The Syndicate

Friends? Hello friends! No clue who i want to vote for yet( no Tarentino

), but I'm happy to be here!!

thellama73 wrote:I'm gonna play chill this game, like a cool cat, daddio. Is that groovy with everyone?

I just finished Invisible Man(ellison), and need to break in the funky dialect, keep it Jazzy. Ya know pops?

thellama73 wrote:
Made wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I'm gonna play chill this game, like a cool cat, daddio. Is that groovy with everyone?
I just finished Invisible Man(ellison), and need to break in the funky dialect, keep it Jazzy. Ya know pops?
I like the part in that where the scientist turns invisible and can't find a way to turn back.

I said ellison tho.

Well that was a fun read. Caught up... It's interesting comparing my first game with (from my perspective) Rico's and how players are choosing to interact with them. While I get being helpful, and I also get being hard on a new person in a jokey kind of way, I feel that the fact that we're even discussing the nuances of how to treat new players is strange.

Just feels a little too on the nose to me. Sure, there's not much to talk about yet, but i'd consider this almost unspoken rule territory. Maybe this is people wanting to add to the discussion of whatever being discussed to seem involved?

Gonna go read my role now

Overslept, sorry ya'll

Figures having multiple of these would be useful later in game, so let's go with it.
my responses are in this pretty color

thellama73 wrote:All right, let's see what we got here:

A Person - No read
Bass the Clever - Seems off/stiff, Iunno
BirdWithTeeth11 - I generally don't like/trust an eagerness to speak on another player's behalf "what I think he meant by that was..." Let people speak for themselves. It may not be a baddie move, but it certainly helps baddies cover slips if they make them. I'll agree with this
BlackRock - No read.samzies
Canucklehead - Textbook sexism on Day 0, but apart from that, no read. can't remember how to read canuck tbh
DFaraday - No read. same
Dom - I am enjoying Dom this game. I think he has been helpful and on-topic, which I appreciate. I won't vote for him today. I agree, but Llama's phrasing here is making me double take
FZ. - seems geunine
Lizzy - Lizzy is hard to read. She is impulsive and typically not a very on topic poster, which is what we've seen here. I don't like her early vote for me, but it doesn't make her bad. No read, but thanks for the insight
Long Con - Fz's ping is actually the reason i'm trusting him more than the average player atm
Made - p chill, could use more hugs tho
MetalMarsh - I don't see anything unusual about his self-vote since he said he was not going to be around for the vote.It's not the first time i've seen himself vote because of out of time i think?
MovingPictures07 - Reading MP is like reading Ulysses: I want to do it, then I just don't. No reads yet this game
Ninjablooper - No pings from her, but after being her teammate I know how subtle and crafty her baddie game is, so I will be keeping a close eye on her.agreed
Ricochet -I like him, kids got spunk. He's got Moxy
Roxy - I think her baddie game is smoother and less reactive than what I have seen so far.too soon to tell imo
sabie12 - No read. ditto
SpaceDaisy - No read. dota
S~V~S - Always imposible for me to read, I have no reason to suspect her as yet.same
thellama73 - a really great guy. He is just the best. He seems more himself than usual, which i have no problem with because he's a swell guy. Going to keep tabs on how long i feel this way tho.
Timmer - No read
TurnipHead - no reeds
Vompatti - no read.

Leaving my vote on BWT, he's totally seemer..

thellama73 wrote:Don't bother reading Ulysses. I did it last year and it was deffo not worth it.

linki Made: Lol

It's sitting on my desk right now I'm gonna at least give it a shot, and if it's really dumb, i'm just gonna throw it across the room mid sentence,

Yo, just a quick thought i want to get out while i'm thinking about it. Does talking about a player play style/tendencies this early in the game kinda taint possible future "AHH GOTCHA" moments later in the game?

k back to homeowrks

Long Con wrote:
Made wrote:Yo, just a quick thought i want to get out while i'm thinking about it. Does talking about a player play style/tendencies this early in the game kinda taint possible future "AHH GOTCHA" moments later in the game?
I don't understand, explain more.

