The Syndicate

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Jay, you voted me the day G-Man was lynched. Why did you vote for me?
I felt you were are viable candidate for either baddie faction, mafia or SK. Your lynch survival played a part in that, as did the general suspicions I've discussed and trice's posts (you were close to the top of that analysis too).

I thought G-Man was a good SK prospect and a bad mafia prospect.
You survived a lynch as well (and clearly so). What should I make of that?

You should consider why I felt that way about you specifically as it pertains to game balance. Otherwise that's a question for you to answer.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Jay, you voted me the day G-Man was lynched. Why did you vote for me?

I felt you were are viable candidate for either baddie faction, mafia or SK. Your lynch survival played a part in that, as did the general suspicions I've discussed and trice's posts (you were close to the top of that analysis too).

I thought G-Man was a good SK prospect and a bad mafia prospect.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Another note, there was obviously an insanifier role in this game, one that is likely mafia. Dom is most likely Sleep, so he could not have that power. G-Man did not have that power. I feel confident that Quin and LoRab were civilians with BTSC, thus didn't have that power. Sig was not around to properly and so methodically use that power.

The players that are left: I feel confident Epignosis is a civilian. DrWilgy/BWT haven't been around to effectively use that power. That leaves you Jay. But with Sleep presumably dead, the trend makes sense that if you are mafia, then you could only kill, not use such a power.

OR

You are the SK, and you opted not to kill or use that power to give the impression that the SK is dead (unlikely).

I think Sleep could have had that power in the [secrets], and the absence of a Captain Insano today would seem to indicate that ability has gone.

Epignosis wrote:I'd like to think so.

This guy.

I think a more accurate depiction of your civilian game relative to those specific beefs would be:

Claims credit and moral high ground for presenting a preferable alternative which was ignored, criticize other players who didn't accept that alternative while also carrying on a discussion with those people, maybe lynch G-Man after having a mutual exchange in which you felt his content was faked after discussing why you felt it was faked or maybe decide that's not the greatest lynch, called me scum for things you're also guilty of (I'll give you that one), and made a visible and consistent effort to hunt for bad guys comparable to the most effortful players in the game.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Considering BWT's disappearance, do you still think he/DrWilgy can be the SK?

I'd have to review the exact moment of Wilgy's arrival relative to the SK kills to be certain. My take has been that it'd be unlikely. I did think he was among the most-implicated players relative to trice's posts. It warrants thorough investigation under the circumstances.

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Epignosis wrote:What "scummy" things have I done Jay?
Claimed credit and moral high ground for doing nothing, criticized other players who didn't do nothing, lynched G-Man without listening to anything he said or respecting his effort, called me scum for things you're also guilty of, and made less effort to hunt for bad guys than your post count implies you would have.
That sounds like my civilian curriculum vitae.

You'd like to think so, but no way.

Epignosis wrote:What "scummy" things have I done Jay?

Claimed credit and moral high ground for doing nothing, criticized other players who didn't do nothing, lynched G-Man without listening to anything he said or respecting his effort, called me scum for things you're also guilty of, and made less effort to hunt for bad guys than your post count implies you would have.

Marmot, how would you assign alignments to the remaining players?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:If the day ended right now Jay, who would get your vote?
Epignosis.

Clearly we're on different wavelengths here.

Linki: lol

I'm considering your BTSC theory and currently looking through alternative possibilities. I don't think your theory is lock-tight, I think Epignosis has done plenty of scummy shit in this game, and I think he looks bad next to Dom.

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:And answer my damned question. Who are the SK and Mladic?
You and you.

No. You've placed us in a scenario where there's still a serial killer and a mafioso. So define that scenario clearly.

And answer my damned question. Who are the SK and Mladic?

Epignosis wrote:Woah woah woah.

I missed this post.

My defense of A Person was based on his post count?

Jay, that tells me you didn't even bother with my defense of A Person.

If you feel you made a brilliant point in his defense that should have changed my mind, share it now and tell me why.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:If the day ended right now Jay, who would get your vote?

Epignosis.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:To answer the underlined question, that's exactly what I've done this game, so yes.

Dom's read on me was very similar to this.

But I will admit, I'm having second thoughts about lynching DrWilgy ASAP based on your ISO of BWT/Dom interactions.

Did you feel that way about Epignosis before you devised that theory of BTSC? Dom's read started on Day 1 and never faltered.

