The Syndicate

Obscure Allure, what was with the punishment you claimed you'd receive if you claimed? I didn't believe it which made me for a while see you as bad. Was there punishment and if so what? Or were you just pulling our leg?

I can't believe this game is over. After spending the day in the car yesterday I planned a day today where I am by myself and could just immerse myself in back reads of people I wasn't sure about. Oh well, maybe I'll read a book.

Golden this was a great game - one of the best I've ever played. I didn't know the lore because I didn't watch the show but that only hampered me a little bit. I didn't post much because I was incredibly unsure of who was bad and who was good. Wilgy was a good example of that - some days I thought he was good and some days I thought he was bad. I was the most unsure in this game than any other I have played which I think implies good mechanics and good play by the baddies.

Congrats to the winners and to the losers know you played a really good game. S~V~S I never even suspected you - you really had me fooled.

On to the next game!

Dang It!!! I forgot So say we all!

Ok, my reads for the baddie team are:

SVS = Cavil
Aaron Doral - G-Man
nutella = Simon O'Neill
Leoben Conoy - Drumbeats or Wilgy.
F5
Dex
Spacedaisy

Caprica Six - OA but I believe this role to be independent.

I feel like I'm short by one on the baddies, so maybe both Drumbeats and Wilgy are bad but I don't have another name to put in there. Or the other F5 besides Nero (who I believe to be good) or me is possibly bad, whoever that is. Or maybe Caprica Six is really a baddie. I'll have to think through this more when I'm not so tired.

I think the best case for my vote today is GMan. I agree with Epi that the thing about "another thread" set off my ping-o-meter.

I'm so sleepy I'm going to fall asleep on this computer.

Voting GMan

linki sorry GMan I can't wait, I've got to go to bed.

I apologize everyone today was a travel day for me and I forgot to inform the thread. Now that I've reached my destination I'm catching up on the posts and then I will list who I think is bad and vote.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
juliets wrote:Well that was an interesting post by Cavil that obviously should have gone in her bts chat. It looks like she's talking to one other person so maybe there is only one more for us to find and lynch. The thing I'm questioning is why it matters if Polo has mentioned this other person or not? Does it have something to do with that person doing the kill tonight? It looks to me that Polo may have been marked for the kill and may be the revenge vote Cavil is talking about. I'm just guessing here, who has another interpretation or potential answers to the questions I have about this.
My interpretation is that Cavil did that on purpose and it should be taken with a grain of salt. Or the entire shaker. But just for fun, let's see who Polo hasn't mentioned:

Number of mentions or direct contact by Polo of remaining players:
Black Rock - 5 (4 in reads lists/gth)
Drum Beats - 8 (4)
DrWilgy - 44 (4)
Epignosis - 46 (4)
G-Man - 17 (4)
juliets - 9 (2) - 6 post-resurrection
Matt - 16 (4)
Nerolunar - 16 (1) - 8 post-resurrection
ObscureAllure - 34 (4)
a2thezebra / rabbit8 - 31 (4)
Ricochet - 35 (4)
sig - 34 (4)
SokothQultuq - 15 (4)

The grand winner of this sweepstakes is... nobody. Black Rock is the closest it gets and she hasn't been around the game to warrant being talked about. After that I guess you could say DrumBeats. I think this is worthless.

Yes, after the first couple of people spoke up and said she was doing it on purpose I realized this is in line with something S~V~S would do. I no longer believe this is a slip but it's good to see that Polo has mentioned everybody because that seals the deal.

Nerolunar wrote:Cavil might have planted that post on purpose. We will never know.

Yes that is always possible and we won't know until the game's end.

Well that was an interesting post by Cavil that obviously should have gone in her bts chat. It looks like she's talking to one other person so maybe there is only one more for us to find and lynch. The thing I'm questioning is why it matters if Polo has mentioned this other person or not? Does it have something to do with that person doing the kill tonight? It looks to me that Polo may have been marked for the kill and may be the revenge vote Cavil is talking about. I'm just guessing here, who has another interpretation or potential answers to the questions I have about this.

Goodbye Daisy hope to see you soon in chatzy, sim, or another game.

