The Syndicate

I won't be here until the end of the day, so I'm placing my vote now for Luke. I seriously hope this is it.

Sorry, no time to stay today.

I'll stop by later to vote. Probably for Luke, not that it'll matter much as it looks at the moment.

Sorsha, if the answer to the question is yes, can you state when and why?

Sorsha, was there a time, after the MM lynch when you were suspicious of Golden?

Matt F wrote:Why does everyone think there is a recruit now?

I am happy to discuss Sorsha though. I was expecting her dead Night 2 and every night since, but nada. No offense, Sorsha, why do the baddies continue to let you live?

I don't necessarily think there is a recruit, but if there was only one baddie left and it was banana, I'd be pissed that the game was still going on. A non active player always works out better for the baddies, especially in the late stages of the game. I get Epi not mod killing throughout the game, but only until that person is the last standing from their group. Otherwise, it just doesn't seem fair.

So, under the assumption of what I said above, there are two options:
1. There's one baddie left and it isn't Banana.
2. Banana was an original baddie, but somewhere along the way, someone got recruited, which is why the game is still going.

If 1 is correct, the only way I could see Sorsha being bad is if MM wanted out of the game on his own, and they came up with that method. But if that was the case, why didn't TH and Sig vote for MM too?
If 2 is correct, Sorsha would be a great choice for a recruit, and while the baddies probably thought she'd be saved on night 2, they might have hoped that wouldn't be the case on night 3. Plus, like I said, she hasn't really contributed much after the MM success, but I need to go back and look when did the change occur

Before I have to go, one more question:

Say Banana is the last baddie, but that there was a recruit before all the other baddies died, who would be the best option for that? I would target Sorsha for a kill or a recruit (not sure how it works) after the MM incident. She was very dangerous to the town. So you either want to block her every day (which you can't), or you want to take her out of the equation somehow, no?

Have you noticed that Sorsha hasn't had anything really valuable to say lately? She's just listening to others.

Matt F wrote:FZ - Where you at? Your thoughts on Golden? (and before Golden says I'm trying to set him up, no that's not what I'm doing)

I think Golden is good.

RIP SVS. We were both wrong about each other. Sorry this got a little ugly.


Question: If Banana was the last baddie standing (assuming no recruits), would Epi really let us continue the game? Wouldn't that just be the lamest thing ever?

Okay, if no one else thinks SVS is bad, I'm letting it go. I made terrible judgements this game, so maybe this is just another one of them

It leaves me with Luke and Blooper.

With Luke, the strongest reason to see him as baddie is how he defended Floyd when there was a tie between MM and Floyd, and the deadline had passed. Only then did Luke say he didn't see why Floyd was getting votes. He had no problem voting for him last day.
In his favour, if he's bad, he didn't really have a reason to jump on the Floyd lynch last day. But if one of his team buddies are still talking to him BTSC, it's more plausible.


With Bloop, Sig took out BR who voted for him on the first day. Blooper voiced suspicion of him but only voted for him on the second day when no one else voted for him, but not on the first day when he had 2 votes. Sig killed Drac on the second night (his other voter from day 1), who was not an active player at all, but left Blooper, who was the only one to vote for him that day, alive. She didn't vote for him the next day either. She voted Floyd after me. She also didn't vote TH, but voted Eloh instead. No idea where that vote came from.


Out of these two, I'd say Blooper feels worse.

Golden wrote:Thanks FZ. I never saw those posts that were deleted, but I can confirm that I had deduced you to be House Fremen.

And what do you think about what I said about SVS? She's never played with me as a baddie, yet she claims to know how I act as one. Doesn't it look to you like maybe she was just trying to make me look bad?

I think I've made it quite clear that I'm a Fremen in those posts that were deleted. So whoever saw them, should have known. I'm not going to repeat what I said there because Epi didn't like what I asked.

I'm sorry Floyd. I was hesitant in those last few hours but was left with no choice but to vote for you, because it was me against you, and you voting for me did not help matters.


