The Syndicate

Hi yay for this game

Thanks aap I am sure that will come in handy

Ricochet wrote:I have a feeling the conclusion of this D0 will be closer to Just Pick Anything (and Hold on to your Butts) than something else.

Having been a recruiter in the last Recruitment game on RM I can tell you the Day 0 poll then had everything to with determining who got to recruit first depending on which poll options that were chosen - I was told what would benefit me before the game started.

I am going to think that some people must have info in this poll so I will look at those who push an option - it was my downfall last game

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:Gonna go with position 1.

I voted for Position 1.

unfurl wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

unfurl wrote:What is all this averb talk, am I taking a grammar class?, I did not know thats what I signep up is over my head
,

Adverbs are evil. Look up the phrase adverb in the dictionary and you will find it says "A sure sign of malice". Maybe. Probably not.

As Hurley said in lost "I need spell check" when it comes to english, so Im not one to judge on grammar matter

I think the mixing the pot has officialy started lol

Hurley ftmfw!


Dude!!!

Tranq wrote:Erlatz 11 was Recruitment 1. RM3 had the Ultramorph Nine. Not sure what happened in RM2. I've been going through the old RM3 thread to see if it got mentioned over there - good times

The Erlatz Eleven led players (La) to look at the Ultramorph Nine which in turn led to my downfall as the Ultramorph - ah great times!

I am going to modify all your asses (in a "Mom" sort of way ) if the adverb talk continues

jk Epi cannot help himself.

If anyone is looking for good recruits I thinkthe record speaks for itself

Whhops hit submit instead of preview that img goes with my first thought.

1. Unfurl/MP - it feels like MP isexpecting more from unfurl than she was prepared to offer since she did explicitly state that she was going to work but this being her first Recruitment game I feel like she is just unsure how to approach it since her normal style is kind of null for this game - something she alluded to earlier. While I do not fault MP for pursuing what he feels I do disagree with his take on unfurl.

Llama - I disagree that Teeth rides the fence in most games. I have he really doesnot. He gets a suspicion and stands behind it in my experience. Why are you so dismissive of ricochet's suspicion? It is based on as much as your Bubbles suspicion - I would go as far to say that they are eerily similar.Both based on a response to a silly question imho.

Typh - I only played RM3. I was the recruiter Ultramorph. I did play differnt in that I took more chances with my poll choices but for my recruitment I picked people I had never had btsc with.

DH - Johnny Mack ftw!


Liky many many times not reading, posting first

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I have so much to catch up on I will get to crackin asap.

Hope you are feeling better, Son!

Golden wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

bea wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Check out MP's adverb usage before and after my interaction with him, and then check out his adverb usage during my calling him out about being bad for using adverbs. Drastic jump. Got em.

Might be something to it. I don't like to use the whole adverb "thing" (since we can't agree on the difference between "theory" and "concept") as my basis for a case on someone. But it could very well influence it.

This feels like you want to agree but you want wiggle room out of it. I'm curious as to why this is the day 0 thing you chose to comment on.

I also want to highlight this post because I feel it has some merit.

What do players think of BWT's post? bea's post?

I like bea's post was insightful and it put BWT on my radar as a candidate for a vote.

Also, as of where I'm up to in catching up, I think MP is looking pretty good to me, although I disagree with his views on unfurl.

I disagreed with his unfurl suspicions as well. I know her very well I have been playing mafia with her since my first game. For that matter so have you. It all read very unfurl-ish to me.

Linky - Golden gtfo of my head!

Ricochet wrote:

Golden wrote:By the way, I've caught up on all of rico's llama suspicions and the talk around it and I have to say - I see no reason to take rico's suspicions of llama as anything but genuine, and it does make me think twice about MP because - MP - why dismiss Rico's suspicion as only able to be genuine if he is biased? I thought he was making pretty decent points (albeit that I agree with you that I don't find llama suspicious for it).

I think MP was saying the suspicion is not genuine because I may be biased.

I called bullshit on his read of your post way back ^^up there somehere.

I seen bea post and just wanted to say hi <3

goodnight all play nice

also I disagree with Epi's "case" on Golden and ofc will not be voting for him.

