The Syndicate

Matt wrote:Boomslang, I find it unlikely that there are two curse roles in a game where there were up to 60 roles (and I'm assuming, role powers) originally but was cut to 30. No doubt our hosts have all kinds of cool shit planned for this game, so why would they keep two roles, one that curses in smilies and the other that curses in questions? Overkill for a champions game, I think.

As for positions, I dunno. I didn't play Recruitment and my role has nothing to do with positions, but I suppose it's possible given Zebra's flip.

Why are so many against looking at Draconus?

juliets, were you faking your confusion earlier or was it legit?

I was confused about whether Keterman was male or female. You said male. I believe JJJ said female. Or maybe I misunderstood what one of you said but I don't think so. I understood from before this game started that zebra identified as female. This was the first I'd heard that Keterman and zebra were the same person. I still don't know for sure how Keterman identified - I thought it was as male. I'm still confused but not about zebra, about Keterman.

Golden wrote:

juliets wrote:

Golden wrote:

juliets wrote:Boomslang, another potential scenario I thought of was that we have one of those roles in the game that does something different every night. One night you curse, one night you are night protected, one night you block, one night you protect, etc. I have seen that type of role in games before (but I don't remember if they were 2015 games) but I think it's at least a possibility in this case. In fact, it's the only way I can make two cursors make sense in my mind. Draconus could have been cursed by a role like that.

(And I have to say my heart bleeds for AJ McCarron...my husband and I are Alabama alums so we were really rooting hard for Cincy)

We do know that positions have at least some presence in this game, as per Recruitment. Did you play that?

Yes I did. Maybe that's one of the games I recognize that kind of position from. My memories of past games and the roles in each game are all muddled.

For a lot of roles that gave a different ability for each 'position', so I think that could make two cursers possible.

I think Draconus was being truthful about his curse. I don't see any reason for him to have faked it.

Yes I agree.

Golden wrote:

juliets wrote:Boomslang, another potential scenario I thought of was that we have one of those roles in the game that does something different every night. One night you curse, one night you are night protected, one night you block, one night you protect, etc. I have seen that type of role in games before (but I don't remember if they were 2015 games) but I think it's at least a possibility in this case. In fact, it's the only way I can make two cursors make sense in my mind. Draconus could have been cursed by a role like that.

(And I have to say my heart bleeds for AJ McCarron...my husband and I are Alabama alums so we were really rooting hard for Cincy)

We do know that positions have at least some presence in this game, as per Recruitment. Did you play that?

Yes I did. Maybe that's one of the games I recognize that kind of position from. My memories of past games and the roles in each game are all muddled.

Boomslang, another potential scenario I thought of was that we have one of those roles in the game that does something different every night. One night you curse, one night you are night protected, one night you block, one night you protect, etc. I have seen that type of role in games before (but I don't remember if they were 2015 games) but I think it's at least a possibility in this case. In fact, it's the only way I can make two cursors make sense in my mind. Draconus could have been cursed by a role like that.

(And I have to say my heart bleeds for AJ McCarron...my husband and I are Alabama alums so we were really rooting hard for Cincy)

Wait - I though Jimmy just told me Keterman was zebra's old name. I'll look at JJJ's post again.


I'm taking some time away from the thread to watch some football. I'll check in a couple of times i hope during the games.

Jimmy, I am terrible at how many games I've played with some one but I can tell you I barely remember Ketterman so it was not many and remember nothing about her meta. I always thought Ketterman was a male. As for zebra, I think I've played a couple of games with her but don't remember any interactions with her. I don't have enough experience with her to know her meta either. All in all, we don't have much experience with each other.

Also thanks for the answer on llama. I will look forward to your comments and whether you still see him as a viable suspicion.

JJJ how ironic that while you were reading mine and Zebra's interactions I was reading your posts to get a better handle on your suspicion of llama. I saw your case from Day 0 and then of course I saw all your references to him being bad during your curse where you couldn't articulate reasons, but the reasons I see for you to think he is bad don't seem as strong as your assertations that he is bad. Does that make sense? Consequently, I think I've missed some of your reasoning somehow and it would be helpful to me and maybe others if you just did a quick bullet point post on why you are convinced he is bad. Thanks in advance.