So after I asked SVS where she remembers me as a baddie, since she said that baddie FZ acts in a certain way, and it wasn't here on TS, she said it's probably from my original home site. So I just went to check and SVS played only two games over there. Interestingly, I was a townie in both.


What say you all now? Is SVS lying? I'd say she is.

Matt F wrote:

FZ. wrote:

Matt F wrote:Can we stop saying SVS is getting personal and angry? That seems anti-fun to me. On that note, if we are to believe Elohcin, then SVS is good in my eyes.

I'm not voting Floyd today. If he's the last Harkonnen and gets lynched as such and I look like a moron, oh well nothing new. I think FZ is the obvious choice and as well she should be.

The only thing giving me pause is how hard Golden is defending her.

Why hasn't Harkonnen killed Sorsha yet? That's weird. :/

I dunno who to vote for.

Matt, if it makes you feel better, it stopped being fun for me long ago. And how would you call it if someone kept ignoring your questions and posts?

I really don't care any more. I'm voting for Floyd, but feel free to lynch me next day if we were wrong about him.

NOOOOOOOO don't stop having fun. That's not what I meant! Here, have a beer!

And honestly, I haven't done much more then you this game FZ. Again, I latched onto Sorsha's case on MM and was forced to vote for sig, and I voted bea instead of Turnip Head.

So yeah, we're in the same boat pretty much as far as bad votes. Haha

But yeah I think you're bad :P

I'll take the beer, thanks
But I'm not the kind of person to take things personally, but some of it sure feels that way this game. Whatever. Never mind.

And you're wrong. I hope this lynch proves it, but if not, you're welcome to try again next day

Matt F wrote:Can we stop saying SVS is getting personal and angry? That seems anti-fun to me. On that note, if we are to believe Elohcin, then SVS is good in my eyes.

I'm not voting Floyd today. If he's the last Harkonnen and gets lynched as such and I look like a moron, oh well nothing new. I think FZ is the obvious choice and as well she should be.

The only thing giving me pause is how hard Golden is defending her.

Why hasn't Harkonnen killed Sorsha yet? That's weird. :/

I dunno who to vote for.

Matt, if it makes you feel better, it stopped being fun for me long ago. And how would you call it if someone kept ignoring your questions and posts?

I really don't care any more. I'm voting for Floyd, but feel free to lynch me next day if we were wrong about him.

*When has she" not have she

bea wrote:fz - without any game info - purely based on her thread actions, it's in the 98+ percent range. I'm usually all over with svs, this is the strongest civ read I've had on her in years. So, yes, she could still be fooling me as much as anyone can be, but I find it very very very very unlikely. Like outside of her admitting to being bad or there's an infodump, I just can't see a vote there.

Golden - I get why you feel the way you do about nanner. For realz. I was just including him on the list because he is unknown to me.

I understand, but I really don't get how if you two don't know anything about each other, both of you can be sure about the other, unless that's your way of not telling me you have info.

The thing with SVS is, either she's been quite rude and ignored specific questions I asked her, or it's too convenient that she ignored those questions.
Here are the questions she ignored:
1. I asked her after the first lynch (when it was between zebra and Eloh) why she decided yours and Floyd's votes were baddies not wanting to vote for their team mate (Eloh) and not wanting to be associated with the civ lynch (zebra), and why she didn't think that Eloh could be a civ and you two could still not want to take part in either civ's lynch. Never got an answer for that.
2. She said townie FZ tends to do x, while baddie FZ tends to do Y. I asked her when have she ever seen me as a baddie (since I was a baddie only one time here and it lasted a day due to reasons not related to me). She never answered that.

I think these are two important questions and she ignored both. The first one I asked twice, by the way.

So either she has something personal against me, or she's bad who doesn't know what to say.

bea wrote:fwiw - I don't think SVS is bad. I also don't think FZ is bad.

The people I'm *least* sure of are floyd, luke, blooper and nannarnannar.

