Now, would I lie?Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:43 pmDo you really think this?Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:31 pmIt's Day 4. Your opinions should not be in Day 1 mode. If you had a problem keeping up (and I genuinely am sorry for your illness), you should have sought a replacement.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:19 pm I was "treading carefully" because I scum player voting to protect another play on Day/Night 1 is a steaming pile of WIFOM. I gave it a "for now" because I'm in the beginning stages of my formulation of reads. I'm not jumping to a conclusion about Quin/Llama because literally all I've read of their interactions is llama's vote to protect Dyslexicon. What treasure troves of information should I pretend to have gathered from that?
I currently have zero information on their interactions. I hope to find new information by reading things that have already been said, if I feel like that's a thing I should do. Do you think that's a thing I should do?
I know this is nearly-end-game for you, but my thought processes are still in Day 1 mode. You seem to be treating me as if my reads should be as developed as yours.
DyslexiQuin right now is my top suspect, and you gave him a pass because thellama73 voted to protect him because of "WIFOM City," as you put it. Isn't that what that is supposed to do? Why not look at Dyslexicon and Quin on your own and make a decision?
Blue Velvet Mafia {THE END}
Moderator: Community Team
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Stream my music for free: https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I hope paraphrasing does not break the rules. It was an afterthought. Sorry.
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I guess you don't really want me to participate since you won't answer my question Epi.
our Linkitis is our lives.
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Because you are not nice.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:47 pmNow, would I lie?Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:43 pmDo you really think this?Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:31 pmIt's Day 4. Your opinions should not be in Day 1 mode. If you had a problem keeping up (and I genuinely am sorry for your illness), you should have sought a replacement.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:19 pm I was "treading carefully" because I scum player voting to protect another play on Day/Night 1 is a steaming pile of WIFOM. I gave it a "for now" because I'm in the beginning stages of my formulation of reads. I'm not jumping to a conclusion about Quin/Llama because literally all I've read of their interactions is llama's vote to protect Dyslexicon. What treasure troves of information should I pretend to have gathered from that?
I currently have zero information on their interactions. I hope to find new information by reading things that have already been said, if I feel like that's a thing I should do. Do you think that's a thing I should do?
I know this is nearly-end-game for you, but my thought processes are still in Day 1 mode. You seem to be treating me as if my reads should be as developed as yours.
DyslexiQuin right now is my top suspect, and you gave him a pass because thellama73 voted to protect him because of "WIFOM City," as you put it. Isn't that what that is supposed to do? Why not look at Dyslexicon and Quin on your own and make a decision?
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Maybe all of the above?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:45 pm Epignosis is probably a civilian since he would have to be the dumbest bastard on earth to claim to have killed llama when he knew the person who actually did it.
Stream my music for free: https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
That doesn't answer the question. Why me? Your vote being on me suggests that I am the best option to you. Why? Who are these multitudinous civs?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:43 pmBecause I feel pretty sure most of the other options are civs and it's a double lynch so I'm trying to maximize the chances of nailing a mafiaSloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:42 pmCool, then let's find the others. Why are you voting for me?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pmI would assume not.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:38 pmWas he the only bad guy?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:37 pmI mean I caught Llama like days before anyone else so.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pmI would like a little more effort from you.DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:33 pm Phase 2 in Sherlock Mafia was "There are no more teams it is LMS now"
FWIW
My banners:
Spoiler: show
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {NIGHT 1}
Fine, but I don't care about your S~V~S-llama interactions either. They're all circumstantial. There is no substance to them. If I need to go through breaking them down, I will, but I would rather not.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:46 pmhuh? No. I'm hardly using that PM to justify my vote. Pay more attention to the post I made highlighting SVS and llama's interactions. That's what I'm actually basing my vote on. I brought the Wilgy PM up now because, like you said, we're getting toward the end of the game. I didn't want to bring it up earlier when I wasn't fully involved in the game because I wouldn't have been able to follow up in any way, and I wasn't sure what would have been going on around me at the time. I'd honestly forgotten the contents of the message anyway. I had to check it after I had made my first couple posts about SVS. At that point I took an additional look at her posts to see what I could find that was relevant to what Wilgy had said to me on Day 1. That is all. It's not a crucial point and I never intended it to be so.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pmLook, I'm not voting S~V~S based on what Wilgy told you privately days ago. You could have said something to incriminate S~V~S then if you wanted to, but you didn't. You've posted every Day as far as I can see, and Wilgy was lynched ages ago. You could have said something. Now it just looks like you're trying to jumble together a case based on a PM a dead man sent you that nobody else can know if he sent or not. It's all very wild and full of hearsay. No thank you.