Oh and I don't see anything you want me to comment on regarding your comments about mine and zebra's relationship but I will say I think you read me better than Mac and what you think might be bias is just an understanding of a particular style. If you would like me to answer any questions I am glad to do so.

I apologize that I cannot quote the post I am answering. It would not let me embed another post within the long string of posts. This is directed at Mac re: his last post about me:

Your evidence is I don't sound sincere or genuine - that I am verbose. Zebra made accusations against me but other than that I don't know what evidence you are talking about. Is it all about my sincerity? I still maintain you just don't understand how I communicate and thats why you question my sincerity and think I'm verbose. It happens, (the sincerity part, never has anyone called me verbose it's usually just the opposite) especially with people who haven't played with me much. But, we are just going to go around and around about that and I do not have any belief that I will change your mind. You could though point me toward this other "evidence" of my baddieness.

MacDougall wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

MacDougall wrote:This is another post that pings me from juliets. It's too waffly.

Really? That whole second paragraph seems very directed and confident about Rico being scum, I'd say her least waffly case so far this game.

Your defense of her is making me think you are know for a fact she is not Zebra's teammate.

Her post to get her vote on Rico included an admission of the validity of the case against him being a lynchable scum, she used what I am reading as verbose language to get her vote onto the wagon of a player bound to be lynched.

juliets wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

juliets wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

juliets wrote:Zebra, I would also like to know why I am on your list if you have time right now to tell me. If not now, later would be fine.

I'm still waiting to hear (see) from Lorab before i vote but i'm getting uneasy about the time squeeze.

I'm the least confident about my baddie read of you, but you have made some posts that have stood out to me as waffly in a careful-baddie sort of way. I can't remember who said it but someone said that your posts were just mimicking others' observations and opinions, and that's not my issue because like you said yourself, it isn't alignment-indicative. However, I do think some of your suspicions are "safe" for lack of a better word. You've given me a sense that you're aiming to follow what trains are going to be the most prominent by the end of the day. In other words, following the pack while making it look like you're borderline leading it.

I understand what you are saying here. At the beginning of games regardless of my affiliation I am not very confident about lynching people. Some people are comfortable with that ambiguity but I am not. Therefore I come off as always following. As the game goes on I become more confident and i think you will see a change in my demeanor (if I make it that far). I will do my best to expose myself more earlier in the game than normal for me regardless of the consequences. Usually that comes out in the form of questions, one of which I've already asked and it hasn't been answered. My questions tell you where I am suspicious.

Thanks for your answer to my question.

This is the most suspect and nervous looking interaction with Zebra. I'd bet dollars to donuts that Zebra just threw juliets in her scum list as her requisite wifom scum teammate and this interaction is them softly trying to flesh it out without it going down a path serious enough for juliets to get any serious attention on her.

I don't understand where you get this idea. Have i done something - other than my response here - to make you think I am a baddie? The post you quoted is just how I am - I try to explain myself, I don't get upset and I tell the truth when I am civ which I am in this game. I don't know how I can prove that what you say is not true but it's not. I am not Zebra or any other baddies teammate and I am not an indy or an SK.

You may very well be not but as we speak I am looking back to through Zebra interactions and your interactions with her, both ways, are the least sincere looking. You might remember that I scum read you accurately for similar reasons in Reborn. It could be that Zebra has done this intentionally. In light of HB defending you after having scum read you I am actually considering the idea that he is the Zebra teammate and knows that you are not. What do you think of that suggestion?

Mac, I think you have not played enough with me to gauge my sincerity. And don't forget I pointed out in World Reborn that I post the same way regardless of affiliation, and now you are seeing an example of that. My interactions with people have all been sincere from my perspective. You are judging me against some standard that has nothing to do with me. I also think just because Ham Boy posted that I didn't seem waffly to him it is a long leap to say that makes him Zebra's teammate. He very well may be but there would have to be more evidence than that to convince me it was true.

