Recruitment Mafia IV: Dawn of the Clans (End Game)

[DharmaHelper]

Also @ Wilgy, I did not kill Unfurl, and I would not have killed Unfurl. She raises the level of every thread she is in, and God knows we need that sometimes. Even if I were bad, which I am not, i would have hoped to recruit her rather than kill her.

Linki, I am not misrepresenting you, DH. This was a good point really, and if it makes you happy I will change it from "DH" to "those who suspect me" and insisting to "possibly". I still think it's a good point and it stands.

You're bad tho

[S~V~S]

lol nub :P

Barking up the wrong tree, Hoss.

[DrWilgy]

Dr W - only bc I think he would make a great recruit and his posts have adifferent feel than they did in the beginning of the game.

It's been the move! I got work sorted out today... so paychecks! I'm happy you think I'd make a great recruit though!

Hey Scotty, I'm gonna respond in another copy paste type fashion!
"Yes, of course they're for a reason , but who knows when Black Rock gets time out her schedule to post what she needs to post?"
-I would hopefully assume that it's accurate, for game integrity. Do you know different or have reason to assume different?

"Being sympathetic is one thing, and being strategically sympathetic is another. I have a theory. Within human societal context. My theory is that no one is completely selfless. There is always a measure of selfishness in a decision or thought to do something. Altruism is an ideal, but not a reality. I used to regularly give homeless people on the street in NY food or change when I was feeling generous and bright-eyed and bushy-tailed in the early years that I lived here. I don't do that anymore, because I'm constantly on the verge of being there myself hahahahahahaa But. Every time I did so, I thought, 'wow, I'm being really charitable right now. I'm a pretty nice dude!' In retrospect, I fail to see how that is altruistic. It makes me feel better about myself, even if the thought is charitable and kind. So I ask you, what did you hope to gain from being sympathetic with her?"
-I'm sorry for your idealism Scotty, and I think this is something that we just disagree on. I'll give you some back story though, hopefully it can change what you believe in me. My favorite game is FF9, I talk about it all the time, I have even had two of my avatars be FF9 related in the short time that I've been here. Here is a screenshot from the game, which features a main character and his "theme"

It should be clear that this game has impacted me and everything I do. I felt like doing what I thought to be the right thing, that's all. Sigh... Real talk in a game of mafia.

"It's that it was very precise defending. It made sense from a bystander level of someone that took stock of your surroundings. You made sure to cover your tracks, and the time stamps don't look bad for you if you assume BR posted at the exact moment of recruitment. I'm saying you could have known for -who knows how long- before that that you were recruited, and had a good alibi to back you up by looking at presumed timing."
-I don't think I can create an alibi, I had no knowledge of BR typing a post. Based upon what you had said and your theory, saw the new teammate and wrote and submitted that entire post, with only a 6 min difference of BR typing out the recruitment post. Would I have written out a post that long only to throw it away had BR posted 6 min earlier? Forcibly creating an alibi based on what the hosts do seems damn near impossible from a logical perspective, so why would I try?

"Well it was 1 hour and 23 minutes after to be precise, but you missed the main idea of this point in that she literally didn't post from Friday Aug 28th @ 2p- with her responses before her absence of basically "guysss, I don't like arguments or confrontations." as her initial defense- to Sunday Aug 30th @ 12:56a where she says she is "happy to address questions". I know this doesn't do much to shed light on your decisions, since she's already dead and gone, but this didn't read to most of the rest of the crowd as a person that was on the civ side, and was a good bet to be bad."
-You are correct, I didn't see this pattern
"You did that to yourself for defending her so avidly. I don't think TinyBubbles was thinking about framing anyone."
-You are also correct here... I made the mistake in judging her, but in a scenario where I had the same judgement I would've defended her again.
"From my viewpoint, it's something like this, replacing the material, of course: "
-First off, that video is still funny. Secondly, I began defending myself heavily and prematurely because it was obvious that this implicates me. Only a fool would think otherwise. I thought what I was doing was right. I flubbed, but I'm willing to fix what I can.

Tranq, I'd appreciate it if you responded to my response to you. I commented and you didn't say anything about it. Otherwise your vote looks somewhat like a "Just because" vote.

