The Syndicate

nutella wrote:My comment at Rico was because he had me totally convinced that we'd be lynching Ubbadubba. He pushed the case so hard and acted like he was certain about it, so I believed it, but it turned out he was wrong. I voted for BWT because of Rico's case. I blame Rico for the lynch.

I take responsability for my vote and my case. I never claimed I'm certain or that I have certain info on it (I didn't have any; it was all pure case-making), but I agree I saw plenty signs, therefore I made my case with conviction. I was utterly wrong and I regret it.

However, I didn't invite anyone to follow me blindly. In fact, I was very specific on D9, when I voted and the lynch went underway. You're basically admitting to wagoning. That's on you. Mafia requires majority in lynching, but not a blind one; nobody claims the role of pack leader, deciding who gets lynched next, and everyone else follows. To my mind, everyone has to explain why they think someone's case is worth following or, if not, they have to lynch the same suspect for their own reasons. You seem to be admitting to have done neither.

Also, please be so kind as to provide, perhaps with examples, where I "pushed the case hard". I made my case D8 and followed that with a vote D9, that was pretty much it. It's hearing stuff like "Rico set Synonym up" (from aapje) or "Rico pushed the case hard" (from you), without any backing up of the claims, that kinda upsets me the most. It can make for a perfect framing technique.

Damn. I'm very sorry, BWT, I thought all the signs were there. I understand that you felt warranted to leave a word that you think I'm bad (even without giving a reason or anything), but I'm not and, in fact, should I get lynched the following Day, I would suffer the same fate as you.

Not to mention I might join you tonight altogether, since it's Azura's team killing time, so they might repay me a visit.

aapje, for a in-depth tactician and game debater, seems to have run out of bullets in pursuing me. I asked him to prove that I influenced anyone to lynch Syn for the PM angle (an angle only he brought up, furthermore) or that anyone voted Syn for that angle (not even he did) and he just came back with blank verdicts. His rezz angle on me suddenly doesn't even matter anymore, lol. Must have been after DH pointed out he did such bullsuit angles in the past as well. Can anyone else who played past Recruitements confirm that aapje was bad and used a rezzcruiting angle to dig a player's grave?

Anyway, given all this, I'm considering calling dingo on appje's endeavour. He thinks he's a soldier dog who found the heroin stash but nah, he's dead wrong and every angle of his will be proven dead wrong if I get lynched. But I'm starting to feel he might be a dingo, instead, putting the baby in my lap.

nutella wrote:
Rico, you have some explaining to do.

Oh? I re-read everyone and BWT's candidacy stood out to me, through what I believed where compelling signs.

Why did you vote BWT, though? Your ISO on him comes up real dry.

nutella on Day 1 wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:I'm probably voting for BWT today. He's not playing like I think he would if he were still neutral. Feels like something is already on the line for him.
Now this is a compelling observation, and a vote I could maybe get behind.

nutella on Day 1 wrote:I'm still considering voting BWT, though his recent posts are looking better to me...

nutella on Day 2 wrote:I'm still not understanding the BWT votes. On Day 1 I think several people voted for him for several different reasons, rather than a single case that gained any kind of momentum.

nutella on Day 8 wrote:Along with BWT -- I liked Rico's case and could definitely see BWT being Ubzimbabwe.

nutella on Day 8 wrote:Bea -- I think the idea behind voting BWT is to see whether he survives to test the theory that he's Ubz. It certainly runs the risk of lynching a neutral (or even a civvie but I doubt that), but I think it would provide more info than a Syn lynch. I'm voting for BWT. Sorry if you die an innocent death but I think this is the slightly more productive way to go.

nutella wrote:
Let's lynch bwt today.

So you like and agree with my case, you vote him the previous Day to test the theory and you vote him toDay without a comment.

And yet now you're giving me the "you've got some explaining to do" wag of the finger?

You reply to bea looks particularly damning, wiggling with "I'm sorry if it'll prove a grave mislynch but I want to test it out".

LoRab wrote:JJJ is dead, so I haven't much thought of him. Rey hasn't done much and I kind of keep forgetting he's playing. Neither of them were major, huge suspicions in the first place. Both pinged me, but they never rose to the top of my list.

Who was on the top of your list on D2, if JJJ and Rey never rose there?

Anyway, I labeled your drop of their suspicions as potential moodswings, not suspicious behaviour. As far as I know, any partnership developed with them could have still inspired you to drop any word on them. Furthermore, as I've told nutella, I still believe you set a double standard with rey. You suss him on a statement and aren't satisfied with his rebuttal, but it's not major, huge and you drop it. You suss me for a statement and aren't satisfied with my rebuttal, and I rose to your top o' the list.

DharmaHelper wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Hey aapje do you think Rico was rezzcruited?
He obviously does, but it's "because reasons".
Well that worked out for him last game so I can see why he'd want to try that again
Ah, so it's "muh empirical evidence".

Was he bad or rezzcruited bad that game?
He was bad, someone got lynched, and rezzed, and he came up with a really dumb case that made no sense that suggested that person was recruited as well as being rezzed. It was dumb, and he should feel bad about it because it was bad.

Sounds like the present, lol.

DharmaHelper wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Hey aapje do you think Rico was rezzcruited?
He obviously does, but it's "because reasons".
Well that worked out for him last game so I can see why he'd want to try that again

Ah, so it's "muh empirical evidence".

Was he bad or rezzcruited bad that game?

Turnip Head wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:What happened to your suspicions of JJJ and rey from the early Days?
Isn't Jay dead? Should we still be suspecting him?
No. I should have rather put it "after [suspecting them] the early Days".

Read my re-read of her. That's what I'm referencing. For a player never letting up on suspicions, she suspected them and then the suspicions vanished.
I could see the LoRab and Rey being recruited to the same team angle but I don't feel strongly about it; Rey fell off the face of the earth. But I'm sure you've noticed Rico that LoRab's opinion of you and me is completely static: nothing I say ever changes her opinion one way or the other, there's never anything new. "My thoughts haven't changed", she says... Since Day 3. I get the feeling that nothing I say will change LoRab's thoughts for better or worse. LoRab isn't accounting for my posts anymore, she's just paying lip service to her suspicion of me.

Now she could just be a lazy neutral, or she could be a coasting baddie, but either way I think she's full of bullsuit.

What does Rey's falling off the earth tell you? What does his case against Golden tell you, maybe together with his falling off the earth, afterwards?

As for LoRab, I can't fight your battle - and to be honest, I think you left her some openings, as I've pointed out in my re-read of you, plus your defense still does't always give me the genuine vibe.

Nonetheless, I can only deal with her issues with me and I have done so, to the point where I'm confident I've shown that she doesn't have anything factual on me, only speculation, disbelief and tone sussing. She can keep drumming on that, for all I care. I'm well aware it's her style to do so and don't have major reasons right now to suspect her for this angle. But I've said this about her in my reads and I'll post it again. It's certainly food for thought.

Ricochet wrote:She's tunnelling on her major cases, but what else is new. She can keep doing that all the way through the game, as an unrecruited. She can keep doing that all the way through the game as a recruited civ. Can she be doing that all the way through as a recruited baddie? That is perhaps a question worth thinking about.

---

Who are you looking into today or planning to vote, old sport?

DharmaHelper wrote:Hey aapje do you think Rico was rezzcruited?

He obviously does, but it's "because reasons".

aapje wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
aapje wrote:I'm surprised nobody has called out Rico yet after the Synonym lynch. Did Synonym lie about missing all of his PMs or did Rico lie about missing his?
So Rico, what do you think has happened?
I haven't lied about missing my PM N5, Synonym could have still been wrong about missing his.

So what's there to be called for? You were the one who pushed this angle on suspecting Syn.