Stream my music for free: https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Spoiler: show
our Linkitis is our lives.
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {NIGHT 1}
I would like to hear any thoughts you have on SVS. You don't have to acknowledge any of the things I've said about her, I just want your own independent thoughts on her.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:50 pmFine, but I don't care about your S~V~S-llama interactions either. They're all circumstantial. There is no substance to them. If I need to go through breaking them down, I will, but I would rather not.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:46 pmhuh? No. I'm hardly using that PM to justify my vote. Pay more attention to the post I made highlighting SVS and llama's interactions. That's what I'm actually basing my vote on. I brought the Wilgy PM up now because, like you said, we're getting toward the end of the game. I didn't want to bring it up earlier when I wasn't fully involved in the game because I wouldn't have been able to follow up in any way, and I wasn't sure what would have been going on around me at the time. I'd honestly forgotten the contents of the message anyway. I had to check it after I had made my first couple posts about SVS. At that point I took an additional look at her posts to see what I could find that was relevant to what Wilgy had said to me on Day 1. That is all. It's not a crucial point and I never intended it to be so.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pmLook, I'm not voting S~V~S based on what Wilgy told you privately days ago. You could have said something to incriminate S~V~S then if you wanted to, but you didn't. You've posted every Day as far as I can see, and Wilgy was lynched ages ago. You could have said something. Now it just looks like you're trying to jumble together a case based on a PM a dead man sent you that nobody else can know if he sent or not. It's all very wild and full of hearsay. No thank you.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I could move off Sloonei onto someone else. I'm kinda wondering how far Speedchuck is going to take the "I do what DH Does" schtick. I had my suspicions of Dyslexicon but I thought they might be an Indie and not a mafia. IDK. Quin might be a good vote. IDK.
our Linkitis is our lives.
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
So that leaves myself, speedchuck, quin, nutella, timmer, and SVS as suspects, correct? Can you think of anything substantial to say about any of those names?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:52 pmI'm pretty much just winging it, mate. I don't think I'm mafia. I don't think LC is mafia because he made six different LMS deals and allegedly thought the game was LMS, which he would not have if his role PM included "Hey LLama is your teammate". Epi is probably a civilian. That closes the window significantly. Of those left, I haven't really seen anything to indicate suspicion. And it's a double lynch.Spoiler: show
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Speedchuck's whole stuck-to-my-hip thing is kinda starting to wear thin and I had earlier suspicions of Dyslexicon whom Quin replaced. Everyone else I don't really have much to say about. If SVS *Is* bad that would make me sad.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:54 pmSo that leaves myself, speedchuck, quin, nutella, timmer, and SVS as suspects, correct? Can you think of anything substantial to say about any of those names?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:52 pmI'm pretty much just winging it, mate. I don't think I'm mafia. I don't think LC is mafia because he made six different LMS deals and allegedly thought the game was LMS, which he would not have if his role PM included "Hey LLama is your teammate". Epi is probably a civilian. That closes the window significantly. Of those left, I haven't really seen anything to indicate suspicion. And it's a double lynch.Spoiler: show
our Linkitis is our lives.
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I am neither indy, mafia or a good vote.DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:54 pm I could move off Sloonei onto someone else. I'm kinda wondering how far Speedchuck is going to take the "I do what DH Does" schtick. I had my suspicions of Dyslexicon but I thought they might be an Indie and not a mafia. IDK. Quin might be a good vote. IDK.
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
See now statistically between the two of you someone's got to be blowing smoke.
our Linkitis is our lives.
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I have never smoked, either. Tell me why this is a statistic.DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:00 pm See now statistically between the two of you someone's got to be blowing smoke.
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
Quin, talk about this succession of posts:
First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Sprityo
Ricochet
Spacedaisy
All three kills, all three pretty much useless. The mafia (even without llama) are not paying attention and/or have no idea who to kill.
Ricochet
Spacedaisy
All three kills, all three pretty much useless. The mafia (even without llama) are not paying attention and/or have no idea who to kill.
our Linkitis is our lives.
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
Mkay see there you go Sloonei and do you think you'd be making those good, good points if I hadn't voted for you and lit that fire under your ass
our Linkitis is our lives.
