The Syndicate

Turnip Head wrote:It's pretty suspicious that I am the marmot's only neutral read. I wonder if I am his teammate.

I don't mind that Jan hasn't found the content to be relevant so far. I would feel pretty detached if this was my first game with 30+ other players and nothing of consequence had happened yet.

Turnip Head wrote:

Quin wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:It's pretty suspicious that I am the marmot's only neutral read. I wonder if I am his teammate.

I don't mind that Jan hasn't found the content to be relevant so far. I would feel pretty detached if this was my first game with 30+ other players and nothing of consequence had happened yet.

What do you mean? Marmot's reading you as civ, unless he does his rainbow lists differently or something. Why do you think it's suspicious? He's only listed three people.

Because it's Day 1, and Marsh is always bad on Day 1.

Turnip Head wrote:THE ANCIENT RITUAL OF CHALLENGE DUEL HAS BEEN INVOKED. RUSSTIFINKO NOW HAS 24 HOURS TO ACCEPT OR WE WILL RAID HIS ANCESTRAL VILLAGE.

DrWilgy wrote:

nutella wrote:Oh I also want to hear more from Wilgy. I feel like he's usually a lot more active than this, but I keep forgetting he's even in this game and I don't think that's a good sign. Likewise with sig, to a slightly lesser extent.

How could you forget about me LoRab? I was at work and had dnd night, but never left...

Glorfindel wrote:

Quin wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:What the HELL happened to Night 0?

I don't recall ever having a Night 0. Doesn't it always just go from Day 0 to Day 1?

The Story of Creation
1 In the beginning, when God created the universe, 2 the earth was formless and desolate. The raging ocean that covered everything was engulfed in total darkness, and the Spirit of God was moving over the water. 3 Then God commanded, “Let there be light”—and light appeared. 4 God was pleased with what he saw. Then he separated the light from the darkness, 5 and he named the light “Day” and the darkness “Night.” Evening passed and morning came—that was the first day.

Jan wrote:Why wasn't anyone killed?

And not me choosing Wilgy for prefect and he turned out to be scum. I'm rather trustful of Scotty now. This has way too few votes to be a scumplay. And the reason why I missed the deadline was because there were so few votes, which got me confused.

And I preferred to stick around to those I know. I've played with Sig, DrWilgy and Glorfindel, whom I found out he's Matty only recently. I know Nerolunar as well, however never played with him.

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

Glorfindel wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

I'm not usually a proponent of lynching low posters but in a circumstance where we have TWO teams with NK ability (one of which has BTSC and still can't get their shit together) and there is no NK, I think I'll be looking at the low/non posters a lot more seriously this game

Glorfindel wrote:

Dom wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

This seems presuming !

What secrets do you know ? Or what do you want all of us-- the regular people-- to think?

This is not a matter of knowing any secrets, my friend - it's simple logic. If you can come up with another plausible explanation for the lack of ANY NK well, I'm listening...

Turnip Head wrote:Bubbles and MM's votes smell the fishiest to me. I want to go back and investigate those.

Scotty my man, I'm sorry I ever doubted you. You are the hero we need. Please be my sensei.

Turnip Head wrote:Or I could always vote myself so that I can duel the marmot and bring honor to my home.

sig wrote:Okay I'm voting Dom for reasons previously stated and lorab since she has posted yet hasn't caught up or in fact posted again since she made her first one that is odd. I'm unsure of MM but wouldn't mind seeing him duel. I don't recall the case on Russ at all so I won't vote there.

Linki I think it makes Mac look slightly more pingy yes. I'd like to see what he says though.
I'd rather not duel hin today and leave him alive for another phase since I think it is to weak to lynch on

sig wrote:Okay I'm voting Dom for reasons previously stated and lorab since she has posted yet hasn't caught up or in fact posted again since she made her first one that is odd. I'm unsure of MM but wouldn't mind seeing him duel. I don't recall the case on Russ at all so I won't vote there.

Linki I think it makes Mac look slightly more pingy yes. I'd like to see what he says though.
I'd rather not duel hin today and leave him alive for another phase since I think it is to weak to lynch on

Jan wrote:I wonder if the scums are aware there is a game going on at all?

And mess at me actually being right with a guess for once. I finally had some time to involve myself further in this game as, just as I admitted, I had played really vaguely because, frankly I'm not used to such huge games and didn't have time too. It was late July when Sig recruited me for this and I expected the game to start earlier than it actually did.

A big post is coming up from me. Get ready for your weaves to be snatched.

Jan wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Jan wrote:I wonder if the scums are aware there is a game going on at all?

And mess at me actually being right with a guess for once. I finally had some time to involve myself further in this game as, just as I admitted, I had played really vaguely because, frankly I'm not used to such huge games and didn't have time too. It was late July when Sig recruited me for this and I expected the game to start earlier than it actually did.

A big post is coming up from me. Get ready for your weaves to be snatched.

Why do you think the baddies aren't aware of a game?

I've never played a game where the scum team(s?) haven't managed to dispose of at least one townie by Day 3 with a Night Kill. I don't know what exactly is going on in there, but frankly it would be against the balance of the game for the scums not being technically able to submit kills so either someone has a super secret ability that effectively stops scums or someone on their part fucked up.

Ricochet wrote:On LoRab re: Turnip, I agree that his early posts would shape up the suspicion of being a third voice in our WIFOM choir, in light of Wilgy's and MM's flip, but I'd inquire what her interpretation of Turnip's voting intents and pattern, concerning MM, during Day 2.

TheCapsFan wrote:I would be comfortable being voted for.

Dom wrote: I think SVS would have found more ways to post. She's a smart lady--okay, and beleive me, very inventive.

Sloonei wrote:I figured I'd have a look at the roster and identify all the Strangers. I've not played with or have very limited experience with the following:
DisgruntledPorcupine
Dunny, unless this is diiny.
Glorfindel (I think we played a heist together a few months ago)
insertnamehere
Jan
leetic
LoRab, name is familiar but I can't recall any past game experience.
rabbit
Simon
CapsFan

That's more than I was expecting.

Dunny wrote:hey guys, sorry a lot of shit happened and I've been in hospital. Will do my best to try and catch up

Glorfindel wrote:I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

Sloonei wrote:anyone can answer that question, it's not just for rico.

Scotty wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Scotty wrote: Actually, this is precisely what Mm would do if he were bad. Mixed in with the "hey guys I'm bad" WIFOM that I've seen him use in orevious games when he was bad, he would point out all his baddie mates if he had a chance just for people like you to go, "oh, he would never do that, it's silly." Well, yes. Silly is MM's MO.

The WIFOM game is exactly how we nabbed MM with Wilgy, why not put all the pieces together and nab TH, the other Yellow Turban, who has been unceremoniously unhelpful this game

UHM

Yes?