Like Hawthorne effect kinda.

So let's say it's agreed that I'm a very outspoken player, unafraid to offend. If I'm meek and submissive, then that's a ping against how I normally play. If the game starts and everyone's like "Yeah man, Made, he's such a feisty one" Baddie Made would attempt to play to his feisty tendencies more than he might otherwise. Through this we'd lose an opportunity to spot a baddie Made.

Hi

Ok, so um, just caught up and read some intresting things. The point the LC (?) made about bring up suspcion too early is kinda suspicious in of itself, which I'd agree with. I also agree that at least one or a few baddies are in the BWT vote.

As for LC's role read, If I find the time, I'll make an annotated version of that and see how that compares. If I find significant more info on the roles, I'll consider looking that way. The thing about that post that kinda pingged me (and someone tapped on this) was the fact that the read was very safe. The last line of LC's post even spoke to that effect..something like "game exactly as advertised".

Anyways, that's where I am right now. Got drivers ed class so if I can I'll be here for that
linki: can I just refer to MP as Ulysses from now on? So many words...and lots of other post From other people, stand by....

Drivers ed is the biggest waste of time ever. Can't use my cellphone, but Ive kept up.

gotta vote now, because last to vote FZ and another reason i swear is legit... i just forgot it <_<

it should be in my post history...

I've yet to catch up, but I have no clue why I thought FZ was the person I needed to vote for. Anyways, I wanted to vote with the reasoning that a baddie would want to blend in, as well as might be motivated to discuss role before it's relevant. I thought both of these things were FZ, but apparently I was thinking of a non existent person. Might of still voted FZ, or another late voter compared to My read list (of which I didn't have a chance to review before I finalized my vote)

Here's my train of thought ( and i have yet to read night 2 so stand by) The person who would had approved a sabie killed would be someone who knew her the least. So I'd cross off Llama and most people who made it to end game in felt?

Also, LC, what?

Reread roles, I think it's more likely that Sabie saved herself for that very reason. I'll prolly catch up tomorrow morning

thellama73 wrote:I wonder if it means anything that FZ was a Vompatti voter and got killed?

RIP FZ.

Llama, I'm reading you as civvie this game partly because of this unrelenting attack of Vompatti, but I think you're wrong (or at least right for the wrong reasons?) I'd personally look elsewhere, but iunno man....
i'm going to reply to stuff in revere chronological if that's cool
oh, and i wasn't cursed or anything, I just been crazy with life and things. Got a huge snowstorm and the super bowl coming up, so I should have a lot of free time in the coming days.

thellama73 wrote: The baddies can communicate with each other outside the thread. The civs cannot. Do you think the civ cause is advanced by obfuscating and purposefully withholding information?

yes

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:To recap: MM just asked why a baddie would try to save a teammate. That's how bad it is, people.
Are you going to deny me an answer?

If this were late game, i'd agree with you, but losing a teammate this early would be devastating and avoided at all cost, at least for the first few days imo.

K think that pretty much caught me up. Gonna try reading Squid Roxy and SVS

Oh and the slip case against Rico is pretty bs too. calling thread chat imo is only a slip if you're a vet player. I personally referred to thread as chat well into Monty Python.

thellama73 wrote:
Made wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I wonder if it means anything that FZ was a Vompatti voter and got killed?

RIP FZ.
Llama, I'm reading you as civvie this game partly because of this unrelenting attack of Vompatti, but I think you're wrong (or at least right for the wrong reasons?) I'd personally look elsewhere, but iunno man....
i'm going to reply to stuff in revere chronological if that's cool
oh, and i wasn't cursed or anything, I just been crazy with life and things. Got a huge snowstorm and the super bowl coming up, so I should have a lot of free time in the coming days.
You don't think him narrowly avoiding a lynch two days in a row, with the same people making the difference, followed by an NK of one of his voters looks suspicious? What kind of evidence would you find suspicious? Would it take an overt confession?

