The Syndicate

thellama73 wrote:I'm going to vote for a man, because it doesn't matter whether directors are talented or make good movies, just which chromosomes they have.

A Person wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

A Person wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

thellama73 wrote:(looking at you, Michael Bay!)

Well he must be somewhere around here.

He's probably just waiting for the thread to blow up.

Voting for Walt Disney might just do it.

It would certainly make it more animated.

Ricochet wrote:I'm too much of a scaredy cat to watch horror. Although I did watch the Babadook recently, due to hype.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:You mean this?

thellama73 wrote:

timmer wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I like the use of color in Chris Nolan's Memento. Very blue palette for the bulk of the film, and more yellow for the flashbacks. It gives it a nice consistent feel that is almost subconscious to the viewer.

I like using colour palettes as well, but man it has GOT to be subtle, or at least not garish and distracting. Peter Jackson did some wonderful work with colour tinting in the LOTR trilogy, for instance. It was noticeable, but added such an otherworldly feel to everything. I wasn't a fan of Soderbergh's blue/red/yellow work in Traffic, though. It was just so THERE, I found myself distracted. Maybe it's my own problem, but such things are important.

I completely agree with you. There was some movie I was watching (I forget which one, I want to say Swordfish or something like that) where everything was SO YELLOW it was terrible and distracting. I think you can get away with a little more of it in an artier film like Memento, but it can easily be taken too far.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:I have to ask, as this point, those who intend to scan back Day 0 for OT content: what exactly do (or will) they consider to be OT in this particular game?

Perhaps S~V~S can better explain what she's looking for... Frankly, the only way this would even prove meaningful to me is that if someone makes every effort to post about film directors, but refuses to engage in current discussion. I can't recall anyone doing this though. And it's not like there's really much to discuss on-topic right now, anyway, due it to being D1.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp? I don't expect you to agree with me, but surely you have seen baddies hiding in OT? I am not trying to discourage OT, and I am amazed that you are implying that i am. I have been involved in it myself. What I am saying is that after some time days, if someone is mostly posting OT, then I might find that suspicious. Like if someone has 10 or 15 posts and says nothing game related, that would get my eye.

What?

I can't say I've ever witnessed a baddie hiding in OT, but it's possible I just don't pay attention to it.

I'm not implying that you are; I'm implying that witch hunts on D1, if this were to be the basis by which people judge activity, might discourage OT.

After some time? Sure. But we've hardly had that happen yet.

I agree with you on the bolded and underlined.

I don't understand why you're offended.

thellama73 wrote:

Dom wrote:Llama, who has suspected you?

Llama, why did you not answer my question?

1. Lizzy mainly with a hint of Long Con.

2. No internet (it is back now.) In answer to your question, yes, I consider his ff-topic banter activity. He has posted more than he usually does, which I consider suspicious.

I have found the responses to my suspicion very productive, however, and I am far from decided on who I will vote for.

thellama73 wrote:Riddle me this: Why would someone refuse to say "no" when asked if they are bad? There are many explanations, but the following springs immediately to my mind:

They are new to the game of mafia and not used to telling bald-faced lies to their fellow players.

Just a thought.

thellama73 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Llama, are you insane? Sure, you could say that's one explanation for Ricochet just didn't say "No", but if you want to believe that's most likely, then it seems to me you have to make some serious assumptions.

I am eager to hear the rationale for your Day 1 vote that involves zero assumptions.

thellama73 wrote:You really wouldn't vote for someone you thought was bad because they are new, SVS? I find that very strange.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Llama, are you insane? Sure, you could say that's one explanation for Ricochet just didn't say "No", but if you want to believe that's most likely, then it seems to me you have to make some serious assumptions.

I am eager to hear the rationale for your Day 1 vote that involves zero assumptions.

^^^^^

LOL, seriously guys? Where did I say my D1 vote wouldn't involve zero assumptions? And way to cut out the rest of my post, Llama, to misrepresent what I was saying.

MovingPictures07 wrote:And one last thing, I'd appreciate to hear what Dom's thinking, since I haven't really seen what he's thinking re: suspects or anything yet other than questioning people.

thellama73 wrote:

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:You really wouldn't vote for someone you thought was bad because they are new, SVS? I find that very strange.

