Thread: Circus: Mafia in St. Damian's, Oxford Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000842
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
"Welcome to St. Damian's, friend! I'm surprised you could make it in with all this snow we're having. Why if it keeps on like this, we may be snowed in for all of the Christmas vacation!" So spoke Harold, the butler, not realizing the accuracy of his prediction.

An hour later, when the snow had accumulated another 6 feet, the Master of St. Damian's college, Prof. Raphsom called Harold into his study. "Butler," began the old don, "if we were to be stuck here, how many days' worth of food do we have?"

"That's actually rather interesting, sir," replied Harold. In fifty years of butlering at St. Damian's, Harold had filled the few quiet hours in each day with enough books and eavesdropping in tutorials that he now had a better command of most undergraduate subjects than any undergraduate, and half of the dons for that matter. He would chuckle to himself at the uninventively prosaic syntax students would resort to when switching to Latin to prevent his eavesdropping. His real love, though, was mathematics.

"The number of servings of food remaining is a triangular number. If one were to go without luncheon, sir, and simply serve breakfast and dinner, serving everyone at the first meal and one person fewer at each subsequent meal, we'd be able to carry on serving until the last plate of food on the property was served to a single person."

"What a bizare thing to notice, Harold!" Exclaimed the master. "Oh, only a thought experiment, sir. No relevance to real life," his butler said to calm him. "Of course not," Prof. Raphsom retorted to try to prove he was in no way in need of being calmed. "It's not as if any members of the Smug Cambridge University Murderers are within these walls!"

St. Damian's was a college that specialized in dramatic foreshadowing.

--

So, come one, come all and add your names to the list of inhabitants of St. Damian's during the worst snow storm to hit Oxford since records began. If you want a date, it's 1899 (maybe we'll have a New Year's Eve party at some point). Most students have gone home for the break, but some might be around. Also around are assorted dons, cooks, housekeepers, groundskeepers, maybe a librarian or two, a chaplain perhaps. It will not be a peaceful stay as, unbeknownst to Harold and Prof. Raphsom, there are indeed members of the Smug Cambridge University Murderers within these hallowed walls.

The game will be open to entrants for another week. Roles will be announced when I know how many people are playing. Being a bunch of braniacs, led by the genius butler, you will of course not be satisfied with first-past-the-post voting. Harold will administer preference voting for you. I plan on using Minimax Condorcet (variant 1 on that link). I will explain more later.

[ 12. February 2012, 01:06: Message edited by: Imaginary Friend ]
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
[Can I put in a plea on the behalf of the mathematically challenged to have the voting system explained very simply in extremely small words, please? [Help] ]

_________________________

Against the falling snow, Felis Rufa's immaculate white fur was hardly visible, but her big yellow eyes stared out watchfully. Sitting in the quad, she had watched the undergraduates leaving for the Christmas holidays, and was not terribly pleased about this state of affairs. Now who was going to fuss over her and feed her tidbits? She would have to go and work her charms on the kitchen staff, she supposed. After all, she did keep the mice down in the pantry, they ought to show her a little gratitude.

She stalked into the library and was pleased to see a nice warm fire lit in the grate. She curled up on top of a copy of the Metamorphoses that someone had left lying around and drifted off to sleep with her tail carefully coiled round her nose.

(Typecast? ego? [Biased] )
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
[Can I put in a plea on the behalf of the mathematically challenged to have the voting system explained very simply in extremely small words, please? [Help] ]
Long story short, though the methodology is a bit complicated, what it's trying to do is reach a Condorcet winner, which is something of a "gold standard" in voting systems, as it means that the choices chosen by the system are, in fact, the choices of the people voting. The basic idea is that it's like having a "next plays winner" tournament; A and B play, B wins. B and C play, B wins. B and D play, B wins. B and E play, E wins. Thus, E is the winner, followed by B; if we want the full ranking, we'd have A, C, and D square off against one another in the same way. The point of using this specific method is that it gets you more-or-less the same result, but more easily—you look at people's votes, then plot a "course" through them, deciding where and how the contests play out.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
To quote Chelley on the last thread, quoting me from 2006:

I'm in.

And bloody well listen to me this time, ok?
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
[Can I put in a plea on the behalf of the mathematically challenged to have the voting system explained very simply in extremely small words, please? [Help] ]
I will provide something fuller later, but I'm also working on a spreadsheet I can send whoever wants it so they can type in the votes themselves (and try out different scenarios for their own votes) and see who'll win.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Mr Dai A. Logge, the classical philosophy scholar, stepped out of his room (through the window) with his umbrella (unopened) to put a bowl of milk out for the college cat. It has to be admitted that sometimes, despite his benevolent intentions, Mr Logge forgot to keep the milk cool and so the bowl of milk would rather resemble curds and whey. This was not the case today, as Mr Logge refused to heat his room on the principle that Diogenes had never heated his.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
To quote Chelley on the last thread, quoting me from 2006:

I'm in.

And bloody well listen to me this time, ok?
That's all very well, but if I start listening to you now you're bound to turn out to be a homicidal maniac!*
(And that's me in).

*though having said that, you were a homicidal maniac last time - and that was as one of the non-killers!!

[ 17. October 2011, 19:15: Message edited by: Chelley ]
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
and that was as one of the non-killers!!
Well, technically, everyone in mafia is a killer, unless they vote no lynching every time.

[ 17. October 2011, 19:24: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
I'm in.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
I'm in.
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
I'm in.
Copycat.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
I'm in.
Copycat.
Ha. Actually just betraying myself as someone who posted without reading the whole thread. But that probably does show why I'm not amazing at this game. So how about I claim I was copying you because you survived pretty well last time, and I would be cool with doing that.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Barbara Layman looked out at the snowdrifts piling ever higher around the quadrangle. It looked very picturesque right now, but she knew that by tomorrow morning all the pipes and most of the doors would be frozen solid, and most of the young men in the establishment would begin behaving very badly indeed.

She wondered whether the old don was up to the challenge of it all.

Whyever they had passed over her husband for the don's position, she would never understand. Still, she tutted, with some satisfaction, she and Professor Layman were better off than most. His motto of 'Be prepared' meant that the cellar was full of coal; the larder was groaning with food for the festive season; and she had a goodly supply of candles and spirits on hand. More, she sniffed, than could be said for the dining hall.

She shivered, pulled the heavy velvet drapes closed, and threw another scuttle full on to the fire.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
The Master called to his trusted butler, "Harold, I was just thinking, chap. If we ever needed to vote for someone from the college to do something (or have something done to them), how might we do it? This democracy lark seems quite the craze these days."

The butler began his lecture: "Well, sir, first one would have to ask people their preferences. After a phase of nominations, we would ask people to rate the nominated (together with trusty old TESS). If two candidates really were tied, they could express that.

"Once all the preferences have been expressed (or a suitable time has elapsed), if someone has the majority of the first preference votes, they should clearly be chosen."

"Yes, of course, that's all quite elementary," feigned Raphsom. "But, what if no-one has a majority of first preference votes?"

"Ah," continued Harold, "that's when things become interesting. Let's look at the following example: an algebraist, a botanist and a chemist are up for some election. TESS is also always an option. Suppose there are three voters and they vote as follows:

"Voter 1: A>B>C>T (ie. A is their first choice, etc.)
"Voter 2: C>B>T>A
"Voter 3: T>B>A>C

"The first place votes are split three ways, so there is no clear winner. But, consider the different two-way competitions. Would the voters prefer to pick A or B? Well, voter 1 prefers A, but voters 2 and 4 prefer B, so the majority prefers B.

"Do they prefer B to C? Well, voter 2 doesn't, but 1 and 3 do, so a majority prefer B to C. Do they prefer B to T? Well, 3 doesn't, but 1 and 2 do. So, a majority prefers B to T too. Hence, B is preferred by a majority to all other options. So, B should get whatever wonderful prize is up for grabs.

"This is a principle about 100 years old now, unfortunately first articulated by a Frenchman: that if there is a candidate preferred by a majority to every other candidate, that candidate should win, even if (as in this case) they garner no first preference votes."

"Splendid!" exclaimed the master, only regretting that information about the French. "Will there always be such a candidate?"

"Unfortunately, sir" lamented the butler, "such is not the way of the fates. We could simply get ties like in any voting system. There's also the following odd situation that can occur. It's possible for a majority to prefer A to B; B to C; and C to A.

"In this situation, there are different conventions. I propose we use Simpson's method (a good English mathematician, contemporary to the Frenchman Condorcet). In this method, we pick the candidate whose worst defeat in a head-to-head match-up was the least bad."

"That's sounds a little complicated," ventured Raphsom. "Not for me, of course, but for some of our more junior dons to understand. Could you help them?"

"Naturally," assured Harold. "I have prepared an Excel-lent table which I would be happy to send out to anyone in the college which will do these calculations for them. They should send me a message privately should this be desired."

"Thank you, Harold, I knew I could rely on you," said the master, attempting a fatherly back-pat somewhat ineptly. "By the way, what should we do about ties?"

"Ties will indeed still arise with this method, especially with a small pool of voters," Harold admitted. "I propose the following: if two or more candidates are tied, and one of them has failed to vote in more elections than any of the others, we select that candidate. If they're tied on that statistic too, we just don't elect anyone."
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Wow, this looks like a display of hobby-horse rodeo.

As Chess and Go show the simplest rules make the most complex and intriguing games, so this one should be a twiddle. I don't promise to have more time or pay any attention to the maths than usual but am in.
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
Also, the butler is wrong about the provenance of this principle; if you look in the Christ Church library, you will find some books by a certain mathematician of that college, C. L. Dodgeson, that articulate the same principle. Furthermore, you might want to check with the librarians of the Taylor Institute-they may have a copy of Ramon Llull's Blanqueta, written in the time of John Duns Scotus, in which, to our knowledge, the idea first appears.

(Needless to say, I'm in. Anything that let's me be this pedantic...)
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:
"By the way, what should we do about ties?"
BL made note of the fact that her husband must, at all times, be wearing the Old School Tie. It was just a shame that when he was deeply immersed in debate with his students or colleagues, he had a habit of leaning forward over the table, invariably over the mustard pot or butter dish.

It was a great bother that Nancy, the girl who came in daily to help with the household chores, was now snowed out of the college. She was most adept at dealing with little emergencies like soiled ties.

Of course Pike would be about. As a scholarship student he was somewhat handicapped, and Professor Layman had graciously taken him under his wing. He would have to earn his meals over the Christmas break by shovelling snow and emptying slops. But Barbara doubted the damnedly Catholick Pike would know much at all about ties. Really, all this snow was MOST unfortunate. It might make strange alliances among them all...
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
"Well this is an intriguing little experiment" remarked Prof. Heisen Berg, the aging physics lecturer. A German immigrant who had become a fixture in the college, he now lived in a suite of rooms above the East Quad from where he routinely stuck his nose into any business that took his fancy. "Given recent political developments regarding the alternative non-vote it will be most interesting to see if this system produces outcomes which are more in tune with the proletariat's collective mind. Now we must think of some suitable notion on which to vote to see if it works. What should that be?"
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
The sun was beginning to set on St. Damian's. Dawn will come with a bloody surprise for the college's residents, and Prof. Berg's question will be answered. Dawn (and the close of registrations) is scheduled for Sunday evening Eastern Standard Time. [Despite Harold having butled in Oxford his whole life, he sometimes like to talk in EST purely in the interests of extra arithemetical exercise.]
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
Archibald St. George was the wine fellow. Yes, that's right—an endowed chair at the college simply for keeping the wine cellar. Most academics would give up alcohol for life just to sit in the chair of any of the chairs at St. Damien's; to know that some muleskinner lived off the fat of the land in a post they would give their father's bait and tackle for . . .

Well, it was a nice gig. Keep the cellar stocked, keep the porter from stealing bottles, keep the butler from even getting close to anything, make sure the Sacred Goose got rolled out every decade or so—it was a life. Most people knew that St. Damien's had good wine; it was up to Archie to make sure that even the master didn't know exactly howgood. Nobody was drinking that magnum of claret before it was ready, even if the '47 was worth half the college's endowment! The master's tongue wasn't worthy—perhaps a bright student or two, Dr. Howell from the philosophy faculty, or even that lovely recent divorcée on the English faculty at St. Cat's might be, though.
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
Jason Meng spent most of his days at St Clare's (the first English Language School google found). However studying English cost money, and the colleges had rooms needing cleaning.
In a few years time he'd be able to get a good respectable job. Till then he had to put up with everyone shouting at him.

[ 22. October 2011, 09:53: Message edited by: Jay-Emm ]
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
She shouldn't have been there really. She really should have been on that world cruise. She deserved it. She had been so sure that the old man would leave her everything in his will... but the daft old bat had not appreciated the care she had put into meeting his every need. What had stray and neglected cats ever done for him? Had they washed his stinking socks? Had they made his cups of tea precisely to his exacting instructions? Had they listened to his inane rantings day in, day out? No.

And here she was now, her culinary skills wasted on these sundry academics as she kept them supplied with the beverages they seemed to rely on being ever present in the college common rooms. But it was here that her best chances lay for ingratiating herself with some dusty old don who might have a little nest-egg treasured away somewhere just waiting for a willing recipient.

Dyllis Smudgetta was in, and on the lookout.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Professor Mumblebore was irritated and looked up. It would have helped if he had cut or at least kempt his straggly hair but such worldly solutions rarely occurred to him. It was rumoured that the last time he had a haircut the queen was still married. So he had to decipher his Thukydides through a screen of long grey hair that kept falling before his face. The dim winter light coming through the iced-up window did not help. He was cold, too, despite the roaring fire. He could not hear much of the roar any more, mind, his ears had recently begun to grant him that kind of peace and quietude that the students had for decades denied him. But this cold in his limbs, his fingers and, by Jove!, even the tea wasn’t hot. Impossible to get good staff these days, he muttered. And he had heard that on top of all the other calamities of this day and age they were thinking of starting to teach engineering. At university! Why, next they’d make sports and soul-searching into academic subjects. It was bad enough having to put up with those bally mathematicians. After this liberating soundless little rant on the ways of the times he returned to his book a much happier man.
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
Jason Meng...
and showing a knack for observation missed the date...
well I'm sure there were immigrant cleaners even then (probably more likely in cities where port isn't a drink but...)
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Chelley was feeling a bit like Baldrick... "I'm so confused Mr. B, I don't know who I am or what my name is!" But I'm sure all will become clear when we get going!
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy had first entered the college as the lowliest of lowly-born servants, so of course completely ignored. She had been an orphan with nothing to go on, so she had felt lucky to get even that place. Her joy had showed and she thanked everyone, and gave everything that extra polish. She even took the time to study with the cook for extra lessons. She did enough extra work that he was happy to teach her. Over time and with promotions, she had found herself as the head cook. She still couldn't believe it--herself the worst of gutter trash to be a cook at St. Damian's--so even after six months, every thought of it put an extra skip into her step. She hummed as she walked. "Holidays are coming up," she muttered to herself. "I will have to make something special for the dons!"
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
The snow has piled up higher than the great doors now, so St. Damian's is officially closed for Christmas; no new registrations. Private Messages going out starting now and when I'm done the game will start. Emails will go out tonight or tomorrow morning with the spreadsheet for those who have requested. (I just need to write instructions for using it).
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Harold walked into Prof. Raphsom's office and was shocked by what he discovered: a note in appallingly bad handwriting! A note this bad could only have been written by someone from Cambridge...

Reading it, he discovered his worst fears were justified: "Dear Oxonians: We are hear two take over St' Damians. Tonights killing will bee the first of many. Yours, etc: The Society of Cambridge Univercity Murderers."

Glancing over, Harold noticed something else unusual about the room: Prof. Raphsom was unusually horizontal and his body much more punctured by knife wounds than usual. The master was dead. His death must be avenged by lynching. But whose neck should be be-noosed? Harold posted a notice in the lodge requesting nominations.

Residents of St. Damian's, you have forty-eight hours to nominate and then we'll move to a vote. If anyone so requests, you can have a twenty-four hour extension.

To the notice, Harold attaches a list of special abilities possessed by residents of the college which might come in handy in defeating the SCUM.
None of the three specials is SCUM.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley entered her beloved library to set about the task of creating order now that those chaotic undergradutes had left for the holidays. She bustled about with an expression of apparent displeasure at the random piles of books 'littering' the tables (how could a book ever be described as litter though, she thought) but in reality it was a task she took great delight in. Despite the turn in the weather a weak sun managed to force its way through the stained glass panels high up in the vaulted ceiling and left its dappled light across the bookshelves.

[bold name to introduce self not to nominate self!]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley paused by one of the lower, plain windows, a pile of books in her arms, and looked out over the college. She wondered who was still resident now that this snow had encased the grounds in a white blanket...
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
[OOC: I have a killing essay to write at present. This should mean I'm as good as dead for the upcoming two days or so. Please don't make any decisions without me though, I'll be back soon. (An extension would be much appreciated, that is.)]

Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher, the gardener, tended to his cocoa plants in the orangery. This atrocious winter hadn't gone easy on his life work, the magnificent botanical garden of St. Damian's. He had only managed to save a few plants, and had kept to the most unusual and valuable ones, including the special grapevine that Archibald St. George had brought him with very special instructions: to guard it with his life. He had succeeded so far and the plant was growing well, but without him he knew the plant would wither away. Without the plant, Archibald St. George would wither away. Without St. George the source of decent alcohol at a cheap price (stolen goods is cheap) for the students would disappear, and thus the students would wither away; and if there was one thing gardener Ferrer-O'Hocher cared about, it was the young, the future of life and the earth. He saw his role in perfect harmony with nature, possibly not as logically adept as many of the professors, but a natural intuition bestowed upon him at birth gave his life meaning.

What's this now? Cut down a TREE? For a coffin? Couldn't we just do as with old Lord Nelson, put him in rum or wine or what-have-you, and keep it 'til we can get resources from outside? I know Archibald St. George keeps a special barrel in his cellar, I've seen it while tending to the flower beds outside the cellar. It's made of sturdy oak and should be perfect for the job!

Jeremiah held on strongly to the key to the toolshed that rested in his pocket. May it never fall into the wrong hands.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
...being a lover of lists, here's one!

la vie en rouge - Felis Rufa (cat!)
Eliab -
Ariston Astuanax - Archibald St. George (wine fellow)
Dafyd - Mr. Dai A. Logge (Philosophy scholar)
Chelley - Miss Chelley (Librarian)
JFH - Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (gardener)
Smudgie - Dyllis Smudgetta (cook)
Gwai - Lucy (head cook)
Banner Lady - Mrs Barbara Layman (Prof Layman's wife)
Sylvander - Professor Mumblebore
Imaginary Friend - Prof Heisen Berg (Physics lecturer)
Jay-Emm - Jason Meng (cleaner?)

[Hope you don't mind, Hart? I am a librarian after all - like to have everything neatly ordered etc!]
Just in time to edit in Jeremiah!

[ 24. October 2011, 07:12: Message edited by: Chelley ]
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Mr Logge peered at Miss Chelley's list. My, there were a lot of people stuck in the snow. As he stepped out of the passage by the Porter's Lodge into the quad he remembered something. Umbrellas should not be kept up while under a roof. He took his down.

In the quad he passed Harold, who looked sufficiently preoccupied by something. Ever ready to lend a listening ear to a chap in distress, Mr Logge asked him what was the matter. The news was appalling. To think the language of Shakespeare was being subjected to such indignities?! Mr Logge sat down and set to work on the enclitic in Heroclitus for a full hour to calm his nerves.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Professor Ernst Viktor Eliabach surveyed the body with an expert eye. Such a mess. Such a waste.

Every important internal organ was punctured, and probably spoiled for any useful purpose. When would people learn that all it took was to open a vein, and inject a little preserving fluid, for the cadaver to be left in an eminently practical condition? No care, that was the problem. No craftsmanship. No pride.

Students' work. That's what it was. Trust a student to botch a job. Sometimes the students would bring in material for Eliabach's experiments which had been recovered with so little attention that he could even see the spade-marks. These things mattered, but try telling that to the average denizen of St Damian's.

He looked again. The brain might be untouched, but Ernst had never had much luck with brains more than an hour or two old, and had written a paper or five on the question to no firm conclusion. Maybe a new approach might be tried this time? Give it, perhaps, two or three hours for the social niceties to be observed, and then discreetly remove Prof Raphson for the particular and unique contribution he might yet make to the, err, 'life' of the college.

Professor Eliabach was already running through the experiment in his mind. With all the self-satisfaction that came of being Oxford's one and only Professor of Applied Thanatontogeny, he reflected that he really did not know what St Damian's College would do without him.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
[OOC: I have a killing essay to write at present. This should mean I'm as good as dead for the upcoming two days or so. Please don't make any decisions without me though, I'll be back soon. (An extension would be much appreciated, that is.)]
Granted. Given my schedule Wednesday evening, you have until 10pm EST Wednesday to nominate.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Felis thinks catching murderers is probably a bit like catching mice. First you sniff and follow your nose. Then once you know there's a rodent inside you sit next to the mouse hole and wait to pounce.

Unfortunately she can't smell anything worth pouncing on at this stage. She will watch the goings-on carefully to see if anyone looks murderous.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Professor Eliabach retires to his room. It is, as many academics' quarters are, in some disarray, especially as the cleaning staff have long refused, on principle, to enter it.

A framed portrait stands over the desk, depicting an impossibly decrepit and quite insanely wicked-looking old man, which the young and sprightly Professor tells enquirers shows his late grandfather. There are, however, a few aged academics, who dimly recall that, in their almost-forgotten student days, the equally young and sprightly Ernst displayed a portrait of a rather more jolly middle-aged man whom he said was his father, and that no one can remember the picture ever having been replaced.

The Professor picks up a monograph out side his usual field - a question of physcial science, connected to the weight of metal. An absolute and irresistable force is the thing to aim at, in engineering, apparently. Can that apply here?

It is possible, in principle, to clear three people, though the usual difficulties in the infirmarian keeping someone alive indefinitely means that it would be hazardous for them to declare themselves. One might be added to that number each night, but one or two lost during the night and day. An equal vote of known innocents to suspects can be forced through IF the prankster is alive. And possibly even if not, since the preference system is likely to deter the suspected parties from forming a unified majority. In practical terms no majority can be expected before day three, but then, if and only if the young Morse can clear one additional person if neither infirmarian and prankster are dead, or two if the infirmarian is, then these upstart Cambridge types quite literally will not stand a chance. Worth thinking about.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
[Out of character: Smudgie, I missed that you were playing a cook. Hope you don't feel I stepped on your toes by picking head cook.]

Lucy just blinked as she heard the news from Dyllis. "Murdered Professor Raphsom? They couldn't have! It must have been an accident. No one would do something so horrible. Professor Raphsom was an excellent man; he always said hello to me so kindly." She might have gone on like that for quite a while if Dyllis had not interrupted to explain the note about the Society of Cambridge University Murderers.

"Oh how horrible!" Lucy flapped her hands. "And I never gave Professor Raphsom a present for the holidays!" She turned to run to her room to panic, but stopped. "What if they hurt someone else? Oh, no one is safe! No one should go about alone! Someone should find where the murderers are hiding. Everyone will be upset. I'd better make cupcakes!" Still crying messily, Lucy rushed for the kitchen.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Logge's mind drifted off Heraclitus onto strategy.

On the one hand, we do need to lynch these criminals before we are all killed off.
On the other, if it's anything that Logge has discovered from his researches into similar situations it was that criminals are often better at appearing to be honest men, women, and feline animals than honest men, women, and feline animals are. So it would be helpful if we avoided lynching the detective on the first round. It appears that the infirmarian cannot protect the detective indefinitely, so forcing the detective to identify himself or herself will not help us.

I think that the optimum time for the detective to reveal himself or herself is after the third round if there are three SCUM. If we lynch every round and there are three SCUM, then that will be too late - there will be three innocents left and three of them.
I therefore counsel everyone to hold off lynching for at least one round.
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
You'd think that having 6 feet of snow and a murder would make things easier on the cleaners, but no, the Master had had words with the hear porter who'd had words until someone low enough to speak to 'that Chinese chap with the silly name, sounds like Jason'.

Now a moderately wide passage was maintained between the Porter's lodge, the chapel (where a memorial prayer would be happening later-his brother had caused enough problems in Jason's homeland), the masters lodge and the dining hall. Narrower passages connected at least one door (the cloisters made some parts of this easier, these were the ones other staff did) from the other key blocks of the college.

Using some stones to remake an abacus (he had had a decent education in China before boarding the ship at Hong Kong-which was why he had determined to learn good English)
12 people, (assuming as Dafyd 3 Scum) by the 3rd day, 3 innocents murdered

with no lynching at all...
(~2/3 chance of each special surviving), the detective (if alive) to know the state of ~2 people.
3 known innocents, 3 scum, 3 unknown. If the scum were drawn out it would be easy or enough specials survived, but if not it would be a tense finish...

with full lynching...
(~1/3 chance of each special surviving, the detective to know the state of ~1 person)
2 known innocents, 3 scum, 1 unknown...again tense.

Was either better, was there a happy middle ground, he wondered, it all looked rather similar to him?
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
Dyllis eyed Lucy suspiciously... this chit of a girl had usurped her rightful position as head cook, but then perhaps a lesser (more persecuted) role in the kitchen hierarchy would work to her advantage in the grand scheme of things. She'd just have to make sure those musty old dons and their acolytes noticed her devotion to duty and uncomplaining demeanour.

In the meantime, however, Lucy was definitely good for a gossip behind the scenes, even if she did show an irritating tendency to flap. Neither of them seemed to have much inspiration as to who might have commited this heinous crime (all the more heinous as the dead man had not had time or reason yet to change his will) but the halls were ringing with rumour and suspicion. Never mind the cupcakes, this was time for a serious brew up.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Barbara Layman looked up from fluffing the cushions in the front parlour as her husband came in, and pretended she had not been at all hanging around for some decent adult conversation.

The pallor in her spouse's visage, however, made her ask in alarum "Why Professor L., whatever is the matter?"

The good Professor headed straight for the whiskey decanter, and poured himself a thumb-full. Eventually, she came to understand that there had been a Most Heinous Crime committed on the college grounds by some discontented SCUM.

Barbara was appalled. But her brain was working overtime on what this might mean for her beloved. "Professor R. is dead?" Conflicting emotions erupted within her. But over and above all was the need for protection.

"A murderer on the loose?" she gasped. Oh why oh why had she not gone up to her mother's in Belgrade Square for Christmas? There she would have had the luxury of gas lights and heating, and civilized female company instead of all these crusty old dons who thought more about the quality of their port, than the quality of company.

Swiftly she topped up Professor Layman's glass, and poured one for herself. Then she took her glass with her as she checked every door and window was locked.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Felis saunters through the college, listening carefully.

Mr. Logge and Professor Eliabach seem to be taking the lead in coming up with ideas for where to sniff. Felis is quite fond of both of them; Mr. Logge for his dishes of milk, and Prof. Eliabach for his utterly squalid suite of rooms, which are home to a veritable horde of rodents and where there's always good sport to be had if Felis is feeling bored or hungry. She even caught a great big juicy rat in there once. Very generously, she carried her prize round to Mrs. Layman's door, in the hopes of ingratiating herself with the lady with the comfy sofas and big toasty fire, but the mean, ungrateful Mrs. Layman screeched like a dying bird and chased her off with a broom. Felis was most insulted at the rejection of her bounteous gift.

Jason Meng has also offered some useful thoughts. Possibly the other humans might overlook him because of his lowly position, but since the cat has the good sense to know that all humans are servants (she's hoping Mrs. Layman will get the memo soon), she's more than happy to listen to him so long as he treats her nice.

Felis listens to Eliabach's musings, and thinks it sounds like something she's heard before. Worth bearing in mind, but needs more exploration. There's a new problem to it as well. The infirmarian can't keep anyone alive indefinitely. They have to change their patient every night (she also hopes they've had veterinary, as well as medical training [Biased] ).

She notes that Mr. Logge and the cleaner are both talking about three SCUM, but she isn't sure this is right. With all the undergraduates gone for the holidays, there's not that many people still around, so there might only be two. Impossible to know at this juncture.

If no one is voted out, then there isn't a vigilante about to kill overnight, so this takes some of the risk out of a TESS vote. Useful information can still be gained by studying secondary votes. Might be the way to go, unless there's an obvious reason to pounce on someone.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
"Well this is a most infuriating distraction" grumbled Prof. Berg, whose tolerance of interactions with the real world was low at the best of times, but for whom the thought of hysterical kitchen staff and pious academics was simply too much. "We must get this nonsense sorted out forthwith and as such I wonder if we shouldn't string someone up from the rafters and see what noises they make as they choke. With any luck, they will lead us to the murderers and we can get back to our lives.

"But, I'll have you know, that I think I am on the verge of unifying gravity with the other fundamental forces but with all this fuss and commotion there is simply no way I can concentrate on my work. So in the name of the progress of the human understanding of the universe, I suggest that a few deaths are a small price to pay for the reward which beckons."
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
So long as nobody dies in the wine cellar, I'm quite happy. It'd be such a horrid mess to have to clean that up. Plus, I always thought that murders were violent, thrashy affairs—no doubt they'd break some of my bottles!

Plus, I'm quite sure that, being filthy Tabs, they wouldn't even have the decency to do it in the £40-and-under section. Oh no. They'd probably even drink that stash of Jackass Hill Vineyard that I've got squirreled away after they were done! The Nerve!

Perhaps a sign might work . . .

No Murdering in the Wine Cellar
In Vinotecum Occidere Nole
(Something in Cuneiform)

There. That ought to cover it.

[ 25. October 2011, 16:19: Message edited by: AristonAstuanax ]
 
Posted by Sir Kevin (# 3492) on :
 
I have a map of Oxford University on the wall of my wife's study and St. Damian's College is not in evidence!
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
Jason through some crumbs to the cat, which sniffed disdainfully and walked away.

The more he thought about it the less convinced he was that Eliabach's force was irresistible.
With lynching, by the third turn there would only be three people left...
Against 3 mafia even if all three specials survived things rely on careful playing, (in fact with open roles and rational play I make it losing), but then there's a reason I'm playing the cleaner.

Against 2 mafia things are better, (though even then by no means certain-I make it 33% odds if 1 villager is unproven).

But there were two contradictory responses either keeping more villagers alive or try getting the scum first. And as the odds of hitting scum increase so too the odds of hitting useful people.
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Kevin:
I have a map of Oxford University on the wall of my wife's study and St. Damian's College is not in evidence!
It got merged into All Souls after the sad events being related, if you had a map from 1899...
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
(The game's afoot! I wish all the cooks, wine keepers, cats, wives, cleaners, librarians and dons in the room happy lynching and merry murder.)