Llama, you of all people know how easily it is to get close to a lynch multiple days in a row as a civvie. For a sus Vomp, I'd need to see blantant support of a teammate. this ofcourse being the reason I'm looking into SVS.....speaking of which....

Just finished reading her, and tell me (everyone) what you think about this: It just be my shitty luck of getting a ton of baddie games in a row, but SVS seems to be playing "Better" than usual. Like don't get me wrong, SVS is an amazing player, but like the reason that i often don't suspect her or think about her is because she seems to sandbag. Like her cases aren't super solid, but the case again Bwt, and jabs on Rico are focused and on point.

Also, tangent, the awesome thing about trust you Llama is i can tell you in thread and not worry about you getting Nked because you're you.

Yo, and also-- this question being directed towards everyone....and probably what i'm going to back to read, Vomp's post this game, after he received a few votes, has he seemed sporadic or jumpy or any other abnormalities. I know Llama mentioned his more on topic post, which was explained way by SVS, but anything else off?

And I just thought of the perfect comparison for how SVS is acting this game: She's playing like how she did in Monty python. While on the surface, that's not damning because she was technically neutral in that game, but it's noteworthy that she said in the post game that she was attempting to draw a night kill that game. Maybe baddie team /w Gollum protection?

Caught this on my reading of roxy

Roxy wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
Roxy wrote:SVS - I hope I was not the one who you thought was rude. I hate to even say this but you still have not answered my only question. I guess at this point it does not matter but I would have liked a response and your thoughts about the other people who used your reasoning for their vote for Teeth.

I cannot believe no one has one word to say about Made. I mean his play style is so unlike Python and so reminiscence of his baddie game.

Here is a linky to all his posts I would like to hear what others are thinking about his game.

BR - can you elaborate a bit more? You seem to be tossing a lot of names about without really backing up as to why you think them suspicious.
Sorry I missed it, and, no, I was not talking to you silly.

I thought I already commented on that, since no one else really seemed to have been in danger day 1.0 I don't see baddies piling on a bandwagon to get rid of someone who often plays a distracted game. Did you mean someone specific? On phone on bus so I can't really look back at this point. I can later if you like.

Maybe I just thought I posted it and just thought it Lol.

What do you think of them?
SVS - I gave my thoughts on them when I asked for yours the ssceond time Here

TH - he (Made) has posted since then.

Llama - again we will agree to disagree inre:Made. I have been baddie with him and his scatteredness reminds me of that game. Lemme tell you - I could not tell him what to post or how to post it - he played his own way.

Here's the funny thing tho. While this is something that i've gotten better at concealing with a facade of scatterbrainedness in thread when i actually am bad, I express my scatterbrainedness to anyone who will listen, or just an empty chatroom or quiet thread. It's just a matter of getting my thoughts out, and writing them down and ish.

Anyways, finished my read on roxy surprisingly little there considering how often her name seems to be mentioned... Her read of me reminds me a lot of the type of read people have on me In my earliest games. This isn't leading me to any clues on her alignment tho . If Llama's theory is that somehow SVS, Roxy, and Vomp are linked, I'm not seeing the Roxy Connection in post alone, but i've yet to really analysis poll results.

Dom wrote:Made-- I'm confused-- what exactly is your stance on Vompatti????

RIPIYWG FZ.

The case against him as I understand it: He's bad for surviving 2 close lynches, and talking off topic is pretty bad, but there might be something there. If there is, it would be found in his person reaction to his own suspicion by those who know his play the best.

Dom wrote:
Made wrote:
Dom wrote:Made-- I'm confused-- what exactly is your stance on Vompatti????

RIPIYWG FZ.
The case against him as I understand it: He's bad for surviving 2 close lynches, and talking off topic is pretty bad, but there might be something there. If there is, it would be found in his person reaction to his own suspicion by those who know his play the best.
What do you propose we do today?

Comment on the above if applicable, if not, then pursue other leads.