You find it strange that SVS would have a sentimental reason for not voting new players? You find it strange that SVS would place principle over pragmatism-- especially early on in a game?
You really find THAT strange?

I find it strange that people say they want to play a game and then they don't try to win that game, yes. But as I said, I understand her perspective on this. It's just a difference of opinion.

Ricochet wrote:(Plus, I'll be amazed if I'll be able to crack out Vompatti at any point of the game. )

FZ. wrote:Oops, got sent in the middle.

Also, is no one worried about Lizzy's early vote? Just MM's? Did she say anything about not being here until the rest of the day? Because voting for llama for his suspicion, that seemed valid to me, not to mention he didn't even vote on that feeling, makes me feel she was looking for a quick reason to vote someone so she doesn't later have to get in the middle of the action.

Ricochet wrote:

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:(Plus, I'll be amazed if I'll be able to crack out Vompatti at any point of the game. )

What makes you feel that way?

If he'll just vomperdoodle as usual, I don't see how I'll manage to profile that in any way as good or bad. But you (collectively) certainly have much more experience with that already.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:You really wouldn't vote for someone you thought was bad because they are new, SVS? I find that very strange.

You find it strange that SVS would have a sentimental reason for not voting new players? You find it strange that SVS would place principle over pragmatism-- especially early on in a game?
You really find THAT strange?

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Llama, are you insane? Sure, you could say that's one explanation for Ricochet just didn't say "No", but if you want to believe that's most likely, then it seems to me you have to make some serious assumptions.

I am eager to hear the rationale for your Day 1 vote that involves zero assumptions.

^^^^^

LOL, seriously guys? Where did I say my D1 vote wouldn't involve zero assumptions? And way to cut out the rest of my post, Llama, to misrepresent what I was saying.

MP, what did you mean to indicate by "serious assumptions", then? Do you intend to make them in your vote?

MovingPictures07 wrote:And one last thing, I'd appreciate to hear what Dom's thinking, since I haven't really seen what he's thinking re: suspects or anything yet other than questioning people.

Now, MP, is that really strange for me at Day 1?
I think it's pretty obvious what I'm thinking.
Is questioning people bad?
Why are you concerned with my questions?
Is this an unusual way for me to play?
(Hint: it's not)

So yeah, Llama's got my eye. I thought that much was obvious.

I never once said it was strange, Dom. I just was hoping you'd clarify since I knew you questioned Llama but you seemed to feel better after his response, but I really couldn't tell what was going on in your mind, so that's why I asked.

I think you're reaching; I never said questioning is bad, that I'm concerned, or anything. I just wanted clarification, that's all.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:i really thought the poll ended at 3 and not 2. i guess i should have voted before i posted.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:i really thought the poll ended at 3 and not 2. i guess i should have voted before i posted.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:if i voted before i started my post i wouldn't have missed vote.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dom wrote:
If I'm reaching, what am i reaching for? You never stated it, and I find that potentially concerning.

Wait, what? (Sorry, I had to cut the quotes since I screwed them up and they were getting too long)

I just said you're "reaching" because you're jumping to all kinds of conclusions about what I asked you, when really it was just a simple request, "state your suspicions", because I honestly had no idea what you were thinking. I'm not gunning for you as bad because of it; I just found it odd I had to ask you for you to clarify who you were actually suspicious of, and when I asked, you asked me all these questions like I implied all these other things when I didn't.

Frankly, I don't think you'll top my suspicion list for this second round of D1 though.

S~V~S wrote:@MP, remember that game where I told you I would explain why i always think you are bad these days, but it just never happened? Remind me again after this game. I know exactly what Canuck means~ you come across as more hyperbole than anything sometimes. Back in the day, that was bad MP. But these days, that is always MP. You didn't used to do this all the time. This is part of why you get lynched early alot these days, imo. You might want to throttle back on the drama words just a tiny bit. When you use those words & phrases, I visualize a sock dressed like Snidely Whiplash; just a bit over the top. Like that time you said, "How Dare You?" to me in the context of an internet Mafia game; overkill much? *Sees a Sock Twirling its' Mustache*

Not saying I suspect you here for that. I don't have much of an opinion yet.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dom wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dom wrote:
If I'm reaching, what am i reaching for? You never stated it, and I find that potentially concerning.