Glorfindel wrote:I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

Quin wrote:

LoRab wrote:So after that lynch, this post from Glorf I'm reading in a different light:

Glorfindel wrote:I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

It looks like a whole bunch of smoke and mirrors to get people to turn away from TH and towards Russ. I know this post was influential in m own thinking about Timmer. I can't help but wonder if this wasn't the push of a baddie to get a lynch train going at the top of the hill so that it could speed up on its own.

More suspish of TH now. Starting to be suspish of Glorf.

Can someone summarize why people are suspicious of Sorsha?

I had the opposite opinion as Glorfindel had in the Day 1 part. I'm not seeing how the timmer lynch would influence your opinion of him in this post. Can you elaborate?

Turnip Head wrote:Well first of all, if I may say, RUDE. I really thought you guys were gonna do it. I really did.

I have read everything.




So I don't have time to respond point by point to each of my accusers from yesterday, but the first major talking point seemed to be about my banter with MM to start the game and I mean yeah, in light of the Wilgy business I can definitely see why that's worth looking into, believe me. But it seems that no one considered the fact that, ever since MM and I became shinigami bros in Death Note Mafia, we mayormaynot vote for each other

in

almost

every

single

game

we

are

in

together.

So, I mean yeah, obviously you have to look into this after MM and Wilgy took turns pulling the WIFOM wagon, but the truth is that this is just a thing that MM and I do, pretty fucking often, and I'm surprised no one has ever noticed it before

(And to the person who said we caught MM for WIFOM so it might work with me too, I would argue that MM's WIFOM alone isn't what got him lynched - at least it wasn't for me. MM slipped. He voted Wilgy as prefect and then he also voted for him Day 1. And then he couldn't come up with any plausible answer for why. That's why I voted for him, and I'm sure it factored into many other's thought processes too; JJJ first and foremost, as he was the one who initially brought it up. For you to then reduce that case to "WIFOM"... I'll bet Jay was rolling in his grave and MM and Wilgy were high-fiving each other in Hell.)




The second point that I noticed that was common among my accusers was "He's rubbing me the wrong way" "He refuses to answer my questions." And to that I say... so what? There's more than one way to scumhunt, and one of those ways is not answering questions that I feel don't need answering. In pretty much every game I will do something "completely unhelpful" such as not answering someone's question directed at me and inevitably someone always gets upset when it's their question. The truth of the matter is Scotty, I didn't feel like answering your question because your question was so far removed from what I was trying to do, that it ended up being more fun to just fuck with you a little bit. Call that unhelpful if you want, but it's not like I'm not trying to be helpful in other ways. I'll say again that there's more than one way to play a good civ game, and sometimes that means playing the slow burn. Some people like JJJ and Ricochet come out here displaying their beautiful civvie feathers and they get taken out before the game even gets interesting. I'd argue that the only players who are worried about "looking weird" are the baddies, and they try to avoid it, because look what happens. Lynch the weirdos during the Day and take out the rational overt civvies at Night. It's a baddie formula that has worked since the dawn of time.

Anyways, to actually be RIGHT about MM this early in the game, only to get silenced by his team the next Day, then taking 5 votes and almost being sent to a duel despite not being able to say a word, only to survive and now have to face the mob of "HE WAS SAVED!!!!" ... it's as if it's all going according to my devious plan. I'm just as shocked as anyone to see I wasn't lynched the way those votes flew in at me in the eleventh hour. You know how much civ cred any of my teammates could have potentially gotten from sealing my fate while I was silenced?! I'd have told them to fucking take that free civvie card, because that kind of cover almost NEVER comes around. So yeah, if you want to now go after the "He was saved", well, you go on ahead with that, since I guess I can't really defend how anyone else played yesterday, and I certainly have no content of my own to point towards from yesterday, on account of being silenced and all


I've got some thoughts about specific people that I wanted to pursue, but I needed to get all that off my chest tonight.

Turnip Head wrote:@Sloomei: I think what happened is no one gave him the Cliff Notes and he was like "Okay well fuck this then." If he was a baddie, I might have expected him to proceed with Option 2 and try to get his head in the game. But hell if I'm gonna be able to make a read based on that.

Linki @Lorab: it's like you didn't even read the links I posted about me and MM. I probably would have played similarly if I was bad with him, I fully admit that. But I've had this rapport with him over many games and the only one where I was on his team, I wasnt even aware of it because my role prevented me from knowing my teammates.

So if you lynch me based on MM being bad, in games where I've bantered with him on Day 1, according to historical record, you would be right like 1 out of like 10 times, and even then it would only be a freak accident that you were right MAYBE THAT'S WHY I DID IT

But remain unconvinced if you wish. You and I have plenty of history too Lorab, and I've learned better than to stress over your read of me

Turnip Head wrote:It's pretty suspicious that I am the marmot's only neutral read. I wonder if I am his teammate.

Turnip Head wrote:

LoRab wrote:You mischaracterize the accusations on you. It wasn't just voting for MM, it was about you buddying up before that. And his voting for you for prefect.

I forgot to mention - THIS NEVER HAPPENED. MM voted Wilgy for prefect. He did not vote me for prefect. He voted for me on Day 1. I mean I just feel like this is a really big difference that you missed here so please recheck your facts.

LoRab wrote:You weren't lynched because it was realized you were silenced. And the votes for you didn't come at the elevnth hour--they were coming in throughout. You're painting the last lynch in a way that it didn't happen.

As I have already said, I read everything. As it was happening. Completely unable to believe my eyes. I know exactly when I got votes and how they influenced the vote tallies. I know who didn't vote for me because I was silenced - that would be you and nutella. Scotty said "So what if he's silenced?" And the other three said nothing at all, and it was AFTER you said you weren't voting for me.

I'm painting the lynch exactly how I experienced it, from my POV, how I perceived it... and tbh I'd have no reason to paint it in a false light even if I was bad so I don't know why this is even important.

Turnip Head wrote:I mean... that post was a joke. I don't know what else to say about it except that it was very clearly a joke.

Spoiler: show

I also don't believe you read all the links because the very first one links to the "Don't click this topic" game and by that game's rules you'd have to post and admit that I made ya look

Sloonei wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:I mean... that post was a joke. I don't know what else to say about it except that it was very clearly a joke.

Spoiler: show

I also don't believe you read all the links because the very first one links to the "Don't click this topic" game and by that game's rules you'd have to post and admit that I made ya look

I did read them all. And I rolled my eyes at the figurative rick roll. And chose not to play that game.