MacDougall wrote:

juliets wrote:i am out of time basically and need to vote. Metalmarsh, I saw you said you must have missed my posts. I'm going to give you the BOTD and give you another opportunity to answer me. I'll even did out the original question for you so it will be easier than you going back to look for it (did I ever tell you i got lynched for being too nice one time?).

This leaves Rico. I understand and believed in what Mac has been saying but the sheer overload of Rico throwing out things that are ridiculous (for example, zebra and bc24 posting near each other) and then trying to call them cases, and making comments that dont even need to be made just to remind people he thinks someone is bad (some directed at me) convinces me that the right vote is for Rico today. In addition, the fact that as far as anyone can remember Rico hasn't behaved like this before causes me to be suspicious that his overwhelming posting was meant to chill the room so not many people could actively participate. I know I had a lot of trouble keeping up and one glance at the posts tells you why. So, I'm voting for Rico today, we'll see how it goes.

Metalmarsh, gone to find your quote next.

This is another post that pings me from juliets. It's too waffly.

I disagree that this is waffly. I'm making a day 1 vote and did what I consider to be a good job explaining why I was voting for Rico. I also explained why I wasn't voting for Metalmarsh. I didn't include Lorab because I had already explained why I wasn't voting for her. I don't see any waffle in this post.

MacDougall wrote:

juliets wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

juliets wrote:Zebra, I would also like to know why I am on your list if you have time right now to tell me. If not now, later would be fine.

I'm still waiting to hear (see) from Lorab before i vote but i'm getting uneasy about the time squeeze.

I'm the least confident about my baddie read of you, but you have made some posts that have stood out to me as waffly in a careful-baddie sort of way. I can't remember who said it but someone said that your posts were just mimicking others' observations and opinions, and that's not my issue because like you said yourself, it isn't alignment-indicative. However, I do think some of your suspicions are "safe" for lack of a better word. You've given me a sense that you're aiming to follow what trains are going to be the most prominent by the end of the day. In other words, following the pack while making it look like you're borderline leading it.

I understand what you are saying here. At the beginning of games regardless of my affiliation I am not very confident about lynching people. Some people are comfortable with that ambiguity but I am not. Therefore I come off as always following. As the game goes on I become more confident and i think you will see a change in my demeanor (if I make it that far). I will do my best to expose myself more earlier in the game than normal for me regardless of the consequences. Usually that comes out in the form of questions, one of which I've already asked and it hasn't been answered. My questions tell you where I am suspicious.

Thanks for your answer to my question.

This is the most suspect and nervous looking interaction with Zebra. I'd bet dollars to donuts that Zebra just threw juliets in her scum list as her requisite wifom scum teammate and this interaction is them softly trying to flesh it out without it going down a path serious enough for juliets to get any serious attention on her.

I don't understand where you get this idea. Have i done something - other than my response here - to make you think I am a baddie? The post you quoted is just how I am - I try to explain myself, I don't get upset and I tell the truth when I am civ which I am in this game. I don't know how I can prove that what you say is not true but it's not. I am not Zebra or any other baddies teammate and I am not an indy or an SK.

HamburgerBoy wrote:

juliets wrote:Hamburger Boy can you talk a little bit about your suspicion of DH? DH, do you know why you are orange on Ham Boy's scale? I probably just missed the basis of a suspicion.

Part of it involves his treatment of RadicalFuzz; he was one of the first to throw suspicion that way (in a fairly joking way admittedly) and then later went the other way, looking at people who had suspected Fuzz. Then he singled out DFaraday for being anti-Fuzz, which I saw as the easy-button target, and of course DFaraday has now flipped town regardless. I also thought his treatment of Rico was silly, especially now in retrospect, being more critical of rainbow lists than anything else, but later referring to Rico's posts as a non-civ gimmick, which doesn't really jive with his initial criticism. Also, that golden apparently even did Rico's exact joke (including Dharma in all layers of the rainbow) and Dharma apparently not remembering that further looks like acting/falling back to a jovial meta.