Wait, what? (Sorry, I had to cut the quotes since I screwed them up and they were getting too long)

I just said you're "reaching" because you're jumping to all kinds of conclusions about what I asked you, when really it was just a simple request, "state your suspicions", because I honestly had no idea what you were thinking. I'm not gunning for you as bad because of it; I just found it odd I had to ask you for you to clarify who you were actually suspicious of, and when I asked, you asked me all these questions like I implied all these other things when I didn't.

Frankly, I don't think you'll top my suspicion list for this second round of D1 though.

So this is the question I asked, MP. What conclusions was I making?
What was I reaching for?

Please, do tell me.

I think we're on two completely different planes of communication right now, Dom, so we're missing each other's points.

Let me walk you through my train of thought and hopefully that will adequately answer your question:

This is the original post I'm referring to:

Dom wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:And one last thing, I'd appreciate to hear what Dom's thinking, since I haven't really seen what he's thinking re: suspects or anything yet other than questioning people.

Now, MP, is that really strange for me at Day 1?
I think it's pretty obvious what I'm thinking.
Is questioning people bad?
Why are you concerned with my questions?
Is this an unusual way for me to play?
(Hint: it's not)

So yeah, Llama's got my eye. I thought that much was obvious.

Now I've been saying that all I was asking you here was for your thoughts re: suspects. You had, before this post, asked Llama a couple of questions and then said to his response "OK. I just wanted an answer. Thank you!", but other than that and your questioning me about my "serious assumptions" post, I didn't really see anywhere where you said "I suspect so and so and here's why" or anything like that. Which is fine, but it's what prompted my question, because I value your input and was wondering what you were currently thinking.

You responded, however, asking all these questions and reading all this stuff into it.
- I never said or meant to insinuate that it was strange for you
- It wasn't obvious to ME what you were thinking, so that's why I asked the question
- I never said or meant to insinuate that questioning people is bad
- I never said or meant to insinuate that I am concerned with your questions
- I never said or meant to insinuate that it's unusual for you to play

So what gave you the impression that I said or meant any of those things? I was only asking for your suspects/thoughts. That's IT.

So when you responded like that, that's why I said it seemed like to me you were "reaching", like you were reaching for some kind of insinuation out of a simple request for your thoughts. That's all. That perception of your behavior, combined with the train of thought below:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Well, I have to leave really soon, and won't be back.

I'd really rather not get any more votes because people miscomprehend what I am clarifying (and maybe that's my fault for not being clear enough with my explanations; if so, I apologize), but I don't see Llama as bad. I really don't want him to die today either because he tends to attract a lot of attention early on regardless of alignment, and I see no reason to believe he's any more bad than anyone else right now (same with S~V~S and Rico).

The point on LC was made, but I thought his response was genuine, and I don't see that being worthy either.

I thought Dom's response to me was incredibly overreacting (not totally out of character, so that alone doesn't mean much), but it struck me as odd because I never implied any of those things, and it seemed to me he wanted to make a big deal out of me asking him who his suspects were, when he NEVER actually said them outright. And I know he asks a lot of questions, but the fact that he never came out and said how he felt about anyone, including Llama, just seemed strange to me, and an easy way to seem like he was contributing but without putting any thoughts out of his own in addition to his questions. And I think he's taking advantage of a vocal Llama to place an easy vote, so I'll be voting Dom. It's relatively weak, but it's really the only thing I'm feeling right now.

votes Dom

Are why I voted for you on D1, since I wasn't really pinged by anything else, and I was only minorly pinged by what I mention there.

Now that we have a day's worth of voting records to go off of, I'm not even really sure what I think about you right now, and I don't think I'll pursue you for a vote today, which is what I said here:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dom wrote:
If I'm reaching, what am i reaching for? You never stated it, and I find that potentially concerning.