Epignosis wrote:

Roxy wrote:I seen bea post and just wanted to say hi <3

goodnight all play nice

also I disagree with Epi's "case" on Golden and ofc will not be voting for him.

So happy you won't be voting for me.

I meant Golden but yah so far I do not see myself voting for you either

Epignosis wrote:Question:

Is Day 1 about ridiculing others' reasons for finding suspicion?

OR

Is Day about articulating your own suspicions and following through?

I have always had both done to me and I do both too

Epignosis wrote:

bea wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

Typhoony wrote:Reywas / Roxy / Bea / any other original baddies from other RM games: Do you remember if you played differently than you normally would've when you were baddie leaders in RM 3?

When I was Jelly King Earl, Supreme Lord of Purpleosity (I think that was my role...but maybe I was just an early recruit to the jelly team? My memory is fucked..) my entire game plan was about fun maximization. I recruited solely based on how funny people's posts were. I don't think my in-thread play differed much (I'm always kind of a sarcastic/goofy asshole)...but I think I was definitely more engaged in the thread than was typical for me at the time

I don't know Typh. You were on my team. Do you think I played differently? I try to play the same from game to game. I do remember that Epi called out what happened with my role (I died early and was rezzed into a secret role.) And for awhlle I was able to brush it off but as more and more civ recruits were rezzed, it was more and more difficult to defend against the truth of Epi's argument. Killing him didn't help anything even though you and Tranq both though it was the right thing to do at the time (if I am remembering correctly). Eventually, I became as close to an outed baddie as I've ever been. So yea, my play was prolly pretty different when I realized there was nothing I could do to hide anymore.

still on like page 16...

I called out Roxy and S~V~S too.

Not before Nutella had called me out first

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:I agree it needs to end. I would plead with people, vote me or epi. I honestly don't care which. Either epi loses, or he is proven wrong. Both will be satisfactory.

Nah. Nice try.

Make people think it has to be me or your, and if I'm wrong, then I have to be bad.

False dilemma. Mafia strategy 101. Get out of here with that.

Y'all go on and vote the way your conscience leads.

But he does not say if you are wrong you are bad - why include that bit in your reply?

Scotty wrote:

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Golden wrote:.He doesn't want to end it to his own lynch, is the point.... he knows that BOTH outcomes of that lynch outcome are bad for him.

How does Epi know anything?

Oh, I think he knows I am not bad just fine. He's just having fun.

But you don't seem to be having any fun.

I am not currently having fun.

You know what's fun? Playing lawn darts midday with a bright sun overhead.

Golden, I'm not sure why you're getting so worked up, with all this Arthur/Knights of the Round table stuff. You have 1 vote on you.

I can see why he is worked up - been there so many times myself. Being suspected for bs reasons sucks especially if they are using twisted logic - "like it has nothing to do with the question - it is how you answered the question" silly Day 1 stuff as per normal. Honestly would be better off just randomizing a vote.

timmer wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:
I think your argument against Llama strikes of bias, since you and he always butt heads.

You really think Llama's behavior indicates that he is a recruiter?

Furthur to this, why does someone being a recruiter mean anything? If they are one, they might be a civ recruiter, which means eliminating them will hurt the civ cause. There are equal numbers of bad and good recruiters. And once you are eventually recruited to a team, that's your team, so why gun for a potential recruiter when that may end up your own team down the road?

But you just said that there really are no "civs" in this game we only call them that bc BR/LC told us to. I agree it is a faction game not a good vs evil game.

timmer wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:All the recruiters are equally naughty. What makes half of them more civvie than the others, other than that's what we're told to call them? They all seem nearly equal in power.

^THIS. While I believe Long Con and Black Rock have styled the four factions as Civ 1 &2, Baddie 1&2, namely by having limited BTSC in the civ team but larger numbers, going by things they've said, does it really behoove us to think that way? Are not all four sides ultimately trying to rule this realm? Why can't people embrace the LMS-hybrid quality of this game? Why wrap yourself in the civvie flag when there are 4 civs or so out of 30+ players right now?

Not much to catch up will stay current while at work today.

Happy Friday everyone!

