Twg Iii: Unfound

Snidely · February 2005

Damn. I can't seem to get into the channel. Anyone else having problems?

Byeka · February 2005

Freak82, who is this Freak82 <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' />

Snidely · February 2005

He's your prototype.

<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>(God damn anti-editing rules.)</span>

Snidely · February 2005

Bleh. It's 00:34h GMT, and I'm tired. Someone keep us poor GMTers in the loop when you PSTers are partying away at 3am GMT. (;

Gwahir · February 2005

well since IRC is messed up, why doesn't somebody explain to me the argument against Chrono here so we can all review with all evidence on hand.

wonedslackystyle · February 2005

well there is erally absolutly nothing to go on so far. so im basically just going to go with instincts. my vote goes to <b>docchimpy</b>
this vote has very little if no evidence at all to it. im making this vote for 3 reasons
1) comes on isnt active at all and just bandwagons. Not good
2)i dont want a phantom
3) idont want to bandwagon with this little evidence and i dont want to make my vote cost much (since dochimpy prob wont get lynched) because i have no evidence at all to go on.

sorry if i offended u chimpy.. this vote will be changed in a second if evidence is presented

wonedslackystyle · February 2005

sorry its a sunday night
*really
im tired forgive me

Chrono · February 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (ZeroByte @ Feb 27 2005, 12:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> I have my suspicions about Chrono now, so I'm changing my vote. I vote for <b>Chrono</b>. My reasoning is that wolves may be leveraging on the de facto agreement to not vote on non-active players that has emerged in the last two TWGs. Now my original line of thinking had all three wolves going underground but I feel maybe this is not so now. I believe there is at least one wolf active in the channel.

Looking at chrono's posting history for Saturadys/Sundays for the last three weeks he is posting less this week. There may be other reasons for this but right now I'm going to be on the side of paranoid.

Another factor in my decision is that I had let my suspicions be known to the channel. The channel wolf may informed him of my suspicions which may have made him become active again (yet still quiet). His post on the forum was nothing more than him saying "Hi I'm not quiet!".  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
understandable but i have many good reasons for my inactivity

1) if you read my posts in the sign ups you would have heard im out of town and so i dont have much access to a PC
2) i just got home from the D1 competitions
3) im scrambling to fill out this years FAFSA

but its your vote so go ahead

i will vote for <b>ZeroByte</b> just because i have no one else to vote against and since you voted against me im voting against you

no hard feelings?

Byeka · February 2005

Good point about not having a PC. If he's using your explained inactivity as an excuse for being a wolf it makes me wonder about him. I change my vote to <b>ZeroByte</b>, sorry but Gwahir and Isamil's situation has basically been IRC lag by the sounds of it. My newest suspicien lies here.

Gwahir · February 2005

It's Sunday night, I have no idea how much time I'll have tomorrow. So I'll have to place my vote for <b>ZeroByte</b> now. It's the best reason I've heard so far...

Pithlit · February 2005

Well, ok, i understand your part with the phantom vote but the next sentence really gets me:
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>This is only applicable for the first phantom vote. The second and up phantom vote for the day will count as a full vote each. (1 phantom vote = 0.001 2 phantom votes = 1.001 5 phantom votes = 4.001)</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

how can i have more than one phantom vote against me per day?
I have only one vote per day so i should only get one phantom vote against me. and since votes are not permanent, but erased after the voting is over i should never have more than one phantomvote against me if i dont vote.

ZeroByte · February 2005

:/ three votes against me. Not good. I think I'm just making the wolves job easier being super paranoid and all and coming up with reasons to vote for people.

If I choose to believe Chrono's reasons for his absence then this should logically lead me back to my original list of suspects. I originally suspected three people for being inactive. My reasons for being suspicious of inactivity is that the wolf may be using inactivity as a shield. Inactivity effectively shields him from suspicion (at least for a day or two) and getting voted against on the initial round of lynching. This is as from the previous rounds of TWGs, a policy of not voting for inactive persons seems to have emerged.

My initial three suspects were Chrono, Docchimpy and Wonedslackstyle. Woned I striked off my list as he had been appeared in the IRC channel already. That left Chrono and Doc. I went with Chrono as I felt he would be a strong wolf. However, now that he has appeared and has given explanations, I feel that if I am going to be faithful to my original line of thinking, I should change my vote to docchimpy. His appearance and voting for Chrono threw me off balance for a bit but if he was the wolf he would jump on a bandwagon. He voted for Chrono after brute, perhaps to start a trend. The vote against chrono at least had some reasoning behind it so he may have felt it may sway others to vote for Chrono.

Therefore, I change my vote to <b>docchimpy</b>.

This move is risky. If I do not change my vote I have a fifty fifty chance of still living as I and Chrono have three votes against us each. <b>By changing my vote, I am making myself the person with the majority of votes. A wolf will not take as big a chance as this early in the game</b>.

ZeroByte · February 2005

Okay, so I missed Snidely voting for Chrono. My bad. Still, my vote change makes me somewhat vulnerable.