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Epignosis:

What do you think of Marmot and Wilgy?
I've always been clear that I suspect MM since his survival. But that suspicion is rooted in how I design and balance games. I can't answer for Ricochet's approach. I naturally worry that he's trying to get me in his corner, but I don't think that's what's going on. Plus there is the timmer factor to consider. I am unlikely to vote for him.

I was not suspicious of birdwithteeth, but DrWilgy hasn't given me anything to work with, and it's too late for his eccentricities.

You think the SK is alive. You know Mladic is alive. Who are they?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Can you offer me two other players who are likely to be 09-15-00?

Off-hand, no I can't. And I understand your perspective. There was never a statement of suspicion between the two, and Epi's defense of Boomslang was immediate. I don't think this is fully conclusive and I don't think it warrants a "definitely", but I understand. I like that you've been considering the notion for so long too. I'll see if I can find any other BTSC possibilities. Meanwhile I ask that you read my Dom/Epi interactive review and share your thoughts on that.

Wilgy: thoughts on all three please.

Marmot, what do you think of Wilgy and I?

Epignosis:

What do you think of Marmot and Wilgy?

Epignosis wrote:Yeah, all four of you really kept the masses off of me

Look at the Day 1 poll. I took my second and third votes AFTER INH had a lead. I did not ever think I was safe.

You had three votes on you. Three.

Five votes staunchly opposed to your lynch.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:This looks to me like a player developing a read Epignosis and not one who already has him solved.

Spoiler: show
Boomslang wrote:As I've said previously, I read Sloon as town.
Epi has given me nothing to go on because of the gimmick. I leave it to others more acquainted with his meta to determine if that's good or bad.
Sig doesn't have much, but I like his point about Dom and think his POE reasoning is valid. Leaning town.

Boomslang wrote:As I've said before, Epi's gimmick renders him pretty much impossible to read at this point. I lean town for the sheer reason that he's not actively attempting to mislead the town's efforts in thread. Scotty seems authentically annoyed, and I like him avoiding the INH vote. I also like his challenges to BWT. Stronger town read than on Epi. And INH is, unfortunately, irrelevant at this point.

Boomslang wrote:Epi's posts have gotten much less obtuse as the game has gone on, I'll give you that much. So I'm stepping back from the idea of obfuscation for now. And I agree that accuracy does not make alignment. But he actively pursued other targets (Epi, BWT, JJJ) in thread instead of just saying he disagreed with the inh lynch. He could've done more late in the day, but he did offer some potential alternatives if others would've taken them.
If you had BTSC with a fellow civilian, would you state an unfounded trust in that player right off the bat?

Read on.

I wouldn't obfuscate other civilians' ability to determine that relationship by posting things like this. Please ask yourself how easy it is for Epignosis to create this impression for you, and also ask yourself how balanced that impression is between the two of them. Which player's posts are the biggest reason for your theory? Is it even?

This looks to me like a player developing a read Epignosis and not one who already has him solved.

Spoiler: show

MM: I'm looking into Boomslang's posts now for the sake of comparison.

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I gave you a reason to believe IMG was good, regardless of your "suspicion.". You ignored it. You didn't even entertain it. Why?

And if you will recall, I was the runner up for that lynch. If I'm bad, do you think I'd be fighting against the lynch of the guy in front of me? What was my motive there?
I literally told you why I didn't agree. The defense you gave of INH did not align with my perception of how he played this game. Your defense was all about a change in behavior that you and MP discussed. I didn't think his behavior changed in the first place. So again, why is that defense you provided supposed to be relevant to my suspicion of him? Why would that change my mind? It's not what I found suspicious about him.

You were the runner up and you also had a slew of late-phase defenders including me who vocally opposed your lynch and the people contributing to it. You had plenty of reason to feel comfortable.
This is false. You are creating a narrative that suits you.

Bullshit. I defended you. MP defended you. Sloonei defended you. Dom defended you. We were all loud and clear about that. You were never getting lynched on Day 1 so long as the four of us were there and so were you.

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:To clarify this with an example, Epignosis:

Suppose you suspect a player because you think his or her interactions with a dead mafioso look bad. You've looked over that material and that's the conclusion you've drawn.

Someone else steps in and says "I don't think his Day 4 vote is bad though."

Does that mean anything to you?
How is that comparable to what I said about INH? On Day 1. With no dead Mafioso?

This is exactly the problem. That's a semantic question that shoves irrelevant context into an example.