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:Changing my vote to Wilgy for mimicking me.

You made a vote with areason on day 1 I am in shock aorn.


Daisy - you can call this game what you like but it is a game with factions ergo a faction game imo. if you want to base a day 1 vote on that be my guest plenty of other votes will happen with far less reasoning.

Boomslang wrote:Argh, I can't even comprehend the amount of posting that's going on here. Two big things stick out to me, and I want to confirm that I share the suspicions previously raised.

Golden wrote: But I certainly think epi and I are not going to be on the same side at any point in this game. Recruiters would be daft to recruit us both on to the same side at this point.

The "certainly" is certainly a key word. Because the only way you'd know that for certain would be to be a recruiter yourself. At this point, the low-level animosity you've already established would be perfect for shedding suspicion of teamwork over time. I think you're being far too rash to discount that possibility.

The second is the continued insistence of some players, most recently Roxy, that this is not a good vs. evil game. It's written right there in the rules: civvie groups 1 and 2, baddie groups 1 and 2. There are lynches by civs and NKs by baddies that happen regardless of position. This is very clear, and I don't see why anyone would deny it except to sow confusion.

Are you saying there are not 5 different factions in this game?
Also if you are saying this is a good vs evil game then what do you call the neutrals (which most of us are) - good or evil?

Boomslang wrote:

Roxy wrote: Are you saying there are not 5 different factions in this game?
Also if you are saying this is a good vs evil game then what do you call the neutrals (which most of us are) - good or evil?

There are five different factions. However, please note the following, from the host post: "These are not teams, just origins." The "factions" are just flavorful ways to inform different roles and spice up some of the position changes. There may be some clan dynamics things that go on, but that doesn't change the essential civ vs. bad nature of this game. In the end, no matter your initial clan, you're going to end up as either good or bad (or neutral, if you's a Guardian).

What do I call the neutrals? Potentially good or bad. But that's not important. There ARE baddies among us right now, and that is where our energy should focus.

Why are neutrals. important? The majority of players are neutral. There are 4or5 baddies aorn. Lets do this - you play your way and I shall play my way.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

G-Man wrote:Time for me to disappear into RL for the weekend, so I have to vote now.

Of the 16 players who failed to register a positive or negative score on my newfangled setup, I took the 8 who made the fewest posts. From there, I removed the three female players because I am a gentleman. Of those five remaining players, I eliminated the one who hasn't posted yet during Day 1 because I am fair and want all players to have a chance to post during the day before I vote unless I have good reason to do otherwise. Of these final four, I voted for the player who had the least compelling content in their posts.

Voted Tranq.

That's sexist yo. Do you want me to remind everyone what happened in LMS 3 Mafia?

Here's what happened.

Everyboday lynched rabbit on Day 6. Bass was the only male left, along with SVS (his coalition partner), Black Rock, Roxy, Elohcin, and unfurl. SVS was nightkilled that Night. Then the rest of the women turned on Bass, devouring him in neat and orderly fashion. It was dreadful to watch, and Bass didn't stand a chance.

Lesson of that game, don't leave Bass alone in a room with four other women.

Sorry I missed the vote, something suddenly came up. I will be catching up and posting thoughts later.

Got about 8 pages to read - see ya'll on the other side

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Apparently I'm hanging out in London today. I'll answer questions and say other things tonight.

Epignosis gets killed early too often. Be brave and face the man for once eh (whoever)?

Say high to splints and the Queen for me!

Kadaj aka Cabbage posted in our thread!!!! He is suspicious of the nub aapje - we should all vote aapje

jk


Teeth's non lynch - I totally get the reasons for the votes he got - but tbh he often plays slightly wacky and different than other players - Idk if I would have voted him but prob not. So The Judge ended the day early. But have we determined why no one was not lynched? I may have not gone back far enough in my catch up

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Sorry I went quiet. I'm at a baseball game right now Go Reds!

But yeah, fairly disappointed about going out on Day 1 in my first game back. Not much I can do about it though. Good luck civs!

Here before lynch end Teeth says "Good Luck Civ's" - is it meant to be a mindfuck or he is hinting at being recruited? If he is implying he was recruited I would venture to say he was prob recruited as a baddie - him saying "Go Civs" just feels unnatural at this stage of this game.