And yes, I'm not denying it was a joke. But jokes aren't necessarily innocent. Heck, I'm the reason that there's a rule that anything in OT green is necessarily off topic, because a few players and I used green text as a civ code in a game once (back in the early days of OT green....Supermarket Mafia on LP, if anyone actually cares to go look it up). Point being, things are not always what they seem. A joke can have deeper meaning and shouldn't always be written off because it's a joke. And, my whole point that made that post ping my suspiciometer is the fact that it was a joke. But I think it was a jokey post that was also an inside joke.

I think it was a joke that you were also laughing about in BTSC.

Listen, I get that you're frustrated. Although the tone of your defense also has me further suspecting you. I notice patterns. It's how I view the world. When something is off in a pattern, I notice it. Your joke was off in your usual pattern of banter.

And I may have been wrong about votes for prefect (again, sorry about that...looking back, I think I just misread someone else's post and didn't fact check). But I could also see MM voting for 2 teammates on the first lynch. You because he always votes you day 1 and Wilgy for the particular shits and giggles of voting for 2 teammates.

Who's your second biggest scum read, independent of all things Turnip related?

Glorfindel wrote:

LoRab wrote:So after that lynch, this post from Glorf I'm reading in a different light:

Glorfindel wrote:I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

It looks like a whole bunch of smoke and mirrors to get people to turn away from TH and towards Russ. I know this post was influential in m own thinking about Timmer. I can't help but wonder if this wasn't the push of a baddie to get a lynch train going at the top of the hill so that it could speed up on its own.

More suspish of TH now. Starting to be suspish of Glorf.

Can someone summarize why people are suspicious of Sorsha?

LoRab, for the record, I made an observation based on the facts as I saw them before me and placed my vote on an interpretaion on those facts. I take responsibility for that. If you (or anyone else) regards me as suspicious for actually trying to contribute in this game, so be it. I'm still learning a lot about playing these games and even I would feel less suspicious of someone genuinely trying to contribute than what I've seen so far this game from some other players.

Turnip Head wrote:I understand that jokes can sometimes be more than jokes, but also sometimes they're just jokes, and it's just such an innocuous thing that I think it should be a part of the Turnip Head equation and not the whole entire equation. Enrique came after me in the Arkham game based on a joke post and I was the goddamned Batman.

Sloonei wrote:@LoRab, I've also felt some suspicion of CapsFan. I even voted for him at the end of the day yesterday. Let's talk about that! What posts of his did you find suspicious?

Diao Chan wrote:你好朋友
誰今天我們殺

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I think you were trying to work the angle of pushing for low-posters to be lynched, or at least creating that as an avenue for yourself to pursue so that you could stay out of any more heated cases later on. Your other vote was on Sorsha, so you cast two votes on players whose biggest mark against them was silence. Consistent, but also safe. I also do not like the method of defense that attempts to entirely brush off and discredit an accusation, which you are using here. I think I've stated a fairly reasonable concern and your response is to mock it as being so bad that I am helping the scum out; which at least suggests that you believe I am town, so it's good to know that.

I am not mocking you, my friend and yes, you're right - You are reasonably high on my town list at the moment - if I come across as sarcastic, I apologise. I do happen to believe you are misguided in the conclusions you're drawing here.

You are not coming off as sarcastic, but you were coming off as a little frustrated and maybe a bit flustered there. And this is something that I am programmed to find suspicious, unfortunately. I can't go against my programming.
Why do you think I'm town?

Frustrated, perhaps. Every game I play here, despite how hard I try I inevitably end up being falsely accused for reasons that range from the spurious to the ridiculous (and if you don't believe me, go back and read Matt's Two-Face accusation of me - it's typical). I understand that you may find my reaction in this regard suspicious but as you say, you're not familiar with my play style and I'll admit I'm probably somewhat 'unique'

Why do I think you're Town? I didn't say this previously but I was disappointed to lose 3J from this game. His posts were (as usual) masterpieces of analysis and interrogation and that's what I want to try to emulate. Consequently, I have little doubt that he was Town. When he got eliminated, I thought we'd lost that but then we got you and Ricochet that have kept the conversations going (clearly not a Mafia agenda). I see some logic to some of your conclusions (clearly not at least one...) and you are clearly an asset to us. I find some of your conclusions aligning to those I've reached so obviously that helps to.

Diao Chan wrote:

nutella wrote:I am hungry for thread activity guys. I'm feeling directionless and not really confident in any suspicions, and I know we have 24 hours but I'd rather not pull votes out of nowhere. I feel helpless without JJJ or Rico to build cases for me, I could do some ISOs and try to farm something myself but I don't know where to start atm. Someone slip or something.

花生醬，我相信你是好人
你現在感覺如何對movingpictures07
他似乎非常渴望殺死你

DFaraday wrote:Whoever asked me about Sorsha, I'm feeling better about her, but I don't understand her reasoning for anything in this game.

One of Lorab's posts pinged me, so I decided to do a reread, and didn't like what I found.

LoRab wrote:So after that lynch, this post from Glorf I'm reading in a different light:

Glorfindel wrote:I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

It looks like a whole bunch of smoke and mirrors to get people to turn away from TH and towards Russ. I know this post was influential in m own thinking about Timmer. I can't help but wonder if this wasn't the push of a baddie to get a lynch train going at the top of the hill so that it could speed up on its own.

More suspish of TH now. Starting to be suspish of Glorf.

Can someone summarize why people are suspicious of Sorsha?

I don't like this one because, for one thing, we have no idea of either TH or Glorfindel's status, so it feels unconvincing to me that this is a save attempt. Possible, of course, I don't see it though. In addition, Lorab cites this very post as a reason why she voted Timmer (elsewhere she called it "a good case" and "good pickup and analysis"), yet now suspects Glorfindel for it after the fact. I tend to find people who propose a wrong theory less suspicious than people who go, "Yeah, that sounds good," and even more suspicious than that are people who go along with it, then claim it was suspicious after it was disproven, as if the guilt rests entirely with the original case maker.

I also feel some of her points re: TH are weak:

LoRab wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Well first of all, if I may say, RUDE. I really thought you guys were gonna do it. I really did.

I have read everything.




So I don't have time to respond point by point to each of my accusers from yesterday, but the first major talking point seemed to be about my banter with MM to start the game and I mean yeah, in light of the Wilgy business I can definitely see why that's worth looking into, believe me. But it seems that no one considered the fact that, ever since MM and I became shinigami bros in Death Note Mafia, we mayormaynot vote for each other

in

almost

every

single

game

we

are

in

together.