The point:

You suspect player because of Reason A.

Someone else defends that player because they disagree with Reason B.

That's not why you're suspicious. It doesn't mean anything to you.

To clarify this with an example, Epignosis:

Suppose you suspect a player because you think his or her interactions with a dead mafioso look bad. You've looked over that material and that's the conclusion you've drawn.

Someone else steps in and says "I don't think his Day 4 vote is bad though."

Does that mean anything to you?

Epignosis wrote:I gave you a reason to believe IMG was good, regardless of your "suspicion.". You ignored it. You didn't even entertain it. Why?

And if you will recall, I was the runner up for that lynch. If I'm bad, do you think I'd be fighting against the lynch of the guy in front of me? What was my motive there?

I literally told you why I didn't agree. The defense you gave of INH did not align with my perception of how he played this game. Your defense was all about a change in behavior that you and MP discussed. I didn't think his behavior changed in the first place. So again, why is that defense you provided supposed to be relevant to my suspicion of him? Why would that change my mind? It's not what I found suspicious about him.

You were the runner up and you also had a slew of late-phase defenders including me who vocally opposed your lynch and the people contributing to it. You had plenty of reason to feel comfortable.

Thank you.

Question for anyone who's still listening:

If I am a killing role, why the hell would I leave myself in a LyLo with Epignosis alive? WIFOM that all you like, it makes no fucking sense.

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Typically I look at CFDs when there is a combination of 1) late phase chatter makes me second guess my current vote and 2) another good option is readily visible. In this scenario I don't have #1.
My Point Didn't Change Your Mind
If I understand you correctly, your point reflects your perspective of how INH's behavior would or would not develop specifically in relation to his relationship with MP. Correct? I don't think that's the most meaningful thing because I don't think INH's approach ever changed so much as MP's interpretation of his play changed.
I ask 3J about my point changing 3J's mind, and 3J talks about MPs interpretation.

Garbage. You said nothing about my suspicion of INH and that's what I told you.

My suspicion of INH was multi-faceted and not relevant to any perceived change in his behavior. I have since stated repeatedly that I didn't think his behavior even changed.

Spoiler: show

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I might call INH the most difficult player for me to read on this roster, because I feel it is impossible to make that read without 1) being pushed by emotion in response to feeling like my play is being belittled and 2) over-reliance upon meta.

When I look at INH's posts in this game and judge them at face value, I see things that are suspicious. I see:

1) Mass, sweeping discredits of everyone who is making an effort
2) Implied but not conclusively stated defenses of perceived "bullzeye" targets
3) A lack of original hunting-relevant content despite a post history of moderate quantity and a few thick posts

These things are red flags in the most general sense. If I see them in a Mafia game thread, I tend to suspect those doing it. And yet, I feel like I've been here before with INH. The 1st and 3rd
items above are hallmarks of his play, and they've caused him to fall under fire repeatedly in recent games from me, from Sloonei, from Golden, and probably others. The 2nd item isn't one I'd call a "hallmark", though it may be a natural product of the 1st.

He was a baddie in Psych Mafia. There's the baseline to draw any comparisons and to qualify any reads. There's one post in particular:

insertnamehere wrote:So, it looks like the Day 1 crazies have set in, and I think that everyone's more than a little bit coo-coo right now. There seem to be weird suspicions directed from sig at Elo, Lorab, and SVS/Soneji that are based on what looks like literally nothing except minute Day 1 interactions and "Why are you defending him? Your defense is weird! You two must be teammates!" All of it seems incoherent, and none of it jives with me logically or emotionally.

Also, Wilgy has a Wilgy thingy-majigger against Dom, because presumably he just saw an episode of Sesame Street featuring the letter "D" and therefore the universe is telling him in a holistic manner that Dom must be scum.

The only vague Day 0/1 kerfuffle-ry that makes my eyebrow twitch is Scotty's "Tee-hee, I haven't even looked at my role card." combined with his fly-by vote for Sokoth and his weak suspicion reasoning against Sig. Not that I'm necessarily saying that I support sig, I just think that there are much more legitimate reasons to suspect him instead of "He usually doesn't post this much."
That post is from Psych Mafia, not this game.

I yellow-highlighted moments of familiarity. INH defended three people by implication by discrediting reads given by sig. A parallel can be drawn there to his discredits and implied defenses in this game. There's also the "none of it jives with me" thing wherein INH shoos away the notion that trying to make any real read on Day 1 isn't inherently a waste of time.