Golden/Rey - I do not get Rey's points about Golden and tbf they read as forced. You say you did not call him bad but then what is this:

Reywas wrote:might could be

Reads that you think he "might could be" bad. Ergo he is bad - is the point I got when catching up. You also said he did not seem sincere - does that in and of itself make him bad Rey? Please elaborate more than you have - use little words so I can be sure to understand

Epignosis wrote:To answer your question, I was referring to several people. Unfurl is one that comes to mind immediately.

I do not remember her (unfurl) being that forceful can you link me up to the posts you are referring to?

aapje wrote:B]Psychedelic Prodding
[/B]

I like this one best

WTF would kill Typh? I was looking forward to the old gang together again playing. And Epi too. Weird. I do not think Golden would actually kill Epi but maybe that is what he wants us to think, the wifom is strong with this kill.

MovingPictures wrote:Can any of the players that defended unfurl's behavior by saying it is like unfurl please explain to me what in her behavior makes you believe this? What adjectives would you use to describe her play in general that you see here, that make you unable to distinguish her alignment, and not persuaded by any of the points I was making?

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 55#p167955

MP your posts about Ricochet and to Ricochet feel weird idk if it the tone or wording that make my nose twitch the most. Same with unfurl. srsly you have played more than one game with her MP I am surprised you needed people (me first I believe) to clarify why they think your vote was so yucky. 's on MP.

DharmaHelper wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey DH, how about a rainbow list? :P

G
O
F
U
C
K
Y
O
U
R
S
E
L
F

Spacedaisy wrote:I'm confused. I mean I know what is going on with MP voting llama, but where are these other votes coming from? I feel like I've missed a step somewhere...

agreed!

to aapje - the best one was psychedelic proddings - imo idk LC's colorizer is not working here for me

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Roxy wrote:

MovingPictures wrote:Can any of the players that defended unfurl's behavior by saying it is like unfurl please explain to me what in her behavior makes you believe this? What adjectives would you use to describe her play in general that you see here, that make you unable to distinguish her alignment, and not persuaded by any of the points I was making?

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 55#p167955

MP your posts about Ricochet and to Ricochet feel weird idk if it the tone or wording that make my nose twitch the most. Same with unfurl. srsly you have played more than one game with her MP I am surprised you needed people (me first I believe) to clarify why they think your vote was so yucky. 's on MP.

What? Can you elaborate on Ricochet? I don't understand.

I don't even remember what games I've played with unfurl, to be frank. I know I hosted her in Fight Club. That's about all I remember. If you were so surprised, why are you mentioning this now and not at the time of my suspicion?

I fail to understand why you are keeping on me.

I did mention it do you not see the link I provided? You never played on RM before? Weird you only played one game with her - I am going to have to check now.
You defended llama yesterday against Rico who was suspecting llama for the same reason he suspected Tiny Bubbles - yet you found Ricochet suspicious for it. I call bullshit.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Roxy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Roxy wrote:

MovingPictures wrote:Can any of the players that defended unfurl's behavior by saying it is like unfurl please explain to me what in her behavior makes you believe this? What adjectives would you use to describe her play in general that you see here, that make you unable to distinguish her alignment, and not persuaded by any of the points I was making?

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 55#p167955

MP your posts about Ricochet and to Ricochet feel weird idk if it the tone or wording that make my nose twitch the most. Same with unfurl. srsly you have played more than one game with her MP I am surprised you needed people (me first I believe) to clarify why they think your vote was so yucky. 's on MP.

What? Can you elaborate on Ricochet? I don't understand.

I don't even remember what games I've played with unfurl, to be frank. I know I hosted her in Fight Club. That's about all I remember. If you were so surprised, why are you mentioning this now and not at the time of my suspicion?

I fail to understand why you are keeping on me.

I did mention it do you not see the link I provided? You never played on RM before? Weird you only played one game with her - I am going to have to check now.
You defended llama yesterday against Rico who was suspecting llama for the same reason he suspected Tiny Bubbles - yet you found Ricochet suspicious for it. I call bullshit.