So, I mean yeah, obviously you have to look into this after MM and Wilgy took turns pulling the WIFOM wagon, but the truth is that this is just a thing that MM and I do, pretty fucking often, and I'm surprised no one has ever noticed it before

(And to the person who said we caught MM for WIFOM so it might work with me too, I would argue that MM's WIFOM alone isn't what got him lynched - at least it wasn't for me. MM slipped. He voted Wilgy as prefect and then he also voted for him Day 1. And then he couldn't come up with any plausible answer for why. That's why I voted for him, and I'm sure it factored into many other's thought processes too; JJJ first and foremost, as he was the one who initially brought it up. For you to then reduce that case to "WIFOM"... I'll bet Jay was rolling in his grave and MM and Wilgy were high-fiving each other in Hell.)

The second point that I noticed that was common among my accusers was "He's rubbing me the wrong way" "He refuses to answer my questions." And to that I say... so what? There's more than one way to scumhunt, and one of those ways is not answering questions that I feel don't need answering. In pretty much every game I will do something "completely unhelpful" such as not answering someone's question directed at me and inevitably someone always gets upset when it's their question. The truth of the matter is Scotty, I didn't feel like answering your question because your question was so far removed from what I was trying to do, that it ended up being more fun to just fuck with you a little bit. Call that unhelpful if you want, but it's not like I'm not trying to be helpful in other ways. I'll say again that there's more than one way to play a good civ game, and sometimes that means playing the slow burn. Some people like JJJ and Ricochet come out here displaying their beautiful civvie feathers and they get taken out before the game even gets interesting. I'd argue that the only players who are worried about "looking weird" are the baddies, and they try to avoid it, because look what happens. Lynch the weirdos during the Day and take out the rational overt civvies at Night. It's a baddie formula that has worked since the dawn of time.

Anyways, to actually be RIGHT about MM this early in the game, only to get silenced by his team the next Day, then taking 5 votes and almost being sent to a duel despite not being able to say a word, only to survive and now have to face the mob of "HE WAS SAVED!!!!" ... it's as if it's all going according to my devious plan. I'm just as shocked as anyone to see I wasn't lynched the way those votes flew in at me in the eleventh hour. You know how much civ cred any of my teammates could have potentially gotten from sealing my fate while I was silenced?! I'd have told them to fucking take that free civvie card, because that kind of cover almost NEVER comes around. So yeah, if you want to now go after the "He was saved", well, you go on ahead with that, since I guess I can't really defend how anyone else played yesterday, and I certainly have no content of my own to point towards from yesterday, on account of being silenced and all

I've got some thoughts about specific people that I wanted to pursue, but I needed to get all that off my chest tonight.

I'm not convinced.

You mischaracterize the accusations on you. It wasn't just voting for MM, it was about you buddying up before that. And his voting for you for prefect. And where you commented that you were his only neutral lead and hahaha, maybe you're teammates.

First of all, no one is saying you were saved--or maybe someone did and I missed it. Can you point out where that was brought up? You put that out there when it isn't even what's happening in the thread. You weren't lynched because it was realized you were silenced. And the votes for you didn't come at the elevnth hour--they were coming in throughout. You're painting the last lynch in a way that it didn't happen.

Also, you seem like an odd choice to have been silenced. And how do you know who silenced you? Yes, there is a silencer on MM's team, but there are also plenty of secrets in both civvie and baddie roles. It honestly seems more plausible to me that your own team silenced you than to think that MM's teammates silenced you.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not buying you as civ at this point.

Linkitis: Keep in mind, I was days behind, and read things with the knowledge of later lynches (because I read those posts right away). So, in reading Day 1, I already knew that MM was bad. It was in reading your day 1 posts that I started to suspect you. They just didn't ring true and read like a baddie bantering with a teammate in the thread.

The enlarged points read to me like Lorab has already focused in on TH and is looking for more reasons to justify it. She says that the banter in this game is different from previous games, and thus may be indicative of them being teammates, but this means that A. they have a particular banter style when not teammates as when they are, and B. that the banter as teammates would necessarily involve them publicly declaring their teaminess. I don't even know whether the former is true, and don't take it for granted that a different style of banter indicates their being on a team.

The other point, that TH would be an unlikely choice for silencing, feels forced. Occam's razor suggests that Meng Huo was the silencer; that Lorab calls into question TH's assertion of this point is odd considering the alternative is a potential secret silencing power. It feels like subtle undermining of TH's credibility. She then says that he would be an unlikely target and thus was more likely targeted by his own teammates. Considering that by my count TH had 64 posts at the time of his silencing, I see no reason he should be an unlikely target for silencing. Again, it feels like trying to make the facts fit the narrative.

Add the fact that Lorab did not vote for either confirmed baddie to date, and all of this is to say, I'm likely voting Lorab today.

Glorfindel wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Diao Chan wrote:你好朋友
誰今天我們殺

So, uh, are we going to talk about this?

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I think you were trying to work the angle of pushing for low-posters to be lynched, or at least creating that as an avenue for yourself to pursue so that you could stay out of any more heated cases later on. Your other vote was on Sorsha, so you cast two votes on players whose biggest mark against them was silence. Consistent, but also safe. I also do not like the method of defense that attempts to entirely brush off and discredit an accusation, which you are using here. I think I've stated a fairly reasonable concern and your response is to mock it as being so bad that I am helping the scum out; which at least suggests that you believe I am town, so it's good to know that.

I am not mocking you, my friend and yes, you're right - You are reasonably high on my town list at the moment - if I come across as sarcastic, I apologise. I do happen to believe you are misguided in the conclusions you're drawing here.

You are not coming off as sarcastic, but you were coming off as a little frustrated and maybe a bit flustered there. And this is something that I am programmed to find suspicious, unfortunately. I can't go against my programming.
Why do you think I'm town?

Frustrated, perhaps. Every game I play here, despite how hard I try I inevitably end up being falsely accused for reasons that range from the spurious to the ridiculous (and if you don't believe me, go back and read Matt's Two-Face accusation of me - it's typical). I understand that you may find my reaction in this regard suspicious but as you say, you're not familiar with my play style and I'll admit I'm probably somewhat 'unique'

Why do I think you're Town? I didn't say this previously but I was disappointed to lose 3J from this game. His posts were (as usual) masterpieces of analysis and interrogation and that's what I want to try to emulate. Consequently, I have little doubt that he was Town. When he got eliminated, I thought we'd lost that but then we got you and Ricochet that have kept the conversations going (clearly not a Mafia agenda). I see some logic to some of your conclusions (clearly not at least one...) and you are clearly an asset to us. I find some of your conclusions aligning to those I've reached so obviously that helps to.

Every game everyone plays many people get falsely suspected. If that weren't the case, there wouldn't be much of a game.

And I would like clarification. Your theory upon seeing no kill after the first night was that 2 entire mafia teams did not show up at all on night 1--not a single member--to send in the team's kill? Can you explain why you thought that was the most plausible explanation?

Also, have you ever seen that happen? Where no one from 2 different mafia teams showed up, on night 1? I'm pretty sure I haven't. So, if it happens regularly in games I'm not playing in, or on other sites, then please enlighten me.

