[END] Talking Heads Mafia (RYM #90)

[Matt]

Alright, I gotta jet.

I'm keeping my vote on Sorsha. I encourage this vote. However, if not, I encourage people to vote for Golden. I think his late vote on bcornett with Long Con is highly suspicious, and I do not agree with him asking people to lynch him while calling himself civilian. Either way, if he is civilian, it's a waste of a lynch, and that's not good for the town (barring some crazy power he has where if he gets lynched a certain day, he can take out a baddie, I have no idea what Golden is trying to do here).

Tomorrow, I believe MacD asked me to do this, I will evaluate other players 'sides Sorsha and Roxy, and see where I stand with them.

Peace

Linki - JJJ, I'll address your responses later.

[a2thezebra]

Five hours remain.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Relationship between motel room and Long Con:

Spoiler: show

Question for the group:
Was Bea's reaction to one early, changeable vote an overreaction or an appropriate reaction?
Discuss.

Current track: Brian Eno - Sparrowfall (3) (1:24)

Long Con's reasoning was worded pretty confidently for this early in the game. Seems like a legit response. Out of the two i had more of a gut feel against long con, his confidence and his defence of.

In response to llama's general question about bea, motel room took the opportunity to simultaneously support bea and oppose LC. If I'm right about bea as a town read, then I think this is a good look for motel room -- opposing both of LC's agendas at once.

Spoiler: show

Sig, how would you feel about switching to Long Con with me?

It's Day 1 and motel room wants to lynch LC. Nice look.

Spoiler: show

Question for the group:
Was Bea's reaction to one early, changeable vote an overreaction or an appropriate reaction?
Discuss.

Current track: Brian Eno - Sparrowfall (3) (1:24)

This has been arguably one of the most quoted and replied to posts, imo anyway. No one seemed to bite against Bea.

So then this

LC's vote for Bea did strike me as fake...

I have to get ready and leave for work soon, so it's time to cast a real vote. The bea vote was actually fake. I thought, since votes are changeable, I'd make a fake case and see if I could catch any opportunistic baddies trying to latch on to it and follow the vote. It didn't really bear fruit; looking over BWT's reasons for voting bea, he is coming from a completely different angle. The truth is, bea's behaviour is pretty normal for her, and I don't suspect her much at all.

My real vote today will go to sig. Despite the reasonable explanation he had for my original suspicion of him (that he was crafting his posts too much, in a baddie way), I've found a few of his reactions suspicious. His reaction that I was "distancing" from him when I forgot he was the third player involved in an earlier discussion was bizarre, as was his assertion that I (and others) are "desperate to try and get him lynched".

sig, saying we're desperate to try and get you lynched strikes me in two ways, neither of them making me feel comfortable about you. On one hand, it's overdefensive and paranoid, and on the other, it's a way to buffalo us out of voting for you... because who wants to looks "desperate" to lynch someone on Day 1?

It's not much, but it's the behaviour I found most suspicious today, and it's time for me to lock in a vote.

Sorry for using you, bea!

Feels pressured and gross. Long Con's wording on his vote for bea was so confident. This feels like backpedalling.

I'm reading this as town as hell for motel room. He has a certain manner of speaking when he's town and thinks someone else is full of crap that is just hard to mimic. This is a meta read for those who can't tell.

Spoiler: show

Voting Seaside until he explains his numerous arbitrary reads to satisfaction.

Your view of Seaside is right and I agree with it it's just that he told me before the game starts that he'll try his best to get lynched early in order to have more free time. It might sound ridiculous but I know Seaside and he's frankly ridiculous. On the other hand if he stops playing midway he'll be a problem to the mods and us.

It's a lose-lose situation to me.

Ugh. It makes me want to lynch him, but not because I particularly believe he was handed a Mafia card at the start. It's ugly, and ugly is such a smelly word.

I just want to quote this so Long Con doesnt get to drop a vote on someone he's not sold as being scum later on by sewing the seeds for it now. Which is how this feels.

in fact yep Long Con for now

Merciless clownage.

Spoiler: show

How is it, that not one regular syndicater voted for LC? How is it, that none of the Rym players don't take that into consideration? Are we missing something here?

Is Wilgy not a regular?

I think he's suss but that translated into a vote from me because he kept being mentioned as suss back on day 1 but he was never a lynch contender, which is a thing that I feel scum can then point back at their posts and say "i thought he was suss, see". Anyway I had a vote on him for a good portion of today and he hasn't flinched or questioned it or brought it up, not sure what that says. And now he's lead lynchguy, there's even an unexplained vote from Choutas on him (or well, I havent seen him mention his vote in thread).

So like, I dunno are we missing something here?

"But no, silly RYMers! LC is legit!"

Hell naw.

I like aokiji (motel room).

Spoiler: show

Again, five votes from people who don't know Long Con and aren't from around here.

This is starting to look cliquish.

Commentary. "cliquish" isnt game related. Is it a bad lynch?

I don't like it, so I'd say yes, it's a bad lynch. You catch a Long Con through petty things he does that he himself isn't aware that he's doing, not through calling him out Day 1 by pretending to set up bea to garner reactions.

Another stupid lynch, I say.

So.. you don't catch Long Con in his short game?

Alright, switching to Choutas, hi

Alright, he actually did drink a bit of the Syndicate Kool Aid and moved his vote back off of LC.

Spoiler: show

Alright, switching to Choutas, hi

Based on what?

I want to know why he voted long con and a reaction. And i'll be here from now til end of day so my vote is my weapon.

But you were sus of LC too right? So you changed your vote once Choutas voted for the same player as you? Why?

Yeah I still am and might switch back but I can't ignore the amount of players outright vouching for him.

One might assert that he's diverting blame to the Syndicateers when LC eventually flips mafia, but I don't think so. I think he's just swayed by a pile of people giving him bad advice.

Spoiler: show

getting back on Long Con for now. Not feeling the bcornett lynch, i believed his post just then I guess. Llama, yeah maybe.

5th final vote for LC. In most lynches this would be a very solid look, but we have to account for LC's power so it loses a little luster in that regard.

Spoiler: show

A more reasonable theory is that (Nothing But) Flowers is an RYM person who wanted to hide their vote in the biggest bandwagon. That, at least, makes some sense. Talking about that makes me think of someone (McDougal? motel room?) who brought up that role. When I read that post, it felt suspicious to me, like the reason for bringing it up was because they were that role, or at least a teammate. I want to go back and read it again.

Which one of those RYMers was talking about that one role that is actually MY role? :P

Spoiler: show

Voting Seaside until he explains his numerous arbitrary reads to satisfaction.

Your view of Seaside is right and I agree with it it's just that he told me before the game starts that he'll try his best to get lynched early in order to have more free time. It might sound ridiculous but I know Seaside and he's frankly ridiculous. On the other hand if he stops playing midway he'll be a problem to the mods and us.

It's a lose-lose situation to me.

Ugh. It makes me want to lynch him, but not because I particularly believe he was handed a Mafia card at the start. It's ugly, and ugly is such a smelly word.

I just want to quote this so Long Con doesnt get to drop a vote on someone he's not sold as being scum later on by sewing the seeds for it now. Which is how this feels.

Thanks for keeping an eye on me, but my vote is more likely to go to someone I think is Mafia.