I saw that link. I saw your original post. Stop asking me questions in that tone; yes, I've played on RM. Where did I say I played only one game with her? WTF? I don't remember what games I've played with her. This is utterly ridiculous.

It's not bullshit. These are my legitimate thoughts. I don't know how you expect me to respond an assertion that what I'm saying is bullshit.

This is irritating to the highest degree.

What tone?
Why are you so worked up at my suspicions?
I am sorry but your response felt like you were acting like you did know unfurl's playstyle when I think you must know, idk it felt like an odd thing to say that you do not remember what games you have played together.
Why is ok and normal for llama to go after Bubbles but it was suspicious of Ricochet to find llama suspicious for the same sort of thing? You cannot blow off a suspicion just bc they do this every game - thats just silly talk.

yep i had linky but still posted anyway.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Roxy wrote:to aapje - the best one was psychedelic proddings - imo idk LC's colorizer is not working here for me

That's weird, it works for me. You need to change the size though, this one is sized for a different kind of forum.

Nub Roxy

thellama73 wrote:I have been quite clear in the fact that I vacationing at the beach until tiesday being relentless pestered by small children and trying to keep up on my phone. I'm sorry that I have been able to weigh in on every topic of discussion, but at least I am not missing votes. I am basing my votes on pings as I see them until I get back. If that makes me a liability, then don't recruit me to your team.

??

kk I am at work and for some lame reason my boss expects to actually work when I am here I will bbialb.

reywaS wrote:

Spoiler: show

Roxy wrote:Kadaj aka Cabbage posted in our thread!!!! He is suspicious of the nub aapje - we should all vote aapje

jk


Teeth's non lynch - I totally get the reasons for the votes he got - but tbh he often plays slightly wacky and different than other players - Idk if I would have voted him but prob not. So The Judge ended the day early. But have we determined why no one was not lynched? I may have not gone back far enough in my catch up

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Sorry I went quiet. I'm at a baseball game right now Go Reds!

But yeah, fairly disappointed about going out on Day 1 in my first game back. Not much I can do about it though. Good luck civs!

Here before lynch end Teeth says "Good Luck Civ's" - is it meant to be a mindfuck or he is hinting at being recruited? If he is implying he was recruited I would venture to say he was prob recruited as a baddie - him saying "Go Civs" just feels unnatural at this stage of this game.

Golden/Rey - I do not get Rey's points about Golden and tbf they read as forced. You say you did not call him bad but then what is this:

Reywas wrote:might could be

Reads that you think he "might could be" bad. Ergo he is bad - is the point I got when catching up. You also said he did not seem sincere - does that in and of itself make him bad Rey? Please elaborate more than you have - use little words so I can be sure to understand

reywaS wrote:

Golden wrote:

reywaS wrote: you certainly don't think you two will end up on the same side? How can you possibly be certain of this when it has been well established that recruiters do not get to pick that way. The recruiters are not picking names directly and will not know exactly who they are recruiting until it is done. This is the first thing you've said in this game so far that makes me

You and I clearly have a different view of well established. If it was well established, as you say, why would that comment make you ponder anyway? Would it make me bad to have said it?

might could be

forced? How? You are implying that I forced myself to share my opinion on Golden? So, I saw Golden's ideas, and rather than the opinion being genuine I forced myself on day one to go after him? To what end? Why in the world would I, after nearly a year long hiatus from playing mafia, force myself to go after Golden?

If you quote me with more specific posts that feel forced to you, I will respond to them in kind. You went the really broad and vague route, so that's how I responded.

As for the "might could be" post. I heard that phrase on The Wire, and I like using it whenever I can. lol. I was NOT (obviously) saying that Golden is bad. If I was saying, in that post, that Golden WAS bad, I would have said something more along the lines of "Golden is bad". "Might could be" meaning that I'm not ruling it out.

Forced as in "I need to find something suspicious let me add to the Golden suspicions already flying".

This is the post that made me feel this way it was after quite a bit of convo between you and Golden.