Also, I don't recall the Hosts confirming or clarifying things past this post of yours.
Well in that case let me refresh your memory:
Black Rock wrote:
aapje wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Ah, so LC's first Host Post was edited after he rain-checked on how many PMs are missing? I'd need a confirmation of that.
Well I doubt he originally wrote one missing pm when he was missing several.

@Hosts:
How many missing PM's on night 5? (and maybe the other nights as well while you are at it :P )

Also Rico you are 100% sure you didn't send in a PM while you had a power that night?

DharmaHelper wrote:This seems like a shit reason to suspect someone.
Eh, I think it looks like it could be a classic slip up. That being said if the hosts don't come back in time I will probably look at someone else for today.
I thought that was listed at the bottom of the night post

Ricochet wrote:
aapje wrote:
Boomslang wrote:I hate to say this after being quiet (mostly) by choice for the last few days, but I'm headed out of town to Riot Fest in Chicago for the weekend and will certainly not be able to keep up with the thread. But I Looked over Rico's reads, and I'm startled by how good they seem to be. Will be checking in to vote BWT until the dude is dead.
This post set of some major alarm bells for me.

Not sure how I feel about BWT but I don't exactly trust Rico
In face I'll place my vote there.
Boomslang pings you like hell, but you vote me. Yup.

Also, are you still suspecting me for an event that in your mind looks suspicious, for reasons you know better, as well as for a response of mine to that event that did not live up to your standards...for reasons you know better? Yeah, still don't know what I'm supposed to argue/defend here.
Your reaction to your rez didn't add up for me and now it certainly looks like you could have set up Synonym to be lynched. Is this supposed to make me feel you are a civvie? Because it certainly doesn't look like you are. I'm comfortable with my vote for you

Ah. Indeed I seemed to have missed that.

Allow me to clarify though. While that indeed confirms your posts (and your question about how many PMs were missed N5), in a previous post to that (that is actually quoted in that post of yours) I asked for clarification on something slightly different:

Ricochet wrote:Ah, so LC's first Host Post was edited after he rain-checked on how many PMs are missing? I'd need a confirmation of that.

Even you weren't sure about that, but then you asked the Hosts a different question:

aapje wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Ah, so LC's first Host Post was edited after he rain-checked on how many PMs are missing? I'd need a confirmation of that.
Well I doubt he originally wrote one missing pm when he was missing several.

@Hosts:
How many missing PM's on night 5? (and maybe the other nights as well while you are at it :P )

Now you're holding me responsible for missing out a confirmation on a matter that is not mine, but yours? Com'on. My question wasn't confirmed.

----

Again, I can't defend against an accusation based on your perception of things, that you hold on to. Carry on suspecting me, then. I'm still unrecruited, so should I get lynched or killed during this phase, I will have proven to you how rezz's don't always mean what you have in mind and nor do simple explanations of it ("I was rezzed. I don't know why the rezzer chose me. I'm still unrecruited") don't mean or hide something other than that.

Moving on to Syn, you're claiming I set up Synonym to be lynched with a reasoning that belonged to you and that only you focused on in voting Synonym to be lynched? That's rich.

I answered your appeal towards players who might know if, by missing themselves PMs on that night, might prove that Syn is lying about missing his (although, mind you, he was very broad in saying he missed every deadline. It is, again, you, who narrowed it to N4-N5 when his claim might be faulty).

I think I might pull the suspicions and votes on Synonym, so I can show you that the "missing PM" angle pretty much belonged to you, you only and you insisted upon, quite a lot in fact. Or better yet, maybe you'd be so kind as to point out how people voted Syn for the "PM angle", so that you can claim I set him up by addressing on that angle.

I didn't go with that. Furthermore, DH called it lazy suss'ing, after which you suddenly backed away from it, despite still believing it might have been a slip. So if nobody really voted Syn for his PM claim (aka your case), how can you claim I set him up to by lynched for that? I didn't set up Syn with anything, I suspected him for a lot of things, maybe apart from his last to final post, but the PM angle was not something I used, it's something you brought up and insisted upon.

Where have I said I'm a civvie? I never claimed that. I'm unrecruited. Are you after lynching unrecruits, just because they don't fit your 'civvie' category? Wouldn't you rather lynch recruited baddies?

Idk, rey only exited after D3's mislynch on Golden. Meanwhile, she suddenly joined the Golden suspecting committee on D3.

reaction to Team Caelia recruiting*

Day 2. She didn't like rey's "ain't that dandy" reaction to Team Caelia and she found his rebuttal "talking around an answer here". To be blunt, I'm particularly interested in why this didn't go anywhere afterwards, because reading into people's statements and then disbelieving that their reactions are well-intended is exactly what she did to me for Days, with my count mistake. So yeah, what happened to this quite similar suspicion she developed on rey?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:What happened to your suspicions of JJJ and rey from the early Days?
Isn't Jay dead? Should we still be suspecting him?

No. I should have rather put it "after [suspecting them] the early Days".

Read my re-read of her. That's what I'm referencing. For a player never letting up on suspicions, she suspected them and then the suspicions vanished.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I believe Scotty is saying something along the lines of "You have not cared at all about what I've said all game long LoRab, and suddenly you are interesting in reading and transcribing my insanified text. I don't understand this sudden reversal in attitude, but I suspect you for it. Ha ha ha ha ha."

Not to be wait nevermind. I don't think the ha ha ha's needed translating. :P

LoRab wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
LoRab wrote:I'm at peace with you voting for me because I'm not really saying much yet this round. It's a fair and true criticism. And havenot excuse other than real life (and, for ther record, I'm in the middle of the equivalent of the superbowl, the world series, and the
nba dinals, while running the boston marathon). Just to give context of my sechedule.
Then I will vote for you too.
Uhhhh...ok.

@Rico: A lot of the LP/Piano players also have experience with the insanifier. I don't remember off hand who is good at reading it. Since LC bumped up the percentage of words that get changed, it became harder to understand.

BWT's self vote, and lack of denial of being bad makes me consider moving my vote in that direction. aaple voting Rico makes me consider a Rico vote, also (no, my suspicion of him hasn't let up).

Understood. You were also cheerfully exclamatory at an insanifying taking place. Do you think insanifying is a good thing or sign?

As for voting me, you haven't let up, I have nothing to add since the previous time you voted (or intended to vote) for me, so I'll use this instead:

What happened to your suspicions of JJJ and rey from the early Days?

aapje wrote:I'm surprised nobody has called out Rico yet after the Synonym lynch. Did Synonym lie about missing all of his PMs or did Rico lie about missing his?
So Rico, what do you think has happened?

I haven't lied about missing my PM N5, Synonym could have still been wrong about missing his.

So what's there to be called for? You were the one who pushed this angle on suspecting Syn.

Also, I don't recall the Hosts confirming or clarifying things past this post of yours.

---

aapje wrote:
Boomslang wrote:I hate to say this after being quiet (mostly) by choice for the last few days, but I'm headed out of town to Riot Fest in Chicago for the weekend and will certainly not be able to keep up with the thread. But I Looked over Rico's reads, and I'm startled by how good they seem to be. Will be checking in to vote BWT until the dude is dead.
This post set of some major alarm bells for me.

Not sure how I feel about BWT but I don't exactly trust Rico
In face I'll place my vote there.

Boomslang pings you like hell, but you vote me. Yup.

Also, are you still suspecting me for an event that in your mind looks suspicious, for reasons you know better, as well as for a response of mine to that event that did not live up to your standards...for reasons you know better? Yeah, still don't know what I'm supposed to argue/defend here.

Is anyone here as familiar and skilled in understanding insanified text as LoRab?

Spacedaisy wrote:
Rico, I'm sorry if your found my last line insulting it wasn't intended as such. All I meant by it was most people work first shift and then fit their mafia in sometime when I am stuck working second shift. I am able to fit in mafia before or on breaks, it limits the amount of time I have. It was not meant to pass judgement on anyone else and their use of their time.

