[ENDGAME] - The Fellowship of the Ring Mafia (LoTR I)

[insertnamehere]

My read on most of the people in this game is a shrug and a hesitant "maaaybe...."

[Epignosis]

I have a bad habit when playing mafia - I usually disengage and go into a bit of self-loathing funk whenever I accidentally mislynch a civilian. I start doubting myself. The reason I haven't had any grand opinions or reads after Kyle's death is that I genuinely don't feel too strongly about anyone else's alignment. I thought I had my grip on this game, then it slipped away from me, and I can't get it back. The run of shit luck that the civilians have had in not lynching any baddies certainly hasn't helped.

If you're a civilian, don't wallow in self-doubt. That's how mafia win. Instead, make mafia uncomfortable to be around you. It's okay to feel bad for lynching civilians, but the better reaction is to vow to make it up to them by getting them the win.

[insertnamehere]

lol at the side mission being shorter than the heist

[Marmot]

In the House of Tom Bombadil

In the house of Tom Bombadil, there was a horrific sight. Rabbit8 was confused with a real rabbit, and slaughtered for stew.


rabbit8 has been lynched. He was...

Spoiler: show

Tom Bombadil

He was a vanilla civilian.

Night 5 has begun. You have until 20:00 EST on Thursday to submit your night actions.

[speedchuck]

Yeahh, not buying the Epi tinfoil theory. I get it, like, everyone's mopey because this game just ain't going well. I replaced in, so it's even worse here. Hard to get motivated. Hard to be confident in this when we have little to go off of and even the hard claims don't help much, or are claimed because of bad thingsTM.

Rabbit feels weird. Like, I can't say for sure whether it's an easy lynch, a bus, or a bulls-eye. Nobody is caring enough for me to gauge the enthusiasm and drive toward the lynch.

I don't think mafia would bus right now with the thread like this, but they wouldn't stick their neck out for rabbit or LC either. This thread apathy might fit those cases.

One or both of them might be scum. I'd be surprised to find two town there.

linki: balls

[Long Con]

Elohcin

Replaced timmer Day 4.

- says hello
- says she'll be lazy and asks for someone to catch her up
- complains about POE suspicion inherited from timmer
- agrees with speedchuck's assessment that Jack's POE is baseless
- asks again for some catchup help

The next one is interesting enogh to warrant a real quote:

I'm sorry, but I cannot go back and read 21 pages at this time. Jay, how about you give me a bit of what has gone on so I can weigh in and actually prove myself a bit.

Glor claimed town so we know he's town.

Sloonei came out Slooneiing. I and a few others expressed belief he was good. Mac said he was bad. Speed then replaced Sloonei and while not doing amazing, hasn't pinged me at all. Epi has also expressed belief he is good.

Mac and Wilgy more or less got himself lynched and Mac almost did the same but was nightkilled for some reason.

I'd appreciate it if you would ISO Juliets/Timmer, LC, Rabbit and weigh in on them.

I'll try to do all of these asap. I'll go in order of what you listed. are we in 23 hour nights?

"I'll go in order of what you listed." Why was that something she needed to say? Well, if she and rabbit are teammates, then that puts the teammate-analysis furthest away... gives her a chance to put eyes on someone earlier in the list. Maybe she won't get around to her teammate at all...? Just a weird thing to say, why would Eloh need for us to know she's doing them in his order? Easy way out of "hey you didn't really look at rabbit and he turned out bad, maybe you're his teammate?" "No, it wasn't even my order, I was just following Jack's instructions!" Y'know? Guess we shoud wait for rabbit's flip before we return to this slightly incriminating bit.

-- ISO on juliets, looks pretty standard, but there's one part that caught my attention:

"-First real topic of discussion was Mac being night-killed. She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely. "

So, if your conclusion is that Mac is not killed by his suspects Speed and Jack... and that a set-up is more likely... then why didn't you follow up on that? And if it's a set-up, then why would you give juliets a nice soft blanket civread, when she's the one that gently pointed the finger at Jack and Speed? Why wouldn't you question her motives, if you really think it's a set-up?

