The Syndicate

Enrique wrote:

Black Rock wrote:Lazy last minute voters. I am literally the least harmful to this game. Vote Dom tomorrow. He is bad. I am not.

guys she's claiming Alfred!

Dom wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

juliets wrote:BR, one of the things i don't understand is why, if you had plenty of time to read then but not now, did you skip big chunks when you had plenty of time but didn't want to employ that same procedure when you had no time. (holy crow was that sentence long enough? I hope you understand what I'm saying)

I felt engaged in GoC, I didn't feel engaged in this game.

Black Rock wrote: That's in response to a case about me and nothing to do with the sabie part. It seemed clear to me and a misrepresentation from you.

The difference between GoC and this game is timing. I had plenty of time at the begging of that game to catch up and read. Also the content of the beginning of that game was much different. This game has made my eyes bleed at several different occasions. When a game makes my head hurt I walk away.

Was it timing or engagement?
You don't seem to make it a mutual reason, but rather at one time saying it was just the timing and later oh i just didn't feel into the game.

Which is it?

Dom wrote:

S~V~S wrote:What BR/Mac business?

Mac's insinuation that he was told he cannot suspect me and BR using that for her personal gain.

Turnip Head wrote:

Black Rock wrote:You're so wrong TH.

Well I'm voting for Dom. He is soooooo bad. He's got that nasty edge to him like his baddie self. Then he pulls himself back and is very gentle. No matter how this lynch goes I hope some of you will take some time and look at Dom. There is no way he is a civvie this game.

Maybe I'm wrong, it happens... but I wanted you to prove me wrong and I don't feel like you have. I was looking for something to make me feel like you're civ and I haven't gotten that.

MacDougall wrote:

Black Rock wrote:You're so wrong TH.

Well I'm voting for Dom. He is soooooo bad. He's got that nasty edge to him like his baddie self. Then he pulls himself back and is very gentle. No matter how this lynch goes I hope some of you will take some time and look at Dom. There is no way he is a civvie this game.

Sorry Black Rock I'm not allowed to scum read Dom.

MacDougall wrote:I don't want to sound bandwagony but in GoC (I know I was scum) but I was reading Black Rock as very very civ. Star Wars as well.

Here, I am reading her fairly differently.

Turnip Head wrote:Black Rock you made 5 posts during Night 2.

One is a reply to Dom's question towards you earlier
One is a reaction to the lynch which is cool
Two of them are about whether the host would bus or help his teammates
And the last one is a joke about the thread being gigantic

Those posts range from 11am to 8:30pm; the fourth was at 7:24pm and the last one was at 8:30 and was a response to the post directly above it. Given these facts I don't think it's unreasonable to assume you had caught up on the night's posts at that time.

What pings me is that was the Night where Enrique made a big stink about me claiming Alfred and being a liar, you couldn't have missed it.

Not everyone knows this, but I know you pay close attention to me in games just like I pay close attention to you. For me it's weird that you didn't give any sort of opinion on me one way or another at this time. It felt like you were content to let it play out without getting involved. That is not what I'm used to from civvie BR.

juliets wrote:BR, one of the things i don't understand is why, if you had plenty of time to read then but not now, did you skip big chunks when you had plenty of time but didn't want to employ that same procedure when you had no time. (holy crow was that sentence long enough? I hope you understand what I'm saying)

Turnip Head wrote:I'd like people to consider my Mac case and also go back and reread him to form their own opinions, but in the meantime I got some juicy nuggets to add to my BR case.

As many of you remember, Day 0/1 of the Champs game was a clusterfuck where Rico pooped all over the thread. Somehow it still had fewer posts than Day 1 in this game. But this was BR's reaction to that thread in a game where she was a civvie:

Black Rock in GoC wrote:What happened? I left off on page 8 and I just got back to page 20. Most of me does not want to read all of that.

Black Rock in GoC wrote:Interesting back and forth between Rico and LoRab.

I haven't read the 11 pages before page 20, and I won't be unless I think I missed something important. Ricos posts don't count.

My opinion is all though Rico has been distracting and posting a lot of crap (all the way up to page 8) I don't find him that suspicious. Would he really want that much attention? I was thinking he had a neutral role, if those exist in this game.

