__________________
How many times do I have to have sex with your mom before you realize we have something special.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bernek77:
When something goes unnoticed drop it! Why do people keep bringing it up! I am getting really annoyed right now! People on here complain time an time again about people and bad play! I have just witnessed some of the dumbest play on here! STFU an worry about WOLVES!

---

I'm annoyed by you.... though I agree with you in the sense of who you speak. You attitude sux, and you are bringing me down, Im tempted to vote for you on this basis alone.

Heed your own bolded words B77.

Fwy

quote:

---

Originally posted by fwybwed:
I'm annoyed by you.... though I agree with you in the sense of who you speak. You attitude sux, and you are bringing me down, Im tempted to vote for you on this basis alone.

Heed your own bolded words B77.

Fwy

---

You know what I don't care anymore! Vote for me. Say what you will about my attitude all you want. What just transpired is beyond anything I can say. Vote for me please! One less villager in the mix that you all have a problem with!

__________________
How many times do I have to have sex with your mom before you realize we have something special.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bernek77:
You know what I don't care anymore! Vote for me. Say what you will about my attitude all you want. What just transpired is beyond anything I can say. Vote for me please! One less villager in the mix that you all have a problem with!

---

@ bernek: what are you talking about? The rukebreaking???

The tracker actually *does* support an "i do not suspect" tag. If you really want to use it, it is:

{TRUST: player (optional reason)}

If you use that tag the tracker will record you as trusting the named player. If you previously stated a suspicion or vote for that player, it will be canceled by the trust tag.

For poops and grins I added one more tag. SUMMARY. You know how when I post links they look like this?

189. May-05 07:43 PM: Bugger - interesting -- analysis tomorrow - (ref: nobody)

The "interesting -- analysis tomorrow" is the summary of the post. I typically write these myself because I want them to be as impartial as possible. But if you'd like to summarize your post for me, feel free to drop a summary tag in there anywhere.

{SUMMARY: discusses trust & summary tags, problems with percentages}

Wait when did I discuss problems with percentages? Oh yeah, I'm going to do that right now!

The reason I object to the way Liq expresses his percentages is they overstate his suspicion. Consider, if there are 14 players left and each has a 50% chance to be a wolf, that means there are approximately 7 wolves!! (And we are HOSED!) While it's certainly true that someone either is a wolf or is not, that doesn't make it a 50/50 proposition. I bought a lottery ticket, and I will either win or I will not. Does that mean I have 50/50 odds? If so, hang on and I'll buy another ticket!

Since there are 2 wolves left out of 14 players, everybody has a base chance to be a wolf of 2/14 = 1/7 = 14.29%. So if you thought someone was say, twice as likely to be a wolf as the average player, that would mean they have a 28.58% chance from your perspective. But these percentages are tricky, and its hard to view them and immediately determine what that means. If I say JSP has a 28% chance to be a wolf what does that mean? Twice as likely as anyone else? Half as likely?

Which is why I use wolf-weights. In the wolf-weight system 1.0 = the base chance to be a wolf whatever that is. Which means if I think JSP is twice as likely to be a wolf as anyone else, I'll give him a wolf-weight of 2. It's very straightforward and it doesn't monkey about with the suspicions in such a way that creates such impossibilities as seven wolves.

So whenever Liq posts a percentage (such as JSP = 60%), I take into account that Liq uses 50% to represent even odds and do math in my head like this:

JSP = 60%. 0.6/0.5 = 1.2. Liq assigns JSP WW of 1.2, or 17.14%.

So Liq thinks JSP is 20% more likely to be a wolf than the average player. (You might be thinking it should be 10% right? But if that's the case how does Liq represent a player he thinks is 75% more likely to be a wolf than the average player? 125%?)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bernek77:
You know what I don't care anymore! Vote for me. Say what you will about my attitude all you want. What just transpired is beyond anything I can say. Vote for me please! One less villager in the mix that you all have a problem with!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MasterWolf:
I don't understand people getting all riled up and emotional about the game. Think with your head and not your heart. Every single person is going to be suspected or questioned in every game. You can't take it personally. Plus, it makes you look very suspicious when you get all loud defending yourself and yelling at others (look at BOT R1).

