The Syndicate

Matt wrote:Just looked at the polls, juliets votes with DH a staggering amount of times in lynches.

Lol. I don't think that means they're on a team, though. Derp.

No of course not you fucking pussy.

FZ. wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
FZ. wrote:Mac, you didn't answer my question
Jesus I have to go man what question? I missed it. Sorry.
Wasn't it you who said HB hid behind juliets, so she's good?

I was wrong.

DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Mac: "DH is my only civ read"
Me: " Hey you know, that Mac guy sure has some suspicious ties to Wilgy."
Mac: "FUCK YOU YOU ARE TEAMMATES WITH JULIETS YOU COCKSUCKER"
Me: "Meh, several people have ties to Wilgy, and I guess motel room could be Kubrick"
Mac; "Hey bro just kidding I love you we're besties."
Me: "I'm not liking that so many people are OK with a motel room lynch"
Mac: "FUCK YOU YOU CHEEKY BITCH I KNEW YOU WERE SATAN"
Paraphrasing reductionist case destruction courtesy of your resident championship winning scum.
I could pull quotes if you like.

My one civ read right now is FZ. And that is an unshakeable read. Everyone else is fair game.

b.b.b.b.but Juliets is confirmed town Rico?

FZ. wrote:Mac, you didn't answer my question

Jesus I have to go man what question? I missed it. Sorry.

sorsha fuck these clowns just vote in protest with me

DharmaHelper wrote:Mac: "DH is my only civ read"
Me: " Hey you know, that Mac guy sure has some suspicious ties to Wilgy."
Mac: "FUCK YOU YOU ARE TEAMMATES WITH JULIETS YOU COCKSUCKER"
Me: "Meh, several people have ties to Wilgy, and I guess motel room could be Kubrick"
Mac; "Hey bro just kidding I love you we're besties."
Me: "I'm not liking that so many people are OK with a motel room lynch"
Mac: "FUCK YOU YOU CHEEKY BITCH I KNEW YOU WERE SATAN"

Paraphrasing reductionist case destruction courtesy of your resident championship winning scum.

Ricochet wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Explain how JC can be scum, Mac.
I don't even know where the idea that she's "confirmed town" came from. And if she was, why is she alive?
I do.

Probably because you and your teamies weren't paying attention.

BURNNNNNNNNNNNN

Let me break it down for you.

Whatever reason you have to think she is confirmed town, you don't have.

PSA from Mac.

I gotta go. Sorry to love you and leave you like that.

DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Rico if juliets was confirmed civ, why is it that DH has been saying she's bad and deserves a look over for days. And he's tunneling one half of the scum. He even said as much. He blamed YOU for it.
Why is it you've called me your only civ read and then as soon as I turn my eye to you I'm Satan incarnate.

Mods rename DharmaHelper to TheArtfulDodger please.

When I said you were my only civ read I meant it. I had seen pings that made me think you were teammies. Then I looked back and had an epiphany.

This is an epiphany on the scale of the epiphany that Wilgy was Salacious Crumb in Star Wars if anyone recalls that. Nobody followed me then though and Wilgy won as scum. So I expect the same thing will happen.

DharmaHelper wrote:So your evidence to tie myself and Juliets together is thusfar, to recap:

1. That by responding to her concerns regarding MM's (by his own admission) sketchy as fuck early game behavior, I was "Speaking for her", even though I was speaking *to* her. In a conversation.
2. That I refused to acknowledge any curses or anyone who might have or might not have broken a rule by claiming to have been cursed or targeted.

Bless your heart.

Linki, those two quotes at least make sense. Though I believe I've been clear enough on that front. Once Sorsha is dead I will consider the case on JC. I just don't find it actionable right now.

There's also the mountain of things left unsaid.

You and juliets have managed to outright avoid open conflict in the thread the entire time and it's day 9.

I didn't even look at her ISO, just yours.

I'd very much appreciate some others analysing this shit because I am not just tossing my toys out of the pram. If anybody actually wants to give me some benefit of the doubt that'd be lovely.

But I really have to go now. So god speed civilians and if DH wins while I'm gone, well done man because you played an ace game (even if you're civ which I doubt you still have played well, there's always room for doubt).