And now that we know that this wasn't the case for at least 1 of the mafia teams, since we've lynched 2 people on those teams, why are you still actively advocating for the lynching of low posters?

Allow me to explain my friend - I'll admit (as I've already done on a number of occasions) that the assumption to which I jumped was a little rash and naive.

Whilst I have never witnessed an absent Mafia team miss their NK, I have likewise never played a game of 37 players where a single Mafia team (one of multiple) make up as little as 8% of the game populace with the extraordinary level of absence and lack of contribution that we've seen this game. Then, there's the fact that one team (on the only time they've had an NK attributed to them) took out a player who'd indicated they would be absent for a substantial period of time and only had two posts...

I also am of the opinion that you are misrepresenting my posts. You claim I'm 'advocating' the lynching of low posters when the ONLY statement I've made in that regard is:

Glorfindel wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:I'm not usually a proponent of lynching low posters but in a circumstance where we have TWO teams with NK ability (one of which has BTSC and still can't get their shit together) and there is no NK, I think I'll be looking at the low/non posters a lot more seriously this game

I can't speak for you or for anyone else but that is hardly what I'd call 'advocating' their lynching and to pursue this matter further, I don't recall having given that as a reason for any of the votes that I've submitted since I made that statement (above)

nutella wrote:

LoRab wrote: And you have definitely advocated for/supported the idea of lynching low playing players. Several times. I don't particularly want to go through all of your posts and link every time you've supported that idea, but I'm happy to if you really are going to deny that you've done so.

This is patently untrue. I have verified Glorfindel's claim that the one post mentioned is the only time he says such a thing. Kind of unbecoming for you to assume he's lying and assume you know what he's said better than he does.

nutella wrote:I skimmed his ISO since you didn't, and I didn't find anything. I may have missed something but I would like to see proof.

Glorfindel wrote:

LoRab wrote:So after that lynch, this post from Glorf I'm reading in a different light:

Glorfindel wrote:I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

It looks like a whole bunch of smoke and mirrors to get people to turn away from TH and towards Russ. I know this post was influential in m own thinking about Timmer. I can't help but wonder if this wasn't the push of a baddie to get a lynch train going at the top of the hill so that it could speed up on its own.

More suspish of TH now. Starting to be suspish of Glorf.

Can someone summarize why people are suspicious of Sorsha?

LoRab, for the record, I made an observation based on the facts as I saw them before me and placed my vote on an interpretaion on those facts. I take responsibility for that. If you (or anyone else) regards me as suspicious for actually trying to contribute in this game, so be it. I'm still learning a lot about playing these games and even I would feel less suspicious of someone genuinely trying to contribute than what I've seen so far this game from some other players.

Glorfindel wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:Glorfindel seems to go out of his way to say "my friend" in nearly every post. Is he projecting his usual friendly civ playstyle? Also hey Matty

I forgot to vote yesterday, sorry about that.

Hey Jan! I didn't realize it was you. It is a pleasure playing with you

Hey, Magnus It's great to have you back playing with us again And no, I'm certain that you know me well enough by now to expect me to be courteous to my fellow players
I notice that you missed the vote at EoD 1. I'm just wondering - were you simply undecided about for whom you'd vote or was there some other reason?

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

Glorfindel wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

I'm not usually a proponent of lynching low posters but in a circumstance where we have TWO teams with NK ability (one of which has BTSC and still can't get their shit together) and there is no NK, I think I'll be looking at the low/non posters a lot more seriously this game

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

Glorfindel wrote:

Dom wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

This seems presuming !

What secrets do you know ? Or what do you want all of us-- the regular people-- to think?

This is not a matter of knowing any secrets, my friend - it's simple logic. If you can come up with another plausible explanation for the lack of ANY NK well, I'm listening...

Glorfindel wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Dom wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

This seems presuming !

What secrets do you know ? Or what do you want all of us-- the regular people-- to think?

This is not a matter of knowing any secrets, my friend - it's simple logic. If you can come up with another plausible explanation for the lack of ANY NK well, I'm listening...

Pang Tong
Strategist
Pang Tong likes to use trickery to confuse the enemy.
*Secrets*

Sima Yi
Strategist
A devious man, he is the primary strategist for the Wei faction.
*Secrets*

Zhang Jiao
Leader
The leader of the Yellow Turban Rebellion, he is able to summon the wind and rain.
*Secrets*

Zhang Bao
Strategist
The middle brother of the Yellow Turban Rebellion, he is able to summon apparitions.
*Secrets*

Zhang Liang
Strategist
The youngest brother of the Yellow Turban Rebellion, he is able to summon a rockslide.
*Secrets*

Dong Zhuo
Leader
This notorious warlord has an entourage of bodyguards, protecting him always from assassination.
Cannot be Night killed. Inherits the Yellow Turban kill.

Yuan Shao
Strategist
Military strategist and commander.
Each Night, Yuan Shao will attempt to recruit a warrior (anyone with BTSC cannot be recruited). He may recruit up to three warriors (one from each kingdom). *Secrets*

Lu Bu
Warrior
A most fearsome warrior, and rider of Red Hare.
By the third Night, Lu Bu must decide what faction he will fight for and achieve victory with. *Secrets*

Every intance of *secrets* in the setup is a way those kills could have been stopped.

Plus we know the serial killer is bulletproof.

That is true DDL but of the eight instances of *secrets that you quoted from Dom's post, three belonged to the Yellow Turbans and I can't personally see them having/using a lynch stop power when they have one of two NKs each night. Another two of the characters nominated are Independents and I can't fathom how either of them might have a power that might do that... I'll accept my original statement on this matter may have been a little impetuous and naive but I don't think (that in a game with a player base of 37 right now when we had 50% of the players fail to vote EoD 1 and a considerable number still with minimal to no posts) it is necessarily prudent to exclude the possibility that player absence could've been a factor in the result we got at the end of the last Night phase.

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Hello Glorfindel, I wrote a post about you

Sloonei wrote:I was looking at some of the timmer voters overnight and a found a few questionable things in Glorfindel’s history. First, These two posts represent his only noteworthy contribution to the Day 1 proceedings, and all he is doing is rejecting a voting strategy proposed by others. He does not propose anything of his own and I see no commitment to anything, really. Looks like Glorfindel spent most of the day in the shadows and then stepped out late to position himself against what could be perceived as a bad lynch (Bubbles, aka me, voting for JJJ and Scotty. I assume Jay was town and have no read on Scotty at this point).

