legitimate question btw

Is it possible spin can only poison every other day?

Im was poisoned, then nobody, now mittens, right?

That could make sense and hes trying to throw M2H utb or something.

And how about the messages at the start. We came to the conclusion that Ahoda did not in fact visit Josh, right. Last day primate was seen visiting a dead Rodney, and now M2H is seen visiting a dead Jay. THOUGHTS?

M2H @ 17/11/2019 20:50

Cody @ 17/11/2019 22:49 So, these last 5 pages were completely useless. Why do we think Spin is scum if Jamie flipped SK. Do we actually think there is a 3p poisoner AND a SK? Or do we think Spin/Jamie were a team, perhaps? That is a thing, right tbh why can't Spin just be aligned with the mafia. why is it either that he is third party or town?

Because it looks like other than night 1, there has been a kill. So are you saying that the Mafia not only has their night/faction kill BUT ALSO an every day poisoner? That seems too much

Throw in mittens visiting dusk in the late mod note yesterday which is actually true.

farlig @ 17/11/2019 22:52

Throw in mittens visiting dusk in the late mod note yesterday which is actually true.

Pending confirmation from dusk but I did get a gift last night so it’s probably true.

farlig @ 17/11/2019 22:46

The Collective “We” October 20, 2012 / libertarianism, philosophy, politics / Leave a Comment Collectivism is an insidious ideology, for it hides foremost in our very language, and in the way some of us think. Take for example the familiar phrase “we won”, or “we lost”, when fans of a sport refer to the actions of the team they support. Clearly, the team won – the fans merely observed. It would be more accurate to say “team A won”, but instead, by saying “we”, the sports fan presumably manages to psychologically partake in the athletic achievement of someone else. Though in this particular case the fault is quite harmless – the ubiquity of its presence is telling. The problem begins to show itself when this collective “we” is applied in politics. As if the person were part of the process. “We” need to balance the budget. “We” need to withdraw the troops from Iraq. “We” need to help the poor. How often have you heard these phrases, and others like them, define political discourse? And yet the people using them are overwhelmingly neither in government, nor do they or would they undertake any of these actions. This language of “we” confuses who does what, and attempts to create a non-existent bond between a citizen-subject and his political masters. Ultimately, such a confusion is used to conflate Society and State, leading to a plethora of logical errors. Here are just a few: If one says that government should not do x, it is assumed that x should not be done at all. When a government takes on debt, it is said that “we owe it to ourselves”. When a government declares war, it is said that “we’re going to war”, as if the entire nation has a will of its own. When foreign policy results in poor relations between governments, it is declared that “the people of Country Y hate us”. When a bailed out corporation returns money to the government, it is said that “the taxpayers were paid back” – as if any taxpayer will actually see his taxes returned to him. You know what this language really betrays? Stockholm syndrome.

My use of the collective "we" in this context is something that not even the author of this particular author would have an issue with.

Cody @ 17/11/2019 22:52

M2H @ 17/11/2019 20:50 Cody @ 17/11/2019 22:49 So, these last 5 pages were completely useless. Why do we think Spin is scum if Jamie flipped SK. Do we actually think there is a 3p poisoner AND a SK? Or do we think Spin/Jamie were a team, perhaps? That is a thing, right tbh why can't Spin just be aligned with the mafia. why is it either that he is third party or town? Because it looks like other than night 1, there has been a kill. So are you saying that the Mafia not only has their night/faction kill BUT ALSO an every day poisoner? That seems too much

In a game this large? Maybe.

There's also the possibility that he only gets a poison every other night or that his poison has some strong restriction in order to make it balanced.

All I'm saying is that he shouldn't be cleared off of role in this situation.

But why put the added pressure on himself yesterday if it was only an every other night action?

farlig @ 17/11/2019 22:56

But why put the added pressure on himself yesterday if it was only an every other night action?

No idea bro. It could be the latter and have something to do with typings, or some other restriction that makes it weaker.

do we know who is emitting the loudspeaker messages?

Mittens @ 17/11/2019 23:34

farlig @ 17/11/2019 22:27 Mittens @ 17/11/2019 22:23 M2H @ 17/11/2019 22:19 I'm kind of shocked that this is the way y'all treat newcomers tbh. Yeah there's definitely a bit of a closed-door vibe around here. It's a fun group though I promise Closed door vibe? Only if you count Curtis banning people every now and again. Otherwise, I find FR very welcoming if your skin is thicker than wet tissue paper. Remember the chickenshit thread? There's definitely a closed door vibe.

Have you considered that you guys fucking SUUUUUUUUUCKED

Hi Farlig

hi curtis

Curtis @ 17/11/2019 23:05

Mittens @ 17/11/2019 23:34 farlig @ 17/11/2019 22:27 Mittens @ 17/11/2019 22:23 M2H @ 17/11/2019 22:19 I'm kind of shocked that this is the way y'all treat newcomers tbh. Yeah there's definitely a bit of a closed-door vibe around here. It's a fun group though I promise Closed door vibe? Only if you count Curtis banning people every now and again. Otherwise, I find FR very welcoming if your skin is thicker than wet tissue paper. Remember the chickenshit thread? There's definitely a closed door vibe. Have you considered that you guys fucking SUUUUUUUUUCK

That’s not very nice.

##Drop Thunder Stone

I have absolutely no use for it (I tried), and I won't be around much at all tomorrow, so you guys now have most of a day to analyze who picks it up and who doesn't.