Rico if juliets was confirmed civ, why is it that DH has been saying she's bad and deserves a look over for days. And he's tunneling one half of the scum. He even said as much. He blamed YOU for it.

To anyone who has ever felt victimised by DharmaHelper I call upon you. Make this your moment to stand on your own two feet. No longer will we be ruled and oppressed by this evil supatown scum.

Otherwise just lynch me and lose and I'll take the cred of being the only one to figure out his bullshit, that's just as good.

Ricochet wrote:Explain how JC can be scum, Mac.

I don't even know where the idea that she's "confirmed town" came from. And if she was, why is she alive?

DharmaHelper wrote:Question: How likely is it that two individuals respond to my suspicion of them by creating completely abominable cases? How likely is it that the second of those people would have defended the first to the point of, in his own words, "parody."

My case is not abominable. You're not even trying hard to discredit me. You're just saying offensive words.

Like I said. DH and juliets are bad and teammates. The evidence is there. I don't expect after DH's championship level performance for me to manage to get them lynched. But I am putting my vote on JC in protest.

DharmaHelper wrote:
juliets wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Matt wrote:Yeah I understand. All I can is derp a derp. I think you are misinterpreting things that may look like teammate behavior but really isn't. But again, derp a derp.

MM - If ya all kill me tonight now that I have dropped suss of you (for the temporary time being), I'm gonna be a saaaad panda.
I can't kill anybody or pardon anybody, or even properlu lynch baddies. Why does no one believe me?
Because Dom the rolechecker said you were bad.
Also if JC was bad I wouldn't be surprised but she did vote for Wilgy before MM, so unless Wilgy's team knew for certain he'd be OK in this past lynch I think I can trust her not to be on his team at the very least. If there are two mafia teams she's a good candidate for the second one, but that's a bridge we'll cross once we GET OVER THE MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE THAT SHOWS THAT WILGY IS BAD AND THAT SORSHA IS HIS TEAMMATE THEY LITERALLY OUTED EACH OTHER IN THE THREAD IT IS A MIRACLE ANY CIVS WIN ANY GAMES IN THIS SITE LMAO

Linki well there you have it.

DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:For my part I cannot fathom why a civvie would be so flippant with the facts. Particularly with the current thread climate.
Really? I thought the prevailing wisdom is that scum play more cautious than civs? Hence why Motel Room currently has zero votes on him.
That being said, you say yourself that bad civ play is usually thought of that way here. Do you think Draco, Marsh, juliets and Motel are just using your case as a place to hide their vote? I doubt any of them would have made a case on him had you not because they'd have just let him be weird and given him a terrible=civ pass as you said. Hell they'd probably be suspecting you and I for actually trying. It's the most frustrating thing about playing Mafia.
JC is probably hiding behind my vote, I agree with the assessment that she is glomping onto people and being as agreeable/blendy as she can. Probably one of my next suspects once this Wilgy/Sorsha mess is cleared up. Her and Drac need a good look over.

DharmaHelper wrote:
Matt wrote:Yeah, I think both niju and Juliets have spoken about being vote blocked. Also, when Boom was "question cursed", he literally thanked SVS in the thread for it being over.

Wtf

DH - What do you make of niju and juliets claiming to be vote blocked, then?
I dunno.

It's fine I don't expect anybody to listen to me. I'm just dumping all this out here now because when I get lynched and the game ends not long after I at least want people to know I solved it because I'm petty like that. I don't expect you've been callous enough for me to catch you outright, but I am legit 100% sure you and JC are scum together.

Good game though DH. Good game.

DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Okay I will explain what has pinged me after I finish work. I don't want to do you wrong if it turns out to be nothing so I want to make sure I am seeing what I thought I was seeing.

MacDougall wrote:Mate you said you were going to give us a juliets analysis days ago. You first. But you won't because she's your teammate. That's okay. You've got everyone fooled with your supertown bs. Good work DH. You deserve to win.

Linki: Sorry sorsha it's 6.35am and I have to go to work. Otherwise I would. But if you want to take a look at ISOs you will see plenty of evidence of juliets and DH being teammates.

Start with how every time DH was asked about juliets, every single time, he dodges it with "yeah she bad I'll read her later" type stuff or outright ignores it (like he just did when I asked him).