Prof Mumblebore was amazed. A murder. A real murder in St Damian's. O tempora o mores, he mused, quem ad finem barbaria vestra se pertinet?
But then he saw the bright side of it. It promised some excitement for the long winter days. A bit like in Ten Little Niggers by Ms Christie, who of course had not yet been invented. With the proliferation of cooks and wine dons he was sure they'd be well enough cared for. And a little murder or lynching to get rid of some of the other inmates might ease the strain on his nerves that other humans always meant. He did not mind the cat that went about the college and he even sometimes gave it some of his morning cream. Seeing how fat the beast was he however suspected that he was not the only one to grant it such favours.
He did not believe in starting on maths too early. With twelve unknown variables maths were at best unnecessary and probably just confusing nonsense. Especially in a game that in its cyber version in his experience was usually decided by luck anyway.
He thought that there could only be two Society of Cambrige University Murderers which would be the normal ratio with twelve players. As the online version (compared to the live game) favours the conspirators anyway an increase of the recommended ratio to three would mean that the odds would be so hugely in their favour that the other team would have virtually no chance. So he'll consistently assume two Society of Cambrige University Murderers until proven otherwise.
This means there are two baddies and two goodie specials.
Lynching on day one is obviously guesswork for the honest team.
So with random voting the chances of lynching a special are equal to those of lynching a Society of Cambrige University Murderer (1/6 each). The likelihood of lynching any innocent are 5/6 (minus a little bit unless someone votes for suicide). The real likelihood for lynching a special is slightly higher than for lynching a Cambridgeonian because the two Society of Cambrige University Murderers can co-ordinate their votes which we cannot. They are slightly lower because the innocent nominee won't vote for himself. With every night Mr Morse however gains extra knowledge.
So I advocate no lynching.
We should however still nominate people in order to create some activity for future info. If nobody else does I shall nominate but will do so by using a random generating device (Can anyone think of a public way of doing this (using a website updated daily?) so everybody can check it really is a random act?)

Prof Mumblebore wondered what TESS meant. He really cursed this modern habit of talking in acronyms. We're a college of derelict old geezers, a haven of conservatism and not a hip boy group or the linguistic avantgarde introducing modern usages that would not be invented for another decade and a half or so.

Does Cambridge not have a different dialect from Oxford? We could just lynch all those speaking funny.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
Does Cambridge not have a different dialect from Oxford? We could just lynch all those speaking funny.
"It is not that I hold the intellectual capacity of those from Cambridge in high regard, but one must presume that anyone clever enough to devise the infiltration which we are currently experiencing must also be sufficiently gifted between the ears to mask their rather regional accent and affect" mused Heisen. "Yes, I'm afraid that I rather fear we will come to realize that appearances can be unfortunately deceptive."

"As I suggested before, perhaps the murderer's facade of respectability will crack under the close scrutiny of a lynchmob. Who should we nominate?"
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
TESS is "this execution should stop" (ie. no lynching).

Also, just to clarify, there are three innocent specials, not two.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Layman drew back the curtains, the morning after the terrible news of the Master's demise, to discover nothing but whiteness.

The snow was all pervasive; but at least she and Professor L., and little Berkeley were still alive. As she prompted the fireplace into more warmth, their pet nightingale chirruped approvingly.

"Well", she said to the nightingale, "This is a terrible decision. Do we open the front door and try to dig our way through to the dining hall in time for the dons' elevenses, or do we have to make tea ourselves?"
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Shouldn't it be "whom"?
Sounds just like the kind of accent you'd expect from a Cambridgeman in disguise...
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Oh my. As usual not payin attenshun to nuffin.
I was referring to IF's post and hadn't noticed a new leaf had been turned.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
So I advocate no lynching.
We should however still nominate people in order to create some activity for future info. If nobody else does I shall nominate but will do so by using a random generating device (Can anyone think of a public way of doing this (using a website updated daily?) so everybody can check it really is a random act?)
I agree that there ought to be some voting options other than TESS. However, I note that the one person excluded from this method of execution-candidate selection is presumably yourself. I might have to nominate you just to keep you honest…and also because you called me fat. I assure that I am a sleek, lean mouse-hunting machine and in no way rotund or tubby at all [Biased]
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Just a reminder that you have fifteen hours to make these nominations.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
In that case, I nominate Mumblebore on the basis that Mumblebore is going to nominate someone other than Mumblebore and we ought to have a variety of options on the slate.

(Failing that, it was going to be Mrs. Layman for being so intolerably rude to me when I was kind enough to give her a lovely present but that would have been petty vengeance, not any kind of strategy.)
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
and also because you called me fat. I assure that I am a sleek, lean mouse-hunting machine and in no way rotund or tubby at all [Biased]
I would never ever call a lady "fat". But with a cat things are different. A lean, yea haggard cat? Where is the fun in that? One cannot cuddle if the beastie's ribs feel more like a xylophone than a cushion.
I have not found an idea how to make it public. So I decided to say a figure and nominate from the list that someone made on page 1. Number 7.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
I nominate Lucy (Gwai). For bringing me a cup of lukewarm tea.
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
So I advocate no lynching.
We should however still nominate people in order to create some activity for future info. If nobody else does I shall nominate but will do so by using a random generating device (Can anyone think of a public way of doing this (using a website updated daily?) so everybody can check it really is a random act?)
Tying it to the lottery would work (giving each person a public number before the draw) then taking the remainder of the first ball divided by the number of players for the first victim.

I'm really not sure if it's in the spirit of the game*, though as it might damage discussion.

*I tried something similar last time I played-I'm not sure it was a good idea (either in terms of fair play or practicalness).

[ 26. October 2011, 17:02: Message edited by: Jay-Emm ]
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy looked disturbed to say the least. "I am so very sorry about the lukewarm cup of tea. May I bring you another one? On the other hand, are you seriously suggesting throwing me out into that snow as punishment? That is so very strange that I am intensely scared of you now."

"Dyllis, is there any chance you would be willing to serve the disturbing Professor Mumblebore his food since apparently he and I have disastrously bad relationship?"

With that Lucy rushed out of the room and back into the safe kitchen. "Oh, what did I do! Oh, what did I ever do to make someone want me dead. Oh my, I knew a girl shouldn't rise above her station. This must be a bad dream. Can't be real. Oh my! Oh my!" She pushed aside the partially finished cupcakes and put her head in her arms to cry.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
With lynching, by the third turn there would only be three people left...
Against 3 mafia even if all three specials survived things rely on careful playing, (in fact with open roles and rational play I make it losing), but then there's a reason I'm playing the cleaner.

Against 2 mafia things are better, (though even then by no means certain-I make it 33% odds if 1 villager is unproven).
Professor Eliabach shakes his head in disbelief. Surely basic reasoning and arithmetic has not entirely disappeared from the curriculum?

On the third day, there will have been two previous days and two previous nights. That is, four possible deaths. Eight survivors, since twelve minus four is eight even at Oxford. At that point, five known innocents is a win. Four suffices if one of them is the prankster. It is also unlikely.

The point is, if we get so lucky as to have most of our specials alive then, it is worth thinking about whether we can force a victory. And the time to raise the possibility is NOW, since no one knows who will be alive in two days' time to suggest it.

For the moment, the thing to do is try to find the SCUM. Personally, although this may be a bias of my own peculiar discipline, my experience has always been that I have learnt much more from the dead than from the living. Therefore we should lynch someone. Someone whose organs are in reasonable condition, for preference, since I have as yet no basis for suspecting any one of you more than another.

[ 26. October 2011, 20:39: Message edited by: Eliab ]
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Pike had done a tolerably fair job of creating a pathway to the dining hall through the snow; and of liberating at least two of the downstairs windows.

Mrs. Layman was uncertain about the wisdom of this, and waved her husband off to get his tea with a heavy heart. She even ordered Pike to go with him. What if the foul fiend who murdered Professor R was still lurking about somewhere? She turned back inside and locked the front door once more.

But the strange feeling she was being watched, would not leave. It was Berkeley, jumping about in his birdcage in a most agitated way, that drew her attention to the very fat, yellow eyed cat, which was lying on the windowsill outside the parlour. It's long white fur blended into the snow behind it, leaving what appeared to be two unblinking orbs which were focussed intently on her exquisite pet.

Mrs. Layman shuddered and pulled the drapes across the window. When Pike came back, she'd get him to sprinkle some black pepper across the outside ledge.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
A thought suddenly occurs to Professor Eliabach, and he swiftly leaves the common room and returns to his chambers. He had almost forgotten - there will be a most interesting conjunction taking place this evening, and urgent preparations to be made. Hastily, he reaches up to find a well-thumbed volume detailing the necessary steps.

As for the vote? He could make that, but probably not have the time to join in any discussions. Unfortunate, but that could not be helped. Still, he might as well keep an ear and an eye open.

A few muttered incantations later, the blaze in the fireplace hisses with a searing, dark flame. The ghostly form of some forgotten student, a suicide, squirms and struggles in fresh agony as Ernst's will draws it forth from its accustomed place of torment in the dark wood beneath.

The shade screams and curses pitifully, in a voice which only an adept or a cat might hear, but it cannot prevail against the words of power. After a few minutes, its resistance collapses. "Master...." it gasps in a broken voice.

"Get thee hence to the common rooms and corridors of this place. Reveal thyself to no one. Watch. Listen. Remember. Report. But disturb me not until a vote is called. Fail me and I will shrivel and char thy soul in the deepest fire, as disobedient to the will that rules thee. Go!"

The image departs and the Professor turns again to his work...


[OOC - I'm away for a few days with sporadic computer access. Should be able to vote, but not otherwise participate until Sunday]
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
Professor Eliabach shakes his head in disbelief. Surely basic reasoning and arithmetic has not entirely disappeared from the curriculum?
I seem to have got confused between on the 3rd day and after 3 days...how bizarre (it's not like you were inconsistent).

In character I'll blame it on Jason's justifiable lack of English.
OOC I don't have the justification. Maybe this line "An equal vote of known innocents to suspects can be forced through IF the prankster is alive" combined with the repeated use of 3 between other posters, made me jump to the conclusion you were referring to the potential 3 innocents-3 scum (as the cat points out it could be 4-2) situation after the third day.

But in any case reading it properly that probably is our best day to make sense of things (if we aren't lucky/unlucky before).
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Clarification for the voting procedure: will we be required to rank all candidates?
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
I might as well respond to that now and give full voting instructions, even though nominations do not close for another three hours. You are not required to vote at all (although not voting may hurt you later -- recall that if the system results in a tie, the candidate who has missed the most votes hangs). If you do vote, you are not required to rank all candidates and, if you do, you are allowed ties.

So, with three candidates, there are a bunch of options available to voters:

1. Don't vote.
2. Vote for one person. The other two are then joint second choice.
3. Vote for a first choice and a second choice. The other person is then automatically third.
4. Vote for two people tied for first place. The other person is then automatically in third.

I was going to in general give 48 hours for such things, but I'll go a little longer to match my schedule and give you until Saturday 8am EST. Nominations are still open for another three hours, don't vote yet.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Further clarification before it becomes relevant: TESS is not eligible to vote, so she will never have missed any votes. The victim of the prankster will count as missing a vote on the day they are pranked.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
An hour late, but here's my official announcement that voting has started. Here are your three candidates:

Prof. Mumblebore (nominated by Felis Rufa)
Lucy (nominated by Prof. Mumblebore)
TESS.

You have until Saturday 8am EST to place your votes.

[For those of you using the spreadsheet, it's designed for four candidates, not three, so just ignore D.]
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
Well, I see it this way: if we lynch someone, we find out their affiliation. That's good.
If we lynch someone, it means we control who dies, rather than the SCUM. That's even better.
We may be shooting in the dark, but the SCUM can pick targets perfectly—they'll never target themselves. Thus, we need to do as much killing (or at least threatening) as possible.
We can rank our preferences equally, leading to two people feeling the pressure.
Finally, if we do the lynching, it means the blood gets spilled somewhere other than my cellar. Someone else has to clean it up. This is of paramount importance.

Thus, I vote:
1st (tie): Prof. Mumble, Lucy
3rd: TESS
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
1. Case for no lynching on day one.
As I said I advocate no lynching. Reasons: Against what Ariston just said (and Eliabeone who always does) previous experience has shown that the "we must lynch on day one" has so far not led to the goodies' team wins (the only recent win, 2 or 3 rounds back came by a sheer strike of early luck). So it is not a strategy that has ever worked. (I used to advocate it myself but have learned). Activism for activity's sake is not good. We must keep calm and collect information before we act. We are (most likely) ten against two, we have time.
This is particularly true when we have a detective who accumulates information during the night. Last time (I think) we lynched our detective on day one. As I said: we are more likely to kill our own specials than mafia. (I know I am not the detective but Gwai might be, so I won't vote for her despite nominating her).
And it is just as good to analyse reasonings as voting patterns with later hindsight.

2. Defense
Believe me, if I were SCUM I would not be out here on stage all the time talking. (I was quiet enough last time to make a more silent approach credible).
I suggested to nominate randomly (solely in order to create debate) in a public way. But I could not think of a method fast enough before last night. I am still prepared to back that up with action (although it might become nonsense after day two because we should have additional information by then). This
Our Chinese friend suggested a way involving the (presumably British) lottery?
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
Tying it to the lottery would work (giving each person a public number before the draw) then taking the remainder of the first ball divided by the number of players for the first victim.
I do not know when Brit lottery numbers are drawn (Germany it is Saturday nights I think which might be feasible for this round. It has 48 numbers which is a multiple of 12 (number of players) and thus might allow a truly random choice by way of a little calculation published beforehand. Our math dons can suggest one to me. [I cannot see how this is against the spirit of the game?? Any method seems fine to me. And it is some new approach. Public randomness is the only safe method to guarantee absolute transparency in any action - that in itself must be good. Because all really firm knowledge at this stage is a privilege of Mafia (and soon of the detective who of course must make sure to leave an unmistakable trail for us to analyse once s/he dies).
This offer to nominate randomly would be extremely risky if I were SCUM. With a 1/6 chance I'd thus have to nominate one of my own (I offer to nominate myself if the rules allow it - otherwise it would only be 1/11, making me look rather silly). That alone may be still be seen as a cunning disguise but with the current voting system lynchings are far likelier than before and it would be a cunning Baldrick plan.

Request of rule clarifications:
1) Are we allowed to PM each other? Day and/or night? This is particularly relevant for Mr Morse of course who could thus tell people he cleared them and discourage them for lynching him.
2) Would Mr Morse see only "innocent/guilty" or also the specific role prankster/infirmarian?

I vote
1. no lynching
No second preference.
For an accused to vote so early and not naming Gwai as second choice greatly increases his (my) risk of dying as I cannot cast my vote late to save myself if need be. You may read this is a sign of my bona fide.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Mrs. Layman keeps her meat in a cage so she doesn't have to use any energy hunting it. She must be fattening that bird up a bit, I suppose, because it doesn't look like there's much eating on it at the moment. Anyway, doesn't she know free range is best?

Onto more serious matters. I think I disagree that not lynching gives the SCUM a free shot, because Oxford being the civilised place it is, vigilanteism is not allowed. The two candidates are more likely innocent than guilty (even though I nominated one of them), so if we lynch one and then the SCUM get their kill in = 2 corpses. No lynch and then the SCUM get a hit on target = 1 corpse. Unless one of the nominees is actually guilty, it therefore strikes me that it's in the innocents' interest to keep everyone alive. Usually the advantage of blind lynching is the information it provides (TESS allows too much hiding in the crowd), but this is a different situation because of Harold's ingenious system. We can vote TESS in first place and then still glean useful information from the secondary votes.

One more problem occurs to Felis, of a purely practical nature: are they really expecting the cat to pick up a pen? [Ultra confused] Nonplussed, she flicks out a perfectly manicured claw and punches a series of holes in her ballot paper. She hopes she will be understood.

Assuming, since for the time being there's no reason to do otherwise, that Mumblebore really did nominate at random:

TESS: •
Mumblebore: ••
Lucy: ••

(to understand Felis' numbers, count the holes, i.e. 1 hole = 1, 2 holes= 2 etc.)
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
1. TESS
2. Lucy (Gwai)
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
[OOC: Sorry, I know I promised to be back yesterday. I usually take some time writing my posts, and had a half written post for this thread in a tab of my browser, but unfortunately had to go to the hospital and spend the night there. Didn't bring my computer and thus couldn't post. Either way, I'm pretty sure you people don't want me lynching and nominating while on morphine... Feeling fine now, though.]

I'm sorry to have been so silent - I had to work my way here by means of a tunnel from the orangery!

I'm uncertain as to whether a lynching would be good or not. Eliabach claims to learn a lot from killing (I've always thought mathematics was a subject for sadists to teach), and I agree that it CAN be useful. We see patterns in the trails of blood, whereas SCUM don't need patterns. To us, patterns are all we have. I usually follow this path.

However, the last argument is also a good counterargument. Before we end up seeing patterns, the SCUM will know who to vote for and who not. They will be able to run off with the vote and get an extra chance at taking out specials. I've heard about similar cases where such things happened, and the SCUM are better off from it. There's a greater chance at striking a special than at striking SCUM.

Still, the patterns are all we have. On the third or fourth day things will come down to having some knowledge at all. Murphy's law predictates that Mr. Morse will be gone by then, but then again that's something we can decide on too right now, it seems. If we stand down on this vote, then I suppose (though I belong to the mathematically challenged) there's a 1/11 greater chance of keeping Mr. Morse a bit longer. A 3/11 chance of keeping any good special role for one day longer. Of course there's 1/6, if we believe the nominations to be at random, that we've got at least one crook. Things could be made more complicated by entering the fact that the likelihood of there being 2 SCUM in the equation is 0, since the first nominee got to pick the second one. That means the chance at there being a crook in there is back at 1/11. Not very good odds. Three times the chance of hitting a special. 10 times the chance of hitting an innocent, or something to that degree. I frankly haven't got the mathematical skills to tie this thought up, but I think the case is quite made for me. I hope I get it right.

I vote for TESS.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
The following rules clarifications are approved, by order of the butler.

quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
(I offer to nominate myself if the rules allow it
They do.

quote:

Request of rule clarifications:
1) Are we allowed to PM each other? Day and/or night? This is particularly relevant for Mr Morse of course who could thus tell people he cleared them and discourage them for lynching him.
Only SCUM may PM each other.

quote:

2) Would Mr Morse see only "innocent/guilty" or also the specific role prankster/infirmarian?
Morse only sees "innocent/guilty," not any special role.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
[OOC] JFH, that sounds kinda scary. I'm glad you're feeling okay now, but look after yourself, yeah?! [Smile] [/OOC]

The Professor's mind was made up. He had been thinking all night and (unusually) his training in the mathematics of uncertainty had let him down. The path integrals were too complicated, the statistical analysis had too many unknowns, and while it was tempting to make jokes about cats being both alive and dead at the same time, he thought that such humor would not go down well in the present company.

So he was back to his gut. And his gut said that he wanted someone else's guts spilled. Talk, talk, talk: it's the only way to spot the traitors, and the only way to gain an intuition for the allegiance of those left in the college.

Therefore, he cast his vote as follows:
1st equal: Prof. Mumbledore and Lucy.
3rd: TESS
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy finally puts the cupcakes in the oven, still having off and on crying jags. "I can't believe somebody would suggest killing me at random. He must really hate me!

"What, I am supposed to vote for who should die? No one, of course! This Execution should most definitely End! I am strongly against hurting anyone. However, anyone who is so bloodthirsty is someone I rather distrust, so if we really can't end this horrible thing, I say we should be very skeptical of Professor Mumblemore's motives."

[So, to clarify:
1) TESS
2) Professor Mumblemore]

(Codefix. -AA)

[ 27. October 2011, 18:50: Message edited by: AristonAstuanax ]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
[OOC: Sorry about lack of involvement from here - just had the first few days of kitchen being knocked out along with a wall or two!! Been mad and noisy! Just going to catch-up with events... Everything is covered in brick dust - hope the laptop doesn't start coughing!]

[ 27. October 2011, 16:16: Message edited by: Chelley ]
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs Layman looked at the voting paper which had been pushed through the letterbox in the front door. What did it all mean? Why was it marked 'URGENT'? Were they trying to get rid of Professor M, and the cook? They would have to be crazy to let anyone leave at Christmas time. Didn't they realize how hard it was to get good staff these days? And who on earth was Tess?

She turned the paper over in her hands three times before sighing and filling in the boxes.

1.TESS
2.Prof.M/Lucy

She hoped she'd done it right. Then she gave it to Pike with instructions it had to be given to Professor R's butler.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
The tension was palpable. Professor Berg fretted. The college waited.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley had burrowed herself away in the library as the college hummed with the disturbing news of recent events. The books gave her a degree of comfort and it was probably true to say that even in the normal run of college life she spent more time here among her paper companions than she did in her little college rooms.
But what to do? There was talk about the Professor - Mumblebore, as well as the cook, Lucy. But could they really have had anything to do with Prof. Raphsom's death? Cold cups of tea and calling the cat, Felis, fat had led to whispers but there was so little of substance to point at the culprits. Miss Chelley knew well though her own tendency to look with suspicion at all around her and thought perhaps her distraction in the library may have been beneficial for once in stopping her own ability to leap to conclusions. But she had to add her voice to the others and as she pondered she thumbed the copy of a book she'd been reading by an author named Austen, Pride and Prejudice. It seemed likely that prejudice would be a contributing factor in these latest events, a trait the novel's heroine habitually displayed. The librarian made the decision then that perhaps more time should pass before she reached any prejudicial conclusions herself.
1. TESS was therefore the obvious choice, but she battled with herself over what to do next. No further vote would leave Lucy and Mumblebore with equal 2. positions. But that niggle of suspicion towards Mumblebore and his early musings was hard to resist... but he had also not placed Lucy higher in the way of suspicion than himself, perhaps that was an honourable decision? So she decided to stick with that first resolve...
1. TESS
Therefore equal 2. Lucy and Mumblebore.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
I will leave the voting open for the next 22 hours as agreed so as the three who are yet to vote can register their opinion, but also let you know that as she now has 7 first preference votes, there is no way for TESS not to win -- no need to cut another tree down for a coffin just yet.

I'll give 48 hours for night actions, beginning 8am EST Saturday, so going through to 8am EST Monday. If they're all in by 8am EST Sunday, though, we'll have dawn then. Hence, if any of the specials are sure they don't want to act, it would be good to pm me to say that. If anyone needs to pm me their night action early, that's fine.

People can talk openly (ie. post on the thread) overnight. (Academics have never kept normal hours and neither, therefore, do their staff, spouses or pets.)
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
One more problem occurs to Felis, of a purely practical nature: are they really expecting the cat to pick up a pen? [Ultra confused] Nonplussed, she flicks out a perfectly manicured claw and punches a series of holes in her ballot paper. She hopes she will be understood.
Ernst bows extravagantly to Felis, with a dramatic sweep of his cape.

“Holy one, I am a mere initiate of the mysteries, but in this company at least, a practical scientist. The problem is not without a solution. I would be pleased to lend you an homunculus to act as your scribe.”

A small thing, resembling a human neonate, but of bluish hue, and with cracked, papery skin, crawls across the floor towards the cat, clasping a gold-nibbed fountain pen.

Eliabach steps backwards, to allow the sacred being to inspect his gift. It is not, in truth, an especially generous one. The thing has no more than a week or two’s life left in it, in any case, and was never a particularly satisfactory specimen. Stillbirths never are. An abortion, if it can be removed relatively intact, is almost always superior, and a fresh infanticide best of all. But it should serve.

He then bows again and hisses in the thing’s misshapen ear: “Serve her well, for when she is done with thee, I shall bind thy soul to thy infant form, grind thy bones to powder, and send thee helpless into the pit.”

Beaming at the assembled company, the Professor then turns to his own vote.


quote:
I think I disagree that not lynching gives the SCUM a free shot, because Oxford being the civilised place it is, vigilanteism is not allowed. The two candidates are more likely innocent than guilty (even though I nominated one of them), so if we lynch one and then the SCUM get their kill in = 2 corpses. No lynch and then the SCUM get a hit on target = 1 corpse. Unless one of the nominees is actually guilty, it therefore strikes me that it's in the innocents' interest to keep everyone alive. Usually the advantage of blind lynching is the information it provides (TESS allows too much hiding in the crowd), but this is a different situation because of Harold's ingenious system. We can vote TESS in first place and then still glean useful information from the secondary votes.
That is the paradox. We need to kill to win, and have only a few chabces to choose wisely, yet each time we kill, the odds are that we will hurt rather than advance our cause.

Whereas the murderers need not lynch at all, but whenever they do, they will almost always have a safe victim.

In my judgement, it is best not to miss a chance, but I see the wisdom of the crowd is, as ever, against me. I do not think we learn as much from second preferences, where the real intent is to abstain, than we do from votes with lives plainly at risk. That said, a hypothetical preference is all I can now offer.

I see no reason to suspect either nominee above the other. I fear I can make neither head nor tail nor any other useful body part of old Mumbledore’s defence, and I am therefore content that the jar marked for his brain remain empty a little longer. I have no fear that it will spoil from over-use. The cook, however, has a pleasing degree of body fat, and quite delectable organs, and I would dearly love to anatomise her.

Thus:

1. Lucy
2. Mumbledore
3. TESS

[ 28. October 2011, 15:44: Message edited by: Eliab ]
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Felis dabs at Eliabach’s strange creature with a doubtful paw. It smells funny.

[OOC: It’s my birthday this weekend [Yipee] - going to my parents’ for a few days. I shall endeavour to check in every so often, but probably online a bit less often than usual.]
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Layman gasped at the pain which shot through her abdomen and left her heart pounding. She clutched at the mantelpiece and bit her lip to stop the tears. She felt colder than death.

Berkeley chirped questioningly.

"Oh my dear Professor," breathed Barbara towards the front door, "please do get home soon. It feels as though a grave that is dear to us has been desecrated. What on earth is going on at St.Damian's?"
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
On the basis i can't make up my mind and even wrongheaded action feels better than waiting till our throats are slit.
1. Lucy =1 mumbled. 2 Less
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
Dyllis took a moment out from her careful polishing of the teaspoons to heave a sigh. How could she make a fair and honest assessment of the situation when she had other more important things on her mind... and Lucy's death would cause her considerable inconvenience were she found to be guilty of the crime. Why, Dyllis would have to take on the role of head cook, with all the ..er.. extra pay and status... hmm... but, then again.. with no poor minion to delegate the teaspoon cleaning to.

There again, Mumbledore might well prove advantageous to her if she could convince him of her devotion to serving him, especially as Lucy had got off to such a bad start and thus paved the way for her. Besides, he'd been nominated by that *spit* cat. Cats. They were always getting in teh way of her plans.

She thought through the options. Her choice suddenly became a whole lot clearer.

1 TESS
2 Lucy

Now, she wondered whether Professor Mumbledore might appreciate another nice hot cup of tea to calm his nerves.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Prof Mumblebore had been muttering and mumbling away to himself. In the end he had found a way. It was easy. All he needed to do was give everybody a number, something he tended to do anyway, lacking the slightest personal interest in other human beans: cook#1, cook#2, chambermaid A, chambermaid B, maths don ζ etc. He went by the order of names on the noticeboard in the hallway:

1. a vie en rouge - Felis Rufa (cat!)
2. Eliab – Prof Eliabach
3. Ariston Astuanax - Archibald St. George (wine fellow)
4. Dafyd - Mr. Dai A. Logge (Philosophy scholar)
5. Chelley - Miss Chelley (Librarian)
6. JFH - Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (gardener)
7. Smudgie - Dyllis Smudgetta (cook)
8. Gwai - Lucy (head cook)
9. Banner Lady - Mrs Barbara Layman (Prof Layman's wife)
10. Sylvander - Professor Mumblebore
11. Imaginary Friend - Prof Heisen Berg (Physics lecturer)
12. Jay-Emm - Jason Meng (cleaner?)

He had found out that German lottery (www.lotto.de) draws 6 numbers Wed + Sat nights. He'll nominate the first number between 1 and 12 that gets drawn (if none is, then the second dozen 13-24 would be used by substracting 12 from it, effectively treating 13-24 as if it was 1 to 12, and so on for 25-36 etc). He'll nominate the person whose number is up (now you know where that one comes from).
If the number in question is dead by then he'll take a neighbouring number: the lower neighbour if the deceased was an even number and the higher neighbour if s/he was an odd number (yes, I know). 1 and 12 will be treated as neighbours.

The lottery website lists the numbers in numerical order, not in the order in which they were drawn, but that information was easily provided because there really are people who put the lottery draw on the notice board in the Youtube Building.

All this may make little sense after day two, but he'll give it a shot, unless he dies before.
Mumblebore was mildly distressed that yesterday he miscounted and hence misnominated (Nr. 7 is cook#1, Dyllis Smudgette, not cook#2, Lucy). That was annoying since giving the other cook a little fright would have provided great satisfaction. In their (his, not hers of course) long-gone youth she had consistently beaten him at a game called „Crew Quiz“ and he had never forgiven her for it.
[Good heavens! This post was ready before he heard of cook#1’s kind offer to provide decent tea… Should he take that into account? Alleviating circumstances? Ach! Kindness! Much overrated. He violently shook his grey mane. Probably she’s SCUM trying to make an ally from an aged soft-hearted professor. But then again, hot tea could never be over-rated.]

Then he overheard a hushed whisper from the servants' quarter (his hearing was remarkable for things he was not supposed to hear).
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai: I say we should be very skeptical of Professor Mumblemore's motives."
O mulier stulta! Qui bonum respuit consilium, sibi ipse nocet. Mark my words, silly cook#1with the lukewarm tea, he muttered. A pretty face is not everything, you know.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Night falls

The college has rather definitively decided not to lynch anyone tonight. TESS beat out Mumblebore 8 votes to 4 and also beat Lucy by the same margin.

People have another 48 hours for night actions, but if you get them to me within the next 24 we'll start then.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Some people's pigeon holes were completely full, remarked Harold.

Could people please be sure to have space in their pm boxes for any communique I may have to make to them?
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
Dyllis was keeping an eye on the kettle bubbling away on the range. It wouldn't be long until it was whistling merrily, indicating the perfect moment for brewing the perfect cup of tea for the recently reprieved professor. Warm the pot, just right... stir the tea... use the finest of strainers just to be sure... Milk first? Tea first? Far better - take the pot and the milkjug on the tray and pour for the professor at the point of delivery... that way the tea remains at maximum temperature.

She could cope with the continued whittering of that Lucy woman - it was so much nicer not to have another death in the college. Perhaps now those SCUM would see the error of their ways and bootle off back whence they came, leaving the honourable people here to get on with their own business. And her business was to make sure that she left the college far wealthier than when she arrived. With a quick kick at the passing moggy, begging as usual at the kitchen door, she turned her attention to the matter in hand. The perfect cup of tea.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Harold noticed that the college door knobs looked a little less clean than usual. This could only mean one thing: Jason Meng (Jay-Emm) had been murdered! He was an ordinary citizen.

You have until 8am EST Wednesday (60 hours from now) to make nominations.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Barbara Layman was shocked and appalled. Shocked that there had been another murder, and appalled that anyone could find cleanliness so offensive that they would prefer dirty door handles to clean ones.

She shuddered. Whatever was the world coming to? It was almost the twentieth century, for heaven's sake.

She poured Professor Layman, Pike and herself a good, hot, strong cup of tea, as they tried to work out who liked dirt the most, among those left at the college. " Scum, indeed," thought Barbara, darkly.

Professor L and Pike thought the dirtiest candidates would have to be either the gardener, or the Thanatology professor. Barbara wasn't sure about either of them.