I'd like to hear a bit more from floyd. I don't suspect him for his day 1 vote, glass houses and all. I can't shake the feeling that he might not be bad, but also I can see how his reluctance to talking about his day 0 till after MM"s lynch makes him look suspicious. It's decent thread evidence and I'd like to hear him talk more about why he was so unwlling to discuss the item initially as well as point me to where I missed his reasoning for voting FZ.

If he doesn't satisfy the itch so to speak with his response, that's likely where my vote is going.

Bea, how sure are you on SVS?

TheFloyd73 wrote:

FZ. wrote:Floyd, funny that you just chose that post from Luke to reply to. Nothing to say about all other accusations?

Most of those accusations are based around my self vote. In case you missed, here's a summary of what I said.

I had one FUCKING minute left.

Spoiler: show

I apologise for profanities, by the way.

What about your thoughts on all other players? Who do you think is bad?

Floyd, funny that you just chose that post from Luke to reply to. Nothing to say about all other accusations?

Unless Luke still has baddies telling him what to do in his BTSC chat, which I don't think is the case, his last post made me feel much better about him.

He's not an option today and he could easily avoid being on Floyd's lynch train if Floyd is the civ and Luke the baddie. The fact that he's choosing to put himself out there makes me think it's what he really thinks. That, and a sentence I found from him from earlier when he was addressing my suspicion. He said "what did I say that was so wrong" or something like that. That strikes me as genuine newbie civvie question and not one coming from a baddie. In my eyes, a baddie would not make it so straight forward.


For me, it's between Floyd and SVS. Floyd for obvious reasons which I've pointed out all game, and SVS is a relatively new suspicion but one I think we should also consider.

Reading SVS' posts makes me really annoyed. This is not personal SVS, it's a game, and you're acting like I've done something to you.

I don't know if this is you tunnelling, if you have issues and taking out your aggressions here, or if you're just a baddie.
The only thing you have going for you is that you voted for MM second. But that's exactly what I would have done as a baddie (voting second because you know Sorsha voted for a really good reason and you want to look really good in the aftermath). You didn't vote for Sig either when you weren't forced and after you were, at no point did you try to convince anyone to vote Sig, so get off your high horse.

You didn't vote for TH because you "missed" the vote. And you're defending Bea very strongly. Could it be that you're a baddie that just knows that Bea is good because she's not on your team?

I am seriously trying to get to the bottom of things. I appreciate those defending me, especially Golden. I don't know who is the other Harkonen, but it's not me. If it's not Floyd or Luke, my money would be on SVS.

Golden wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Yes you make a valid point.

The most persuasive bit for me is the poison thing. What do you make of that?

The thing is, unlike us, they had to know Sorsha was sitting on some information. I don't know, when I'm bad, which is not the case now, when I recognize a team mate has been caught by solid information, I'd buss him as fast as I can, because this is something that won't go away next day. With Floyd, things could get better as the game progressed. So trying to save MM at the expense of Floyd doesn't really seem logical to me.

MacDougall wrote:I don't buy it. If the scum had a grand plan around making floyd look civ while sacrificing their own players all the power to them but I doubt it.

I was going to say you were wrong because they weren't the ones who started the votes on Floyd. If he's bad, they were just taking advantage of a stinky situation.
But, I looked again at the two lynches of MM and Sig and I actually think it's not likely.
Floyd was the third to vote for MM, when he himself only had one vote on him. He could have waited to see who was getting the votes and only if it was between him and MM, go for the MM option. Why push for the MM lynch, your alleged team mate? People were still debating.
We have 3 confirmed baddies voting for Floyd. It seems suicidal if MM gets lynched at the end, but maybe they just figured that's what we'd think. That part is still bothering me.

And then when Sig was being lynched, it seems like Floyd was really trying to save himself, because Sig wasn't considered bad at the time. It was just forced votes. So it was between Floyd and Sig. He put his vote on Sig when he got 3 votes.