No worries, I most likely got the wrong impression as well.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:MM, why did you vote Llama?
Because he is not Supatown.

Is he Supabad?

And why?

Could be. I don't get what he meant with the "by choice" stuff, either.

Isolated, his low posting gave me the slight detached-neutral vibe and his Wilgy angle was as common as others', but if BWT will flip bad + Boom staying away from Bubbles lynch + hunting Wilgy, he'll look far worse.

Holy shit, Scotty might have been hit by the Goochi-Goochi-Goo as well.

Is there a decoder available, too?

Long Con wrote:
Ricochet wrote:@Hosts: The front page says timmer was killed by Uzbloosh, the Host Post says he was done by Team Ubzagga. Which one is it? They are one and the same.

Damn, maybe my question was confusing with all the name banter. I meant if Ubzargan himself killed timmer or "his team" (i.e. someone else from the team) did.

I need to thoroughly check back if Ubzargan might be dead (but...that could only mean it was SVS!). But if MM's winning stats are genuine, then I think the team should have only lost one member (Bubbles being lynched) until now.

Anyway, confusing use of "team Ubzargan" term in the kill post is confusing.

ok wut

---

RIPIYWGOU (if you were good or unrecruited), Tim. Good to see the other deaths failing. DH is a curious case, though, because I had in mind who he might be after the D6/N6 attempts, but that now doesn't make sense after last Night's attempt. Alternatively, I can spot at least two immune roles for last Night, but they don't match immunity for D6/N6.

Yikes @ Scotty! That's a nasty 5th language you learned.

I overslept a bit and I have to stop by work, so don't have time to reply to everything.

@Hosts: The front page says timmer was killed by Uzbloosh, the Host Post says he was done by Team Ubzagga. Which one is it?

@Hosts: Does a bad leader need to personally send in a kill PM? Can his teammates decide for him or for themselves, if he's AWOL, and send in a kill on his behalf?

@Hosts: Was there no kill attempt from the Executioner last Night?

Roxy, so far so good. I wouldn't mind a civ recruitement, though.

Nutella, oops @ Tranq's gender. At least I didn't write that much about her. HIM.

Spacedaisy, I'm never judgemental about the RL issues or busy schedules of any player who has or doesn't have the proper time to play, I'm sorry if it sounded that way, I just saw less of you the past Days, compared to the first.

And yeah, I know I'm still in the "home slug who still can't shake the addiction of making ISOs for 20+ people for three Days rather studying or writing on his PhD" category (school hours will start next week, tho, that should change things), but that last line was still a wee uncalled for, generally speaking. Also you're the second after late timmer to bring the "I have my reasons to not give reasons" argument, to which I'm sorry, but nope. This game is too role-maddening for me to even have the slightest idea what you could mean. Furthermore, wouldn't it be "civ minded" to actually make your suspicions as reasoned as possible?

Keeper of Gossips is not helpful one bit. Gee, I wonder who he might be.

MM, why did you vote Llama?

Voting BWT, but also watching any votes coming that way closely. I made my case, but everyone else should have their own take on it.
Except baddies, they are welcome to wagon.

So that's a bit too many players I made Uz connections for, for my taste, but an Azura angle in the future would certainly refine things.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Scotty	Inconclusive	No vibe	No vibe

ISO:

Spoiler: show

D1 - has no leads; is interested in sorting out Guardians from Sorcerers for some reason
D1 - finds Bass' theory on sign-ups good, because of the sign up polls format
D1 - reads Epi-Golden benign, MP possible recruiter, Wilgy's vote not unnatural
D1 - not sure about Golden's outbursts; pretty dismissive of the debate amount
D1 - votes SVS for thinking she has some kind of power
N1 - clarifies vote on SVS and dismisses Dom's BTSC case
D2 - unsure how to read MP's frustrations (not quite the frustrated civ from Watchmen)
D2 - votes MP
D2 - flips out over RL and losing a big post, votes himself
D2 - reads Golden and rey neutral, not Epig's killers
D2 - sees JJJ and SVS on same team; thinks MM is Raven, finds TH all over the place
N2 - still finds Golden neutral
N2 - finds JJJ candidate for recruiting (big baddie hunting, could stear in any direction)
D3 - placehold votes for JJJ
D3 - rebuttals with JJJ
D3 - finds SVS possible recruit material,
D3 - dislikes appje for his no-show lynch strategy and for his TH suss going nowhere
D3 - votes appje for not baddie hunting
D3 - confused by Bubbles's statements, finds her recruit material
D3 - votes Bubbles, for finding her top recruiting candidate
D4 - would have switched to Boom for his Golden vote
D4 - reads on Golden voters
D4 - reads on Golden voters, continued, finds rey and SVS likely civ, MP suspicious
D4 - votes Bubbles for her posts tone
D4 - read on DH, calls him shifty
D4 - disagrees with Roxy on Boomslang not being good rec material
D4 - hesitant to call DH's shiftiness bad
D4 - read on Dom, finds him sollid in arguments, starts to doubt hounders would be bad
D4 - read on Sorsha, suspects her for contradiction on "Golden framer"
D4 - switches to Sorsha
D4 - interested in replies from TB, Wilgy, DP, MM, DH
N4 - wary of Bubbles after the lynch switch
D5 - doesn't understand or like MoSh's contribution
D5 - reads Dom as unrecruited neutral, despite baddie agressiveness
D5 - still finds JJJ dangerous candidate
D5 - finds DH's case-making out of character, possible Uz recruited
D5 - votes Bubbles for not improving
N5 - finds Bubbles lynch very bad for Wilgy
D6 - votes Wilgy
D6 - doesn't see Sorsha as potential Ubzeksis
D6 - read on llama, concerned with his D5 avoidance
D6 - questions Syn on gameplay, dismisses Caelia's messages, questions TH Boom vote
D6 - acknowledges DH's SVS case, but doesn't sense tone switch, still sussing Wilgy
N6 - still considers Wilgy took a gamble to defend Bubbles and came up short
D7 - votes Wilgy
D7 - doesn't like Roxy's attitude and avoidance of questions
D7 - confused by DH voting SVS and thinking she's a baddie
D7 - considers quiet people, and BWT's distancing of late, worth looking into
D7 - considers TH prime Uzbekisguy candidate, with Wilgy as his recruit
D7 - votes TH
D8 - takes responsability for Wilgy mislynch
D8 - considers Judge being on Caelia's lynch, due to Caelia's lynch window
D8 - finds lynch looking very bad for Synonym, suspects TH and BWT
D8 - unsure why Spacedaisy suspects him and what happened with her Llama suss
D8 - reads into Syn wagon, doesn't like any of the votes, considers voting TH again
N8 - woes Syn mislynch
N8 - eyeballs Bullzeye for D8 stances on talking about Ubzeggy

Meta notes:
-- doesn't like position 5 much
-- focused on big posters & egos
-- would not be bold n brash as rec
-- blendy n shifty would lean bad
-- reading much into Host Posts

I'll be rueing my sweet ass if this is basically Scotty's revenge turn to slip my radar and betray the whole game in the process (after what I did in Watchmen), but I don't see anything to ping me. The Sorsha dynamic is a bit wobbly throughout the Days, but that's about all regarding that. He's also starting to borrow from the Dragon Book of mislynching, but I'm reading him rather stubborn on suspecting potential bussers than orchestrating that angle in any way. His style is very consistent, in case he got recruited along the way, which I was I can't project it. If he is, I very much doubt he's in Uzcamp (except if massive Fool You Hard, Leave No Traces mode); not sure about Azcamp, but he could be missing material to look for those baddies as much as anyone else, right now.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Sorsha	Maybe?	Inconclusive	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Notable moodswings:
-- TB flip D5?
-- double standard w. Canuck?
-- D6 hunting

Meta notes: D1 voting anxiety

If this were a regular format game, I'd call my read on her neutral-like. I'm not sure that translates just as well into reading her neutral (unrecruited) here, but I'm not leaning towards the extremes either.