"What do the others think?" she asked, over the rim of the cup.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Interesting.
Because our poor Chinese friend was the one whose number was up. (Ziehung Samstag 29.10.2011 = draw Saturday ...)
So killing him (#6) means I shall have to nominate the lower neighbour Chelley. SCUM may of course have ignored it all. On the other hand they may well have taken it into account. Part of my idea was to provoke something like this - killing the lotto number is the only way how SCUM could influence my nomination.
And however arbitrary my system and the reasons for nominating someone are, SCUM are unlikely (or extremely bold) to unnecessarily put one of their own names on the list. The voting behaviour is too unpredictable and the drive for lynchings (esp. on day 2) too strong for that.
So I conclude that Miss Chelley is probably innocent. Plus I like books too much to lynch a librarian.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
Because our poor Chinese friend was the one whose number was up. (Ziehung Samstag 29.10.2011 = draw Saturday ...)
So killing him (#6) means I shall have to nominate the lower neighbour Chelley.
Much as I hate to disturb your most fascinating scheming, old fellow, I feel that professional courtesy between scholars obliges me to point out that the deceased, Mr Meng, was number 12 on your list.

quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
Professor L and Pike thought the dirtiest candidates would have to be either the gardener, or the Thanatology professor. Barbara wasn't sure about either of them.
Thanatontogeny, my dear lady. A coinage of the great Haeckel of Jena, for which my profession is most grateful. The earlier names for our craft were so tainted by popular ignorance and superstition as to be positively misleading.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
A rules clarification was requested by pm which I might as well give here:

If the prankster is killed overnight, their prank is ineffective (they're a little too busy getting killed to be pouring things in pens).
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
O! Si tacuisses philosophus mansisses. Mumblebore theatrically pounded his chest and tore his hair until he looked like the aged Jethro Tull on ecstasy. Except neither had been invented as yet.
Ah, well, he muttered, our necrophile colleague is annoying but right. JM, not JFH. Hadn't he told them he was against all those acronyms? He had.
It meant all his earlier words were tosh. They usually were but between book covers it was not as obvious.
But the good thing was he now had to nominate that annoying Fiend PHB as he is affectionately known: "Prof Heisen Berg, step forward to be nominated. No need to thank me, it's alright, Everybody deserves their place in the limelight now and then. Yours is now."
I'll think of a reason to lynch him and post it later. Or maybe I'll spare you.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Another rules clarification related to the prankster (which seems to be a much more complicated role than I'd envisaged!): The victim of the prank can still nominate.

Also, can people be clear with their nominations? I'm not clear as to quite who Mumblebore is nominating. Three different characters have been mentioned by him. Can I have a sentence in the form: "I nominate name (ship-name)."

[ 31. October 2011, 15:02: Message edited by: Hart ]
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
Jai Cheng Meng (he wasn't going to die by his adopted name) breathed his last as the blood seeped into the icy snow.
Maybe if the Lords Krisnu and Jesu had pity he'd escape the pain of reincarnation and reach nirvana.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Well, you lot are a fat lot of good, you are. None of you is acting particularly suspicious at all. How are we suppose to find you SCUM if you act like innocent people?

The person acting most like I would expect a member of the mafia to act is Prof Heisen Berg. Followed by Prof Eliabach, who is perhaps not acting quite as suspiciously as his reputation would suggest he usually does.

I'm hesitant about nominating this round, but I'd like to put someone up there with Mumblebore's random choice. Let's put up a nomination and see what happens. We don't have to vote to lynch the person.
I nominate Prof Heisen Berg (Imaginary Friend).
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
The cat checks in from the middle of some protacted (whatever cats get up to when you're not watching) and is completely perturbed by the qwerty keyboard that has replaced her usual azerty [Help] This might have to be fairly brief...

My feline intuition is that Mumblebore and Lucy are most likely both innocent. I think that the SCUM would therefore be quite happy to lynch either one. So I am most suspicious of those who voted for a lynching, putting both nominees in equal first place. If they are both innocent then the killers would be happy for either one of them to get lynched, and wouldn't care particularly which one it was.

Mumblebore's random picks are obselete after the first round, ISTM. You only pick randomly when there's nothing to sniff at, which is no longer the case. He is wrong about this game being won by chance. A little close analysis will show that it is usually won by *me* [Razz]
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
Whereas I do think you, my dear cat, have a point in that if the pair accused yesterday are innocent then the SCUM should want them out, I'm not sure that this would lead to them voting solely for lynching. The past has shown, I believe, that it's just about as common as not that the SCUM would split their votes to avoid the limelight, or even all vote in one direction opposite to the one they'd prefer. If we look at the votes, we have Archibald St. George voting at a decisive moment for a lynching, and then Professor Heisen Berg at the standing 4-1 in the favour of no lynching, but with one more expected (the necrophilist Eliabach) to the lesser side, bringing it to 4-3. This might look suspicious, that's true, but is it enough? There was a silence on what way the rest of the votes would swing, that's true. This could be proof for their guilt, but is it proof enough?

If it's not those two and only those two, who is it, I suppose I'm asking. If the SCUM split their votes, it might seem likely that at least one of them (are we agreed on that there's probably two of them?) would save their vote until late in the voting, so as to be able to steer the vote only if it's a really tight call*, but most likely just hide in the numbers of a decided vote.

However, as always, this is only theory. People are conniving and rationalising creatures. It may well be that the reasoning is flawed because the SCUM tends to hide in the average and bland. Now, if only we could find someone who fits into all these categories...


-------------


*In which case they'll be able to claim just as well as any of the previous several voters for their side that they were only acting in what they thought to be the best interest of the university.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Professor Eliabach wipes away the excess unguent from Mr Meng’s body cavity and begins the painstaking task of clearing away the full specimen jars and stitching up the incisions. On the whole it was very considerate of the man to have expired in the snow. It kept everything nice and fresh.

quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
But the good thing was he now had to nominate that annoying Fiend PHB as he is affectionately known: "Prof Heisen Berg, step forward to be nominated. No need to thank me, it's alright, Everybody deserves their place in the limelight now and then. Yours is now."
One hates to acquire a reputation as a pedant, dear boy, but sadly, and once again, I feel honour bound to inform you that if the random number was, as it appears to have been, “6”, then that would imply the nomination of Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (jfh), because that particular gentleman (and you really must defer to me on these matters, I am after all the expert) is NOT YET DEAD. Therefore you need not select his next neighbour, nor the next neighbour of the unfortunate Mr Meng, whose number was certainly up in the colloquial sense, but not in your convoluted selection process. You can nominate the man himself.

That is the random nomination if we can do no better. I hope we can.

I have considered carefully whether old Mumbledore would be more likely to have proposed is, frankly, quite insane scheme if he were guilty or innocent. On balance I think that, if he were guilty, he would at least have made fewer embarrassing errors in implementing it. On the other hand, it is at least vaguely possible that the Professor took a gamble on the random nomination generator, and is now trying to shield a bad result by (twice) getting the nomination wrong. That doesn’t sound very like Mumbledore to me, it must be said. I think it more likely that the killers simply ignored his nonsense, and he’s innocent.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The person acting most like I would expect a member of the mafia to act is Prof Heisen Berg.
"Well now, it's one thing to put forward an unfounded and, frankly, insulting nomination. But to do so without a single scrap of evidence in your favor is really quite obscene. Pray tell: in what way have I been acting as a member of the SCUM might? I would contend that I have only been acting in such a way as to bring those scoundrels out into the light. It may be that you don't agree with my motives, but that does not mean that I am in league with the rogues.

"But perhaps you are? In wishing to implicate an innocent man you are walking a thin line between respectability and notoriety. Perhaps you should also share the stand with me and we can see who survives the harsh light of public scrutiny. I can assure you: my conscience is clear and I am confident that I can take my case to a public vote.

"I therefore nominate Mr. Dai A. Logge for lynching."
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
A thought occurs - is there really any reason not to nominate everyone?

Normally, that is, in lesser colleges, that would mean a real risk of splitting the vote, but here all in means is more work for Harold organising the results.

It will give us a lot of data to analyse, probably too much for most of us, but if we are (against my advice) considering a 'not lynching' strategy to maximise Morse's viability, then it gives him a easy and inconspicuous way to tell us whom he has cleared: they are the bottom of his preference list. The real risk of not lynching to assist a detective is that he might die before revealing anything at all. This method would avoid that risk. (For clarity, I don't wish to avoid lynching. I would like something to analyse once the detective is dead. But if I am over-ruled, I would want to play the no lynching strategy well rather than poorly).

I can't say I've thought through all the implications. These murders would, of course, have to occur at a pivotal moment of conjunction, and I am necessarily engaged on urgent other business, but I offer it up now for your great minds to consider.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Pray tell: in what way have I been acting as a member of the SCUM might? I would contend that I have only been acting in such a way as to bring those scoundrels out into the light.
You've been talking about the need to lynch people, but you haven't actually put yourself on the line by making a spontaneous nomination of your own. Trying to get a lynching by piggybacking on other people's nominations seems to me classic SCUM behaviour. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean every one who does it is SCUM.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Poor Hart, now I and Eliabach have put up bold printed nominations which aren't really nominations. Can you cope if I nominate not Chelley but JFH (O'Hocher) in line with the lottery?

Nominating everybody sounds like fun and the kind of absurd intervention I tried to introduce with my random thingy. And indeed allows the detective to easily hide his information.
Apologies all round - it is a bit of a game-spoil if a player visibly pays no attention at all. I am currently rather preoccupied with something else and while the Ship is a welcome distraction my thoughts are constantly elsewhere as I type.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley was feeling rather confused as she sorted out the shelves of poetry in the library... but she smiled all the same as she saw the college cat come padding through the reading tables and find a comfortable spot near one of the stained glass windows. The dim sunlight laid dappled blues across Felis's white coat and the librarian turned back to her tasks and continued musing to herself.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
Poor Hart, now I and Eliabach have put up bold printed nominations which aren't really nominations.
Actually, mine was meant as a nomination. On this voting system, I don't see any harm in over-nominating, and if some people wanted a purely random guess then if you weren't going to put one up, I might as well.

By way of advanced notice, unless I'm persuaded by someone of intellectual stature that nominating everyone would be a mistake, I'm currently thinking of doing just that. I haven't yet had the analytical time to propose a most-likely suspect, and no one has yet made a very persuasive case, and the advantage of having everyone votable-for is that it allows Morse an inconspicuous way of signalling to us (once he's dead) who he investigated last night.

And, on the matter of full disclosure, some joker has filled my stylus with embalming fluid, so it doesn't look like I'll be voting today.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Reasons for not nominating everybody:
It makes a lot of work for the moderator.
It quietens down the arguments over who got nominated and why.
I think it also makes the voting system less intuitive and transparent.

I don't think that second reason has much going for it: we'd still want to have a phase in which we all announced who we thought should be for it and why we're clearly innocent. And as you say, the chance to send signals using a long slate might be useful. So basically, it's up to Hart to decide what his maximum limit on nominations is.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy bustled in to Professor Eliabach's study with a cupcake and a nice hot cup of tea. "Oh, sir, please still try to vote, even if it won't be effective. You dons are a source of wisdom for servants like me. I would truly appreciate knowing how you want to vote." She curtsied and left shyly.

"Oh, I do hope I didn't overstep myself saying that. I bet I did. Oh my! I wonder if I should apologize. But perhaps that would be overstepping too! Maybe I'm just not wise enough to be here. It's all so much worry. I'd better calm down a bit with a bit of tea myself. I'll save the cakes for the dons though.

"All this murder! It's terrible for the digestion. It seems like we have to catch someone, and I don't see how we'll catch anyone if we don't try. But I haven't a clue who would do such a horrible thing, so I really don't know. I think Professor Mumbledore is a bit odd, but I really doubt he's a murderer. Professor Eliabach is definitely disturbing, but I can't tell much about him. He seems honest enough, but how would a servant like me know! I don't see him relaxed. Felis Rufa has been awfully quite on details for herself, but she has already stated she's a busy cat, so maybe that's all it is. I really can't tell anything, I swear, Professor Eisen Berg and Archibald St. George both seem a bit suspiciously randomly bloodthirsty to me, but then I can't wager that amounts to much either. Who wouldn't want to kill the murderers when death is on the line. Oh my, I just don't know. I guess I should get to washing up, and stop bothering about things I can't change. Oh, but where did I accept the promotion instead of going to work in my home town where I would see my mam!
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
The cat returns from her absence (no thanks to the *****s at Air France who are on strike and have given her a VERY stressful journey home [Mad] ) and feels rather confused. She’s only a cat after all. Could we please have a confirmation of exactly who has been nominated?

I think Mumblebore is a) probably innocent and b) not very bright. “Nominate completely at random without paying any attention to the behaviour of the individual concerned” is, as Eliabach says, an insane strategy. I can’t see how it’s possibly in the interests of the innocent.

The main reason I can see for not nominating everyone is that Harry’s spreadsheet only has four spaces on it and I’m not good enough at maths to work out any more possibilities without it. [Biased]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley had moved on to the 'Renaissance' shelf after dealing with Poetry but even with time to think there were some rather confusing whispers and accusations going around and she tried to make sense of them...
Mumblebore had leapt to nominate that she be lynched for the killing, but apparently by means of a 'lucky' number, or not so lucky number for her it would seem. But in the same breath he declared he thought her innocent.
And then having been challenged about his random number choice, the Mumbling Professor had decided to also, or perhaps instead (the librarian wasn't quite sure), accuse Prof Heisen Berg because his random number was the 'right' one?
But then Mr. Dai A. Logge wanted to put someone up for lynching to go alongside Mumblebore's random choice... and nominated Prof Heisen Berg who was already the random choice.
And then prof Eliabach came along and accused O'Hocher (apparently also randomly but now the right random choice instead of the wrong random choice?). But then Eliabach was also thinking about nominating everyone else too?
And then Prof Heisen Berg came along and in a seeming retaliation for being accused, nominated his accuser Dai A. Logge!
Miss Chelley wasn't much clearer having turned these things over in her mind, but she had a few more piles of books to get away before she retired to her rooms for the evening and the activity would allow her a bit more time to think.

Though she did just start to wonder if they'd all, in fact, gone mad?!

[ 01. November 2011, 17:21: Message edited by: Chelley ]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
The cat returns from her absence (no thanks to the *****s at Air France who are on strike and have given her a VERY stressful journey home [Mad] ) and feels rather confused.
Hmmmm if Felis was just returning from a trip to France (quite impressive for a college cat) then who was the mystery cat that had spent the afternoon curled up under the window in the library??
[Paranoid]
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
There is no limit on the number of people who can be nominated. There is the time limit. However, I am going to set a limit that each resident of the college may only nominate once per day. If there are more than three nominees, a new spreadsheet will be prepared. For the record, the current nominees are:

Dai A. Logge (Dafyd) -- nominated by Prof. Heisen Berg (imaginary Friend)
Prof. Heisen Berg (iF) -- nominated by Dai (Dafyd)
Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (JFH) -- nominated by Prof. Eliabach.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:
There is no limit on the number of people who can be nominated. There is the time limit. However, I am going to set a limit that each resident of the college may only nominate once per day.
[OOC] Can I make a request that that be put into effect as from tomorrow? I have been RL busy recently, and have not yet decided if I wanted to accuse anyone. My nomination of JFH was made on the assumption that it wasn't using a limited option - I wouldn't (necessarily) have committed myself to it if it meant I couldn't nominate anyone else. [/OOC]
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Upon reflection, it doesn't make much sense to allow people to express alternative preferences in voting, but not nominating. No limit on nominations. If people don't like how many people someone's nominating, they're free to kill them. If it takes me a little longer to get the spreadsheet out to people, we'll have correspondingly longer for voting.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Let’s see if this works for a round, then. I really don’t care about giving Harold extra work, and I think that anyone whose analysis I will be influenced by will be able to cope with it. It makes voting less transparent, but for one turn at least, it eliminates tactical voting and allows everyone to rank everyone else in the true order in which they suspect them. Allowing the detective to signal results swings it for me, because otherwise I doubt he’ll declare himself with only an erratic infirmarian for protection until it is too late.

Therefore, to the extent that they haven’t been nominated already, and in the approximate order that I suspect them, I nominate:

Archibald St. George (Ariston Astuanax) – who has been suspiciously quiet

Dai A. Logge (Dafyd) – who is devious and clever and plausibly guilty

Prof Heisen Berg (Imaginary Friend) – because Dai suspects him, and if Dai is innocent, he’s worth listening to

Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (JFH) – because Sod’s law might apply and the insane random pick might be correct

Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie) - whom I have no real reason to suspect

Lucy (Gwai) - whom I have no real reason to suspect

Felis Rufa (la vie en rouge) - whom I have no real reason to suspect

Miss Chelley (Chelley) - whom I have no real reason to suspect

Mrs Barbara Layman (Banner Lady) - whom I have no real reason to suspect

Professor Mumblebore (Sylvander) – can’t believe he’d make so many mistakes in proposing a scheme if guilty

Ernst Viktor Eliabach (Eliab) – the only one of whose innocence I can be assured.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Well, now everyone's been nominated, we might as well start voting. Please number your preferences (1 = most like to lynch). You can rank as many or as few members of the college as you like, and you can tie people.

A new spreadsheet will be emailed out 8am Wednesday (EST) and you have until 8am Friday (EST) to vote.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
it eliminates tactical voting
This it does not. No voting system eliminates tactical voting(*). It is harder to rig the system without understanding it.

(*) not quite true: for example, no tactical voting is required in the Vetinari system (one man, one vote; Vetinari is the man and he has the vote).
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Right:
1) Prof Heisen Berg (Imaginary Friend) (bloodthirsty without target).
2) Archibald St George (AristonAstuanax) (Eliabach is right: quieter than usual).
3) Ernst Viktor Eliabach (Eliab) (also quieter than usual)
4) Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hocher (JFH)
5) Professor Mumblebore (Sylvander).
6) TESS
7=) Lucy (Gwai); Miss Chelley (Chelley); Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie); Felis Rufa (la vie en rouge)
8) Barbara Layman (Banner Lady)
9) Dai A Logge (Dafyd)

Note to other voters: please put in a second last place (in the case above: Banner Lady) - if the detective does so to signal someone's innocent we don't want him or her to stick out like a sore thumb as a result.
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
The wine fellow digs himself out of a pile of God-knows-what in the cellar.
"Been busy! Can't lynch! Help! Don't kill anyone without me! Can't talk! Help! HELP!!"
*CRASH*
"Don't worry, nothing important broke, maybe just a bone or two."
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy rubs her head and frowns. "If I survive this, I am definitely asking for a temporary leave of absence. Either I am going crazy or this is far past what a poor woman should have to put up with. I cannot believe I am even thinking of making a list of who should be lynched. God have mercy on my soul!"

1) Prof Heisen Berg (Imaginary Friend) (Professor Dai Logge has a point)

2) Felis Rufa (la vie en rouge) (I don't trust people who don't give details)
3) Archibald St George (AristonAstuanax) (Much different than usual, but may well just be real life)

4) Ernst Viktor Eliabach (Eliab) (Though if he doesn't submit votes this round, he will be much higher in my votes in the future.)

5) Barbara Layman (Banner Lady) (Not sure)

6) TESS

7=) Lucy; Miss Chelley (Chelley); Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie); Dai Logge (Dafyd)
8) Professor Mumblebore (Sylvander) (Strange, but not guilty, I say)
9) Lucy (Gwai)
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
Lucy rubs her head and frowns. "If I survive this, I am definitely asking for a temporary leave of absence. Either I am going crazy or this is far past what a poor woman should have to put up with. I cannot believe I am even thinking of making a list of who should be lynched. God have mercy on my soul!"

1) Prof Heisen Berg (Imaginary Friend) (Professor Dai Logge has a point)

2) Felis Rufa (la vie en rouge) (I don't trust people who don't give details)
3) Archibald St George (AristonAstuanax) (Much different than usual, but may well just be real life)

4) Ernst Viktor Eliabach (Eliab) (Though if he doesn't submit votes this round, he will be much higher in my votes in the future.)

5) Barbara Layman (Banner Lady) (Not sure)

6) TESS

7=) Lucy; Miss Chelley (Chelley); Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie); Dai Logge (Dafyd)
8) Professor Mumblebore (Sylvander) (Strange, but not guilty, I say)
9) Lucy (Gwai)
Did you mean to list JFH instead of Lucy in the 7-block?
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley had been making lists and rearranging names. It was the suspiciously quiet ones that caused her the most difficulty... first she put them high on her list because that quietness made her suspicious, and then she started again and put them low down because their quietness also made her wonder if they were 'specials' keeping quiet for self-preservation. And then she made another list with the ones she instinctively felt suspicious of at the top, but having done that she crossed them out again as her track record for getting things right by instinct wasn't very high. Oh dear. This might take a while.
Miss Chelley put the kettle on the stove to make some tea...
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Note to other voters: please put in a second last place (in the case above: Banner Lady) - if the detective does so to signal someone's innocent we don't want him or her to stick out like a sore thumb as a result.
Seconded. THIS IS IMPORTANT.

For those that have been paying attention, I have been quite extraordinarily busy with other important matters at present, which would account for my (relative) quiet.

And I will not be voting, because I have been the victim of some idiot's attempt at humour. You may take my list of nominees as indicative of voting preferences, had I been at liberty to express them.

[OOC]For Hart's benefit - this post is a formal 'no vote'[/OOC]
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Hart: Yes! I must have been too flustered to even vote correctly. Oh this is so upsetting!
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
"Of course I have a concussion, and a broken finger to boot!"
"Had a concussion, sir."
"No, have. See, I have a bump right here on my head. Don't tell me that's not a sign of having a concussion!"

Archie was back to being his usual hypochondriac self. Any accident always brought out a litany of injuries, but such was the price of having a good wine fellow. The fact that most of the "gushing rivers of blood" turned out to be scratches and spilled wine . . .

"Oh, there's a vote. Dear me, you all do seem eager to cause me injury! A poor working man with an endowed fellowship does attract some enemies, even though he's been stuck in the wine cellar, out of shouting range temporarily—please, take that noose away from my neck! I do fear it would chafe fearfully, so put it away before someone gets hurt!
"Alright, I've looked over the arguments. You're right, some people are acting very suspiciously, or, at the very least, are protesting a tad much.
1. Prof. Heisen Burg—Methinks the lady doth protest too much. We may have a lucky strike here.
1. Mr. Dai A. Logge—Of course, that "random" nomination might not have been so random.
3. Felis Rufa—I'm always suspicious of that one—she hides her guilt so very well. The kitty always seems to have something up her collar—has someone checked for a "made in Cambridgeshire" engraving on her bell?
4. TESS
5. Everyone I haven't mentioned
6. Ernst Eliabach—Yes, he's being strange. E.V.E. is always being strange. Perhaps he's finally learned that spouting "clever plans" is a good way to get yourself lynched.
7. Me, Archibald St. George. I couldn't kill anyone—too much blood, not enough wine, all that struggly bit. Might suffer a grievous flesh wound.
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
Let's think this through. I fear we might be missing something. There are two chief suspects, a few supporting suspects and a whole bunch of silent audience that seems to be supposed to do the voting while some of the more active ones fight it out on stage and in discussions. I think we're missing that they are people too, with personal goals and struggles and reasons that we are not aware of.

I'm talking about Dyllis Smudgetta, who has been mostly silent but who voted last of all. Her vote is unintelligible since it was already set. Her silence is sadly not of the speaking variety.

However, I'm also talking about Miss Chelley, Lucy and Mrs Layman, all seemingly confused and who all voted for TESS without stating any major reason to in the first round.

I'm talking about the fact that these are all listed mainly as a mass in the post-TESS stage in the votes so far cast. I'm not trying to bluster it all away by splitting the notion of suspects, but rather I want to point to the fact that these go largely unsuspected - which has usually been where true crooks have been found in the past. Rabbits are as dull as the earth in their plumage. The birds you want in your garden are full of song and colour.

I don't think these people are all guilty, but I do think that they are to prefer before TESS. It's too late for TESS. Someone has to be at the top of the list.

I maintain suspicious of the idea that the SCUM would inherently try to get a lynching from the start. Dai A. Logge immediately stepped up on the no-side, in his first post following the murder of prof. Raphsom. I don't know what to make of this, but I know I sure don't trust him for it. Then he's the first to nominate for the second round, bar Mumblemore's presaged lottery nomination. He does have a point about prof. Heisen Berg, however. Yet I can't tell who I find the most suspicious.

1. Dai A. Logge (Dafyd) and prof. Heisen Berg (iF) (Explanation above.)
2. Barbara Layman (Banner Lady) (delving in shadows and putting forth names without real arguments to back it up - stirring about muck for no visible reason), Felis Rufa (La vie en rouge) (Mysterious. Beware of mysterious cats.*)
3. Archibald St. George (AristonAstuanax) (Silent, different from usual appearance), prof Eliabach (Eliab) (Silent and mysterious. One to watch.).
4. Miss Chelley (Chelley) (Saying things, but not as full of suspicion as usual. Nothing to go on.), Lucy (Gwai) (Voted recently with descriptions of why. Still unclear to me, though.)
5. Mumblemore (Sylvander) (Talkative and crazy, just as usual. Probably innocent or SCUM. Same odds for him as for anyone randomly picked to be guilty, in my view.)
6. TESS.
7. Dellis Smudgetta (Smudgie) (Demure and careful. Just as expected and usual.)
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs Layman heard the letterbox flap clang, and saw that there was another official envelope addressed to her on the mat. With a sinking heart she saw it was yet another voting slip.

It wanted her to check off those she thought might be SCUM.
"I don't know about being SCUM,' she thought; 'but I'm reasonably sure all the professors except mine are rather insane. Why, they are all still arguing about this new-fangled voting system.'

The fact that the college cleaner had been killed, still rankled with Barbara. She worried about her husband's working conditions now, all the more. 'I don't like dirt,' she said to the nightingale. 'And I don't like arguments.' But if a few more professors were voted off the establishment, then perhaps Professor Layman might have a better chance at becoming the new Master.


1.Prof.H.Berg/Mr.D.Logge
2. Prof. Mumblebore/Prof. Eliabach
3. J.F.O'Hocher
4. Felis Rufa/Miss Chelley
5. Archibald St.George
6. Miss Dyllis/ Miss Lucy
7.TESS

'Yes,' she said, looking at it. 'I think in order of importance, this is right. The professors are far less necessary at the moment than those who put food and wine on the table. We could be here for quite some time yet.'
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Vote in the following order:
Smudgie - Dyllis Smudgetta (cook)
a vie en rouge - Felis Rufa (cat!)
Eliab – Prof Eliabach
Ariston Astuanax - Archibald St. George (wine fellow)
Dafyd - Mr. Dai A. Logge (Philosophy scholar)
Chelley - Miss Chelley (Librarian)
JFH - Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (gardener)
Gwai - Lucy (head cook)
Banner Lady - Mrs Barbara Layman (Prof Layman's wife)
Imaginary Friend - Prof Heisen Berg (Physics lecturer)
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I don't know what Lucy means about me giving a lack of detail. I thought I'd been explaining myself mostly. And chasing a mouse all the way to France is rather time-consuming, you know.

More importantly, I think Dai is innocent. Here's 'cause why: Dai has provided important and useful advice about how the innocent can/should help the detective. If he was a murderer, I doubt he would have done this, because I can't see any way it would be in his own best interest. He might have noticed, but I think he'd be using this advice against us, not in our favour.

I see the argument for suspecting Heisenberg, but I think the argument for suspecting Archibald is better, and since Archibald voted for Heisenberg in first place, I think they're rather unlikely to be in it together.

Therefore:

1 Archibald St. George - voted in the first round to lynch no matter who, has it in for me for no adequately explained reason. Voted for Dai, who I also believe to be innocent (admittedly, so has just about everyone, which I suppose is the flaw in this argument)
2 Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hocher, Lucy, Dyllis, Miss Chelley, Mrs. Layman - I don't think any of them has done anything particularly incriminating yet, but they're all unknown quantities and one of them might well be guilty
7 Eliabach - for the time being I incline to probably not, but you never know, and Mumblebore - also probably not but a loose cannon and behaving unpredictably
9 Heisen Berg
10 TESS
11 Dai
12 Felis
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
'Oh dear,' said Barbara to herself, I appear to have left one name off my voting slip. Carefully she added in next to TESS, her own name.

7. TESS/Mrs.Layman.

Then she put it on the hall table for Pike to take back to the butler.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
"Friends, enemies, fellow college members, I see that my protestations have largely been in vain. It may well be that my fate is already sealed, although the intricacies of this voting system make it difficult for me to know for sure.

"Hence, in the pure interests of self-preservation, I shall vote as follows. Please note that these votes do not indicate any specific thoughts or feelings about the individuals involved, they are purely designed to keep neck out of that noose."

1. Archibald St. George.
2. Dai A. Logge (Dafyd).
3. Felis Rufa (la vie en rouge).
4. Ernst Viktor Eliabach (Eliab).
5. Professor Mumblebore (Sylvander).
6. TESS
7 equal. Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (JFH), Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie), Lucy (Gwai), Miss Chelley (Chelley), Mrs Barbara Layman (Banner Lady).
12. Prof Heisen Berg (Imaginary Friend).
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
1. Archibald St. George
2. Smudgetta
3. Prof Heisen Berg
4. Barbara Layman
5. Mumblebore
6. = Eliabach, Felis Rufa, Lucy, O'Hocher
7. TESS
8. Dai A. Logge
9. Miss Chelley

I had been suspicious of Dai A. Logge (Dafyd) to the point where he was going high on my list but the cat had a very good point here:
More importantly, I think Dai is innocent. Here's 'cause why: Dai has provided important and useful advice about how the innocent can/should help the detective. If he was a murderer, I doubt he would have done this, because I can't see any way it would be in his own best interest. He might have noticed, but I think he'd be using this advice against us, not in our favour.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Harold tabulated the votes so far and started analyzing. There is but one person left to vote who can (Ms Smudgetta). Currently, Heisen is winning all of his head-to-head match-ups. However, he is only winning against Archibold 5-4. Hence, a ballot that ranked Archibold equal or lower to Heisen will result in Heisen's death. No ballot being cast would have the same effect. A ballot ranking Archibold higher than Heisen, however, would result in a stalemate (no death today).

The cook has until 8am tomorrow morning (EST) to vote.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
After running a few more scenarios in his head, Harold realized that the above was not necessarily true. It is possible for Archibold to be ranked higher than Heisen but for them not to tie because Archibold loses his head-to-head matchup with someone else whereas Heisen loses none, even though they would tie with each other.

However, here are what the results would be in two scenarios that Smudgetta can choose between if she wants to be sure of the outcome of her vote (she has no spreadsheet to try this herself):

Option A. For no lynching, rank Archibold first and everyone else second.

Option B. For Heisen to die, rank everyone equally.

If she doesn't vote, Heisen will be lynched.