[S~V~S]

Wilgy, if you could do me a favor (I have asked other people in other games to do this as well, I am not picking on you or anything) I would appreciate it if you could stop changing your avatar so much. When I am looking for someones posts, that is how I identify whose posts i am looking for skimming down the thread. If people keep changing their avatar, it makes things harder for me to follow as I am a pretty visual person. Thank You for understanding

[Bullzeye]

Continuing my analysis of all the people I couldn't think of a decent reason not to suspect, we kick off with *Drumroll*

Scotty

Seems quite interested in baddie hunting, which is always nice. Called Bubbles a prime candidate for recruitment on day three, because of her blendy niceness. Seems like he'd been after her for a while, so I'm temporarily ruling him out of being an Uzberry. He had the same intentions as me on the day they locked the thread - vote Boom to save Golden, though I now think that was lose-lose. I don't think I've played with Scotty before but I like his overall style here, and he had some fairly decent ideas about where to look in light of Golden's lynch without losing focus on his other suspicion. Solid case against Bubbles followed by some good logic/over-enthusiasm regarding her defenders, namely Wilgy. His views on Llama will be something I think of when I get to that particular creature's posts. Can't possibly connect him to Uzerbaijan, and see nothing to make me think he'd be pro-Azura either, so I'm giving Scotty 1/10 suspicion points. As a reminder, 0 suspicion points is perfection (which could mean civ or unrecruited) while 10 is ultimate evil.

DrWilgy

Gonna just cut to the chase here, Wilgy is #1 contender for my vote today. In the interest of fairness, I'll look at his posts by themselves and evaluate him, but I think through reading other people's posts already I know what I think of him. Fairly zany of a player, it's definitely fun to read back over him. He was pretty quiet up until day 3 - literally the first of his four pages of post span day 0-3. Does anyone who knows Wilgy's style think that might mean something? Sorry if I missed a legit explanation like him having been busy, I skimmed most of the green after a while tbh.

Started day 4 by saying he'd be voting Sorsha and here's where things get interesting. He never really seemed to make a case on Sorsha, or at least I don't see one anywhere around the time of his vote but he does ask MM & Unfurl to "help" him by voting for her. Then seemingly changes his mind and flips to Boom, calling him a comfortable placeholder. Says he was surprised where the Sorshawagon came from and acts surprised at Unfurl's vote for her despite the fact he himself had asked her to vote Sorsha.

On day 5 one of his first comments is to call the idea of a Bubbles lynch "dumb". Then he goes on the defensive for her, and says he chose to defend her because he didn't believe anyone else would (I would argue TH did too). Why so invested? If you're neutral it literally doesn't matter and it's not like Bubbles was an innocent who people jumped on for no reason. If you're not neutral and she's not on your team then again... why? Furthermore, if this is an accurate portrayal of his case on SVS then it's the biggest chunk of bullsuit we've seen all game. Do bulls have a relative that's impressively larger? Because that's what this is the suit of:

So Doc, talk to me about your vote on SVS. What's your reasoning? I caught DH's thoughts, but I don't recall yours.

I'm not going to type out everything again, here's the short and simple version.
1. Past history shows SVS has a thing for being a baddie
2. SVS was one of the leaders in lynching Golden
3. SVS was one of the players who survived day 1, meaning they had immunity (Ububuzagoon)

FWIW I think we're seeing Good-SVS here and won't be NO Uing her any time soon. But that's not the current topic. Regardless only one of these points is relevant. #1 means nothing and #3 could at best be described as clutching at straws. As I understood it the lynch was just completely stopped, and it didn't matter who had how many votes. I could be wrong, that is a thing that happens from time to time. Anyway, I don't think it's unfair to call Wilgy Bubbles' biggest defender. He gets 8/10 suspicion points (while nobody is getting 0, nobody is gonna get 10 either) and *My Vote is also going to Dr Wilgy*, at least for now.

Oh good, now I come to some of the highest posters in the game, and they've all made a lot of posts as well!