Blaaaaah, rabbit8 was Civ.... I'll post this anyway, although it contains some rabbit-assumption-bad stuff.

Long story short, the rest of it is "blah blah LC is bad"

[speedchuck]

Bleh. Just realized that the vote ended nearly an hour ago.

[Long Con]

Yeahh, not buying the Epi tinfoil theory. I get it, like, everyone's mopey because this game just ain't going well. I replaced in, so it's even worse here. Hard to get motivated. Hard to be confident in this when we have little to go off of and even the hard claims don't help much, or are claimed because of bad thingsTM.

Rabbit feels weird. Like, I can't say for sure whether it's an easy lynch, a bus, or a bulls-eye. Nobody is caring enough for me to gauge the enthusiasm and drive toward the lynch.

I don't think mafia would bus right now with the thread like this, but they wouldn't stick their neck out for rabbit or LC either. This thread apathy might fit those cases.

One or both of them might be scum. I'd be surprised to find two town there.

linki: balls

Balls indeed. Two town there.

[Epignosis]

[juliets]

Well that sucks. We are having terrible luck.

To Long Con: I never said anything about a re-direct. I never said I thought jack and speed were bad. I didn't gently point at Jack and speed. What do you mean question my motives? I'm confused by this whole section of your post about me.

[Long Con]

You misunderstand, and I see why. This is a continuation of evaluating only Elohcin.

Elohcin did the "-- ISO on juliets" I speak of. This is all about her stil.

Elohcin


<snip>

-- ISO on juliets, looks pretty standard, but there's one part that caught my attention:

"-First real topic of discussion was Mac being night-killed. She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely. "

So, if your conclusion is that Mac is not killed by his suspects Speed and Jack... and that a set-up is more likely... then why didn't you follow up on that? And if it's a set-up, then why would you give juliets a nice soft blanket civread, when she's the one that gently pointed the finger at Jack and Speed? Why wouldn't you question her motives, if you really think it's a set-up?

[Long Con]

Well that sucks. We are having terrible luck.

To Long Con: I never said anything about a re-direct. I never said I thought jack and speed were bad. I didn't gently point at Jack and speed. What do you mean question my motives? I'm confused by this whole section of your post about me.

If you didn't do that, then have ytou questioned Eloh about saying "She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. "

This is from Elohcin's evaluation of your ISO, juliets. Why do you question it and deny everything when I say it, and ignore it when Eloh says it?

[insertnamehere]

GODDAMN IT TOM BOMBADIL

[insertnamehere]

[Epignosis]

If Glorfindel told his first story and wins as mafia, I won't even be mad.

[juliets]

Well that sucks. We are having terrible luck.

To Long Con: I never said anything about a re-direct. I never said I thought jack and speed were bad. I didn't gently point at Jack and speed. What do you mean question my motives? I'm confused by this whole section of your post about me.

If you didn't do that, then have ytou questioned Eloh about saying "She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. "

This is from Elohcin's evaluation of your ISO, juliets. Why do you question it and deny everything when I say it, and ignore it when Eloh says it?

I didn't even see where she had said it. However, here in your partial quote of her she says "Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad". That part is true - he did think Jack and speed were bad. That's not what you said Elo said I said. In other words, you either summarized what I said wrong or summarized what Elo said wrong. I think I'll just go back to the original post of Elo instead of depending on your summaries.

Elo, what did you see that made you think I was saying there was a redirect? Please quote me where it seems like I was saying that.

[Elohcin]

Elohcin

Replaced timmer Day 4.