He did have a point about LoRabs original post. Seemed easy and even her Matt points were wishy washy at best. Not the best example of LoRabs mafia play. Is she bad? or just not that into it?

BR skipped a portion of the thread and had no regrets about doing so, saying she would go back if she felt she missed something. She was still able to form reads from what she read and continued to be engaged in current events in the thread.

She even gave bea advice to do the same:

Black Rock in GoC wrote:Linki: Bea I am so sad for you. I hope things get better. Honestly I think you should move forward from here and then check back on specific things as needed.

That is in sharp contrast to how she has handled this thread. I speculate that, as a baddie, BR would think that saying something like "I won't be reading the thread" would be viewed as suspicious whereas civvie BR doesn't care how that looks. So instead of saying "fuck it" and either quickly skimming or starting from the present, BR in this game attempts to:

Black Rock wrote:I've decided to look at a few people to best get a feeling of the thread. I feel a little out of the groove. So I started with Scotty, which I was happy to see had under 30 posts. I wish I knew how to read him better. In a direct comparison to the last game I played with him and this game, he feels a lot more conservative and less accusational. He's playing it safe and I don't trust that.

I'm going to check out dharmahelper next.

As has been widely publicized, the DH ISO never takes place. BR's single attempt at an ISO was Scotty, a player with 30 posts who she doesn't read well and concludes she doesn't trust him.

Her next attempt:

Black Rock wrote:So I am officially starting from the beginning and I can't promise that some of the shit I'll bring up is so three days ago.

This was on Page 40. BR started at the beginning of the thread and makes a bunch of posts about the first 8 pages of the game. She gets through 8 pages and calls it a night. BR never got back to this method of becoming involved which is one reason I think her heart wasn't in this exercise and she was just doing it for show. If her intentions were true, I figure she could have started closer towards the End of Day to get a grasp on what people were voting for, or she could have just not commented on every little thing in the first 8 pages, her read would have gone a lot faster.

Black Rock wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:@Turnip Head interesting point about Black Rock.

The same case could possibly be made for Sabie. Im going to check her ISO right now.

I better find this case.

Well this is an odd post. BR demands that Nero follow through with an ISO of sabie.

Black Rock wrote:It doesn't make me bad just busy and disconnected, it's been hard to have my own opinion when my catch ups are coloured by everyone else opinion and it makes me sad that when I actually was trying to put myself back in the game I get told I am hollow and false.

It should be pointed out that being busy and disconnected doesn't make BR a civ either. I don't know how I feel about BR saying it's hard for her to have an opinion from her catch ups, but I know it wasn't difficult for her to have opinions in GoC where she was similarly behind.

DH asks BR about the ISO on him again:

DharmaHelper wrote:The point I was making with my post count is that my posts for the most part aren't that superfluous or difficult to follow. and I'm not posting like six or seven times in a row or using big fuck-off paragraphs or posting one sentence per line or anything that would make a sincere re-read of me implausible.

Black Rock wrote:I think I misunderstood. I will read you since you really want me to but I was only planning that at the time because I was trying to catch up through key players but I haven't bothered because I have changed tactics several times on how I am trying to attack the thread. I don't find you suspicious at this moment so I saw no point. Maybe your posts are insightful so I'll give it a shot.

This ISO still hasn't happened. If BR did not want to do an ISO of DH, why didn't she just say so? Saying she doesn't find DH suspicious but also saying "maybe your posts are insightful" gives the impression she hasn't read DH's posts so why does she think he isn't suspicious? It just feels like empty words with no real meaning behind them.

Matt wrote:I wonder if Equivocate is coming back or if he ran for the hills after seeing how we treat new people.

Dom wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

Dom wrote:

Black Rock wrote:I would have liked to vote for Dom, as he sounds like baddie Dom to me, but I guess I'll vote for Nero. If you're right Enrique, then I will help keep him alive. I do not think he's bad.

BR, I am having a really hard time wrapping my head around this post. You will help keep who alive? Who don't you think is bad?

Matt. Sorry I went to bed before this post

It's okay.. I thought you were saying Nero and got really confused.