The evidence is there. I unfortunately haven't had the time to gather it.

inb4 DH posts this smiley

You've got nothing. Noted. That's okay I'll just dump some quotes in the thread. I have about 4 minutes. I'll dump a fair few.

DharmaHelper wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:If there's more than one, which you insinuated yourself, why wouldn't they have names to distinguish them?
How many are there?

Juliets said that I suggested the mafia teams have names and I know what they are. I did not; that was a new idea that juliets put in my mouth.

I would agree that if there are two mafia teams, that they would have distinctive names.
Are you then suggesting that juliets knew already that the mafia teams were named, and in questioning you revealed too much?
Yes. I suggested there are two mafia teams. Juliets responded by stating that "That sounds like you not only know there are two teams (i know you responded to this already) but that you knew what the team names were." Juliets brought up the idea of names, but said that I insinuated the existence of names. She put the words in my mouth, which is why I think she has secret knowledge.
Assuming your question got an answer, how did you expect anyone to indicate "which team"?

DharmaHelper wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:I understand the question was bait, but at the time you asked it, surely you would have expected a response. At the time you asked, nobody knew it was a bait question. So given that, they would indicate to you "which team", how exactly?

The question itself is a poison pill, is what I'm getting at. You suspect JC for saying that you suggested the teams were named, which you didn't explicitly, but you can't in turn suspect her when "which team is he on" requires a distinction between teams.
No, I was not. My expectations are not the same as yours.

Juliets suggested that I knew what the team names are, not just that I know that there are names.

Do you know what names have been given to any mafia teams in this game?
I don't. I do see what you are saying regarding why JC says she suspects you. I get that part. I think we're not quite connecting our points here.

You're saying it is unreasonable for JC to suggest that you knew what the names are. Which I get.

DharmaHelper wrote:
juliets wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
juliets wrote:Metalmarsh here is the question I asked you. Note that I am not asking the same questions you already answered. I'm wanting to know what was in your head when you picked the word "which" when you framed the question.

juliets wrote:MM, your question to him was "which team do you think he is on?". That sounds like you not only know there are two teams (i know you responded to this already) but that you knew what the team names were. What made you use the word "which"? And what did you expect in return from JJJ that would be an example of "which"? I hope you understand what I am asking. If not, let me know.
Sorry I never responded juliets. I've been playing much of this game so far on my phone, and just must be missing posts.

Anyway, to answer your questions.
1) I have no idea how many teams there are. That was an intentional "slip" to see how folks responded.
2) I did not know that the mafia team(s) have names. Your suggestion of that is very suspicious imo. I did not imply that I knew it either.
3) I expected Jay to be far more aggressive in his response, since the number of mafia teams is unknown, and I implied that I knew how many there were. Then again, Jay was acting apathetic before I asked the question, so I don't know what to make of it. Different Jay =/= mafia Jay.
And to add, Matt did propose the same case that you did, that I slipped, and must be mafia. But he took a pretty hesitant approach to it. The Matt I remember from Talking Heads would have dogged me all day and all game over something like that.

Juliets, where did you get the idea that the mafia team(s) have names?
I've never played a game where the mafia teams haven't had names. It just made sense that since you were indicating you thought there was more than one team you also thought the teams would have names. I think you admitted to this during the discussion that has taken place.

zebra and DH have hit precisely on my reasons for asking you the question so i don't feel we need to rehash that. Thanks to the two of you for reading my mind while I wasn't here. I do think the root of the miscommunication here is that you asked the question to see what reactions there were to the question, not to get a specific answer to the "which" question. You didn't expect a response to the question. (That's a little hard for me to understand but I take you at your word). I, on the other hand, read the question as one where you were looking for a specific answer and didn't understand how someone could be expected to answer a "which" question without knowledge of names of the parties from which he would choose. I wouldn't have asked the question if I had realized you were just looking for reactions about the question.

The only thing I can't understand is why you think I'm suspicious for asking the question. As games go on I ask lots of questions. Some of them represent misunderstanding which sounds like the case here. Thats why I ask, to cull out those issues and get to the real issues.

If you feel we need further discussion about this just let me know.

As far as the vote goes for today, I think I'll vote for spider monkey. I have no idea who that could be and we don't even know if the person attached to it receives something good, something bad, or nothing at all. We don't even know for sure if someone is attached to animal. So Spider monkey it is.
Cuz it's a crock of shit basically.