- says hello
- says she'll be lazy and asks for someone to catch her up
- complains about POE suspicion inherited from timmer
- agrees with speedchuck's assessment that Jack's POE is baseless
- asks again for some catchup help

The next one is interesting enogh to warrant a real quote:

I'm sorry, but I cannot go back and read 21 pages at this time. Jay, how about you give me a bit of what has gone on so I can weigh in and actually prove myself a bit.

Glor claimed town so we know he's town.

Sloonei came out Slooneiing. I and a few others expressed belief he was good. Mac said he was bad. Speed then replaced Sloonei and while not doing amazing, hasn't pinged me at all. Epi has also expressed belief he is good.

Mac and Wilgy more or less got himself lynched and Mac almost did the same but was nightkilled for some reason.

I'd appreciate it if you would ISO Juliets/Timmer, LC, Rabbit and weigh in on them.

I'll try to do all of these asap. I'll go in order of what you listed. are we in 23 hour nights?

"I'll go in order of what you listed." Why was that something she needed to say? Well, if she and rabbit are teammates, then that puts the teammate-analysis furthest away... gives her a chance to put eyes on someone earlier in the list. Maybe she won't get around to her teammate at all...? Just a weird thing to say, why would Eloh need for us to know she's doing them in his order? Easy way out of "hey you didn't really look at rabbit and he turned out bad, maybe you're his teammate?" "No, it wasn't even my order, I was just following Jack's instructions!" Y'know? Guess we shoud wait for rabbit's flip before we return to this slightly incriminating bit.

-- ISO on juliets, looks pretty standard, but there's one part that caught my attention:

"-First real topic of discussion was Mac being night-killed. She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely. "

So, if your conclusion is that Mac is not killed by his suspects Speed and Jack... and that a set-up is more likely... then why didn't you follow up on that? And if it's a set-up, then why would you give juliets a nice soft blanket civread, when she's the one that gently pointed the finger at Jack and Speed? Why wouldn't you question her motives, if you really think it's a set-up?

Blaaaaah, rabbit8 was Civ.... I'll post this anyway, although it contains some rabbit-assumption-bad stuff.

Long story short, the rest of it is "blah blah LC is bad"

You're just mad because I made fun of you.

To answer your questions though, I came into this game as a civ, but as a civ replacing someone who apparently did not have the trust of the people. I have to earn that trust, not from a zero starting point, but from a negative spot (if that makes sense). I'm not big into ISOs, but I wanted to try to get to some in if I could find the time because Jack asked me to do so and just after reading some of jack, I felt he could be trusted. I did them in the order that they were requested, and said I would, because I felt that they were probably listed in an order of importance of the requester. Obviously, Juliets was first on Jack's mind as he listed her first and so on. I knew I would probably not get to all of them. I'm sorry, but I run this household, take care of my children 24 damn 7 (don't get me wrong, they are my life right now but can you imagine being with all your children 24/7? I do it because it is what's right for our family), and run a 20 hour a week business. But I do my best to help out (i.e. subbing in) and I enjoy playing this game because it helps me escape RL just a bit.

What I don't understand from your post is this part, "So, if your conclusion is that Mac is not killed by his suspects Speed and Jack... and that a set-up is more likely... then why didn't you follow up on that? And if it's a set-up, then why would you give juliets a nice soft blanket civread, when she's the one that gently pointed the finger at Jack and Speed? Why wouldn't you question her motives, if you really think it's a set-up?" I didn't say anything about a set-up. You are going to have to explain what all you mean. I said maybe mac was killed because of a redirect. meaning, maybe the mafia didn't mean to kill him. I said this because Jules said that there wasn't a lot of sus on him. I don't see what this has to do with any kind of set-up that I would need to look further into or how I could be suspected for not looking into it. Maybe I am just ignorant and not seeing something. But I don't think that is the thing here.

[Elohcin]

Well that sucks. We are having terrible luck.

To Long Con: I never said anything about a re-direct. I never said I thought jack and speed were bad. I didn't gently point at Jack and speed. What do you mean question my motives? I'm confused by this whole section of your post about me.

