a villager who misunderstood me or is just very eager to start making cases, which I can't blame him for considering that I was one of the first to make a non-joke post. I shared my thoughts, not to get him lynched as revenge, but to get answers from him and create more discussion in general.

[Fat Rose]

Fat Rose's Post #58 feels like he's reading too far into absolutely nothing. 'This list of people who haven't voted is evidence of metagaming and therefore scumminess!' Though it could be an overactive villager...

Please point to where I stated that it is scummy. Because I most certainly did not.

Apart from that, this is just a small part of the actual post and I'm kinda curious why you just focus on that small part instead of commenting on the other 9/10s of my post.

[Fat Rose]

Serdoa, I thought maybe there would be a wolf on MJW, but then again, maybe not. So I moved on.

Your ten-page justification for voting for me is slight overkill.

I don't follow that exactly Jon. You thought there was a wolf on MJW so you voted Bert. Ok, I get that. But why did you move away from him after he got some more votes? I mean you moved onto Edith, so obviously you still believed there was a wolf on Courage. Why did you change your mind from Bert to Edith? I can't really see anything in his answer to you that explains this.

[Sister Mary]

I see the village gather a little earlier than my obligations to the abby could allow me. It is a beautiful morning, and may the Lord grace you with clear judgement and sharp wits.

Yes, Old Tom, I worry too about what the dusk will bring and I look forward to your insights.
Sir Percival, I feel the need to chatise you, that is noy the way a knight speaks to a lady, a friar, or a dog.

Catching up to the thread, I would not take and Courage's and Fat Rose's comments (Is it okay dear, to call you this way or would you prefer simply: Rose?) in a bad way, there are certainly worse ways to start a conversation. I did not quite grasp the argument against Muriel, but the pushers may be up to something.

Since the tiem frame for half-hearted votes may be past us, I will vote on a later post.

[Sir Percival]

mary, i am percy, knight of honor integrity sexiness and general brilliance. i am a man of authority. you are a lowly nun. i shall continue to do as i please peasant.

[Half-Nose Harry]

Old Tom is not happy.

The last few posts have been quite revealing.

Firstly [color="red"] Friar Andrew[/color] for the too-forced joke vote.
THEN
[color="red"]Fat Rose[/color] for the wot that screamed scum
THEN
[color="red"]Muriel the Slow[/color] for the line "Especially when I know the person you are attacking is a villager"

There will be blood at dusk.
Old Tom will root out these scum.

Old Tom, in what way are you finding Rose's post scummy? To me is just reads as her explaining her reasoning. Also, it seemed like you were being deliberately obtuse in not knowing what Muriel meant by "Especially when I know the person you are attacking is a villager" but since others seem to have misunderstood what she meant it's possible you may have as well.

[Widow Edith]

I like Agnes she at last feels like villager to me.

The rest of all this "that's serdoa, that's thestick, that's ...."-BS makes me think about leaving the game. I did sign up specifically to avoid this "that's unlike his usual play"-way and I have no interest to get that via backdoor.

For motivation reasons: Simple Anne

[Rob The Filch]

Now to my vote. Rob, you are very eager to attack someone only a few hours into the game. While I find it hard to believe that a wolf would rather go on an attack like that than stay low, I find it even harder to believe that a villager would be so convinced of someone's guiltiness right off the bat that they would go on such an attack. Especially when I know that the person you are attacking is a villager, and one of the few contributors so far. It's also odd how you describe that my post had an aura of innocence, yet you take this as a reason to lynch me? What kind of screwed up logic is that, to lynch those who you feel are villagers? Yes, a wolf could play you so that you believe it to be a villager, but for gods sake man there's a thing called Occam's razor maybe you should look it up.

This is bad justification for a revenge vote. Villagers do attack people at the start of day 1, that is perfectly normal behaviour. It's not like Rob made a massive wall of text case. It was a vote with a one line explanation. Rob didn't say he thought you actually had an aura of innocence either, he accused you of trying to falsely project one.

And Bingo was his name OH! I never said your post had an aura of innocence I said you were trying to create one. Your post was scummy, Muriel. This latest post was even scummier.

[Rob The Filch]

This is bad justification for a revenge vote. Villagers do attack people at the start of day 1, that is perfectly normal behaviour. It's not like Rob made a massive wall of text case. It was a vote with a one line explanation. Rob didn't say he thought you actually had an aura of innocence either, he accused you of trying to falsely project one.

I partly agree with you, which is why I did not place a vote on him. What was strangest about the attack was that in both of his attack posts against me, he lied about the contents of my posts. He said my post was a wall of text, when it was just two short paragraphs. He said it says nothing, when it clearly does. He says I create paranoia, when I'm doing the exact opposite by saying that we shouldn't meta. He could just be a villager who misunderstood me or is just very eager to start making cases, which I can't blame him for considering that I was one of the first to make a non-joke post. I shared my thoughts, not to get him lynched as revenge, but to get answers from him and create more discussion in general.

I was reading on my phone, your post was literally a wall of text. You did create paranoia suggesting that last names were important, but then saying don't bring them up. You wrote long paragraphs, not short ones, that said nothing at all. What answers were you looking from me? And you weren't trying to generate discussion. That seems pretty farfetched. More likely you were looking to try and stop an early bandwagon.

You are overly-defensive and only digging a deeper hole.