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I'm interested in Nutella as a player right now. Her Process of Elimination magic has whittled the game down to three possible baddies occupying two available spots. There does not seem to be a whole lot of suspicion around her. If I'm not misreading things, she almost seems like a trusted player to some degree. I've seen her as an excellent townie in past games. If she says she is confident that 2 out of 3 players are scum, and I am one of those three players, then that is something I am going to take interest in. Like I said before, if she is right then I have a 100% chance of voting for scum today by following her.
So what do we think of nutella's thought process? And could you provide more elaboration now, nutella?
So what do we think of nutella's thought process? And could you provide more elaboration now, nutella?
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
I don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
This is a good reason to suspect me, I don't object. It also seems like it could be a good reason to suspect SVS and Quin. Cool.DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:05 pm Sprityo
Ricochet
Spacedaisy
All three kills, all three pretty much useless. The mafia (even without llama) are not paying attention and/or have no idea who to kill.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
No it's not. I've been here.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pmThis is a good reason to suspect me, I don't object. It also seems like it could be a good reason to suspect SVS and Quin. Cool.DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:05 pm Sprityo
Ricochet
Spacedaisy
All three kills, all three pretty much useless. The mafia (even without llama) are not paying attention and/or have no idea who to kill.
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I subbed in after sprityo was killed, and Dizzy wasn't inactive on Day 1. So explain why these set of night kills makes me look bad, Sloonei.
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
The bolded text is where I got the idea that you dropped your suspicion of llama. Where I come from, "I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another" is not a statement of suspicion. Your post trajectory reads like this: Mildly suspicious of llama -[2 days pass]-> Neutral on llama -> opposed to lynching llama -> quietly return to original suspicion of llama an hour later.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pmI don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Have you not stated elsewhere that you're having trouble getting caught up in this game?
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
His posts didn't give me any reason to read him one way or another. Does that help you?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:14 pmThe bolded text is where I got the idea that you dropped your suspicion of llama. Where I come from, "I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another" is not a statement of suspicion. Your post trajectory reads like this: Mildly suspicious of llama -[2 days pass]-> Neutral on llama -> opposed to lynching llama -> quietly return to original suspicion of llama an hour later.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pmI don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Which suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
A little bit but not enough. You're still opposed to his lynch in those middle two posts, but in favor of it in the two on opposite ends of the chain. If you continued to be suspicious of llama for his vote, then why did you neglect this in your read of llama in those other two posts?Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmHis posts didn't give me any reason to read him one way or another. Does that help you?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:14 pmThe bolded text is where I got the idea that you dropped your suspicion of llama. Where I come from, "I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another" is not a statement of suspicion. Your post trajectory reads like this: Mildly suspicious of llama -[2 days pass]-> Neutral on llama -> opposed to lynching llama -> quietly return to original suspicion of llama an hour later.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pmI don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
How do you feel about nutella, Quin? The mafia player, not the hazelnut spread.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Yes, but unless all of my teammates are as misinformed as I am, that won't affect the night kill choices. If I'm bad and all my teammates are misinformed, then I'm going to figure out what's going on, aren't I?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmWhich suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Yes, but unless all of my teammates are as misinformed as I am, that won't affect the night kill choices. If I'm bad and all my teammates are misinformed, then I'm going to figure out what's going on, aren't I?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmWhich suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
Wary. Not opposed. I'm not going to constantly reiterate my suspicion whenever I mention someone.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:19 pmA little bit but not enough. You're still opposed to his lynch in those middle two posts, but in favor of it in the two on opposite ends of the chain. If you continued to be suspicious of llama for his vote, then why did you neglect this in your read of llama in those other two posts?Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmHis posts didn't give me any reason to read him one way or another. Does that help you?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:14 pmThe bolded text is where I got the idea that you dropped your suspicion of llama. Where I come from, "I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another" is not a statement of suspicion. Your post trajectory reads like this: Mildly suspicious of llama -[2 days pass]-> Neutral on llama -> opposed to lynching llama -> quietly return to original suspicion of llama an hour later.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pmI don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
- speedchuck
- Knight of No Renown
- Posts in topic: 103
- Posts: 10958
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:43 am
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Try me.DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:54 pmI'm kinda wondering how far Speedchuck is going to take the "I do what DH Does" schtick.
SIGNATURE:
Spoiler: show
- nutella
- Connoisseur of Spice
- Posts in topic: 58
- Posts: 24677
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:23 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Gender: Female
- Preferred Pronouns: she/her/hers
- Contact:
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 1}
What made you just pull this out of nowhere? Playing the "convincingly civ description of my role card" card, four game days after timmer's post but fairly soon after I said it's a major reason I trust him?