@3J, I haven't paid that much attention to Matt because his theories seem improbable. Those improbable theories though don't indicate alignment as far as I've seen in his past play - he seems to do them whether he's good or bad. Since I haven't reviewed his posts or any cases against him I guess I would have to call him good using botd. I'd rather call him "I don't know" though until I can review.

@Matt - sorry I didn't answer your question last night. I think your theory is possible but not probable. With that said I don't know why Dex seemed to invite suspicion on he and Spacedaisy instead of making us waste a lynch on Cavil. He may have just thought he could steer the suspicion to Nero and/or me.

I'll be out this morning and early afternoon so if you have questions for me I won't be able to get to them until then.

I've never been bad with Daisy that I can remember so I accept the feedback from you guys that she is probably just busy. I wish she had been able to get on and answer the point I raised about Nero yesterday though.

I think I'm going to vote for Spacedaisy. I didn't like her pointing at Nero as bad for the reason JJJ pointed out. Nero for me is one of my highest civ reads. And after saying that she has stayed out of the thread - looks like avoidance though I know her job keeps her busy.

Also intriguing theory today about Vompatti being one of the Final Five and that's why we were raised when we were (when he was modkilled). I'll have to ponder that one for awhile and god knows whether Vompatti was good or bad but with this vote I'm betting he was good if he was part of the F5.

I also considered Wilgy today. The only reason I haven't voted him in the past was Dex's strong push away from him but somebody today thought Dex's push was based on lore, not on anything that he caught in the thread like he said. But in the end I like Spacedaisy better as a vote.

Rico, nice job with those interaction reads. I'm going to have to study them a little more but they were thorough and more often than not you gave a read.

Vote Spacedaisy

So say we all!

RIP INH. Hope to see you soon in another game.

Admiral's questions -

1. I think there has got to be one or two more baddies out there (maybe more) and i fall into the school that thinks Cavil's minions have to be dead before he can be killed. Otherwise, why would the game mechanics allow him to be an outted baddie in our midst? He would be too easy to kill if that were the case.

2. Nero - civ
juliets - civ
daisy - I'm not sure yet but leaning baddie. The thing that makes me suspect her as bad is that she thinks Nero is bad. That may not be enough though. It could be that the other bad person is the one unrevealed or there is only one bad person and he is dead. I'm wrestling with this one.

3. I don't see anything specific the admiral can do just keep doing what you've been doing.

whoopee! Good job Nero and Epi! Goodbye Dex.

I'll be doing chatzy and Jeopardy tonight. Come by to talk or play or watch Jeopardy. The chatzy meet-up is 3:00 pm est to whenever and Jeopardy is at 6:00.

#5

First, I want to just clarify something that's been repeated in several posts today. I don't know about the other 3 of the 4 who came back but I said I thought 2 out of 5, not 2 out of 4, would be bad, and that was just a guess. So in my mind, it could be only 1 out of the 4 who returned might be bad and the second bad would be the 4th out of 5 - the one we don't know yet. And note that I pointed out that lore said 4 out of 5 were good so that is also a possibility in my mind.

Up until recently I would have said I don't know who might be bad out of the other 3 but most recently Epi has convinced me it is Dex. I too thought he was saying he thought I was good. The rest of Epi's logic follows from there.

I don't understand what the plan is for the John Cavil votes. Didn't several people say they thought all Cavil's people would have to be gone before he (she) could be lynched? I know Drumbeats had a plan but it didn't seem like it accommodated that possible game construct. And otherwise I just don't understand enough about it to vote there.

So for me tonight it's Dex. I hope you are bad Dex because i will feel really bad if you turn out to be a civ cylon.

Voting Dex

Polo wrote:Post #5

I think ObscureAllure is Caprica Six for reasons I've mentioned before; and I am as sure of this as I was of S~V~S being Colon.

I am sad that you decided to vote ME, OA, because I am civ and this is not a vote that will do any good to the civ team.

Why not go after Wilgy like you said previously, who is a confirmed Colon and one that you know is NOT Caprica Six?

@Polo - do you believe Caprica Six is civ or an indy or bad? Could you explain why for any of those answers? I was impressed that you were able to name SVS as Cavil and so I tend to believe you on this but I'm not sure what to do with the info not being sure what alignment Caprica Six is.