Bea comes off looking bad from the Sig lynch. She was the last one to place her vote, and like I said, if Floyd came out civ and Sig was saved from a tie, it wouldn't make anyone look too bad, because everyone who voted for Floyd, could be seen as trying to save Sig who didn't really look bad to anyone.
Blooper also comes off looking bad because she was suspicious of Sig before, even noted it, but voted for Floyd just the same.

SVS, can you please explain why you think Bea is a civ?
In addition, whoever said Bloop feels okay, can you explain why?

Last but not least, Luke, who is acting weird and I can't decide if it's because it's his first game or because he's bad.

SVS, I don't know where the "jabby stabs" comment is coming from. The only jabby stab I can really think of came when I was getting a little insulted by your attitude toward me (how you didn't like any of my votes, for example). Up until then, there were only questions and the comment about not liking your vote was serious frustration from what I felt was a wasted vote when we didn't know what we were dealing with regarding the Sig forced votes.

Just to refresh my memory, when have you seen me as baddie? Amazingly, I have only been a baddie here one time, and I was lynched the second day after MP who was in my team said he thought I was bad (probably tried to distance me), got caught on the first day. After that, everyone was saying this is what MP does when bad, and I stood no chance. So basically, I haven't played a real baddie here. Where have you had the chance to see baddie FZ?

Sorsha wrote:I could see the Floyd thing. Either him or FZ.

I want to say I'm insulted that you all think I could be such a bad and obvious baddie, but if I'm a bad civvie, I guess I can easily be a bad baddie. Only thing is, I'm not bad.

And you have no idea how badly I want Floyd to be a baddie. I'm willing to vote for him. I also think that while I've made awful mistakes this game, I've tried my best to help the town. I'm paying for the fact that some just don't give a damn and I do and I take responsibility for my actions when others don't.

Look at the lynches that occurred.
1. The first one, I tried to talk people out of voting zebra. I really really tried, but people didn't listen. No one ever mentioned that, did they.
2. Then we have the MM vs. Floyd. I thought both cases were good, but I also felt that the Floyd case was more thread based while MM's was info based, so I brought it to a tie. None of you know whether Floyd is bad (except for the person who is the baddie, be it Floyd or someone else), so the jury should still be out.
3. We have Sig vs. Floyd. Again, NO ONE, other than Golden said maybe we should lynch Sig. Everyone was comfortable relying on their forced vote, while I was honestly trying to find out what was going on and wrongly thought Sig was a civ. Yeah, when you look at the results, I led the save. But a. we still don't know if Floyd is bad, and b. no one voted for the baddie because they wanted him out, so no one should really get any credit here.
4. That is the only real screw up I'm willing to fully take responsibility for, and even then, everyone already thinks I'm bad. TH is so obviously going down. Why the hell would I vote with him to make myself look better?

You all need to take a closer look at yourselves and everyone else because most of you are acting hypocritically. Basically, very few people have played a good game here and can take credit for the baddies' lynches. Sure, you want to go with the easiest option for a lynch, do it. Like I said, I'm not proud of my game here, and I don't think I deserve to win, but after you lynch me, you will be less deserving of a civvie win as well.


That felt good

Golden wrote:I was a pretty key vote at a pretty key time in two of the lynches. In the third, I was the person encouraging everyone (when they were suggesting lynching either me or zebra to lynch sig) that lynching sig would probably be better than lynching zebra.

I'm a great paranoid theory that I'm bad, but I think there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate I'm not.

I'm not sure I agree that, if I was bad, pushing floyd ahead of FZ would be a good idea. Either order would be equally fine. If I was bad, I could have waited on the Floyd thing. I don't want to because I want us to get it right today. TH's votes always stuck out to me as way more poorly (mafia-ly) timed than FZs ones.

Maybe I'm blind, she could have me fooled. I could well be wrong. I don't blame anyone for choosing FZ today.

@FZ - in the TH voters, obviously I know it's not zebra or I, I'm also pretty confident about Eloh, and I did an iso of sorsha yesterday and came back with her asking really pertinent questions to MM and TH before we had lynched any baddies. If she is bad, it's one of the best performances I've seen (and she certainly did a lot to paint her teammates as bad before it seemed needed). Once again, that means we come back to only Floyd... someone who jumped on TH immediately at the start of the day and said he'd 'consider changing it later'

I agree that if you were a baddie, the order of who you pushed for would not be important.