If you didn't do that, then have ytou questioned Eloh about saying "She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. "

This is from Elohcin's evaluation of your ISO, juliets. Why do you question it and deny everything when I say it, and ignore it when Eloh says it?

you are misreading my post. I said maybe a re-direct based on jules saying mac didn;t have much sus on him. that is all.

[Elohcin]

anyway...early morning and long day tomorrow.. I'm out.

[juliets]

Here is my original post about Mac/speed/Jack:

I just read through Mac to see if I could get an idea of why he was killed. It looks like he was under suspicion so it strikes me as an odd kill. He was suspicious of Sloonei/speedchuck and at the very end he called Jack bad. The speedchuck suspicion seemed the strongest but I have to wonder if he was killed to set speed up. I will need to read Sloonei and speed and hope that helps me determine if thats true or not. I see by reading up thats what Epi thinks has happened.

And here is Elo's ISO of me:

I hate doing ISOs, they wear me out. So I am doing the best I can.

Juliets -
-Just replaced in as well, I've notices and already has 23 posts within a little over 4 hours. That's pretty nuts!
-First real topic of discussion was Mac being night-killed. She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely.
-At one point, she questions long cons motives for voting chuck.
-Engages Glorf on a vote matter.
-doesn't say much about timmer except that he is a quiet baddie from her memory, but that he was hurt somehow and had to replace out. I believe that was who I replaced
-votes wilgy because there is n better option in her opinion but she contemplates moving her vote and acts worried
-helpful to me as I replace in

overall, I think juliets seems civ.

I never said anything about a redirect so I'll wait for her answer on that part but if you look at the underlined parts you can see what I said and what she said I said.

Now that we have both quotes in front of us can you please make your point again LC?

linki

[Epignosis]

I don't believe a redirect exists. That doesn't fit the lore and I know the lore.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I moved my vote to INH.

What is this? 30 min before the night post? Bleh.

[Jackofhearts2005]

EBWOP

Day end, not night post.

[Epignosis]

I moved my vote to INH.

What is this? 30 min before the night post? Bleh.

INH was online. I wanted to make shit happen.

Should I have left my vote on rabbit?

[Long Con]

Ok...

ELOHCIN: [juliets] says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? I see now that the 'redirect' is Eloh's idea; I took it to be more of what "she (juliets) says"

ELOHCIN: [juliets] says [Mac] thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely.

Purple text seems to be Elohcin's words and thoughts. Green text is back to juliets' words, but I had assumed they were Elohcin's words, because they followed what I perceived as Elohcin's words.

Even now, reading it, it reads like Eloh's opinion. If she had that opinion, I would expect her to follow up on it... juliets, in her original quote, floats the idea that speedchuck and/or Jack killed Mac because Mac was suspicious of them, but instantly waves in the idea that the Mac kill was to set speedchuck up.

"I will need to read Sloonei and speed and hope that helps me determine if thats true or not." Can you link me to your post-Sloonchuck-read results, juliets?

[Jackofhearts2005]

I moved my vote to INH.

What is this? 30 min before the night post? Bleh.

INH was online. I wanted to make shit happen.

Should I have left my vote on rabbit?

Did it work?

[Long Con]

Long Con
Glorfindel
insertnamehere
speedchuck
juliets
Elohcin
Epignosis
Jackofhearts2005

This is where I currently sit.

[Long Con]

Long Con
Glorfindel
insertnamehere
speedchuck
juliets
Elohcin
Epignosis
Jackofhearts2005

This is where I currently sit.

[Long Con]

So, as you can see, I sat in the same place for one minute and twenty-eight seconds.

[juliets]

Ok...

ELOHCIN: [juliets] says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? I see now that the 'redirect' is Eloh's idea; I took it to be more of what "she (juliets) says"

ELOHCIN: [juliets] says [Mac] thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely.