@Obscure Allure - I have you down as bad because during the argument about whether you were going to state your alignment you kept saying you would be punished if you said "I am a cylon". Nobody else got punished for saying that so your reason seems suspicious to me. I assume you are a cylon and since you didn't claim you are a bad one but note my suspicion is based again on the reason you gave for not claiming. HOWEVER, Polo's post is interesting and depending on what he or others say in response to my questions i may move you off my baddie list. If you reply to this just don't expect an answer right away as I am trying to conserve my posts. I will be interested to hear why others see you as bad.

Dex wrote:
Dex wrote:SO SAY WE ALL!

#1

SUSPECTS JOHN CAVIL

For my own part, I doubt that a vote for Cavil will do anything more than to buy him more time. I have to agree that a focus on the 4ofF5 is our most productive approach, even though that includes me. If we have to eliminate Cavil's team to get to Cavil, one or two of them are there, and that's a small pool of suspects to search.

Nero's throwing S~V~S to the brig is behaviorally positive civ cred, albeit very easy. If I was nero and mafia, I'd do the same. Meanwhile, Julliettes has chosen to pursue some arcane issue with Sok that seems rather beside the point. SpaceDaisy seems to be mostly lurking. There is little left to go by than reads, and I'm terrible at reads.

I find it ironic, though, that I have spent the entire game trying to defend civ cylons, only to find myself in their very predicament.

I really don't know how you could call my issue with Sokoth arcane unless you don't understand it. My issue is that he came up with a secondary reason that he had never mentioned before as to why he was fighting claiming. It looks like to me he was trying to make himself look better for not claiming, i.e., there was something he didnt understand about the process. The important thing is he had never once mentioned this reason, he had used other reasons. Isn't the whole claiming argument with him the reason some find him suspicious? It was my reason at least. But I will drop it if it continues to be misunderstood or if he shows me I have misread something. I'm not going to waste all my posts on this one subject.

Also thanks Matt for clearing up that we do have to number our posts.

Post #3

linki: Drumbeats I will participate in anything that would show the true nature of the cylons in the game. I'll wait to hear if people think your idea will work.

Matt wrote:Dear Cavil

You and your friends make me smile. But for realsies bother someone else k? K.

@Rico - For what it's worth I'm a terrible civilian but thank you for acknowledging my civvieness out of nowhere.

Post 2 (are we still numbering? juliets said no?)

My guess at "no" is due to this statement from the Admiral:
You've earned a break from my authoritarian streak. No orders today except to give it all you've got.

Just in case though this is post #2

So Say We All!
I don't think we have to number posts anymore.

Ok Sokoth I'm going to try one more time.

1. My point has nothing to do with Wilgy or any other person in the game besides you or anyone you've given a read on.
2. Back when you were arguing about claiming you gave reasons for doing so. The reason I remember most was at the end when you said you were just testing the waters (you already acknowledged this in one of the posts we've had in this sequence). Here is an example:

Spoiler: show

So in this quote you gave your reasons, one being you stick to your convictions until shown you are wrong and you were testing the waters or getting more information.
3. Right before the end of the lynch you made this comment:

Spoiler: show

4. You are saying here that you believed that claiming to be cylon while being a non cylon meant you died if you got lynched. Why did you never use this reason back when you were arguing about not wanting to claim? If you really believed that, it would have been normal to mention that reason when you were making your argument. Instead, all you talked about was what I mentioned in point 3. So did you not mention it because you are cylon and it didn't apply to you? Or did you think about it later and add that reason? And where did you get the idea that if you were a non-cylon and claimed you were a cylon you would get lynched. The Law that introduced the concept was very clear it applied to cylons only.

I think I've laid this out chronologically in a way that is understandable. Please respond when you get a chance.

That was post #4.

Sukoth, we are definitely on two different subjects. Let me try again tomorrow morning when my brain is fresh to re-word my post. I understand your post very well it's just not what I'm talking about. So in the morning I'll try again.

Post #3

Sokoth, I think somewhere we've got our wires crossed. The statement that i am talking about that you made was this:

SokothQultuq wrote:Post 4?