Bernek Suspicion+

---

I'm suspicious, before you make an accusation like that go back re-read what has been posted and see why I am upset. If you know anything about this game it is spelled out in bold!

@PD I will calm down, just don't know when. I hate when something that is a blessing in disguise gets punted away!

__________________
How many times do I have to have sex with your mom before you realize we have something special.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bernek77:
I'm suspicious, before you make an accusation like that go back re-read what has been posted and see why I am upset. If you know anything about this game it is spelled out in bold!

@PD I will calm down, just don't know when. I hate when something that is a blessing in disguise gets punted away!

---

Ok now I am really suspicious of you, hahaaa

ps - Hi Bernek!

quote:

---

Originally posted by BernieB:
Jack's posts do make me suspect him, but I am not sure if they are enough to sway me from PGB. I am going to keep watch on them both and make my vote tomorrow afternoon. Man, I wish my workplace had not filtered MOTL.
{Suspects JackSpade, PBG}

ps - Hi Bernek!

---

{SUSPECT: JackSpade,PGB}

The tags are:

{SUSPECT: target (optional reason)}
{VOTING: target (optional reason)}
{TRUST: target (optional reason)}
{SUMMARY: brief description of post}

quote:

---

Originally posted by XplicitR:
I think JackSpade is pretty suspicious.

{SUSPECT: JackSpade (his posts)}

---

Fixed. (the optional reasons have to be put in parentheses)

{SUMMARY: Expounds summary tags to XPR}

quote:

---

Originally posted by JackSpade:
At what point do we begin to vote out the silent people?

---

I think this post is a pretty big deal, more than people are making it out to be. People keep discounting Jack's otherwise suspicious post by saying he's a newbie with the jitters, but that doesn't sound like a newbie line to me. Only someone who understood both the concept of the game and MOTL's past games would know that silents can often be targeted. This means Jack is either more knowledgeable than we are giving him credit for OR he is being coached by more experienced wolves and picked up the line from conversation with them. I know for one if I was offering advice I'd tell Jack not to be too quiet lest he be targeted for silence.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MasterWolf:
I don't understand people getting all riled up and emotional about the game.

---

Interesting observation coming from the person who called me "scum" in WW8 and now has me on his permanent suspect list because I told an emotional lie.

-----------

quote:

---

Originally posted by AlmasterGM:
I think this post is a pretty big deal, more than people are making it out to be. People keep discounting Jack's otherwise suspicious post by saying he's a newbie with the jitters, but that doesn't sound like a newbie line to me. Only someone who understood both the concept of the game and MOTL's past games would know that silents can often be targeted. This means Jack is either more knowledgeable than we are giving him credit for OR he is being coached by more experienced wolves and picked up the line from conversation with them. I know for one if I was offering advice I'd tell Jack not to be too quiet lest he be targeted for silence.

{SUSPECT: PGB)

---

Holy crap, you're right. Sort of. I mean, that is crazy suspicious, but you can probably tell nobody's really giving him a pass- he's neck and neck with PGB in terms of both suspicion and votes if memory serves.

Also: The summary bar starts and ends with the fancy brackets like {this}, not like {this).

{SUMMARY: AGM makes good point about JackSpade,must further correct about summary tags}

EDIT: sending in my vote for Jack now.
{VOTING: JackSpade (exaggerated play,inconsistency)}

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bugger:
I don't get why a wagon's forming on B_o_T. The guy's made one post. I haven't seen much of his playstyle, but what about advocating quietness in R0 is so amazingly suspicious? Can someone explain this to me, because I'm really not seeing anything.

WRT Liq's suspicions: I assume you are suspecting PGB because he launched off for Thanos. If you'd check the aftergame discussion of (I think it was) WW8, PGB declared from then on he'd be voting for a quiet/unhelpful cit each R1. I did as well. And both of us have been sticking to that. Furthermore, in all the games I've seen PGB play, he guns every single round for cit unity. His behaviour this game is not OOC in the slightest.