Also, I just saw that orange bit by chance and it bears an obvious connection to this game too. I'll look into that separately.

Compiling this post proved rather moving, actually. The parallels are tight, and regardless of meta face value problems should be acknowledged. I could get behind an INH lynch.

Epi's defense of INH was related to a perceived change in behavior asserted by MP, not me:

Spoiler: show

Epignosis wrote:I addressed you directly.

Then show me how your point was relevant to my suspicion. Go on then.

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Moreover, I don't believe that you really believe your "good reasons not to lynch people" are the damned Gospel. People disagree. That's weak fucking sauce. You don't like when your reads are ignored? You've ignored every single post I've made since Day 5. You're not thinking about my alignment at all. You already decided.

That's not how a civilian operates, not even you. You're showing no interest in exploration of other angles. You're showing no concern about the other two.
Your disagreement wasn't genuine. There is no sauce.

You haven't even talked about my disagreement.

Go back to that INH lynch and tell me how your defense of him had anything to do with my suspicion of him. Then tell me why your point was supposed to change my mind. You were talking to MP.

Epignosis wrote:My point is you normally try to listen to fellow civilians. You are one of the few who make honest efforts to understand a civilian angle to a person's posts, but you didn't do that. You certainly never listened to me. You're not a civilian this time.

Hey 3J-

Who is the serial killer?

You're taking two lynches you didn't like and then casting an umbrella over my entire performance in this game. I have tried the best I can to listen to other people's perspectives. When I have agreed I have said so, and when I have not agreed I have said so.

The reasons you gave in defense of INH and A Person were either completely irrelevant to my suspicions or just plain crap. Your defense of A Person was based on his post count. You were on a team with reywaS in recent memory and know better than that logic.

I don't know who the SK is. I don't even know if the SK is alive. If it's one of you my first guess would be Marmot.

Mafia -- Epignosis
Civilian -- Wilgy
SK -- Marmot

If the SK is dead, Marmot is civilian.

Moreover, I don't believe that you really believe your "good reasons not to lynch people" are the damned Gospel. People disagree. That's weak fucking sauce. You don't like when your reads are ignored? You've ignored every single post I've made since Day 5. You're not thinking about my alignment at all. You already decided.

That's not how a civilian operates, not even you. You're showing no interest in exploration of other angles. You're showing no concern about the other two.

Epignosis wrote:I spent all day moving. That's doing something. Even now my office isn't set up and I'm not doing that until morning.

But in my rocking chair by the fire, I will tell you that I don't believe you care about "Solving the Game." You didn't care about that when you lynched civilian after civilian despite my good reasons not to lynch them. You should also know that mafia tend to buddy up to me so they don't incur my righteous anger, but nope.

I'm sorry for ever letting up on you.

Who hasn't lynched civilian after civilian, or at least tried? You keep shoving my votes in my face as though anyone alive right now has a leg to stand on in that regard. There hasn't been a single lynch of a mafioso. WTF is your point?

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Epignosis wrote:No you don't.
I do. You're not even trying.
Trying to do what?

Solve the game. Do something. Do anything. You're just giving me this bullshit retort without acknowledging anything I have to say.

One concern I have about Epignosis is that Both LoRab and Quin colored him green on their simultaneous reads posts. The M=R role doesn't provide a method for them to arrive at a conclusive read though so I am not sure how they came to it. One possibility would be that one of them ID'd Epignosis and he didn't die. There's a percentage chance working in there though which means that's not clear.

If Dom was Sleep then I think Epignosis looks more like his teammate than the other two of you.

Dom and Metalmarsh89

Dom's posts about Metalmarsh89:

Spoiler: show

Day 1 suspicion of Marmot for the timmer/Boomslang timing thing.

Spoiler: show

Restates the negative read on MM through Sloonei. / Again.

Spoiler: show

"Nonsensical reasons" is strong language against MM.

Spoiler: show

Dom backtracked hard from that suspicion in response to MM clarifying his vote switch.

Contests MM's comment to Epignosis.

Spoiler: show

Calls for more Day 3 focus on MM among these other two.

Spoiler: show

I don't know what the point of this question was -- he asked Marmot to read BWT's mind.

Same point made earlier -- he lamented that people weren't talking more about Marmot's suspicions of BWT.

Spoiler: show

Curse babble in response to MM's BWT vote, which I assume was meant to be approving. / Affirmed.