You guys keep asking me to lay out something that I've already laid out, your either not reading what i'm saying or your ignoring it in order to cause some sort of controversy. So here I'll make it easy.

Its my understanding that claiming ones self to be a Cylon while being a non-cylon meant if you got Lynched you died.

You never used that reason when you were posting all those posts about whether you were going to claim or not yet you say above that you have already laid this out. I had read your posts and not seen anything about thinking claiming if you're non-cylon meant if you got lynched you died. You used other reasons for prolonging your refusal to say it that had to do with seeing how other people will react.

So I'm looking for any post where you mentioned you thought claiming while being a non-cylon meant you would die before this post right before the lynch.

Does that explain things better?

sig wrote:
I really hate juilets and Dex's votes, JJJ also to a lesser extent. I can see Soko's reasoning since Wilgy is a cylon, but I really disliked juliets vote and explanation.
Juliets voted at a time where there were three votes on Epi and two on SVS.
JJJ and Dex voted when Epi and SVS where tied. I think at least one of the players who avoided both wagons was mafia.

What exactly do you hate about my vote? Sokoth offered an alternative reason he had kept up with his no claim antics than the reason he offered in the thread at the time. It's like he threw that out there at the last minute. Sokoth was on my list of reads as bad so i already had a bad feeling about him. Why didn't I vote Epi or SVS? Because I thought they were good, as my list of reads would tell you. Why would I vote for someone I thought was good?

Gah! I can never read SVS. The buss of nutella was a brilliant move and had me convinced SVS was good. There was something else in there that had me convinced but I can't remember what it was. Good job those of you who knew she was bad.

#1

G-Man wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Forgot the vote needs its own line.

Black Rock
And this vote puts me in a quandary. I'd like to stick to voting for one of my bad reads. Both BR and SVS are among those reads but they are my #4 and 3 respectively. We need to stop spreading the votes around, so voting my top two seem to be off the table. I just don't think BR is going to have much traction but I also want to spend some time reading up SVS's progression on bea in case that makes me feel any better or worse on her.

This is post #5.

I am likely to vote Sokoth if that helps you any. I read through his posts twice and didn't see the explanation he gave above which he says he's already given.
Post #8

In fact, I'm going to go ahead and vote now
Vote SokothQultuq

Post #8

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:#4

~~~

juliets wrote:which if true would mean there was only one baddie among the Final five if I'm reading it right. Some of you who watched the show can tell me if what I found in the wiki is right. I'm guessing though that Golden didn't go straight with the lore and made 2 of them bad. I am not one of them.
This is a very specific guess. What inspires it?

Here is the part of the post right above where you quoted
Someone asked the four who came back from the dead to make a guess as to how many of the five are good versus bad. Based strictly on my perception of how many baddies we would have versus how many good I would GUESS we have two baddies and three civ's.
The 3 - 2 split was a guess on my part based on how many I think Golden would have made civ vs. mafia. I just don't believe he would have given more to the mafia. I also talk about the lore a little in this post since it suggests a 4-1 ratio of civs to mafia. I asked for some feedback from others on that bit of lore.
~~~

juliets wrote:Drumbeats my suspicion of Epi had nothing to do with Glorfindel because I didn't know that at the time to my recollection. He wasn't NK'd, his votes didn't look good to me, and i started thinking maybe Golden had randomized.

Your tone was confident in that dead-message. What votes of his bothered you so much, and why have you since changed your mind? You've called him a civilian read gun to head.

The votes that bothered me were the first two right off the bat where he didn't vote (unless I missed his name in that first poll but I double checked) and then his vote on day 6 where he voted Drum when the day before he voted Glorfindel and the day after he voted Glorfindel. That just made no sense to me. Be aware this was not the only thing that made me feel confident about him. What changed my mind was first looking at what his responses were to later accusations and my strong gut feel that he really isn't bad. The votes didn't look so bad to me anymore and Epi had addressed the other points and his overall behavior when I looked at it again tells me he's civ. I just changed my mind back to where it was before I thought I had found some good evidence. I am sorry if i caused confusion in the thread.

Post # 7

Rico, i heard back from Golden and my answer to your question regarding what I knew in the beginning is the same as Dex's answer. I knew my win conditions which implied alignment.