I give no guarantees as to what other votes might do.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
"For the record, the non-SCUM will live to regret it if they allow me to be lynched. Don't say I didn't warn you."
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
If that's a bluff by Prof Heisen Berg, it's a convincing one. Is there any way in which Dyllis can vote that will result in Archibald St George getting lynched?
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
For that matter, is it possible for me to reverse the order of my top two votes to:
1) Archibald St George
2) Prof Heisen Berg
?
Both Eliabach and Felis Rufa have expressed strong suspicions of St George. At the moment, I'd much rather see what happens if we lynch St George before we lynch Heisen Berg.
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
Now wait just a minute here! Again, put away that dreadful rope! First, if that's a convincing bluff, then I'm a no-account drinker of cheap gin, sir! I can very much assure you that my life is of at least as much value as any other Honest Oxonian, and quite possibly more—after all, who will provide you with expert knowledge of wine, and those who drink it, when I'm gone?
Second, I suppose my suspicion of the Kitty is this: she's famously inscrutable. Time and experience have shown that, perhaps more than the rest of us, she's hard to read; her behaviors are so perfectly balanced between the suspicious and the unremarkable as to be the epitome of Felinity. If I thought we should toss her over the college wall to the townies, I would have placed her higher in my rankings; as it is, though, I'm going to be suspicious of her until proven otherwise. She may be innocent, she may be guilty, but we'll never be able to tell based on her behaviors. If our good would-be Inspector is reading this, I'd suggest checking up on her.
Third, this late push to have me raised from my cellar to dangling somewhere above the quad . . . I suspect SCUM influence. While early posts were divided (more or less) between Profs. Berg and Logge, the latest ones have been unanimous in having my name at the top. What's more, I notice that Miss Smudgetta has risen to prominence from the ranks of the unsuspected to topping the list of Mumblebore and coming in #2 for Miss Chelley—with no explanation given at all.
This, ladies, gentlemen, and other assorted beings, is something to watch, methinks.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
For that matter, is it possible for me to reverse the order of my top two votes to:
1) Archibald St George
2) Prof Heisen Berg
?
Both Eliabach and Felis Rufa have expressed strong suspicions of St George. At the moment, I'd much rather see what happens if we lynch St George before we lynch Heisen Berg.
Votes, once cast, cannot be changed.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
So, it is down to the cook.

[Help]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
[OOC]: Apologies for the rather stark list, life is a bit mad at the moment and decided that getting a list in quick in the bit of time I had yesterday was better than no list at all! Kitchen and various walls being knocked out at home and trying to get all the usual work stuff done while living on a building site has been first priority! As it's my day off I'll post a bit more. I was going to try and say that in character but tying together being a late 19th century, college dwelling, librarian wasn't easy to link with having a late 20th century kitchen knocked out! [/OOC]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
AristonAstuanax:
quote:
The wine fellow digs himself out of a pile of God-knows-what in the cellar.
"Been busy! Can't lynch! Help! Don't kill anyone without me! Can't talk! Help! HELP!!"
*CRASH*
"Don't worry, nothing important broke, maybe just a bone or two."
Eliab:
quote:
And I will not be voting, because I have been the victim of some idiot's attempt at humour. You may take my list of nominees as indicative of voting preferences, had I been at liberty to express them.
Both of these would appear to be claims of being silenced by whatever the silencer is called. But AA went on to post votes for lynching. A bit puzzling? I had no problem accepting Eliab's claim as I'm sure he would've voted if he'd been able to having led the way with the nominations. Or was there a disaster in the wine cellar AA, that I missed and it wasn't actually a case of being silenced? [Eek!]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:

Option A. For no lynching, rank Archibold first and everyone else second.

Option B. For Heisen to die, rank everyone equally.

If she doesn't vote, Heisen will be lynched.

I give no guarantees as to what other votes might do.
Is it fair on those high on the lists (or on earlier voters) to give such a direct indication to the last voter of what their votes may do? Other voters didn't have the knowledge of exactly the outcome of their musings? Just a polite wondering.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
Is it fair on those high on the lists (or on earlier voters) to give such a direct indication to the last voter of what their votes may do? Other voters didn't have the knowledge of exactly the outcome of their musings? Just a polite wondering.
My dear librarian: Since the dawn of time, the butler of St. Damian's has had one role only: to serve the master. In period's such as this, a sad point in our history when there is no master, the role becomes uncharacteristically egalitarian -- when there is no master, the butler is to serve everyone.

When crises such as the current bru-ha-ha have erupted, since the days of the medieval butler Teufelchen, votes have been cast in public. Those voting later have, hence, had the advantage of knowing more precisely what effect their vote would have. If someone wishes to change that custom, it will be a later butler, not I. Under the voting system of our forebears (including our various forebears from the future), calculating what effect a vote would have was very easy. The current voting system makes that a little harder, so it is only fitting for the butler to share the results of his calculations (which anyone can make) with the whole group when available.
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
A rather dazed Dyllis opens her eyes and gazes through the haze of lack of sleep. It had seemed an unavoidable task, cleaning the pantries so thoroughly after the honey jar had exploded on impact with the shelf she had been reaching to return it to, but it had left her utterly exhausted. (IRL an unplanned but unavoidable waking night shift between two day shifts took its toll on my thinking capacity for playing mafia. Sorry. Hopefully back now in full force)

She was reluctant to vote in any mass attempt to lynch people but had to admit that fear of further insurgence of SCUM was severely hampering her ability to get a good night's sleep.

1 Mumblebore (for his inability to appreciate a good cook when he meets her, for his incredibly weird voting methods, and for his tendency to live up to his name)
2 Eliabach and Archibald St. George who both seem to have been acting in an incredibly suspicious manner, especially the former whose wafflings are occasionally insightful but equally well honed to deceive.
3 Felis She's a cat. 'nuff said.
4 Lucy All that blather is clearly meant to distract us from a guilty conscience. And besides, she didn't offer to help with the honey at all.
5 TESS
6 Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hocher, Miss Chelley, Mrs. Layman, Heisen Berg, Dai (None of whom have given me any true reason to mistrust them... yet)

Dyllis would not be voting for herself. After all, she knew her own innocence. She wiped the last remnants of the honey off her fingers onto the voting paper and made her way back to the sanctuary of the kitchen fire for a snooze. Job well done.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Archibold and Heisen are the two players not to lose any head-to-head competitions (everyone else loses against at least someone). They tied with each other, 5-5. Hence, the vote is tied and no-one is lynched.

Night falls

I know some people aren't regularly on ship over weekends, so I'll give until 8am Monday morning (EST) for night actions. However, if I receive them all earlier, dawn will come earlier. I'll give until 8am Wednesday morning for nominations, or until everyone is nominated, whichever is earlier. Then, there'll be at least 48 hours for voting.

PM me your night actions please!
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Two effective 'no lynchings'.

As of tomorrow they'll be ten of us left alive, unless the infirmarian gets very lucky. If we still have Morse with us, we might be able to clear five of those, which is very close to being a win.

Given that the detective can signal, by placing votes first or last, whom he has exposed or cleared, in a momentous break with tradition (and, incidentally, heaping great clods of suspicion onto my own head, though that cannot be helped) I think we should at least consider no lynching tomorrow, if we don't lose a special. Having missed two lynchings, the odds of taking out the SCUM by deduction diminish, while the odds of lynching people who might be known innocents or specials increase.

I am well aware that I have (I think) never proposed not killing before, but I don't think we have ever had the situation of two missed chances and a living detective before. And certainly not a living detective who (if he or she is doing what I hope) can leave a clear record of investigations to assist us if they are unfortunately murdered. That changes the game considerably, and means that the hitherto unthinkable strategy of not killing anyone suddenly has a real advantage.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:

When crises such as the current bru-ha-ha have erupted, since the days of the medieval butler Teufelchen, votes have been cast in public. Those voting later have, hence, had the advantage of knowing more precisely what effect their vote would have. If someone wishes to change that custom, it will be a later butler, not I. Under the voting system of our forebears (including our various forebears from the future), calculating what effect a vote would have was very easy. The current voting system makes that a little harder, so it is only fitting for the butler to share the results of his calculations (which anyone can make) with the whole group when available.
Fair enough! So the new voting system wasn't just to lose that ability of knowing what on earth we're doing! [Big Grin] (As you can tell, I'm still trying to get to grips with it - made a bit tougher by the lack of time mentioned above!)
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
I am well aware that I have (I think) never proposed not killing before,
"There is no shame in learning even at your age, old boy" Mumblebore mumbled to himself, "mens semper reformanda. Carry on with the good work."
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
AristonAstuanax:
quote:
The wine fellow digs himself out of a pile of God-knows-what in the cellar.
"Been busy! Can't lynch! Help! Don't kill anyone without me! Can't talk! Help! HELP!!"
*CRASH*
"Don't worry, nothing important broke, maybe just a bone or two."
Both of these would appear to be claims of being silenced by whatever the silencer is called. But AA went on to post votes for lynching. A bit puzzling? I had no problem accepting Eliab's claim as I'm sure he would've voted if he'd been able to having led the way with the nominations. Or was there a disaster in the wine cellar AA, that I missed and it wasn't actually a case of being silenced? [Eek!]
Dear goodness me. You didn't hear that awful collapse of all things holy and good in my cellar? It must have caused an earthquake of near-Biblical proportions, woman! I assure you, no mere prank could have caused that mess.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Dawn comes to St. Damian's. Harold spies a red puddle spreading from the door to the wine cellar. Fearing another accident, he unlocks the door to find that the wine pouring from the broken bottles is intermingled with the blood pouring from the wine fellow's still warm dead body. A pocket book full of writing is poking out of his jacket. Unfortunately, it is too blood-soaked to read.

Archibold (Ariston) has been killed. He was the detective.

You have until 8am Eastern Wednesday to nominate, or until everyone is nominated whichever comes first. Most American clocks (and Harold's) fall back tonight, giving you an hour longer than you might think.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Professor Eliabach wakes to the sound of hammering, with the occasional dull thud, as the late Mr Meng brings the hammer down on his shattered left thumb. Reanimation has not improved the cleaner's dexterity, and there are already several bone splinters breaking through the back of his hand, but he does not complain. There is a neat stack of three serviceable coffins already, with planks cut and stacked to assemble more. The cleaner works on steadily, without hurry or fatigue.

Ernst receives the news of Archibold's death with a grim smile. It is no bad thing to be vindicated, even if the price is somewhat higher than he would have wished to pay. What is to be done now?


Ten of us left. Archibold clears me. As I am neither infirmarian nor prankster, we could have a field of seven suspects left. That is as good as it's going to get, so we should certainly start lynching now. Having the infirmarian keep quiet has the obvious advantage, of course, that if he declares himself he'll be protecting himself, whereas if he keeps quiet he might well protect me. But if accused, he or she ought certainly to speak up, because we can't risk killing our best remaining asset.

There is a chance, though, that he investigated Prof. Berg, of course, and merely guessed right about me. So I will nominate the Professor unless he claims to be a special.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Right. I am officially no good at this game. I had thought that Heisen Berg had outed himself as the detective by accusing Archibold (Berg doesn't rank a final innocent; if the detective had investigated somebody and found them guilty that's what they'd have to have done). So I'm a bit perplexed.

Can anyone work out what the SCUM were thinking when they targeted Archibold St George? Were they just randomly lucky?

My thoughts at the moment are that Eliabach, Felis Rufa and Miss Chelley all endorsed my suggestion to rank someone second last. Eliabach has been cleared of attempted murder by Archibold. I'm inclined to clear all three of them for now.

I thought it was possible that the SCUM recognised that Archibold was the detective because other people had picked SCUM as their innocents.
Looking at the semi-final choices:
(Eliabach would have gone for Mumblebore)
I picked Mrs Layman.
Lucy picked Mumblebore.
O'Hocher picked Dyllis.
Mrs Layman picked Dyllis and Lucy jointly.
Felis picked me.
Mumblebore picked Heisen Berg.
Berg picked nobody.
Chelley picked me.
Dyllis picked nobody.

Unfortunately, there are rather too many different people in that list to be sure.
Dyllis and Berg acting together would get the list down to a plausibly low number of candidates that they could pick St George.
Thoughts?

[ 05. November 2011, 20:57: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Thoughts?
Archibald may have picked one of the SCUM as first choice AND an innocent last.

Possibly the SCUM reasoned that no one would place me last unless they had investigated me.

Possibly they thought (as I did) that he was suspiciously quiet, but knew that he couldn't be one of theirs so might be a detective keeping a low profile.

Who knows? He's dead, and although I have no intention of leting his fine brain go to waste, I regret that my skills are not such as to let him be any further help to us.
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
Oh good. So glad to see that I get a chance to come back. Would someone please be a dear and make sure the SCUM don't kill our good professor of creepy things and corpse reanimation until after I'm back?
Many thanks. That was a very good bottle of claret that the nasty Tabs used to do me in with, and I have every intention of haunting them mercilessly for breaking it.
Oh, they also killed me, I suppose. It did dilute good wine with not especially remarkable blood. What a waste.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Eliabach pokes at the carcass's engorged liver with some distaste. That was no good, and was likely to complicate matters - indeed it was something of a surprise that this specimen's vitality had not failed of its own accord.

Some people, the professor reflects, really do not deserve to live. They take no care of their bodies at all. Ernst shakes his head. He has always taken excellent care of his bodies. At least, for as long as they are useful or interesting.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
On reflection, I am not yet finally decided on nominating my fellow professor. Please do not let my suspicions rush you into making, or not making, an over hasty role claim, dear chap.


E.V.E.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
There's one flaw in Dai's reasoning, which is this: Archibald hadn't had time to investigate anyone yet. He was guessing, as were we all.

I am going to have review my thinking about Heisen Berg. I was clearly miaowing up the wrong tree about Archibald, and the reason I didn't suspect Heisen was that I didn't think they were on the same side.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by AristonAstuanax:
1. Prof. Heisen Burg—Methinks the lady doth protest too much. We may have a lucky strike here.
1. Mr. Dai A. Logge—Of course, that "random" nomination might not have been so random.
3. Felis Rufa—I'm always suspicious of that one—she hides her guilt so very well. The kitty always seems to have something up her collar—has someone checked for a "made in Cambridgeshire" engraving on her bell?
4. TESS
5. Everyone I haven't mentioned
6. Ernst Eliabach—Yes, he's being strange. E.V.E. is always being strange. Perhaps he's finally learned that spouting "clever plans" is a good way to get yourself lynched.
This post must hold the clue from the detective's sole investigation in the one night he lived. He puts Eliabach behind "everyone I haven't mentioned". This means he puts him very conspicuously in last place. This is what we suggested the detective should do (albeit he did it unnecessarily conspicuously it seems to me, which may well have been his doom).
So I conclude he cleared him in the first night.
As he voted for a shared #1 this cannot be a clue to anything he knew.
I do not understand what he meant by saying "1. Prof. Heisen Burg—Methinks the lady doth protest too much." What lady? Why a lady? Heisen is a well-known man's name, no?

Further: Why did Smudgella vote for "no-lynching"? I find she behaves the same way she once did when she was guilty, occasional very general posts entirely "in character" with no reflective content (I did not play that time but in a PM told her she looked guilty to my outsider's eye - and she was). Voting "no-lynching" may be a hint that she did not want to arouse suspicion by casting the decisive vote for an innocent. It is what I reckon she'd do to appear inconspicuous.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Archibald may have picked one of the SCUM as first choice AND an innocent last.
What makes you think he may have put SCUM on #1 (and which of his two #1 do you mean?) other than by luck (or clever but unrevealed thinking - which you think exists in this game)?

[ 06. November 2011, 18:29: Message edited by: Sylvander ]
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Oh bugger we're onto the second day, aren't we? Ignore my previous post.

[That pesky real life has been flat out lately]
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Eliabach studies Mumbledore's cranium for a switch. Someone has clearly turned the man's brain back on.

quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
What makes you think he may have put SCUM on #1 (and which of his two #1 do you mean?) other than by luck (or clever but unrevealed thinking - which you think exists in this game)?
The first number 1, good sir. As voting preferences they may have been equal, but in the analysis that matters here, the first listed is the one that might have been a signal to us.

Though you are right to ask, because, of course, if Archibald had investigated young Berg, and positively knew him to be guilty, he would hardly have ranked anyone else equal to him. Unless, as might be the case, the second "1" was a slip of the pen. These things happen, but I see I am attempting to argue the possibility that it is not quite certain that Archibald cleared me, so I shall hold my tongue.

Yet the possibility exists that if Berg is guilty and our detective was, by luck or skill, right to suspect him first, then that would explain his murder. It is, of course, one possibility amongst many. Initially I thought that the possibility was reason enough to accuse Berg, but on reflection, I don't think that an especially strong basis for a nomination, and I am considering better ideas.

[ 06. November 2011, 19:40: Message edited by: Eliab ]
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
if Archibald had investigated young Berg, and positively knew him to be guilty, he would hardly have ranked anyone else equal to him. Unless, as might be the case, the second "1" was a slip of the pen. These things happen,
Indeed. But hardly in conjunction with another slip of distinctly listing you last.
Maybe in a fit of modesty you wish not to point it out. But apparently your reputation is thus that it is very feasible that the detective might want to gain certainty about you in the first night before all others.

quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Yet the possibility exists that if Berg is guilty and our detective was, by luck or skill, right to suspect him first, then that would explain his murder.
Would it? Murdering someone who (by luck or knowledge) puts SCUM on #1 looks like rather a risky thing to do from their p.o.v., especially if that someone turns out to be the detective. Losing the detective for one piece of SCUM is a good deal for us not them.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
Maybe in a fit of modesty you wish not to point it out. But apparently your reputation is thus that it is very feasible that the detective might want to gain certainty about you in the first night before all others.
Quite possibly. It’s not what I would have done. If I were gifted with powers of detection, I would investigate those who were giving nothing away, and rely on my own analysis of the vocal and the suspicious. Not that I am to grateful to dear Archibald for confirming my innocence, of course.
quote:
Murdering someone who (by luck or knowledge) puts SCUM on #1 looks like rather a risky thing to do from their p.o.v., especially if that someone turns out to be the detective. Losing the detective for one piece of SCUM is a good deal for us not them.
Not so. The SCUM have to kill the detective or lose. No matter how suspicious the death, leaving them alive is worse. After all, once the detective has found a killer, they can expose him at any time – he is, essentially, a dead man walking (and again, I would be the expert there, I fear in more than one sense). Anyway, no matter how they did it, the fact is they did do it. They found their best target. We need to return the compliment.

[ 06. November 2011, 20:54: Message edited by: Eliab ]
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
p.....e...n.........w.....o....n..'t.......w........o.r...k
[brick wall]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
p.....e...n.........w.....o....n..'t.......w........o.r...k
[brick wall]
Is this a cryptic clue?! [Eek!]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
"My word, so much talk about a humble physicist. I'm quite unused to this spot in the limelight.

"I would contend that the detective's placing of me at the top of his voting list is more likely to be an act of self-preservation than underhand communication. He and I were, after all, the main contenders for lynching yesterday so I suppose his primary instinct would have been to try and save himself and his best means of doing so would have been to rank me first.

"I feel I should also explain again my apparent blood-thirst, since this is raising concerns about my allegiances to St. Damien's and the university. I actually suspect that events have proved me correct - some agitation for a hanging has caused plenty of reaction and many things to be said by many people. We now have information on which to proceed, and personally I would be more suspicious of those who are keeping quiet than those who are saying much and advocating a particular course."
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
p.....e...n.........w.....o....n..'t.......w........o.r...k
Is this a cryptic clue?!
The prankster has chosen Smudgie for his or her attentions.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
I do not understand what he meant by saying "1. Prof. Heisen Burg—Methinks the lady doth protest too much." What lady? Why a lady? Heisen is a well-known man's name, no?
I believe it to be a quotation from that Shakespeare person, who is widely admired in this country despite his being incapable of observing the unities, the only foundations of true drama. I am glad to see that as far as my fellow classicist is concerned he occupies the obscurities in which he deserves to languish.
(D. Logge)
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
I continue to think that Prof Heisen Berg is the best lead that we've got. This is not saying much, so he could well be innocent but I don't think we've got anything better to go on.
I nominate Prof Heisen Berg.
Anyone with any better ideas please put them forward.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs Layman stared at her husband in horror. "Another death? The wine keeper?" Oh, these SCUM were fiends indeed! How bitter a blow, to have the wine cellar now out of bounds, when everyone will be wanting to wash away the sorrow and angst of the situation all the more.

She looked at the list of those still alive at St.Damians. If Berg was not guilty, then Logge would be in trouble. As to the other professors, Mumblebore and Eliabach; their votes would be telling, but she did not think about either of them quite so darkly now. This left the gardener, the cooks, the librarian and the cat; and who knew what twisted thinking lay underneath the veneer of servitude among them.

What she desperately wanted to know, was why they had to nominate one person, if during the voting everyone was automatically listed as nominated anyway?

She shook her head. It was all very perplexing.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
p.....e...n.........w.....o....n..'t.......w........o.r...k
Is this a cryptic clue?!
The prankster has chosen Smudgie for his or her attentions.
I had had a long day when I read that! I even wondered for a moment if Smudgie had posted something on the wrong thread! I don't seem to be very good at interpretation having thought AA's earlier post was a 'being silenced' when it wasn't and then not twigging this one when it was. [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:

What she desperately wanted to know, was why they had to nominate one person, if during the voting everyone was automatically listed as nominated anyway?

She shook her head. It was all very perplexing.
Eliabach nominated everyone before which was why we had everyone to vote for.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I continue to think that Prof Heisen Berg is the best lead that we've got. This is not saying much, so he could well be innocent but I don't think we've got anything better to go on.
I nominate Prof Heisen Berg.
Anyone with any better ideas please put them forward.
Only one, I'm afraid. Dai A. Logge (Dafyd) is my nomination.

I do so tentatively, because as a philosophy scholar, Mr Logge is an accomplished expert on seeming plausible and articulate, no matter what nonsense he is arguing. The difference between Dai innocent and Dai guilty is as thin as a baby's skull. I am not going to claim to be able to read him infallibly, and I would not believe anyone else who claimed to, but I'll give my reasons.

Dai proposed not lynching at the start, so that the detective can work. Nothing wrong with that, but it sat uneasily with me the next day, when he opposed (not very strenuously, not so as to commit himself) my plan to make reliance on the detective a little less precarious.

Then in the vote, when Professor Berg, his own nominee, was one vote away from death, Mr Logge was apparently convinced by his assertion of innocence, and tried to disassociate himself from the killing. I think that he knew very well that votes can't be changed, and (assuming she is innocent) Miss Smudgetta's most likely vote was to draw the noose - voting for a tie (as she in fact did). It was an odd vote - saying in effect "I'm tired and I just want the people who are confusing me to go away" - and, unless Dai and Dyllis are in league, unpredictable.

Now Berg's assertion really was rather bland - unless it was meant as a subtle role claim - and certainly nothing that a truthfully accused killer could not have said. I don't see why it would have so dramatically have affected inocent-Dai. I can see guilty-Dai seeing, or claiming to see, that Heisen was saying that we'd regret killing him for a reason - he's a special - and then wishing to disassociate himself, while relying on Dyllis to kill regardless. He could, after all, have killed Berg in the night, and possibly would have if Archibald St George had not looked like the better bet to be the detective.

Archibald's death made me think that at least one of the killers has a sound analytical mind, and Dai certainly qualifies there, but his analysis as to how the killers might have found the detective is uncharacteristically weak. Of course some of us might have listed SCUM in our last places, and the SCUM knew that those people were not detectives, but that doesn't explain how they narrowed it down to one right choice. We can't know exactly, of course, but Dai is certainly capable of finding a much more credible route to that conclusuion than he suggested.

And now he nominates Berg again. That seems wrong, because Berg's assertion of innocence is, it seems to me, no more or less convincing now as it was yesterday, and then Dai seemed to find it compelling. What's changed? He now knows that Heisen can't be the detective. He might, though, still be the infirmarian, and if Logge is thinking on those lines, he can't reliably kill him at night.

I'm not sure of any of that. I never will be sure about Dai A. Logge. He is as slippery as viscera, but not as easy to read. Still, I can construct a more plausible account supposing him to be guilty than I can supposing him to be innocent, so he is my nomination.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Now Berg's assertion really was rather bland - unless it was meant as a subtle role claim - and certainly nothing that a truthfully accused killer could not have said. I don't see why it would have so dramatically have affected inocent-Dai.
As I said, there was nothing special about the claim itself. But I then thought he'd tried to send a signal in the way that he voted.
Also, you and Felis Rufa had agreed with him about putting Archibold in first place and most of the time (except now) I'd trust anything on which the two of you agree above my own judgement. I can talk a fine analysis, but my intuition is crap.
(Also, if I were guilty I'd be keeping quieter than usual.)
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Eliabach studies Mumbledore's cranium for a switch. Someone has clearly turned the man's brain back on.
The mouse has taken over and wrestled control from my hands, that's why. But I'll be back.
I nominate Dyllis Smudgella for reasons I gave. And because I love to imagine her struggling in desperation with that blasted poison ink while under accusation... Nothing more inconvenient for a fair trial than a talking defendant [Big Grin]
But I am quite happy to vote for Dai if that is where the swing goes, as I find his latest explanation not very convincing.

[ 07. November 2011, 11:51: Message edited by: Sylvander ]
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
Nothing more inconvenient for a fair trial than a talking defendant [Big Grin]
"[cough]... just to remind you, good professor, that the cook is quite able to talk, it is simply her voting and grocery-list writing abilities which are temporarily disabled."
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
For what it's worth, if either Berg or myself are guilty then killing that person is going to be more revealing of the other SCUM than getting lucky and killing somebody else.
That's a big if and one of us at most is guilty.

In a self-serving fashion, I think Berg will be more revealing if guilty than I will, just because there were more votes cast to condemn him.
That is, if Berg's guilty that would clear me, Lucy, O'Hocher, Mumblebore (who put him last, which I think would be too obvious for a mafia member), and Mrs Layman. If you then rule out in addition Eliabach, Felis Rufa, and Chelley that leaves Dyllis Smudgetta.
If Berg's innocent I'd clear Smudgetta - I can't believe in a mafia member who'd vote for a no lynching when they had the chance to decide it innocently.
If I'm guilty, it clears Berg, O'Hocher, and Mrs Layman and probably Smudgetta, but puts Felis Rufa and Miss Chelley back on the table. So you'd be left with Mumblebore, Felis Rufa, Chelley, and Lucy as suspects.
If you find we're both innocent then I think you know only that Eliabach, and probably Felis Rufa, Chelley and Smudgetta are innocent. That's better than nothing I suppose.

Both Mumblebore and O'Hocher have expressed suspicions of Smudgetta. (X-posted with Mumblebore's nomination.)

[ 07. November 2011, 12:30: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
Nothing more inconvenient for a fair trial than a talking defendant [Big Grin]
"[cough]... just to remind you, good professor, that the cook is quite able to talk, it is simply her voting and grocery-list writing abilities which are temporarily disabled."
I told I was going to regain control from that mouse and return to old form!
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy shakes her head. "This is all so horrible, it absolutely must be a nightmare. There is no way it could be true. Absolutely not. How is anyone supposed to cope with people being murdered everywhere. It's not just horrible, it's not fair. I cannot handle this!
Speaking of which, where is that cook Dyllis. She's never around when you need her. Off flirting with the professors or breaking honey jars, but not much cooking! Whatever is she doing these days anyway?"

The more Lucy thought about this, the more it worried her. She could see why people were suspicious of Professor Logge, but his behavior seemed exceedingly reasonable to her. Really Dyllis Smudgetta's behavior was much more off, to her mind.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
I do think Miss Smudgetta's vote yesterday was bizarre, but is it indicative of guilt? What would she gain from such odd behaviour if she were one of the killers?

If Berg were guilty, and Dyllis was protecting him, then the suspicious interpretation makes sense. Otherwise, it's just as unusual if she is innocent. Therefore, it seems to me, that Professor Berg would be a better preference to Smudgetta. Although at the moment I'm still going with my own nominee.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy nods and sniffles in her tea. "Yes, I worry about Professor Berg too. But he said he was important to us, so I figured that if he is a horrible murderer, so probably is my trusted cook! Since she has not made such a claim, better to face her first and then if she is guilty, we know who the other murderer is. If she is not, perhaps we will have avoided killing our doctor.
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:

Both Mumblebore and O'Hocher have expressed suspicions of Smudgetta. (X-posted with Mumblebore's nomination.)
Problem is, I have also pointed out that I don't think she's guilty - she seems just the way I expected her to play. I interpret her move as realizing that Archibold had a special role as well as believing Prof Berg's claim to a special role. This could be because of Scumminess just as well as believing rightly, just like it would seem the SCUM did, that Archibold was a special. I don't know what to say in her defense, but just like yesterday, it seems to me that she acts like she would if she was the real deal - which is a problem since she's so silent and difficult to trace. However, look at the time and place of her vote. If she was SCUM, she could easily have gotten away with lynching either Archibold St George or prof Heisen Berg, both of whom she in that case would have reason to believe carried special roles. Archibold was killed in the night, when Smudgetta could have taken out someone else, had she been SCUM. Voting late, she'd have had the time to confer with her companions, but instead it seems she saved the man they later killed as well as another unknown substance.

I think there are things speaking FOR Smudgetta as well as against her, and I'm not sure she's the most suspicious character at present. Just thought I'd add something on that side. On another note, I think there is someone I'm ready to accuse.

Barbara Layman (Banner Lady)

I think you're piggybacking too much (to use Dai A. Logge's expression), making too many vague comments, and acting suspiciously in general. You have so far added nothing to the discussion but the fact that those talkative are suspicious. I believe you're wrong in this aspect, (at least if it's for its own sake) and I think you're grasping for shadows and phantasms without making it too obvious. I think you're as good and likely a candidate as anyone else. I want to hear you state a defence, or at least an opinion not hid in "I just want my husband's position to rise". Why do you believe the silent ones to be free of guilt? Why do you embrace the silent masses? What way would be chosen to find the guilty in your system of choice?

I am not completely convinced of your guilt, but I think the likelihood of it to be of a high caliber. Account for yourself.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
However, look at the time and place of her vote. If she was SCUM, she could easily have gotten away with lynching either Archibold St George or prof Heisen Berg, both of whom she in that case would have reason to believe carried special roles.
AIUI the only person Smudgetta could lynch was Heisen Berg. Could someone correct me if I'm wrong? I don't think there was any way to lynch Archibald when she voted.

Mrs Layman isn't acting any more suspiciously for her than Smudgetta as far as I can tell, but I think your judgement on these things is more reliable than mine.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Layman looked out of the upstairs window in alarm. The gardener was standing downstairs, outside in the snow, and violently hurling abuse and slush at her house. She wondered why? She had mildly pointed out some time ago, that the two remaining denizens of St.Damians who had confessed to most enjoying dirt, were Professor Eliabach and the gardener.

Professor Eliabach had barely blinked at the truth of this; but the gardener was working himself into a fury over it. She found this very interesting. As though he was desperately trying to orchestrate a distraction.

Could the gardener and the cook be in league together, she pondered, with him wanting to protect Smudgetta by pointing the finger at an innocent onlooker?

For innocent, Mrs. Layman most certainly is. I will leave it up to the others, JFH, to determine which of us is most acting like SCUM.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
[Apologies if I'm being a bit quiet at the mo - I really shouldn't try playing mafia AND writing a NaNo AND playing in two orchestras all at the same time [Eek!] ]

I still think Dai is more likely innocent than not. I just can't see why a murderer would tell us how to help the detective. It doesn't make sense. Miss Chelley agreed with this and I think she might well be innocent as well for that reason.