RIP zebra. You played a good game.

You can all decide to lynch me, but you're going to need a plan after I come out civ. Like TH said, I don't deserve to win this game, only I'm genuine about being a civ who screwed up. I wish I were bad, at least I would have had a reason for defending the baddies, but I'm not.

I actually thought the same thing as Mac did, about Golden, when I saw zebra died, and there's the part where TH said Golden seemed bad which could have been distancing, but he's coming off genuine to me(not that I'm a good judge), and there's always the possibility that the whoever is bad killed zebra because of that, so I don't know. I don't trust my judgement this game at all.


Golden's idea about Floyd being bad because of what MM and Sig said, as well as TH's votes is also interesting. I'm kind of hoping this is true, because it will mean I was at least right about him in the game, and would paint my actions in a different colour, LOL.

But I wouldn't rule out the baddie being in TH's voters. He was going down and other than me, everyone was willing to accept it.

MacDougall wrote:

FZ. wrote:

MacDougall wrote:So like. FZ is getting lynched tomorrow then?

Yes please. This is officially my worst game ever E_V_E_R

In light of what went down with Turnip Head this reads like a concession.

You obviously don't know me. Just acknowledging how off my scum radar has been this game. Have you ever had a game where you tried to prevent the lynch of 3 baddies in a row? You know what? Forget in a row. I can't say I have, not even as a baddie, LOL.

MacDougall wrote:So like. FZ is getting lynched tomorrow then?

Yes please. This is officially my worst game ever E_V_E_R

Going to bed.

Matt F wrote:Btw FZ my post doesn't reflect on you. I'm not accusing you two of being teamies because of what Turnip said (although I do think you two could be teamies). I'm just baffled why someone wouldn't try to defend, say it would be best to remove them from the game, but then deny the same exact thing be done to you, who has also voted poorly.

Also, to be fair. I latched onto Sorsha's "case" on MM without even considering him before, and I was forced to vote sig, so I may have had just a bad a voting record as the two of you had unforeseen circumstances hadn't arisen.

I just can't believe Turnip's not even trying to defend himself! If you're town, dude, that will not be cool.

Yeah, I get it. I'm quite baffled by the fact he's so sure I'm a townie.
For what it's worth, I would try to defend myself harder as a baddie, so I actually do get where he's coming from if he's not bad.

Turnip Head wrote:

Matt F wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

FZ. wrote:TH, look me in the eye :P
Are you bad?

I would never play this sloppy if I was. I do think it's worth lynching me though, from a numbers perspective we can afford it and I don't deserve to win this game. And otherwise I'm just gonna be a question mark the whole game and continue to derail the game with my bad decisions.

At least this will prove that I can play shitty as a civ :P

IF you feel you don't deserve to win as a civ because of your votes, would you say the same about FZ?

I would never say that about FZ, I <3 her and she always gives 100%.

LOL, this sounds like your attempt to make me feel better when you're lynched and it turns out I was defending a baddie once again.

For what it's worth, I <3 you too
And if you are bad, at least it will prove I can't read you like I thought I could.

Turnip Head wrote:

FZ. wrote:TH, look me in the eye :P
Are you bad?

I would never play this sloppy if I was. I do think it's worth lynching me though, from a numbers perspective we can afford it and I don't deserve to win this game. And otherwise I'm just gonna be a question mark the whole game and continue to derail the game with my bad decisions.

At least this will prove that I can play shitty as a civ :P

If this is an appeal to emotion, it worked on me. I can't vote for someone just because they don't deserve to win, or I'd have to vote for myself here. I'm going to vote for someone else, sorry.
Voting Luke

linki:

TH, look me in the eye :P
Are you bad?

Sorsha wrote:Mac where are you leaning with your vote?

Are you leaning TH?