Last post was #5 (I forgot to label)
This post is #6

Ok, I will take a run at my reads but i can't say I'm very confident. I've lost touch with how many good cylons we think we have that aren't accounted for and other such details that would affect my reads. Think of these as more gun-to-head reads.

Black Rock: civ
Dex: F5 *if i am right in the ratio I guessed one of the three has to be bad but I don't know who.
DrumBeats: civ
DrWilgy: civ - Dex seemed so sure
Epignosis: Civ
insertnamehere: civ
JaggedJimmyJay: civ
Matt: civ
Nerolunar: F5*
ObscureAllure: mafia
Polo: civ
Rabbit8: civ
Ricochet: go back and forth on but leaning civ today
S~V~S: civ
sig: mafia
SokothQultuq: mafia
Spacedaisy: F5*

Also, someone asked about whether we (the returned 4) knew our alignment from the beginning and I need to chec k in with Golden to make sure I can answer that.

Drumbeats my suspicion of Epi had nothing to do with Glorfindel because I didn't know that at the time to my recollection. He wasn't NK'd, his votes didn't look good to me, and i started thinking maybe Golden had randomized.

Spacedaisy wrote:
I did not know I was F5 until I was night killed. At that point I was told what my alignment was, so the Final 5 don't get the option who to align with, for the record. So don't base your votes on who you think we (the player) would choose align with, it has no bearing.

I just want to validate what Spacedaisy says here about not knowing I was F5 until I was nightkilled and being told at that time my alignment. There was no "choosing" which alignment to be a part of.

Someone asked the four who came back from the dead to make a guess as to how many of the five are good versus bad. Based strictly on my perception of how many baddies we would have versus how many good I would GUESS we have two baddies and three civ's. What I found in the lore indicates:

Eventually, the four arrive at Galactica’s gym and upon seeing each other the truth becomes clear to them; they are Cylons, four of the Final Five. When they learn the truth, they decide to remain loyal to the Colonial Fleet, because they thought they were humans for as long as they can remember, and cling to what they know to make sense of their lives.

which if true would mean there was only one baddie among the Final five if I'm reading it right. Some of you who watched the show can tell me if what I found in the wiki is right. I'm guessing though that Golden didn't go straight with the lore and made 2 of them bad. I am not one of them.

#4

linki

Ricochet wrote:
juliets wrote:I have missed two very important points if they are true and they are that Glorifindel and Lorab are confirmed good, at least that's what it sounds like in the above post. Could someone explain to me how they are confirmed or point me to the posts that show how they are confirmed good? Also Boomer - how do we know she is confirmed good?
We know their alignments based on their lynch and according to the time of their lynch, because the Host has updated the OPs. None of these players have resurrected (well, they are original numbers, after all, so...), which means their alignment status is final. Do you have another take on this or were you simply unaware of the new information?

No, I don't have any additional information. I didn't look at the front page of the thread so I was just unaware of the new information until everyone started talking about it.

#3

I have missed two very important points if they are true and they are that Glorifindel and Lorab are confirmed good, at least that's what it sounds like in the above post. Could someone explain to me how they are confirmed or point me to the posts that show how they are confirmed good? Also Boomer - how do we know she is confirmed good?

Also someone asked the Dead to claim what their Wills of the Dead claims were. In the first round I said something like "Yay for having Wills of the Dead for Epi is not who he appears to me". At the time I wrote that I was looking at Epi's voting record and thinking about the fact that Golden said you didn't have to know the lore to play the game. This led me to thinking that Golden had probably randomized the cylons to pick the ones that were good. That would mean one of the big things that had us thinking Epi was good would be gone. At this point in time I think Epi's defenses to the posts about him are pretty good and I don't think I trust some of those who are throwing shade at him.

The second round I forgot to send one in

#2

So Say We All! I'm glad to be back but will need to do a little re-reading before giving my reads. I've skimmed a little as I've been following but need to look at some things a little more in depth.