I agree with Eliabach about Heisen Berg and Dyllis. The reason to suspect Dyllis depends on whether Heisen is innocent or not, so it makes more sense to go for Heisen first.

It makes sense that the detective would check out Eliabach first, because he's such a forceful personality that it's always a good thing to know who's side he's on.

Mumblebore is odd but probably innocent ISTM.

Mrs. Layman? Well, the thing about her is that she's always just about impossible to read. In just about all circumstances she acts pretty much the same way, so there's really no way of being sure about her unless she does something very obviously incriminating. Actually, I think Jeremiah himself is potentially as suspicious as Mrs. Layman, by which I mean he's one of the people I regard as pretty much a completely unknown quantity. I don't have any particular reason to think him guilty, but he's not giving me any good reason to think he's innocent either. Same goes to a lesser extent for Lucy. I just don't know.

Since this multiple choice malarkey means I can keep my options open, I think I'm making the nomination just in case, to flag up that I think he's potentially suspicious.

Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hoch.

With the detective gone, we need to lynch someone this time, I think.
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
However, look at the time and place of her vote. If she was SCUM, she could easily have gotten away with lynching either Archibold St George or prof Heisen Berg, both of whom she in that case would have reason to believe carried special roles.
AIUI the only person Smudgetta could lynch was Heisen Berg. Could someone correct me if I'm wrong? I don't think there was any way to lynch Archibald when she voted.

Mrs Layman isn't acting any more suspiciously for her than Smudgetta as far as I can tell, but I think your judgement on these things is more reliable than mine.
I was wrong. I have a brain of grassroot level and menial manual tasks. That does make Smudgetta's vote more bizarre. I kept Archibold's words,
quote:
Originally posted by AristonAstuanax:
Now wait just a minute here! Again, put away that dreadful rope!
in mind, spoken before your vote change was overruled. This also casts Prof Heisen Berg in new light, or at least the relation between the two. Still, what I have wanted to point to is that I know a little bit of Smudgetta's family and ancestors, though admittedly not all, and she seems to be acting just like the family, not like the familia. I believe that she is clever, about as bent towards no lynching as Eliabach with his ancestry is bent towards death, and that she'd be quiet when she's innocent.

I will admit that I have not encountered her more disreputable ancestors, and that is a problem. My perception of her could easily be called unfalsifiable, as she has a particularly easy way of hiding guilt - just play it the regular way. I have no reason for defending her other than that I would like to balance the accounts a little bit. I could very easily be wrong and then I'd be in deep trouble. Out of ten of us here, though, only two are guilty, and there are others that in my opinion differs more from my expectations of them.

Mrs Layman is difficult to pin down, so I thought I'd subject her to the old lithmus of nomination. I honestly do not know what to expect from her bloodline, and what I have seen so far I have a hard time judging. It is possible we shouldn't send her to the executioner just yet. When nominating her I had some bits of the following words in my head:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
You've been talking about the need to lynch people, but you haven't actually put yourself on the line by making a spontaneous nomination of your own. Trying to get a lynching by piggybacking on other people's nominations seems to me classic SCUM behaviour. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean every one who does it is SCUM.
I don't agree however that the talk has to be of lynchings to point to the shadows. Rather, talking much without saying anything is shadow-behaviour in my experience. I have tried so far to widen the talks, because since last morning it seemed to be a certain group of people, referred to by Mrs Layman as the professors, that talked about each other and suspected each other. Mrs Layman added suspicions toward the group of people that talked about action, and that added to my frustration towards her, since she didn't nominate or put forth any arguments to this. Now, you may know her ancestors and what she ought to be like, but to me she's completely off the charts.

At the time of her first vote, however, she put in the decisive vote for no lynching. These are hard facts and unsurpassable. I could argue that it's a cover-up and I could argue that (which does not seem that unlikely to me but that is hard to argue for) it was a rescue of a companion. Among those that voted for a lynching in the first vote, however, only prof Eliabach and prof Heisen Berg remain, and Eliabach seems to be cleared by Archibold. There has to be a mole in the garden of "no lynching". I have pointed before to the silent ladies, and it worries me that Felis Rufa is a part of them. At present, however, I'm mostly suspicious of the vague talks and name-mentionings (notably far too many names) by Mrs Layman. It could just be that I can't seem to pin her down, but it seems to me that her argumentless, directionless yet nameful talks would be the perfect cover in which a rodent would hide. And rodents need to be rooted out. This is an attempt to clear out the bushes.

quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
Mrs. Layman looked out of the upstairs window in alarm. The gardener was standing downstairs, outside in the snow, and violently hurling abuse and slush at her house. She wondered why? She had mildly pointed out some time ago, that the two remaining denizens of St.Damians who had confessed to most enjoying dirt, were Professor Eliabach and the gardener.

Professor Eliabach had barely blinked at the truth of this; but the gardener was working himself into a fury over it. She found this very interesting. As though he was desperately trying to orchestrate a distraction.

Could the gardener and the cook be in league together, she pondered, with him wanting to protect Smudgetta by pointing the finger at an innocent onlooker?

For innocent, Mrs. Layman most certainly is. I will leave it up to the others, JFH, to determine which of us is most acting like SCUM.
In the past day or so, you have expressed suspicions of about half the characters around this house. Do you really want to raise the "I've pointed you out!" argument? Yes, you did, and I was curious at how you got to that point. No reason to it was given, and then you moved on to other 'main vague suspects'. You're a promiscuous suspecter, Mrs Layman.

If I had tried, guiltily, to defend Smudgetta, it would indeed be a risky game to do it as a first move by placing her lowest on my list of suspects yesterday. It would have tied me to her irrevocably, which I wouldn't want to as guilty. If she's guilty I'm in trouble, because I've come to seem like her greatest defender. I'm not. I just think there ought to be a better candidate than Sherlock and Watson of yesterday (Dai and Heisen) next to her, and more thinking about what we're expecting of her. People are different in style, and I just think Smudgetta hides less than others, looking at what I thought of her. I'm worried about you, Lucy, Felis, Chelley and Smudgetta. The thing is that with Smudgetta I know what to expect, and she's hitting at that. The rest of you need to, in my opinion, account for yourselves. I started with you because you seem to attempt to have an influence on this game, and I asked you to explain what your thoughts or intuitions on the game are, more specifically. I got a counter-accusation back. Thank you very much.
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
[Post above cross-posted with La vie en rouge]

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:

Mrs. Layman? Well, the thing about her is that she's always just about impossible to read. In just about all circumstances she acts pretty much the same way, so there's really no way of being sure about her unless she does something very obviously incriminating. Actually, I think Jeremiah himself is potentially as suspicious as Mrs. Layman, by which I mean he's one of the people I regard as pretty much a completely unknown quantity. I don't have any particular reason to think him guilty, but he's not giving me any good reason to think he's innocent either. Same goes to a lesser extent for Lucy. I just don't know.

Since this multiple choice malarkey means I can keep my options open, I think I'm making the nomination just in case, to flag up that I think he's potentially suspicious.

Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hoch.

With the detective gone, we need to lynch someone this time, I think.
I believe I have attempted to reveal my reasonings every time I have posted, and so too in votings. If I am to contribute, allow me to contribute a list of known/unknown quantities:

Innocents:

Eliabach - Most likely innocent due to Morse.
Mumblebore - Considered innocent due to craziness.
Dafyd - Considered innocent by some due to being helpful.

Devious:

Heisen Berg for claiming some sort of role of importance.
Dyllis for supporting said claim and forcing TESS.

Unknowns:

Felis Rufa - Relatively silent and proven good at hiding but useful if innocent.
Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher - For not proving his innocence.
Lucy, Chelley, Banner Lady - For not contributing enough to be known.

I would like to state that I have posted long descriptions of why my votes have fared in one direction or the other. Others haven't. I have provided attempts at arguments. Others have claimed not to like arguments. I was the one who started pointing to the direction in which we're currently digging, the silent ones which most put below TESS before me. Others have merely supported the already high-listed characters ("The professors").

I was generally included in the group consisting of Lucy, Miss Chelley, Dyllis and Mrs Layman in the previous voting, but it was not by my own doing. I have stated my opinions clear and true, and learnt from a good master to remain suspicious of everyone. If this means I cannot clear anyone and add to the innocentification, then so be it. I know my reasonings have proven right in previous ends.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
Out of ten of us here, though, only two are guilty
You know this how? It's a reasonable assumption to make, but we haven't actually been told, have we?
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
Out of ten of us here, though, only two are guilty
You know this how? It's a reasonable assumption to make, but we haven't actually been told, have we?
I asked previously. No one objected, and I've assumed ever since that this is the number of SCUM. In a game with one less participants, Eliab himself stated that "three's too many". I have seen no reason for this not to be the case. Let's look at this:
If there were three we'd have three days of gameplay if we lynched every time, and in a ranking based voting system the SCUM would have a very great power of controlling the votes.

No, I'm not going to make sure to add "isn't there?" and "aren't they?" all the time I write about the SCUM. I write about them way too often to do that. Plenty of people have assumed a single SCUM relation, and not several. I'm writing based on thoughts shaped from the plenty of arguments stating that Dyllis and Heisen are SCUM together, or me and Dyllis, or even Heisen and Dai (which would sure seem unlikely). I don't think there are more than two SCUM. I don't see why I should act as if I doubt that. Do you know that we have reason to?
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
. You're a promiscuous suspecter, Mrs Layman.

I asked you to explain what your thoughts or intuitions on the game are, more specifically. I got a counter-accusation back. Thank you very much.
Mrs.Layman was truly flabbergasted by this nonsense. She smoothed down her woollen skirt, adjusted the pearls over her twin-set, and rapped sharply on the window. How dare ANYONE call her promiscuous?!

"You, sir, are making absolutely no sense at all. First you nominate me because I am being too silent for your liking, and then you inform the world that I am suspecting everyone willy-nilly. Make up your mind.

How can I not have suspicions, when there have now been several murders here at St.Damians, and the SCUM are all still on the loose? IF I was absolutely certain about you being a murderer, I would have nominated you.

You, sir, are the one perpetrating filth about me for no good reason at all. When I HAVE a strong inkling about the felons involved, I will most certainly communicate this. But I will never blather on nonsensically as you do, you may be certain."
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
I agree with my esteemed colleague Prof. Eliabach that Banner Lady does not behave much differently from Dyllis Smudgeletta. The argument is in both cases based on psychological speculation rather than voting behaviour (with no lynchings we have little to go on except Dyllis' effective TESS vote on day 2). This sort of vague speculation is easier with someone you know a bit better - and Banner Lady is a blank to me while the cook #2 is not. Very good at hiding her guilt, that much I remember about BL.

Why I still think lynching the cook Smudgella might be not a bad idea is

a) if she is guilty this will point strongly in the direction of Prof. Heisen Burg (but this works the other way round as well, so I would not mind taking him out first).

b) I do not agree that she acts like all her ancestors, criminals or not. While usually on the quiet side, when innocent they tried to contribute a bit of reflection now and then. But they all were gentle souls, it runs in the family, and when guilty they had this haunted look and exuded a fragrance of fright that makes them post entirely in role character and not much else. They are not bold criminals lusting for murder. They acted like she does now.

As it happens I do not trust that weird cat, either. She goes out in the snow, disappears round the corner, never catches any mice and still seems quite substantial. Who is feeding it? She has some secret, possibly nibbling on corpses, is she? Maybe I'll suggest killing her the morrow.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
Devious:

Heisen Berg for claiming some sort of role of importance.
He didn't exactly do that. He said "kill me and you'll regret it". That could be seen as a role claim, but it isn't one explicitly.
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
IN mental turmoil, Dyllis Smudgetta struggles to remember whether she has already salted the soup or not. She normally wrote herself a little note to remind her not to salt it a second time, but for some strange reason her favoured pen seemed reluctant to emit more than a few random blotches of ink, no matter how much she scribbled at the paper or breathed warm air on the nib. Well, if the soup was bland, it would more than compensate for the rather spicy atmosphere here in the college. An atmosphere which sent a chill down her spine and made her fearful for her very life.

Apparently people suspected her of ill deeds... as if she had killed the detective instead of saving him from the lynching mob. [Roll Eyes] And that Mumbledore fellow seemed to have convinced himself of her guilt, either that or to have targeted her in order to deflect attention from his own misdeeds. That was the last cup of hot tea she would make for him... at least not without spitting in the milk jug first anyway [Biased] She was, it is true, a woman who held a grudge, but that is a far cry from murderous intent.

Without a writing implement she was unable to share her suspicions clearly by nominating or voting. However, with her fingers now clean of honey and her head far clearer from the ensuing sleep, she is heard to mutter under her breath... "Perhaps Eliabach is right, after all".
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
That was the last cup of hot tea she would make for him... at least not without spitting in the milk jug first anyway [Biased]
[Projectile] Lynch her! Lynch her, I say! That woman clearly is a maniac capable of anything.

[ 08. November 2011, 15:09: Message edited by: Sylvander ]
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
Without a writing implement she was unable to share her suspicions clearly by nominating or voting.
You can nominate, if you've been pranked, just not vote.

Not that I wish to dissuade you from listening to me, of course.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Would you mind dissuading her from poisoning, mee,THAT'S what I really want to know?
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
And where has my sig gone? Some prankster stole it, or what?
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
The nominations so far... (with an attempt, in italics, to summarise the reasons - with apologies if I haven't hit the nail on the head for the nominators!).
Prof Heisen Berg (iF) nominated by Dafyd (Dai A. Logge) because there's nothing better to go on.
Dai A Logge nominated by Eliab a tentative nomination but partly due to peculiar choices regarding Heisen Berg: lynch, vote change request to not lynch, lynch again
Smudgetta nominated by Slyvander (Mumblebore) because she voted for a no lynching when she had the casting vote, perhaps to avoid suspicion. But a vague nomination with "I'll happily vote for Dai" thrown in
Banner Lady (Mrs Layman) nominated by JFH (O'Hocher) piggybacking, being vague, generally acting suspiciously
JFH nominated by Vie (Felis) potentially as suspicious as his nominee Mrs Layman or the cook Lucy
I keep going round in circles with Dai, Heisen and Eliabach's nominations/nominees. We're content that Eliabach is innocent (my inclination is to listen to the innocent one more than everyone else - and he did command me to this time before we started all this! - but I have to keep reminding myself that innocent doesn't mean all-knowing! But I was also leaning towards Dai's innocence, and still am really (mainly due to the detective/vote position suggestion). Though he's also puzzled me with the whole Heisen thing. I just can't work out what it means or if Dai just does slightly random things at times as my 'ancestors' have been accused of doing! As for Heisen Berg, I don't seem to have picked up as much about him as others seem to have. But then I end up with innocent Eliab nominating I-thought-seemed innocent Dai, and Dai nominating Heisen Berg (who I can't make up my mind about) - but changing his mind a bit and backtracking! This all makes me either suspicious of Heisen Berg, or to wonder if Dai and Heisen have a clever cover up going, or to wonder if a bunch of innocents have got it in for each other!

I actually wonder more about Smudgetta, Mumblebore and Lucy than the first bunch now! (Though I also veered towards Mumblebore's innocence before due to his mistakes and that still makes me tip more towards not SCUM) but I have wondered why Smudgetta went for him when it was seeming that so many mistakes led most to unsuspect him? I was a bit suspicious of Smudgetta's quietness before, but mostly I found her voting bizarre before:
quote:
Smudgie:
1 Mumblebore (for his inability to appreciate a good cook when he meets her, for his incredibly weird voting methods, and for his tendency to live up to his name)
2 Eliabach and Archibald St. George who both seem to have been acting in an incredibly suspicious manner, especially the former whose wafflings are occasionally insightful but equally well honed to deceive.
3 Felis She's a cat. 'nuff said.
4 Lucy All that blather is clearly meant to distract us from a guilty conscience. And besides, she didn't offer to help with the honey at all.
5 TESS
6 Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hocher, Miss Chelley, Mrs. Layman, Heisen Berg, Dai (None of whom have given me any true reason to mistrust them... yet)
Mrs Layman and Lucy are equally hard to read, but I can't help being slightly influenced by my ancestor's completely wrong interpretation of Mrs Banner Lady's presentation of herself in times past so I'm a bit reluctant to jump on that band wagon, though I can see why she got O'Hocher's suspicions raised, because she is hard to read. I'm inclined to trust the cat though can see why O'Hocher was as good a suspect as anyone - but these three (Mrs Layman, Felis, O'Hocher) don't make me wonder as much as the previous bunch... but I'm trying not to go on hunches!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
Prof Heisen Berg (iF) nominated by Dafyd (Dai A. Logge) because there's nothing better to go on.
"Well I think we do have something more to go on. My starting assumption is that I am innocent because I know this to be categorically true. Therefore, I think that Smudgetta voting for TESS yesterday temporarily clears her of suspicion in my book. Of course, I am going to have some hard feelings towards Dai for his nomination of me but his behavior in the voting was strange and I don't know what to make of it. As for the cat, well, it's hard to get inside the mind of a feline, but her general quietness is out of character and she herself often advocates conversation as a way to tease out the murderers. So, unfortunately, at this time, my suspicions have to go towards her."
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Nominations closed, voting begins! You have 48 hours to vote, until 8am EST Friday. (I'm an hour late with this post -- apologies).

To recap, your options are:

Prof. Heisen Berg (iF) nominated by Dai (Dafyd)
Prof. Dai Logge nominated by Eliabach
Barbara Layman (Banner Lady) nominated by Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (JFH)
Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie) nominated by Mumblebore (Sylvander)
Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher nominated by Felis Rufa (Vie)
TESS

As always, rank as many as you like, ties allowed.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
To answer a clarifying question received by pm... As I posted an hour later than planned (RL...), I should have said that you have forty-seven hours from the time I posted to vote. The 8am EST was correct, not the 48 hours. Anyone feeling horribly aggrieved by this should pm me.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
...or we could wait nervously and see who'll be the first to pull the trigger...
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
So, it has come to direct democracy again. Such wondrous days to live in...

I think many good arguments have flown through the air, and some lesser ones too. I must admit that in the face of it all, Dyllis Smudgetta's silence does seem more and more suspicious. I find that the points made about Heisen and Dyllis and that they would reveal most if guilty are noteworthy, but not necessarily brilliant. Eliab's points about Dai are well-formulated and highly reasonable. Dai's defense is not that well-formulated, and the best argument in his defence is that Felis Rufa thinks him innocent since he supposedly helped protect Mr Morse system-wise. However, as Eliab points out,
quote:
Archibald may have picked one of the SCUM as first choice AND an innocent last.

Possibly the SCUM reasoned that no one would place me last unless they had investigated me.
this system may well have caused Archibald's death.

I still haven't given up on the thought of Mrs Layman as guilty. She might be innocent, yet either way I think her sly nature makes the entire process of finding the murderers much more complicated. I place her as high as Smudgetta on the list. Smudgetta is silent, but Mrs Layman is sneaky.

No major arguments save a "He's more revealing than me if he's guilty and I'm not" have really been made against Heisen. I'm not sure he's innocent, but on a list of four people who all have acted suspiciously, he's not making it to the top. Not today.

1. Dai A. Logge (Dafyd).
2. Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie) / Mrs Layman (Banner Lady).
3. Prof Heisen Berg (iF).
4. TESS.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
In the light of O'Hocher's vote, I don't think I trust his judgement about Mrs Layman. Do I trust Felis Rufa's instincts over mine? Difficult.

1) Heisen Berg
2) Dyllis Smudgetta
3) O' Hocher
4) Mrs Layman
5) TESS
6) Dai Logge

Appeal to everyone else: please don't lynch me. It would be a bad idea because I'm a) innocent and b) the doctor.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Note to people using the spreadsheet: you'll only be using 6 rows. You'll have to enter a number larger than any ranks you use (eg. 7) in the blank rows for any columns you use. Totally blank columns don't bother the system, but missing numbers count as 0-preferences (ie. highest preferences) and screw things up.
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
Archibald descends from his perch on a chapel spire (scaring the pigeons is ever so much fun!) to point out a simple fact:

It's spelled "Archibald," no "o," you louts!

Also, if our dead-person professor could kindly enchant me a corkscrew before he's lynched/assassinated, we'd be very happy. Just because I'm a spirt doesn't mean I have to give up the spirits.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Right. We need to lynch someone this round, and I believe Dai.

So - I think I'm going to have to put Heisen as top pick (in order to secure a lynching), even though I think Jeremiah is the most suspicious. Dyllis is suspicious only if Heisen is, and we now know that Heisen's not the doctor, assuming that Dai's telling the truth.

Consequently:

1) Heisen Berg/Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hoch
2) Dyllis Smudgetta
3) Mrs Layman
4) TESS
5) Dai
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs Layman sighed at the sight of yet another voting slip on the mat at the front door.

"Very well," she said, "Although it would be kinder if the ink in MY pen, didn't work. No such luck, I suppose."

1. Professor Berg/Mr.Logge
2. Mr. J.F. O 'Hocher/Miss Smudgetta
3. TESS/ Mrs. Layman

"That will have to do."
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Appeal to everyone else: please don't lynch me. It would be a bad idea because I'm a) innocent and b) the doctor.
Really? Assuming for the moment that you are telling the truth, I don't think that's the smartest thing to do. Because now the SCUM know that you are bound to be protecting yourself tonight so they have a free shot at any of the rest of us. And they know that you cannot protect yourself tomorrow night so they are guaranteed to be able to get rid of a highly influential special.

Given that, I am minded to call your bluff since the outcome of killing the doctor isn't really any worse than the outcome of not killing him or her.

Therefore, I vote:

1. Prof. Dai Logge (Dafyd)
2 equal: Barbara Layman (Banner Lady), Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie), Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (JFH)
5. TESS
6. Prof. Heisen Berg (iF)
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs Layman blinked at the memo lying underneath all the other mail. "What? How on earth did I miss THAT last bit of information? Professor Logge has a secret doctorate? Dear me, that is quite strange, even for St.Damians.

Well, let us take note of those hanging back until last to vote. This will be very telling."
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy sighed as she turned in her slip. "Some of us would be here earlier if we hadn't been working to serve you all. I have had to work double-time what with two of the undercooks having taken to their beds in terror. If Dyllis is guilty or killed, it will be even worse. I can't imagine. Oh my! Oh my!

"Well, must face it and vote I guess. Giving up is even worse. I too can not wish to kill a doctor, and don't trust anyone who would.

1) Prof Heisen Berg/Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hoch
2) Dyllis Smudgetta
3) Mrs Layman
4) TESS
5) Dai
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
There are three people still to vote and everything still to play for. Harold has been busy fiddling with numbers and has constructed a set of votes for each person that will hang them as well as one that will hang the vote. If the three remaining people don't vote, right now Prof. Berg would be facing the noose.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Mumblebore had been called to an urgent taask kn the capital of Frogland. He was onyl able 2 communic8 wth home bymeans of a little handheld notepad he was as yet unfamiliar with & disliked.
He votes:
1. Smudgeletta, 4 he h8@ quiet people
2. Heisen Birg
3. Banner Lady & Dai

It occurs 2 me that nobpdy has analysed (or I ovrlooked) whom the last murder victim had nomin8d or voted 4 althg this may qlso hold clues why they got murdered.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley finally found a moment to cast her vote...

1. Smudgetta
2. Heisen
3. Mrs Layman/O'Hocher
4. TESS
5. Dai

[ 10. November 2011, 22:06: Message edited by: Chelley ]
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Either Dai is telling the truth, or he’s guilty. If he was guilty, the real doctor could and should have exposed him. No one did, so I have to conclude he’s innocent.

Smudgetta is suspicious if Berg is guilty, so must rank behind Berg. Both Layman and Ferrer-O’Hocher are on my ‘probably innocent, but worth watching’ list. In the order that I suspect them:

1. Prof. Heisen Berg
2. Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher
3. Dyllis Smudgetta
4. Barbara Layman
5. TESS
6. Prof. Dai A. Logge
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Winning every head-to-head contest, Prof. Heisen Berg (imaginary Friend) faces the noose. He is an ordinary citizen.

Night falls

I'll give you until 8pm EST Sunday to get your night actions in, but if I get them earlier we'll do dawn earlier.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Appeal to everyone else: please don't lynch me. It would be a bad idea because I'm a) innocent and b) the doctor.
And they know that you cannot protect yourself tomorrow night so they are guaranteed to be able to get g (iF)
Really? Precisely that may be the reason he need not not do it & protect someone else, e.g Eliabach, who is our only certain innocent, hence an asset. Or assuming SCUM think he may prozect him, go 4 someone elee. It slill remains acase of " what do we think he thinks?" etc
So, dpes our innocent-lynching tell us sth?
And who is writing the obituary 4 our colleague/ surely an aology is in order, 2?
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
For what it's worth, I'm resolving the problem by rolling a die.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
On the lynching, bugrit, millennium hand and shrimp.

Still, can we agree that Smudgetta is almost certainly innocent?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
The professor's wish had come true. As his blood slowly pooled in the gaps between the floor tiles, his dying hope was that the SCUM would pay. Perhaps his death was necessary to expose them; perhaps it would be in vain. Only time would tell. The physicists eyelids drooped as his face became pale. This wasn't how it was supposed to be...
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I think we’re amassing quite a nice list of innocents, actually.

We have definitely innocent:

Prof Eliabach
Dai A. Logge
Felis (I know, you have to take my word on this one, but I can at least give you good reason to put me in the “probably innocent” category – see below)

Probably innocent:

Felis – I pointed out that I thought Dai was innocent, and I turn out to have been right.
Miss Chelley – agreed with me about Dai’s innocence.
Dyllis Smudgetta – was only thought to be guilty by association, and if Heisen’s not guilty then the case against Dyllis falls apart.

I think there’s a choice to be made between Jeremiah and Mrs. Layman; it’s quite possible that at least one – but not both – is a murderer. I nominated Jeremiah because he seemed to be going after Mrs. Layman for no good reason, but she is looking more suspicious now – voting for either one of Heisen (who turns out to be innocent) or Dai (who had already claimed to be the doctor) to buy the farm.

Dai - I think you are wrong to roll a die. Keep yourself alive tonight, and you might get lucky and be able to save someone else by rolling the dice tomorrow. It’s true that you’re probably not long for this world, but the citizens’ chances are marginally improved by your (slightly) prolonged survival, ISTM. An average citizen (I include myself in this) is less useful to us than you are.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs.Layman checked off the list of those still alive within the freezing walls of St.Damians.

It seemed that Professor Eliabach, and Dr.Logge were looking the least like SCUM. It seemed rather doubtful that Professor Mumblebore and Miss Smudgetta were SCUM either. Apart from herself, who she knew to be the very opposite of SCUM, those left were the gardener, the head cook, the librarian, and the cat.

Obviously, the SCUM would love to have two more innocent citizens topping the voting list, tomorrow. She prayed this would not happen.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
The point of rolling a die is that what I don't have to try to predict what the mafia will do. My strategy will save the same amount of lives on average over the next few turns (.667 - don't get your hopes up) whatever they try.

Anyway, what is done is done.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley took her little bound notebook from where she kept it on the Atlas shelf in the library. She doodled little drawings around the names she'd written and then chewed her pencil, trying to think...

Dai A. Logge (Doctor)
Eliabach (Citizen)
Felis
Mrs. Layman
O'Hocher
Smudgetta
Lucy
Mumblebore
Miss Chelley (Citizen)

Dai A. Logge had made me very suspicious in the beginning (as mentioned before) to the point I was going to put him high on my list. That was until he offered the helpful, and as I decided back then, innocence proving suggestion about voting. His innocence was then cemented by revealing that he is a doctor.
Eliabach also proven as an innocent citizen through the final words of Morse's ancestor Archibald St. George.

So that leaves Smudgetta, Mumblebore, Lucy, Felis, O'Hocher and Mrs. Layman (as I am of course aware of my own innocence).

Mumblebore had also shifted himself onto my 'likely innocent' list early on, and that was because of all the mistakes he made. But, have to consider the possibility of writing him off too early? Also, the way Smudgetta and Mumblebore accused each other made me wonder a bit. But it also seemed strange that Smudgetta put Mumblebore at the top of her vote list when most others were (as I was) assuming Mumblebore's innocence because of his craziness (safe attack?) And Smudgetta was already making me suspicious with her quietness. So not sure about the Mumbling Prof, but the cook concerns me.

I'm feeling pretty confident about Felis (Vie) due to likemindedness about Dai - though I have learnt to my cost before that you can't always trust cats!
And Mrs. Layman, Lucy and O'Hocher are pretty much in a 'don't know' category as there's nothing I've been able to particularly put my finger on, but that's usually where I've been led up the garden path before!
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Dawn rises

As the residents come out of their rooms, a sigh of relief (or is it?) gradually goes around the quad as people realize that no-one has died over night. With the weekend coming up, I'll give until Tuesday 8am EST for nominations, or until everyone is nominated whichever comes first.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Hooray for Dai!! Now tell us whom you protected & we'll have three cerfain innocents, unless u proteted Yourself of course in which case you"ll bring the ultimate sacrifice 2moro night.
OR Scum tried a trick and did not attempt 2 kill ill in order to fool us.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Mr Logge carefully replaces his volume of Hippocrates on the shelf, before putting a saucer of milk out for the cat. They say that stuff is outdated, do they?

I was protecting Eliabach so we're no farther forward with finding innocents I'm afraid. Also, I'm afraid Eliabach should make his contributions to the day's discussions count as the SCUM know he'll be unprotected tomorrow night.

As my last suggestion as to the guilty parties was not a success I'm going to shut up.

[ 11. November 2011, 19:56: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Dai Logge wandered out into the quad. Nobody was about. There were no footprints in the snow even. Most odd. Where was everyone?
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
In my case, thinking, Mr Logge.

Specifically I am thinking that at this point we have to trust you, me, Mumbledore and Smudgetta.

You, because no one contradicts your claim to be the doctor. Me, because the detective says so. Mumbledore because to suppose him guilty is to suppose that on the second day he proposed a elaborate scheme predicated on forgetting whom he had just murdered. Twice. And Smudgetta because, if guilty, she is unlikely to have passed up the chance to sink the late, lamented, but still reasonably useful, Professor Berg on that same day.

If I am right about those last two, and we are lucky enough that Mumbledore isn't the prankster (it can't be you if you are the doctor, and Smudgetta and I have both been victims, so it can't be us either) then if the prankster declares him- or her-self, then we may be able to muster a voting block of known innocents that outnumbers the pool of suspects. That would be worth doing. I'm holding off on expressing suspicions until we see if our humour-deprived mischief-maker is prepared to confess.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Layman concurred. Yes, the prankster probably did need to confess; and to confess how ludicrously bad they were at picking SCUM to nobble.

She sighed. It was during her protracted periods of boredom that she had discovered Pike shared a love of practical jokes with her. She was the one who had been sending him off to put embalming fluid in Professor Eliabach's pen; and to remove the ink entirely from Miss Smudgetta's inkwell.

Her last prank had been to get him to fill the gardener's inkpen with mud. Her reasoning had been thus: On day one, nobody knew which side Professor Eliabach was on. This was why it was safer to stop him from voting than to allow him to do so; and also why the detective had investigated him. He is always a formidable player.