Her D6 change of pace could be symptomatic. I don't find her that suspicious in the Golden affair (I get what Wilgy and Scotty have brought up, but only find a few points noteworthy). Her Bubbles D5 affair looks much worse; until then, my sense were saying "no way she bussed Bubbles that hard". But with Bubbles probably recruited around D4-D5, Sorsha's D5 wobble made my nose twitch, @ almost Ubzcamp levels. I'm still mulling over if it was a bad wobble, or a bad fine-tune to Bubbles becoming her teammates. I don't understand where her SVS vote came from. I agree with the late JJJ that her D6 stuff reads more like hard work and more solid viewpoints.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Spacedaisy	Could be?	Unsure	Unsure

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Notable moodswings:
-- picks on Canuck, but nut Nutella
-- activity gone cold

Meta notes: would recruit in balanced way

Really unsure about her, her activity has gone real cold, with only moments of jumping on a case or stance and keeping pressure on that for the entire Day. Neither this, nor her previous "big posts", make me comfortable, because she really has an unlucky meta this past year of doing that as a blendy, but focused baddie (Death Note, Guess Who). Overall, if people are looking into under-the-radar players, I think they should read and make up their mind about SD in particular.

I think both her and LoRab's "playing for the civ cause" angle and demands are a bit twitchy, I think her big stance to treat this as a "civ vs bad" only refers to how the view will look in the end of the game, yet she eyeballed (and even voted) players like Canuck or timmer for their neutrality credo. Later on, she understands, instead, nutella's choice of keeping the distance. She wobbled re: Sorsha as well, from calling her "civ vigi killed Epi" ideas far-fetched to taking her off the hook for a one-liner rebuttal to SVS sounding genuine. Similarly, she never criticises Bubbles for her indecisiveness, but the next Day I think she was among the first to call her lynch reaction off.There is a part of that that makes me wonder if Bubbles wasn't her teammate and she had to readjust real quick to the lynch switch and to buss TB.

D8, considers voting SVS why? Voted Syn why? Mirrored Wilgy reluctance why?

Idk, these are kinda real pinges and not being able to give a verdict on her gameplay sort of unsettles me. Her sink in activity could be a recruited moodswing or a desire to stay low as unrecruited.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Llama	Unsure	Inconclusive	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

D0 - asks Bubbles the bad question
D1 - vote choice secure; elaborates on Bubbles
D1 - agrees with bea on wiggle room being a baddie hallmark
D1 - finds BWT prone to make unforced errors early on
D1 - likes JJJ's energy
D1 - believes MP could recruit Spacedaisy, as an ideal candidate
D1 - doesn't find Golden, Epi, MM bad
D2 - wary of MP overcorrecting him on Spacedaisy recruit theory, then overreacting
D2 - votes MP as strongest ping
N2 - agrees that TH's D2 reasoning was weak, but not unlike him
N2 - feeling worse about nutella (Bass flip), TH, unfurl, Bubbles
N2 - could see Golden pulling the Epi kill; could see DH as a powerful recruit
N2 - disapproves of JJJ pressuring Bass into reads
D3 - votes DH for being uneasy about being on rainbow lists
D3 - not comfortable lynching Golden
D4 - doesn't get case on Boomslang, doesn't think SVS was nefarious in her hunt
D4 - suspects Bubbles, DH, unfurl, LoRab
D4 - votes Bubbles
D4 - doesn't trust unfurl for her defense
D4 - doesn't like Sorsha wagoners, notably nutella and unfurl
D4 - finds MP's case on Devin contrived
D5 - considers Ubzargan would use his power no matter what
D5 - sides with Dom on MP brawl
D5 - placehold votes DP for apathetic posts, finds Bubbles post entirely insincere
D5 - agrees about timmer advocating neutral lynches, but claiming neutrality is fishy
D5 - approves a case from DH, but still finds him suspicious and doesn't think SVS is
D5 - votes DH, finds him early recruited, before deciding on a style
D6 - splits Bubbles case into interactions and non-interactions, singles out Bullzeye
D6 - suspects Bullz for being defensive
D6 - dismisses Daisy's case (no chance to save her, illogical to not buss her if teammate)
D6 - wary of Wilgy for defending Bubbles and suspecting SVS for logic issues
D6 - votes Wilgy for above
D7 - considers baddies are sidelining
D7 - agrees with Scotty's under-the-radar list, not convinced of his TH case
D7 - undecided between Wilgy and TH, tempted to leave the tie between them
D7 - not finding Syn dangerous, hesistating about Wilgy's silencing
D7 - votes Wilgy nevertheless
D7 - certain Rico is recruited
D7 - wary of Synonym pile-up
D8 - votes Synonym, thinking he was saved. Adopts Occam razor

Meta notes:
-- recruiters are nervous early on
-- would pick dependable recs

I'm not convinced by Daisy's case on him overall and after doing all these reads, I'm also not getting the Bubbles teammate vibe from him. I'm not getting any moodswings from him, although I'm a bit sure he would be able to cultivate his gameplay for it to not be sensed so well. His TH reluctance on D7 strikes a bit odd, he had him on the suspects lists quite a lot.

Until getting to D8 in my ready, I was ready to think that Syn and him might be teammates, because I don't expect of Llama to give so much BOTD to an inactive / low poster. But then he votes Synonym D8, under the same impulse as voting Bubbles D5. So if Syn was an Ahri Man, I don't think Llama can be one. So if he's recruited, that leaves more chances for him to be on one of the bad camps than on Caelia's side. But I'm not running with such stats too deep atm. I'm going to eat my fucking words if I'm wrong, of course, but at the moment, I don't have Llama as a suspect, none of these pings are significant enough.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Timmer	Unsure	Highly unlikely	Unsure

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Meta notes:
-- neutrality credo
-- support people true to themselves
-- vote people who give false vibe
-- neutral =/= apathetic

A full revisit was helpful to get a full sense of his credo. I assume he's adopting it all over again, compared to RecIII, and facing the same issues. In no way am I not respecting or understanding his credo (to the best extent I can, that is), but I still think there are issues. Where Canuck's take on it and gameplay feels pretty right, I'm getting wrong vibes from Timmer instead. His idea that he'll morph into his civ game or his bad game when he'll be recruited simply cannot be fully taken at face value; if he'll switch bad, he'd have to hide it right away and force the neutral act even more; if he'll switch good, he'd probably have to fine tune it, not to make it obvious and expose himself to baddie kills. I just can't see the changes he implies will genuinely happen; and since my feel is that he can stay intentionally stubborn with his neutral act, it makes me uneasy towards him.

He is the definition of a moodchanger in this game, from wagoning to making arguments and back again, but somehow I still can't tell from it if a switch occured. He has been slightly more engaged the past Days, but he also had RL time off the early Days. His wagoning and flipping, in itself, is real annoying, in no way would I imagine anyone getting away with this in a traditional game. I don't get why he switched away from Bubbles on D5, but I find it unlikely he's Uzbaddie nonetheless. He's become rather insistent on TH the past Days and I don't see any background to it, from previous Days; maybe it's something subtle.