1

Doctor Wilgy is
The one who i would pick first
Then possibly sig

DrWilgy wrote:
Silverwolf wrote:Zebra has posted content. JJJ seems like he's analyzing things similar to when he was town in Turf Wars. I'm not opposed to Glorfindel being another option outside of sig but I'd also be unopposed to Wilgy. I mean, IAWY had a scum game here where he was majorly lurky. He hardly posted here at all before he replaced. He supposedly, by people who know him, is a huge asset if he's town. Wilgy replaces, tells me he doesn't post much as scum and tries to fly under the radar, and that's exactly what he is doing here. I mean, come on people what has he done? He wants to do GTH.

Hey Wilgy:

Do it. ISO every JJJ post where he does GTH, quote them one at a time and do it FFS. It's not that hard. You also said you thought I was bad a long time ago and were gonna ISO me and prove it. I haven't seen that yet and I already asked you for it. If you changed your mind, that's fine but explain why then. What are your thoughts on me? Let's go. It's not that hard.

You say you trust Bea and Zebra-Why? You don't trust Rico and OA? Why?

You voted sig and Nerolunar and Epi. Why?
Why not? Huge asset to town? What gave you that impression?

Silver my friend, I'm a simple old school soul reader. I'll read bits n judge based on those bits. I said that stuff bout ISO'ing you for examination purpose.

What do you mean by
Examination purpose
Will you please explain?

So say we all. Yet
I can only say haiku
I will try my best

Had some things to do
This morning I will catch up
And give thoughts on posts

ObscureAllure wrote:SD and Juliets - it's that people are saying "I don't see it, she didn't say anything what did she say?" Just because you didn't notice it doesn't mean it's not there.

Question for the thread. So I have this guard dog who was up barking all last night. Suddenly in the middle the night it stops. What do you guys think? Do you think the threat went away? Do you think the threat was actually a friendly neighbor? Do you think there was never any threat to begin with and I just need a new guard dog? Do you think someone tranquilized my dog to make it shut up? Do you think the dog was abducted by aliens? These are the things that keep Me Up at night.

OA I think there is some confusion here. I said I DID see where you said something that probably should have been punished and my thought is you were punished for what I saw. I never meant to imply I didn't see anything so what and where is it. I can't even hint at what I saw because I don't want to inadvertently break any rules and I think you should not say anything else about it for the same reason.

linki

Ricochet wrote:People should simply address what has been pointed at in regards to him being a Cylon and decide if it sounds genuine / plausible / etc. or not. You can stick with the Cain vibes just as much, if you like, but address actual suggestive statements made in the game first. My only gripe, as I've said before, is for it not to turn out to be yet another messy "Boomslang gambit".

I'm sorry but I don't understand what the Boomslang gambit is. Could you give a short explanation?

a2thezebra wrote:A Long Con lynch will be disastrous.

zebra what are you thinking about when you say this?

a2thezebra wrote:
juliets wrote:
Polo wrote:
juliets wrote:Scotty, just fyi there are only 7 who haven't claimed according to Polo's last list.
Actually it's 8, I may have forgotten to count Epig.
Oh ok Polo thanks for the update.
I can't tell if "thanks for the update" is sarcastic or not.

No, not at all.

Polo wrote:
juliets wrote:Scotty, just fyi there are only 7 who haven't claimed according to Polo's last list.
Actually it's 8, I may have forgotten to count Epig.

Oh ok Polo thanks for the update.

Scotty, just fyi there are only 7 who haven't claimed according to Polo's last list.

Dex wrote:
juliets wrote:I saw something in her posts that I believe would have got her punished but I don't think it is wise for me to repeat it. So, I think she's telling the truth.
You did better than I did. Like SD, I couldn't find anything even remotely punishable in her posts prior to her smiley phase. I couldn't find anything that looked like a trigger, either, and I consider her specific claim - that she was punished for triggering an event - just bizarre.

Of all the excuses for not declaring cylon remaining, this may be, to me, the weakest, and therefore the most suspicious.

Even though I saw something for which I see she could be punished I agree that her using that punishment at this stage is the weakest of the reasons. Many of us have claimed and no one has sent out a warning to the others that punishment will come if you claim. Nor has Golden stepped in and given us all a warning quoting a rule and telling us that counts as breaking the rule. I believe one of those things would have happened if punishments go with claiming.

If OA is saying it's because of her specific role that she would be punished for claiming I don't know what exactly to think of that.