Purple text seems to be Elohcin's words and thoughts. Green text is back to juliets' words, but I had assumed they were Elohcin's words, because they followed what I perceived as Elohcin's words.

Even now, reading it, it reads like Eloh's opinion. If she had that opinion, I would expect her to follow up on it... juliets, in her original quote, floats the idea that speedchuck and/or Jack killed Mac because Mac was suspicious of them, but instantly waves in the idea that the Mac kill was to set speedchuck up.

"I will need to read Sloonei and speed and hope that helps me determine if thats true or not." Can you link me to your post-Sloonchuck-read results, juliets?

Yes, I can link you to that post:

Where is everyone? I need some people to talk to about what's going on in this game. I jus read speedchuck and most of Sloonei (there were a few of sloonei's posts that made my eyes glaze over so I'll have to revisit them later) and I didn't see anything I would consider a mafia tell in either. So, at this point, I have to consider the Mac kill more of a set-up. What do the rest of you think? I will read Glorfindel and Long Con next because they voted for speed and hopefully I can see where my thinking might be wrong.

You seem to think I am bad. Can you explain why? You've played a million games with me, I would expect you to know my civ game by now.

[Long Con]

"You've played a million games with me, I would expect you to know my civ game by now." Well this makes me suspicious. There is not a single person I have ever played Mafia with that I expect myself to just "know" their Civ game and cross them off the list. I don't believe in that kind of thing, I think it's a fairy tale that baddies try to fall back on in order to coerce Civvies into feeling like they are not trying hard enough, or aren't being a good enough Old Mafia Friend. "Shame on you for not knowing me well enough to know I'm Civ right now!" NO THANK YOU.

You are bad. Describe for me what you imagined you might have seen that would make you say "A HA! Now I believe Sloonchuck killed Mac!" This whole "investigation" you claimed to do feels paper-thin and false to me.

[juliets]

"You've played a million games with me, I would expect you to know my civ game by now." Well this makes me suspicious. There is not a single person I have ever played Mafia with that I expect myself to just "know" their Civ game and cross them off the list. I don't believe in that kind of thing, I think it's a fairy tale that baddies try to fall back on in order to coerce Civvies into feeling like they are not trying hard enough, or aren't being a good enough Old Mafia Friend. "Shame on you for not knowing me well enough to know I'm Civ right now!" NO THANK YOU.

You are bad. Describe for me what you imagined you might have seen that would make you say "A HA! Now I believe Sloonchuck killed Mac!" This whole "investigation" you claimed to do feels paper-thin and false to me.

I was looking for anything that would ping me - isn't that what most people would look for when they are looking at someone? As for my civ game it is generally recognizable by people who have played with me a lot but I'll take your point that you don't believe in that kind of thing. You still haven't
pointed to why you think I am bad, or what you saw in DF that made you think he was bad. I am most assuredly not bad.

[juliets]

I am going to work now but will respond to reasons LC thinks I am bad when I get home from therapy.

[Long Con]

Instant reaction: you don't like being caught as bad for what you consider bad reasons.

I said why I think you're bad when I said I think you're bad. I never said anything about DFaraday.

[Elohcin]

Here is my original post about Mac/speed/Jack:

I just read through Mac to see if I could get an idea of why he was killed. It looks like he was under suspicion so it strikes me as an odd kill. He was suspicious of Sloonei/speedchuck and at the very end he called Jack bad. The speedchuck suspicion seemed the strongest but I have to wonder if he was killed to set speed up. I will need to read Sloonei and speed and hope that helps me determine if thats true or not. I see by reading up thats what Epi thinks has happened.

And here is Elo's ISO of me:

I hate doing ISOs, they wear me out. So I am doing the best I can.