Black Rock wrote:I agree Epig would rather save his team then throw them to the wolves. As a teammate he actively tries to give you advice to survive. He's more loyal team first kinda guy. I enjoy being on his team.

I agree with this 100%, but I'm not sure why Epig's actions are relevant in a game where he is hosting.

Additionally, MP, I don't like your claim that you're playing your town meta. That pinged me. I'm not reading either town or your baddie persona that I associate you with (at least internally-- however wrong I may be). I am seeing something in between. Maybe you're not Nero's teammate (there is some evidence to point to that), but I'm not thinking you are civ.

Dom wrote:

Black Rock wrote:I would have liked to vote for Dom, as he sounds like baddie Dom to me, but I guess I'll vote for Nero. If you're right Enrique, then I will help keep him alive. I do not think he's bad.

BR, I am having a really hard time wrapping my head around this post. You will help keep who alive? Who don't you think is bad?

Epignosis wrote:

Enrique wrote:@Hosts: What happens if Two Face takes his own would-be-killer hostage?

Suicide. Ugly business.

Enrique wrote:It's such a pointless convo really because we lynch whoever we get, but Zebra is just arbitrarily deciding when they are baddies and when they are indies.

Enrique wrote:So correct me if I'm wrong. The Joker is a baddie because he needs two civvies dead (along with two baddies), even though the civvies don't need him dead. But say, Scarecrow. Up to four civvies want him dead. So why isn't he a baddie?

linki- ugh sig you're going asap

DharmaHelper wrote:Just a little devil's advocate. I've already made my stance on the Inmates clear I think.

Also, @HOSTS: WHAT HAPPENS IF CATWOMAN STEALS THE WIN CONDITION OF THE GCPD OFFICER ASSIGNED TO KILL HER

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
I hope there aren't positions in this game.

sig wrote:Did Sorsha vote without saying anything? That is a little odd.

Enrique wrote:Matt,
I am the one who brought Nero into the conversation.
Twice.
I have no interest in lynching him today because I have a case against you and absolutely nothing on him. You insist he's not the Joker, but also, I'm sus for not wanting to lynch him without a motive. I don't know what his role is and look forward to finding out eventually.

Forever yours,
Enri.

Enrique wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Does someone mind quickly summarizing the cases against Matt and Nero, for those of us like me who are catching up but still have some posts to go?

Don't lynch Matt I fucked up.

Golden wrote:This is insane. I don't know if something like Enrique's recent posting is genuine or forced, and it makes me paranoid either way.

I'm barely going to be around before deadline and definitely don't have time to keep up with all of the developments. I feel that it's kind of ironic that I'm in a position where I'm picking between Matt or Nero for my vote given they are in opposition to each other, but my vote comes down to 'do I trust Matt or not'.

I'm hoping to see at least a bit more to help make up my mind before deadline.

Turnip Head wrote:Massive thread not naive

Matt wrote:

Dom wrote:You have seemed to easily get around that before by telling multiple jokes.
My point is that you have founds ways to talk at length about things you want to talk about, but no thte things other people want to hear from you.

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Lol

Lol who?

Lol if you really think I can display my thoughts in full force, more power to ya Dom

Turnip Head wrote:BR my words weren't meant to make you feel sad, I'm just trying to convey how your posts make me feel. I know what you're capable of as a civ and I know you were excited about this game despite the bad timing or naive thread. If you're a civ I want you to prove me wrong about you.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:My suspects thusfar, in no particular order:

SVS - I'm waiting for the shoe to drop on this one where I get accused of always doing this, or whatever, but I can't help legitimately finding the fact that she missed a vote after saying 10 minutes beforehand that she had to vote. Her explanations conflict with each other and don't make sense either. She got wrapped up in the Matt/Zebra conflict? OK ya sure. Except her "Better vote" post was her LAST POST before the 10 minute gap, her post following that was the one wherein she addressed her thoughts on Matt/Zebra. She had 10 minutes. Nobody'll follow me on this suspicion because I "always do this" or somethine lame but there you go. I probably won't vote for SVS today. I also intentionally put her at the top of this list after saying that it was in no particular order but that was only because I thought it was funny.