Thank you Ham Boy. DH has been more toward the other end of my scale but that's mostly based on vibes. I will consider what you said here as I continue to look at him (and everyone else).

Hamburger Boy can you talk a little bit about your suspicion of DH? DH, do you know why you are orange on Ham Boy's scale? I probably just missed the basis of a suspicion.

@sig - I can't say for sure that Elo was or wasn't bad but she generally doesn't like big games where there are a lot of posts and it's hard to keep up with. I haven't noticed her alignment when dropping but that's usually the reason. Epig could speak to this issue better than me I think.

MacDougall wrote:

juliets wrote:

Ricochet wrote:why didn't zebra emojify me? nub nub nub nub nub nub

Sorsha is pretty present right now. Thoughts?

@juliets: I did. Now where does that leave you?

Rico, "I did" what? I don't know what you mean by that.

He read her as bad.

Ricochet were you actually scum reading those people yesterday or were you just saying that to provoke votes?

Oh ok. That leaves me as a mistaken civ who had the wrong read on someone.

Ricochet wrote:why didn't zebra emojify me? nub nub nub nub nub nub

Sorsha is pretty present right now. Thoughts?

@juliets: I did. Now where does that leave you?

Rico, "I did" what? I don't know what you mean by that.

Wow I did not read zebra as a baddie at all. And we also have the answer as to who would emoticon curse JJJ. Well ok, I should start day 2 with a rethink on people I've formed some civ reads on.

RIP DF, I was neutral on you but know you have good insights when you are civ so I'm sorry to see you go. Also, I just enjoy playing with you.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I hope the road team is never up 27-0 in the next game tonight.

Totally agree.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Speaking of that, I can translate any of my emoji posts on request for those who might care.

Hi Zebra. I'm watching football so any posts I make right now will be limited.

It only takes half a brain to watch this game, lol!

Ricochet wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:During your rampage of silliness yesterday Rico, who did you genuinely suspect?

Off the top of my head, the rebuttals in which I actually blended flipping out with actually having an issue with the casemakin' were towards LoRab and juliets. I felt LoRab plainly picked up others' suspicion, which is uncharacteristic of her. I was also genuinely confused by how juliets can suspect LoRab for the things she is also doing (working with other players' material). Tranq's EoD felt very shady, tbh. I could add Dom's wagoning in the mix perhaps, but thing is Dom's D1 has been docile, and that doesn't show up in my baddie reads of Dom. I probably partly influenced him to take such an approach, but it is what it is now.

Let me see if I can clear this up. This is the line in Epig's post that finally clicked for me as far as Lorab was concerned. It's not the only issue but it is the issue at question here:

"What is it about Ricochet that others have pointed out that Lorab "definitely" sees? With Ricochet being the author of almost a quarter (!) of the thread's posts, this is as unspecific as it gets."

In other words, she was using thoughts of others but she didn't name the others or the specific issues that led her to her suspicions. This to me sounded like something a baddie would do, make the suspicion as broad as possible and only find some specifics if someone asks for them.

In contrast, I provided specifics both for why I wasn't at the time suspecting Rico anymore and why I was suspecting Lorab based on things others had brought to the table. There is a difference in these two examples. The issue was about specifics with Lorab. I was specific in my suspicion.

I feel the need to add here that as I've said before I no longer suspect Lorab because when she addressed what Epig and Sorsha had said I felt she was sincere and was satisfied with her answer.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

juliets wrote:Metalmarsh here is the question I asked you. Note that I am not asking the same questions you already answered. I'm wanting to know what was in your head when you picked the word "which" when you framed the question.

juliets wrote:MM, your question to him was "which team do you think he is on?". That sounds like you not only know there are two teams (i know you responded to this already) but that you knew what the team names were. What made you use the word "which"? And what did you expect in return from JJJ that would be an example of "which"? I hope you understand what I am asking. If not, let me know.