Wait, what? (Sorry, I had to cut the quotes since I screwed them up and they were getting too long)

I just said you're "reaching" because you're jumping to all kinds of conclusions about what I asked you, when really it was just a simple request, "state your suspicions", because I honestly had no idea what you were thinking. I'm not gunning for you as bad because of it; I just found it odd I had to ask you for you to clarify who you were actually suspicious of, and when I asked, you asked me all these questions like I implied all these other things when I didn't.

Frankly, I don't think you'll top my suspicion list for this second round of D1 though.

Now I thought I addressed your "what am I reaching for?" question in this post as well, but apparently it wasn't adequate. So hopefully this post answers your question? If it doesn't, please let me know.

Turnip Head wrote:You say you don't want to rehash the Dom thing anymore MP, and even said you don't suspect him, and yet you seem to expect that someone else should find his behavior suspicious. Why is that?

FZ. wrote:
I get number 2 in the first list. Can you recall why Dom voted llama? Dom, can you answer it?
But basically you're saying that all this talk was a waste of time? :P
Which avenues do you feel are worth pursuing? I have to be honest. The thing that worries me about you is the fact that usually, you are more involved in the other discussions and is the first one to see my point of view. I haven't seen that so far this game, which makes me wonder. Basically, you've only focused on Dom and defended the rest.

thellama73 wrote:I will gladly explain why I want to vote for Vomps. Basically, I just think I am seeing his baddie game. He's more engaged than he usually is, and more on topic. He reacted to my suspicion of him when I was the only one even talking about a vote for him, and in my experience, a civ Vomps would have been unfazed by that and ignored it. Then, he started trying to buddy up to me, calling me the epitome of a helpful civ. I have very often seen baddies try to support the people who suspect them as a way of engendering sympathy, and I have very often seen it work.

It doesn't feel like Vomps' normal game. He seems unduly worried about getting lynched (even though only two people really mentioned him as a lynch possibility) and in my experience, people with teams to support are more worried about getting lynched than lone civilians.

FZ. wrote:So Dom, you still think MP is suspicious? Is he the person you'll vote for, or do you still plan to vote llama. In regards to llama, do you think he's trying to make vomp look bad on purpose, or that he's just wrong? It would be nice if you took a look at the links I supplied.

SVS, who is your top suspect at the moment?

S~V~S wrote:

Dom wrote:Just a warning:

I go to school in Rhode Island. I am on an Island. We are going to experience extremely high winds (Hurricane Force) all night and get 2-3+ feet of snow. If I am absent, you know why.

That's right, I forgot you were in RI, I am on the North Shore of Long Island, right across the Sound, so yeah. Good Luck Stay warm & electrified~!

MovingPictures07 wrote:Wow, talkative thread is talkative.

Turnip Head wrote:You say you don't want to rehash the Dom thing anymore MP, and even said you don't suspect him, and yet you seem to expect that someone else should find his behavior suspicious. Why is that?

Clearly I am not communicating well this game.

I DID suspect him, very mildly, on D1. I don't know what I think anymore, so, yes, I don't actively suspect him.

I was asking others because I appreciate other players' inputs, and since no one commented on my vote or thoughts on Dom at all, I wanted to make sure that I'm right to back off of it due to thinking it was a misunderstanding, or if someone else saw what I originally saw on D1. That's why.

Contrary to what Dom says, it's not because I WANT someone else to find it suspicious. I just wanted other people's input. I don't understand what's so wrong about that.

I appreciate what you, Llama, Bass, and others have said on the matter.

Dom wrote: In a game where we've discussed how people who don't add to the discussion might be bad and you then say that I haven't said who I'm suspicious of yet, only asked questions....
You don't see that might seem a bit.... jumpy... almost like you were trying to get someone to lynch me?

Huh?

Well, I clearly thought you were worthy of my vote on D1, so that's why I voted you. If you call that "trying to get someone to lynch" you, then I suppose OK.

I don't understand what point you're trying to make.

But I'm done discussing it unless you feel I haven't adequately answered your questions.

thellama73 wrote:
I'm not feeling baddie Roxy or Long Con. I don't trust Blooper, more because I know how shifty she can be than because of anything she has said (very little). No reads on the others.

nijuukyugou wrote: Are you changing jobs? Move to DC and I will buy you a drink.