On day two, with not much at all to go on, she tossed up between the cook and the gardener. So Smudgetta was silenced for the day.

This proving unhelpful too, she decided to gag the gardener last night, as he had been deliberately targetting her.

Lord knows, she could easily be wrong again; so if you other innocent citizens want to weigh in with suggestions, please do. Not that I may get the chance to prank anyone again from here on in, but you never know.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I suppose we have to wait and see if anyone contradicts Mrs. Layman. If not, then I think we can safely add her to our list of innocents.

That gives us
Definitely innocent
Eliabach
Dai (well done with the nursing)
Mrs. Layman

Probably innocent
Felis (obviously I know I'm definitely innocent, but I think I can demonstrably show myself to be at least probably innocent to the rest of you)
Miss Chelley (like me, defended Dai ahead of times)
Dyllis Smudgetta (if she was guilty, why would she have conspicuously avoided lynching an innocent?)

I don't know what to think about Mumblebore - he's such a loose cannon that he's impossible to read. *If* he's one of the SCUM, then he must have an accomplice in any case, so I think it's worth pursuing other leads for the time being.

I think the best leads for now are Lucy, Jeremiah Ferrer O'Hoch (for having it in for Mrs. Layman) and possibly Mumblebore.

And out of those my top pick is still Jeremiah.

(Struggling to think if I've forgotten anyone?)
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
When Hart announces who has been prevented from voting this round, it should confirm what I have just revealed.
BL = innocent citizen.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
So that leaves Felis, Lucy, Chelley and O'Hocher.

If I am in danger (as I fear I may be) then I would prefer very much to spend my last evening getting under the skin of an attractive, nicely plump, female cadaver, and ever since casting eyes on dear Lucy, I have been itching to peel back those delicious adipose deposits and get my hands on her innards. But I am a practical scientist above all (despite what that ridiculous St George fellow says - enchanted corkscrews forsooth! Does he take me for a fairground magician? He'll drink blood and like it.) and must set sentiment aside.

Lucy has been very quiet. And while I think it is a sound policy to deter silent play, and early on would lynch for that reason alone, in my experience murderers are regrettably loose-lipped, and rarely the silent type. When I think of what some of my suppliers have been when like in their cups it makes the blood fairly run cold. I must place her last of those four.

I have reasons for suspecting both Felis and Chelley. I would not be at all quick to advocate slaying such a sacred being as Felis, and it is hardly an auspicious time for me to start offending divinities, but it occurs to me that, before all this trouble started Felis said very vocally that, if guilty, she would always favour lynching and controlling the vote, and for her to start this unfortunate episode by doing the opposite is very like her usual guile. Chelley, similarly, has played in a measured, helpful and analytical way, without pushing for any particular lynching, and that is rather what I would expect her to do if she were trying to be unsuspicious. It is not how I expect her to act if innocent.

But I note that Felis and Chelley both argue for the other's innocence, and that seems to me to be too unsubtle for either of them if they are conspiring together. I do not think that they are both guilty. I'd pick Chelley of the two, but not be confident about it.

If I am right, that Lucy is probably not guilty, and that one of Felis and Chelley is innocent too (and that Dai and Layman are who they claim to be, and that Mumbledore and Smudgetta are also innocent), then it follows that the second guilty figure would have to be Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher whom I would have nominated had blessed Felis not done so first.

That's quite an accumulation of (in themselves plausible) guesses, which makes the overall conclusion uncertain, but I am comforted by Felis' suspicions. If she is innocent, her intuition is worth attending to. If she is guilty, a little misdirectional noise about her colleague is what I would expect (and if I am right about the pool of suspects, she has to do something to look more innocent that Smudgetta and Mumbledore). Either way, it is an additional reason to suspect him.

A pity, because when you've reanimated one labourer, the rest are just more of the same, but my duty to the college must come before my personal pleasures.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
When Hart announces who has been prevented from voting this round, it should confirm what I have just revealed.
He won't announce it. The victim himself might.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
On which subject, the reason that Logge and Layman must be taken as obviously innocent, is that their claims are uncontradicted. If, in fact, either of them is lying, and the real doctor and prankster have not realised how important this is, then they ought to declare themselves now. They could not possibly do us better service than to expose a false claimant to their role.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Just a reminder that you have 24 hours from now for any further nominations.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
[Sorry all, I was on a awesome retreat at a monastery this weekend, so no internet. Back now.]

Lucy shakes her head. "I just don't know how to talk to people sometimes! If I were you all, I think I'd suspect me too. Problem is, of course that I know I am just an innocent cook, who doesn't talk to much because she doesn't want to tell her betters what to do.

I agree with the cat who deserves salmon for her reasoning, and will be voting for Jeremiah this day. I do not know I can say to convince you of my innocence, because I don't have a special role in the gentry to reveal. I am just Lucy Smith, honest citizen. Jeremiah seems to almost have to be SCUM by default, unless we have all been rather mislead. As to who the other one is, I would say I am the best choice, except I'm not! That seems to leave Professor Mumblebore to me, though I have presumed him innocent until now. One at a time, I guess.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:


I have reasons for suspecting both Felis and Chelley. I would not be at all quick to advocate slaying such a sacred being as Felis, and it is hardly an auspicious time for me to start offending divinities, but it occurs to me that, before all this trouble started Felis said very vocally that, if guilty, she would always favour lynching and controlling the vote, and for her to start this unfortunate episode by doing the opposite is very like her usual guile. Chelley, similarly, has played in a measured, helpful and analytical way, without pushing for any particular lynching, and that is rather what I would expect her to do if she were trying to be unsuspicious. It is not how I expect her to act if innocent.

I dunno... you try and be a bit more analytical instead of reactionary - having been viciously accused repeatedly not too long ago (by Prof Eliabach's gangster relative) of being the dumbest dumb thing since dumb was invented because of those reactionary decisions, and that makes you guilty of being SCUM! My only crime is having said I'd listen to you this time round, which I have done!

As I see it, the most obviously innocent are still Eliabach, Dai A. Logge, Mrs Layman and I still think Felis the cat is more to be trusted than the rest. I still have doubts about Mumblebore, Lucy, O'Hocher and Smudgetta. I had been tempted to follow Eliabach's earlier example by nominating everyone (haven't quite mastered the new votes system yet, but that was fun!) though that would probably take me back to reactionary dumbness so have resisted. But as my change of attitude has been called I will therefore put my 'money where my mouth is' and nominate Mumblebore.

The quiet, thoughtful librarian felt liberated from trying to compete with the mafia big-league and felt like she was living up to her more assertive relative's disposition. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
In a haste, sorry.
I nominate the fat cat.
She is more silent than usual and the absence of her usual braggery looks weird, too. Like someone trying to keep a low profile without shutting up entirely.
I also find Chelley's nomination of me slightly suspicious (but have no time to read her reasoning just now). It would take great chuzpe to use my blundering on day two as a cover. More likely explained by my usual happy-go-lucky approach to all games (except the One That Matters). So it casts a shadow on her.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
If Jeremiah is lynched and proves innocent, it will not look good for Felis and Chelley. But to me, he seems more likely to be SCUM than any of the others.

So, Professor Eliabach, how do you suggest the innocent should vote this round to get the best outcome?
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Well that makes Mumblebore look more guilty to me, not less.

I have already explained my silence - it's not every kitty who could write a novel, play Mozart, Bach and Sibelius, take a trip to France and go sniffing out murderers all at once.

Nominating me looks like trying to find an outlet to stave off the accusation that just came in his own direction. "Erm, erm I just got nominated* and I've got to find an alternative so erm… erm… let's go for the kitty. That's probably as plausible as it gets because oh crap there's only quite a small pool of unknowns."

Actually the odd professor has just nominated an imaginary character, because there's no fat kitty round here. It was only weirdoface who said I was corpulent. I must insist that I am a sleek lean pussy cat of outstanding probity.

*NB this would particularly valid if the two nominated are both SCUM.

[OOC: I have time right now because it's 9 p.m. and I'm still in the office doing nothing *just in case* the work isn't finished [Roll Eyes] I'm bored and I wanna go home...]
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
[I'm horrendously busy at present with studies, travel plans (crossing the Atlantic on Saturday) and university applications (announced on thread in All Saints). I really don't know if postponing the deadline would even help. Just wanted to express my regrets at being unable to get into the game more these days.]

Please don't kill me. I'm innocent.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Nominations close; votes open. Your options are:

Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher (JFH) nominated by Felis Rufa (vie);
Prof. Mumblebore (Sylvander) nominated by Miss Chelley;
Felis Rufa nominated by Mumblebore;
TESS

I'll give 72 hours for voting this time, giving you until 8am EST Friday.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
The kitty's defence of her untypical behaviour is weak, as it is only in her role, not in substance: "I am just a cat and cannot write novels." Quite.
I am dubious of Chelley, too. But I admit there is a hitch in suspecting both (although Eliabach hinted at thoughts in that direction, too): It would be very daring for both SCUM to make the first two nominations). Still, we have seen similar Mafia behaviour before.

I suggest that the certified innocents Eliab, Dafyd and Banner Lady vote last. This will increase the pressure on SCUM to vote en bloc .
This means that Chelley, Smudgie, Gwai, la vie en rouge and JFH will be required to come up with good explanations if they delay their votes.

I vote for

1. Felis Rufa, cat

And I shall leave it at that, since casting my second vote for someone whom the cat nominated is illogical and her nomination of him rather makes J-F O'Hocher look innocent.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
That's enough to convince me that the lunatic and the gardener are in it together.

My defence, FWIW, was not "a cat can't write novels". It was "the cat is writing a novel and playing in two orchestras, consequently she's rather busy at the minute".

1/ Mumblebore/Jeremiah - both at the top because I think they are conspiring together so it doesn't bother me which one gets lynched*
2/ TESS
3/ Felis

*NB for those who vote late - sooner or later you need to pick one of them. The one way for them to avoid lynching is to split the vote down the middle. This of course assumes that I'm right about them both being guilty.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I think that needs a bit more explanation, now I think about it.

To wit: if Mumblebore was innocent, he should have voted for TESS in last but one place, and himself last. Because he would be sure of his own innocence so his own lynching is absolutely the least desirable option both to him, and to the innocent team. We know that no one nominated is a detective, so whatever one's suspicions, the only thing an innocent can be *sure* of is their own innocence. You might think a nomination is mistaken, but there's no way you can definitely know.

Instead, he casts a solitary vote for a poor innocent moggy. I reason that this means that he and the gardener are both guilty, because lynching me is the only outcome that he wants from the vote.

If he votes only for me and for TESS, then he is obviously protecting Jeremiah, which still incriminates him, which is I why I think he voted only for me.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy couldn't stop crying into the tea. "Oh, now I'll make the tea salty. What a bad cook I am. Oh! Oh! But I'm not evil, I swear I'm not!

Well, I'll set a new pot of tea on, and vote about who is evil, I guess. Oh!

Professor Mumblebore is either deranged or guilty, so I think I'll put him first. Jeremiah is not very persuasive, but I'd rather hear more from him before silencing him, so him second. Not the cat. She could be guilty, but she makes more sense than the other two."

In other words:
1. Professor Mumblebore
2. Jeremiah
3. TESS
4. Felis
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
Much as it pains me to say it, I am coming to the conclusion that Mumblebore's waffling is not a distraction from his guilt but more just a sign of his obvious insanity, as the pattern of his voting and musings seems to point to a degree of innocence.

I find myself feeling suspicious of Miss Chelley and also of Lucy but as they are not nominated this round (yes, I know, I know, I could have nominated them but today has been the first chance I have had to sit down and properly study the thread!). Having met some of Lucy's extended family in my long and interesting life, I find her unexpectedly simple - a good guise for one who is aiming to hide her guilt. If I die tonight, perhaps my suspicions are right!

Felis has also previously aroused my suspicions but, like Eliabach, I am inclined to think her innocent and that Chelley is riding in her wake to cover her own guilt.

I am unsure about Jeremiah, and think that a non-lynching at this stage would be detrimental to our chances.

Therefore my votes are as follows:

1 Jeremiah
2 TESS
3 Mumblebore
4 Felis
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:


Felis has also previously aroused my suspicions but, like Eliabach, I am inclined to think her innocent and that Chelley is riding in her wake to cover her own guilt.

"Riding in her wake" I don't ride in anyone's wake! I might be just the bookish librarian but I am my own person thank you! Hmmmppff... the librarian wandered off muttering to herself.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
The one way for them to avoid lynching is to split the vote down the middle.
I don't think that would avoid a lynching. We assume O'Hocher cannot vote. Ties are resolved against the person who has failed to vote most often; Harold has said explicitly that being a victim of the prankster is no excuse. Mumblebore has voted every day.
Therefore, according to my reading of the rules, in the event of a tie between O'Hocher and Mumblebore O'Hocher will swing.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
At the moment, I think that if O'Hocher turns out to be innocent then there is less reason for suspecting Mumblebore. But not the other way around. (Mumblebore's guilt would therefore implicate O'Hocher, but I think we're still at the stage where we're more likely to hit an innocent.)

So:
1) O'Hocher
2) Mumblebore
3) Felis Rufa
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
Much as it pains me to say it, I am coming to the conclusion that Mumblebore's waffling is not a distraction from his guilt
"pains you"? Hypocrite! You spat in my tea, you vicious dwarf, and you're jealous because with your silly beak you can't waffle nicely, but only do tweettweet. Further you look like a small barrel with walking stumps. And you have almost no hair left. And worst, afaIk you may well may be from Oxford.
There! At least I can die with peace of mind now, if I have to.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
1. Mumblebore
2. O'Hocher
3. Felis
4. TESS

Miss Chelley had been on the receiving end of some irritating scowls in the library recently due to not following her own "quiet please" request on the wall. So instead of rattling on again she quickly aired her votes and put her head in a book.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
For the reasons given, I think:

1. Jeremiah Ferrer-O'Hocher most likely to be guilty.

Although I suspect other s more than her:

2: Felis Rufa is in my pool of 'unknowns', and it is crucial that we kill our way through those more quickly than the SCUM can dispose of known innocents.

Next after lynching a suspect I would prefer not lynching at all (we have the prankster and can win an otherwise tied vote).

3. TESS

Worst would be to lynch someone I am sure is innocent. Am I that sure of Mumbledore? While he is capable of brilliance, he is one of the more inattentive academics I have ever known, and prone to embarrassing mistakes. However I cannot believe that even he would have murdered Mr Meng on the first night and by morning forgotten that and imagined that he had killed Jeremiah. I think I have to vote on the basis that he is innocent.

4. Prof. Mumbledore.

[ 17. November 2011, 08:16: Message edited by: Eliab ]
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
1. Jeremiah
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
And with that, Jeremiah is marched to his death. He won all of his head-to-head match-ups. He was SCUM (mafioso). Well done, St. Damian's! Unfortunately, the college is not safe yet.

Night falls

I'll give 49 hours for night actions, so we'll have dawn by 8am EST Saturday.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Well done us. Note to self: in future remember the cat's not wrong.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
So the definitely cleared list goes:
Mr Dai Logge
Mrs Barbara Layman
Prof Eliabach
Felis Rufa

Not yet fully cleared, in increasing order of suspicion:
Smudgetta
Miss Chelley
Lucy
Mumblebore
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Smudgetta
Miss Chelley
Lucy
Mumblebore
I posted that before looking back over the thread.
I now notice that O'Hocher stepped in to defend Dyllis Smudgetta once she'd been nominated and then put forward another nomination of his own. Smudgetta was the only person still on the list of suspects who was up for lynching at the time.

On the other hand, Mumblebore has I think been consistently voting to lynch anyone except O'Hocher.

I'm inclined to clear Lucy based on her voting record. (She voted for Heisen/O'Hocher equal first in the round when Heisen was lynched.) Chelley's voting record is uninformative.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Right. I am heading off to the kitchen to claim that plate of salmon from Lucy. In the event that I don't survive the night, I'm going to have a good meal before I go.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
I would not definitely clear Felis.

If I was right about the pool of four likely suspects, and she were guilty, nominating a co-conspirator is exactly what I would expect her to do.

I agree that she looks much less guilty, but I wouldn't write off the possibility altogether.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy smiled at the kitty. She knew that it probably only came to visit for the salmon, but when the kitty is dear, and soft, and friendly and warm, one can forget that. Sometimes she talked to Felis, and wondered if Felis listened. Whether or not she did, it was one way to vent in this dangerous scary world.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
If I was right about the pool of four likely suspects, and she were guilty, nominating a co-conspirator is exactly what I would expect her to do.
Felis nominated O'Hocher back before I outed myself as the Doctor. At that stage, you were the only person cleared.

Having looked again at the voting records, Smudgetta voted for O'Hocher above Mumblebore this last round. So Smudgetta is probably not guilty unless there were three SCUM and Smudgetta and Mumblebore are in on it together.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Lucy raises her head from the kitty. "I'm just a simple girl and all, so I have to ask: If Smudgetta had voted for Mumblebore, would that have saved o'Hocher? If so, I would say that Smudgetta should be considered cleared. However, if not, then I don't think her vote can be considered defining.

Either way though, I've made some cookies and hot chocolate. This is all so very stressful, that everyone except the murderer deserves some."
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
I'm just a simple girl and all, so I have to ask: If Smudgetta had voted for Mumblebore, would that have saved o'Hocher?
If everybody had kept their votes the same, then Mumblebore and O'Hocher would have drawn so it wouldn't have saved O'Hocher as the votes stood. However, she voted early enough that she couldn't have predicted that so many people would have voted Mumblebore to make her vote irrelevant. And also she put a stop to any momentum for Mumblebore.

quote:
Either way though, I've made some cookies and hot chocolate.
Thank you.
Mr Logge takes a sip. Ah, hot chocolate, lovely. He puts the mug half drunk to one side where it will be discovered with other half drunk mugs of tea once the cleaners finally get in after Christmas. The cleaners are used to this.

[ 17. November 2011, 16:26: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
So the definitely cleared list goes:
Mr Dai Logge
Mrs Barbara Layman
Prof Eliabach
Felis Rufa

Not yet fully cleared, in increasing order of suspicion:
Smudgetta
Miss Chelley
Lucy
Mumblebore
I admit I still don't understand what made JFO'Hocher look guilty but then I don't deny that I am not a very careful player. Anyway, I am glad others are, and especially that our three known innocents managed to vote last and decide the day in our favour (may I add that I suggested this – it is not a difficult strategy but nonetheless not something SCUM need to actively suggest at this decisive stage).

Methinks things re innocents and suspects are not as clear as you think, Dafyd. I would suggest the following speculations.
Three people look more innocent than guilty but not entirely cleared:

- Smudgetta
Case for her innocence:
She effectively decided the vote for "TESS" on day one when she could have lynched without arousing much suspicion.
She voted for JFO’H on #1 in the last round.
Case against:
JFO'H defended her. The no lynching on day one could have been a trick to create a cover for precisely the situation now. (Did I mention that possibility then? I remember typing it but maybe deleted that passage from an over-long post). As I know her this would be in character - she is a rather mild-mannered sort of cook. Despite spitting in my tea. And voting for JFO’H last round might also be a trick to create a cover.
But I admit that using two such tricks looks very unlikely. And SCUM will always occasionally defend innocents.

- Felis (l.v.e.rouge)
Case for innocence: She was the first both in nominating and voting for JFO'H.
Case against:
BUT this might have been a simple trick - when she saw there was a mood against JFO'H the team decided to sacrifice him spectacularly (i.e. precisely by being the first in nominating and voting for him)? Am I right remembering that she was not nearly as proactive on any of the other days, usually being far less energetic and waiting to see what others did? Whence this sudden activism?

- Mumblebore (myself):
Case for being guilty:
Dafyd points out that I consistently voted not to lynch JFO'H. I had not noticed but in a way you are right. I put him in the middle on day one but then did not list him at all. But then that logically is true for a lot of others players whom I never voted for either. Wouldn’t you expect SCUM to act a bit less obviously? With so many nominees it is fairly safe for SCUM to list their team mates further down the voting list and arouse less suspicion.

But in another instance I acted even more suspiciously: On day two my lottery thingy forced me to nominate JFO'H (can't link to individual posts. It was on 1 November 14:04). But by inattention I got my nominations wrong and nominated someone else. You may think this looks like my own scheme had forced me to nominate my fellow SCUM and then I tried to get out of doing it by nominating someone else. And not only once but twice! Question: Why would I suggest such a scheme in the first place then?
You may think I am daft as Mr Daft of 3 Thick Lane, Little Daftington, and I don’t blame you - but even I would not think I could get away with a silly thing like that, assuming no one would notice (Eliabach kindly pointed my mistakes out to me and I ended up nominating JFO’H).
So you must choose: either you think I play extremely naively (in the way outlined above) despite having team mates to discuss with me and avoid actions that may seem suspicious. Or you assume I often just do not pay huge attention to detail in this game. What is more likely?

My general craziness is quoted as suspicious by some, but quite frankly, which of you would be brave enough to thus play the maverick on open stage if he had murder to hide? Not me.

So in my book we have:

Definitely innocent
- Dafyd
- Banner Lady
- Eliabach (will probably die tonight)

Very likely innocent:
- Smudgetta

Either innocent or playing a feasible trick:
- La vie en rouge

Unknown entities:
- Chelley
- Gwai
I have not given these two any thought. Has someone analysed their voting and nominating records?

I am not on the list obviously because you will have to make up your minds about the likelihood of my innocence/guilt in comparison to others.

This means all the honest people will know three innocents (themselves included) by tomorrow. And one of the other four is SCUM. We can win – and even have another day if we get it wrong tomorrow.
So the question for tomorrow will be:
Assuming we lynch an innocent – which of the five people:
Chelley
Gwai
La vie en rouge
Mumblebore
Smudgetta
will give us the maximum information by their death? Assuming Eliabach gets killed (why should SCUM risk hitting another protected victim if they or rather s/he can play safe?) we can start speculating now.
Eliabach – do you have any ideas before leaving us?
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs.Layman looked at the snow falling again, and wondered how long the supplies in the college would last. She took out her notepaper and penned Professor Eliabach a missive.

'There are rumours you may be leaving us. I don't understand, but should this be true, please leave detailed instructions as to how you would like us to preserve your bodies of work. I'm sure this will be valuable to St.Damian's.'

Mrs. Layman sent this off via the ever reliable Pike, and then wondered who she might prank this time to ease the boredom of the night.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Seeing your prank may well decide a lynching, depending on whether you hit SCUM or innocent, would you wait to take suggestions from the other two known innocents?
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Professor Mumblebore, I am very happy to work in concert and to a plan. It will be 10 hours before I can post again, so I await the collective wisdom of my fellow collegians.

As to who may be missing from St.Damian's tomorrow, I would not be so certain it will be Professor Eliabach. If I were SCUM, I would be taking out those who might impede their evil plans the most. Either Dr.Logge or myself are the biggest targets. No doubt Dr.Logge will be rolling the die to determine which of us he will put safely in the infirmary. But under no circumstances would I wish Dr.Logge to reveal his determinings. Some things are best left secret.
BL
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
I've said who I think the remaining suspects are already. I think Mrs Layman should use her own judgement which is likely to be at least as reliable as mine.
The college cat seems to dislike Mumblebore. Every time I remember disagreeing with the cat's suspicions I've turned out wrong.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Every time I remember disagreeing with the cat's suspicions I've turned out wrong.
Hmmm.
May I remind you that last time round she turned out to be a catwoman of very dubious morals (e.g. a string of murders to her name) and that disagreeing with her might have been not such a bad idea? It might well be wise to consider this possibility again and use your own judgment rather than hers.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
I would not definitely clear Felis.

If I was right about the pool of four likely suspects, and she were guilty, nominating a co-conspirator is exactly what I would expect her to do.

I agree that she looks much less guilty, but I wouldn't write off the possibility altogether.
In that case you don't know me as well as you think you do. When the Red Cat goes on a murderous rampage, it is a point of honour to her to keep her co-conspirators alive if at all humanly (or felinely) possible.

Just ask Mrs. Layman [Biased]
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
In that case you don't know me as well as you think you do. When the Red Cat goes on a murderous rampage, it is a point of honour to her to keep her co-conspirators alive if at all humanly (or felinely) possible.
I’m quite sure you would avoid unnecessary team sacrifices, Holy One, but I have indeed misjudged you if your blood is not almost as cold as mine when sacrifices are unavoidable.

That said, I would advise lynching Lucy next. On the day I nominated everyone, our one known killer put her inconspicuously in the centre of his list. She, however, didn’t list him at all. She put her own name twice, both joint seventh and last. Anyone can make a mistake, but there is only one person who has a positive reason to see O’Hocher and themselves as interchangeable – his co-conspirator.

I think Smudgetta innocent, because on the same day our killer placed her last in his list, and I think he was more subtle that to put fellow SCUM there. Mumbledore I think innocent for reasons already given.

If I’m wrong about Lucy, though, those two are worth watching. Ahead of them I’d place Chelley, and next after her Felis.

Now if you will excuse me, I have some guardian spirits to summon and bind.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
What Eliabach says makes sense to me (thanks for the work involved in going back over the thread).
So your order of suspicion is:

1. Lucy
2. Chelley
3. Felis
4. Me and Smudgetta

I can live with that, although I'd place Chelley third and the cat on #2 - scheming is what the game's about. So I suggest moving me further down your list. I assure you it will increase (y)our chances of winning.

Suggesting to lynch Lucy would imply silencing her as well, then. Because if she turns out to be innocent we cannot learn anything from her vote anyway as she is as blind as we are.

Dafyd: I think you would be safer to trust the opinion of someone we certainly know to be innocent (Eliabach) than someone whom we do not (the cat). Also his reflections are invariably more logical than hers (cats are cute, but).

[ 18. November 2011, 12:42: Message edited by: Sylvander ]
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
You agree with the view which makes you look plausibly innocent. Well surprise, surprise.

You still haven't given any convincing explanation for why you didn't want to lynch the gardener. You can call me tricksy if you want, but I'm a great believer in Occam's razor, actually (and you've got to admit that the fact I've heard of it is pretty impressive for a cat). Occam's razor says you didn't want to lynch Jeremiah because you are in league with him.

I actually think being certifiably barking insane could be a pretty good bluff. I know which way my catfood's buttered and you look guiltier than anyone else to me.

As for me - as Dai pointed out, I accused Jeremiah when no one was known for certain to be innocent except for Eliabach. There would be no reason for me to lynch one of my own at that point.

Jeremiah already let slip that there are only two murderers.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs Layman had always been suspicious of the cook and the gardener. But had she got the wrong cook? She summoned Pike and whispered in his ear.
Time would tell.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
You still haven't given any convincing explanation for why you didn't want to lynch the gardener.
In fact I did. If you read my post (seeing I don't always, you are forgiven for not doing it).

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I actually think being certifiably barking insane could be a pretty good bluff. I know which way my catfood's buttered and you look guiltier than anyone else to me.
This simple fact smells fishy to me. The more you post the more I grow suspicious.
You are (1) a bit too adamantly protesting your innocence while no one suspects you much but me (I at least have several lynch votes to my name) and (2) making such self-assured revanche accusations of me that I find it strange. Maybe my main fault is simply keeping your name on the suspects list?
Whatever case there is against me, I think Eliab's explanation of my behaviour is not only accurate (only I can know that) but also quite sensible and logical (anybody can judge for themselves). So the fact you so strongly disagree looks weird to me.
I am suspicious of you - but with far less certainty than the reverse.

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
As for me - as Dai pointed out, I accused Jeremiah when no one was known for certain to be innocent except for Eliabach. There would be no reason for me to lynch one of my own at that point.
Well, we already found a plausible explanation for that. Especially the strange pattern that you suddenly so conspiciously did that, making sure everyone would notice. You were never as hasty as on that particular day.
Why? I still wait for a reply.
You only said: "I try to win with the whole team and would not sacrifice JFO'H" - but even if that was true then JFO'H may have had more sense and actually suggested the plot himself. It is not my first preference but certainly not unlikely imo.

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Jeremiah already let slip that there are only two murderers.
Are you trying to pretend you are making constructive contributions while in fact saying nothing at all in the way SCUM often do? This particular bit of information was as good as crystal clear from the start.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Dawn rises

The college awakes to an unusual smell -- there is a corpse in Prof. Eliabach's room and it has not been treated with any preservatives. Upon inspection, it turns out to be his own. He was an ordinary citizen.

You have until 8am EST Tuesday to nominate. We'll begin voting either then, or when everyone is nominated.
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
Dai, please remind me of why you believe the cat to be definitely innocent.

On the other hand, I am really not convinced by Lucy's protestations of simplicity... it really does seem more like a cover for someone more devious. When it comes to actions, others seem more suspicious but considering character does make me veer towards thinking there's more to Lucy than meets the eye.

I would like to nominate Lucy the cook.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
The Professor stands in the gloom, and lets the rat's blood run freely down his arm and onto the symbols carved on the floor. Almost as soon as it touches, it pools and begins to boil violently.

"Come forth from the scalding stream, child of Phlegethon!

I have need of thee. I call thee up for my defence. By that which is willed, where what is willed must be, I charge and require thee, defend me from mine enemies with utmost violence until the dawn, lest thou be cast back into the iver and lie in torment with thy lungs filled with boiling blood beneath thy fellows' feet. Come forth!"

After the shade's anguished screams and protests have subsided a little, Eliabach retires to bed, in perfect security from his foes.

[...]

A little after midnight, the professor awakes in a cold sweat. He had used that spell perhaps a hundred times, so often that it had become a matter of routine. He no longer needed to consult the books, and rarely stopped to consider what it actually did.

Which was to summon the protective spirit of a murderer. It did not specify which one. Most places had their histories of violence, and associated spirits could be culled from the depths without difficulty, but today, with the blood of a known murderer even now on his hands, it might, perhaps, have been a good idea to be a little more specific in selecting a guardian against the man's fellows.


Eliabach reaches for his bedside tome, just as the door opens and figure stands in the doorway. The intruder seems somewhat self-conscious to be observed holding a ludicrous and unwieldy pitchfork in one hand, and flaming torch in the other, but there are traditions universally observed in such matters, even at Cambridge.

"Defend me!" cries Eliabach, but the guardian spirit only quakes and writhes as it shrieks in agony and malice, while its mortal companion steps forward plunges the wickedly sharp prongs deeply into Eliabach's chest.

[...]

The first thing that the visitors to the Professor's rooms notice the next day is that Ernst has at last replaced the portrait of the ugly old man above his desk. But the replacement is a curious choice of artwork. The canvas is so old and dull with dark pigments and grime that it appears almost black. It is only when one stands so close to the frame and stares that it is possible to make out any detail, to see a faint flicker of flame, and realise that the canvas itself is most uncomfortably warm.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
Dai, please remind me of why you believe the cat to be definitely innocent.
The cat nominated a SCUM back when we were just thrashing around. If she hadn't nominated him then, I don't think we would have lynched him yesterday.
If she were evil there was no need to throw one of her own out at that stage. We'd have been chasing our own tails quite comfortably.