---

And also you claim suspicion of me because I initially defended BoT, and indeed i did. BUT i was not the first person to defend him, the first person to defend him was you Bugger (see 1st part of your post). And i did eventually vote for BoT, whereas you did not.

This couple with the fact that you are so quick to suspect me for taking advice that you yourself gave makes you highly, HIGHLY suspicious.
Oh and "Holy crap"? Who sounds like they are playacting now Bugger, i think you do and I think you are a wolf.

@AGM,XPR,Thanos: Thanks for using the tags, Bug's right though, it's either {TAG: player} or {TAG: player (reason)}, you need the colon, the open and close braces, and if there's a "reason" for the vote/suspicion, you need open and close parentheses--without them the tracker can't tell where the TAG ends and the player begins, or where the player ends and the reason begins, or where the whole tag ends.

Witness:

WW3.1: 117. Oct-02 05:39 PM: Mardak5150 - Playacting - balloons? - (ref: PGB, TMB)

WW4: 075. Dec-10 08:20 PM: randon007 - playacting - I have to trade. - (ref: Liq, PD)

WW7: 070. Feb-17 05:00 AM: Bugger - playacting - throws confetti - (ref: nobody)

But if you are a cit, don't panic, you still win and get the winning points if your team wins--it's a team score--getting killed doesn't hurt your standings in the slightest. It's *wolves* who worry about dying since they are outnumbered.

I've definitely got my watchful eye on Bugsie, but so far you strike me as the most suspicious player.

Of course, it's also the new player's curse. As nobody has played with you before they don't know what's is in-character and OOC (out-of-character), as you get more games under your belt people will get used to your style and suspect you less--maybe . But in the meantime, newbies tend to die early, but don't lose hope, and please do follow the game and play with us again. It's never the same game twice. BTW, if you get lynched and are a cit, I'd be happy to send you a copy of the tracker and the manual if you would like to follow along the remainder of the game with it. Just using it helps you get the game mechanics down and helps you to spot patterns.

quote:

---

Currently Voting :
 
• JackSpade

---

Evidence

quote:

---

Originally posted by JackSpade:
posted May 02, 2009 08:01 PM

This is a lot harder than i thought it was going to be. I have to say im probably hoping on the bandwagon and voting for thanos, still thinking about it obviously seeing what develops and all that. But I do find ThoughtsofLepers putting suspicion on BoT to be suspicious. It was a good piece of advice and it just seems strange to me that Thought would then cast suspicion on BoT for doing something helpful.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JackSpade:
posted May 03, 2009 04:18 PM

Wowzers lots to think bout. Well my first suspicion was of ToL because he criticized BoTs 1st post when it looked like BoT was being helpful. But the more i think about it the more i begin to agree with ToL that it is a bit of a suspicious post. At that point i would say im equally suspicious of both. And then, as PD points out, BoT starts to defend himself against the "wagon" against him. said wagon not being very big. BoT doth protest too much, methinks. So for now going BoT.
At what point do we begin to vote out the silent people?

---

My original thought when I saw these posts was normal noob posting. However in a reread of the thread (with the knowledge that BoT was wolf), I saw something different. A player like BoT knows better than to ask a fresh wolf to cover for him like this. But if someone else (Bugger) had already cautioned away from it, it may have been the best time to attempt to break him in. If the plan failed, inexperience could be become a shield.

Of course the coin can land on either side.

Another thing that has me concerned is Bugger's switch vote once he "knew" that Thanos had 8 votes. His vote didn't go to BoT (aka Alpha Wolf) but to JackSpade, the very person who agreed with him. Yet at the moment my gut is telling me not to vote him.

quote:

---

Suspicion List :
 
• High :

  61% : JackSpade
  55% : PlasteredDragon
  55% : GottaLoveElves
  54% : XplicitR
  54% : Bugger
   

• Mid :

  53% : Thanos
  53% : puregoblinboy47
  53% : Bernek77
  53% : Masterwolf
  53% : fwybwed
   

• Low :

  52% : BernieB
  52% : AlmasterGM
  46% : ThoughtsofLepers

---

__________________
Your Captain N of 2008

quote:

---

Originally posted by puregoblinboy47:
Sent in my vote. I'll be away for a few days with a family emergency. See you all on Sunday.