That’s one thing. I read that and was feeling a mild tingle, but then I got to his next string of posts and the tingling intensified.
There’s no nightkill Night 1, so Glorfindel immediately jumps to the conclusion that there’s an inactive scum who simply forgot to submit the kill and then proposes the strategy, which he’s normally against, of lynching quiet players because of this. On the following page people started pointing out all the numerous other ways that a nightkill could be prevented, but Glorfindel doubled down on the “inactive scum” theory, even suggesting it’s the most logical explanation. I would not say it is logical to assume that every single scum player (if any scum player is capable of submitting a factional kill, idk how Epi’s doing it this game) simply forgot that there was a responsibility to submit a kill on Night 1, rather than the list of other possible explanations (doctor, unkillable role, roleblocks, etc.). Glorfindel sort of acknowledged this here but also stuck to his guns.

What do y’all think of this? I am not at all familiar with Glorfindel’s playstyle, so any useful knowledge there would be helpful.

Indeed you did, my friend. It was addressed (rather obvious;y to every other player in this game) not to me. I expressed an opinion to explain what I thought was (in a game this size) the rather odd occurrence of there being no NK Night 1. Others expressed their views and I accept the validity of them. As I said earlier, I may very well have been naive in my assumption but from my perspective, in a game of 38 players, I should think that equally, the odds of both NKs being negated through role blocks, etc would be pretty long. Again, it's just an opinion.

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Hello Glorfindel, I wrote a post about you

Sloonei wrote:I was looking at some of the timmer voters overnight and a found a few questionable things in Glorfindel’s history. First, These two posts represent his only noteworthy contribution to the Day 1 proceedings, and all he is doing is rejecting a voting strategy proposed by others. He does not propose anything of his own and I see no commitment to anything, really. Looks like Glorfindel spent most of the day in the shadows and then stepped out late to position himself against what could be perceived as a bad lynch (Bubbles, aka me, voting for JJJ and Scotty. I assume Jay was town and have no read on Scotty at this point).

That’s one thing. I read that and was feeling a mild tingle, but then I got to his next string of posts and the tingling intensified.
There’s no nightkill Night 1, so Glorfindel immediately jumps to the conclusion that there’s an inactive scum who simply forgot to submit the kill and then proposes the strategy, which he’s normally against, of lynching quiet players because of this. On the following page people started pointing out all the numerous other ways that a nightkill could be prevented, but Glorfindel doubled down on the “inactive scum” theory, even suggesting it’s the most logical explanation. I would not say it is logical to assume that every single scum player (if any scum player is capable of submitting a factional kill, idk how Epi’s doing it this game) simply forgot that there was a responsibility to submit a kill on Night 1, rather than the list of other possible explanations (doctor, unkillable role, roleblocks, etc.). Glorfindel sort of acknowledged this here but also stuck to his guns.

What do y’all think of this? I am not at all familiar with Glorfindel’s playstyle, so any useful knowledge there would be helpful.

Indeed you did, my friend. It was addressed (rather obvious;y to every other player in this game) not to me. I expressed an opinion to explain what I thought was (in a game this size) the rather odd occurrence of there being no NK Night 1. Others expressed their views and I accept the validity of them. As I said earlier, I may very well have been naive in my assumption but from my perspective, in a game of 38 players, I should think that equally, the odds of both NKs being negated through role blocks, etc would be pretty long. Again, it's just an opinion.

It certainly is an opinion, but I can't dismiss the point entirely on the fact of your opinion. So much of this game is built around forming opinions of things, and my opinion is that this particular opinion you expressed gives the impression of something dishonest. It is not unreasonable to entertain the thought that all potential scum killers could have simply neglected their duties, but to jump to that conclusion as strongly and as swiftly as you did seems like quite a leap. It seems like you were trying to work a specific angle or spread an agenda, or avoid something else.

Please elaborate my friend on precisely what "specific angle" I was working or what agenda I was trying to spread or what it was I was intending to avoid by making the comment that I did. For what it's worth, given the number of absent and semi absent players in this game, I don't know that it is necessarily that long a bow to draw. In any case, if you consider that sufficient grounds to suspect me, it looks like the Mafia teams will have an easy ride of it this game.

Glorfindel wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Diao Chan wrote:你好朋友
誰今天我們殺

So, uh, are we going to talk about this?

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I think you were trying to work the angle of pushing for low-posters to be lynched, or at least creating that as an avenue for yourself to pursue so that you could stay out of any more heated cases later on. Your other vote was on Sorsha, so you cast two votes on players whose biggest mark against them was silence. Consistent, but also safe. I also do not like the method of defense that attempts to entirely brush off and discredit an accusation, which you are using here. I think I've stated a fairly reasonable concern and your response is to mock it as being so bad that I am helping the scum out; which at least suggests that you believe I am town, so it's good to know that.

I am not mocking you, my friend and yes, you're right - You are reasonably high on my town list at the moment - if I come across as sarcastic, I apologise. I do happen to believe you are misguided in the conclusions you're drawing here.

You are not coming off as sarcastic, but you were coming off as a little frustrated and maybe a bit flustered there. And this is something that I am programmed to find suspicious, unfortunately. I can't go against my programming.
Why do you think I'm town?

Frustrated, perhaps. Every game I play here, despite how hard I try I inevitably end up being falsely accused for reasons that range from the spurious to the ridiculous (and if you don't believe me, go back and read Matt's Two-Face accusation of me - it's typical). I understand that you may find my reaction in this regard suspicious but as you say, you're not familiar with my play style and I'll admit I'm probably somewhat 'unique'

Why do I think you're Town? I didn't say this previously but I was disappointed to lose 3J from this game. His posts were (as usual) masterpieces of analysis and interrogation and that's what I want to try to emulate. Consequently, I have little doubt that he was Town. When he got eliminated, I thought we'd lost that but then we got you and Ricochet that have kept the conversations going (clearly not a Mafia agenda). I see some logic to some of your conclusions (clearly not at least one...) and you are clearly an asset to us. I find some of your conclusions aligning to those I've reached so obviously that helps to.

Every game everyone plays many people get falsely suspected. If that weren't the case, there wouldn't be much of a game.

And I would like clarification. Your theory upon seeing no kill after the first night was that 2 entire mafia teams did not show up at all on night 1--not a single member--to send in the team's kill? Can you explain why you thought that was the most plausible explanation?

Also, have you ever seen that happen? Where no one from 2 different mafia teams showed up, on night 1? I'm pretty sure I haven't. So, if it happens regularly in games I'm not playing in, or on other sites, then please enlighten me.

And now that we know that this wasn't the case for at least 1 of the mafia teams, since we've lynched 2 people on those teams, why are you still actively advocating for the lynching of low posters?

Allow me to explain my friend - I'll admit (as I've already done on a number of occasions) that the assumption to which I jumped was a little rash and naive.