[quote="Reywas"]I don't know what the baddie motive is for it. If you read my post more clearly you would see that I said that it doesn't make sense for you to think that way even as a recruiter. That is not why I think you could be bad. You do not sound sincere to me. It's that simple. Epig basically made the same argument about a different post from you and you kept trying to argue semantics with him over the content of the posts like you are with me right now.[/quote]

In my understanding of your points were that the only way for Golden to think the way he was thinking is if was a recruiter bc you think he was misunderstanding the way recruitments happen. Bc the Recruiting roles do not have control over who is part of their team. You go on and on about how Golden cannot guarantee that he and Epi won't be on the same team.

KK I get that point but

The whole time you were driving that point home he asked you from the beginning "how does that make me bad". You did not answer until the post above saying "You did not know what the baddie motive for it was" and now go on to say "That is not why I think you could be bad" and then say you find that his posts "do not sound sincere". Its that simple. If it was that simple why did you not just say you did not think he sounded sincere from the beginning? Why go on about the recruitment angle since you did not think there was a baddie motive for that?

See in my mind that reads as a forced suspicion.

reywaS wrote:And I agree with what you said about BWT's "good luck civs" post, Roxy. I left that part of your quote in and I meant to add that to my last post

I still find his end of day quite suspicious and am quite surprised the people who voted for him yesterday are not feeling the same way. Or at least not from what I have read so far.

unfurl wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

unfurl wrote: BWT, got a lot votes, maybe is worth lo look at him or his voters, some manipulation may be going on in that situation something I may look into later on

I agree re-reading the BWT voters might be a traditional way to spot some potential bandwagoning, but what manipulation do you plan to unearth, considering the Day officially ended before BWT received 7 out of his 8 total votes?

Mearly that Im curious as to he received 8 votes (looking at the image poll) from Devin-Lorab-TurnipHead-jaggedjimmy -DrWiggly-Golden-Typh-Tranq
More toward the end of the lynch poll
And even if the day ended early, and we have no clue to bwt alliance, I think is intersting to see if people still feel the same about him or if something changed?

I agree I am curious to their thoughts now.


Ricochet - I have never been good at reading Typh or Tranq or aapje. So I won't even try and guess about his role through his play style. Sure he could be Azura but chances are more likely he is one of the others imo. And they will only be dangerous to the civ cause if they are recruited by baddies. As to Dr Wigly - Dr who? Bc I do not remember much from him except his new found friendship with MM and his crush unfurl. I do not think he is a recruiter nor do I think he has been recruited aorn.

Lorab - there are a lot of new players maybe they stopped the day bc they wanted try out their power? Odds were highest day one to take out a Neutral anyway. Feels like if they were unrecruited they would most likely be a new play to the Recruitment games.

Canuck - inre: DH - I did not read that particular post as jokey. I felt he legitimately wanted to know if that meant Daisy was impressed enough to recruit Golden. But a ping is a ping and to each their own ping.

S~V~S wrote:Well, if Golden doesn't get Bass lynched, he will just get the baddies to kill him for him.

reywaS wrote:I thought he was being willfully ignorant of the way recruits happen. That's why I voted for him.

I thought it was bc he did not sound sincere

Gman - you always make games more fun!

Dr W's post made me laugh and gave a me a lovely start to today

Still do not find him suspicious.

Will not likely vote MP

Sebass (my son) does have this job going crazy right now. I know he has not had time to catch up. I don't like the tone of his posts but for right now I am willing to give him a chance.

Why is no one besides Rey and unfurl and I the only ones to comment on Teeth?

Also llama what happened to your Bubbles suspicion? Did it just magically disappear?

Same goes to all the Teeth voters - did your suspicion (strong enough to place a vote on him yesterday) just disappear over the night phase?

aapje wrote:

Roxy wrote:Sebass (my son) does have this job going crazy right now. I know he has not had time to catch up. I don't like the tone of his posts but for right now I am willing to give him a chance.

Which player is he?

@Rey: why did you vote the non player option?

Sorry I did not even realize I did not use his user name. unfurl is right he is Bass_the_Clever.

A lot of people put votes in all will nilly when they know they can change them. I try not to pay attention to the votes until we get closer to lynch time.

G-Man wrote:

Golden wrote:Can someone please recruit G-Man? He deserves it.