Trying to move schools. This one has done me wrong too many times. If I find my way up there, I expect a good strong one

If you find yourself looking up in my neck of the country, let me know. I can give you the names of some really good districts!

Though, that would be a MASSIVE move for you.

Mongoose wrote:Hi darlings.

Hope you are having a magical ass Monday!

This was my favorite thing I saw this year: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2407380/combined

What was yours?

Happy hunting!

Mongoose wrote:

Dom wrote:

Mongoose wrote:Hi darlings.

Hope you are having a magical ass Monday!

This was my favorite thing I saw this year: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2407380/combined

What was yours?

Happy hunting!

I don't watch many films, but I really really enjoyed The Skeleton Twins.

I did too! I watched them singing Starship 5x in a row.

Mongoose wrote:

Dom wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

Dom wrote:

Mongoose wrote:Hi darlings.

Hope you are having a magical ass Monday!

This was my favorite thing I saw this year: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2407380/combined

What was yours?

Happy hunting!

I don't watch many films, but I really really enjoyed The Skeleton Twins.

I did too! I watched them singing Starship 5x in a row.

SAME!! My friend and I reenact that scene all the time!!!!
The nitrous scene was so so so so SO funny! I have a feeling that Bill and Kristin ad-libbed a lot of that.

My biggest regret in life is that I never have a twin brother. Logan's the closest I have to do that.

My second biggest regret is that I am not actually Kristin Wiig.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Black Rock wrote:Holy crap, it's hard to keep up to you guys.

My initial read was very interesting. MP/Dom, you're out of control. I can't decide who I'm more suspicious of out of you two but you have both made my radar. Although I doubt I'll be voting for either of them because TH has gotten my eye His posts are reading baddie TH to me. I don't like how he is so dismissive of MP/Dom. Like he's trying to lead eyes away from a teammate.

Also SVS and Llama are on my watch list for minor pings.

*joins game*

It was a lot to take in so I may have missed a few things but I'm playing catch up nonetheless.

MovingPictures07 wrote:LOL, is that me getting a thousand eyes from you, Dom?

Go ahead and vote me then. :P

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dom wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:LOL, is that me getting a thousand eyes from you, Dom?

Go ahead and vote me then. :P

"That I didn't even start"


Are you serious?
This is not only false, but it is also ridiculously deflecting onto me. You are saying to BR, "See, I didn't even START this".

Are you serious?

I asked you what your thoughts/suspects were, and you drew millions of implications from a simple request. So, no, I didn't start an insanely crazy back and forth where it turned into much more than that.

Black Rock wrote:Alright MP and Dom, you misunderstood my out of control remark. I often don't use smilies and I should have. That part was a bit of a joke, my sense of humour is often misunderstood. I meant the gigantic size of your posts sometimes, and was making fun. In my mind, the response to that was also funny. I do think the two of you are worth looking at, I'm not going to just dismiss as civvie vs civvie arguments till I trust you. Which I don't at this point. If that"s a bit odd so be it. You two have not said or did anything to gain civvie trust in my opinion and I will be reading and watching you two.

Long Con wrote:
Dom-MP has obviously been a thing. I agree with MP that Dom is the one that made it into a "thing", and that MP was asking a simple question that Dom reacted to with a lot of... reaction. So, if this turned into a lynch with only MP and Dom on it, I'd vote Dom.

thellama73 wrote:A couple of people have now said that they think, between MP and Dom, Dom is the likely baddie if there is one. I disagree with that. Dom is being aggressive and unreasonable with MP, but that to me does not say baddie. I think Dom tends to be a more emotional player, and I think we are seeing this in his conflict with MP.

On the other hand, MP's sudden suspicion of Black Rock feels fishy to me, like he's in need of a distraction. I agree with SVS that BR's post was not weird or out of character.

Now we have two players (Long Con and BWT) misrepresenting Dom's vote. Of course, we know BWT is civvie, so he is surely just going off what LC said, but I am starting to get the sinking feeling that a subtle conspiracy is building against Dom. If I had to vote either Dom or MP, it would certainly be MP at this point.

Does anyone else feel like this Day 1 has lasted forever?