Sorry I never responded juliets. I've been playing much of this game so far on my phone, and just must be missing posts.

Anyway, to answer your questions.

• 1) I have no idea how many teams there are. That was an intentional "slip" to see how folks responded.
  2) I did not know that the mafia team(s) have names. Your suggestion of that is very suspicious imo. I did not imply that I knew it either.
  3) I expected Jay to be far more aggressive in his response, since the number of mafia teams is unknown, and I implied that I knew how many there were. Then again, Jay was acting apathetic before I asked the question, so I don't know what to make of it. Different Jay =/= mafia Jay.

And to add, Matt did propose the same case that you did, that I slipped, and must be mafia. But he took a pretty hesitant approach to it. The Matt I remember from Talking Heads would have dogged me all day and all game over something like that.


Juliets, where did you get the idea that the mafia team(s) have names?

I've never played a game where the mafia teams haven't had names. It just made sense that since you were indicating you thought there was more than one team you also thought the teams would have names. I think you admitted to this during the discussion that has taken place.

zebra and DH have hit precisely on my reasons for asking you the question so i don't feel we need to rehash that. Thanks to the two of you for reading my mind while I wasn't here. I do think the root of the miscommunication here is that you asked the question to see what reactions there were to the question, not to get a specific answer to the "which" question. You didn't expect a response to the question. (That's a little hard for me to understand but I take you at your word). I, on the other hand, read the question as one where you were looking for a specific answer and didn't understand how someone could be expected to answer a "which" question without knowledge of names of the parties from which he would choose. I wouldn't have asked the question if I had realized you were just looking for reactions about the question.

The only thing I can't understand is why you think I'm suspicious for asking the question. As games go on I ask lots of questions. Some of them represent misunderstanding which sounds like the case here. Thats why I ask, to cull out those issues and get to the real issues.

If you feel we need further discussion about this just let me know.

As far as the vote goes for today, I think I'll vote for spider monkey. I have no idea who that could be and we don't even know if the person attached to it receives something good, something bad, or nothing at all. We don't even know for sure if someone is attached to animal. So Spider monkey it is.

a2thezebra wrote:Enrique? You mean Ricochet, lol.

DharmaHelper wrote:

juliets wrote:Good work Enrique getting yourself lynched. Several people have said it already but I look forward to playing with someone who is as much of an analyst of the game as you are. Please though, less posts so I can better absorb what I am reading, including what you are saying. These last two days went by in kind of a blur.

Metalmarsh, I really don't want to be a pain in the ass but i re-posted my question to you last night and even though you were talking in the thread you didn't answer me. This wasn't supposed to be this big of a deal but it's hard for me to believe you missed it again since I even posted to say it was coming shortly.

And the identity of the people posting, I guess :P

LOL! As some of you know Enrique was the original Rico and my mind just played a trick on me. This is what I get for posting before coffee. Thanks for the corrections zebra and DH, and DH your comment was true. With so many posts it was hard to separate who said what.

Good work Enrique getting yourself lynched. Several people have said it already but I look forward to playing with someone who is as much of an analyst of the game as you are. Please though, less posts so I can better absorb what I am reading, including what you are saying. These last two days went by in kind of a blur.

Metalmarsh, I really don't want to be a pain in the ass but i re-posted my question to you last night and even though you were talking in the thread you didn't answer me. This wasn't supposed to be this big of a deal but it's hard for me to believe you missed it again since I even posted to say it was coming shortly.

Metalmarsh here is the question I asked you. Note that I am not asking the same questions you already answered. I'm wanting to know what was in your head when you picked the word "which" when you framed the question.

juliets wrote:MM, your question to him was "which team do you think he is on?". That sounds like you not only know there are two teams (i know you responded to this already) but that you knew what the team names were. What made you use the word "which"? And what did you expect in return from JJJ that would be an example of "which"? I hope you understand what I am asking. If not, let me know.

i am out of time basically and need to vote. Metalmarsh, I saw you said you must have missed my posts. I'm going to give you the BOTD and give you another opportunity to answer me. I'll even did out the original question for you so it will be easier than you going back to look for it (did I ever tell you i got lynched for being too nice one time?).