Who says I haven't been recruited yet? I posted that in OT green on purpose. That was proposed as a legitimate theme song, not a personal plea for recruitment.

Roxy wrote:Also llama what happened to your Bubbles suspicion? Did it just magically disappear?

Same goes to all the Teeth voters - did your suspicion (strong enough to place a vote on him yesterday) just disappear over the night phase?

Maybe they think they don't have to speak to that issue since the day was ended before most of those votes were even cast?


Thoughts:

I'm not interested in either Bass or MP right now. Maybe I'm still a little hung up on getting a read on people. I still have no read on 13 different players. I'll probably vote for one of them.

The game quieted down substantially over the weekend. While I liked less content sitting there when catching up, it does hamper progress on the game. It still feels like a lot of people just aren't participating.

Not sure what to make of Dr. Wilgy. It's cute and all but it could also be a distraction. He's one of my 13.

Yay for 3-J sticking around.

Right - so since the day ended early (even though they had no idea it was happening at the time of their votes) they hold no responsilbility for them?

Ofc I disagree with your assessment.

*voted*

nutella wrote:Dom, thanks for clarifying -- I was indeed the second player to vote for Bass today, after MP, but I still don't get why that is suspicious. Can you elaborate on why my vote warranted an ? And no I wasn't upset about you eyeing me specifically, it's more that your general pattern of opportunistically badgering people about little things is bothersome and imo unproductive. Maybe you have some success rate of catching baddies with stuff like that, I don't know, but to me it really seems like fluffing up your posts with trivial "pings" rather than discussing more substantial thoughts.

I'm still not understanding the BWT votes. On Day 1 I think several people voted for him for several different reasons, rather than a single case that gained any kind of momentum. Now Roxy votes for him without any kind of explanation that I see, and Lorab repeats her vote for him despite the fact that it seemed to me that her previous reasons for suspecting him were mostly resolved (primarily the list of low posters taken from G-man being inaccurate). Lorab, am I wrong -- did you have other qualms with BWT that he has not responded to?

Before you repeat things like I voted "with no explanation" maybe you should read my posts to find the explanation.
Also I will add that Teeth COMPLETELY ignored my suspicion of him for the entire day period.

timmer wrote:Only in wifi for 5 minutes. Voted myself worn catch up when I'm home tomorrow

I do not want a "worn" catch up
I want a new one

nutella wrote:Okay, that's totally fair. I have read his responses as genuine for the most part but I can definitely get where you're coming from. I'm inclined to think he's an unrecruited who's not devoting much effort to playing the game at this point.

linki @ Roxy: I'm looking through your posts and I see no explanation. In fact I do not see mention of BWT besides asking his D1 voters whether they still suspect him or not. The only thing I see is your first post after the EOD when you comment on BWT's "Go Civs" comment -- and that is right after you say you probably would not have voted for him because he is "generally wacky". Is the "go civvies" comment your sole reason for suspecting he was recruited? Or did I miss something else in your posts, because I don't see any more mention of suspecting him between then and your vote.

Well then you did see it. That post felt unnatural to me. I stated something about and despite being in the thread and claimed to have read he never even mentioned it.

I don't mean to no u but your vote for Bass to prod him after not really mentioning him before is sort of the same thing - just saying hey I think you could be bad - show me that you are not.

Just catching up and posting as I go

Sorsha wrote:

nutella wrote:Okay, that's totally fair. I have read his responses as genuine for the most part but I can definitely get where you're coming from. I'm inclined to think he's an unrecruited who's not devoting much effort to playing the game at this point.

linki @ Roxy: I'm looking through your posts and I see no explanation. In fact I do not see mention of BWT besides asking his D1 voters whether they still suspect him or not. The only thing I see is your first post after the EOD when you comment on BWT's "Go Civs" comment -- and that is right after you say you probably would not have voted for him because he is "generally wacky". Is the "go civvies" comment your sole reason for suspecting he was recruited? Or did I miss something else in your posts, because I don't see any more mention of suspecting him between then and your vote.

I went back and looked through Roxys posts for her bwt suspicion as well and found the same as you....

....and your point is......?