*meep*

~~~

motel room looks good to me primarily because of the way he treated LC on Day 1.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Relationship between RadicalFuzz / reywaS and Long Con:

null

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Relationship between Zebra and Long Con:

Spoiler: show

I'm sticking with my Long Con vote for now because the combination of his overt failure to read everything combined with his unwarranted confidence with his bea vote just screams baddie to me. So I guess that's everything, took me two and a half damn hours to catch up. The power of RYM's post quantity and The Syndicate's elaborate structure is quite overwhelming, but my body is ready. I'm charged up, don't put me down!

Wasted no time telling LC he's full of it.

Spoiler: show

Well obviously I'm going to need to come out of hiding to address this.

Rbzmncaeaei, I take offense that you accuse me of not reading everything. I read everything, and bea is the one who raised my eyebrow. Unlike you, I have a job, and I have kids, and I have responsibilities, so I don't always have time to write hour-long posts that broadcast every thought I have about every post in the game. I read, I analyze, and I consider who I think is bad. I don't feel the need to respond to every conversation that has gone on in the game.

Suspect my suspicion all you want, but don't accuse me of not reading every post, because that is not true.

I'm sincerely sorry for offending you, my tendency to start drama unintentionally is another one of the reasons I've continued to avoid mafia and online communities in general, starting over with a new name after new name again and again. My wording was overly harsh to drive the point in but I did not mean to imply that there was anything wrong with your style, or anything about you for that matter. My reference to you not reading was referring to your comment to JJJ wondering why he colored his vote for you rather than bolding it, when he explained that earlier. Noticeably missing a single post is a far cry from an "overt failure to read everything", so I take that back, even without the context that it offended you, so again, I apologize. The only thing I take issue with in your response is the assumption that I have no responsibilities; you could not possibly even imagine how incorrect you are with that statement, but it's a reasonable assumption considering everything else, so no hard feelings.

I read this apology as a genuine effort to reach out to someone in the game that he can't talk to elsewhere (i.e. BTSC).

Spoiler: show

Long Con -

Bad marks on the eyeball scale.

Spoiler: show

In fact I'm switching to Long Con, at least until I see Wilgy's Part 2. I can't have a bcornett lynch, a tie is better than nothing.

linki: Well is your bcornett read more than just meta? It doesn't seem like it, it goes to show that your first mention of him as one of your suspects was delayed from the others, complete with apology on your behalf.

He made it clear that he hated the bcornett lynch possibility and made the effort to move the tally against the other candidate (LC). Unless bcornett is also mafia, this effort is a good look. Zebra had actually started to let off the gas with regards to his aggression against LC, which would have set him up nicely to place his vote elsewhere. Instead, he returned to his original suspect and helped kill him.

Aside from the brief exchange that led to the apology, LC didn't really say much to or about Zebra.

~~~

He was a town read before and so he remains.

[FZ.]

I'm off to bed. Just in case people miss this in the sea of posts, here's my reason for voting Russ.

What is the argument for a Russ lynch?

linki: I'm reading his post and waiting for one about me :P

Can't speak for the rest, but these are my reasons:

The part where you mentioned Russ brings me back to my theory that the person to gain the most from framing you (if you were in fact framed) with K4J's death is Russ. Other than K4J and I, he was the only one I can remember that said you were suspicious, and then you came after him for the "deliberately misinterpreting" comment and ended up voting for him. So by killing K4J, he would make you look even worse, and maybe get you to back off from him. I just can't think of a reason that someone would choose K4J out of all people in the game, when he was only voicing suspicion of you, and no one has interacted with him in a while.

In continuation of my theory of Russ being scum:

Russ and LC were the last to vote. Before that, LC had already 7 votes, and Bcornett had 5 votes. This means that if LC voted BC, it would tie (due to his 3 votes), and no matter who died, we would know that one of the BC voters was Flowers. If Russ is bad, he could have voted for BC with LC which would make BC die, ending in the same result- we learn that Flower is in the BC voters, and making Russ look really bad for putting that vote at the end.
So at that point, LC was going down no matter what. The smartest option was for Russ to vote LC and LC to vote BC, giving both 8 votes. In case Bcornett lost that tie, they got a civvie lynched and LC has to deal with the results, as well as the rest of the voters. It still takes time to figure out who is Flower. In case LC lost that tie, like he did, Russ still comes out looking great.

Unless I counted wrong, anyone care to join me on a Russ lynch?

I hope we get a baddie whichever way this goes. But at the risk of ending up defending another baddie, I still think Golden is not bad. No idea about Sorsha, but I didn't get a bad feeling from her either.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Relationship between Ricochet and Long Con:

Spoiler: show

Catching up myself as quickly as possible.

I will say that in reading LC's further explanation of his vote for bea, I came to understand it and find the potential links between bea and rico significant. I feel even more sure of my vote for rico as things stand at the moment, I think it would be a wise way to go.

I will repeat that I do NOT think Diiny is a wise way to go and it bothers me that he has continued to be the person with the most votes. I will use my vote in defence of Diiny if necessary.

I only remember LC stating one time that bea not seeing what FZ saw as suspicion of me will be a defending cue, if either of us flip bad - with which, incidentally, I don't agree; I'm not myself responsible for every (or any) players chiming in to discussion about me looking suspicious. By this angle, we'd be witch hunting every player that a flipped baddie "defended" or agreed with and get, likely, awful results.

I'm going to be honest: I don't know what's going on in the highlighted portion. I'm not saying it doesn't make sense, I'm saying I don't follow this entire conversation. I must have glossed over it when it was current. Rico, please drop by and tell me a little about this -- or Golden since it appears you were there. I'm not sure whether it's relevant to this exercise.

I think I've been doing too many of these analyses.

Spoiler: show

And I may have found myself thinking sig's vote for BWT was self-defense - or at least thinking this way because of someone labeling it as such (Golden?) - but it turns out it was a vote based on other's arguments and on BWT being his most suspicious player. Yet I see no traces of BWT growing as a suspect to him. Plus, from his posts, I rather get the feel LC would have qualified as more suspicious overall (on whom he held off voting, preferring BWT instead).

I'm having trouble following again, and I think it might just be because this content is a bit disjointed -- which is not ideal for a player that I know is articulate and can convey a point very effectively. In this case he appears to be throwing a little shade on sig for voting BWT instead of LC independent of sig's need for self-defense in that tally. I think Rico might be revealing a little too much consciousness of LC in this comment. If he's bad, he's trying to work out a way that he can vaguely accuse sig from a position of comfort while also linking him to LC. Maybe.

Spoiler: show

My main suspicion at this point is Ricco. First of all, he seems to be saying a lot, without really saying anything. Even when he voiced some suspicion, it's done in an "intrigued" tone, as if he's trying to avoid confrontation. If you add to that what K4J said about how he voted at the end of day 0 on the syndicate, it's another reason to not trust him at the moment.

As for rico - he seems fairly rico for me atm. I don't have a good feel for his civ vs his bad game as I've only played a few with him and tbh, I don't remember where he ended on any of them. (This is my fault not his) but his meta seems to be what I'd expect from him.

I snipped the quote for clarity. Here, bea defends Rico while not defending him at the same time. (This opinion of mine is new upon this reread, actually) If either bea or Rico turn up bad, then this kind of statement would make me look at the other.