Or how bout this one where you speak for juliets when the evil Marmot is after her. What do you think of this one Marsh?

DharmaHelper wrote:
Black Rock wrote:Ok, I have basically caught up.A quick answer to Juliets and HB.

I did not respond to LoRabs responses to her suspicion because I saw no point. She took her time, made her excuses, and as far as I am concerned, carefully crafted her response so it was 'just perfect'. The fact that she was under suspicion because of her wording means she was careful to try and debunk that theory. LoRab is not a player to be underestimated. She is smart. She is crafty. She is a damn good mafia player. She is also one that is hard for the masses to suspect because of that. Mostly I am running on gut. If I were a baddie trying to take down LoRab for no good reason, I would have dropped it after it didn't work. LoRab is a personal friend of mine and I won't go after her unless she twists my gut (except for the brief period I always thought she was bad). I also have played with her for 7 years and know for a damn fact she is not an easy target to get lynched. This is not baddie BR trying to take out an easy target. This is BR acting on her gut. When I act on my gut I cannot give you the proper reasons, the reasons some of you need to make sense of all. I have not built a case because there will be no good case to build. LoRab was accused early and she will be careful.

Could I be wrong? Damn right I could. I didn't role check her and I can't know with certainty. Am I questioning myself? Yes, because I am starting to wonder is HB has information I do not. If HB does not tell me he knows without a doubt she is civ then I will not trust LoRab this game.

I will go back and address any other concerns juliets and HB have.
Still catching up on last night, but I got to this post and felt the need to address it, because it set off several red flags.

1. Refusing to engage the person you suspect in discourse regarding those suspicions is pingy as Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. The reasoning you give here also doesn't make sense to me. You say her response was measured and careful in order to debunk the theory that she was being too measured and careful? Dunno, that doesn't click with me. I'm wary in general of anyone who outright refuses to back up their suspicions of someone. That tells me you know you're standing on thin ice and would rather ignore the person you suspect (in this case LoRab), than have your suspicion debunked. If a suspicion cannot stand up to scrutiny, it is either false in nature or faulty in nature.

2. This is fear mongering to me. You're not arguing the facts of the case, you're propping LoRab up as this "big scary boogie woman" as justification for why you refused to engage. Using a player's skill at the game as a reason to A) Want to lynch them and B) Ignore the holes in your suspicion does not sit well with me.

3. Explicit WIFOM. And especially faulty WIFOM as well.

4. I find this particularly amusing. There won't ever be a good case to build on LoRab ever in the whole game? That's just patently false. Anyone can build a "good case" on anyone given enough time and content and effort. But you don't want to put that effort forward because why? Because you know that if you do, your "gut read" starts to turn into something entirely different?

Looking at this post, I'm seeing a majority of emotional appeals rather than factual statements and evidence. That tells me that you have no evidence, and indeed no desire to acquire any such evidence. It comes down to you just wanting to lynch LoRab because she's a "good player", which is a motivation I'd associate with baddies.

Let me just leave this here.

Mate you said you were going to give us a juliets analysis days ago. You first. But you won't because she's your teammate. That's okay. You've got everyone fooled with your supertown bs. Good work DH. You deserve to win.

Linki: Sorry sorsha it's 6.35am and I have to go to work. Otherwise I would. But if you want to take a look at ISOs you will see plenty of evidence of juliets and DH being teammates.

Start with how every time DH was asked about juliets, every single time, he dodges it with "yeah she bad I'll read her later" type stuff or outright ignores it (like he just did when I asked him).

The evidence is there. I unfortunately haven't had the time to gather it.

inb4 DH posts this smiley

You have a couple of hours DH how bout you give us that juliets read you were going to do but didn't because she's your teammate?

DharmaHelper wrote:Couple hours left. Everyone voting for Motel Room means everyone is comfortable with his lynch which means he's probably not on anyones team.

Is it time for a Mac Attack?

Just got a spare second while eating breakfast. Fine with Motel Room.

Sorry guys I got really busy tonight writing a speech for our CEO and tomorrow I will be busy until a few hours after deadline. Please do not lynch me for I am but a poor civilian.