Spacedaisy wrote:I never said she role claimed. I said that she insisted that she said something that was too close to her role for Golden's liking. I never saw anything personally that I would have considered punishable, but clearly OA has said that she did and was. If she wishes to deny those statements now I will gladly vote for her because she is admitting to lying.

I saw something in her posts that I believe would have got her punished but I don't think it is wise for me to repeat it. So, I think she's telling the truth.

Polo, here is where I declared.

juliets wrote:So say we all.

I slept late this morning after a long drive yesterday through terrible thunderstorms and haven't fully caught up yet. I do however see that the claiming cylon has really taken on a serious tone so I am a cylon too. I hear you bea about being the member of one of the five but I'd rather take that chance than not claim cylon based on the reasoning put forth.

I am leaning toward a lorab vote today because we already believe (or I already believe) that Epi is a good cylon and there can't really be that many. I don't know what to do about the new win con where it concerns Epi but I think someone else said this too - maybe if given some time that martial law will be canceled or replaced with something more moderate.

Dex wrote:I am a Cylon.

Just in case my predecessor didn't declare.

Welcome Dex, and I don't think your predecessor declared so good for you. I was leaning baddie on your predecessor but will give you the botd for awhile to let you play your way. Maybe DF was really just too busy with too many games which was one of the reasons he gave for why he wasn't participating much.

Polo, I did declare.

Holy Easter bunny it's rabbit!!!!! Good to see you back. We haven't forgotten you!

Ricochet wrote:
juliets wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Juliets

Day Two [20th vote out of 26, 6th vote on nutella, pushing her away from Long Con, 6-4]

~ plans to read into JJJ's case on nutella; wants to hear from her; wants input from others
~ planned to BOTD nutella, but she ended top suspect among a few others, so went ahead with voting her

Day Three [16th vote out of 25, 3rd vote on Nerolunar, LoRab already claimed]

- wants to know what makes LoRab so suspicious ("other" evidence besides a potential save vote for Long Con)
- votes Nerolunar without reasoning and background

Back on Day Three, I judged juliets favourably purely by the timing of he vote (taking nutella from 5-4 to 6-4), because it looked like too cruel of a buss move. But content-wise, juliets' game is taking a turn for the worse I'm afraid. Day Two stance on nutella comes out very wishy-washy in writing, indeed. Zero input + questioning other's input on LoRab looks awful. Two mentions of Nerolunar in the entire game, both being in her vote post for Nerolunar, which happened out of simply following Epignosis and Obscure's votes, looks awful. Most deserving of a Wag of the Finger.

You must not know me very well. I always ask questions like the question I asked about Lorab. I didn't understand the full reasoning for the Lorab votes so I asked. There is no harm in that and I wanted to understand. Also, first you say you judged me favorably by my vote on Day 3 but then you go back to address something you saw on Day 2. Why didn't you bring that up when you judged me favorably?

Sorry, that should have been "vote on Day Two". And that time when I judged you favourably was purely when I looked at the votes and their timing. This right now has been a full read, vote, posts, context, everything.

juliets wrote:As for the Nerolunar post here is my quote that came right before that vote:

I have no idea what to do now. sig has convinced me to back off him at the moment and I can't go to Lorab as a second choice. G-Man's case was pretty good but I need to see Glorfindel's response.

I didn't have anyway to turn but I felt good about OA and Epi at that time so followed them in their vote. Not the best reason to vote someone but I didn't feel like I had another choice out there. This is not the first time someone has followed someone else's vote.

And this tells me what about you voting Nerolunar with any purpose whatsoever? Simply following players you trusted is exactly what I said you did.

Wishy washy defense. A lot of "oh that's normal of me" and "I did something because I had to do something" and "I wasn't the only one doing this". For the record, yes, I recall that this kind of play can make you look bad, in different games, under different guises. But right now, all this evidence is growingly disconcerting, nonetheless.

What I said in my response was the truth. I can't do anything more to satisfy you except tell you the truth and do my best to provide more thoughts and input in the game.

And since my question went unanswered I assume it is ok to go ahead and vote.

Vote Lorab

Silverwolf wrote:Juliets is someone I also am suspicious of due to very safe, under the radar play very similar to nutella. She seems too cautious to be town.