---

@Everyone: Okay, apart from some bickering, this round has gotten real quiet. Given votes are due tonite, I assume conversation will pick up today.

Since the beginning of round two 7 players have declared (AGM, Bugger, Fwy, Jack, Liq, PD, and Thanos), and a further three have announced suspicions (Bernie, MW, and XPR). This leaves (Bernek, GLE, PGB, and TOL) has having announced no suspicions/votes since the beginning of R2D.

Of those four, two announced suspicions in R1N, Bernek (suspected Bugger), and PGB (also suspected Bugger).

That leaves GLE and TOL. TOL said yesterday that he'd post later, and GLE said on May 5 that he wouldn't be back until lunchtime yesterday. It would be very nice to get the insights of GLE and TOL at this time.

At present it's not clear which way the round is going to go. I count 4 votes on JSP, 2 on PGB, and 1 on Bugger (4/2/1). If PGB and Bernek go the way I anticipate they will that will make 3 on Bugger (4/2/3). I anticipate XPR will vote JSP, making it 5 on JSP (5/2/3). Bernie seems to be leaning toward a PGB vote, making it 3 on PGB. (5/3/3)

That leaves GLE, MW, and TOL as the question marks. MW has listed 7 suspects, and JackSpade is not among them, but both Bugger and PGB are (5/4/3) or (5/3/4).

The upshot is it is not clear (as I said before) where the round is going. If GLE & TOL & MW vote the same, and others vote as predicted, then whoever they vote for is sunk. If any of them votes for Spade, I think his number is up.

As an aside, my wife likes to follow along these games with me (trying to talk her into playing but she's thus far resisted), and the other day she put a question to me which gave me a little pause. She said: "Do you think that whole fight between XPR and Bugger was staged?"

At the time I said "no, I think they can't stand each other". But it would make for excellent cover if they were both wolves--nobody would really think one was a wolf if the other was revealed.

As noted previously I do have my eye on Bugger. Right now his wolf weight is pretty low, 1.02, but it's above 1.0--he's devilishly smart, and I'm perplexed that he didn't notice the peculiarities in BOT's posts that many others noted. Unlike other people, his departure from the Thanos pile strikes me as a mark in his favor--a wolf would have been like "hells yes, pile on!!" (unless Thanos is also a wolf--I expect our seer has already checked him). Thanos doesn't really seem wolfy to me tho--so like I said, it's a mark in Bugsie's favor.

But right now, with a wolf weight of 1.08, Jack's the player I suspect most. His posts have very contrived language (much like BoT's did)--and that's usually a good indicator of wolfishness.

If Jack turns out to be a cit, it's probably worthwhile revisiting Bugger & Thanos (who are both voting Jack this round) and if you think the XPR/Bugger clash was staged, maybe XPR too, although that felt pretty genuine to me, especially considering my own experience with XPR--keeping the possibility in mind at least, I have XPR at 1.01 wolf weight.

PGB's harsh salvo and dogged charge at Thanos in R1 azlso weirded me out. I know he was upset with Thanos for his part in throwing WW9, but yikes. Also he's a strong Thanos voter. He's at 1.02 right now.

GLE's also a strong Thanos voter and I suspect him as well, but not as much as PGB.

{VOTING: JackSpade (contrived language, WW=1.08)}
{SUSPECT: BUG (BOT defense, staged XPR fight?, WW=1.02)}
{SUSPECT: PGB (very harsh in R1, WW=1.02)}
{SUSPECT: XPR (staged fight w/Bugger?, WW=1.01)}
{SUSPECT: GLE (strong Thanos voter, WW=1.01)}

{SUMMARY: R2 appears to be toss up, identifies undeclareds, voting JSP, suspects Bugger, PGB, GLE, and XPR}

I just don't feel like JackSpade is a wolf, he's still low on my suspicion list.

PD: Can we get a post count update?

{VOTING: JackSpade (his suspicious posts)}