Long Con wrote:Sorry for the misread, it was indeed Rico and not Dom that did it:

Made
1
Ricochet (17) 6%
Dom
1
MovingPictures07 (10) 6%

These polls transferred to pure text mess me up sometimes, sorry for the slander, Dom!

MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't understand how any of my behavior this game is out of character for me whatsoever.

MovingPictures07 wrote: The people who are saying BR is totally in character: Why is it acceptable for someone to say who they suspect but not give reasons why? She said twice now that I'm worth looking at, or something to that effect, but never cited a reason. I find that suspicious.

S~V~S wrote: I am on a snow removal break, about to go back out :P While we did not get 3 feet 20 inches is plenty enough

timmer wrote: And I don't quite trust Long Con. Part of it is linked to his defence of MP and suspicion of Dom, though, so that will wait until i know the alignment of one of the players. But LC gets the for now.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Dom wrote:

timmer wrote: And I don't quite trust Long Con. Part of it is linked to his defence of MP and suspicion of Dom, though, so that will wait until i know the alignment of one of the players. But LC gets the for now.

Let's say that MP is civvie.
Why would that reflect poorly on me?
I mean, I genuinely think he is bad. Why would that make me bad?

I'm confused here Dom, let me reread these interactions circa you, LC, and timmer real quick.

Linki: @SD Oh dear, I can't wait to see how the others react. But fair enough.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Dom wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Dom wrote:

timmer wrote: And I don't quite trust Long Con. Part of it is linked to his defence of MP and suspicion of Dom, though, so that will wait until i know the alignment of one of the players. But LC gets the for now.

Let's say that MP is civvie.
Why would that reflect poorly on me?
I mean, I genuinely think he is bad. Why would that make me bad?

I'm confused here Dom, let me reread these interactions circa you, LC, and timmer real quick.

Linki: @SD Oh dear, I can't wait to see how the others react. But fair enough.

what?

Your comment made me think there was some insinuations from LC (that timmer mentioned) that meant that if MP is good that you are bad. That was not the case.

But still, I just had a look back at LC. He made a few jumps in his logic for his final vote of AP. I don't understand the logic there.

FZ. wrote:Why do you all start talking so late in the day? and when I need to go

llama, I saw your answer, thanks. I actually remember you playing like that in the first game we played together and you were a civ.

Right now, I'm still thinking of voting Vomp. First, because he's lowered his post number drastically since we started pushing for him. If he doesn't care if he's lynched like he says, why not continue just the way he did before?

Then, there's AP, which I agree, made a cop out vote. Especially at the time of the vote. Also I see no difference between not voting at all and voting yourself or randomizing. That said, I've seen him do it before.

The last points regarding MP have some merit, but I still think I'm seeing civ MP. Like TH, I can't put my finger on it, but it's the opposite. I can't vote for him feeling like that. I hope I'm not wrong.

Lastly, there's Dom, who focuses on one person (MP), just like he did in the Champions' game, and he was bad. I still think that between the two, he's more likely bad.

So it's between Dom and Vompatti, but Dom doesn't seem to have any votes, so I guess I'll be voting for Vomp. I have 5 more minutes before I need to go

Turnip Head wrote:So... Vomps voted for Dom on Day 1 in the Are You Being Served game too.

Strange puzzlings.

Mongoose wrote:What was the very last film you saw?

Mine was Luis Buñuel's Tristana (based on the novel of the same name), starring the effervescent Catherine Deneuve (did anyone catch her in the recentish film Potiche? I freakin loved that).

You've probably seen his classic short film Un Chien Andalou, but have you seen L'Age d'Or? Whoamg.


Deneuve shines brightly in Tristana.

Long Con wrote:I can understand why you would suspect me if MP turns up bad. It's one of the risks one takes when one puts one's opinion out there. I guess it would have been a lot easier and blendy to say it looks like Civ on Civ. Nice and blendy, then you don't get people eyeballing you as much, right, blendies?

I thought MP seemed reasonable at the outset, and Dom seemed less so. I thought Dom's original post was very reactionary. Dom says he explained that, but I'm more interested in studying original interactions than later explanations. You can explain away most things with ease.