Back in that round before last, Lucy voted O'Hocher and Berg equal first. I think O'Hocher was still a possible lynch candidate at that stage, which although it doesn't clear her entirely puts Lucy low on my list of suspects.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
"As Lucy faces the crowd, her cheeks are puffy and red, but her face is determined. "If you all really think it will help you solve things, lynch me, but it won't help you find the mafia. I rather suspect that the reason Dyllis Smudgetta is so interested in discrediting me is that she might be the mob. My voting pen has indeed been filled with what smells like cold tea, so I will not show my opinion in my votes until it has dried out. However, I can still nominate Dyllis Smudgetta I'm not a wise one, and I could be completely wrong, but since our doctor and prankster are innocent, and I believe the cat, and the resident crazy are probably innocent, I think that rather leaves my undercook.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
At the moment, I don't think Lucy is likely to be guilty, and I think Smudgetta is only guilty if Mumblebore is guilty as well and we started off with three SCUM. I'd suspect Chelley above either. But most of all I suspect Mumblebore.
Otherwise, it really would be a bit of a coincidence that the person he had so much trouble randomly nominating at the beginning turns out to be SCUM.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I think Smudgetta is only guilty if Mumblebore is guilty as well
Quite. And that must also be the reason he nominated her and voted for her lynching.
Your logic leaves the poor old professor [Ultra confused] but then at his advanced age one is generally unperturbed by the frailty of the human brain, not least one's own. And anyway Mumblebore is the one who always says this is primarily a game of luck, so he regards this as proof.
Seeing Lucy is already nominated he nominates the cat as usual. IF her conspiciously patterned nominating and voting was indeed a trick it would be more fun catching her than another piece of SCUM. If not we'll have another day and another guess.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
[I have the crappiest internet connection in the universe [Mad] ]

I would nominate Mumblebore but Dai’s already done it. He looked guilty already to me, and the fact that he’s going after me so hard makes him look very guilty to me indeed. OTOH if you really want to lynch me, you can – I know I’m innocent, and if I go to the great mousehunt in the sky it might persuade to off Mumblebore next.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Have had a barmy few days (and not just sorting the books in the library). My suspicions seem to have been re-covered by others so now to try and prioritise those thoughts. See-sawing.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Right, now that I have some time and a working internet connection:

My views on the pool of suspects are the following:

Dyllis Smudgetta - most likely innocent. At the eleventh hour she chose to go against the general opinion that (the innocent) Heisen Berg should be lynched and hung the vote. Were she a murderer I think she would have gone with the flow and let him hang. It would have been inconspicuous enough.

Miss Chelley has done nothing particularly incriminating AFAICT. She's called several innocents correctly aforetimes.

Lucy could be guilty I suppose. She's not done anything desperately incriminating though, apart from keep a low profile and the strange mix-up between herself and Jeremiah. OTOH if Mumblebore is going to plead inattention, then I don't see why Lucy can't make the same defence. So I find this inconclusive. I note she made an accusation of Dyllis that went largely unnoticed, but this is also inconclusive. She also voted to lynch Jeremiah the day before he was finally caught when she probably could have got away with doing something else.

Mumblebore. Barking mad or not, his voting pattern protected the only person so far proven to have been guilty, which I consider makes him a much better pick than anyone else on the menu. I still think that if he was innocent, last time round, he should have preferred to lynch Jeremiah or no one than to lynch himself. He might think the accusation of Jeremiah unconvincing, but he would know that he (Mumblebore) was innocent and should be kept alive.

Of course you have to add into this the fact that he is trying to prove the guilt of an innocent kitty. Maybe I'm just piqued that he's telling nasty lies about me, but one last time for the hard of thinking, why the cat is innocent:

To understand this you need to look not at what happened yesterday, but what happened the day before.

The scenario is this: imagine for the sake of argument that I am a bad murderous kitty in league with the gardener. No one is known for certain to be innocent except EVE (i.e. neither Dai nor Mrs. Layman has so far revealed their special powers). Jeremiah has just accused Mrs. Layman. Now is it more likely that I would a) leave him in peace to stitch up Mrs. Layman ('cause apart from anything else I still haven't forgiven her for not accepting my beautiful rat more politely and I don't like her - I mean what did she want, gift wrap?) or b) try to instigate the lynching of my own (hitherto unsuspected by anyone) co-conspirator? Anyone who persists in saying I would have gone for (b) is an obvious target for suspicion, IMO. Either that or very stupid.

One more thing: I should like to know who Mrs. Layman was playing tricks on last night. No one's come forward and I think someone's hiding something.

In response to a couple of specific points:

quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
revanche accusations of me that I find it strange. Maybe my main fault is simply keeping your name on the suspects list?
I think this is called "projection" (and you've got to admit it's pretty impressive that a cat's heard of it) [Biased]
quote:
Are you trying to pretend you are making constructive contributions while in fact saying nothing at all in the way SCUM often do? This particular bit of information was as good as crystal clear from the start.
Dai was still floating the possibility of three murderers extremely recently.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Barking mad or not, his voting pattern
It takes a cat to distinguish a "pattern" in a sample of two votes in one of which gardener was not even nominated. The vote on day two was demonstrably cast on the basis of an elaborately executed random pick.

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Barking
Aaaah! And now I understand my main crime … Sorry, I can’t do purring.

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I still think that if he was innocent, last time round, he should have preferred to lynch Jeremiah or no one than to lynch himself.
Sorry, dear, but this makes no sense at all. Cast a vote I did and that is as much as anyone can do who is nominated to save their skin.

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
He might think the accusation of Jeremiah unconvincing, but he would know that he (Mumblebore) was innocent and should be kept alive.
Of course, of course. So according to your logic, because I know I am guilty I cast my vote in such a way as to increase the risk of my own death? Something I would not have done if I were innocent?
I know you do not believe this yourself. Why would a SCUM cherish his own life less than someone innocent?
But coming up with confusingly complicated but illogical stuff like that is the mark of murderers.
I admit that seeing this is a team game, keeping myself alive is never my prime objective, but that applies to whatever side I am on.

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
One more thing: I should like to know who Mrs. Layman was playing tricks on last night. No one's come forward and I think someone's hiding something.
I think someone did mention they had been pranked further up the page.

quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
revanche accusations of me that I find it strange. Maybe my main fault is simply keeping your name on the suspects list?
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I think this is called "projection" (and you've got to admit it's pretty impressive that a cat's heard of it) [Biased] [/QB]
I draw my hat to the kitkat for knowledge and spelling. [Overused]
But I think I started it, didn’t I? And only then did you return the favour by accusing me.
So the projection – if there is such a thing outside kitty world – would work the other way round.

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Dai was still floating the possibility of three murderers extremely recently.
Yes, I know, [Roll Eyes] .
I think he has been sent from God to test my faith.
Maybe if I repent, do a Jonah and let myself be thrown overboard the Lord will deliver us from him the following night?
BUT, ladies, I should like to mention that, whether I do a Jonah or not, Dafyd is most likely a lamb to the slaughter come nightfall. So lynching me today would mean you ‘d wake up deprived of all male company tomorrow. And even if you found the killer afterwards- you’re snowed in, remember? What fun would that leave you in the college for the rest of those cold winter nights?
Knitting and tea, that’s what!
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
One more thing: I should like to know who Mrs. Layman was playing tricks on last night. No one's come forward and I think someone's hiding something.
Lucy says she's got a pen full of cold tea.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
"I don't like the way that Lucy encourages that awful fat cat, " said Mrs. Layman to Pike. "Yes, I know the long white fur probably hides a sleek and hungry animal, but it's always out in the snow prowling about, when any sensible feline would be curled up on a hearth, fast asleep. It does make me nervous. Would you check the shutters again, please, Pike? One day, it will appear at the window and make poor little Berkeley simply die of fright. That animal seems almost...possessed."
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
One more thing: I should like to know who Mrs. Layman was playing tricks on last night. No one's come forward and I think someone's hiding something.
Lucy says she's got a pen full of cold tea.
That's bad.
BUT NOT AS BAD AS TEA THAT'S BEEN SPAT IN!! [Mad] Smudgie, remember that I have an elephant's memory! (And often the brains, too, but that is irrelevant here).
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
One more thing: I should like to know who Mrs. Layman was playing tricks on last night. No one's come forward and I think someone's hiding something.
Lucy says she's got a pen full of cold tea.
So she does. Did I mention I have the crappiest internet connection in the universe?
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
I'd like to emphasise Mumblebore and Chelley are the only people still alive who never put O'Hocher in either first place or joint first place for lynching.
I think that's important.

[ 22. November 2011, 09:32: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Well, as I am not at all sure whether all the bold bits in the cat's litter tray mean she has nominated people or not, I hereby nominate Chelley just to make up the full compliment of suspects.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
[I kept trying to post this morning but the electricians kept either blowing or turning off the electric which didn't bother the laptop but did bother the wireless connection!]

quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I'd like to emphasise Mumblebore and Chelley are the only people still alive who never put O'Hocher in either first place or joint first place for lynching.
I think that's important.
I put Mumblebore above O'Hocher because I'd thought Mumblebore more suspicious and put O'Hocher above TESS and Felis because I thought he was next most likely. Seemed to make sense at the time!
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Nominations close, votes open.

Your options are:

Miss Chelley nominated by Barbara Layman (Banner Lady)
Lucy (Gwai) nominated by Dyllis Smudgetta
Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie) nominated by Lucy
Mumblebore (Sylvander) nominated by Dai (Dafyd)
Felis Rufa (la vie en rose) nominated by Mumblebore
TESS

48 hours for voting, so you have until 8am EST Thursday. [Thursday being Thanksgiving, I'll be having a lie in and may not actually be around to witness the close of polls. The execution will follow shortly afterwards though.]
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I'd like to emphasise Mumblebore and Chelley are the only people still alive who never put O'Hocher in either first place or joint first place for lynching.
I think that's important.
Since you clearly you will not be impressed by rhyme or reason - what will do you in repentance if you get me lynched and lose us this game?

[ 22. November 2011, 12:42: Message edited by: Sylvander ]
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs Layman hunted around for the memo from the late Professor Eliabach. "Yes," she said to herself. "I agree that the cook and the librarian seem to be the most suspicious."

She marked the voting slip clearly:

1. Lucy
2. Chelley

Why were good staff so hard to find these days?
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
If the SCUM win because we lynch Mumblebore or Chelley despite their innocence then I'll congratulate them on how well they played. But Mumblebore's insistence that there's no reason to lynch him is simply wrong. And the fact he claims he can't see that strikes me as suspicious in and of itself.

1) Mumblebore
2) Chelley
3) Smudgetta, Lucy
4) TESS
5) Felis Rufa

[ 22. November 2011, 19:10: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
1) Mumblebore
2) Chelley
3) Smudgetta, Lucy
4) TESS
5) Felis Rufa
Just because I often like to know how someone would have voted if they could, This is almost exactly how I would have voted except I would have given TESS #5 and myself #4. Yes, it is better to lynch me than no one, because then you'll at least know I'm not guilty.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
Miss Chelley nominated by Barbara Layman (Banner Lady)
Lucy (Gwai) nominated by Dyllis Smudgetta
Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie) nominated by Lucy
Mumblebore (Sylvander) nominated by Dai (Dafyd)
Felis Rufa (la vie en rose) nominated by Mumblebore
TESS

I can understand (having said myself before that the 'everyone nominated' situation made for a good sense of votes) why Banner Lady decided to throw me at the last minute into the mix along with everyone else, but find the first few sets of votes rather interesting. Seems fair enough Banner Lady just going for Lucy and then me - if I was to complete the set - that she'd put someone above her nominated choice but not sure how I come to take such an exclusive place with Lucy! Lucy (expressing how she would have voted) going for Mumblebore then me even though she nominated Smudgetta! I'm not sure why Dai (Dafyd) has decided to lump me at 2 after Mumblebore when I defended him a number of times even before he was a known innocent, as well as having concerns (and previously nominating Mumblebore myself). But at least he followed up his own nomination! So far that just makes me more suspicious of Lucy, and also of Smudgetta (was that a cover-up nomination with no intention of being acted upon?).

At least that's helped my going round in circles...

1. Lucy
2. Smudgetta
3. Mumblebore
4. Felis
5. TESS
6. Miss Chelley
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
About the only thing one can say with any certainty about Mumblebore is that he's very odd. I still think he's more suspicious than anyone else. If his thoroughly bizarre behaviour is really what he says it is, then frankly he should have paid better attention. Mrs. Layman seems a bit swayed by him - I find it a little odd that she interprets my insistence the way she does. I would have expected her to remember that I arrived in the college after my previous owner was so bloodymindedly right about something that she burned her own house down. I'm a determined beast, if nothing else.

I still think Mumblebore is the best pick going, and after him I would probably go for Lucy. However, this puts them neck and neck and since Mumblebore gets a vote, and Lucy doesn't, and I want Mumblebore lynched more than I want Lucy lynched, after consultation of the spreadsheet:

• Mumblebore
•• TESS

(Apparently EVE's homunculus scribe couldn't survive without its creator. It definitely smells dead to me. Back to the trusty claw then.)

FWIW, my full order of suspicion is Mumblebore - Lucy - Chelley - Dyllis - Felis but if I vote this way, the spreadsheet says it actually doesn't get me the result I want, thus the vote above.
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
1 Lucy
2 Felis
3 Chelley
4 Mumblebore
5 TESS
6 Smudgetta (on the grounds that I know my innocence)
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
I hope I am right in assuming that we have enough votes to get poor Lucy lynched.

1 Lucy
2 Felis and Chelley
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
The gavel falls and Lucy (gwai) goes to her death. She was an ordinary citizen.

Night falls. I'll give until Friday 8am EST for night actions, but if I get them in earlier we'll have dawn earlier.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
<Look of haughty reproach of which only a cat is capable>

Told you Mumblebore was a better pick.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
"That cat's insane,"
mumbled the professor,
"It's barking.
Up the wrong tree."
Anyway, I believe you when you say you are laughing. You would, even if innocent.
Alright, whom do we have left?

Chelley
La vie en rouge
Mumblebore
Smudgetta (probably innocent)
Banner Lady (known innocent)
Dafyd (probably dead by tomorrow)

So, come tomorrow there are five players, one of whom is SCUM. We will have two attempts: Even if we mis-lynch tomorrow and lose Banner Lady the following night (she is an asset because we are sure she is innocent), there'll still be three players left and they absolutely have to find a way to avoid a three-way TESS result.

As far as I can tell we only have three viable culprits (all seem to more or less agree about Smudgella's innocence) whom we have to weigh against each other. Chelley, Mumblebore (me) and the cat. For two (or even all three) of us, who are innocent, this basically leaves a choice between the other two.
If Chelley, the cat and I do not form a two-one majority against the third one, but vote in a circle it will be down to Smudgie and BL to decide things. BL even has double impact, as she can deprive one of us three of the vote.
I am too lazy to analyze past voting behaviour much to make up my mind between l.v.e.r. and Chelley [Frown]
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
I'm clearly missing something. Could somebody please explain to me what made Lucy our prime suspect?
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
I am too lazy to analyze past voting behaviour much to make up my mind between l.v.e.r. and Chelley
La vie en rouge led the only lynch mob that actually picked the correct target. She was the first to say that O'Hocher was suspicious and it turns out that she was right.

If that's not enough to make up your mind, then what would?
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I'm clearly missing something. Could somebody please explain to me what made Lucy our prime suspect?
She was EVE's prime suspect. And some people trusted him to do their thinking for them.

EVE was brilliant, but he's never been infallible.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Layman sighed. If she was that sort of woman, she would have sworn that the cat's head was even bigger than the last time she saw it.

"If you look back over my voting slips, you will see that I consistently suspected the cook and the gardner. As I had already put tea in Lucy's pen, I voted for her to go. I asked you all for your suggestions, explained that I was happy to work as a team - especially with Dr.Logge, and was not given any direction other than to go with my own instincts. Am I happy that it's almost Christmas and now there is no head cook in the college? Of course not! Poor Dyllis will have double the workload.

Of those left, Miss Chelley and Professor Mumblebore seem the most likely to be SCUM. Again, I will ask you, who you wish to see prevented from voting tomorrow? If I am alive, I will endeavour to put the majority wishes into action. But if you leave it up to me, Dr.Logge, then don't bleat if I get it wrong."

Mr.Layman poured herself a hot toddy, and wished the world had a few less academics and cats in it.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
La vie en rouge led the only lynch mob that actually picked the correct target. She was the first to say that O'Hocher was suspicious and it turns out that she was right.
If that's not enough to make up your mind, then what would?
The only people we can be sure of are Dafyd, Banner Lady, Smudgetta (almost). For all others keep your mind open.

As I said before: The cat's obvious lead in lynching JFO'H is precisely the reason why I do not entirely discard the possibility of her guilt. Imagine the situation: JFO'H had come under suspicion (not from her). This is a chance to create an excellent cover. If she is instrumental in killing him, this will always be an argument in her favour – "I would not kill my own ally, would I?" This is not a particularly difficult or far-fetched trick. Why do you find it so impossible to imagine?

What is weird: At this moment suddenly the cat changes her behaviour. Previously she held back, observed what others did before acting. She nominated and voted in the middle or towards the end of the pack. But now she jumps to the forefront: She is the first to nominate and later she is the first to vote for JFO'H. I asked twice and she never gave any explanation why she suddenly switched to becoming so extremely proactive.

Yes, I may be wrong. Overestimating the cat's scheming ability (but I do not think the scheme is THAT complex, so I would not put it past anyone here). Or being over-suspicious. But then reversely you may be too naïve in excluding the possibility altogether. (You certainly act naïvely in assuming that my double mis-nominating on day two was best explained by trying to avoid nominating my ally – at a time when everybody got nominated anyway, so the risk even for SCUM nominating another SCUM minimal).

There is an argument against the cat scheming this way. She spoke true when she earlier said she prefers to win with the entire team (I was Mafia with her once and she was against a beautiful sacrifice even when we already were winning hands down). This is a game of psychology and people usually stick with a particular style of play (true, psychology is quite hard online where liars don't blush and voices don't flicker). I think she really dislikes strategic sacrifices as much as I like them (like in chess they make the game far more interesting but riskier). This is why I am not at all sure of her guilt (and voted for others first).

Actually there is a chance that Smudgetta used a similar scheme (i.e. assuring TESS on day one or two) to create the (now generally accepted) impression of her innocence. But because Smudgetta's action came earlier and without need (JFO'H was not under threat, nor would she have been), I think that one far less likely.

Because I know I am innocent that leaves me with the choice of two candidates: Chelley and La Vie.

I am not sure what the case for Chelley's guilt is. I usually suspect quiet people and she is relatively quiet – but so was Lucy.

I am too lazy and short of time to re-read the thread and list her nominating and voting patterns (and please, don't tell me about my alleged pattern again – a "pattern" derived from the total of two votes is statistically useless) unless nobody else does. But come the time for voting after the weekend I may be forced to (I'll also have a bit more time then). I would say that in the last two days anybody who saved me from lynching may be a bit suspicious, too. It would look suspicious IF Lucy is innocent. In this case saving Mumblebore-me could indicate that SCUM saves me because I constantly accused her, another innocent.

quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
As I had already put tea in Lucy's pen, I voted for her to go. I asked you all for your suggestions, explained that I was happy to work as a team - especially with Dr.Logge, and was not given any direction other than to go with my own instincts.
I think you did the sensible thing, Lucy was not an unlikely target.
And I think we might win, even if we lynch two innocents in the next two days (incl. me).

We shall have tomorrow:
• Chelley
• La vie en rouge
• Mumblebore
• Smudgetta (probably innocent)
• Banner Lady (known innocent)


Assume tomorrow we lynch one innocent out of the three unknown quantities (e.g. me or Chelley. Seeing that I am almost alone in still suspecting the cat, she'll survive).

I suggest that the (almost) certain innocents (Smudgetta and Banner Lady) vote last. This way the one SCUM must vote early, perhaps giving a hint. I am even happy for the three innocents (or, if Dafyd dies too quickly) to determine an order of voting that we all abide by. Chelley and La Vie should be happy to agree to this, if they are innocent (or continue pretending to be :-)

This will leave tomorrow night:
• Banner Lady
• Smudgie
• Chelley/Me
• La Vie

The following night, our last absolutely certain player, i.e. Banner Lady (no longer protectable) will most likely die.

This would leave:
• Smudgetta
• Chelley/me
• The cat

In this situation SCUM can win two ways: Lynching an innocent or TESS.
Smudgetta is the one player most likely innocent (actually all this banks totally on her innocence). So it is vital that she votes last, because only this way can one ensure SCUM does not. This would at least give us a 50% chance and it is down to poor Smudgie.
Smudgie, IF in this situation you would vote for me, I'd prefer to be lynched tomorrow, because voting for me on the last day will lose for Cambridge.

quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
If the SCUM win because we lynch Mumblebore or Chelley despite their innocence then I'll congratulate them on how well they played.
Hey! This is not repentance, just simple politeness.
I was thinking more along the lines of self-flagellation, teeth-gnashing, wailing and ashes on your head.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Sorry for double post.
But after posting I felt a bit guilty for being so lazy while writing so much. So I did something I usually find boring: I went back and re-skimmed the thread just before JFO'Hs lynching.

And apologies: I think I based my entire speculation on a wrong assumption, i.e. that the cat nominated him when he was already being suspected. But he was not - unless I overlooked something. (Can someone check?) She did indeed start it, saying she did so "without any particular reason" and without constructing a case against him, i.e. she made a shot in the dark like most other nominations at that stage. This would indeed suggest she probably is innocent and the whole thing was not a scheme.

Miss Chelley in the last round voted inconspicuously – voting for Lucy was safe as the mood was against her anyway. Then she put me somewhere in the middle votes, out of the danger zone. As I said SCUM might do that in order to save someone making a wrong accusation all the time, but someone whom one might easily lynch later, seeing the popular mood building against me. It all would fit.
I have not checked her other votes prior to JFO'H's death, do they point anywhere?

I would suggest going for Chelley tomorrow. In the unlikely event there is still a day after that, you can lynch me (but then we have lost and the cat's strutting and crowing will be completely unbearable for years to come).
Of course you can lynch me first to test my bona fide and then Chelley. Amounts to the same, just takes longer.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
All that blathering and I still say MUMBLEBORE DID IT....

And in the unlikely event that it wasn't him, then it has to be Miss Chelley.

Since Mrs. Layman is taking suggestions, I obviously think you should go for Mumblebore. Even if you don't agree with me about him looking like a murderer at least it might make less work for the hosts [Razz]

I'm not sure we can say for certain Dai will be dead tomorrow - he might have been protecting Mrs. Layman last night, no? All depends who's bluffing who.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I'm not sure we can say for certain Dai will be dead tomorrow - he might have been protecting Mrs. Layman last night, no?
I'm saying nothing.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
To answer some of the comments above (too many come to mind to try and quote all the bits!). I'm happy to try and vote when the time comes in a particular order but my voting times have pretty much happened when I can manage to vote rather than being placed anywhere in particular, and they've reflected my suspicions according to where my mix of hunch and attempted logic have got to. So I'd have the same challenge of voting to order (as mentioned before I was trying to post when the electricians working on the house kept fusing everything and I lost the connection repeatedly!).

As far as voting for Lucy goes... I expressed those suspicions long before this round and that was nothing to do with going along with what others were doing. The reason I decided to opt for Lucy over Mumblebore (having nominated him in the previous round) I explained in an earlier comment - I thought it was strange that she would nominate Smudgetta and then place Smudgetta so low going for Mumblebore and me first. She did things I couldn't work out without being suspicious (when she wasn't being relatively quiet).

And to ask a question... I might have missed something but can someone tell me why Smudgetta is so obviously innocent to the rest? I know I get a thought and keep hold of it like a bone but think I've missed something that might help here! Or is it just others going by the same 'hunch' system? I've commented before on finding her voting pattern strange but am happy to be reminded of what I've missed. (That's a bit of a repetitive sentence, sorry, but too long a day to try and sort it!)

Who is EVE?

When everyone else was going flat out for the trio of Dai, Heisen and Archibald, I was already expressing more concern about the bunch of Lucy (innocent it turns out but I still reckon made some weird choices), Mumblebore and Smudgetta and still can't see what convinces others that the SCUM isn't one of them? (That's a question). I've been pretty sure of the cat all through (as innocent) though have been hoodwinked by Vie before but she's last on my list (aside from the known innocents). And I had to take my hat off to getting O'Hocher - I hadn't picked up on what the cat had.
Mumblebore seems to have decided on me as most likely, apparently going by my voting pattern - but as I said, that's just reflected where my thinking's got to at each stage (as it usually does - and having started out trying to be more logical and having been accused of playing differently, I've said since then that out comes the random gut feeling now - when I've had the chances to say what I want to say). Is he a dog with a bone too or more sinister?
Anyway, that's about all I can remember to comment on for now and need to do a bit of looking back at how the rest have been voting.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:

Who is EVE?
I've answered that one now anyway!
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I'm not sure we can say for certain Dai will be dead tomorrow - he might have been protecting Mrs. Layman last night, no?
I'm saying nothing.
I don't want you to say anything about who you are nursing tonight.
But if you say nothing about your preferences as to whom I might silence, then you leave me with the cat wanting Mumblebore silenced and Mumblebore wanting Chelley unable to vote. One of these last two has to be innocent. I doubt both are, although it is still possible. So please tell me Dr.Logge, whose pen shall be doctored?
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I'm not sure we can say for certain Dai will be dead tomorrow - he might have been protecting Mrs. Layman last night, no? All depends who's bluffing who.
Oh, greeeaaaat. Congratulations for blurting it out!

There was the off-chance that SCUM had not thought about this possibility. I had rather hoped that Dafyd had protected BL last night, in order to protect himself tonight. So I tried to tempt SCUM to only think of hitting him and perhaps score another miss.

Oh cat, si tacuisses ...

At least SCUM still run a 50 percent risk of getting it wrong again [Snigger]
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
Who is EVE?
I've answered that one now anyway!
I am too dumb. What/who is EVE?
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Ernst Something-beginning-with-V Eliabach

[ETA - for Miss Chelley - I think Dyllis is innocent because of her conspicuously saving Heisen from the noose the day before he got lynched]

[ 24. November 2011, 11:01: Message edited by: la vie en rouge ]
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
But if you say nothing about your preferences as to whom I might silence, then you leave me with the cat wanting Mumblebore silenced and Mumblebore wanting Chelley unable to vote.
I agree with the cat.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I think Dyllis is innocent because of her conspicuously saving Heisen from the noose the day before he got lynched
In addition, O'Hocher said something ambiguous about her which at the time I took to mean he suspected her, and then when we found out he was guilty I wondered whether he was trying to defend her, and now I think he was just stirring and trying to raise suspicions without being obvious.
My main reason for thinking that Smudgetta's innocent is that she voted to lynch O'Hocher at what looks to me like a critical stage of the proceedings.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
"Dear me," thought Mrs. Layman, "Professor Mumblebore may soon be permanently silenced. I suppose I DID wish for less academics in the world..." She sent Pike off in the direction of the Professor's rooms, and reflected that whoever was laying waste to the remnant in the college seemed to prefer male victims.

Small comfort, but one to which she clung hopefully as the night drew in.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
As dawn dawned over St. Damian's, everyone looked suspiciously vertical: no-one had died overnight.

I'll give until 8am EST Saturday for nominating, then we'll go until 8am EST Tuesday with the votes.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
I still think it more likely to be Chelley than Mumblebore, so I will nominate the librarian. However I will vote in accord with the majority.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
My only expertise in murder is watching 'Murder She Wrote'... but of course, this being 1889 (or something like that) I am very ahead of my time! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
I was protecting Mrs Layman, for what it's worth.

If I wasn't suspicious of Mumblebore previously I would be now: he's been loudly predicting that the SCUM will target me and then the SCUM have gone and targeted someone else. It looks like an unsubtle attempt at reverse psychology to me.

I nominate Mumblebore.
 
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
(I realise that non-participants probably aren't allowed to post on this thread, but I'm sitting on the edge of my chair here: whodunnit? whodunnit?)
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
"Well, thank you so much for that announcement, Dr.Logge. If we don't lynch the murderer this time around, then they will know I am fair game this coming night. I am most humbly appreciative of the good work done in protecting my household last night, but I do wish you had kept that information to yourself. All I can say, is that the majority had best get it right, this time."
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Well done Dai.

(I also thought Mrs. Layman might be the real target, which is why I flagged this up last night.)

I continue to assert that Mumblebore dunnit. But he's nominated already.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
If we don't lynch the murderer this time around, then they will know I am fair game this coming night.
I think that they knew that already.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
It's Cambridge Lucky Winter. First JFO'H, and then SCUM twice hit the wrong target. How likely is all this coinciding?
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I was protecting Mrs Layman, for what it's worth.
Well done! Hurrah!
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
If I wasn't suspicious of Mumblebore previously I would be now: he's been loudly predicting that the SCUM will target me and then the SCUM have gone and targeted someone else. It looks like an unsubtle attempt at reverse psychology to me.
Maybe. Maybe not. Who knows? :-) Kill me and you'll find out.
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
My only expertise in murder is watching 'Murder She Wrote'... [Big Grin]
Yep, it looks like your methods were a bit too old-fashioned for the modern youth. You should use Dafyd's and my method: a coin or random generator often works miracles of unpredictability.
Whatever peeps think, I won't do anything like „Murder He Wrote“. My pen has dried up for the day. But I know who dunnit.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
"My Goodness, but the cook has been ominously quiet," thought Mrs.Layman. "I wonder what she thinks of all this?"
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
My only expertise in murder is watching 'Murder She Wrote'... [Big Grin]
Yep, it looks like your methods were a bit too old-fashioned for the modern youth. You should use Dafyd's and my method: a coin or random generator often works miracles of unpredictability.
Whatever peeps think, I won't do anything like „Murder He Wrote“. My pen has dried up for the day. But I know who dunnit.
You are a rather presumptuous young man! "Old fashioned" indeed! And I have had no need for coins or random generators as, like most others here, I have tried to use my logic to work out who's guilty. I can understand why Dafyd may have wanted to employ a random method of choice but still can't see why you would/did earlier unless you didn't care who was got rid of!

[ 26. November 2011, 00:15: Message edited by: Chelley ]
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Prof Bumblebore shook his grey mane. Apparently he could grow a beard down to his knees and still the staff would address him as "young man!" when they reproached him It always made him feel very bad when the cleaner lady scolded: You really ought not put the alarm in the fridge and the marmelade on the bedside table. No wonder you're always late for your lectures! Oh really, one day I'll have to tell your mum."

quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
I can understand why Dafyd may have wanted to employ a random method of choice but still can't see why you would/did earlier unless you didn't care who was got rid of!
So you DID understand, see. Because SCUM do care who gets got rid of, i.e. none of their own. While we (not you) honest folk, don't, at least not in the beginning.


Oh, Mrs Layman, while Dafyd is no doubt a very fine young man whom your mother would approve of, there are moments in life when it is better not to take the advice of Mr Nice Guy. But rather from the bad boy with the wild beard and reputation. Especially when, as in this case your instincts coincide with his advice... This would have left you the chance of lynching Chelley first and on the off-chance that she proved innocent, go for that utterly irrational big cat.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Let the votes begin!