MP and Mac - For painting Scotty as confirmed civ and running with the Wilgy=Robin theory

Black Rock - TH's case covers this pretty well and it kind of bugs me she never followed through with a readthrough of me in particular because it's not like I'm buffing my post count or posting unnecessarily robust posts.

I got distracted. Maybe after the lynch but you haven't interested me much the past few days to worry about it. I still haven't read most of the thread and this particular time I am just trying to keep up with current events.

I see why Bea said she was highly criticized in the past by trying to get involved. Why is everyone worried about post count?

Did I use the words "post count"?

Um yes.

I meant to say did I seem at all concerned with your post count :P

The point I was making with my post count is that my posts for the most part aren't that superfluous or difficult to follow. and I'm not posting like six or seven times in a row or using big fuck-off paragraphs or posting one sentence per line or anything that would make a sincere re-read of me implausible.

sig wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:My suspects thusfar, in no particular order:

SVS - I'm waiting for the shoe to drop on this one where I get accused of always doing this, or whatever, but I can't help legitimately finding the fact that she missed a vote after saying 10 minutes beforehand that she had to vote. Her explanations conflict with each other and don't make sense either. She got wrapped up in the Matt/Zebra conflict? OK ya sure. Except her "Better vote" post was her LAST POST before the 10 minute gap, her post following that was the one wherein she addressed her thoughts on Matt/Zebra. She had 10 minutes. Nobody'll follow me on this suspicion because I "always do this" or somethine lame but there you go. I probably won't vote for SVS today. I also intentionally put her at the top of this list after saying that it was in no particular order but that was only because I thought it was funny.

MP and Mac - For painting Scotty as confirmed civ and running with the Wilgy=Robin theory

Black Rock - TH's case covers this pretty well and it kind of bugs me she never followed through with a readthrough of me in particular because it's not like I'm buffing my post count or posting unnecessarily robust posts.

I got distracted. Maybe after the lynch but you haven't interested me much the past few days to worry about it. I still haven't read most of the thread and this particular time I am just trying to keep up with current events.

I see why Bea said she was highly criticized in the past by trying to get involved. Why is everyone worried about post count?

Wait I'm confused did Bea say this during the game or at another time?

DharmaHelper wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:My suspects thusfar, in no particular order:

SVS - I'm waiting for the shoe to drop on this one where I get accused of always doing this, or whatever, but I can't help legitimately finding the fact that she missed a vote after saying 10 minutes beforehand that she had to vote. Her explanations conflict with each other and don't make sense either. She got wrapped up in the Matt/Zebra conflict? OK ya sure. Except her "Better vote" post was her LAST POST before the 10 minute gap, her post following that was the one wherein she addressed her thoughts on Matt/Zebra. She had 10 minutes. Nobody'll follow me on this suspicion because I "always do this" or somethine lame but there you go. I probably won't vote for SVS today. I also intentionally put her at the top of this list after saying that it was in no particular order but that was only because I thought it was funny.

MP and Mac - For painting Scotty as confirmed civ and running with the Wilgy=Robin theory

Black Rock - TH's case covers this pretty well and it kind of bugs me she never followed through with a readthrough of me in particular because it's not like I'm buffing my post count or posting unnecessarily robust posts.

I got distracted. Maybe after the lynch but you haven't interested me much the past few days to worry about it. I still haven't read most of the thread and this particular time I am just trying to keep up with current events.

I see why Bea said she was highly criticized in the past by trying to get involved. Why is everyone worried about post count?

Did I use the words "post count"?

Turnip Head wrote:I bet the baddies are enjoying their extended vaycay with the Matt/Enrique show taking up 83% of the discussion today.

Black Rock is still a baddie read for me. Here's her ISO if you want to look at her efforts this game. She has 3 posts in this Day cycle and while her posts came in at the height of the Matt discussion she doesn't give us her take on that. I believe civ BR would have something to say on the subject one way or the other. IMO that fits the profile that the baddies are sitting back and letting this discussion take over. I think her attempts to get herself involved in the game ring false. When bea does her nightly catch-up and makes a bunch of posts in a row, giving us her take of the current events, it feels genuine to me. When BR binge reads a 40 page thread, takes the time to comment on insignificant or soon-to-be insignificant things in the first 8 pages, and then never goes back to the exercise, it feels like a hollow way to contribute.