Overall, I'd hate for him to really be unrecruited and get his tactic game ruined (again?), but I'm not all approving of the way he does it and I don't believe there'll be a future moment where his "morph" will come off as genuine or obvious. It either happened, it'll either happen or it won't happen at all. We have to decide for ourselves where he's at, methinks.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Tranq	Inconclusive	Inconclusive	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Meta notes:
-- would recruit for skill and exp
-- would recruit aapje, Typh, SVS

Hard to squeeze conclusions out of her very few and very low contributions. D5 onwards feels more focused, which could be a tone indication of a recruitement. Her Bubbles vote was actually fairly original, so I doubt her being in that camp. Overall I'd suspect her for low activity about the same as any low poster, but compared to others (such as Devin), her posts don't scream baddie to me very much.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Turnip Head	Could be	Unsure	Unsure

ISO:

Spoiler: show

D1 - infamous comment on all recruiters being equal in power and self-interested
D1 - pinged by BWT for reasons he can't fully explain
D1 - considers voting BWT, because he finds his game off, for an unrecruited
D1 - votes BWT for gut feeling and his lazy DF vote
D2 - keeps BWT suss for his last word reaction, agrees with suspicion on Bass as well
D2 - reads MP fine
D2 - defends his neutrals comment to aapje as being said by a neutral
D2 - finds votes for Bubbles weak
D2 - finds Epi-Golden neutral-neutral
D2 - doesn't see Golden's bad game
D2 - wary of Jay
D2 - doesn't believe Golden WIFOMd the bait, but can understand him being a threat
D2 - not feeling a Bass or Golden vote
D2 - considers rey being on Azura team
D2 - votes Bass
N2 - denies being off with his reads
N2 - rebuttal on his Bass vote: not wasting it on other wagons, voting somewhere
N2 - doesn't think flip-flopping i sproblematic
D3 - considers Scotty exagerrating his read on him
D3 - places vote on rey
D3 - disapproves of Lorab neutrals angle (calls it trying to lynch neutrals)
D3 - rebuttals to LoRab
D3 - dislikes LoRab's neutral stance (finds it unhelpful)
D3 - finds Boomslang's self-vote the least genuine and snarkiest
D4 - votes LoRab for her stance
D4 - pinged by BWT leaving out Azura's actions in assessing the manipulations
D4 - pinged by Devin for his placeholding vote and bandwagoning
D4 - votes JJJ?
D5 - votes JJJ again, finds him recruited
D5 - elaborates JJJ suspicious (emulating civ game, but not hitting the mark)
D5 - embraces several viewpoints on Bubbles and lynch switch
D5 - mostly embraces switch being a chaos action
D5 - rebuttal to JJJ
D6 - finds Bullzeye as defensive and spinning SVS's take on his play
D6 - likes Spacedaisy's post
D6 - votes Boomslang, finds him Uzcandidate
D6 - doubtful of Wilgy defending Bubbles
D7 - rebuttal to Scotty: would not stick his neck out for a doomed teammate
D7 - recap of LoRab's suspicion on him, calls for no original new input
D8 - votes bea, thinks she's been recruited (and for odd lack of content)
D8 - likes Synonym's threatening attitude, but not his actions
D8 - in reply to Rico's case, suspected BWT on and off
D8 - votes BWT when he calls for it

Notable moodswings:
-- JJJ D4 vote - wat de wat
-- indistinct recruit vote
-- slight drop in activity since D6

Meta notes:
-- claims wanting to stay unrec
-- team neutral 4 life (options open)
-- defends neutrals

Yeah, I have a few issues with his game. I'm partial regarding what inconsistencies Scotty or LoRab brought up. On the other hand, his defense of his D1 stance to someone like LoRab sounds different than how he addressed it back when he said it, in dialogue with players like DH. He's also trimming a bit LoRab's stance of Golden from "I think he's neutral, but anti-civ in how he plays" to "I think he's neutral", making it sound like she wants to lynch neutrals for being neutrals.

A bigger issue for me is when he defended neutrals, for potentially ending up on either side in the future, but then made some initial hunt claims towards certain players (JJJ and bea, I think) whilst forgetting the dichotomy between civ and bad recruits. He refined the reasoning towards both players shortly afterwards, but that's what it feels like, a fine-tune under inquiry. My overall vibe is that it's like this could come from baddie-like TH, who can hang on in defenses for as long as possible, but doesn't come off as completely genuine.

My third issue is his rather wobbly evolution during D5's Bubbles affair, from seeing her responses suspicious to advocating the switch was pure chaos and not a save attempt (all the way to a sort of snarky reply to Bullzeye I don't even get why it was called for). His defense against accusations (that he'd never openly defend a doomed teammate) sounds reasonable, but see paragraph above. Baddie TH can find a niche to sound reasonable in defending, but not get himself off the hook completely. I'm slightly leaning on that.

So, overall, I could tag him as suspicious. Maybe even slighly Uzbicious.

Ok, here it bloody is. Three-day endeavour, guys. I'll definitely have to stop doing this. I thought a field down to 22-23 would be reasonable, but it's just grueling. We'll see if I get repaid with a kill tonight, especially from Ubzlatan. Or you know, you could embrace the hunt, Uzblake, my man! I wouldn't mind the vigis/SK staying away from me, either.

EDIT: omg I broke the 60k characters limit

so splitting it in two

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
aapje	Could be	Unlikely	Inconclusive

ISO

Spoiler: show

Notable moodswings:
-- D6 flip-flop on Wilgy

Meta notes:
--defending teammates
--extra-meta reliance
--objective: stay alive, win recruited

I can see appje being recruited by either sides for his stats-man skills. Wildly detached from any hunting and tunnelling for one particular wallflower, but consistent with his credo to stay low.

Torn if he would feed Bubbles to the field (his remarks on Bubbles' reaction got picked up, after all), but Bubbles was bussing material after being saved D4. Inclined to say he's not on Team Ubz.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
DFaraday / Bass 2.0.	Inconclusive	Inconclusive	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Notable moodswings: Bass 2.0. even more inactive than Bass 1.0., in case one thought I can't be possible

Meta notes: DF - not a great survivor

I got literally nothing. It's like squeezing water out of stones. Maybe DF got recruited and Bass got told to keep his inactivity, for "consistency", but this is pure tin foil and it could come from either sides - inactives have so far been swept only by Ahriman. Bass' inactivity always throws me off and I know there's RL behind it, but it simply isn't crackable under civ/bad traits.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
bea	Maybe?	Unlikely	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Notable moodswings: activity really slippin'

Meta notes:
-- would recruit better teammates
-- D1s are crapshoot
-- her civ game is comfort zone
-- fluff posts habit

It's true that her activity and consistency has been slipping and that she may have reached recruit camp haven, but unlike how TH feels, her previous content doesn't fully make me equate bad + recruited. From the gut, I'd suspect bea being recruited early on if any team is a nostalgia club, but that's about it.

Her Bubbles suspecting doesn't give me the vibe that she'd be Uz camping. Way too much bussing needed for that to be true. Her worst thing that comes up is her Wilgy vote, two days in a row. Totally unreasoned, wagoning Bullzeye's case the first time, voting and disappearing the second time (sorry to hear about RL problems, bea).

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
BWT	Yes	He's Ubz	No, because he's Ubz

I believe you have my case.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Boomslang	Leaning neutral, but slightly	Inconclusive	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Meta notes: skeptical of empirical meta

Tough to say. He makes rare, but condensed posts. He once said some things make more sense in his head than in the thread. He has a bit of detachment and a couple of out-of-the-field votes that makes me read him as neutral and keeping the distance. His mislynch record isn't very good, of course. His Golden suspicion had a thread, but he botched the D3 vote completely. He read Wilgy bad from the interaction with Bubbles, but this one doesn't reek entirely of mischevious mislynching, tbh. Very tough to say, can't call him a clear suspect right now.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Bullzeye	Could be	Not sure	Not sure

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Meta notes: would recruit better players, according to alignment

Spotty stuff, with some issues or debates that didn't make his game breezy at all so far. No doubt active throughout the entire game, but if his Days 1 -4 make me lean an active neutral (meaning neither embracing every big issue - for instance, he mislynched Bass, but didn't suspect Golden beyond some flaws in his judgement -, nor sidelining hard), his engagement and embrace of serious issues (switches, baddie behaviour, etc.) sounds like a gear switch, so I could find it possible that he's recruited.