GTH town read on Day 5

Spoiler: show

Disagreement about how to judge trice's alignment.

~~~~~

Metalmarsh89's posts about Dom:

Spoiler: show

Answers Dom's prod for suspects. / More.

Clarifies his positive perspective of Epignosis in response to Dom's questioning.

Spoiler: show

Pledged to not vote for Dom on Day 3.

Spoiler: show

Expands on his civilian read on Dom -- appreciates his efforts to engage with people at length.

GTH good read on Day 3

Spoiler: show

Still positive on Day 4 when he invites Dom to the funeral.

Spoiler: show

Night 4 civilian read.

Develops a code at Dom's behest when cursed again.

Reasserts civilian read on Dom.

Spoiler: show

Acknowledges that he hadn't talked much about Dom. It looks like a civilian read is being implied here though that's unclear.

~~~~~

Conclusion:

I would be more comfortable with this if I saw more evidence of a progressing read by MM on Dom. He arrived at a civilian read at an undefined point and didn't move from that during Dom's lifespan. I do think, however, that Dom's treatment of Marmot on Day 1 looks opportunistic -- he hounded him for the logical discrepancy, and then awkwardly bailed on that when Marmot explained his vote switch. That would represent pretty sloppy teammate behavior, and I think that's a decent look for MM.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I will use the word definitely if I feel it applies.

I'll see what you have to say about it.

Epignosis wrote:No you don't.

I do. You're not even trying.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Epignosis gets a pass today.
Why?
I'll explain why I think he's definitely civilian (if he doesn't mind) when I get home.

Just now leaving the Bearcats' basketball game. What a thriller!!

I welcome your thoughts. Fuck whether he minds. We can't dick around with only 4 people alive. I ask though that if you're a civilian, please remove the word "definitely" from your vocabulary. This is likely to be the last phase of the game and we need to be as thorough as possible. I think there are serious problems with Epi's Dom interactions.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Epignosis gets a pass today.

Why?

Dom and Epignosis

Dom's posts about Epignosis:

Spoiler: show

Defensive of Epi in response to Scotty's Day 1 vote.

Spoiler: show

Again in response to trice.

Spoiler: show

Sort of similar in response to Sloonei.

Spoiler: show

States a town read on Epi through Sloonei.

Spoiler: show

Trend continues. / More.

Joins Epignosis in this criticism of MP.

Spoiler: show

More defense.

More. / More. / More.

Spoiler: show

Curse banter. / More, this time in discussion of BWT[/url]

Town GTH read Day 5

Spoiler: show

The first halfway-critical thing Dom has said to Epignosis. Barely.

Spoiler: show

Still a civilian read on Day 7.

Spoiler: show

His read explained. He called Epi genuine and suggested he was targeted opportunistically.

~~~~~

Epignosis's posts about Dom:

Spoiler: show

Cursed response to trice placing Dom and Epi in a team together (along with me). I dunno what Epi wanted to say, maybe he can clarify now.

Spoiler: show

Banter.

Questions Dom's suspicion of BWT and a few other things. No read is implied on Dom.

~~~~~

Conclusion:

Dom's read on Epignosis started great and stayed that way for his entire lifespan. He defended Epignosis constantly. In many cases that's not something that I'd find immediately problematic, but in this case we need to understand the player -- Epignosis. Has anyone ever naturally trusted him unconditionally in his entire Mafia career? Dom made no visible effort to explore his read on Epignosis or reassess it, it merely happened and never changed. Epignosis also said close to nothing about Dom and never made any clear read on him either. Indeed his most engaged treatment of Dom came when Dom was cursed.

Bad look.

Dom and birdwithteeth11 / DrWilgy 2.0

Dom's posts about BWT/Wilgy:

Spoiler: show

Prodded Scotty to expand on his Day 1 suspicion of BWT.

Spoiler: show

A little shade is implied in this question but not outright stated.

Spoiler: show

Dom made this "code" thing a consistent point of grief in his treatment of BWT. I think that's a decent look, because I rarely see mafia members trying to nail their teammates for "slippy" stuff like this -- they more commonly sweep it under the rug by talking about anything else.

Light contest of timmer's suspicion of BWT and questioning of my defense of BWT simultaneously.

Dom's own stance on BWT is muddy here because of this two-way kind of griping.