Nerolunar wrote:@Turnip Head interesting point about Black Rock.

The same case could possibly be made for Sabie. Im going to check her ISO right now.

DharmaHelper wrote:My suspects thusfar, in no particular order:

SVS - I'm waiting for the shoe to drop on this one where I get accused of always doing this, or whatever, but I can't help legitimately finding the fact that she missed a vote after saying 10 minutes beforehand that she had to vote. Her explanations conflict with each other and don't make sense either. She got wrapped up in the Matt/Zebra conflict? OK ya sure. Except her "Better vote" post was her LAST POST before the 10 minute gap, her post following that was the one wherein she addressed her thoughts on Matt/Zebra. She had 10 minutes. Nobody'll follow me on this suspicion because I "always do this" or somethine lame but there you go. I probably won't vote for SVS today. I also intentionally put her at the top of this list after saying that it was in no particular order but that was only because I thought it was funny.

MP and Mac - For painting Scotty as confirmed civ and running with the Wilgy=Robin theory

Black Rock - TH's case covers this pretty well and it kind of bugs me she never followed through with a readthrough of me in particular because it's not like I'm buffing my post count or posting unnecessarily robust posts.

Dom wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

Golden wrote:No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Maybe is like a hungering. You can't mention the Joker, you can't mention you are cursed by the Joker, You can't mention the name of the Joker or the Joker will kill you!?

That would be a cool thing I could see these hosts thinking up. I love the Hunger.

I thought of this, but didn't want to activate the other part of teh Hunger, which if I remember correctly, was that no one can guess you're under those conditions. Right? Or am I mixing things up?

MacDougall wrote:"Hmm what role should Joker be LC" young Epi asked.

"Well he should have power! He's a great character and should be really cool and tough!" young LC said.

"Yeah you are right! So we should make it so if he gets targeted something BAD happens to that person... but also JOKEY!" Epignosis enthusiastically intoned.

"Yeah for sure!" young LC agreed. "Like they get POST CURSED!"

"That is a great idea. That way if someone targets him, then they will immediately know that who they targeted is the Joker and whenever they start posting in curses in the thread, everybody else will also know that they targeted The Joker... making it easy for them to lynch The Joker!"

Epignosis was thrilled with his new creation. All the hosts beamed when he told them of his majestic role creation. Not one single host realising the folly therein. That such a role would be cursed by it's own creation and possibly the stupidest role to have ever lived.

Scotty wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

Golden wrote:No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Maybe is like a hungering. You can't mention the Joker, you can't mention you are cursed by the Joker, You can't mention the name of the Joker or the Joker will kill you!?

That would be a cool thing I could see these hosts thinking up. I love the Hunger.

I was curious about what would happen in your game if I had mentioned I had been hungered. Would I have been mod killed?

Golden wrote:No, I think the point about why 2 is unlikely is pretty sound. It's the same thing I was trying to say in Star Wars when Mac thought I might be on Team Hutt... Epi is not going to create mechanics that out people outright in the thread.

On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out how the joker thing will work without at least informing the person who targetted him.

Black Rock wrote:

Typhoony wrote:Why the fuck do people still think Wilgy was Robin when he was not around to send in the lynch stop? Please explain, thanks.

Also, I don't have a lot of time until Night 2 to follow the game so don't expect a lot from me

How do you know he didn't send in the lynch stop?

Typhoony wrote:Why the fuck do people still think Wilgy was Robin when he was not around to send in the lynch stop? Please explain, thanks.

Also, I don't have a lot of time until Night 2 to follow the game so don't expect a lot from me

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Enrique wrote:... my point is that Scotty wasn't/isn't in any danger. Don't take this as an attack, I'm disagreeing with you and telling you why the case against you right now is valid.

But you don't even know that. No one can predict who is going to be "in danger" at any given time. That's ridiculous.

Epignosis wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Awesome write-up Epi

Long Con wrote that one.

DrWilgy wrote:Only had 300 posts left to catch up on, big post and everything half written too

a2thezebra wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

a2thezebra wrote: Neither. As humorous as my response is, it is also genuine. I don't have enough content with any of the other players but yourself to be confident in reading them even slightly. I don't see why saying that I find the amount of votes for Arkham Asylum to be alarming - which it is - has to refer to any specific votes or any specific voters.