Whilst I have never witnessed an absent Mafia team miss their NK, I have likewise never played a game of 37 players where a single Mafia team (one of multiple) make up as little as 8% of the game populace with the extraordinary level of absence and lack of contribution that we've seen this game. Then, there's the fact that one team (on the only time they've had an NK attributed to them) took out a player who'd indicated they would be absent for a substantial period of time and only had two posts...

I also am of the opinion that you are misrepresenting my posts. You claim I'm 'advocating' the lynching of low posters when the ONLY statement I've made in that regard is:

Glorfindel wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:I'm not usually a proponent of lynching low posters but in a circumstance where we have TWO teams with NK ability (one of which has BTSC and still can't get their shit together) and there is no NK, I think I'll be looking at the low/non posters a lot more seriously this game

I can't speak for you or for anyone else but that is hardly what I'd call 'advocating' their lynching and to pursue this matter further, I don't recall having given that as a reason for any of the votes that I've submitted since I made that statement (above)

nutella wrote:I am of course aware of all of those posts. None of them, however, except for that one that was already brought up, actually advocate for the lynching of low posters. He repeatedly discusses the odds of one of the teams being inactive, which I guess you could say implies that he thinks it would be a good idea to go after inactives, but only once does he say it outright, and he never really follows up on it. I guess you and I interpreted his posts differently, but to me, advocating for lynching low posters is a very different thing from stating observations about mechanics and numbers in the game.

nutella wrote:Also, lack of precedence does not mean lack of probability. There's probably a fancy logical fallacy term for that but idgaf. Just because you've never seen an inactive mafia team before doesn't mean it couldn't happen, especially considering the Yellow Turban team only consists of three players, and this game has WAY more than three inactive players. They only killed once, and it was on SVS, an inactive player -- perhaps if nobody in the team had been paying attention they wouldn't know SVS hadn't been participating and just picked her to get rid of. Idk, I just think Glorfindel's lines of thinking are not entirely unreasonable

nutella wrote:I mean, I would be surprised if nobody on the team participated, but let's just take Night 1 -- missed PMs happen, and again, there were enough inactive players at that point that I could see a three-person team missing their night PM. I'm not saying it's necessarily the most likely explanation and I didn't really agree with Glorf when he suggested it, but it's not exactly improbable either and I think you're being pretty harsh on him.

Linki: Fair point, yeah, I guess Epi wouldn't let a team be made up of only inactives (though there might be a couple players who have been inactive this game that he might not have foreseen as such)

Golden wrote:Good work on lynching the suicidal moron.

I think the Nanmans are full of people who aren't posting very much, hence the high profile targets.

@LoRab - I need to take a good look at you today. For most of the game, I've felt you are engaged town and I've been sort of thinking 'its great that LoRab clearly has plenty of time to play'. It's just that yesterday really bothered me. I think you really are wrong on Glorfindel.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Golden wrote:The problem with allowing genuine inactives to survive is it makes the end game quite problematic and less fun. For me there is no easy solution.

There is. Modkill people.

I'd rather have a 4 week game with no inactives than a 6 week game with a bunch of inactives.

I don't get why hosts in this site avoid modkills so much. Yes it screws up balance, but it's a necessary evil.

MacDougall wrote:

Dom wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Talking in this game seems dangerous. Also if they are killing high posters and people who look like they are these civ leaders then why would they leave Quin alive ?

So which baddie are you?

MacDougall wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Yeah his vote on me that he didn't explain aside he looked competent in this game.

Fuck all you who tried to lynch me yesterday while I was incapable of speaking in my defence. Luffy did you silence me and try to get me lynched swine?

You had 4 days to make yourself look like a civ. You didn't so I don't give a shit if you didn't have an extra day.

And who sileneced you on day 2, 3 and 4, btw?

I'm sorry I didn't spend the first 4 days trying to "look like a civ".

If you really require an answer as to why I didn't post a lot it's because I work about 60 hours a week and have a 5 year old. And since when was me being quiet indicative of me being bad?

You being quiet wasn't.

You being more pacific than Glorfindel was.

What does that mean?

It means that you haven't gone after anyone with any fervor all game. That's uncharacterisitc of you.

Nah I drove MP (bad) to tears.

MacDougall wrote:Why did you vote for me?

DFaraday wrote:

LoRab wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Why did you vote for me?

Because, as I stated above, and you didn't respond to, you aren't playing like usual. That makes me suspect you.

But Mac's usual style applies when he's bad too, so I'm not seeing the correlation.

I went ahead and voted TCF and Bass.

MacDougall wrote:I voted for you as well. Hope that's ok. I don't find your suspicion of me genuine. You aren't trying.

And Luffy because of similar.

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:I don't think I've ever seen a baddie silencer who didn't silence a teammate at some point in the game, usually multiple times. So point 3 doesn't hold for me.

My challenge with you is that your tone is off. It's not just that you're phoning in the game, it's that the way you state things isn't in keeping with your civ game.

Also, that you completely discount anyone that suspects you, not only as being wrong, but painting them as being bad because they suspect you.

That isn't going to keep me from suspecting you. And, honestly, only makes you look worse to me.

Also, there are evil indies in this game, so saying that you're not on either mafia team doesn't really convince me that you are civ.

For you to claim you have a solid grasp of my civ game to the point of being able to observe that anything I do is in keeping with it is absurd. And if you are producing that as case quality evidence then how is my tone in keeping with the Mafia me, whom you would have more experience playing with I believe.

I am not painting anyone who suspects me as bad. I was just dishing out some standard brand omgus so meta in essence it wore itself as a hat. But you wouldn't pick that up because despite your belief that I scum read you in every game, here we are yet again with you scum reading me. Have you ever not?

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I have no problem dueling it's probably going to happen anyway. All I ask is if I can duel Quinn .

Sloonei wrote:People who find Bass suspicious for volunteering to duel: Why? What do you suppose is his baddie motivation?

Sloonei wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Sloonei wrote:People who find Bass suspicious for volunteering to duel: Why? What do you suppose is his baddie motivation?

I don't necessarily suspect him for it, but it seems odd and I'd like an explanation from him. I'm not sure what a baddie motivation would be. but I see even less of a civie motivation to do so.

Really, it's just odd to me and I'd like to try to understand it better.

So what did you mean when you said it "does not feel good"?

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I want to duel Quinn because I think he is bad and I would love to be the one to beat him in a duel. I figured he felt the same. I don't see why he would decline my challenge unless he his scared he will flip bad in that case who wants a civ around you isn't welling to put their money where their mouth is.

Quin wrote:

Matahari wrote:I'm seriously debating voting Sorsha. She is the only one on this list who dueled and won, and was later night-killed. I may be looking at this wrong, but it seems more likely that she is town and while that may not be helpful in the event of a role reveal, it would be safer in the event of a rezz. Or maybe not? Anyone want to comment on whether I'm thinking clearly here?