Okay I will explain what has pinged me after I finish work. I don't want to do you wrong if it turns out to be nothing so I want to make sure I am seeing what I thought I was seeing.

Crazy speculative theory doesn't override my actual opinion. I want to eliminate my doubt DH. I think since you have earned all this cred of the Wilgy lynch it's important that we put you under fire to see if you deserve it.

Don't mistake it for conviction. It's a little pingy idea in the back of my head. So don't jump down my throat here DH. If you have nothing to hide nothing will come of it.

DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Her and Drac need a good look over.

DharmaHelper wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
juliets wrote:Since its slow DH why don't you explain to me why you think I'm bad.
Its mostly vibes really. Like Rico says, a lot of your activity has been agreeing with X case and voting for X case, not really ruffling too many feathers or getting into the mud. Admittedly my energy has been put elsewhere so I'd have to really read you over to finalize my thoughts.
This post =/= "good look over" DH.
I didn't say it was. You asked for my thoughts. There they are. Today was spent looking for Wilgy's teammates at Rico's behest. I can't do everything for you.

I have this crazy theory that juliets and DharmaHelper are teammates. Who wants to test it with me?

In fact you even said you need to further inspect her in the post you spoke to HER in.

DharmaHelper wrote:Her and Drac need a good look over.

DharmaHelper wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
juliets wrote:Since its slow DH why don't you explain to me why you think I'm bad.
Its mostly vibes really. Like Rico says, a lot of your activity has been agreeing with X case and voting for X case, not really ruffling too many feathers or getting into the mud. Admittedly my energy has been put elsewhere so I'd have to really read you over to finalize my thoughts.

This post =/= "good look over" DH.

DharmaHelper wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
juliets wrote:Since its slow DH why don't you explain to me why you think I'm bad.
Its mostly vibes really. Like Rico says, a lot of your activity has been agreeing with X case and voting for X case, not really ruffling too many feathers or getting into the mud. Admittedly my energy has been put elsewhere so I'd have to really read you over to finalize my thoughts.

Where/when is that post?

DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Actually fuck it FZ said she was going to follow my vote so I'm going Motel Room.
How bout juliets? What do you think about her?
Already said.

Oh yeah really where?

DharmaHelper wrote:JC is probably hiding behind my vote, I agree with the assessment that she is glomping onto people and being as agreeable/blendy as she can. Probably one of my next suspects once this Wilgy/Sorsha mess is cleared up. Her and Drac need a good look over.

What happened to this coastal chill?

DharmaHelper wrote:Actually fuck it FZ said she was going to follow my vote so I'm going Motel Room.

How bout juliets? What do you think about her?

DH my staunch defender and only friend has turned his back on me at the last. The impending darkness overwhelms me. I know that I deserve it, for I sinned by allowing a murderer to live and even defended him. Is being wrong a sin worthy of the gallows? Perhaps it depends on the outcome of incorrectness. Do we not all folly from time to time though? Do all our follies result in the continued survival of a murderer? No.

You literally said that you read my play as civ after the lynch, now you are using it as a justification for a vote.

My pushing of Metalmarsh as a candidate makes more sense than anything I've said so far, maybe I'm taking heat from you for being abruptly sensible.

DharmaHelper wrote:Also you hella defended Dr Wilgy.

Wow.

DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:DH explain your vote or feel my wrath.
You're pushing to lynch an independent player, and Sorsha moved her vote off Motel Room.

Wow.

DH explain your vote or feel my wrath.

Today is not lylo but if we lynch scum today it is possible that tomorrow is lylo. The ironic thing is that if we lynch civilian today it is still not lylo. At this point lylo will only happen if one team remains due to the potential of scum killing each other. I find it extremely hard to believe that Wilgy, Zebra and Lorab are all on a team together, so I believe both teams have at least 2 players remaining. A team of 2 and a team of 3 seems like almost the only possible situation. If we lynch a player from the team with 2 scum remaining and the team with 3 has the kill tonight and manages to kill the remaining scum on the other team, tomorrow is lylo with 3 scum vs. 4 non scum.

So if Marsh is alive tomorrow the fact that we can't afford to not lynch scum means his indie gambit does keep him alive. Meaning that we have no way of eliminating the potential that he's an indie with a solo win con. If he is bad and on the team with 3, his claim is going to win his team the game.