I only bring it up because one or two people have suspicion floating around me for my opinion on the MP-Dom. I do not bring it up as an accusation against Dom of baddieness, it was just a 'hot topic' in the thread, so I weighed in. Gonna take a bit more to make me vote Dom than an argument with the sometimes bull-headed MP.

Ricochet wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:For me (and I think I said this somewhere?), on a day when there are a few strong (in terms of cases and/or number of votes already placed) candidiates for lynching, I really don't like voting for someone with no votes, or someone who is very unlikely to be lynched. It's too much like shirking responsibility, and I avoid that when a civ.
So for this vote, I was torn between TH (who no one else would vote for, but who was and is my strongest suspicion), MP, and AP. I thought the reasoning about the avoiding the bwt vote once it was scured made sense (I understand lots of you don't think so, but ), and SVS' points about MM also rang true at the time. If AP had flipped bad, I would deffo have voted MM today. I didn't vote MM yesterday because there was no chance of him being lynched, so I went with AP. I was one of the last to vote, and at the time I was voting there were a flurry of inconsequential votes, so between MP and AP I went with the one that would be more decisive rather than keep things closer to a tie and leave the deciding votes to TH (who I don't trust) and BR, who I wasn't sure would make it in time since she hadn't been around.

Does that make sense (even if you wouldn't personally have acted similarly)?

Yes (even if). I sort of understand better now the "attraction" for such a vote, but I still find it questionable for baddie hunting later on. If I don't believe the "strong candidate" to be suspicious and vote something else, I can wake up the next day as a suspect of "shirking responsibility". Why? All in all, I wouldn't have voted for AP, really, because I was more convinced he just didn't manage to get in the game in either days - which proved to be true.

Long Con wrote:I saw that Dom. I have only read through that part once, and it was pretty skimmy. To the best of my recollection, BR said you and MP were crazy, and wasn't just going to assume it's Civ on Civ. Then I remember a few posts of backlash against BR, including MP and I think Turnip Head (who BR was suspicious of).

I haven't really done any more analysis on that part, like rereading them in a baddie light for instance, to see if I think it's something a baddie would say/do". My first read was more of a "well, BR certainly jumped right in there, how is this going to go?" kind of read.

So I don't have a changed opinion on MP because of it, but it's probably worth a reread, clearly you are referencing it for a reason.

timmer wrote:'ve been too invested in the Champs game so far.

S~V~S wrote:I thought they were teammates. This is not apparent?

thellama73 wrote:I think SVS is acting weird and suspicious, but the number of people who have jumped on that is making me nervous. I also, like MP, acknowledge that I am bad at reading her. Does anyone agree with my "if Vompatti is bad, SVS likely saved shim, so let's lynch Vompatti first and see" logic?

Black Rock wrote:SVS, I had responded to why I put you on a watch lynch. At the time that's how I felt. Trust you less this game cause I trust you too much lately. That kind of bull. Now though you seem to be twisting in the wind. I would not be surprised if you flipped baddie. You don't have your usual civvie calm logic flowing here. I also am looking at the players that also feel this way, these are players that know you well. I don't believe they are all a baddie team setting you up so I am taking there opinion into consideration.

Roxy wrote:I feel I should tell everyone that I had asked to be replaced after what had happened in the GoC game but the next morning I realized it was just a knee-jerk reaction and I had hurt feelings (read:over-reaction) - again. So I joined back in which is why Mongoose then said she no longer needed a replacement. Sorry for causing anyone confusion.

S~V~S wrote: Linki~ I think it depends on context, Dom. I am more asking my former BTS partners what they think. Do YOU think I would make really stupid baddie votes on two bandwagons in a row on low participators if I was a baddie?

Black Rock wrote:What do you think of that MP?

Dom, who are you looking at today?

Turnip Head wrote:How does everyone feel about MovingPictures?

MovingPictures07 wrote: No.

What do people think of Canuck?

And is timmer silenced or something? Is there even a silencer? I'd have to go check. It's almost time for me though.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Black Rock wrote:I think I'm understanding SVS completely clear right now. Thank you.

Why did everyone just pile onto, then fall off SVS in one collective swing???

As far as I know, BR is the only one who's been drinking.