I think that (at least right now) information would be better than a rezz, so I'd suggest voting somewhere that would help us in terms of giving us that. Checking Sorsha might bring an end to the whole recruitment conversation from a few days ago, so he's not a bad option by any means.

Quin wrote:Why did you vote Glorfindel, LoRab?

Elohcin wrote:

Dom wrote:Hm.... JJJ was a civ-- who's been trying their best to paint him as bad?

Wow...and see I was going to give an explanation of why I voted for JJJ but thought to keep my mouth shut since I don't have true evidence. But...I voted JJJ b/c I thought maybe this was a "bring someone back" poll. I thought JJJ was civ and thought whoever started the whole JJJ is bad thing is the one who is actually bad. Anyone know who started that train of thought?

Also, may I say that my instincts have been spot on this game despite not getting caught up in all the details of what everyone is saying. Meaning, I am not keeping up with the thread too much, but I do read for tone here and there and I have been wrong ONE time on who is who regarding roles and what not. B/c of that, I think I will share my thoughts on golden and Lorab. I think both are bad. The whole thing where golden changed his mind so quickly about Simon....I didn't say it at the time, but it pinged me somethin' awful. Lorab's overall tone has made me thing she is bad. And they both voted for TH most recently, who I think is also bad. Maybe they thought it was a resurrect poll as well.

Scotty wrote:

Scotty wrote:K. JJJ was bad.

I actually was hoping he would be bad, which would look more incriminating for the people that originally questioned his alignment. I'm pretty sure Quin brought it up first, but again now that JJJ is bad, I think that looks better for him.

Er, that should read JJJ is GOOD. I just woke up. Gimme a break

Zuo Ci wrote:

TheCapsFan wrote:I would be comfortable being voted for.

Our departed spirit is at peace. He lived by truth and he embraced The Way. His light was lost before its time, and nature mourns him. His enemies would bring him to destruction, and it is they who do not act in accordance with the will of the universe. It is they who seek opportunity; it is they who encroach upon the spirit of the weak. To forget this is to be free, but my thoughts dwell there alone. If you would feel what I feel, you may be guided to understand what may move my voting hand.

I would speak the names of those whose actions may not be in harmony with nature. They are Scotty, LoRab, Quin, and nutella. Others may apply, but my thoughts wander with the wind...

Zuo Ci wrote:

LoRab wrote:I'm happy to speak with you.

And so we commune, spirit to spirit, and may our words reveal virtue. Our fallen brother, he who welcomed the end freely, was met with your ire. It is my chief worry that this ire is not in alignment with the flow of life, and that you have not embraced wu wei. Allow your anger to take you this moment, that I might observe it as you express it, and perhaps my perspective will warp to your will.

DFaraday wrote:

LoRab wrote:Kidnapped again. Meh.

I need to go back and check who mentioned me early on both times I was silenced, as I think it was perhaps purposeful.

I'm not bad. I may have unpopluar points of view and I may be stubborn as shit about them. But that's me being me. Yes, I voted INH late. Because that's when I got online. And I saw that there had been good points made about him. No, I hadn't mentioned him before. He was slightly pingy in the back of my brain for running for prefect and disappearing, but it was a dull and minor ping, and was never relevant enough (or pingy enough) to mention.

That seems to be the basic gist of the case against me. If there is anything else, let me know.

I mean, I made a whole case on you before that wasn't about tunneling. Since it's absurdly long, I'll just link it here. The basic reason is in response to this train of events:

Glorf presents a case on Timmer
Lorab: That's a convincing case *votes Timmer*
Timmer turns out to be civ
Lorab: It was all a baddie ploy, Glorf is bad!

Going along with the case, then immediately (literally, her very next post) turning around and going after the guy who presented it when it turns out to be incorrect struck me as very shady, even more so now that we know Glorf was civ.

In addition, as I outlined in my earlier post, Lorab was not only tunneling TH, she was, in my opinion, twisting the facts to fit her case on him. The fact that she keeps saying the only case on her is for tunneling (as she also did here)only makes me more suspicious of her.

Matahari wrote:Hi Indi, welcome. I replaced in too, and I'm a bit more comfortable now, but still find myself researching posts constantly. Good luck to you.

I have found four players who did not seem eager to vote inactives. Quin, Sig (sorry Indi), Golden, and Lorab (in sideways fashion? Lorab suspected Glorf, I think, for mentioning inactives a lot, as though he was trying to point suspicion their way, but she also pointed out that he only mentioned voting them once, and she found this suspicious for some reason).

On the one hand, this is suspicious because we have turned up 2 bad inactives now, but on the other hand, there is more btsc than just bad teams. I also have a theory that Epignosis is not replacing the mafia inactives. I could be wrong there, of course, but I'm kind of stuck on that.

Scotty wrote:You're welcome.

DFaraday wrote:

LoRab wrote:Kidnapped again. Meh.

I need to go back and check who mentioned me early on both times I was silenced, as I think it was perhaps purposeful.

I'm not bad. I may have unpopluar points of view and I may be stubborn as shit about them. But that's me being me. Yes, I voted INH late. Because that's when I got online. And I saw that there had been good points made about him. No, I hadn't mentioned him before. He was slightly pingy in the back of my brain for running for prefect and disappearing, but it was a dull and minor ping, and was never relevant enough (or pingy enough) to mention.

That seems to be the basic gist of the case against me. If there is anything else, let me know.

I mean, I made a whole case on you before that wasn't about tunneling. Since it's absurdly long, I'll just link it here. The basic reason is in response to this train of events:

Glorf presents a case on Timmer
Lorab: That's a convincing case *votes Timmer*
Timmer turns out to be civ
Lorab: It was all a baddie ploy, Glorf is bad!

Going along with the case, then immediately (literally, her very next post) turning around and going after the guy who presented it when it turns out to be incorrect struck me as very shady, even more so now that we know Glorf was civ.

In addition, as I outlined in my earlier post, Lorab was not only tunneling TH, she was, in my opinion, twisting the facts to fit her case on him. The fact that she keeps saying the only case on her is for tunneling (as she also did here)only makes me more suspicious of her.

Wait, where was this canon? I don't think we know that at all. Did I miss something?

Also, LoRab, kidnapped again eh? I could believe that, but I also am wary of kidnappings at this stage. I think you very well could be Nanman.

I do not suspect indiglo in the slightest right now because if she were a YT she would have killed someone last night. But YT didn't kill. Again.

I'm all for lynching an inactive at this point to eliminate the YT's (if they haven't been eliminated already, but I assume Epi would notify us of such). If the YTs have been eliminated, Mr. indie leader would take over and we haven't seen that yet.