It is possible to get through today without lynching him, if future actions don't go a certain way. Lynching civilian would be fucking tragic but not put us in danger of lylo. But today is the last day that we can for certain remove the element of Marmot doubt.

I would like to hear from not Marmot's what justification there is for not lynching Metalmarsh today?

Ricochet wrote:MM, if you're not a baddie, you are spoonfeeding the mafia reasons to push for your wagon toDay. Reconfigure your strategy.

[wifom]

If I was bad, this post would have scared me into not doing what I am doing. As I am not, I saw this post as a green light to attack the fuck out of you.

[/wifom]

We shouldn't lynch Metalmarsh in case he's bad. Okay guys pack it up. We've reached peak Mafia.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I just told you. Even if I was bad, I cannot possibly be the only baddie left in the game. And then, even if I was, 1 baddie out of 10 does not LYLO make.

There are at least 2 baddies left in this game, possibly more. But I am not one of them. You've got the wrong marmot.

I didn't say you were the only baddie left in the game? I said that you need to be lynched today if you are an indie. If you are bad, ironically yes we can afford to lynch a different baddie lol.

But you are literally telling me that we shouldn't lynch you on the off chance that you are bad. Do you realise how retarded that is?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
MacDougall wrote:I am not employing scare tactics Metalmarsh, I'm actually pointing out the opposite. Scare tactics have been employed to paint you as an impossible lynch today because of perceived lylo WHEN IT IS NOT LYLO.
Yes you are. You just told everyone that I must be lynched, or else.

Linki:

The only person playing to emotions here is you with your attempt to paint my points as so bad they are humorous.

You just OMGUSed me more than anyone I have ever seen.

I am trying to make up for days of defending confirmed scum Wilgy. To what end does a scum me come into this thread like a whirling dervish exposing the shit out of myself?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:A civilian has no right or need to appeal to the emotions of other players in the game. Declaring a scenario with only one way out is not only off-the-mark, it is unnecessary and even looks bad. Two days ago, you read me as civ Mac. Now suddenly, the only way for the civilians to win the game is to lynch me today?

This reads as a desperate attempt to steer the lynch away from either you, or someone on your team. There are more than two baddies left in the game. Even if I was a baddie, there would still be other options about. This ultimatum is false.

Suddenly Metalmarsh is passionate. Suddenly he cares. When he realises he's actually fucked. Hold still.

Here's a few synapse connections:

You just said the ultimatum was false, meaning that we don't have to lynch you today. Meaning that you don't think it's lylo and we can afford to lynch you later. Meaning that you literally just said you should be lynched.

For what reason would we lynch anybody but you, today?

Take all of Matt's circumstantial evidence + Dom's breadcrumbs + what I have just said and vote for anybody but Metalmarsh and I will do this at you.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Have you read my Day 1 Mac, or are you just vomiting shit into the thread to continue paint me as bad?

Yes, I have read your day 1. Yes I have read where you told Jimmy on day 2 that you identified Rico's attempts. You didn't tell him then that you wanted to get lynched on day 1. You are lying.

I am not employing scare tactics Metalmarsh, I'm actually pointing out the opposite. Scare tactics have been employed to paint you as an impossible lynch today because of perceived lylo WHEN IT IS NOT LYLO.

The only arguments against unanimously lynching you have come today from the perspective of it being lylo, which it is not.

You must be lynched. Hold still.

I see absolutely zero reason for anybody to vote for anybody other than the Marmot right now. This is likely our last chance to actually take the risk that all his gambits are actual truths because if he DOES flip neutral today we CAN still win because the remaining scum teams are going to be trying to kill each other at this point rather than civs, so no civs will actually die until our next lynch day if they shoot right which they have a very good chance of doing by both numbers and the fact that the scum teams no doubt will have a better grip on who is on the other team than we do at this point. If we lynch Metalmarsh and he flips neutral and then the scum team kill a civ, we will still not be at lylo because the scum team will still have kills and they will both be still looking at each other as primary enemy rather than civilians.

There is no other outcome here except for killing Metalmarsh. It is our last chance to remove this chance element from the game and to boot he is the most likely to be scum out of anybody anyway.

Search found 960 matches