The reason I'm quick to explain away voting specifically, is because of how easy it is for a civvie to have a shitty voting record. That said, I just read Vomp....wtf dude?
Let's take it this way: Vomp, Do you have any opinions at this point on any player, or things you want to investigate, or defenses of your play (IE, love for the theme, or lack of time) that you'd like to commit to?
If you don't answer this questions, I might have to vote you.

Dom wrote:
Made wrote:
Dom wrote:
Made wrote:
Dom wrote:Made-- I'm confused-- what exactly is your stance on Vompatti????

RIPIYWG FZ.
The case against him as I understand it: He's bad for surviving 2 close lynches, and talking off topic is pretty bad, but there might be something there. If there is, it would be found in his person reaction to his own suspicion by those who know his play the best.
What do you propose we do today?
Comment on the above if applicable, if not, then pursue other leads.
Who would you like to lynch?

At this exact moment I would vote Vompi, But i would like to hear other players opinion on my read of SVS, or just any feedback at all due to my crippling need for others approval.

All the above said, SVS has yet to talk today and isn't on the poll...

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Why not FZ?
Because it's essential to the civilian cause that I save myself.

If you're implying that he's hinting, Idgaf, nor should anyone else, especially if he doesn't defend himself.

Riddle me this Vomp:

Made wrote:The reason I'm quick to explain away voting specifically, is because of how easy it is for a civvie to have a shitty voting record. That said, I just read Vomp....wtf dude?
Let' take it this way: Vomp, Do you have any opinions at this point on any player, or things you want to investigate, or defenses of your play (IE, love for the theme, or lack of time) that you'd like to commit to?
If you don't answer this questions, I might have to vote you.

Vompatti wrote:
Made wrote:Riddle me this Vomp:
Made wrote:The reason I'm quick to explain away voting specifically, is because of how easy it is for a civvie to have a shitty voting record. That said, I just read Vomp....wtf dude?
Let' take it this way: Vomp, Do you have any opinions at this point on any player, or things you want to investigate, or defenses of your play (IE, love for the theme, or lack of time) that you'd like to commit to?
If you don't answer this questions, I might have to vote you.
Just vote for me, I think I've deserved it.

so, caught up....

Is there a recruiter in this game?

I don't know what it is, but the previous page, (or last 40 or so post for those on weird page formats) just felt off to me too re:Canuck . I know what I was doing on that page, but just like early in the game( with everything surrounding RIco), the things people say just seems so on the nose. I'm known (among irl friends) for being really bad at picking up on subtlety, as well as having other notice when i'm low key saying something. That all said, It seems like every little thing anyone's doing this game is being spelled out, almost as if people want to be see as adding something to the conversation, but not really adding anything at all, just explaining subtleties.

Two people who I feel are doing this right now is
Dom- with his Juliet tier questioning
And
TH-

Turnip Head wrote:Roxy, my point about BWT was that he's the closest thing we have to a confirmed civ, and he isn't even on the poll, so we shouldn't keep discussing him when we have to talk about somebody to lynch.

Iunno, thoughts?

I'll be back later, Job interview!!!

So I thought the Lynched was at 10:50....
Anyways just got home from drivers ed, catching up now...

huh...permission to strong arm this game and lead a lynch on someone? I mean, I know my own alignment, so i might be kinda good at it.

also, I'm kinda just asking permission as a formality, I'm pretty sure I know where my vote is going tomorrow....

thellama73 wrote:Sudden extremity is my middle name.

Do you not believe that Blooper is bad, or do you not believe I believe she's bad?

Looking back at this, I'm kinda agreeing with MM, which is rare for me....I get voicing your own opinion, and I'd expect nothing less from you but to have a strong opinion in any direction, However, I'd expect further looks at SVS and Roxy from you before I'd expect a Ninjabloop vote. I hate looking at every lynch as if it were a save, but this seems very unlikely to me. Going to further read Llama for the time being, to see if I can understand his reasoning.

S~V~S wrote:And why would he still be looking at me, Made?