MacDougall wrote:
If you are going to make statements like that I have not confrontes anybody you should know you are correct lest you inspire a mislynch.

Yes I do. If you have a scum read on me isn't it in your interests as a civ to analyse my posts? Why would you want to scum read a player and then refuse to analyse when asked to?

I questioned Golden on his town read of Elo quote pointedly. Why did you just question that one and not the others? Is it because you do in fact recall the confrontation with others. Yes this is our first time btw but it is still an example.

I am not sure whether you are faking it or whether you are just being a lazy civ. I am attempting to find out. Baseless statements especially ones directed at me deserve scrutiny. Are you genuinely questioning the point of this discussion? Because I feel a responsibility to ensure players are genuine as a civ and I think that is basically scum hunting 101 so for you to be confused is at best strange.

I'm am not pursuing it at this stage because a. I'm not even close to feeling strong about it. It was a gun to head reply (not to mention your reaction to it actually makes me feel better).
b. There's no point in doing it today because it's too late and I don't think anyone thinks of you as a possible baddie. Maybe I'm just wrong.
c. Yeah, I'm a lazy civ. It's almost 2 am here. I just can't bother, and if my memory is a fail, it's something I'm going to have to fix tomorrow, not today.
I'm still awake just because I can't decide if I'm once again wrong on my read (thinking we shouldn't lynch TH), or if maybe this time I'm right, and who the hell should I vote for.

*sue me, don't sew me :P

MacDougall wrote:

FZ. wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

FZ. wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

FZ. wrote:Haha, I wrote Mac as bad. That was a surprise. That's what gun to head will do to you.

Basically, I think Mac is being quite careful this game.

So it's a surprise to you but then you have an explanation for it. Ok.

How am I being careful? The whole policy lynch thing did happen you know.

I wasn't really thinking about you much, but when your name was brought up, this is what my first reaction was. Apart from your day 1 policy vote, and wanting to know about zebra's suspicions of you, you didn't really confront anyone. The day 1 thing is easy to do as a scum, and nothing really came out from the zebra thing.

I am not disputing that my policy lynch push could easily be from scum. I am disputing that it could be considered careful.

What? What do you mean? Have you even read my posts? I contributed heavily to Zebs mislynch. I have confronted heaps of players. Why are you lying?

LOL, I'm not lying. Why are you so defensive?
Yes, I've read your posts. Most of them. That's just the feeling I get from you. I told you earlier in the game, you are acting very different from TH game, and I can't decide if this is because you are on a different side this time, or because you're deliberately trying to be different.

You said I am being careful. You said I didn't confront anyone. Both demonstratable lies. I am not just being defensive. I am assertively questioning you saying wrong things about me and am wondering what you have to gain from putting wrong things out there about me.

Have I not confronted anybody FZ? Answer again please.

If the answer is that I have. Please explain why you said that I hadn't.

If the answer is that I haven't then please explain what my interactions with yourself, Golden, MattF, Zebra both versions, Elo, SVS, bea and TH amount to.

Cheers.

Well, excuse me if I don't have every post you made engraved in my memory. I told you, when there was a gun to my head, I thought of you as being careful. Do you now want me to go and look up your conversations with people? Sorry, I won't do it.
What confrontation have you had with Golden? With me (that's our first one if I recall)?
Now that you mention it, I do recall you suspecting Eloh. Sew me for forgetting it. I seriously don't see the point in this discussion. Do you think I'm faking something? If so, just say it. Don't ask questions that will do nothing.

nijuukyugou wrote:I'm sorry I'm about to do this (and it's the first time I've really done so), but I thought I would have more time today to catch up and post, but I have had next to nothing in the last three days or so (enough to pop in every once in a while for a few minutes at a time). I knew I wouldn't have as much time to dedicate to this game as usual, but I overestimated (or underestimated?) how little time that actually would be, and I apologize to my fellow players and host for this. I have to prep for and drive to my high school reunion and decide whether or not I want to tell egregious lies for shits and giggles, so I must place a vote now. I'm going to put my money where my mouth is (or was a few days ago) and vote Eloh. I have a feeling I can't shake.