ZeroByte · February 2005

Vote tally so far:

Zerobyte - 3 (gwahir, freak83, chrono)
chrono - 3 (snidely, docchimpy, brute force)
docchimpy - 2 (zerobyte, won)
ismail - 2 (hellfire3k, sky)
snidely - 1 (condizzle)
gwahir - 1 (lolfighter)

non voters: ismail, pithlit, mouse

ZeroByte · February 2005

>_< non-edit rule! Saw mouse' vote right after I posted hte tally list >_<

Zerobyte - 3 (gwahir, freak83, chrono)
chrono - 3 (snidely, docchimpy, brute force)
docchimpy - 2 (zerobyte, won)
ismail - 2 (hellfire3k, sky)
snidely - 1 (condizzle)
gwahir - 1 (lolfighter)
sky - 1 (mouse)

non voters: ismail, pithlit

brute_force · February 2005

Hmm, well, assuming the day isn't over, I'd also like to change my vote to <b>docchimpy</b>. Chrono has at least given a reason for his inactivity. Man, now it looks like I'm just hopping on a bandwagon or something. Well, whatever. docchimpy, if you can offer some explanation or some proof, I'd gladly change my vote if there's time.

Mouse · February 2005

I had a thought just now.

Before I start, bear in mind that the main reason I'm suggesting this is because it's the first day and we have nothing truely substantial to go on.

There is a fairly good chance that at least one of the people being voted for is a wolf. With that in mind, if we were to spread our votes evenly across 5 people, our chances of killing a human decrease dramatically. If we limit our votes to the 'top 5', then we also increase our chances of killing a wolf. Admittedly it will mean a stressful night for the top 5, wolf or otherwise; but it also means that they have the 'safety net' of only a 1 in 5 chance of being lynched.

Wolves, I know you're reading this, the same also applies for you, if you're one of the top 5, there is no guarantee that you will be lynched, you to have the same safety blanket.

Considering how much I've mentioned the 'top 5', I may as well throw out a suggestion to whom the top 5 are.
Going by the current votes; the top 5 are:

Zerobyte
chrono
docchimpy
ismail
<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' />

(I do realise a number of you are innocent despite your position in this top 5, for this I am sorry)

Note I only mentioned 4, this is simply because there is no-one worthy of the 5th spot at this time.

So, would anyone be willing to assist me in this endevour?

Seer, your guidance would be much appreciated.

Mouse · February 2005

triple question mark smily, I hate thee so.

brute_force · February 2005

For all we know Mouse could be a wolf and he's trying to get the seer to come out and contact him >_>

Mouse · February 2005

I have already said that I am not a wolf, this is not something I would lie about. If it will help you sleep at night I will happily place myself in the top 5.

brute_force · February 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mouse @ Feb 28 2005, 01:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> I have already said that I am not a wolf, this is not something I would lie about. If it will help you sleep at night I will happily place myself in the top 5.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
You know we can't trust "I'm not a wolf". I don't really think you're a wolf, but a wolf *could* use this to their advantage. I have no idea who to place in 5th place... Gwahir? He and Isamil have been fighting a bit over a pretty trivial matter.

Mouse · February 2005

To be honest, the method of voting that I suggested works as an advantage for both the wolves and the humans. Being 1 in 5 is better than being 1 in 1, wolf and human alike.

And yes, there is a chance that a suggestion similar to my own could be thought of by a wolf, this I will not deny. However the seer doesn't have to reveal himself to me, it would be appreciated, but the decision is his own, I dare not pretend it is otherwise.

Pithlit · February 2005

This method is far better for wolves than for humans.
As you said, of the 5 persons, everyone has a chngase of 1/5 to be killed
thats right, but be only have 4 wolves beneath us.

So the chance for everyone is 4/15 that he is a wolf and 9/15 that he is human

So the changse that we kill a human here far greater that that we kill a wolf.
You said you used your brain, when you made this, in think u used it in the wolves advantage!

Mouse · February 2005

I don't see how it changes things, at the end of the day one person dies, human or wolf, I can't imagine how it would innately advantage either party.

If it will appease you, I nominate myself for the 5th spot

<b>Mouse</b> is where my vote now lies.

Gwahir · February 2005

That ended a while ago Brute.

And mouse, you know voting for yourself never works out in your favor.

Snidely · February 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pithlit @ Feb 28 2005, 07:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> This method is far better for wolves than for humans.
As you said, of the 5 persons, everyone has a chngase of 1/5 to be killed
thats right, but be only have 4 wolves beneath us.

So the chance for everyone is 4/15 that he is a wolf and 9/15 that he is human

So the changse that we kill a human here far greater that that we kill a wolf.
You said you used your brain, when you made this, in think u used it in the wolves advantage!  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Wait...I thought there were only three wolves?

Snidely · February 2005

Mouse, the votes are atm (to modify someone else's list):

Zerobyte - 3 (gwahir, freak83, chrono)
chrono - 2 (snidely, docchimpy)
docchimpy - 3 (zerobyte, won, brute force)
ismail - 2 (hellfire3k, sky)
snidely - 1 (condizzle)
gwahir - 1 (lolfighter)
mouse - 1 (mouse)

It's more realistic to establish a top three by voting for chrono, if that's what you want to do. Just watch out for the last-minute vote changes.

Snidely · February 2005

Or ismail, actually. Maybe it's not that implausible.

Snidely · February 2005

Having said that, I'm not sure why it's a good idea. Either way, someone fairly random gets sent off - by instalynch, we have a 3/15 chance of getting a wolf. By nominating five candidates, there's a equal chance that a candidate is a wolf and voted off. However, the latter system also means that we can't question people's motives. ("I vote for X so that we maintain five candidates." Nothing can be gleaned from that).

Pithlit · February 2005

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>One quarter of the players are wolves</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
with 16 people at start,we have 4 wolves among us!

Twg Iii: Unfound

Comments