Juliets -
-Just replaced in as well, I've notices and already has 23 posts within a little over 4 hours. That's pretty nuts!
-First real topic of discussion was Mac being night-killed. She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely.
-At one point, she questions long cons motives for voting chuck.
-Engages Glorf on a vote matter.
-doesn't say much about timmer except that he is a quiet baddie from her memory, but that he was hurt somehow and had to replace out. I believe that was who I replaced
-votes wilgy because there is n better option in her opinion but she contemplates moving her vote and acts worried
-helpful to me as I replace in

overall, I think juliets seems civ.

I never said anything about a redirect so I'll wait for her answer on that part but if you look at the underlined parts you can see what I said and what she said I said.

Now that we have both quotes in front of us can you please make your point again LC?

linki

The redirect comment was all me. And it should have read..."She says there was some suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect?"

I misspoke. There WAS some suspicion on him which made her wonder why he, specifically, was killed. This is when I suggested maybe a redirect. Granted, I hadn't read any roles at that time

Does this clear it up? Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Long Con]

I quickly read through to catch up, and don't have really strong reads atm. I will go ahead and *vote Rabbit* for now since he's made a fair few posts but seems to be avoiding casebuilding or even on-topic engagement.

Easy vote. I think I voted there as well. But it was a vote for a Civ, so no points awarded.

I'm going to put my vote on DFaraday.

I agree with his briefest of points about rabbit, that he hasn't contributed much, but then again, neither has Wilgy (all jokes), neither has DF himself ( posts), or novaselinenever (barely here), neither have I, really. In a game full of quiet players, singling one out who doesn't have an established meta while others with established metas run rampant with jokes etc and you give them a pass just feels cheap and like something a mafia would do. Why tangle with a meta people know when you can vote the new guy?

Timmer is, intentionally or not, misrepresenting my admittedly terrible case.

My point was specifically that Rabbit seemed to have a high post count and low on-topic content. I went back and looked, at the time I voted Rabbit had made about 15 posts, Wilgy had made 12 (and literally half of those were posted altogether as a meme reference), and I had made one. And about half the players in this game (myself included) have quite a bit of experience playing with Rabbit in the past. I certainly remember him as always being jokey and strange, but also making insightful observations and taking strong stances. He does seem to have been engaging more later in the day, to be fair.

If anything, Timmer seems to be taking an easy option here and setting up a quiet player who makes weak votes as an easy target.

SOOOOOOOFTEST accusation ever on Timmer here. The barest suggestion of "misrepresentation, intentionally or not...", and he's "setting up a quiet player". DF is sticking a little bit of suspicion on, but it's like he knows timmer is Civ, so he doesn't want to pull the trigger on a full-blown accusation.

I quickly read through to catch up, and don't have really strong reads atm. I will go ahead and *vote Rabbit* for now since he's made a fair few posts but seems to be avoiding casebuilding or even on-topic engagement.

Why me, why not Epi? The same fucking case could be made, Yeah.

Bullshit reason, but not indicative of alignment IMO . Since all of our votes were complete fucking bullshit.

Yeah, I could have voted Epi, but I was speed reading and your posts stood out to me more (in the wrong way). I fully admit it was a weak reason though.

Wants to make sure we all know it was weak, so that we can't accuse him of it and have it catch hold.

Mac is reading civ to me, and his explanation of the red peek being a joke comes across more as dismissing it as typical Day 1 shenanigans rather than a serious case.

I'd still like to hear more from Timmer, and why he feels good about me now.

Civ-reads Mac, who has been proven Civ now. How insightful! Or did DF just know it and was buddying Mac? Or maybe setting up a good-looking read on a Civ before that Civ is killed?

Voting Timmer for now. He hasn't addressed my points against him from earlier.

"Points" from earlier? As though DFaraday had made some case on Timmer? Don't be fooled! Here's all he ever said on the subject: "I'd still like to hear more from Timmer, and why he feels good about me now." That's it. Does anyone feel like it's honest play to vote timmer because "He hasn't addressed my points against him"?? His "points" weren't even an accusation! Now it suddenly turns into a votable offense?? *tweet* Party foul!

Even if Mac wasn't consistent in his analysis of Sloonei's treatment of Ambray and Nutella, that doesn't mean he's bad. Civs are inconsistent in their positions all the time.

Having said that, I feel good about Epi and think his case on Mac is a good look for Epi.

Last post from DFaraday. Again reaffirming that Mac is Civ, and now adding in that Epi is Civ for suspecting Mac.

Note the lack of suspicions from DF. I mean, he HAD to cast votes, so he was like "rabbit is too quiet" and "timmer didn't respond"... but that is soooooo WEAK!

Someone help me out here. Take these meagre few posts and convince us DFaraday is Civ, because I don't see it at all.

[Long Con]

Here is my original post about Mac/speed/Jack:

I just read through Mac to see if I could get an idea of why he was killed. It looks like he was under suspicion so it strikes me as an odd kill. He was suspicious of Sloonei/speedchuck and at the very end he called Jack bad. The speedchuck suspicion seemed the strongest but I have to wonder if he was killed to set speed up. I will need to read Sloonei and speed and hope that helps me determine if thats true or not. I see by reading up thats what Epi thinks has happened.

And here is Elo's ISO of me:

I hate doing ISOs, they wear me out. So I am doing the best I can.

Juliets -
-Just replaced in as well, I've notices and already has 23 posts within a little over 4 hours. That's pretty nuts!
-First real topic of discussion was Mac being night-killed. She says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? Or, she says he thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely.
-At one point, she questions long cons motives for voting chuck.
-Engages Glorf on a vote matter.
-doesn't say much about timmer except that he is a quiet baddie from her memory, but that he was hurt somehow and had to replace out. I believe that was who I replaced
-votes wilgy because there is n better option in her opinion but she contemplates moving her vote and acts worried
-helpful to me as I replace in

overall, I think juliets seems civ.

I never said anything about a redirect so I'll wait for her answer on that part but if you look at the underlined parts you can see what I said and what she said I said.

Now that we have both quotes in front of us can you please make your point again LC?

linki

The redirect comment was all me. And it should have read..."She says there was some suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect?"

I misspoke. There WAS some suspicion on him which made her wonder why he, specifically, was killed. This is when I suggested maybe a redirect. Granted, I hadn't read any roles at that time

Does this clear it up? Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Now that you've read the roles, and you are sure there are no redirects, do you think Mac was killed by his suspects, or do you think it was a set-up?

[Marmot]

DAY 5 LYNCH

Someone's bad. Who is it?
Poll ended at Wed Feb 14, 2018 5:59:56 pm
Please note that if you vote, your vote will be visible.


Elohcin
0
No votes
Voters: None

Epignosis
0
No votes
Voters: None

Glorfindel
0
No votes
Voters: None

insertnamehere
1
8%
Voters: Epignosis

Jackofhearts2005
0
No votes
Voters: None

juliets
0
No votes
Voters: None

Long Con
2
15%
Voters: speedchuck, insertnamehere

rabbit8
5
38%
Voters: Jackofhearts2005, Elohcin, juliets, Long Con, Glorfindel

speedchuck
0
No votes
Voters: None

Fatty Bolger (Host/dead/np/faculty)
5
38%
Voters: nutella, MacDougall, Kylemii, JaggedJimmyJay, Marmot
Total votes: 13

[Jackofhearts2005]

Long Con
Glorfindel
insertnamehere
speedchuck
juliets
Elohcin
Epignosis
Jackofhearts2005

This is where I currently sit.

#Surprised. When did I become a bigger suspect of yours than Epi?

Maybe your next few posts say.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I'm having trouble telling who is saying what in these posts.

Ok...

ELOHCIN: [juliets] says there was not a lot of suspicion on him, so maybe a redirect? I see now that the 'redirect' is Eloh's idea; I took it to be more of what "she (juliets) says"

ELOHCIN: [juliets] says [Mac] thought Jack and chuck were bad. But I am not sure if I would put Jack or chuck as bad at this point. A set-up looks more likely.

Purple text seems to be Elohcin's words and thoughts. Green text is back to juliets' words, but I had assumed they were Elohcin's words, because they followed what I perceived as Elohcin's words.

Even now, reading it, it reads like Eloh's opinion. If she had that opinion, I would expect her to follow up on it... juliets, in her original quote, floats the idea that speedchuck and/or Jack killed Mac because Mac was suspicious of them, but instantly waves in the idea that the Mac kill was to set speedchuck up.

"I will need to read Sloonei and speed and hope that helps me determine if thats true or not." Can you link me to your post-Sloonchuck-read results, juliets?

"You've played a million games with me, I would expect you to know my civ game by now." Well this makes me suspicious. There is not a single person I have ever played Mafia with that I expect myself to just "know" their Civ game and cross them off the list. I don't believe in that kind of thing, I think it's a fairy tale that baddies try to fall back on in order to coerce Civvies into feeling like they are not trying hard enough, or aren't being a good enough Old Mafia Friend. "Shame on you for not knowing me well enough to know I'm Civ right now!" NO THANK YOU.

You are bad. Describe for me what you imagined you might have seen that would make you say "A HA! Now I believe Sloonchuck killed Mac!" This whole "investigation" you claimed to do feels paper-thin and false to me.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Nope.

[mention]Long Con[/mention]

Why am I your top suspect?

[Long Con]

I didn't order the four orange in order of suspicion. I'd vote juliets at this point.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I didn't order the four orange in order of suspicion. I'd vote juliets at this point.

Why am I orange at all then?

[juliets]

Instant reaction: you don't like being caught as bad for what you consider bad reasons.

I said why I think you're bad when I said I think you're bad. I never said anything about DFaraday.

Your "instant reaction" sounds like something you would feel, not me. Without reasons that pertain to me I'm not going to spend any more time on this.

[Long Con]

I didn't order the four orange in order of suspicion. I'd vote juliets at this point.

Why am I orange at all then?

I didn't like your early-game interaction with my nutella suspicion, and you've pinged me a few times here and there.

[Long Con]

Instant reaction: you don't like being caught as bad for what you consider bad reasons.

I said why I think you're bad when I said I think you're bad. I never said anything about DFaraday.

Your "instant reaction" sounds like something you would feel, not me. Without reasons that pertain to me I'm not going to spend any more time on this.

That's ok, it's there for other people to spend time with.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I didn't order the four orange in order of suspicion. I'd vote juliets at this point.

Why am I orange at all then?

I didn't like your early-game interaction with my nutella suspicion, and you've pinged me a few times here and there.

To be clear, you mean http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 92#p402392 and "a few times here and there."

Try again.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I mean, literally, I shrug and your Nutella accusation. You've stated several times that I encouraged you to go after Nutella and I'm not sure where that's coming from.

[Elohcin]

Now that you've read the roles, and you are sure there are no redirects, do you think Mac was killed by his suspects, or do you think it was a set-up?

I don't think he was killed by his suspects. He suspected sloon/chuck and jack according to jules and I don't have any pings from either of those players. Jack, for sure seems civ to me. Chuck, well, doesn't seem bad. I do like what he said about POE in a game where no baddies have been lynched yet though. But atm, that's all I actually remember him saying so far this game. I don't seem to notice him all too much. That could be good or that could be bad.

[Long Con]

I didn't order the four orange in order of suspicion. I'd vote juliets at this point.

Why am I orange at all then?

I didn't like your early-game interaction with my nutella suspicion, and you've pinged me a few times here and there.

To be clear, you mean http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 92#p402392 and "a few times here and there."

Try again.

I didn't say I commented on them. I just mean that when reading your posts, some struck me as baddielike. Is this a big problem for you?