You're right, logically, he would of dropped the case as his reason for thinking you or roxy were mafia was chained directly to Vomp right? Once Vomp died, Llama should have no opinions of you or Roxy, and his cases against you and Roxy should of dissolved. But they didn't, not truly anyways. There are very many points independent of Vomp that suddently Llama has forgotten in favor of a Ninja Bloop vote.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 28#p110728

thellama73 wrote:SVS hasn't really brought me up as a suspect before. Now she doesn't trust me. She knows I am on her trail and she is scared. Watch for me to be the mindless bandwagon alternative to Vomps tomorrow.

thellama73 wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Btw llama, what are your thoughts on Roxy? Does she usually just post thoughts about players without addressing actual game content?
Damn straight I'm going to vote Vomps tomorrow. SVS or Roxy or both are desperate to see absolutely anybody but him lynched. What better reason to lynch him is there than that?

My suspicions go:
1. Vomps
2. Roxy
3. SVS

SVS is only below Roxy because I think she mostly sounds sincere, and I have a hard time believing she is playing the most blatant baddie game ever rather than just being a victim of bad luck, but the vote record looks VERY bad for her. Roxy has been wiffle waffly and non-committal, barely brought up suspicion of MP before this lynch, and her voting record is as bad as SVS'. I don't trust her one bit.

Arguments against Blooper?

thellama73 wrote:After a game of silence, you've gotten awfully chatty now that I asked people to lynch you, Blooper. Awfully chatty indeed.

Which If i'm correct He's said early this game to someone else.....

thellama73 wrote: Vompatti - I still think his level of participation so far is unusual and I don't trust him. He might well get my vote today.

But what do you I know?

what do I know*

I think the funniest part of this Is Llama isn't even the person I plan to gun after...

Ricochet wrote:
Made wrote:huh...permission to strong arm this game and lead a lynch on someone? I mean, I know my own alignment, so i might be kinda good at it.

also, I'm kinda just asking permission as a formality, I'm pretty sure I know where my vote is going tomorrow....
What do you mean? It's the night phase until tomorrow.

What??? Shouldn't the day start tonight and end Monday or something because of the need for a long day 5?

Mongoose wrote:
It is now Night 4. You have 48 hours to submit your PMs (notice extended time).

oh

Made wrote:
S~V~S wrote:And why would he still be looking at me, Made?
You're right, logically, he would of dropped the case as his reason for thinking you or roxy were mafia was chained directly to Vomp right? Once Vomp died, Llama should have no opinions of you or Roxy, and his cases against you and Roxy should of dissolved. But they didn't, not truly anyways. There are very many points independent of Vomp that suddently Llama has forgotten in favor of a Ninja Bloop vote.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 28#p110728

thellama73 wrote:SVS hasn't really brought me up as a suspect before. Now she doesn't trust me. She knows I am on her trail and she is scared. Watch for me to be the mindless bandwagon alternative to Vomps tomorrow.

thellama73 wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Btw llama, what are your thoughts on Roxy? Does she usually just post thoughts about players without addressing actual game content?
Damn straight I'm going to vote Vomps tomorrow. SVS or Roxy or both are desperate to see absolutely anybody but him lynched. What better reason to lynch him is there than that?

My suspicions go:
1. Vomps
2. Roxy
3. SVS

SVS is only below Roxy because I think she mostly sounds sincere, and I have a hard time believing she is playing the most blatant baddie game ever rather than just being a victim of bad luck, but the vote record looks VERY bad for her. Roxy has been wiffle waffly and non-committal, barely brought up suspicion of MP before this lynch, and her voting record is as bad as SVS'. I don't trust her one bit.
Arguments against Blooper?
thellama73 wrote:After a game of silence, you've gotten awfully chatty now that I asked people to lynch you, Blooper. Awfully chatty indeed.
Which If i'm correct He's said early this game to someone else.....

thellama73 wrote: Vompatti - I still think his level of participation so far is unusual and I don't trust him. He might well get my vote today.
But what do you I know?

Ok as there is confusion.