I can't decide which side he's on, though. Sometimes he posts stuff like his D6 reads or certain rebuttals that makes me feel better about him, then some replies or views get stingey again. Interesting to me that BWT came almost the most benign in his opinion, from the players he read on D6. He made the right call on Bubbles D5 (even though he didn't have time to fully develop the suspicion, only catch up on it), then he got it wrong with Wilgy. The latter doesn't scream orchestration, but it's definitely not something to overlook.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Canuck	Inconclusive	Highly unlikely	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Notable moodswings:
-- DH-SVS D7 stance?
-- TH waffleness?

Meta notes: recruit criterias: fun, skill, WIFOM value (bad); skill, record, staying clean (civ)

Her neutral credo is strong and I don't think it fluctuated. However, I also have the feeling that a player like her, after such strong statements, could also have the ability to maintain composure, if she'd be recruited, not to draw suspicion for changing her gameplay significantly. The slight fluctuations I noticed have more to do with her reads, like going back and forth on TH or deeming SVS civ-like only to consider DH's hunt, too. Despite her stat candidacy to be Uzbecky, I highly doubt that she was teammates with Bubbles (although, due to the dynamic of the game, there's also a slight chance Bubbles was recruited later, after which Canuck's case on her, if part of Uzb team, would only be convenient and consistent). Slight wobbles in her Bubbles conviction when her lynch started snowballing, but I'd read such concerns as genuine. If this were a traditional game, I'd find Canuck's game civ-like by and large; in this case, she could still be unrecruited or mask successfully - but bad vibes, I am not getting. Maybe TH and her are in a team, but I don't feel as good about TH. She lynched Wilgy for all the reasons Wilgy got mislynched, but I definitely don't find her the most suspicious for it, right now.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka	Vigi/SK odds
Devin	Yes (or 3P)	Could be	Why not	Could be

ISO:

Spoiler: show

First off, I think at some point Devin was tagged as "doing what he always does" and "being too bad of a choice to be recruited (by baddies)". It's D9, I think we should ease up on that. Low posters haven't been threatened one bit so far, except for DP being killed by Ahriman [EDIT: well I wrote this D8, so yeah, except Syn too]. Saying it's not likely doesn't mean it can't happen this time. So from the low posters, my eye is definitely on him. His Golden vote was awful, most of his votes, except for BWT (for meta), are based on other people's cases and that D6 comment on why Uzbekistan wouldn't let Bubbles get lynched is weird.

But the biggest thing that stood out to me was when early on he once acknowledged the game is hard for him to perform, but that he doesn't want to ask for replacement either. Is it out of pride? Perhaps. Is it to battle on as an unrecruited? Real early to have such high hopes. So I think it is because either he's been recruited and has a spot / function / role to defend or he is the vigi or SK that wants to hold on to the role and do things his way. That Bubbles wagon and indiference addressed at Uzby's switch actions makes me think he could be an Uzbeg.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Dharma	Yes	No	No

Yeaaaah, I'm not combing through 8 pages of dingus dangus, maybe maybes and shenanigans. His SVS case was the only solid one he came with and that matter seems to have been settled. Bit weird to hand out "civ" tags for such actions, but there you have it, welcome to Recruitement Mafia. I guess it's also a lesson for those with strict "civ cause" mentality. People can act differently no matter the grand cause.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
LoRab	Maybe	Inconclusive	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

D0: "everyone will play civ-friendly from the start" is dangerous assumption
D1 - critical of Golden's gambling fallacy
D1 - alongside Daisy, critical of those claiming this isn't civ vs. good
D1 - keeps TH (for claiming there are no good-bad sides) and Rox in mind
D1 - doesn't like that BWT gave an incomplete "low posters" list, votes him
D1 - finds Golden frustrated
N1 - questions BWT post-lynch, satisfied, but still keeping an eye on him
N1 - thinks the Judge has been recruited based on his D1 action
N1 - suspects JJJ's timing and tone of his D1 comment on people rushing to vote
D2 - replies to Roxy that BWT suspicion has waned
D2 - picks on rey's "dandy" tone to Caelia's recruiting
D2 - votes BWT again [no strong counter candidates]
D2 - finds JJJ's reactions to her suss over the top
N2 - likes JJJ's contribution and wouldn't like to lose that simply because of her out there theories
N2 - would have changed her vote to Bass for his MP civ comment
D3 - jumps on Golden for his comments, stances, contradictions
D3 - growing suss on Golden for not being civ friendly
D3 - claims neutrality and playing civ-friendly
D3 - adds up to Golden suss with his asking to be lynched
D3 - states no solid suspicions on anyone bad recruited
D3 - reconsiders Golden vote due to his pleas
D3 - votes TH for his contradictions in mentality
D3 - more rebuttals
D4 - rebuttals to Llama and TH, plus snark reply to JJJ
D4 - votes TH again (same suspicion, no other suspicion)
D4-D5 - Rico-LoRab exchange
D4 - no reads on Boom, Sorsha neutral, Bubbles hesitant to call (meta)
D5 - still suspects Rico and TH
D6 - calls Caelia wrong or misinformed with her message
D6 - asks Rico his thoughts on his rezz, votes TH (same suspicions)
D6 - finds Syn's boost in posting (and suss of SVS) ringing false
D6 - suspects Wilgy for Bubbles defending and for "his style"
D6 - suss on Wilgy grows because of his WIFOM comments
D7 - still suspects Wilgy, but not enough + him being silenced counts
D7 - disbelief in Rico's unrecruited claims and rezz replies
D8 - doubts what Synonym is saying would come from a baddie
D8 - could see Bea being bad (tone read)

Notable moodswings:
-- JJJ suss went where
-- rey suss went where
-- bit tangly in this post

Meta notes:
-- reactions to accusations matter
-- roles benefit the player
-- eyeballin' civ-unfriendly actions
-- putting out there theories and drumming

You'll notice that I added a lot of meta input and stances from her, since it's an important part of her gaming (here and in general). I can't say, however, that I found major inconsistencies. Maybe after she started the game saying never to assume all neutrals will play civ-friendly, her D3 stance that she's neutral but trying to play civ-friendly rings a bit false, but it can also be her mentality of the game vs. her mentality of her own game. Or it can mean she has been recruited by a team and she's blocking reads on that through denial and insisting on good intentions. Her unwillingness to expand on baddie reads (remember she had none yet by D3?) can be a way to stay away from mislynches coming back to bite her.

She's tunnelling on her major cases, but what else is new. She can keep doing that all the way through the game, as an unrecruited. She can keep doing that all the way through the game as a recruited civ. Can she be doing that all the way through as a recruited baddie? That is perhaps a question worth thinking about.

I'm curious what happened with her JJJ and rey suspicions. It can be an inconsistency or a sign of mentality change. I'm personally reading JJJ as having been good-oriented, so if LoRab joined him, then I guess she dropped the suss on him. I'm personally reading rey as suspicious, so if she joined him, it can be an attempt to bury both her Golden mislynch and rey's own faults in that affair. Out of sight, out of mind.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
MetalMarsh89	Neutral	Inconclusive	Inconclusive

I'm really not that much of a masochist. There are some neutrals left, at this point, so I'm going to hand out one of these tags to him. When an MM post will scream baddie to me, I'll shout and maybe do the damn ISO after all.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
nutella	Could be	Hmm	Inconclusive

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Notable moodswings: flip on BWT?

Meta notes: admits doing clueless easy bandwagoning

Christ, that's a lot of stances, but the substance of those and her activity is actually less impressive than that. Her rey votes and suss's feel like a pivot, many other votes and suss's are weaker or borrowed. She even has a way of admitting to easy bandwagon, which is intriguing.