So you are basically saying that you are so easily alarmed that you literally find "nothing" alarming?

I have no idea what you mean by this.

S~V~S wrote:Yet were something *really* alarming to happen, I don't imagine you'll go running out of the thread screaming, hmm?

Still don't know what you mean.

S~V~S wrote:Null = Nothing.

You were alarmed literally by *nothing*

Golden wrote:

Black Rock wrote:WTF, are you really expecting that the Mafia are going to be lynched one after another and all the Independents will be alive? Golden has made a really good point. Independents will die. I don't really understand you at this point. Like, at all.

This is why I was sussing Enrique at the time, I think you are the first person to understand why I was finding Enrique suss.

I felt ok about him by the end, though.

MacDougall wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:From my perspective, Enrique and Golden are arguing about semantics and I cannot discern any alignment-indicative behavior from them. I find myself agreeing with Turnip Head on this one.

Now, with that said, I will admit that my first slight civilian read is Dom. He questioned Enrique, pursued it, and GTH I evaluate his behavior to be one in which he is developing those thoughts organically. But I'm systematically incorrect about Dom, so this means you all should probably find him a slight mafia read. :P

Why wouldn't it be alignment-indicative? It seems like a fairly substantial issue, and hardly seems to be semantic. And TH did suggest it ruled out certain alignments (for me anyway)....

I don't much like this post, MP. That includes the equivocating on Dom.

If it is alignment-indicative, then I don't get it.

OMG MP you are killing me. I don't like you saying you don't get things, I find it hard to believe. Giving that I feel you are very smart.

MacDougall wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Checking in to say that Turnip Head is bad.

I hope you backed this up.

Maybe you should wait until the end of your reads before making numerous posts otherwise one might be inclined to feel like you are just trying to jack your post count for cred.

So you are saying you did?

I'm not trying to "jack my post count" I don't out that much faith in a post count to care. I'm just doing what's best for me.

How is the post you made in your own best interests? I see it as an attempt to cast doubt on me by bringing something up from the catacombs without even having fact checked it.

Yes, I did back it up. Quite so.

Black Rock wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:From my perspective, Enrique and Golden are arguing about semantics and I cannot discern any alignment-indicative behavior from them. I find myself agreeing with Turnip Head on this one.

Now, with that said, I will admit that my first slight civilian read is Dom. He questioned Enrique, pursued it, and GTH I evaluate his behavior to be one in which he is developing those thoughts organically. But I'm systematically incorrect about Dom, so this means you all should probably find him a slight mafia read. :P

Why wouldn't it be alignment-indicative? It seems like a fairly substantial issue, and hardly seems to be semantic. And TH did suggest it ruled out certain alignments (for me anyway)....

I don't much like this post, MP. That includes the equivocating on Dom.

If it is alignment-indicative, then I don't get it.

OMG MP you are killing me. I don't like you saying you don't get things, I find it hard to believe. Giving that I feel you are very smart.

MacDougall wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Checking in to say that Turnip Head is bad.

I hope you backed this up.

Maybe you should wait until the end of your reads before making numerous posts otherwise one might be inclined to feel like you are just trying to jack your post count for cred.

So you are saying you did?

I'm not trying to "jack my post count" I don't out that much faith in a post count to care. I'm just doing what's best for me.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:From my perspective, Enrique and Golden are arguing about semantics and I cannot discern any alignment-indicative behavior from them. I find myself agreeing with Turnip Head on this one.

Now, with that said, I will admit that my first slight civilian read is Dom. He questioned Enrique, pursued it, and GTH I evaluate his behavior to be one in which he is developing those thoughts organically. But I'm systematically incorrect about Dom, so this means you all should probably find him a slight mafia read. :P

Why wouldn't it be alignment-indicative? It seems like a fairly substantial issue, and hardly seems to be semantic. And TH did suggest it ruled out certain alignments (for me anyway)....

I don't much like this post, MP. That includes the equivocating on Dom.

If it is alignment-indicative, then I don't get it.

MacDougall wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Checking in to say that Turnip Head is bad.

I hope you backed this up.