Spoiler: show

Dom made a point of expressing his beef with BWT here, and redirected timmer to his "code" thing when his stated BWT read was questioned/contested.

Spoiler: show

Dom asked Marmot this question about BWT, showing he'd observed something questionable but not stating his own stance.

Spoiler: show

Laments that others didn't seem to be talking about MM's beefs with BWT, if I understand this correctly.

BWT is GTH bad on Day 5. I think that's what his coding meant at least.

Spoiler: show

After Wilgy replaced in for BWT, Dom clarified him as being his top suspect. The highlighted portion here looks like an unreasonable demand of Wilgy -- to change his [already made up] mind without having a fair grasp of the game to that point. That's a nice look for BWT/Wilgy.

Spoiler: show

This was directed at sig. It's a bit tinfoil but this does look like an attempt at drawing a false link between sig and BWT, something that is more sensible in a world where BWT is bad.

Spoiler: show

This was Dom's response to my asking him why he read the Marmot as a townie. He attributed that read to the voting behavior of BWT.

Spoiler: show

Dom kept the pressure on through Day 7. In these posts it really looks to me like Dom is just pretending to give Wilgy a "fair chance", because what he was asking for was never reasonable in the first place. And on that front, I think it's a good look for BWT/Wilgy.

~~~~~

BWT/Wilgy's posts about Dom:

Spoiler: show

This was in BWT's list of Day 1 reads. It's a rather pointless inclusion.

Spoiler: show

This was in response to MP's discussion of POE. Dom prodded everyone for thoughts and BWT's response is reads-neutral.

Spoiler: show

BWT joined Dom in this little light poking of MP.

This whole exchange looks innocent to me[/url] re: BWT. It looks more like Dom flinging mud and seeing what sticks.

Spoiler: show

Chummy.

Spoiler: show

Compares Dom to Scotty, seems a little more negative in his assessment of Scotty. /// Affirmed here -- it should be noted that at this point in the game I had the same perspective. That's what inspired this dialogue in the first place.

Spoiler: show

I don't recall seeing much evidence of this being BWT's read on Dom.

Spoiler: show

Calls Dom a suspect alongside LoRab in response to trice's suspect list.

~~~~~

There's a little of everything in this review. What I think looks the best for BWT/Wilgy is Dom's most recent handling of that player slot -- he has voiced clear and consistent suspicion of them, and the "space" he was giving to Wilgy to catch up just looked very fake. That looks more like opportunism than distancing to me. On the flip side, BWT's read on Dom didn't develop in a way that is easy to follow or understand, and that's not great.

Overall, I think the positive point is more inspired than the negative.

I'll reiterate that this entire exercise is based upon the theory that Dom was Sleep. If any of you has a reason to theorize something else, speak up.

DrWilgy wrote:I'd like for everyone to answer why they are alive.

I'm probably alive because I still don't know what is going on.

Probably because I look like an auto-lynch given the crap I've taken all game long and most specifically trice calling me the SK.

DrWilgy wrote:When was this simultaneous read made?

We're Quins's and LoRab's interactions indicative of being btsc buddies?

I didn't realize how close the game was to coming to a close when I subbed in lol.

These two posts came at almost the same time on Night 7:

Quin wrote:Mafia Dawn Thoughts:

Epi
LoRab

Wilgy
Dom
3J
MM
sig

LoRab wrote:Mafia dawn thoughts:

Epi
Quin
Wilgy
Dom
3J
MM
sig

Like a coordinated effort by the two of them to co-reveal as BTSC pals without abjectly infodumping.

I'm going to operate under the theory that Dom was Sleep and proceed with interactive reviews.

Mladic delivered the kill, suggesting Sleep is gone. I thought it looked pretty clear that Quin and LoRab were M=R, which would imply Dom was Sleep. Sleep killed Night 7 but not Night 8. There's also the fact that if Sleep was alive, this game would likely be over -- 2 living mafia in a game of 4 players.

The lack of a SK kill is less clear cut. The SK killed Dom on Night 7, and the other two deaths were M=R if that reasoning holds. So I don't see how the SK could have been dead entering Night 8. It could have been sig, but there'd still be an SK kill. That would imply a roleblock or protection of some sort. The only alternative I see is either Quin or LoRab being the SK -- making me wonder how they could have pulled off that simultaneous reads list maneuver they did. Sorting this out is key, because there's a huge difference between 3 vs. 1 and 2 vs. 1 vs. 1.

Search found 589 matches