MacDougall wrote:

FZ. wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

FZ. wrote:Haha, I wrote Mac as bad. That was a surprise. That's what gun to head will do to you.

Basically, I think Mac is being quite careful this game.

So it's a surprise to you but then you have an explanation for it. Ok.

How am I being careful? The whole policy lynch thing did happen you know.

I wasn't really thinking about you much, but when your name was brought up, this is what my first reaction was. Apart from your day 1 policy vote, and wanting to know about zebra's suspicions of you, you didn't really confront anyone. The day 1 thing is easy to do as a scum, and nothing really came out from the zebra thing.

I am not disputing that my policy lynch push could easily be from scum. I am disputing that it could be considered careful.

What? What do you mean? Have you even read my posts? I contributed heavily to Zebs mislynch. I have confronted heaps of players. Why are you lying?

LOL, I'm not lying. Why are you so defensive?
Yes, I've read your posts. Most of them. That's just the feeling I get from you. I told you earlier in the game, you are acting very different from TH game, and I can't decide if this is because you are on a different side this time, or because you're deliberately trying to be different.

So Luke is not an option for anyone?

MacDougall wrote:

FZ. wrote:Haha, I wrote Mac as bad. That was a surprise. That's what gun to head will do to you.

Basically, I think Mac is being quite careful this game.

So it's a surprise to you but then you have an explanation for it. Ok.

How am I being careful? The whole policy lynch thing did happen you know.

I wasn't really thinking about you much, but when your name was brought up, this is what my first reaction was. Apart from your day 1 policy vote, and wanting to know about zebra's suspicions of you, you didn't really confront anyone. The day 1 thing is easy to do as a scum, and nothing really came out from the zebra thing.

Just so you can all come after me when TH comes out bad, I'm going to vote Luke. Seriously though, I think Luke is bad. My track record isn't good, but I can only go with what I think is right.

a2thezebra wrote:

FZ. wrote: What's up with the "?????"?
I explained why I DGAF. I can't be bothered by players who sign up but don't play.

Another reason why "?????" is because it messes with your ratio. All four of the other players including myself had a 9 TOWN / 4 SCUM ratio, so it's interesting to see that you are an exception for breaking the rules twice. I don't mind/care that you did, it's just interesting to observe that anomaly.

Since 2 baddies are dead, and Harkonnen only have 4 people, I'm not sure we're looking for 4 more baddies. I don't care what others did.

As for TH, if he's an indi, I don't know if he's bad or good, but if he can win with either, no strings attached, I think he'd take the civvie side. Again, just my opinion

Matt F wrote:

FZ. wrote:

Matt F wrote:FZ - Well duh you're on there

You think bea, Turnip, and Zeebs are on the up and up?

I don't know about Bea. If SVS is good, I want to trust her on Bea, even though she's wrong about me.
I think TH is a better player than just saving all his baddie team so obviously.
Zebra, I started out thinking she was okay, then went to bad, and back to good lately. I don't really know why I've gone back and forth with her, but at the moment, that's how I'm feeling.

Ask me again in two hours

Per the underline. In the recent games I've been playing, players always say stuff like "Why would they so blatantly defend so and so?" My feeling on the matter, is that blatantly defending your teammates is the new smart move to make, because nobody will think you did.

But that isn't just it. Turnip's recent comments like "Maybe it'll just be best for the game if I die" and such does not say civvie to me.

Linki - I can see what you're saying, Zeebs. I've tried to keep an open mind after my play in TH. Trying not to tunnel so much.

Back in the day, I guarantee you I would've been all over SVS simply for refusing to listen to reason regarding me, but again, trying to play a little differently.

I swear I'm a good egg, though! Swearsies!

I disagree. You know why? Because one in all the games I've ever played as a baddie, I tried what you're suggesting. I got lynched just for that. No matter how many times you tell people that defending baddies does not automatically indicate fellow scum, those are the people that always get suspected.