This leaves Rico. I understand and believed in what Mac has been saying but the sheer overload of Rico throwing out things that are ridiculous (for example, zebra and bc24 posting near each other) and then trying to call them cases, and making comments that dont even need to be made just to remind people he thinks someone is bad (some directed at me) convinces me that the right vote is for Rico today. In addition, the fact that as far as anyone can remember Rico hasn't behaved like this before causes me to be suspicious that his overwhelming posting was meant to chill the room so not many people could actively participate. I know I had a lot of trouble keeping up and one glance at the posts tells you why. So, I'm voting for Rico today, we'll see how it goes.

Metalmarsh, gone to find your quote next.

I have voted Rico and am explaining why in another post. I voted first because of the time.

I just caught up and am glad to see Lorab's responses in the thread. Rico, Lorab did indeed address me because she addressed Epi and Sorsha's concerns and my concerns were based on issues that they had brought up. I'm not quite sure why you didn't understand that.

Anyway, unlike Sorsha and BR I found Lorabs points to be clear and concise and she has persuaded me not to vote for her tonight. I'll keep an eye open for any future behavior but I am currently satisfied she is not bad. This does not mean however that I am suspicious of Sorsha or BR.

So now I have to decide who to vote. Metalmarsh comes to mind because I have twice asked him a question about why he used the word "which" in his question to JJJ re: "which team do you thin he is on". I have been ignored both times. MM has not even acknowledged I posted a question to him. This makes me think he doesn't want to answer because the only reason you would phrase the question as "which team" is if you had team names in mind. What kind of answer did he expect out of JJJ? What's an example? Those were the questions I asked. Without any response from him after asking twice I think it was a total slip. Now maybe MM can convince me differently and I wish he would try because maybe there is some explanation that I'm not thinking of. Also, if anyone has a strong point they want to bring out in MM's favor for me to consider please do so.

I'm also going to take the time now to re-read Rico. Mac's observations kept me from suspecting him earlier but so much has happened since Mac made those comments that I'm feeling like I'm possibly not weighing the evidence appropriately. Maybe Rico is the place to vote, zebra's points about him have been strong. Since i don't have a lot of time (I would have started the re-read this morning had I been able) i would say I lean more toward MM

Ok I'm going to go ahead and start re-reading. I plan on keeping up with the thread while I so so.

HamburgerBoy wrote:

juliets wrote:

Ricochet wrote:All I'm reading in juliets' post is I'm following Mac's, Epig's and Sorsha's train of thoughts.

Yes, that is exactly what i am saying. Is there something wrong with that? Sometimes people post their thoughts to persuade others and whether or not that was their intent, I was persuaded to look hard at Lorab as a result of those posts. That's how the game works.

This is exactly the same juliets I saw last game, and it's just as suspicious as ever to me. I know she said that she was playing her usual game back then as well, but I definitely can't ignore this. Gun to head scum.

I understand what you're saying about last game we played (and I will reiterate this answer to Ricochet is indicative of my style) but i don't understand why you see my reply as suspicious. Can you explain that for me?

I have several appointments today and will likely not be back until 5:00+ pm. Just want everyone to know why I'm not responding to any questions or putting forth any thoughts during the day. I still suspect Lorab but whether I vote for her is dependent on what her reply is to the comments made about her.

Metalmarsh I posted a question for you about your question "which team do you think he's on?" (I'm paraphrasing the quote). Would you look at that question and answer it for me please? If it does not make sense to you please let me know and I'll make my question clearer. I'm asking something that's different than what was asked before.

a2thezebra wrote:

juliets wrote:Zebra, I would also like to know why I am on your list if you have time right now to tell me. If not now, later would be fine.

I'm still waiting to hear (see) from Lorab before i vote but i'm getting uneasy about the time squeeze.