Maybe you should wait until the end of your reads before making numerous posts otherwise one might be inclined to feel like you are just trying to jack your post count for cred.

MacDougall wrote:Checking in to say that Turnip Head is bad.

a2thezebra wrote:

Matt wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Matt wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Matt wrote:Zeebs - Strong or not, can you give me your current read of each of the Arkham voters? Considering the votes for Arkham are "downright alarming", just wondering.

Bass_the_Clever - Null
ekeknat - Null
sprityo - Null
Matt - Bad
Scotty - Null
MovingPictures07 - Null
Nerolunar - Null

So you are either refusing to give your reads or your "downright alarming" post was BS.

Which one?

Neither. As humorous as my response is, it is also genuine. I don't have enough content with any of the other players but yourself to be confident in reading them even slightly. I don't see why saying that I find the amount of votes for Arkham Asylum to be alarming - which it is - has to refer to any specific votes or any specific voters.

So you genuinely believe me to be bad?

Maybe I should explain myself then. By calling the Arkham votes alarming, which I don't think they are at all btw, I feel like you were trying to paint some of the voters as bad. Otherwise, why would the votes for Arkham be alarming? Are you trying to say you feel the Arkham voters are civvie but it's just alarming that they voted Arkham? I don't think that's what you were insinuating with your initial post.

On top of that, when questioned why you voted your option, you turned it around with a question. When questioned again, you simply say "I like docks", which has no game relevance at all.

You also state that you "did not design this game", and thus did not answer when I asked what kind of trap Arkham could be. Yet, even though you did not design the game, you still feel confident that Arkham is some kind of trap regardless.

I dunno, it doesn't gel IMO.

If I was wishing to imply something more specific when I said that I thought the amount of votes for Arkham Asylum was alarming, then I would have outright said whatever it was you're assuming I meant to imply. Maybe the amount of votes for Arkham are alarming because of misguided civs, maybe it's because of scheming baddies. Maybe it's a mix. I don't know.

I already told you that my question was rhetorical, and therefore the equivalent of a statement. You're not helping my baddie read of you by continuing to pretend otherwise. I also don't believe that you think that I was trying to give the impression that saying "I like docks" somehow was relevant to the game. My point in saying it was that it wasn't because you're looking for game-relevant answers that aren't there. I have no game-relevant reason for voting for that particular option. For most Day 0 votes I've come across, this one included, I don't think there's much use trying to figure out which option would be best for the civ cause. Instead, I only avoid the options that seem shady to me (the one you voted for being one of them) and out of the options left I tend to pick a more-or-less random one for reasons that aren't relevant to the game. Your insistence that I have to have some game-related motive for voting the docks seems disingenuous to me, and you seem pretty desperate to be suspicious of me for, frankly, stupid reasons.

Where did I give you the impression that I am confident that Arkham is a trap? I even outright stated that it's not that I think it will be harmful to the civs (though it very well could be) but rather that I don't see how it could be beneficial to the civs. You insist I give you more specific answers for my prevous statements under the assumption that I either have knowledge, are implying something more specific than what I said, have a game-related reason for everything I have done and said so far, and am completely confident with everything I have done and said so far as well. You have absolutely zero reason to assume any of this yet you assume it all anyway in a pathetic attempt to justify your suspicion of me and ask me questions that I either have already answered with my initial statements or can't answer because the questions don't apply to me in the first place. Every thing you've said and asked directed at me so far has come off as opportunistic and desperate. So yes, I genuinely believe you to be bad. Surprised?

Golden wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:From my perspective, Enrique and Golden are arguing about semantics and I cannot discern any alignment-indicative behavior from them. I find myself agreeing with Turnip Head on this one.

Now, with that said, I will admit that my first slight civilian read is Dom. He questioned Enrique, pursued it, and GTH I evaluate his behavior to be one in which he is developing those thoughts organically. But I'm systematically incorrect about Dom, so this means you all should probably find him a slight mafia read. :P

Why wouldn't it be alignment-indicative? It seems like a fairly substantial issue, and hardly seems to be semantic. And TH did suggest it ruled out certain alignments (for me anyway)....

I don't much like this post, MP. That includes the equivocating on Dom.