I don't know about TH. I said I think he's an indi, but it's just me. Maybe he's doing exactly that, but if he is, look how it's working out for him. Once again those voting late to "save" the baddies, are those getting the votes. I think it proves my point

a2thezebra wrote:

FZ. wrote: I don't think Nana banana should have been on the list. Someone who isn't playing does nothing to the game. If baddies win because no one lynched the absent player, that's not a win in my opinion. If he's civ, then there's not point talking about him. Either way, it's a waste of time.

But who said Banana is bad?

I could not disagree more. Hearing what people have to say about Banana could effect how they are perceived, in addition to Banana himself. See this isn't just to tally the general consensus, it's also to gauge reactions. Your refusal to say "good" or "bad" with Banana may be telling later on, as well as the rest of us who gave our read of him. Besides, even if I was to agree that inactive players should be left out, where would I draw the line? Luke has come dangerously close to that label until recently.

I think there's a big difference between Luke and Banana. All I can remember Banana saying is something like "hi, I realized I haven't said anything today'. Has he said anything after that? If so, I guess I need to read back. Luke has made several posts every day. They just seem so insignificant that they are both treated the same. For what it's worth, I'd say Banana is a civ, because if the his BTSC friends told him to play like this, and keep it low just to survive, I'd feel embarrassed for them.

a2thezebra wrote:FZ.:

a2thezebra - TOWN
bea - TOWN
Elohcin - TOWN
FZ - TOWN (won't count in final ratio)
Golden - TOWN
Luke11646 - SCUM
MacDougall - SCUM
Matt F - TOWN
NANANANANANA_BANANA - DON'T CARE (????)
nijuukyugou - SCUM
Sorsha - TOWN
S~V~S - TOWN
TheFloyd73 - TOWN
Turnip Head - INDEPENDENT

8 TOWN / 3 SCUM / 1 INDY / 1 DGAF

\
What's up with the "?????"?
I explained why I DGAF. I can't be bothered by players who sign up but don't play.

Matt F wrote:FZ - Well duh you're on there

You think bea, Turnip, and Zeebs are on the up and up?

I don't know about Bea. If SVS is good, I want to trust her on Bea, even though she's wrong about me.
I think TH is a better player than just saving all his baddie team so obviously.
Zebra, I started out thinking she was okay, then went to bad, and back to good lately. I don't really know why I've gone back and forth with her, but at the moment, that's how I'm feeling.

Ask me again in two hours

a2thezebra wrote:Matt F:

a2thezebra - SCUM
bea - SCUM
Elohcin - TOWN
FZ - SCUM
Golden - TOWN
Luke11646 - TOWN
MacDougall - TOWN
Matt F - BEST THEORIST EVER
NANANANANANA_BANANA - TOWN
nijuukyugou - TOWN
Sorsha - TOWN
S~V~S - TOWN (but wrong)
TheFloyd73 - TOWN
Turnip Head - SCUM

9 TOWN / 4 SCUM

Wow, I don't agree with any of Matt's baddie reads

How many people played?

linki: Really? I'd eye you, but it's you. Why?

a2thezebra wrote:There is more of a consensus than I expected.

Turnip Head - III and a Half (thanks to FZ saying "Indy"...)
Luke11646 - III
nijuukyugou - III
bea - II
a2thezebra - I
FZ - I
Golden - I
MacDougall - I
Matt F - I
NANANANANANA_BANANA - I (as well as a "Don't care" from FZ...)
S~V~S - I
TheFloyd73 - I
Elohcin - 0
Sorsha - 0

I don't think Nana banana should have been on the list. Someone who isn't playing does nothing to the game. If baddies win because no one lynched the absent player, that's not a win in my opinion. If he's civ, then there's not point talking about him. Either way, it's a waste of time.

But who said Banana is bad?

By the way, so did you, TH. You wrote fail


linki: I'm still trying to figure out whether SVS' suspicions are just tunnelling and bad or is she bad herself. For some reason, I tend to look at people suspecting me as civvies. It's stupid, but I'm biased that way.