I'm the least confident about my baddie read of you, but you have made some posts that have stood out to me as waffly in a careful-baddie sort of way. I can't remember who said it but someone said that your posts were just mimicking others' observations and opinions, and that's not my issue because like you said yourself, it isn't alignment-indicative. However, I do think some of your suspicions are "safe" for lack of a better word. You've given me a sense that you're aiming to follow what trains are going to be the most prominent by the end of the day. In other words, following the pack while making it look like you're borderline leading it.

I understand what you are saying here. At the beginning of games regardless of my affiliation I am not very confident about lynching people. Some people are comfortable with that ambiguity but I am not. Therefore I come off as always following. As the game goes on I become more confident and i think you will see a change in my demeanor (if I make it that far). I will do my best to expose myself more earlier in the game than normal for me regardless of the consequences. Usually that comes out in the form of questions, one of which I've already asked and it hasn't been answered. My questions tell you where I am suspicious.

Thanks for your answer to my question.

MacDougall wrote:

juliets wrote:Zebra, I would also like to know why I am on your list if you have time right now to tell me. If not now, later would be fine.

I'm still waiting to hear (see) from Lorab before i vote but i'm getting uneasy about the time squeeze.

24 hours makes you uneasy?

oh for God's sake, i thought the deadline was tonight. Thank you for the correction.

Zebra, I would also like to know why I am on your list if you have time right now to tell me. If not now, later would be fine.

I'm still waiting to hear (see) from Lorab before i vote but i'm getting uneasy about the time squeeze.

MM, your question to him was "which team do you think he is on?". That sounds like you not only know there are two teams (i know you responded to this already) but that you knew what the team names were. What made you use the word "which"? And what did you expect in return from JJJ that would be an example of "which"? I hope you understand what I am asking. If not, let me know.

Ricochet I'm not getting into a long boring nobody will read it discussion with you over whether it's possible for me to be persuaded. In Lorabs case she was not specific about what others had said that caused her suspicions. In my case I was specific. And calling me a potential baddie does not scare me in the lease because i know I am civ.

Ricochet wrote:

juliets wrote:

Ricochet wrote:All I'm reading in juliets' post is I'm following Mac's, Epig's and Sorsha's train of thoughts.

Yes, that is exactly what i am saying. Is there something wrong with that? Sometimes people post their thoughts to persuade others and whether or not that was their intent, I was persuaded to look hard at Lorab as a result of those posts. That's how the game works.

Buuut LoRab was also "persuaded" by others and she is the one you are suspecting, "persuaded" by others.

Hmmmm-etc-mmm?

I don't understand your point. If Lorab was persuaded by others what does that have to do with me being persuaded by others that she could be bad? Persuasion is at the root of this game, i expect a lot of people to be persuaded. And just as a reminder, I want to hear or see Lorab's response to the allegations before making any decisions.

Ricochet wrote:All I'm reading in juliets' post is I'm following Mac's, Epig's and Sorsha's train of thoughts.

Yes, that is exactly what i am saying. Is there something wrong with that? Sometimes people post their thoughts to persuade others and whether or not that was their intent, I was persuaded to look hard at Lorab as a result of those posts. That's how the game works.

I have been thinking for some time that my vote would go to Rico for Day 1 but Mac's thoughts are making me reconsider that stance.
In addition, Epig's argument about Lorab is compelling
Sorsha followed soon after with some points of her own that also made me re-evaluate how I felt about Lorab (I was neutral on her up until Epi's post).

So, I'm leaning Lorab but I would like to see what she has to say before I cast a vote for her.

MacDougall wrote:
How exactly is Zebra confirmed caught, you'll need to refresh my memory on that?

This is a question that occurred to me while reading but I can't find the answer anywhere. Ricco can you answer this please? If you did and i missed it (quite possible due to all the discussion of the Mac/Ricco/Zebra issue) then I apologize but could you please point it out to me? Also, this question was in an answer with a lot of embedded posts so I just snipped down to the question itself.

linki

I'm voting Ezekiel.

I don't remember any of the roles listed and think it's just scandalous that I have to go back and take a look at what their powers were in past games.

It took me six times to post this.