The options are:

Chelley nominated by Barbara Layman (Banner Lady)
Mumblebore (Sylvander) nominated by Dai (Dafyd)
TESS

You have until 8am EST Tuesday to cast your votes.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
My internet connection is actually working at the minute, so I’m going to vote before it gives up the ghost again [Roll Eyes]

• Mumblebore
•• Miss Chelley
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:

quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
I can understand why Dafyd may have wanted to employ a random method of choice but still can't see why you would/did earlier unless you didn't care who was got rid of!
So you DID understand, see. Because SCUM do care who gets got rid of, i.e. none of their own. While we (not you) honest folk, don't, at least not in the beginning.

Er, I think it's *us* citizens who do actually care who's got rid of! But you say that you didn't care???

1. Mumblebore
2. TESS
3. Miss Chelley
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
1. Mumblebore
2. Chelley
3. TESS
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
Smudgetta crawls miserably from the kitchen, though it is unclear whether her misery is at the guilt of discovering that the former head cook was innocent after all or at the huge amount of washing up and potato peeling which she seems to have inherited from her. Probably a combination of the two have kept her closeted away in the scullery (*either that or an unexpected trip to France with her brother!)

With Lucy's innocence, Smudgetta has now begun to doubt herself, but realises that a vote for Mumbledore would at least seal the certainty of a lynching, which is probably our best chance of making the most of Mrs Layman's narrow escape at this stage in the game.

1) Mumbledore
2) Chelley
3) TESS
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Et tu, Brute?
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Layman's hand hung heavily over the voting paper. She had a terrible feeling she was signing her own death warrant.

But as the majority were sure Professor Mumblebore was SCUM, she acquiesced to their determination to get rid of him.

If they were right, then the last obstacle between her husband and the Mastership of St.Damian's would be removed. If they were wrong...she shuddered. Sleep would not come easily tonight.

Her pen shakily wrote: Professor Mumblebore.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
With the first unanimous expression of opinion at St. Damian's since the vote on whether to stop serving liver and onions, Prof. Mumblebore goes to the noose. He was an ordinary citizen.

I'll give 47 hours and 10 minutes for night actions (till 8am EST Tuesday), but hopefully we can get done earlier.
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
Mumblebore may have been innocent as far as SCUM was concerned, and his death was indeed untimely for that reason. The cook - now head cook, of course - felt bad about that. But not too bad - the place was much quieter without that old buffoon rambling and waffling around.. if only there had not been another bit of undiscovered SCUM sullying the water. At least now it was fairly clear who that SCUM was... but their murderous tendencies looked likely to lead to another innocent death tonight.

She shuddered... and made herself a nice warm reassuring cup of tea.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
Dear friends,
I moved. Kindly direct all further correspondence to

Prof. Eustace Mumblebore
Row 4a, lot 56
St. Dunstan's-by-the-bookshelf Churchyard
Cambridge DE3 AD71

Yours sincerely
Mumblebore

He hesitated and, remembering that he had no friends to send his note to, tore it up. He heard the bunch of removal men coming up the stairs. Strange, to judge by the pitch of their voices they rather seemed to be in touch with their feminine side.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Blast. This is getting rather close to the tape.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Layman looked out at the ever falling snow. The drifts were piling high all around the house again.

Three suspects remained. The librarian, the cook and the cat. Which one was SCUM? Dr. Logge and the cat had chosen wrongly, and now the college was in deep peril indeed.

She sighed. She never did like cats.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I don't feel guilty. Not at all. I'm a cat and everyone knows that cats never feel guilty about anything.

I am rather surprised though. He looked so very guilty. All goes to show that it pays to stay alert and pay attention, I suppose.

Between Dyllis and Miss Chelley, I think I have to say Miss Chelley looks guiltier. But if Dyllis gets away with murder, then she'll deserve my grudging admiration.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
It just goes to show that appearances can be deceptive!
I seem to have had the opposite instinct to others in suspecting the cook and trusting the cat but I've also had a niggle underlying all along that I've been hoodwinked by the cat's forebears, but then can you hold a cat responsible for their actions - I don't think so? But can't put aside the strange choices of the cook and the only defence for her seems to have been her non-lynch vote early on (thanks for the answers to that question anyway).
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Dawn rises. As the inhabitants of St. Damian's rise from their beds, they find that Barbara Layman has been killed overnight. She was the prankster. As she was a little busy being killed, she was unable to prank anyone overnight, so all of you can vote today.

Nominations open till 8pm EST Wednesday.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Mrs. Layman stoked up the fires before she went to bed. The wind was howling, and more snow beating upon the window shutters. The chill was all pervasive, as the snow drifts against the walls of the house had now encased it in icy coldness.

She lay awake for what seemed like forever, listening to her husband softly snoring, and Pike occasionally coughing in his sleep downstairs. Eventually unconsciousness overcame her. She did not hear the villain who crept on to the roof, and stopped up both chimneys with rags. In fact, she did not hear anything again, ever.

It was not until Professor Layman was missed in the dining hall, that Dr.Logge went looking for him, and discovered that the Laymans were no more. He arranged for the bodies of Professor and Mrs. Layman, and the unfortunate Pike, to be carried out during a break in the weather, and laid in the gardener's shed until the authorities could come. Strangely, the nightingale's cage was empty.

It was only a most discerning eye that would notice the little feathers in the furball left behind by a most satisfied cat.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
So I'm pretty sure that Felis Rufa and Smudgetta have both contributed to the identification or lynching of SCUM, so that leaves by elimination only Chelley, whom I therefore nominate.

If I'm wrong about either Felis Rufa or Smudgetta then I think we're stuffed.
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
Despite my total dislike of cats in general...sneaky, devious, self-serving creatures... splitting the vote at this stage would be suicidal. I'll be going along with the nomination of Miss Chelley.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
So I'm pretty sure that Felis Rufa and Smudgetta have both contributed to the identification or lynching of SCUM, so that leaves by elimination only Chelley, whom I therefore nominate.
Felis definitely contributed to the identification and lynching of SCUM and that can't have been a clever Vie twist at the time it happened which does counteract my niggle of being caught out by her again! Smudgetta voted for the lynching but as the gardener's cards were pretty marked with most others going for Mumblebore and O'Hocher as first or second or joint first/second choice (including me) then it doesn't exactly show Smudgetta in the same light as the cat.
And she switched to O'Hocher having gone after Mumblebore when the rest of us were still sure of his innocence (before his craziness started to make him look guilty!).

At least you have clarified my thoughts on the cat's innocence... which just leaves the cook. So I nominate Smudgetta (she already made me suspicious anyway and at least that means I'm nominating her on real suspicions and not the niggling grudge at being accused of "riding in the cat's wake"! [Disappointed] )
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
Despite my total dislike of cats in general...sneaky, devious, self-serving creatures... splitting the vote at this stage would be suicidal. I'll be going along with the nomination of Miss Chelley.
How convenient! So at this crucial stage you don't care which of us it is, and even though you can't stand the cat you're going to go after me just to make sure someone gets lynched. Slight change of tactic compared with earlier, and when now, as Dafyd put it, "we're stuffed" if we get it wrong!
 
Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :
 
Oh my. It's getting really quite tense now . . . and nobody around to even develop a ghost-useable corkscrew! One of you might have some consideration for the lot of us and cobble together something based on EVE's old notes—after all, one of you is going to be quite grateful you had the foresight to think ahead before you got lynched!

Pip, pip. Old grudges die with the bodies. Or they would, if someone could fetch me one of those bottles under the third flagstone past the steps under the rose-tinted window—lift it just at the crack where the center pane hits at 1:07 in the afternoon by the college sundial on St. Aethefrith's eve. You can do that for us, right?
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by AristonAstuanax:
Oh my. It's getting really quite tense now . . . and nobody around to even develop a ghost-useable corkscrew!
Amazing what death can do for you, Mumblebore mused. He felt and looked rejuvenated. And had he known the pleasant company this side of the mirror, he'd've come earlier! Why, even that Oxford SCUM was quite a decent fella once you downed a few bottles with him.
True, the wine was rather on the dry side. He guessed it was because Prof Eliabach had forgotten to dust the skulls before bringing them. Did he think they had feather dusters here? Ah well, probably he was just in a hurry upon his departure. Mumblebore cheerily raised his skull: "To your health, guys, nunc est bibendum!"
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
... Oxford SCUM was quite a decent fella once you ...

While it seems to be the witching hour, I was moderately surprised no-one picked up you getting the Universities backwards earlier (I did something similar with forgetting the Conservationists were the bad guys).
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Election time again, Damianites. Your options are:

Dyllis Smudgetta (Smudgie) nominated by Chelley
Chelley nominated by Dai (Dafyd)
TESS

I won't be around Friday night, so I'll give until 8am EST Saturday morning for voting.
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
1Chelley


I won't protest my innocence. Sorry Chelley, it was either you or the cat. A non-lynching means a win for the SCUM, at least this way there's a small chance of winning. And if you're not SCUM and that shifty cat is, then it'll just prove I was right all along about that feline race but at least there'll be nobody left to feed her! [Biased]
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Well, it wasn't me (and for the record, I did not eat Mrs. Layman's bird - it looked far too tough to me) and it wasn't Dai, and out of the two survivors, Miss Chelley smells dodgier to me.

•Miss Chelley
•• Dyllis
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
If I understand the voting system it's now effectively decided anyway.
1. Chelley.
2. Smudgetta.

If we're wrong I think we've still got a 1/4 chance of winning.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
As Chelley walked to the gallows, the snow started to melt. Yes, the librarian dunnit, she was SCUM (Mafia). There are no more SCUM in the college. Congratulations, St. Damian's!

...

Harold retired to the wine cellar where, amidst all the broken bottles and blood, a few bottles of excellent champagne still survived. "A toast!"
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
A ghostly sigh of relief was almost perceptible in the Quad. Or perhaps it was just the wind.
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
was moderately surprised no-one picked up you getting the Universities backwards earlier
[/i]
Oh. You mean, we were Oxford and they were Cambridge? Good grief, now I feel even more like a blind deaf-mute sleepwalking on the roof. I guess people did pick it up, but it just confirmed their accurate impression that I am not quite there.

Congratulations to us for winning and thank you to Chelley and JFO'H for showing up. Be assured that we ghosts behind the mirror do not bear grudges and you are welcome to join us for a wee dram. And bring a ghostly corkscrew so we can uncork the Beaujolais.

We were a bit lucky in getting JFO'H so early (but then they were lucky in getting our detective so fast) and of course with two mis-hits from SCUM. But despite a little luck I'd say this win for our team goes to a large extent to Dafyd who played superbly and showed how valuable the doctor can be.
The unique voting system was well exploited by Eliabach's idea to nominate everybody in order to allow the detective to leave an inconspicuous trace.
Methinks the rules contributed to making this round more balanced than previous ones or am I overestimating them?
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Hooray for us.

Congratulations to Chelley though for a masterclass in appearing innocent right to the end. And of course congratulations also to La Vie en Rouge for detecting suspicious behaviour in JFH.

I enjoyed the new voting system, although I don't think it played any significant part in the final rounds.
I think the rule that the Doctor can't protect the same person twice in a row is a good one.
I think the Mafia let me get lucky this time. Still, I do think I was better as a doctor than as a guilt-detector.
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
was moderately surprised no-one picked up you getting the Universities backwards earlier
[/i]
Oh. You mean, we were Oxford and they were Cambridge? Good grief, now I feel even more like a blind deaf-mute sleepwalking on the roof. I guess people did pick it up, but it just confirmed their accurate impression that I am not quite there.

Congratulations to us for winning and thank you to Chelley and JFO'H for showing up. Be assured that we ghosts behind the mirror do not bear grudges and you are welcome to join us for a wee dram. And bring a ghostly corkscrew so we can uncork the Beaujolais.

We were a bit lucky in getting JFO'H so early (but then they were lucky in getting our detective so fast) and of course with two mis-hits from SCUM. But despite a little luck I'd say this win for our team goes to a large extent to Dafyd who played superbly and showed how valuable the doctor can be.
The unique voting system was well exploited by Eliabach's idea to nominate everybody in order to allow the detective to leave an inconspicuous trace.
Methinks the rules contributed to making this round more balanced than previous ones or am I overestimating them?
I think Dafyd definitely proved the most valuable player this game. BL also knew precisely when to role-claim, which put me in a tight spot. As I had a tight schedule at the time, it was just as good. I don't think I would have been able to come up with that good a defence. Had Dafyd been wrong the first of the two times, I'm sure the game would have been different. Did you really flip a coin, Dafyd, or was it well planned?

Either way, well done all citizens, and as always, especially La Vie. I've been waiting to get to admit this: as soon as I read your post questioning the two mafioso I listed, my belly turned and twisted. It took me a few seconds to regain control of my literal panic, but then I did. Still don't think I was that convincing - had I just gotten away with that, I felt things could have been very different too.

In general I found it very difficult with so many skilled counterplayers arguing from reason, and I wasn't sure of how I ought to act. With the voting system, it seemed to be easier to clear out sure innocents, which we then had to picket off, but that may have just been me being paranoid and completely lacking self-confidence in my side. Chelley can vouch for that. She played brilliant in my mind, too. She kicked off Lucy, Mumblemore and Heisen Berg and kept me alive for quite a while in the process too. Alone she managed to come very close to a victory, which seems to have eluded her mainly due to the fact that BL survived the first night.

Ah well, thanks all for a good game! I enjoyed it (up until my fatal mistake). La Vie... One day... One day...
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
I forgot: Thank you, Hart, for hosting and all the work involved!
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
Seconded! Great work, Hart! Great thinking behind the innovation with the voting system!
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
Well done indeed, Hart. That was one of the more interesting games mafia I've played in quite a while.

(Though JFH can expect any tea he gets from Lucy in heaven to be cold and stewed. ; )
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:


We were a bit lucky in getting JFO'H so early (but then they were lucky in getting our detective so fast) and of course with two mis-hits from SCUM. But despite a little luck I'd say this win for our team goes to a large extent to Dafyd who played superbly and showed how valuable the doctor can be.
Ah well... nearly made it! [Big Grin]
Getting the detective so early was down to JFH's clever workings-out!
I wouldn't quite describe those night actions as 'mis-hits' - we/I hit them hard enough lol, the doctor just wrapped them in cotton wool first! Getting more hits wouldn't have been so hard if we hadn't needed to go for the known innocents so early on. You should have seen all my backtracking to work out if Dafyd was likely to save himself or Banner Lady the first night I hit Banner Lady - Dai... Layman... Dai... Layman... etc but I had to go for one of them or would've stood no chance and I ended up hoping that was the night the doctor saved himself!
Great game, and thanks to all... and to Hart for organising.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:

In general I found it very difficult with so many skilled counterplayers arguing from reason, and I wasn't sure of how I ought to act. With the voting system, it seemed to be easier to clear out sure innocents, which we then had to picket off, but that may have just been me being paranoid and completely lacking self-confidence in my side. Chelley can vouch for that. She played brilliant in my mind, too. She kicked off Lucy, Mumblemore and Heisen Berg and kept me alive for quite a while in the process too. Alone she managed to come very close to a victory, which seems to have eluded her mainly due to the fact that BL survived the first night.
Great game my SCUM friend! And your minor meltdown was pretty funny... we bumped off a fair few of 'em anyway, see! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
In order to clarify what was at one point a relatively well-discussed matter, but more so to show off, here are the reasonings that were posted with Chelley regarding Mr. Morse:
quote:
Evidence A:
AA is quiet and out of the regular.
Evidence B:
AA is the only one with a high-profile last on his list.
Evidence C:
He used a particularly shoddy logic for this.
Evidence D:
He has role-claimed and hidden this by "role-claiming the wine cellar guy". (Re-read his response to iF:s role-claiming, which I also believe to be true.)
Evidence E:
Smudgie is silent but clever - note how she believed AA on his words though she hid this by placing him high on the lists yet not so high as to have hime executed. She didn't want to execute neither iF nor AA; she believed they both play important parts. It's not just me.
Some of these things were wrong (like Smudgie protecting AA from lynching - in fact she only protected iF, but still), but it was obvious enough IMO. If you're reading this, Eliab, I think you're quite wrong in your theory that most detectives will study the silent ones. I'd reason, and have reasoned in the past, that as a detective it's important to clear the ones that possibly will lead the investigations. Also, recent experience have shown that even our brightest can be duped. Either way, that was what we thought AA would think.

One I must say came as a complete surprise to me was when BL turned out to be the prankster. That came completely out of the blue and shook me pretty bad. I didn't know how to respond, whether to fake something, or just let it be. I also hadn't thought about how obvious it would be when no one was killed the night before that the prankster was innocent. I was also the one silenced, so it all got quite tricky. Never really figured it out, and got voted off the day after. Well played, BL!
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
I always feel sorry for those who bite the dust early - especially when the game is such an interesting one. Hart, if that was "a fairly vanilla" mafia game, then I'm all for vanilla. I thought your rules worked really well.

I could have cheerfully throttled Dai myself, at the point where he admitted which of us he'd been protecting the previous night; and right up to the end I wasn't sure if it would be Chelley or La vie.

Well played, and a lovely setting orchestrated by Hart.

I have a new game (set in a tropical retreat in the Antipodes) ready to go in January for those who are interested in playing again soon. I liked Hart's voting system very much - any comments from others?
 
Posted by JFH (# 14794) on :
 
I could go for a new game if it's in January. I'd like some more thoughts regarding the effects on this voting system if there had been a traitor involved in the game. Even with the sheriff out, the game seemed difficult for two mafioso, but that might have been due to the doctor, too. What did others think about the balance of the game?
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Oh, and congratulations to Dai, who, as the last remaining academic at St.Damian's must be a shoo-in for the Master's job!
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
I could have cheerfully throttled Dai myself, at the point where he admitted which of us he'd been protecting the previous night; and right up to the end I wasn't sure if it would be Chelley or La vie.
See, that's what I didn't get. Surely the mob already knew who he'd been protecting, because they knew that whoever they'd tried to kill (you) was the person he must have been protecting?

[ 01. December 2011, 19:50: Message edited by: Gwai ]
 
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
I could go for a new game if it's in January. I'd like some more thoughts regarding the effects on this voting system if there had been a traitor involved in the game. Even with the sheriff out, the game seemed difficult for two mafioso, but that might have been due to the doctor, too. What did others think about the balance of the game?
It ended in a bitter finish, which is a positive sign. The problem with balance is that a tiny event can make a huge difference.
Didn't have much chance to see the effect of voting...and in one game we're hardly likely to see all the subtleties (we saw one with the detective indicating and the mafia catching on).


I had one idea for a variation, and that's where you have no detective role...but you all get to see stuff and the mafia have to (vaguely like cludo) I'm not sure how what rules you'd need (perhaps each person could be given a duty eg. the cook to go to the kitchen in every 5 turns)
and how to make it simple to roleplay/judge. But I'd be curious of any thoughts.
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Thanks all for playing. I'm glad the rules seemed to work well. It's hard to judge balance on one game, but the close finish suggests it was fine. I thought the voting system gave quite a big advantage to the town, so I kept the roles weak.

A couple of changes I thought about, but didn't want to switch halfway through:

1) I was disappointed with the voting system on the day when two people tied and no-one got lynched, despite TESS having being pretty low on everyone's ranking. With a small number of voters, any voting system is going to give ties reasonably often (sometimes deliberately in this game). A solution I thought of is that in that situation the GM should randomly pick one of them to execute, as the voters don't have any (collective) preference as to which of them dies but do have a collective preference that there should be an election.

2) I'm not sure that I see the purpose of a nomination phase if you have preference voting. Why not just have everyone also up for voting every time? You might then want some time for discussion before anyone casts a vote.

Apart from that, I think things went well and it was fun to watch the game evolve when I knew everyone's subterfuge. I had to stop myself from jumping into the discussions, though!
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
Thank you to Hart for running.

I think the tie in voting was fine. Anything short of requiring a strict majority will give that possibility. The last person to vote has more of an advantage in deciding what happens than usual, but that makes it more interesting.

I think it's a good idea to have a discussion phase if not a nomination phase. I forgot to have one in the first round of the Don Cannelloni game and I don't think the result went well.

One thing I'd like to suggest is that there's a free lynching in the first round. That is, the first person lynched is only incapacitated for a turn but does have their role revealed. Obviously this would help the majority a lot so you'd want to have an extra mafia player or some other aid to the mafia (not adding extra majority roles). It would omit the rather unsatisfactory first round lynching on no information.
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
Had Dafyd been wrong the first of the two times, I'm sure the game would have been different. Did you really flip a coin, Dafyd, or was it well planned?
That first time with Eliab I overruled the die. The second time I went with the random roll. I'm still going to claim credit for setting up the probabilities for the roll correctly.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
I could have cheerfully throttled Dai myself, at the point where he admitted which of us he'd been protecting the previous night; and right up to the end I wasn't sure if it would be Chelley or La vie.
See, that's what I didn't get. Surely the mob already knew who he'd been protecting, because they knew that whoever they'd tried to kill (you) was the person he must have been protecting?
Yes, there was no revelation - we knew who had been protected when they didn't die!
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:

Congratulations to Chelley though for a masterclass in appearing innocent right to the end. And of course congratulations also to La Vie en Rouge for detecting suspicious behaviour in JFH.

[Big Grin] It's my trusting face (always stuck in a book)!
 
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
hart, thank you so much for running the game.

My apologies to Lucy, whom I suspected from the very start, for totally misjudging you and for slipping a bit of extra pepper in your soup. Mumbledore, you may not have been SCUM but you deserved everything you got [Biased]

Congratulations to the doctor - I don't think we could have done it without you.

I like the voting system a lot and would definitely like to see it used again. I don't like too complicated a range of roles, so particularly enjoyed this game: though it was funny/frustrating to see a vote I made in an utter rush between two crazy mind-destroying shifts at work be analysed so thoroughly!
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:

I like the voting system a lot and would definitely like to see it used again. I don't like too complicated a range of roles, so particularly enjoyed this game: though it was funny/frustrating to see a vote I made in an utter rush between two crazy mind-destroying shifts at work be analysed so thoroughly!
Well it was about all there was to go on! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I feel quite smug about spotting JFH. He's right that the give away was "we know there are two killers". Apart from that I thought you put up a pretty good defence, actually.

OTOH, I did think Sylvander looked very, very guilty. Partly because of voting in a way that made Mumblebore and Jeremiah functionally equivalent, and partly because of going on about me when I knew I was innocent. I guess you really are just barking mad and inattentive [Razz]

I also liked the rule about the doctor not being able to defend the same person twice.

(I wasn't making it up about being busy - the NaNoMonster has been successfully fed [Yipee] , tonight we're playing the Bach cantata, and I've been catching murderers. No, I have not practised the Nielsen symphony. [Biased] )
 
Posted by Sylvander (# 12857) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:
It's hard to judge balance on one game, but the close finish suggests it was fine. I thought the voting system gave quite a big advantage to the town, so I kept the roles weak.
I thought the game well balanced; Hart There will always be an element of luck involved.

quote:
Originally posted by Hart:

1) I was disappointed with the voting system on the day when two people tied and no-one got lynched, despite TESS having being pretty low on everyone's ranking.
Disagree, M'lord. This effective TESS vote was very informative, it cleared Smudgie right to the end. It would be a pity to deprive the game of these moments where a late-voting player is forced to reveal something.

quote:
Originally posted by Hart:
A solution I thought of is that in that situation the GM should randomly pick one of them to execute, as the voters don't have any (collective) preference as to which of them dies but do have a collective preference that there should be an election.
I prefer it the way you ran it now.
I also feel justified for saying that random lynchings on day one are not a good idea when there is a detective (and a frustration to the player lynched). The key is to publicly agree on a safe method for the detective to hide and this was suggested by Eliab. (Although the method could be improved - I understand JFO'H was able to identify the detective. I draw my hat to that!)

quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I feel quite smug about spotting JFH. He's right that the give away was "we know there are two killers".
I still don't get that, la vie. I was absolutely certain there could be no more than two killers and I said so. Why suspect JFO'H for saying something that is obvious and others said before him? I always understood yours as one of the necessarily random accusations at this stage – one has to provide some reason, but it is usually a flimsy one (but occasionally hits the target). What made JFH’s statement look different from mine (and possibly others who agreed)?

quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
Evidence C:
He used a particularly shoddy logic for this.
Evidence D:
I discourage this approach. If that was a criterion I'd be declared dead before the start of the game.

quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
Oh, and congratulations to Dai, who, as the last remaining academic at St.Damian's must be a shoo-in for the Master's job!
What troubles me, is that he is also the last man in the college...

quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
Mumbledore, you may not have been SCUM but you deserved everything you got [Biased]
Oi! Ref! She's kicking me on the shin after the game's over, how ungracious! AND it’s Mumblebore, if you please, Madam (nomen est omen). Wait till I next come to London, you bouncy-ball-kind-of-a-bird, so you can see what pepper in wine tastes like IRL!
But I admit I felt I was not lynched for looking guilty but for being a bit annoying. Fair enough, I hope I wasn't tooo bad. Still, I’d have silenced me much earlier.

What does OTOH mean?
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
What does OTOH mean?
On the other hand.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
What a fun game! Well played us (and well-played the SCUM, too).

I don't think the SCUM made any real mistakes - and I think we made two, one of which was mine. For my death-bed prediction, I should have stuck with my first instinct that of the three possible suspects, Felis, Chelley and Lucy, it was Chelley who should go first. I was too swayed by Gwai's mistake in swapping her name for jfh's - which might have been a plausibly guilty error, but went against my reading that Lucy was acting innocently and Chelley merely trying to.

The other mistake was lynching Mumbledore, for which I deny all responsibility. I was more certain of his innocence than anyone else's at that point.

Dafyd's skilled doctoring (I'm betting he's an absolute demon at Rock Paper Scissors) made all that irrelevant, though, and gave us the two nights needed to get it right.


I liked the voting system, but I'll give fair warning that if we play it again, I'm going to use the ‘nominate everyone" option a lot more. I wish I'd thought of it sooner this time, because then I could have put the detective on notice, and not left him stuck with a fucking necromancer as his "most obviously innocent". Sorry about that - but it worked out OK in the end.

On which point:

quote:
Originally posted by JFH:
If you're reading this, Eliab, I think you're quite wrong in your theory that most detectives will study the silent ones. I'd reason, and have reasoned in the past, that as a detective it's important to clear the ones that possibly will lead the investigations.
I've argued in the past that the detective's job is to maximise information, and that is (usually) best done by investigating the people you know nothing about (moving from no knowledge to complete knowledge) rather than the gobby (about whom you already know something). But then I am definitely of the view that a Mafia game is a problem that can potentially be solved by analysis, and that the detective is primarily useful in narrowing the field of suspects. The gameplay objective, in my view, is to get to the point where there are more known innocents than suspects, because that's a straight win, rather than necessarily spotting the guilty straight off - which is harder.

I think that the detective ought to be concentrating on staying alive to the point where they can say "I'm innocent, so are A & B, and if someone else is going to claim to be the doctor, we have a majority". That's more certain, and just as much a victory, as saying "I'm the detective and C & D are guilty". We didn't exploit the new voting system to the full in trying to get to that result - we should have globally nominated from the off, and everyone should have listed a plausible last vote as a deception play to shield the detective. Next time.


I think Ernst Viktor Eliabach has to have been my most unpleasant Mafia character ever. I enjoyed playing him a lot.


Thanks to Hart for running the game.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Right, so let me see if I have this right as a good mix:

3 non-mafia roles:
the detective, who can investigate one character each night action; the doctor, who can protect one character each night, but not the same person two nights in a row; and the prankster, who can prevent a character from voting, but not the same person two nights in a row.

3 mafia roles:
the mafia leader, who nominates the hit each night; the mobster; and the traitor, who may choose to change sides in order to win.

An unlimited voting system, where one or all may be nominated.

A two day turn around in real time for actions to be taken.

What do you think?
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
Some of that depends on how many people you have sign up. I remember once reading advice that at least 50% of the players should be normal citizens.

As for the traitor, a traitor who can switch from Town to Mafia once can work, but not vice versa (otherwise you have a citizen who knows precisely who the mafia are). A role like this could be pretty powerful for the mob. If you have enough players, that balances that out. If not, you could let the detective detect the traitor as a balance. Or, you could try out the idea of an 'outing' rather than a 'lynching' on the first day.

As for timing, I don't know if this is necessary, but I counted a two-day weekend as one day for the purposes of the two-day rule. (So, starting something Friday morning means finishing Monday morning).
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sylvander:
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I feel quite smug about spotting JFH. He's right that the give away was "we know there are two killers".
I still don't get that, la vie. I was absolutely certain there could be no more than two killers and I said so. Why suspect JFO'H for saying something that is obvious and others said before him? I always understood yours as one of the necessarily random accusations at this stage – one has to provide some reason, but it is usually a flimsy one (but occasionally hits the target). What made JFH’s statement look different from mine (and possibly others who agreed)?
Jeremiah already smelled suspicious to me - the accusation of Mrs. Layman looked like an opportunistic attempt to off an unknown. I couldn't be sure reason he was innocent, but he was giving me no good reason to think him innocent either. The two killers thing was the tip-off that I was right.

The difference between mafia and innocents is knowledge - the innocent can only strongly suspect, while the guilty know. Jason and Dai had both been speculating about three killers, so the bald statement "we know that there are only two" stood out. Incidentally it's another reason I thought you were an accomplice i.e. stating as common knowledge something that only the guilty can be completely certain of.
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
For the record it was JFH's somewhat random accusation of Banner Lady that made me jump on board and agree with la vie en rouge that he was guilty. I missed the flag of his certainty about the mafia, though I did not and was not bothered by Mumblebore's. That character was sure of so many things, that I figured it was just the way Sylvander was playing the character.
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
I arrived at JFH by process of elimination. It seemed to me pretty much impossible for Smudgetta or Mumbledore to be guilty, and I thought that Lucy wasn't, and that is was most unlikely that Felis and Chelley both were. O'Hocher was the only one left.

I should have stuck with that analysis in the next round, rather than follow up an (as it turned out) innocent mistake.
 
Posted by Chelley (# 11322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:

I think Ernst Viktor Eliabach has to have been my most unpleasant Mafia character ever. I enjoyed playing him a lot.
Really? I think the last one was - but then I would wouldn't I!
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:

I think Ernst Viktor Eliabach has to have been my most unpleasant Mafia character ever. I enjoyed playing him a lot.
Really? I think the last one was - but then I would wouldn't I!
I kind of agree with Chelley. EVE may have been a necromancer, but he seemed like such a nice necromancer.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
I'm trying to remember what the role of the policeman was in past games, which differentiated that role from either the detective or the doctor. [Help]
 
Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
The Wikipedia page is very useful for giving ideas for roles.
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
Ok, see you all in January. (Pack your insect repellent, you'll need it!).
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:
quote:
Originally posted by Chelley:
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:

I think Ernst Viktor Eliabach has to have been my most unpleasant Mafia character ever. I enjoyed playing him a lot.
Really? I think the last one was - but then I would wouldn't I!
I kind of agree with Chelley. EVE may have been a necromancer, but he seemed like such a nice necromancer.
I obviously failed to convey his true nature, then - he may have been outwardly civilised but he was still quite happy to torture a dead baby in order to ingratiate himself with a cat. And he didn't even have any illusions that the cat might be remotely grateful.
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0