Silverwolf, this isn't something I would expect you to know because we haven't played together but I am always a cautious player. I always look (or try to always look) at both sides of an issue when a suspicion comes up about someone. This analysis side of me often pushes me to go around in circles and can lead to indecision. If there is a case made on someone I like to hear the response before I make up my mind. I usually get better as the game goes on. It is a play style issue though I recognize it can cause people at times to be suspicious.

Ricochet wrote:
Juliets

Day Two [20th vote out of 26, 6th vote on nutella, pushing her away from Long Con, 6-4]

~ plans to read into JJJ's case on nutella; wants to hear from her; wants input from others
~ planned to BOTD nutella, but she ended top suspect among a few others, so went ahead with voting her

Day Three [16th vote out of 25, 3rd vote on Nerolunar, LoRab already claimed]

- wants to know what makes LoRab so suspicious ("other" evidence besides a potential save vote for Long Con)
- votes Nerolunar without reasoning and background

Back on Day Three, I judged juliets favourably purely by the timing of he vote (taking nutella from 5-4 to 6-4), because it looked like too cruel of a buss move. But content-wise, juliets' game is taking a turn for the worse I'm afraid. Day Two stance on nutella comes out very wishy-washy in writing, indeed. Zero input + questioning other's input on LoRab looks awful. Two mentions of Nerolunar in the entire game, both being in her vote post for Nerolunar, which happened out of simply following Epignosis and Obscure's votes, looks awful. Most deserving of a Wag of the Finger.

You must not know me very well. I always ask questions like the question I asked about Lorab. I didn't understand the full reasoning for the Lorab votes so I asked. There is no harm in that and I wanted to understand. Also, first you say you judged me favorably by my vote on Day 3 but then you go back to address something you saw on Day 2. Why didn't you bring that up when you judged me favorably? As for the Nerolunar post here is my quote that came right before that vote:

juliets wrote:I have no idea what to do now. sig has convinced me to back off him at the moment and I can't go to Lorab as a second choice. G-Man's case was pretty good but I need to see Glorfindel's response.

I didn't have anyway to turn but I felt good about OA and Epi at that time so followed them in their vote. Not the best reason to vote someone but I didn't feel like I had another choice out there. This is not the first time someone has followed someone else's vote.

Regarding Long Con, I thought he was good though I am reevaluating in lieu of this new Cain presence. His response to SVS about the sig issue though has me still leaning good on him for the time being.

As for not having much input I have been traveling almost the entire time this game has been going on, and not on vacation. As I told the thread several times I was out two days in a row, Monday and Tuesday of this week. That automatically reduces any input I would have had. My mind has been on family issues, as we experienced a tragedy in April and I just haven't been as mentally involved in the game as I would like to be. Again though, it is pretty typical for me to not have a lot of input early in a game.

Now that I am home I will try to give more to the game so you won't feel like I am just not giving input because I'm a baddie.

Also, regarding Lorab, my understanding is we are supposed to be holding our vote to maybe vote for someone who hasn't claimed. Is that correct? If not I am ready to vote.

So say we all.

I slept late this morning after a long drive yesterday through terrible thunderstorms and haven't fully caught up yet. I do however see that the claiming cylon has really taken on a serious tone so I am a cylon too. I hear you bea about being the member of one of the five but I'd rather take that chance than not claim cylon based on the reasoning put forth.

I am leaning toward a lorab vote today because we already believe (or I already believe) that Epi is a good cylon and there can't really be that many. I don't know what to do about the new win con where it concerns Epi but I think someone else said this too - maybe if given some time that martial law will be canceled or replaced with something more moderate.

RIP Nero and I'm sorry for my part in lynching you. Now I'm gone for two RL days traveling.

Ok, I feel good about OA and Epi so I'm going to follow their vote on Nerolunar. I have a gut feeling about him anyway, though i wouldn't have voted for him based solely on this gut feel.

Vote: Nerolunar

Also, my travel plans are finally worked out and unfortunately I will be out of the thread both tomorrow May 16th and the next day May 17th. I know this is not ideal but there is nothing I can do about it. The place we are spending the night tomorrow night does not have working wifi.

Search found 142 matches