Her early flip on BWT (D1-D2), her switch on Bubbles and her cluelessness stated in hunting Bubbles teammates are twitching my nose a bit towards the Ububblez camp. Her beef with Dom twitched my nose a bit towards the Executioner, as well, but the rest of his victims or targets (Typhoony, MP-failed, G Man, LoRab-failed, JJJ-failed) are players she kept distance from or approve of. Maybe that's the point?

Last but not least, due to her early approval of Tim's "unrecruited stances", together with the vibe of her involvement, I could concede that maybe she's still unrecruited, but overall if I were to get a recruited vibe, it's leaning towards baddie.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
rey	Yes	Dunno	Could be

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Four and half pages are his first three Days alone, so check my grand "story of Golden" to see how I ISO'd rey and what parts pinged me about it, I'm not doing it all over again.

I can understand his need for the siesta, but I didn't like the span of it and still don't and I like his "I lost grip on the game" comeback even less. He voted DP on D5, a player that barely played, a vote that didn't amount to anything. Wagons Wilgy to counter other wagons, but spends his reasoning post to talk about a different suspect. All this is highly unsubstantial. Again, burnout could be real, but the Golden affair gives me more the orchestrator rather than mislyncher vibe in his case and so his crash into low posting can be read as staying the heck put. I think he's bad.

Player	Recruit odds	Mafia odds - Ubzekistan	Mafia odds - Azurenka
Roxy	Could be	No vibe	No vibe

ISO:

Spoiler: show

Meta notes:
-- picked players new in BTSC
-- prefers fun game
-- wants to focus on recruits

This'll be a very big blind spot for me, if Rox will flip bad, but so far I am not getting bad vibes from her. I think my only gripe would be how starting D3 or so she demanded recruits to be the focus, but without pursuing a clear cut between civ recruits and bad recruits; then again, she had clear bad vibes on people, some of which I agree with myself. I don't see quite what she saw in JJJ, but her case doesn't have any nefarious traits (forcing, spinning, etc.). She's combining playing a fun game, the way she prefers it to be, but also manages to stay engaged.

I'm ok with keeping in mind the seemer option, but at lower odds than a genuine result. The team count contest results have to do with this, but they're not 100% solid. Then again, why would the Host launch such a contest right away, that could ideally point out the real situation, if at the same time the last lynch perception would be screwed by a seemer's ability?

Also, there's this reaction by BWT prior to Syn's lynch that I now have in mind:

birdwithteeth11 wrote: Does anyone else think the chances of Synonym appearing as a Seemer are realistic at all?

the hell. What inspired him to bring this up half an hour before EoD?

Voting Fore four.

Let's get that Uzbaddie!

timmer wrote:Correct, you don't see how. And I can't help you see without breaking rules. I'm not trying to convince people to vote for 2, you asked me why I picked it and I've been giving you the best answer I can. We can move on any time you're ready.

I never implied you are trying to convince anyone to vote position 2. However, a position choice is still up for scrunity (even though, so far in this game, we haven't really made much of a hunt out of this); it can be civ-centered, it can be game-centered, it can be self-centered, it can have nefarious hidden intents etc.; acknowledging both that "my choice is in my best own interest" and that "my choice can help the game (or the civs) - and I know so" just didn't add up too well, in my view.

To make myself clear, since I personally don't have the interest for positions that can help a baddie leader to be chosen toNight, I'm going to be wary, at least, of players who gloss over this issue, in choosing those positions. I think you sort of did that, by saying you chose position 2 simply because it's of your liking. Of course, it can be a claim that your position can perhaps counter the downsides of that position. Such a claim, however, is of course up for scrutiny.

But I'm ok with leaving it at that.

timmer wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
I don't see what answering those questions has to do with role revealing, I didn't ask anything that specific in nature. First question was more like testing whether you're really ok with a bad leader, namely Uzbekistan, receiving a position that allows him to possibly evade a lynch (for a second Day in a row, in fact). Second question was asked because your option strikes me as totally self-centered, according to your game credo, so I don't see how you can claim to have the other players' (let alone the civs) interest in your position choosing strategy.
I really don't think I can expound too much on this, but my credo was to be neutral while neutral, and then to move along into eventually being on a team. Just as I said in the beginning that this was a sort of LMS game that would morph into a traditional mafia game, so too is my gameplay evolving with it. If others are reluctant to go with Position 2, that's cool with me, I'm just stating that based on a lot of things, I'm happy to go with Position 2.

Which position would you prefer? And why?

Correct. But I still don't see how your personal content for position 2 contents into it looking good for the overall play and for the civs' cause in particular, since you claimed to care.

I have already made an aim at Uzbarackistan toDay, so I don't endorse positions 2 and 5 for tomorrow, given that they could help him. I realize it has poison, curse and seemer, but position 4 is probably the best we can go with, in my opinion.

timmer wrote:
Ricochet wrote: But you'd rather hand a bad leader a way out of getting lynched by voting position 2?

How so?
I can't properly answer either of these questions without revealing my role, etc. so suffice to say that I'm comfortable voting for Position 2.

I don't see what answering those questions has to do with role revealing, I didn't ask anything that specific in nature. First question was more like testing whether you're really ok with a bad leader, namely Uzbekistan, receiving a position that allows him to possibly evade a lynch (for a second Day in a row, in fact). Second question was asked because your option strikes me as totally self-centered, according to your game credo, so I don't see how you can claim to have the other players' (let alone the civs) interest in your position choosing strategy.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Everyone except me said Ubteam 3 - Azteam 4 out in the open, that's what I meant. If a private PM won, it's a different matter.
It wasn't a private PM that won it though, it was my first guess.

And no Scotty, I'd prefer to keep my prize a mystery. Sorry.

Ahriman at 3!

Shit, if Syn checked on SVS and got a read on her as recruited, it could mean SVS was on team Ahriman.

timmer wrote:
Scotty wrote:
Tranq wrote:
Scotty wrote:Voted Pos. 4.

If we're going to focus on Ubz tomorrow (which I think we should) we don't want a lynch switch or a protect from him (plus mild consequences, whatever that entails). I think poison is, while not ideal, manageable.
Position 2 has Ubzulu's lynch switch. Last time Position 5 got picked, the Druidic Elder switched the lynch to DharmaHelper. Are you assuming Druidic Elder is on team Ubzulu?

Voting Position 4.
I'm not sure I understand what logic made you assume I think Elder is bad.

No, I've already said it appeared that Druidic Elder is good, seeing as he switched the lynch of Wilgy, a Caelia recruit.
But he switched it to DH, who based on game events seems pretty civvie too. Why assume Elder was saving one civ and not trying to kill the other? I'd frankly rather not hand that role that power again.

But you'd rather hand a bad leader a way out of getting lynched by voting position 2?

timmer wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
timmer wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
timmer wrote:Voted #2.
Why?
I like my position 2 power! I wouldn't mind 5, as well.
Is it a pretty position 2? Or a venomous one?

Do you care how the positions look for the game, or the civ game, at all, in choosing them?
Very much so!

How so?

Scotty wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Scotty wrote:
Ricochet wrote:I said I'd let Syn clarify first, but since he didn't, my thoughts on his D8 vote were that he blundered it and voted BWT, but was thinking of Bullzeye, at least judging from his reasoning (dissertation issues, dropping in activity after a good first rounds).
Possibly.

Looking back at his posts I didn't see any cases done on Bullz, but I do see him laying into SVS on Day 6. The day after he had position 4. Which checks alignment.

I think it quite possible Syn saw that SVS was recruited (and bad?).
Could be. Perhaps just like Wilgy may have alichecked SVS after D4. In your opinion, do you think Wilgy's D5 looks like a plant on SVS, a plant on timmer or neither?