Hello, forced link.

Someone read this and tell me both bea and Rico are bad. I don't think so. But one? LC sure seems to think so.

Hi Rico.

Terrible look. Even worse, I don't think Rico ever commented on this.

Spoiler: show

Is banter early voting common habit on RYM? I'm oscillating between reading bcornett24's vote as such and wanting to hear more from him on why he desired to make such an early vote for no serious reasons.

this vote seems to be generating some content so it seems to have served its purpose

By some content do you mean how it made some of us wonder qu'est-ce que c'est with your vote and some of us even voting for you after your move? Is this the content you imply you intended to achieve?

This post made "qu'est-ce que c'est?" ring through my mind over and over, even as I read on. I would Like this post if we had that here.

Post count inflation banter.

Otherwise LC's mentions of Rico are just playful.

~~~

I think Rico is bad and ensorse his lynch right now.

RICOCHET

[bcornett24]

Epi, right now my rainbow list has you as my strongest town read. That is just context for why I'm asking you specifically this question, it is not intended as flattery to get me the answer I want.

I want to know, what is your view on whether or not the whole JJJ/LC thing could be a designed gig to create credit for others (such as JJJ and bea).

Of course it could be. It could be anything. It could be that, with a Mafia team of seven (!), its you and 3J on a team with LC, merrily gumming up the works so that, whichever one of you doesn't get lynched comes out of this thing looking clean as God's fingers, with only the serial killer's knife to worry about.

The way you went from "3J a damn foo" to "3J not a damn foo" to "3J tryna merk a bitch up in here" immediately after he merely said he had bad vibes from you...

The whole thing feels manufactured and over-the-top to me.

JJJ and Golden are both super town players (at least in my experience) and the fact that both of them are at each others throats isn't unheard of. I don't think it is unreasonable that two players playing super town find each other suspicious and come up with conflicting view points. I do happen to to agree though that this feels manufactured. I don't know if it both Golden and JJJ or just one of them. JJJ is normally a very heavy poster, so this would be a good way for scum to set him up.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Can we (everyone) stop implying that Golden and I are at each other's throats? We were for a short period, but that has long since passed. He still wants me dead, but I will not participate in his lynch this phase regardless of what he thinks that indicates about me.

[MacDougall]

Went to bed and it was all about golden and sorsha. Awaken to find Russ with 4 votes. Always a good sign that a scum led counterwagon is happening. Especially when the case made isn't as substantial as the reasons outlined for both leading contenders.

FZ I'm not sure I agree with your case, but I'm going to point out the buddy votes. I actually think you come across genuine here and I'm not going to criticise you for scum hunting... Some of these votes do not look genuine.

I will be gone most of the evening, and I sure don't think it's Golden. Russ is a much better choice.

I think this stinks. Just comes in and votes on the counterwagon with no actual reason.

Yeah I think FZ has raised a decent point about Russ, and I can't see any other explanations, so I will be *Voting Russti*

Can't see any other explanations for what? His behaviour? I don't like your choice of words here...

In continuation of my theory of Russ being scum:

Russ and LC were the last to vote. Before that, LC had already 7 votes, and Bcornett had 5 votes. This means that if LC voted BC, it would tie (due to his 3 votes), and no matter who died, we would know that one of the BC voters was Flowers. If Russ is bad, he could have voted for BC with LC which would make BC die, ending in the same result- we learn that Flower is in the BC voters, and making Russ look really bad for putting that vote at the end.
So at that point, LC was going down no matter what. The smartest option was for Russ to vote LC and LC to vote BC, giving both 8 votes. In case Bcornett lost that tie, they got a civvie lynched and LC has to deal with the results, as well as the rest of the voters. It still takes time to figure out who is Flower. In case LC lost that tie, like he did, Russ still comes out looking great.

Unless I counted wrong, anyone care to join me on a Russ lynch?

I would. I still haven't forgotten this:

"I do think it's suspicious that Epi deliberately misinterpreted this point. At least, it looked like he did to me. I mean, I get why - no one wants to be suspected on Day 1. But he wrote a pretty impactful-looking response that really didn't address the point against him."

That adverb.

How do you KNOW I deliberately did something? Maybe I didn't mean to...maybe I misunderstood. That, of all the things you supposedly read, you chose to comment on this?

And you can't deliberately misinterpret something. If you deliberately misinterpret something, we have another word for it: You're lying. There's no such thing as deliberately misinterpreting something. That's like saying, "He deliberately misjudged the trajectory of his car so he could run over a civilian."

Nah.

Voting Russtifinko.

Addendum: Roxy harps against voting people new to the site (that's my understanding of her ways).

Or maybe I'm deliberately misinterpreting something.

I don't know you deliberately misinterpreted it. But as I said in the next sentence, it looked that way to me.

If vertically challenged = short, deliberately misinterpreted = lying. So yeah, I think you lied. Rattled much?

My word! I've incurred the Wrath of Epi! Someone save me! Have mercy!

No. Syntax.

"I do think it's suspicious that Epi deliberately misinterpreted this point."

The predicate here indicates a posteriori knowledge that I was being deceptive. That you add a phrase that does more than qualify (it negates what you imply) looks even worse to me.

If you think I'm a liar, come out and call me a liar. Don't use weasel words and say you're gonna read me tomorrow.

Epi's vote comes from historic issue so it's reasonable.

I think my case on MattF is better than this one and yet I haven't had a flicker of attention from anyone except the man himself. Whereas this case is getting followers at an alarming rate.

Not keen.

[Ricochet]

Relationship between Ricochet and Long Con:

Spoiler: show

Catching up myself as quickly as possible.

I will say that in reading LC's further explanation of his vote for bea, I came to understand it and find the potential links between bea and rico significant. I feel even more sure of my vote for rico as things stand at the moment, I think it would be a wise way to go.

I will repeat that I do NOT think Diiny is a wise way to go and it bothers me that he has continued to be the person with the most votes. I will use my vote in defence of Diiny if necessary.

I only remember LC stating one time that bea not seeing what FZ saw as suspicion of me will be a defending cue, if either of us flip bad - with which, incidentally, I don't agree; I'm not myself responsible for every (or any) players chiming in to discussion about me looking suspicious. By this angle, we'd be witch hunting every player that a flipped baddie "defended" or agreed with and get, likely, awful results.

I'm going to be honest: I don't know what's going on in the highlighted portion. I'm not saying it doesn't make sense, I'm saying I don't follow this entire conversation. I must have glossed over it when it was current. Rico, please drop by and tell me a little about this -- or Golden since it appears you were there. I'm not sure whether it's relevant to this exercise.

I think I've been doing too many of these analyses.

Spoiler: show

And I may have found myself thinking sig's vote for BWT was self-defense - or at least thinking this way because of someone labeling it as such (Golden?) - but it turns out it was a vote based on other's arguments and on BWT being his most suspicious player. Yet I see no traces of BWT growing as a suspect to him. Plus, from his posts, I rather get the feel LC would have qualified as more suspicious overall (on whom he held off voting, preferring BWT instead).

I'm having trouble following again, and I think it might just be because this content is a bit disjointed -- which is not ideal for a player that I know is articulate and can convey a point very effectively. In this case he appears to be throwing a little shade on sig for voting BWT instead of LC independent of sig's need for self-defense in that tally. I think Rico might be revealing a little too much consciousness of LC in this comment. If he's bad, he's trying to work out a way that he can vaguely accuse sig from a position of comfort while also linking him to LC. Maybe.

Spoiler: show

My main suspicion at this point is Ricco. First of all, he seems to be saying a lot, without really saying anything. Even when he voiced some suspicion, it's done in an "intrigued" tone, as if he's trying to avoid confrontation. If you add to that what K4J said about how he voted at the end of day 0 on the syndicate, it's another reason to not trust him at the moment.

As for rico - he seems fairly rico for me atm. I don't have a good feel for his civ vs his bad game as I've only played a few with him and tbh, I don't remember where he ended on any of them. (This is my fault not his) but his meta seems to be what I'd expect from him.

I snipped the quote for clarity. Here, bea defends Rico while not defending him at the same time. (This opinion of mine is new upon this reread, actually) If either bea or Rico turn up bad, then this kind of statement would make me look at the other.

Hello, forced link.

Someone read this and tell me both bea and Rico are bad. I don't think so. But one? LC sure seems to think so.

Hi Rico.

Terrible look. Even worse, I don't think Rico ever commented on this.

Spoiler: show

Is banter early voting common habit on RYM? I'm oscillating between reading bcornett24's vote as such and wanting to hear more from him on why he desired to make such an early vote for no serious reasons.

this vote seems to be generating some content so it seems to have served its purpose

By some content do you mean how it made some of us wonder qu'est-ce que c'est with your vote and some of us even voting for you after your move? Is this the content you imply you intended to achieve?

This post made "qu'est-ce que c'est?" ring through my mind over and over, even as I read on. I would Like this post if we had that here.

Post count inflation banter.

Otherwise LC's mentions of Rico are just playful.

~~~

I think Rico is bad and ensorse his lynch right now.

RICOCHET

quoi?

Golden's highlighted portion is him seeing veracity to LC's making links between me and bea, whilst in "bea is bad" mode. As I've said back then, I have no idea what I have to do with bea replying to FZ that she doesn't see me suspicious (for what FZ saw me), nor with LC making connections out of that. bea chiming in to FZ's suss of me must automatically mean she's defending me? nah.

I was accusing sig of his BWT vote. You'll get to sig soon, so you tell me yourself if you don't think sig was highly suspicious of LC the whole Day, only to pull a BWT vote and call it "most suspicious". It seemed contradictory to me. I made no LC consciousness exercise that you speak of, I treated sig's vote and reasoning with what sig used.

Now for the third quote, I'm really confused. If LC's yellow highlighted connection between me and bea is forced, why do you make me suspicious for it? Again, bea said her share to FZ about me looking suspicious.

Furthermore, if LC's case on bea was utter bullsuit, how can his paint on me and bea being defending buddies look genuine and be used to convict me?

And I commented on it. You have it right there in your first quote.

Sorry, this is sloppy analysis of me. I'm bad because LC painted me as such, within a bullsuit case on bea and because you spin my sig accusations into LC self-awareness? Nothing makes sense in this.

[Diiny]

@floyd why the bea vote? I appreciate that things are busy (I'm busy too) but if you can post threads on OT you can take a minute to explain your past votes, even in just a nutshell. Even better, general thoughts on the game.

Wilgy: pretty happy with his long con explanation/vote, but an in depth, well thought out view on one player who happens to flip scum can more easily be interpreted as bussing than even a 'worse' vote in the context of more 'work.' That's tinfoily from me though and he's not lynchable for me. I'm not happy with llama, still.

Also I was thinking: seeing as long con did flip sum and that the Brian wagon grew as a response to it I think it's fair to say there's a old chance of our scumsters trying to push that wagon. Glad I listened to my senses there and didn't join.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Relationship between Roxy and Long Con:

Spoiler: show

Yay game - no time to play but I did vote

RBz bc weird name will prob equal an awesome player and Long Con only bc Black Rock is not playing

I have a night post to write <3

She voted LC on Dusk 0, and provided an excuse. Shrug.

Spoiler: show

LC - His initial vote and suspicion fooled me bc I thought it was srsbns until he said it was a ploy to see who would run with it. I am not sure he did this bc of the result of llama's post asking if it is normal Bea response. (paraphrasing) and it gained no traction and then looked worse after the responses or bc he was really putting a trap into action. LC is tricksy for sure and always worth watching for now I will give him the botd and keep a close eye on him.

Roxy expresses some mild doubts about LC's ruse but doesn't commit to them. I'm not quite sure what she means when she reference's llama's response re: bea as being a reason to doubt LC's claim. Roxy could you please expand on what you meant?

Spoiler: show

I am not digging the bandwagon on LC. I am still 5 pages behind but I just wanted to say - I thought it was a weak day 1 vote on Bea - I really believed he was going after Bea then when he backed off it was after llama had asked the question something like - do you think Bea's response was appropriate/" and so many chimed in and said yes bc one vote can lead to a late day bandwagon here or similar sentiments. Maybe it was a ploy to see if or what would come of his suspicion but it did seem a bit haphazard for a baddie LC. Which is why I think - would he do this if he was bad? No. I think he is a careful baddie. If he was going to try a ploy it would not have been something like this.

Ofc this is all wifom to the RYM'ers but it is true about LC. He would not be this sloppy if he was bad. No one who has played regularly with him has voted him just Wiggly who has been around for a couple of games and does not really know LC the way most of us do.


linky - FZ - Bcorn - odk bc I do not know his meta its hard to take someones word for it.

JJJ feels different this game. Is it bc of Sweden? Idk. He sure was not giving me the aggressive - JJJ supatownie at large vibe when he was here. But he is on vacation so maybe his mind is elsewhere, as it should be. Yep I am on the fence with him.

The highlighted bit about LC is about as strong an endorsement as one can offer. I've stated that I don't think it's inherently a huge issue that some people defended LC, in this case I'm inclined to wonder why Roxy used such strong language though. She expressed some doubts in the post I previously referenced, but they seemed to evaporate when LC was getting more defense from his fellow Syndicateers.

Spoiler: show

Hmmm... well, there's been lots of activity since I went to bed last night. I just read through it all, what sticks out in my mind? The Roxy thing is funny to me (though I don't like her use of someone else's avatar because it confuses me). I feel a bit of a dissonance, Roxy is getting harassed for saying she was going to randomize, and at the same time people are saying that Random Voting on Day 1 is a sound strategy. So which is it? I'm not a big fan of random voting myself, I'd rather read through and see what my gut says on Day 1 than throw a dart. Which is why I have a vote on bea.

I don't think it's that likely that JJJ, Epig and the other person all voted as baddies together. Too risky. The votes for JJJ and Wilgy seemed pretty natural to me, as I recall.

More opinions about Day 1 so far will have to wait until I look back over things again. I read through it once, but it hasn't all sunk in yet - it's a little harder for me to get a handle on things with all the players that are new to me, the new people kind of blend together.

LC defends Roxy's honor w/r/t her perspective on randomized Day 1 votes. I don't think this is a bad look for Roxy, but it isn't good either because it wouldn't be a hard post to make about a team mate. Null.

Larger post in which he explains his beef with bea pre-ruse claim

A big component of this post was LC's assertion that bea was defending Roxy. I don't think this reflects any particular way on Roxy unless we assume LC wanted to force a link between her and bea -- I am not inclined to think so because I don't think his move against bea looked like bussing. UNLESS Roxy is mafia and he wanted to smear bea pre-emptively on that front. A bit speculative.

Spoiler: show

Roxy, I'm glad to see you took your vote off me, but you're not allowed to placehold.

Why not? You were my placeholder so far should I return my vote there?

When you allow changeable votes then expect people to vote in wonky ways until we get closer to lynch time.

Still reading and thinking.

Actually, I just mean voting for the non-player option, but this got stuck in my head, probably from Recruitement, as voting that as a placeholder.

6. No self-voting, even as a placeholder. This is considered an illegal move in this game as much as voting for the non-player option.

Good eye, Rico. Roxy must be punished!

Just goofing around I think, null.

~~~

Her perspectives about LC's ruse are a bit inconsistent I think and she should speak about that. Minor negative pings.

[MacDougall]

Jimmy I don't agree with your case on Ricochet if it's based on the fact that he is using Talking Heads phrasings in his posts. Your difficulty following what he's posting is because of that.

[a2thezebra]

JJJ's analysis on Rico and subsequent vote made me go back and take a closer look at Rico's post history. What I found was that JJJ missed the best ping connecting Rico to LC. And that is this, which was presented in his rainbow reads with LC being the only one in the green section along with myself, Mac, and FZ:

[row][cell][/cell][cell]LC[/cell][cell]I like this curious feeling[/cell][cell]I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but I'm ok with his game so far. Whilst I'm not so confident it would have achieved the fishing results he desired, his bea gambit doesn't strike me as different from any baiting attempts players might try at this early stage; in fact, it's more developed than the usual bait & hook attempts I've seen. Some players are unnerved by how genuine his case seemed for a sec, but it doesn't give me the feel that it was anything but well developed.[/cell][/row]

Ricochet

[JaggedJimmyJay]

A wild Rico appears!

Golden's highlighted portion is him seeing veracity to LC's making links between me and bea, whilst in "bea is bad" mode. As I've said back then, I have no idea what I have to do with bea replying to FZ that she doesn't see me suspicious (for what FZ saw me), nor with LC making connections out of that. bea chiming in to FZ's suss of me must automatically mean she's defending me? nah.

Thanks for the explanation. That's what I was missing when I didn't think you'd commented on the forced link bit.

I was accusing sig of his BWT vote. You'll get to sig soon, so you tell me yourself if you don't think sig was highly suspicious of LC the whole Day, only to pull a BWT vote and call it "most suspicious". It seemed contradictory to me. I made no LC consciousness exercise that you speak of, I treated sig's vote and reasoning with what sig used.

I will do so.

Now for the third quote, I'm really confused. If LC's yellow highlighted connection between me and bea is forced, why do you make me suspicious for it? Again, bea said her share to FZ about me looking suspicious.

Furthermore, if LC's case on bea was utter bullsuit, how can his paint on me and bea being defending buddies look genuine and be used to convict me?

For a mafia player to attempt to force a link between two people, the only way they gain something from that is if one of those people is their team mate. Linking two townies together doesn't help because when one is lynched the link is destroyed by the flip. If a team mate ends up lynched and a fake link is in place, it can allow for a townie to follow them to the grave the next day.

I'm suggesting that bea is town and you are mafia. LC set up a scenario in which your lynch could be followed by bea's if ever necessary. Forced links like this are one of the most common blunders I ever see in mafia games.

And I commented on it. You have it right there in your first quote.

Yes indeed. You refuted the existence of the link, but I honestly don't think that's important. Whether you and bea actually deserve to be linked means nothing -- what's important is that a confirmed scum saw fit to make that link.

Sorry, this is sloppy analysis of me. I'm bad because LC painted me as such, within a bullsuit case on bea and because you spin my sig accusations into LC self-awareness? Nothing makes sense in this.

Naw.

[Ricochet]

I don't give green skittles (read: defend) to my teammates, if I happen to be mafia with them. This is my 10th mafia game on this site, if you think I'm that much of a dumbass to do that, then you clearly don't know a single thing about me.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Jimmy I don't agree with your case on Ricochet if it's based on the fact that he is using Talking Heads phrasings in his posts. Your difficulty following what he's posting is because of that.

That would be a dumb thing to case someone for, I agree. The biggest issue by far is the forced link LC attempted to draw between bea and Rico -- see the portion of my case with all the emoticons.

Tell me what you think.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I don't give green skittles (read: defend) to my teammates, if I happen to be mafia with them. This is my 10th mafia game on this site, if you think I'm that much of a dumbass to do that, then you clearly don't know a single thing about me.

Eh? The mafia team is 7-strong. You think it'd be smart to place the entire team in the neutral pile or worse? This isn't how reads lists work.

[Diiny]

"I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but..."

[wi:sirengif]

[Diiny]

I don't give green skittles (read: defend) to my teammates, if I happen to be mafia with them. This is my 10th mafia game on this site, if you think I'm that much of a dumbass to do that, then you clearly don't know a single thing about me.

hello wifom my old friend

I've come to talk with you again

[Diiny]

Now I have to iso rico

[a2thezebra]

I don't give green skittles (read: defend) to my teammates, if I happen to be mafia with them. This is my 10th mafia game on this site, if you think I'm that much of a dumbass to do that, then you clearly don't know a single thing about me.

Oooooh this response just made me feel a lot better about my vote.

[Ricochet]

A wild Rico appears! Been here for hours, bro.

Golden's highlighted portion is him seeing veracity to LC's making links between me and bea, whilst in "bea is bad" mode. As I've said back then, I have no idea what I have to do with bea replying to FZ that she doesn't see me suspicious (for what FZ saw me), nor with LC making connections out of that. bea chiming in to FZ's suss of me must automatically mean she's defending me? nah.

Thanks for the explanation. That's what I was missing when I didn't think you'd commented on the forced link bit.

I was accusing sig of his BWT vote. You'll get to sig soon, so you tell me yourself if you don't think sig was highly suspicious of LC the whole Day, only to pull a BWT vote and call it "most suspicious". It seemed contradictory to me. I made no LC consciousness exercise that you speak of, I treated sig's vote and reasoning with what sig used.

I will do so.

Now for the third quote, I'm really confused. If LC's yellow highlighted connection between me and bea is forced, why do you make me suspicious for it? Again, bea said her share to FZ about me looking suspicious.

Furthermore, if LC's case on bea was utter bullsuit, how can his paint on me and bea being defending buddies look genuine and be used to convict me?

For a mafia player to attempt to force a link between two people, the only way they gain something from that is if one of those people is their team mate. Linking two townies together doesn't help because when one is lynched the link is destroyed by the flip. If a team mate ends up lynched and a fake link is in place, it can allow for a townie to follow them to the grave the next day.

I'm suggesting that bea is town and you are mafia. LC set up a scenario in which your lynch could be followed by bea's if ever necessary. Forced links like this are one of the most common blunders I ever see in mafia games.

False. I can tell you very clearly what that mafia player can gain. Paint all over civs. Just like he tried to spray it on bea, he tried to spray it on me. Simple. Bea (or myself, yet) hasn't been lynched due to his efforts, so the link is not destroyed. Right now, it serves exactly for you to be tricked by it. I don't know about bea, but I'll be the first townie to go to the grave because of that, if you insist on seeing it otherwise.

And I commented on it. You have it right there in your first quote.

Yes indeed. You refuted the existence of the link, but I honestly don't think that's important. Whether you and bea actually deserve to be linked means nothing -- what's important is that a confirmed scum saw fit to make that link.

Yes, a confirmed scum saw fit to weave "scumreads" everywhere.

Sorry, this is sloppy analysis of me. I'm bad because LC painted me as such, within a bullsuit case on bea and because you spin my sig accusations into LC self-awareness? Nothing makes sense in this.

Naw.

Alright then, stop making sense.

[a2thezebra]

I don't give green skittles (read: defend) to my teammates, if I happen to be mafia with them. This is my 10th mafia game on this site, if you think I'm that much of a dumbass to do that, then you clearly don't know a single thing about me.

hello wifom my old friend

I've come to talk with you again

SImon and Garfunkel Mafia confirmed.

[Ricochet]

Right, well it's 3am over here and ironically I just finished re-reading 30 players yet again, so just let me know if you're gonna mislynch me, so I drop everything k thx

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Relationship between rundontwalk and Long Con:

RDW hasn't mentioned LC in his 9 posts.

Spoiler: show

Posting because the host tells me I will be a non-participant if I don't.

I will read up throughout today and try to say something intelligent.

Why are you going to put so much thought in what you post? Trying to hide something? Just post your gut reads whether they are intelligent or not.

I support his decision to read up before posting suspicions.

Hooray, LC said a couple things about RDW! That should help give us some standard by which to get a read on him. In this LC defends Russ against RDW's assertion that Russ was "trying to hide something by putting too much thought in what he posts" (typical RDW language to those who aren't familiar). I don't think this is team mate incompatible, but either way I think LC just took advantage of an easy opportunity to inflate his post count and maybe even make a friend in Russ.

Spoiler: show

In RYM I like to vote for a lot of different people but I don't know how to do that here. Can we change votes?

You sure can, in this poll at least. Just bold it in the thread as well.

LC helps RDW out with the voting procedure. Not really relevant.

~~~

Not as helpful as I'd like. RDW has made himself impossible to read with anything other than meta, which would be a bad look for him. He's typically a decently heavy poster and almost always very aggressive.

[bea]

I'm enjoying reading JJJS anylisis. Also the chin insurance by zebra and mac. I'm late for work....again.... I will try to keep up for now. Not voting golden or jj for sure.

Golden, I think I get what you are doing, but I just can't vote someone I think is civ. Canno do it.

I was leaning mm on the fact that his quiet skerrs me but if he's camping, that makes sense. I'm sure he mentioned it and I just forgot.

I'm actually curious about people who avoided talking to or about lc given his flip. I tend to avoid scummates like the plague when I'm scum so as to not have that trail....

[Ricochet]

"I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but..."

[wi:sirengif]

Shall I pull other players' quotes on finding LC genuine, but at the same time hoping he didn't actually con the whole thing and will make them look like fools post-flip or will you do that?

[a2thezebra]

Right, well it's 3am over here and ironically I just finished re-reading 30 players yet again, so just let me know if you're gonna mislynch me, so I drop everything k thx

If you're civilian then you need to defend yourself better than the age-old "I wouldn't do that because it's against my meta and it would be dumb" tactic.

[Diiny]

linki: All talk is still preferable to nothing whatsoever.

I don't agree. Flooding the thread is a way that can keep quieter civilians disengaged.

That's definitely true. I know I didn't feel like reading the twenty or so pages of material I saw when I got home from a very busy workday.

But you've been doing just that, haven't you? I forgot that I think you're bad llama man

[Diiny]

"I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but..."

[wi:sirengif]

Shall I pull other players' quotes on finding LC genuine, but at the same time hoping he didn't actually con the whole thing and will make them look like fools post-flip or will you do that?

There's a difference between saying "I think he's doing x and not y"/"I think he's not conning" to phrasing it in a super caveaty/distancy manner. And if you do find me anyone else saying it like you do I'll be sure to allocate them some scum points too, so do so and help out the scumhunt pls

[MacDougall]

Jimmy I don't agree with your case on Ricochet if it's based on the fact that he is using Talking Heads phrasings in his posts. Your difficulty following what he's posting is because of that.

That would be a dumb thing to case someone for, I agree. The biggest issue by far is the forced link LC attempted to draw between bea and Rico -- see the portion of my case with all the emoticons.

Tell me what you think.

Well, you did bring it up. If you think it's dumb then why have you brought it up?

I don't think that your linking idea is as huge as you do. It's something. But we have pages and pages of sorsha and golden related content. Not to mention we have an FZ case on Russ that's gathering momentum. Do you think your linking case is more of a valid reason to lynch than any of the other three cases? You are assuming that Long Con didn't just do this to get a townie lynched after he dies?

[Ricochet]

Right, well it's 3am over here and ironically I just finished re-reading 30 players yet again, so just let me know if you're gonna mislynch me, so I drop everything k thx

If you're civilian then you need to defend yourself better than the age-old "I wouldn't do that because it's against my meta and it would be dumb" tactic.

No, if the main charge to lynch me is that I've super defended a confirmed mafia, on the eve of his highly likely lynch no less, then that's exactly what needs to be said, because it simply goes against a year-long experience. It'd be pure recklessness and I wouldn't be caught dead doing it.

I've been lynched before, for looking real bad in my votes (i.e. lynching civs in a row) or for seemingly going soft / defending a flipped mafia. Never flipped mafia. I never said I don't look foolish for green-skittling LC, but it doesn't mean anything other that how utterly wrong I was to judge his "bea job".

[bea]

On the rest of the car ride to work, I started thinking about llama as being in the criteria of what I mentioned above. He mentions lc in regards to his day one bit about me and I am starting to wonder if his intention was to gls etc up the idea that I overreacted to lc's vote. Not much more out of him. I'm placing my vote on llama kins it's what I feel strongest about now and I don't know I will make it back before poll close. Slow last night usually means busy as eff Saturday plus there's an asu game tonight.

[MacDougall]

Rico are you being intentionally disingenous? Jimmy's case on you revolves around Long Con having a scum team read on you and bea. Based on his obs of Long Con he thinks it more likely that you are is his scummate than bea.

I read the entire thing as Jimmy getting to the end of his analysis and not having good obs on anyone and forcing himself to have a scum read to validate the whole project in his mind tbh.

But your response to the pressure has got my interest piqued. You have two votes on you when there are three others with more and you are chucking a tanty. That has spooked scum written all over it. Especially since you seem to have misread Jimmy's entire point.

[Ricochet]

"I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but..."

[wi:sirengif]

Shall I pull other players' quotes on finding LC genuine, but at the same time hoping he didn't actually con the whole thing and will make them look like fools post-flip or will you do that?

There's a difference between saying "I think he's doing x and not y"/"I think he's not conning" to phrasing it in a super caveaty/distancy manner. And if you do find me anyone else saying it like you do I'll be sure to allocate them some scum points too, so do so and help out the scumhunt pls

Well you snipped the part of my post in which I did say just as much that I don't think his bea gambit was nefarious aka "I don't think he was conning". That I was wrong in thinking that is undisputable.

And no, if your mentality is so one directional, in the sense that anyone making such caveats are scum, then you need to do the allocating of those scum points to each player; it's not my mentality as well, it's yours. I can't simply point to others and say "they're bad for saying it, I'm not". That's the opposite of my point, which is I've been wrong in my LC assertion and nothing more.

[Diiny]

If I were to currently cast a vote based on who I felt was the scummiest, I would have to say Golden based on the above post. This is of course subject change as I continue to read further.

Just like llama's posts have felt weird/rehearsed, this does too

[sig]

I will need to think over the Rico argument people have made some good points, and I really think Sorsha is clean so if my vote for Rico would help Sorsha. As I said I will think it over some more, I like both JJJ and FZ post about him, but I still think Golden is scum. I will wait until we are closer to the deadline and see how the votes have fallen to decided if me voting for Rico will keep Sorsha from getting lynched I will. However, I would still like to see Golden lynched if not today, tomorrow unless something extraordinary happens.

[MacDougall]

Remember that Llama was the other lynch candidate with Long Con and we nabbed a scum. What chance that the other primary candidate at day's end was also scum? I just find that so unlikely.

That being said, Good Lord has he been scummy. Can I please point out that he floated into the thread and voted for Russ and vanished. Typical lurky scum play.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Relationship between Russtifinko and Long Con:

Spoiler: show

I wasn't convinced by JJJ's single read on Long Con. The Llama Gambit (saying you're suspicious of someone you're not to see who bandwagons it) is a fairly common Syndicate ploy. But this analysis by Matt F might have some merit. The posts you're highlighting show Sorsha acting how I'd imagine myself acting if I were on a baddie team with LC. Sorsha, you say you and LC have been playing together for years, but what made it obvious to you that LC's suspicion of bea was a ploy if you think she's the last person he'd use to pull a ploy?
LC, what are your thoughts on Sorsha at the moment?

sig, you said earlier you're a weak player and an easy lynch candidate. Any examples? I'm not sure if I've played with you before.

espers, why did you change from voting seaside with a reason to voting me without one? And no, "to make things interesting" does not count. If tightening up the lynch was really your objective, sig would've made more sense than me as he was closer to BWT in votes.

He expressed doubts about my initial case against LC and suggested that such gambits are common in general around The Syndicate. I've not observed this maneuver in any game yet, so I'll ask Russ now to reference another example of that precise gambit.

Also he's criticizing Sorsha for her treatment of LC re: The Ruse and prodding LC to talk about Sorsha. At the least he is showing that he isn't afraid to talk a lot about the confirmed scum, and to defend him in the face of my inquisition.

Spoiler: show

RIP to our departed friends.

I had a Hell Day at work and am keeping it light tonight, since reading hurts my head.

I wasn't convinced by JJJ's single read on Long Con. The Llama Gambit (saying you're suspicious of someone you're not to see who bandwagons it) is a fairly common Syndicate ploy. But this analysis by Matt F might have some merit. The posts you're highlighting show Sorsha acting how I'd imagine myself acting if I were on a baddie team with LC. Sorsha, you say you and LC have been playing together for years, but what made it obvious to you that LC's suspicion of bea was a ploy if you think she's the last person he'd use to pull a ploy?
LC, what are your thoughts on Sorsha at the moment?

Nothing too pingy at the moment. Sorsha's not always the easiest to read, but I haven't found her particularly suspicious yet.

Well this is waffly.

To Russ's credit, LC responded to that prior request with meaningless vagueness and Russ didn't let him get away with that.

Spoiler: show

Ugh, I'm on time to vote but feel like I may be late to the party. This was a very good point.

How is it, that not one regular syndicater voted for LC? How is it, that none of the Rym players don't take that into consideration? Are we missing something here?

I should say that I have suspected LC as recently as my last post, though, and I'm a Syndicater, so it's not 100% true. Everyone seems to have ignored my posts, though, as I don't think anyone answered a question I asked...

Anyway, the fact that no other TSers are suspecting LC makes me feel a bit better about him. However, I have absolutely no read whatsoever on bcornett, and I think voting seaside or Macdougall at this point seems like a real bad idea. So I don't see a ton of opportunity to influence the lynch with my vote.

Also, I know Golden is a SuperStar Civ, but it's weird to me that at least 2 people (bea and motel room) are willing to just accept his suspicion at face value and go that way.

Starting to drink the Kool Aid that LC's ruse was legit.

Spoiler: show

Linki: Also don't love Sorsha trying to push LC harder to people who don't know LC here. I'm voting Sorsha.

I kind of like this. That he'd go after Sorsha for pushing against LC specifically to people that don't know him suggests to me that he was experiencing genuine doubts about his suspicion of LC.

Spoiler: show

I really don't see any reason to lynch llama at the moment and don't trust the reads of the people voting him. If necessary I'll switch my vote to prevent it.

Russ's vote for LC is famous now, and controversial (hi Wilgy and FZ). I am inclined to side with Wilgy in this case, because I think such an important vote wasn't absolutely necessary for Russ given his post history. He started [/i]mildly[/i] suspicious of LC and that suspicion waned -- he had so many avenues to vote for someone else. And given the heat LC was already under and likely to stay under, I don't think the mafia would have seen it as a major problem if the Flowers role was exposed with the group of bcornett voters. It'd still serve to delay the LC lynch, perhaps long enough to make a huge difference.

I like Russ's vote.

Spoiler: show

Posting because the host tells me I will be a non-participant if I don't.

I will read up throughout today and try to say something intelligent.

Why are you going to put so much thought in what you post? Trying to hide something? Just post your gut reads whether they are intelligent or not.

I support his decision to read up before posting suspicions.

Looks like mild buddying.

~~~

I think Russ emerges from this looking decent. I don't want to lynch him today.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Well, you did bring it up. If you think it's dumb then why have you brought it up?

I didn't bring up Talking Heads phrasing -- playing to the theme of a game is almost never a good reason to suspect someone in my opinion. I just said I was confused about what they were talking about in that particular discussion.

[Diiny]

"I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but..."

[wi:sirengif]

Shall I pull other players' quotes on finding LC genuine, but at the same time hoping he didn't actually con the whole thing and will make them look like fools post-flip or will you do that?

There's a difference between saying "I think he's doing x and not y"/"I think he's not conning" to phrasing it in a super caveaty/distancy manner. And if you do find me anyone else saying it like you do I'll be sure to allocate them some scum points too, so do so and help out the scumhunt pls

Well you snipped the part of my post in which I did say just as much that I don't think his bea gambit was nefarious aka "I don't think he was conning". That I was wrong in thinking that is undisputable.

Are you actually, honestly trying to tell me that "I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but..." doesn't sound caveaty? I'd expect a townie person to respond reasonably by saying yeah, I just didn't want to feel mercilessly clowned or whatever but you're insisting quite defensively now that it's INDISPUTABLE that you were just wrong about thinking he was scum with no strong evidence to prove that.

I can't really see a townie reacting to pressure/this situation like you are

[Ricochet]

Rico are you being intentionally disingenous? Jimmy's case on you revolves around Long Con having a scum team read on you and bea. Based on his obs of Long Con he thinks it more likely that you are is his scummate than bea.

I read the entire thing as Jimmy getting to the end of his analysis and not having good obs on anyone and forcing himself to have a scum read to validate the whole project in his mind tbh.

But your response to the pressure has got my interest piqued. You have two votes on you when there are three others with more and you are chucking a tanty. That has spooked scum written all over it. Especially since you seem to have misread Jimmy's entire point.

No, I'm not. I was clear to JJJ that LC's teamforming between me and bea is based on a) a forced perception that bea sharing her viewpoint to FZ's suspicion on me is supposed to look like defending and b) LC was paintbrushing scumdots on me, if not on the both of us.

I'm not going to go again over how I defend myself, especially not that it's no mere suss, but a clear scum tag applied to me. The pressure also comes from sensing that, just like LC might have planted that link to frame me (on a basic level, back when he was pretending his bea case is real, as well as on a higher level, now that he flipped and his intentions were all nefarious), I can get mislynched for the whole thing. Warning signs of things to come, perhaps.

[a2thezebra]

Right, well it's 3am over here and ironically I just finished re-reading 30 players yet again, so just let me know if you're gonna mislynch me, so I drop everything k thx

If you're civilian then you need to defend yourself better than the age-old "I wouldn't do that because it's against my meta and it would be dumb" tactic.

No, if the main charge to lynch me is that I've super defended a confirmed mafia, on the eve of his highly likely lynch no less, then that's exactly what needs to be said, because it simply goes against a year-long experience. It'd be pure recklessness and I wouldn't be caught dead doing it.

I've been lynched before, for looking real bad in my votes (i.e. lynching civs in a row) or for seemingly going soft / defending a flipped mafia. Never flipped mafia. I never said I don't look foolish for green-skittling LC, but it doesn't mean anything other that how utterly wrong I was to judge his "bea job".

Your misdirection of what the actual ping on you is reminds me of someone...but anyway, the main charge I have on you is not that you defended him, but the way you distanced yourself from him at the same time, as Diiny said. The fact that you ignored that fact and (un?)intentionally misinterpreted the charge to make your defense look better is sealing the deal.

[Diiny]

Remember that Llama was the other lynch candidate with Long Con and we nabbed a scum. What chance that the other primary candidate at day's end was also scum? I just find that so unlikely.

This is one of the genuine points in his favour for me. That said his bandwagon didn't really pick up, I think it was you me and jjj that ever voted for him. It never really got into competition with long con/brian/whoever else there was I don't remember, but I logged off before the deadline so I might be wrong and I'm not sure how to check historic tallies.

That being said, Good Lord has he been scummy.

4 real

[Ricochet]

"I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but..."

[wi:sirengif]

Shall I pull other players' quotes on finding LC genuine, but at the same time hoping he didn't actually con the whole thing and will make them look like fools post-flip or will you do that?

There's a difference between saying "I think he's doing x and not y"/"I think he's not conning" to phrasing it in a super caveaty/distancy manner. And if you do find me anyone else saying it like you do I'll be sure to allocate them some scum points too, so do so and help out the scumhunt pls

Well you snipped the part of my post in which I did say just as much that I don't think his bea gambit was nefarious aka "I don't think he was conning". That I was wrong in thinking that is undisputable.

Are you actually, honestly trying to tell me that "I sure hope he isn't "Scum Conning" and thus make me regret saying this later on, but..." doesn't sound caveaty? I'd expect a townie person to respond reasonably by saying yeah, I just didn't want to feel mercilessly clowned or whatever but you're insisting quite defensively now that it's INDISPUTABLE that you were just wrong about thinking he was scum with no strong evidence to prove that.

I can't really see a townie reacting to pressure/this situation like you are

Facts are never what they seem to be.

I don't understand the latter part of your first paragraph. I thought I'm suspected of thinking he wasn't scum, as an act to defend him.

[seaside]

Okay, back in it. Also this is the first time since the game started that I'm actually listening to Talking Heads. Like, IRL. Remain In Light at the moment. More Songs About Buildings and Food is next. Man, this band... Regrettably I always seem to forget how damn fuckin' cool they are. Even the overplayed hits like 'Once In a Lifetime' and 'Psycho Killer' are so good. Dang. Sorry, had to get RYM there for a second. Oh wait, what am I talking about. People don't praise music on RYM.

My thoughts on Seaside are the same, but with less potency. The 'Floyd Certainty Principle' still bugs me, over everything else. If Seasy didn't have much time to play, which is something I believe him on principle, his phrasing seems almost deliberately shady. 'Think what you will I guess.' being the prime factor. Part of me wants to think that there are dozens less shady ways to go about this. Maybe it was defeatist on Seaside's part, maybe it's his way of playing something valuable close to the chest.

I don't know. Maybe it was just part of his plan to get lynched.

Right now he supports the Sorsha lynch, and is voting for her. He makes no mention of her before the case on her started to gain momentum, though, which could read as a scumbuddy jumping on the bandwagon. Or it could be the result of real life preventing him from posting much, still.

On the RYM scale, with five stars being town and half-star being scum, I'd rate Seaside at ★★, bordering on ★★½. Because of his time-commitment variable, it's a bit of a tough case.

Alright, case incoming: I'm skipping thellama73 and going for the more pressing issue: Golden.

it was a joke bruv, i really have no idea if he is town or not.
i thought rdw was gonna come in here and slam him and i wanted to give him a bit of confidence and room to move to get involved in the game as a noob when everyone was telling him rdw is gonna get him
neither of which have happened though

and it was also good thing to raise eyebrows against me

wtf rdw? where you at?

[a2thezebra]

I thought I'm suspected of thinking he wasn't scum, as an act to defend him.

Try again lol

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Relationship between seaside and Long Con:

Spoiler: show

i'm going to swap my vote in the interest of survival. i'm deciding between bcornett and long con.
i'm going to place it on long con as i'm bout to go to work, but ill check at lunch back and have a think and see if i want to stick with it.

So long as bcornett isn't mafia, he made the right choice here. This is the only mention of LC in seaside's post history though prior to his lynch, so that's disconcerting.

Spoiler: show

Voting Seaside until he explains his numerous arbitrary reads to satisfaction.

Your view of Seaside is right and I agree with it it's just that he told me before the game starts that he'll try his best to get lynched early in order to have more free time. It might sound ridiculous but I know Seaside and he's frankly ridiculous. On the other hand if he stops playing midway he'll be a problem to the mods and us.

It's a lose-lose situation to me.

Ugh. It makes me want to lynch him, but not because I particularly believe he was handed a Mafia card at the start. It's ugly, and ugly is such a smelly word.

I've stated before that I think this reflects decently upon Seaside. I think LC was gleeful at the opportunity to policy lynch someone -- policy lynches are by default terrible because they enable mafia to participate in town lynches without any real personal responsibility. Obviously policy lynches of mafia players are a good thing, but only because of blind luck.

I think LC set himself up in this post to vote for Seaside if such a policy lynch developed.

~~~

That's it. I think the limited content is mostly a good look for seaside, but I'd be a lot more comfortable if there was more of it.