Wheewww yeah this series of posts by Quin really stinks to high heavens.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
I'm trying to let up a bit on the POE and open up to a couple other possibilities of players who could be fooling me, like speedchuck or DH maybe. I could turn my previously rather black-and-white list into a more nuanced rainbow if you like.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:09 pm I'm interested in Nutella as a player right now. Her Process of Elimination magic has whittled the game down to three possible baddies occupying two available spots. There does not seem to be a whole lot of suspicion around her. If I'm not misreading things, she almost seems like a trusted player to some degree. I've seen her as an excellent townie in past games. If she says she is confident that 2 out of 3 players are scum, and I am one of those three players, then that is something I am going to take interest in. Like I said before, if she is right then I have a 100% chance of voting for scum today by following her.
So what do we think of nutella's thought process? And could you provide more elaboration now, nutella?
BTW, is it just me or has LC completely dropped off the face of the earth? (As has SVS obviously.)
avatar art credit to chardonnay! (colors added by me tho)
http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23 ~ http://ofmonstersandmintcookies.tumblr.com ~ https://rateyourmusic.com/~nutella23
http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23 ~ http://ofmonstersandmintcookies.tumblr.com ~ https://rateyourmusic.com/~nutella23
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I don't know the answer to this question, but it seems a little contrived. I don't know much about what you've done in this game period. I just know that, as a replacement, you're one of the less informed players left, along with myself. This means you would fit into DharmaHelper's criteria for suspicion. Note that it's not my criteria for suspicion. I never said I agree with the assessment, just that it's fair to say that either of us are suspicious if one is using DH's thought process.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:20 pmYes, but unless all of my teammates are as misinformed as I am, that won't affect the night kill choices. If I'm bad and all my teammates are misinformed, then I'm going to figure out what's going on, aren't I?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmWhich suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- speedchuck
- Knight of No Renown
- Posts in topic: 103
- Posts: 10958
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:43 am
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Rainbow without color:
Nutella
Epignosis
Timmer
LC
DH
Quin
SVS
Sloonei
Is that really all the players? wow.
Nutella
Epignosis
Timmer
LC
DH
Quin
SVS
Sloonei
Is that really all the players? wow.
SIGNATURE:
Spoiler: show
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
That's too bad. If you're not bad, it sounds like DH needs a new criteria.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:26 pmI don't know the answer to this question, but it seems a little contrived. I don't know much about what you've done in this game period. I just know that, as a replacement, you're one of the less informed players left, along with myself. This means you would fit into DharmaHelper's criteria for suspicion. Note that it's not my criteria for suspicion. I never said I agree with the assessment, just that it's fair to say that either of us are suspicious if one is using DH's thought process.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:20 pmYes, but unless all of my teammates are as misinformed as I am, that won't affect the night kill choices. If I'm bad and all my teammates are misinformed, then I'm going to figure out what's going on, aren't I?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmWhich suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 1}
Okay, ice cream sandwich.nutella wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:25 pmWhat made you just pull this out of nowhere? Playing the "convincingly civ description of my role card" card, four game days after timmer's post but fairly soon after I said it's a major reason I trust him?
Wheewww yeah this series of posts by Quin really stinks to high heavens.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
I'm trying to let up a bit on the POE and open up to a couple other possibilities of players who could be fooling me, like speedchuck or DH maybe. I could turn my previously rather black-and-white list into a more nuanced rainbow if you like.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:09 pm I'm interested in Nutella as a player right now. Her Process of Elimination magic has whittled the game down to three possible baddies occupying two available spots. There does not seem to be a whole lot of suspicion around her. If I'm not misreading things, she almost seems like a trusted player to some degree. I've seen her as an excellent townie in past games. If she says she is confident that 2 out of 3 players are scum, and I am one of those three players, then that is something I am going to take interest in. Like I said before, if she is right then I have a 100% chance of voting for scum today by following her.
So what do we think of nutella's thought process? And could you provide more elaboration now, nutella?
BTW, is it just me or has LC completely dropped off the face of the earth? (As has SVS obviously.)
- nutella
- Connoisseur of Spice
- Posts in topic: 58
- Posts: 24677
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:23 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Gender: Female
- Preferred Pronouns: she/her/hers
- Contact:
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
Timmer
Long Con
Epignosis
DharmaHelper
Speedchuck
Sloonei
S~V~S
Quin
Long Con
Epignosis
DharmaHelper
Speedchuck
Sloonei
S~V~S
Quin
avatar art credit to chardonnay! (colors added by me tho)
http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23 ~ http://ofmonstersandmintcookies.tumblr.com ~ https://rateyourmusic.com/~nutella23
http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23 ~ http://ofmonstersandmintcookies.tumblr.com ~ https://rateyourmusic.com/~nutella23
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
Snipped.