Problem is, if someone who said Ubteam is at 3 and Azteam is at 4 wob the contest, it means no baddies have been nightkilled, I think. So it wouldn't sound like SVS was a baddie hit.

What happened with the Judge toDay? It appears he stayed away from the vote progress completely.
Keep in mind we're assuming MM isn't lying about winning that contest. After all, he did say he received a secret message on Day 1 of Watchmen just for shits.

linki @ timmer: but was DH a pretty civvie person at that point? I'm not so sure. What cemented it for me was the attempted failed NK that night.

Everyone except me said Ubteam 3 - Azteam 4 out in the open, that's what I meant. If a private PM won, it's a different matter.

Scotty wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Scotty wrote:
Ricochet wrote:I said I'd let Syn clarify first, but since he didn't, my thoughts on his D8 vote were that he blundered it and voted BWT, but was thinking of Bullzeye, at least judging from his reasoning (dissertation issues, dropping in activity after a good first rounds).
Possibly.

Looking back at his posts I didn't see any cases done on Bullz, but I do see him laying into SVS on Day 6. The day after he had position 4. Which checks alignment.

I think it quite possible Syn saw that SVS was recruited (and bad?).
Could be. Perhaps just like Wilgy may have alichecked SVS after D4. In your opinion, do you think Wilgy's D5 looks like a plant on SVS, a plant on timmer or neither?

Problem is, if someone who said Ubteam is at 3 and Azteam is at 4 wob the contest, it means no baddies have been nightkilled, I think. So it wouldn't sound like SVS was a baddie hit.

What happened with the Judge toDay? It appears he stayed away from the vote progress completely.
Keep in mind we're assuming MM isn't lying about winning that contest. After all, he did say he received a secret message on Day 1 of Watchmen just for shits.

linki @ timmer: but was DH a pretty civvie person at that point? I'm not so sure. What cemented it for me was the attempted failed NK that night.

Everyone except me said Ubteam 3 - Azteam 4 out in the open, that's what I meant. If a private PM won, it's a different matter.

timmer wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
timmer wrote:Voted #2.
Why?
I like my position 2 power! I wouldn't mind 5, as well.

Is it a pretty position 2?

Or a venomous one?

Do you care how the positions look for the game, or the civ game, at all, in choosing them?

Scotty wrote:
Ricochet wrote:I said I'd let Syn clarify first, but since he didn't, my thoughts on his D8 vote were that he blundered it and voted BWT, but was thinking of Bullzeye, at least judging from his reasoning (dissertation issues, dropping in activity after a good first rounds).
Possibly.

Looking back at his posts I didn't see any cases done on Bullz, but I do see him laying into SVS on Day 6. The day after he had position 4. Which checks alignment.

I think it quite possible Syn saw that SVS was recruited (and bad?).

Could be. Perhaps just like Wilgy may have alichecked SVS after D4. In your opinion, do you think Wilgy's D5 looks like a plant on SVS, a plant on timmer or neither?

Problem is, if someone who said Ubteam is at 3 and Azteam is at 4 wob the contest, it means no baddies have been nightkilled, I think. So it wouldn't sound like SVS was a baddie hit.

What happened with the Judge toDay? It appears he stayed away from the vote progress completely.

I said I'd let Syn clarify first, but since he didn't, my thoughts on his D8 vote were that he blundered it and voted BWT, but was thinking of Bullzeye, at least judging from his reasoning (dissertation issues, dropping in activity after a good first rounds).

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Well I didn't win shit, so grats MM or nut or a PMer.
Thanks.

Looks like a couple civvies have been nightkilled.

And the baddie teams, except for one lynch, are intact...

timmer wrote:Voted #2.

Why?

Well I didn't win shit, so grats MM or nut or a PMer.

Black Rock wrote:
Game Time!

The first person to tell us how many recruits (including Team Leaders) are alive on each team will win a hefty prize!

Is this in the open or should we send in PMs? Did MM just won because he was first?

Anyway, I'm gonna say 3 / 3 / 3 / 3.

Jeeesus Christ I need to stop staying in bed when on the computer. I am utterly ashamed I missed it twice (in a row) now.

I would have re-read timmer to see if I would vote him (I had enough bad vibes from him before seeing that Wilgy's odd case on him D5).

RIP Syn. Bad result for the Guardians as well. Can't say he wasn't suspicious for a lot of previous things, but the switch and his last reply left me undecided for toDay. For one thing, there was a difference in the past between Ubzorgun's lockdown (Golden 7 to Boomslang 6, apparently) and his lynch switch, in the past. The lockdown was more chaos making and distancing from both wagons than the teammate save the switch aluded to. We don't know which side Boomslang is, from the first lockdown, but this time it's proven his lockdowns are mostly of the former kind: waiting for a lynch leader, locking it on to him, hoping the second wagon then gets suspected and lynched the Day after.

We need to hunt Uzbeky the next Day. And vote the position that can help him the least with being lynched. That means voting Position 2, at least, should be out of the question. Can he protect himself from a lynch with position 5?

I'll get the reads finished toNight.

I don't know if I'll make it in time with the final five reads , so I took a breather to focus a bit on DrWilgy's possible legacy.

I'm looking over Wilgy's Day 5, because he had an alignment check on N4 (position 2), which I find his most important position of all. If there's any legacy to spot, I think it's either SVS or timmer. He made a late case on SVS that Day 5, influenced by some posts of hers that he suddenly found odd, then revisiting a lot of her game. That would be the "out in the open" legacy read. It would also match with Caelia including SVS in her gossip, one Day later. Of course, if SVS is the one, then by now Caelia already took care of it last Night, so the matter is finished.

Yet I must say, the timmer stuff, on the other hand, is totally out of the blue - I literally don't think Wilgy mentioned him before in the entire game. He votes timmer straight up on D5, he later comes with a [url=http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... dissection[/url] of some of tim's post, that mostly feels obstinate in picking on everything timmer said (calling it "triggers" over and over); yet it's so forced it could be a tactic: not sounding reasonable at all, but still being a legit chance to firmly plant the legacy there. Otherwise, it would mean he just went talking like a mad man about a player he never said a word before. Well, being DrWilgy, who knows...

Of course, this is only D5 stuff. I haven't gone over his possible reactions and hints after tracking on the other positions.

What does everyone think?

Also, omg I completely missed that he used "Uzbeethoven". First prize, end of thread.

Aha. I see what you're pointing out, but I don't understand the inconsistency in the Host announcements, in that case. DH wasn't lynched D6 due to likely immunity. Then why wasn't the D1 survivor announced as not being lynched, if it was also likely due to immunity, as well?

There has to be a survivor D1, right?

I doubt Windscout's number of votes randomly nullified can be that high, if D1 ended with 12 people having 1 vote each.

I have five more players to look at and it's past midnight.

I need counseling.

I wonder if this will be related to our game.

Turnip Head wrote:
Then again, we've already tried lynching BWT during Position 1... it didn't take

Yeah, because he's one of the candidates for being immune due to the Position 1.

Do you see any of the D1 candidates as likely or more likely to be the D1 survivor, compared to BWT?

He could have been tied with many other people and then either the tie dice roll or some vote shenanigans made him the lynch target and he was the one who survived. It was all random, in this case (but also karma-levels of misfortune, if he's really our baddie).

Or he finished, through vote manipulation, ahead of all the other players with 1 vote each. Thinking especially of Thunder's potential +3 votes, in tandem with Lightning (Golden) picking the player. Here's the thing, reading back Golden, he sussed BWT a lot on D1. I find it possible he targeted BWT in time (meaning until the Judge put an end to the Day). If Thunder also sent his extra votes in time, then BWT is likely the lynch winner (and survivor) of D1. Hence our 50-50 odds of being Uzboosh.

Search found 393 matches