TLDR: Llama is shifty because he suspected a Squid before SVS or Roxy. While Yes, part of his suspicion was based on Vomp, Not all of his stated suspension was. Above i listed all the loose ends in the cases that llama created that are separate from Vomp

The second post with the quote from Llama re:bloops are drawing parallels between the reasons Llama found Vomp suspicious and why he found bloops suspicious. I find these parallel noteworthy because you'd assume that if someone suspects someone for one reason, and is prove to be wrong, they wouldn't push for a lynch against another person for the same exact reason, or at least wait a cycle before doing so because they were just wrong.

Ricochet wrote:Catching up a bit...

The case on Llama oscillates too much right now, IMO, between seeking an easy lynch in reaction for the past two ones and a tricky gamble that he'd actually be bad. I'd be surprised for him to be the orchestrator of all that's happened. Has he exhibited in past games such a tactic of leading hunts decisively, but turning out to have been a grand manipulator?

I think the best option as of now is to keep him alive, not lynch him unless we find a tie to a baddie, but not listen to him, or let him lead a lynch as he is very good at doing that.

thellama73 wrote:
Made wrote: Ok as there is confusion.

TLDR: Llama is shifty because he suspected a Squid before SVS or Roxy. While Yes, part of his suspicion was based on Vomp, Not all of his stated suspension was. Above i listed all the loose ends in the cases that llama created that are separate from Vomp

The second post with the quote from Llama re:bloops are drawing parallels between the reasons Llama found Vomp suspicious and why he found bloops suspicious. I find these parallel noteworthy because you'd assume that if someone suspects someone for one reason, and is prove to be wrong, they wouldn't push for a lynch against another person for the same exact reason, or at least wait a cycle before doing so because they were just wrong.
I don't agree with this. Just because the conclusion is wrong, doesn't mean the reasoning leading there is.

Suppose you were a police officer and you found someone next to a dead body with a bloody knife in their hands. You would assume that person did it, yes? It's possible they didn't, but the balance of the evidence is that they did.

Now suppose you later find out that they were framed and are innocent. Okay, fine. Next day, you go out on the homicide beat, and find a guy with a literally smoking gun fleeing the scene of a murder. Would you say "well, I was wrong about the last guy, this guy must be innocent too?" Of course not. You would assume that the evidence is what it appears to be unless given a good reason to think otherwise.

Ok, but let's try it where it's a little less obvious. I'd say that standing next to a dead person with a knife would be the same as someone who was outed.
I'd say this is a far fairer comparison:
Let's say an officer is on call to a bank robbery. She sees a man briskly walking in the opposite direction with shifty eyes. She tries to flag him down from the car, but he refuses to stop, so she get's out the car and arrest him. He was innocent.

A week later, a bank robbery occurs and the same cop is on call. A person once again walks quickly down the street in the opposite direction. Wouldn't she hesitate to arrest out of fear of once again confusing the same relatively innocent, but ping worth action with something relevant.

I think it's reasonable to expect a person to be hesitant to vote someone for the same reason two nights in a row after being wrong. Are you saying that the comparison of a person with a knife next to a dead body and a person talking more is so adept that you don't even second guess its fallibility after it failed? I've been talking more than usual this game why not go after me next?

RE: MM The thing is tho, he had other option. Why create a new case when he still had one? I'd look specifically at Roxy and SVS as the cart before Llama, the wagon.

Turnip Head wrote:
Made wrote:TLDR: Llama is shifty because he suspected a Squid before SVS or Roxy.

Made wrote:RE: MM The thing is tho, he had other option. Why create a new case when he still had one? I'd look specifically at Roxy and SVS as the cart before Llama, the wagon.
But I thought you said you didn't suspect Llama/ you don't think we should lynch him... so what are you going on about here? You seem to feel strongly about this but I can't figure out why.

It's call a power play, Bojang.

No, but I don't think we should lynch him, as I don't have enough faith in my read just yet, and it's mainly dependant on Llama having ulterior motives for his vote of Bloops rather than Roxy or SVS.

S~V~S wrote:I thought his main reason for suspecting me, at least, was tied to Vomps being bad. When Vomps came up civ, that reason was gone.

His main reason was gone, but he multiple other reason. My question is why did he want to vote Ninjabloop right then rather than continuing suspicions of you and Roxy where relevant?

The Parts of Llama's arguement that are relevant regardless of Vomp are in bold and underlined

thellama73 wrote:
Roxy wrote: Llama - that is not true. I have asked should I conform to your suspicion just so I am not suspicious. That is not saying let me play my own way it is asking a serious question - should I stop hunting baddies and just go along with the crowd? No one is telling me howto play - I can tel the difference.
I do not think it is a serious question, I think it is a rhetorical question, but I will answer it anyway. No, of course not. But who is suggesting you do that? No one is. I do not find you suspicious because you don't suspect Vomps. Lots of people don't suspect Vomps. I find you suspicious because of the timing and placement of your votes, which I think I've been quite clear about.

Perhaps I am misinterpreting you, but you seem to be very defensive of your playstyle, even though no one has critiqued it that I have seen.
Roxy wrote: llama - you did not even respond to the reason I did not vote for Vomps. If you were so concerned why wouldn't you have said something before now? Should I have just went along like a good little poppet and voted the way you like? I am sorry but that is not the way I play. And I know it is not the way you play. Give my posts a good long look I have nothing to hide - if you have any questions I will be happy to respond.

Roxy wrote:Llama - yes I understand my votes look bad but you are wrong when you say MP was not on my radar when in fact I said I thought Canuck had made some decent points - but - the top 3 vote getters last round were MP, Vomps and MM I had not read back on MP and bc I was unsure of my vote rather than use someone else's opinions/suspicions for my vote reasoning I like to use my own. Out of the 3 MP's game stood out the most bc this game he was very back track-y but in the beginning of Dr Who he was laser focused and unbending in his suspicions so I went with MP.
i am sorry but I have to play my own way. I can tel you in the 100's of games I have played I have never tried to save a teamie mostly I am one of the first to vote a teamie or even make the case myself - in other words I have never once voted to save a teamie nor have I ever defended one ofc this is all wifom but it is checkable. if Vomps was my teammate I would have been the first to make the case or held onto your coattails of suspicion.

Roxy wrote: The only value is what others have given it. I personally think we would learn just as much with a Made or MM lynch - their are some who have not even commented on Made and some who are quietly backing him up. As for MM he seems to be suspciousof everyone who did not vote for Vomps - except himself. Do you see value in everyone putting their eggs in one basket?
Should I vote for someone I am not as suspicious of as others just to conform? tbh that does seem like what a civ does - conforms.

Your defensiveness is very puzzling to me, especially since you have taken no votes and don't seem likely to today.

thellama73 wrote:SVS hasn't really brought me up as a suspect before. Now she doesn't trust me. She knows I am on her trail and she is scared. Watch for me to be the mindless bandwagon alternative to Vomps tomorrow.

thellama73 wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Btw llama, what are your thoughts on Roxy? Does she usually just post thoughts about players without addressing actual game content?

Damn straight I'm going to vote Vomps tomorrow. SVS or Roxy or both are desperate to see absolutely anybody but him lynched. What better reason to lynch him is there than that?

My suspicions go:
1. Vomps
2. Roxy
3. SVS

SVS is only below Roxy because I think she mostly sounds sincere, and I have a hard time believing she is playing the most blatant baddie game ever rather than just being a victim of bad luck, but the vote record looks VERY bad for her. Roxy has been wiffle waffly and non-committal, barely brought up suspicion of MP before this lynch, and her voting record is as bad as SVS'. I don't trust her one bit.

The above underlined and bold still apply. I'm curious why Llama decided to construct a new case rather look at You, SVS, or even more peculiar, Roxy.

He did infact mention Roxy, but seemed to drop it in favor of Bloop which gives me a lot of pause.

Also, Just noticed, Gag's off for Champion game. My chain of thinking right now is Llama might be trying to pull what i pulled in that game. Give someone attention, then absolving them, thus removing them from most people's radar.

Search found 124 matches