This still does not address the essence of my point, which is that you seemed to totally ignore your supposed suspicion of llama when composing those middle two posts. If you had a substantial reason to vote for llama, why make two posts in which you directly oppose the lynch? By "oppose" I mean you took a stance which was contrary to the act of voting for him. You can say that you were wary of the bandwagon and this is true. But this does not change the observable fact that you have two posts which are opposed to the idea of lynching llama, sandwiched between two posts in which you support his lynch.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
When I asked you why I was your top suspect (or at least the recipient of your vote) earlier, you said it was because you were following DH (who is currently plopped right in the middle of this list). Is that still the case, or do you have a substantial reason to choose me over Quin and SVS?speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:27 pm Rainbow without color:
Nutella
Epignosis
Timmer
LC
DH
Quin
SVS
Sloonei
Is that really all the players? wow.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 3}
Post 1 - The llama case was only just being formed. I figured it was noteworthy, for the reason I explained in Post 4, so I mentioned it.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:31 pmSnipped.
This still does not address the essence of my point, which is that you seemed to totally ignore your supposed suspicion of llama when composing those middle two posts. If you had a substantial reason to vote for llama, why make two posts in which you directly oppose the lynch? By "oppose" I mean you took a stance which was contrary to the act of voting for him. You can say that you were wary of the bandwagon and this is true. But this does not change the observable fact that you have two posts which are opposed to the idea of lynching llama, sandwiched between two posts in which you support his lynch.
Post 2 - Not an opposition. Not a support. I read his posts, and there was fluff.
Post 3 - I can support the llama case, but it's a runaway, so I'm wary.
Post 4 - I elaborate on Post 1. I'm cool with it.
I do not know how best to explain this further.
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
a thing i am currently interested in.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:32 pmWhen I asked you why I was your top suspect (or at least the recipient of your vote) earlier, you said it was because you were following DH (who is currently plopped right in the middle of this list). Is that still the case, or do you have a substantial reason to choose me over Quin and SVS?speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:27 pm Rainbow without color:
Nutella
Epignosis
Timmer
LC
DH
Quin
SVS
Sloonei
Is that really all the players? wow.
- Sloonei
- Cap'n Sloonbeard
- Posts in topic: 162
- Posts: 26368
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
- Location: Buffalo
- Gender: Male
- Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him
- Quin
- Indecent Bastard
- Posts in topic: 79
- Posts: 10894
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:08 am
- Location: The Future
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {DAY 4}
I am unimpressed by the context in which she first voted for me. For reference, it was that 'look me in the eyes' thing. I agree with Epi's thoughts that she's less likely to be bad since she called Epi out on his lie rather than keeping it to her team, though.
Re: Blue Velvet Mafia {NIGHT 1}
Civilian. I already said why. Go read.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:52 pmI would like to hear any thoughts you have on SVS. You don't have to acknowledge any of the things I've said about her, I just want your own independent thoughts on her.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:50 pmFine, but I don't care about your S~V~S-llama interactions either. They're all circumstantial. There is no substance to them. If I need to go through breaking them down, I will, but I would rather not.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:46 pmhuh? No. I'm hardly using that PM to justify my vote. Pay more attention to the post I made highlighting SVS and llama's interactions. That's what I'm actually basing my vote on. I brought the Wilgy PM up now because, like you said, we're getting toward the end of the game. I didn't want to bring it up earlier when I wasn't fully involved in the game because I wouldn't have been able to follow up in any way, and I wasn't sure what would have been going on around me at the time. I'd honestly forgotten the contents of the message anyway. I had to check it after I had made my first couple posts about SVS. At that point I took an additional look at her posts to see what I could find that was relevant to what Wilgy had said to me on Day 1. That is all. It's not a crucial point and I never intended it to be so.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pmLook, I'm not voting S~V~S based on what Wilgy told you privately days ago. You could have said something to incriminate S~V~S then if you wanted to, but you didn't. You've posted every Day as far as I can see, and Wilgy was lynched ages ago. You could have said something. Now it just looks like you're trying to jumble together a case based on a PM a dead man sent you that nobody else can know if he sent or not. It's all very wild and full of hearsay. No thank you.
Stream my music for free: https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 374
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm