Mountain Mafia [END]

[colonialbob]

On the off chance of vote shenanigans...


Nutella, Sloonei, Jimmy, Bob, Quin good.

Epi bad. DDL maybe bad. Daisy maybe bad but only if Epi is.

Everyone else mostly null.

Do people use legacy reads? I feel like these get ignored.

Anyone want to/able to weigh in on what I just said about colonialbob? He's leapfrogged everyone else to the top of my suspects list.

I found what you said convincing.

Second time you've done this, town read me then next post flip me to bottom of your list based on somebody else's suspicions. I'm getting Crossover vibes all over the place from you, and I don't like it.

[colonialbob]

PS I think Sloonei's ISO of me started with the premise that I was probably bad and surprisingly enough found reasons to confirm. I don't think that's alignment indicative, I think it's a problem with ISOing people you're not neutral on.

[Jackofhearts2005]

On the off chance of vote shenanigans...


Nutella, Sloonei, Jimmy, Bob, Quin good.

Epi bad. DDL maybe bad. Daisy maybe bad but only if Epi is.

Everyone else mostly null.

Do people use legacy reads? I feel like these get ignored.

Anyone want to/able to weigh in on what I just said about colonialbob? He's leapfrogged everyone else to the top of my suspects list.

I found what you said convincing.

Second time you've done this, town read me then next post flip me to bottom of your list based on somebody else's suspicions. I'm getting Crossover vibes all over the place from you, and I don't like it.

Bob, I'm shit at reading you. See: All of Hybridity, basically. First three reads of you were pure gut and some were explicitly stated to not be reads anyone should listen to.

Last one is based on Sloonei's arguement sounding legit.

What do you think of Jimmy, Daisy, Dom, DDL, Speed?

[colonialbob]

On the off chance of vote shenanigans...


Nutella, Sloonei, Jimmy, Bob, Quin good.

Epi bad. DDL maybe bad. Daisy maybe bad but only if Epi is.

Everyone else mostly null.

Do people use legacy reads? I feel like these get ignored.

Anyone want to/able to weigh in on what I just said about colonialbob? He's leapfrogged everyone else to the top of my suspects list.

I found what you said convincing.

Second time you've done this, town read me then next post flip me to bottom of your list based on somebody else's suspicions. I'm getting Crossover vibes all over the place from you, and I don't like it.

Bob, I'm shit at reading you. See: All of Hybridity, basically. First three reads of you were pure gut and some were explicitly stated to not be reads anyone should listen to.

Last one is based on Sloonei's arguement sounding legit.

What do you think of Jimmy, Daisy, Dom, DDL, Speed?

Town, Town, null, lean Town, evaluating.

I'm fine putting a lean Scum on Dom from PoE, but that's all it is.

[Sloonei]

PS I think Sloonei's ISO of me started with the premise that I was probably bad and surprisingly enough found reasons to confirm. I don't think that's alignment indicative, I think it's a problem with ISOing people you're not neutral on.

You still haven't addressed my primary concern, which was your behavior from the time you started suspecting me to the end of the day.
this post here also suggests you've reversed your opinion on me again.

[Marmot]

Another note from the host.

I will be out of town this weekend until Mondayish. As such, my ability to respond to questions will be delayed, and I will only have access to the game via my phone.
I intend to extend Day 3 to 48 hours. I also intend to handle end-phases in the best capacity I can.

But the game will carry on! I will keep you all informed if anything changes.

[colonialbob]

PS I think Sloonei's ISO of me started with the premise that I was probably bad and surprisingly enough found reasons to confirm. I don't think that's alignment indicative, I think it's a problem with ISOing people you're not neutral on.

You still haven't addressed my primary concern, which was your behavior from the time you started suspecting me to the end of the day.
this post here also suggests you've reversed your opinion on me again.

I've reversed position on you for mechanical reasons. Town has the avoid lynch powers, so that makes you more likely to be town. Also Jack's non-tie vote bothers me and the more likely he is to be scum the less likely you are to be, since the w/w thing doesn't hold up mechanically.

My behavior from suspecting you until end of day? My choices were you, Jack, or sprit. I didn't want to vote sprit because I don't like going low poster this early. I could've voted Jack but my suspicions of you were fresher and less meta. I don't really get this "waving my vote in your face" complaint tbh.

[Sloonei]

But also, for the sake of discussion philosophy/theory, you're right that I was looking for reasons to suspect you. When I'm engaging in an ISO like the one I did of cbob last night, I am asking myself "Can I see any of these actions being scum-indicative?". If I can pull enough out that consistently makes sense, I'm willing to run with it. If I struggle, I'll probably still submit the post for sake of discussion, but I won't push the person as a suspect. I don't think I can catch baddies without this approach.

Other times I'll ISO a person from a totally neutral standpoint. It depends on what I'm working with and where I'm at in the game.

[Sloonei]

PS I think Sloonei's ISO of me started with the premise that I was probably bad and surprisingly enough found reasons to confirm. I don't think that's alignment indicative, I think it's a problem with ISOing people you're not neutral on.

You still haven't addressed my primary concern, which was your behavior from the time you started suspecting me to the end of the day.
this post here also suggests you've reversed your opinion on me again.

I've reversed position on you for mechanical reasons. Town has the avoid lynch powers, so that makes you more likely to be town. Also Jack's non-tie vote bothers me and the more likely he is to be scum the less likely you are to be, since the w/w thing doesn't hold up mechanically.

My behavior from suspecting you until end of day? My choices were you, Jack, or sprit. I didn't want to vote sprit because I don't like going low poster this early. I could've voted Jack but my suspicions of you were fresher and less meta. I don't really get this "waving my vote in your face" complaint tbh.

I never got the impression you were honestly considering a vote change. You were poking Jay with some questions about sprityo and me, but I don't remember seeing you offer any critical thoughts of your own, and you never wavered for a moment from your position. Your vote was on me and you were acting like there was still room to change your mind, but I never saw evidence of this. I also feel like the confidence you expressed in your vote was not backed up by the justification you provided, but that's not something I can view objectively since I was the target of it.

Why didn't you vote for Jack?

[speedchuck]

Cbob is easy for me to see as scum, and I'm glad someone brought it up. I didn't feel like posting much during the day. It all started when Cbob saw my firey post against LC and jumped on the bandwagon against him. But for those that remember, my post train wasn't condemning of LC's alignment, only his reasoning. Cbob wasn't looking for a read, he was looking for an excuse.

In general, it feels like Cbob is trying to hide his lack of scumhunting behind aggression and agreement, depending on the tide of the game. Most of the end of D2 had Cbob waving his vote in sloon's face without substantiating it or arguing it.

"But he seems so confident!"
Yeah, that's what I do as scum. I'd vote there.

I find this post funny because you're basically regurgitating Sloonei's argument against me (including using his exact (underlined) words!) while accusing me of hiding behind agreement.

IKR? It's like irony.

The non-underlined part of the post is my take though. There's more to what I'm saying. I'm just agreeing with sloon at the same time.

[speedchuck]

Hm. I could have sworn Sprit had like 2-3 times as many posts.

[speedchuck]

[mention]colonialbob[/mention] I happen to disagree with most every D2 read you've posted, so I'm [retty sure I'd read you scum if I ISO'd you. The lack of defense you're getting in this is kinda disturbing.

I mean, sloon had a good argument, but everyone's just like 'sure' so far and we townies haven't been uniform on anything all game.

Does anyone think Cbob is town? Why?

[colonialbob]

But also, for the sake of discussion philosophy/theory, you're right that I was looking for reasons to suspect you. When I'm engaging in an ISO like the one I did of cbob last night, I am asking myself "Can I see any of these actions being scum-indicative?". If I can pull enough out that consistently makes sense, I'm willing to run with it. If I struggle, I'll probably still submit the post for sake of discussion, but I won't push the person as a suspect. I don't think I can catch baddies without this approach.

Other times I'll ISO a person from a totally neutral standpoint. It depends on what I'm working with and where I'm at in the game.

So the problem is this opens you up to confirmation bias, which is basically inevitable when you go looking for stuff to confirm what you already think. I've seen it happen before, and it's frustrating to fight against because, well, they don't want to hear it. It's not even consciously, but confirmation bias is worse than just looking for stuff that confirms your theory - when people are confronted with evidence that goes against what they think, they're actually more likely to believe it stronger than they are to change their minds.

(Again this is all theory and not alignment specific, I'm more than happy to talk theory because I find it very interesting)

[colonialbob]

PS I think Sloonei's ISO of me started with the premise that I was probably bad and surprisingly enough found reasons to confirm. I don't think that's alignment indicative, I think it's a problem with ISOing people you're not neutral on.

You still haven't addressed my primary concern, which was your behavior from the time you started suspecting me to the end of the day.
this post here also suggests you've reversed your opinion on me again.

I've reversed position on you for mechanical reasons. Town has the avoid lynch powers, so that makes you more likely to be town. Also Jack's non-tie vote bothers me and the more likely he is to be scum the less likely you are to be, since the w/w thing doesn't hold up mechanically.

My behavior from suspecting you until end of day? My choices were you, Jack, or sprit. I didn't want to vote sprit because I don't like going low poster this early. I could've voted Jack but my suspicions of you were fresher and less meta. I don't really get this "waving my vote in your face" complaint tbh.

I never got the impression you were honestly considering a vote change. You were poking Jay with some questions about sprityo and me, but I don't remember seeing you offer any critical thoughts of your own, and you never wavered for a moment from your position. Your vote was on me and you were acting like there was still room to change your mind, but I never saw evidence of this. I also feel like the confidence you expressed in your vote was not backed up by the justification you provided, but that's not something I can view objectively since I was the target of it.

Why didn't you vote for Jack?

Answered in the post you quoted...

[colonialbob]

@colonialbob I happen to disagree with most every D2 read you've posted, so I'm [retty sure I'd read you scum if I ISO'd you. The lack of defense you're getting in this is kinda disturbing.

I mean, sloon had a good argument, but everyone's just like 'sure' so far and we townies haven't been uniform on anything all game.

Does anyone think Cbob is town? Why?

I mean, sloon had a good argument, but everyone's just like 'sure' so far and we townies haven't been uniform on anything all game.

we townies

Also there were several people who read me as town, and I'm not sure why a lack of defense (in half a night phase on Thanksgiving) is more proof I'm bad?

[Sloonei]

PS I think Sloonei's ISO of me started with the premise that I was probably bad and surprisingly enough found reasons to confirm. I don't think that's alignment indicative, I think it's a problem with ISOing people you're not neutral on.

You still haven't addressed my primary concern, which was your behavior from the time you started suspecting me to the end of the day.
this post here also suggests you've reversed your opinion on me again.

I've reversed position on you for mechanical reasons. Town has the avoid lynch powers, so that makes you more likely to be town. Also Jack's non-tie vote bothers me and the more likely he is to be scum the less likely you are to be, since the w/w thing doesn't hold up mechanically.

My behavior from suspecting you until end of day? My choices were you, Jack, or sprit. I didn't want to vote sprit because I don't like going low poster this early. I could've voted Jack but my suspicions of you were fresher and less meta. I don't really get this "waving my vote in your face" complaint tbh.

I never got the impression you were honestly considering a vote change. You were poking Jay with some questions about sprityo and me, but I don't remember seeing you offer any critical thoughts of your own, and you never wavered for a moment from your position. Your vote was on me and you were acting like there was still room to change your mind, but I never saw evidence of this. I also feel like the confidence you expressed in your vote was not backed up by the justification you provided, but that's not something I can view objectively since I was the target of it.

Why didn't you vote for Jack?

Answered in the post you quoted...

I don't like that answer, you're just reasserting that you voted for me. What was the case against Jack and why did you not follow it?

[Sloonei]

But also, for the sake of discussion philosophy/theory, you're right that I was looking for reasons to suspect you. When I'm engaging in an ISO like the one I did of cbob last night, I am asking myself "Can I see any of these actions being scum-indicative?". If I can pull enough out that consistently makes sense, I'm willing to run with it. If I struggle, I'll probably still submit the post for sake of discussion, but I won't push the person as a suspect. I don't think I can catch baddies without this approach.

Other times I'll ISO a person from a totally neutral standpoint. It depends on what I'm working with and where I'm at in the game.

So the problem is this opens you up to confirmation bias, which is basically inevitable when you go looking for stuff to confirm what you already think. I've seen it happen before, and it's frustrating to fight against because, well, they don't want to hear it. It's not even consciously, but confirmation bias is worse than just looking for stuff that confirms your theory - when people are confronted with evidence that goes against what they think, they're actually more likely to believe it stronger than they are to change their minds.

(Again this is all theory and not alignment specific, I'm more than happy to talk theory because I find it very interesting)

I do open myself up to confirmation bias. But, the way I see it, I need to be asking myself "Does [this action] make sense from a scum point of view?". I also ask myself the inverse of that, "Does this make sense from a town point of view?", but if I'm going to be playing that game with myself then I'll get stuck in a barrel of WIFOM and never lynch anybody. At a certain point a decision has to be made: Which option makes more sense? I am currently positing the theory that it makes more sense for you to be bad. You can change my mind. Others can disagree. It's all in the game.

[Spacedaisy]

Cristobal Colon (which I somehow missed in my tally of how no one got lynched) may have had to send in a lynch-stop without knowing which of the players in the "tie" were going to be lynched. It's conceivable that Civ Sloonei just saved baddie Jack, or vice-versa.

Yes it is conceivable. But if it is the case I maintain it was Sloonei who stopped the lynch and not Jack because Sloonei predicted non-death. Also, this possibility is why I asked Marmot how he will write a lynch stop.

True there might be other vote things going on, but I feel like neither Jack nor sloonie would make sense for the mafia team to target with their minus 1. Unless we're all way off with mafia members.

I don't understand what you mean by this. Some of us think that Jack could well be a mafia member who was protected by Sutter Buttes. Why are you discounting this possibility out of hand?

Nutella's response to my out loud theorizing is interesting to me. She seems to fall in with the idea of Sutter Buttes protecting Jack making it a tie lynch when it shouldn't have been.

Sloonei has gone from, "tell me what the case is on Jack?" to "why did you not vote for Jack?" This is also very interesting to me.

I did not get an answer from Marmot so I will ask again: Marmot, When you say "Aconcagua will survive the first attempt on its life." does this apply to either lynch or NK, whichever comes first? Or does this only apply to NK?

Can you tell us how a lynch stop will be written?

[Sloonei]

What's interesting about my change of vocabulary RE: Jack?

[Spacedaisy]

Nothing incriminating if that's what you want to know. I fully believe you are civ and there is little to nothing that can convince me otherwise at this point.

The reason I am trying to sort through this in the manner I am is because I think Nutella's posts and behavior have reinforced the belief I held. Either she really is who I believe or she wants me to believe she is.

I think I am at a point where I strongly believe either nutella is bad or Jack is bad.

[Spacedaisy]

And I am inclined to lean Jack.

Or the lynch was stopped.

[Sloonei]

Nothing incriminating if that's what you want to know. I fully believe you are civ and there is little to nothing that can convince me otherwise at this point.

The reason I am trying to sort through this in the manner I am is because I think Nutella's posts and behavior have reinforced the belief I held. Either she really is who I believe or she wants me to believe she is.

I think I am at a point where I strongly believe either nutella is bad or Jack is bad.

Naw, I know where I stand in your view. I'm interested in what you're thinking about jack and nutella. I've been unclear on the Jack case and haven't received much explanation of it. What I have seen seems unorganized and unconvincing, and I liked the vibe he gave off at EOD last night.

I gave nutella a town read on Night 1 but she hasn't much to solidify that since. I could go either way on her right now.

[Spacedaisy]

Ok, perhaps I misread your intent. It read to me like, before the lynch you were trying to figure out why people were voting for Jack. Then after the result you were trying to figure out why people did not vote for Jack. Which would give me the impression that the result of the lynch made you feel worse about Jack. But this last post seems to make that impression incorrect. Do you still feel the same way about Jack now?

[Sloonei]

I've been undecided on Jack for most of the game, but his attitude last night didn't feel false or forced or fabricated or anything with an f. I'm interested in why the lynch played out the way it did. Certain people voted for Jack, and certain people did not and I don't understand all the reasons why.

I'm the people who enabled the tie to happen as well. Namely bob. I sincerely do not understand his behavior last night from a town perspective.

[Spacedaisy]

I don't like daisy going after me and sprit and other low posters that screams mafia. Targeting people who aren't around to one defend themselves and two yo lynch since you get less heat if they flip civ when lynched. Since they weren't active so no big deal. Is my thoughts regarding lynching low posters. I also don't like het posts on wilgy they seem like she's trying to spread paranoia.

1. My case against you and at first sprityo was never about low posters. It was about people who had been somewhat active but their content was so minimal that it was forgettable to me. So nice misrepresentation there.

2. I'm not spreading paranoia, I'm trying to sort through my own feelings and figure out if it's tinfoil insanity or really something. Also, if I was spreading paranoia I would not be so willing to hear other opinions and adjust based on good points in response.

This accusation was definitively a no u and it really makes me like the look of you even less.

It might've been a little no uish. However, I do see a main argument of your case being that we're low posters which is a slippery and dangerous route to follow.

2. That's something someone trying to spread paranoia would say.

linki: Jack would you mind explaining why you think you were almost lynched?

Sig, I have already said it had nothing to do with how many posts you had. I didn't even know how many posts you had when I threw your name out there. I just knew I had seen you posting, but I couldn't recall a single thing about your posts or reads. That is a worrisome place to be in, mafia want to look active without drawing a bunch of attention to themselves. Honestly if I had gone and looked at how many posts you had I would have likely not even voted you because you had less posts than I felt like you did. But I never once took how many posts you had into consideration.

In fact if I were to apply the exact same criteria to casting a vote at this very moment and taking into consideration post count, I would vote either sprityo or Quin. Quin has the second highest post count in this thread and yet I can't think of a single case he has made independent of someone else, or a strong stance I can recall. And sprityo, I did vote for him and I would be willing to do it again for the same reasons as before. Though it is nothing personal and I'm sorry you had a rough day yesterday sprityo

But your insistence that I am going after you because you're a low poster even though I have corrected this misunderstanding makes you look worse to me, not better. That tactic is a great way to paint someone as bad because around here people going after low posters is viewed as an easy lynch (even though it almost never gets someone lynched, so I think this is a really weird case to make, but that is a mafia theory discussion really).

Linki @ Sloonei: Can you please specify what you mean by people who did not. Do you mean you want to know why people chose you over Jack or do you mean everyone who did not vote for Jack (including people like myself who voted for sprityo)?

[colonialbob]

Just an aside, I'm out for the day with holiday festivities. See y'all tomorrow.

[speedchuck]

Spacedaisy seems way more town than normal.

Quin seems consistent wit his cc123 performance. ???

I have no sig opinion yet

[Sloonei]

Linki @ Sloonei: Can you please specify what you mean by people who did not. Do you mean you want to know why people chose you over Jack or do you mean everyone who did not vote for Jack (including people like myself who voted for sprityo)?

Both. I want to know why everyone did everything with their votes yesterday.

[Spacedaisy]

I will answer the question. I believed you to be civ. I have gone back and forth on Jack and I didn't feel strongly enough about lynching him. I did however feel like sprityo was a decent option and there was actually a chance he might get the most votes so I voted there.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Bob, can you explain the crossover comparison?

[Quin]

Quin seems consistent wit his cc123 performance. ???

wat

[Quin]

Me too! *vote Epignosis*

Are you still angry from the previous game with epi where he found you out as mafia?

Put a vote on Spacedaisy. Do we believe her guilt to be coming from a place of empathy for game hosts everywhere, or from her role card?

I believe her.

I don't like this Epi lynch. Feels like there's a bunch of scum surrounding him like vultures waiting to see if they can lynch him or not. Lots of people "kind of" wanting to vote for him.

I agree with this.

Posting but still catching up.

What does Elohcin thinks about the people "kind of" wanting to vote for him? Maybe she's answered this. if not, I'd like one.

Like who? DDL, Eloh and now you have talked about the vultures. Who are the vultures? DDL answered LC, which is wrong, and required people to ask him like 8 times. Makes his vultures idea sound made up.

You and Eloh subscribe to the vultures theory and have not named vultures, which also sounds made up or at least barely paying attention to it.

read the ebwop dood

I did. I don't see any names. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong post.

I still want Eloh and DDL to answer this with actual names.

fixed this for it to make any amount of sense

[Epignosis]

True there might be other vote things going on, but I feel like neither Jack nor sloonie would make sense for the mafia team to target with their minus 1. Unless we're all way off with mafia members.

I don't understand what you mean by this. Some of us think that Jack could well be a mafia member who was protected by Sutter Buttes. Why are you discounting this possibility out of hand?

Can you explain how this transpired given the result?

I mean it's a night power, right? So the scum team anticipated jack getting some votes and gave him minus one. He would have been one vote ahead of sloonei but this would bring it back to a tie, which was randomly flipped to sloonei who is one of the civ roles who would survive the lynch.

That's...more premises than I would care to accept.

The underlined conclusion doesn't require any of the previous premises to be true. Sloonei would have no idea what the vote tally was if he stopped the lynch, and whether the votes were manipulated doesn't matter if he is automatically safe from one death, because there was a no lynch, and the mafia can't stop a lynch regardless of the tally.

My view is that Sloonei stopped the lynch. He was not at all passionate about defending himself or making a fuss to get people to vote elsewhere. He called it "a waste of time." If you are automatically safe from one death, your job isn't to save yourself from a lynch, but to eat a Night kill (thereby protecting the other civilians). Had Sloonei had that responsibility, I believe we would have witnessed more urgency and fire. We witnessed none.

[speedchuck]

Quin seems consistent wit his cc123 performance. ???

wat

Idk what that means for your alignment.

[Quin]

Quin seems consistent wit his cc123 performance. ???

wat

Idk what that means for your alignment.

I was just a bit shocked to see that comparison tbh.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Me too! *vote Epignosis*

Are you still angry from the previous game with epi where he found you out as mafia?

Put a vote on Spacedaisy. Do we believe her guilt to be coming from a place of empathy for game hosts everywhere, or from her role card?

I believe her.

I don't like this Epi lynch. Feels like there's a bunch of scum surrounding him like vultures waiting to see if they can lynch him or not. Lots of people "kind of" wanting to vote for him.

I agree with this.

Posting but still catching up.

What does Elohcin thinks about the people "kind of" wanting to vote for him? Maybe she's answered this. if not, I'd like one.

Like who? DDL, Eloh and now you have talked about the vultures. Who are the vultures? DDL answered LC, which is wrong, and required people to ask him like 8 times. Makes his vultures idea sound made up.

You and Eloh subscribe to the vultures theory and have not named vultures, which also sounds made up or at least barely paying attention to it.

read the ebwop dood

I did. I don't see any names. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong post.

I still want Eloh and DDL to answer this with actual names.

fixed this for it to make any amount of sense

Are there supposed to be vulture names in this post?

[Quin]

Are you still angry from the previous game with epi where he found you out as mafia?



I believe her.



I agree with this.

Posting but still catching up.

What does Elohcin thinks about the people "kind of" wanting to vote for him? Maybe she's answered this. if not, I'd like one.

Like who? DDL, Eloh and now you have talked about the vultures. Who are the vultures? DDL answered LC, which is wrong, and required people to ask him like 8 times. Makes his vultures idea sound made up.

You and Eloh subscribe to the vultures theory and have not named vultures, which also sounds made up or at least barely paying attention to it.

read the ebwop dood

I did. I don't see any names. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong post.

I still want Eloh and DDL to answer this with actual names.

fixed this for it to make any amount of sense

Are there supposed to be vulture names in this post?

I didn't mention vultures, Jack. I asked about Eloh's mention of vultures, Jack.

[speedchuck]

Quin seems consistent wit his cc123 performance. ???

wat

Idk what that means for your alignment.

I was just a bit shocked to see that comparison tbh.

I don't know what to do with it

[Jackofhearts2005]

Quin, I see what you mean now, Quin.

I misinterpreted your post to mean you agreed and wanted her thoughts I now see the quote marks as not subscribing to her belief. (Originally, the multiquote may have had me thinking someone else's post was yours but idk.)

[Quin]

Quin, I see what you mean now, Quin.

I misinterpreted your post to mean you agreed and wanted her thoughts I now see the quote marks as not subscribing to her belief. (Originally, the multiquote may have had me thinking someone else's post was yours but idk.)

Jack, I think that might have been it, Jack. I forgive you, Jack. Quote breaks are the worst, Jack.

[Quin]

Jack

[Jackofhearts2005]

Quin.

You've taken some flack for talking without saying things, despite isos and a number of people reading you as town.

What is your one opinion or bit of analysis that you have provided that should be underlined, that should be getting more attention?

[Quin]

Quin.

You've taken some flack for talking without saying things, despite isos and a number of people reading you as town.

What is your one opinion or bit of analysis that you have provided that should be underlined, that should be getting more attention?

Sloonei, probably. It's the most "urgent" of my reads right now. I'd like some opinions on my initial gripe (what I saw as dancing around my question re: Epi pressure vote).

[Quin]

I'm feeling better about him after he came out with his case on bob (still need to read it), but I'd like some opinions as to whether I'm being unreasonable in that one instance.

[Sloonei]

Sloonei is town

[speedchuck]

Sloonei is town

How did you arrive at that

[Sloonei]

Sloonei is town

How did you arrive at that

A magician never reveals his secret.

[Long Con]

Sloonei is town

How did you arrive at that

A magician never reveals his secret.

But should a secretion reveal its magic?

[Sloonei]

There's nothing magic about it, it's all base material.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Alternative theory:

Switching to Sprityo. At time of posting, I've read like none of his content (cause he had none when I left) so that sounds better than lynching Sloonei.

Whyyyyyyyyyyyy

I firmly believe Sloonei is good. He feels good. He's been thinking and he's working.

Tell me why you think he's bad.

Ugh. This night. Now to go see why I was almost lynched.

On the off chance of vote shenanigans...


Nutella, Sloonei, Jimmy, Bob, Quin good.

Epi bad. DDL maybe bad. Daisy maybe bad but only if Epi is.

Everyone else mostly null.

Do people use legacy reads? I feel like these get ignored.

The first post came just before the poll deadline, and the next two came after -- but before Marmot posted the [non]results.

Focus on the latter two posts. The highlighted portions suggest a player who does not anticipate being lynched despite being tied for the tally lead. Sloonei also projected a no-lynch as Spacedaisy has observed with "lynching me will be a waste of time". Neither of these two seemed to be very concerned about dying. One can assert that Jack's projection of survival barring vote shenanigans is evidence of the influence of Sutter Buttes, but then I have to question if he would say that. The poll was tied. Sloonei dying would have appeared to be the result of a coin flip; there's no need to make one's own mafia-driven voting advantage public before the results are revealed. If it's a civilian-driven advantage though (i.e. Everest)? Sure.

The first post above I also brought out to consider the notion that Jack stopped the lynch instead, given that he was firmly good on Sloonei. That'd give him a motive to put a stop to a tied lynch featuring a firm civilian read and himself at the gallows. This one is more difficult to believe though given the third quoted post -- "vote shenanigans" shouldn't matter to someone who is about to stop a lynch. This notion would require some semantic gymnastics.

Summarizing the theory:

~ Civilian Sloonei stopped the lynch/wasn't lynchable
~ Civilian Jack expected to survive because of his double vote

Other possibilities which are applicable – Matterhorn is somehow involved / Olympus Mons is somehow involved. Their “secrets” can be pretty much anything, and a lynch survival for OM especially wouldn’t surprise me.

Gimme those delicious thoughts.