Llama

Oh god he has 5 pages of posts. From now on I'm going to just skim the first three days, I don't think much interesting happened until day three. Apparently Llama's activity doesn't kick off til day four anyway. He called out Bubbles practically from the starting pistol, but I'm 99% sure the whole exchange was a joke. Maintained his suspicion of Bubbles - I don't know if I'd see Llama engaging in such hardcore distancing. Maybe. It's not like he's responsible for her lynch, so he could've started off distancing and then realised he had to keep it up when she drew heat. Worth noting he didn't vote her when she died? Though he's had some suspicion on DH for a while too. I don't know what to think here tbh, I'll put 5/10 suspicion points on him.


Going to post this now because it decides my vote and I don't think I'll see anything from the other three on my list that changes my mind. Still intend to try to read them but they're the three top posters so I might be at it all week.

[S~V~S]

Ah now I see that JJJ has voted for me. Looking forward to hearing why.

[DrWilgy]

Wilgy, if you could do me a favor (I have asked other people in other games to do this as well, I am not picking on you or anything) I would appreciate it if you could stop changing your avatar so much. When I am looking for someones posts, that is how I identify whose posts i am looking for skimming down the thread. If people keep changing their avatar, it makes things harder for me to follow as I am a pretty visual person. Thank You for understanding

*bows* I will refrain from changing my avatar for the remainder of the game

[S~V~S]

Wilgy, if you could do me a favor (I have asked other people in other games to do this as well, I am not picking on you or anything) I would appreciate it if you could stop changing your avatar so much. When I am looking for someones posts, that is how I identify whose posts i am looking for skimming down the thread. If people keep changing their avatar, it makes things harder for me to follow as I am a pretty visual person. Thank You for understanding

*bows* I will refrain from changing my avatar for the remainder of the game

Thank You

[bea]

So much death last night!! Rip to all those that perished.

I got called in to work early today. Now that the power is back plus football, we have been crazy busy. I find myself agreeing with bullz lots today so imma follow his lead, and vote Dr wiggly . Sorry this is pretty drive by like. don't wanna miss the vote again.

[Sorsha]

Ok, one of the players to vote for bubbles on day 4 when it didn't matter and then NOT vote for her on day 5 when it did matter is Timmer.
(Voted Golden day 3)

Day 4 vote:

voted for tinybubbles.

I agree with the basic thrust of the case against tiny bubbles, her posts have been the epitome of both wishy and washy. But moreso, I'm liking the gameplay of the people voting her, so I'm willing to follow their lead on this.

Day 5:

aapje, I'd be willing to shift my vote from Bubbles for the right candidate, did you have an alternate in mind? I'd gladly vote DP, for instance.

There's a difference, imo, between what I'm doing, which is playing as a neutral, and what DP is apparently doing, which is just complete apathy. If his plan is actually to deliberately coast through and never contribute, I'd be good with kicking him out.

The first sentence of ^ that quote doesn’t mesh with the last two paragraphs of this quote:

@Wilgy, I'm not sure I agree with your stance on unfurl/Bubbles. I'm not saying you are necessarily wrong, but that you are tuned in too heavily on one possibility.

Looking back, we were in position 2, so yes, Ubzargan had a lynch switch to use. So yes, it seems likely that he caused unfurl's death. But it's to what END where I am not sure you are right.

You suggest Ubby wanted to frame Bubbles. Maybe, but what about this?

- TinyBubbles is on Ubby's team, or is Ubby himself. The lynch switch rather handily went to saving her own life or the life of her teammate.

Can you give me any reason why this isn't a possibility? I personally think that those wanting to catch a baddie recruiter should be all OVER a Bubbles lynch, because of the very possibility that she's bad and on the Ub team.

I don't know if you had actually voted for bubbles when you posted that first post saying you'd change it but then you make that next post saying that you think bubbles WAS on Uzi’s team. Then you say this:

Frankly Doc, I think aapje is correct. A baddie had a chance to switch a lynch. Why wouldn't he? It sows chaos and confusion. It's entirely likely that neither unfurl or Bubbles have any relevance to that player and they were chosen just 'coz.

I am more piqued by those who seem to think they understand the motivations behind the switch, because it could suggest background knowledge.

Now you think bubbles wasn’t on team Uzi? And that last line in this last post can pretty much apply to yourself. You are all over the place in regards to the bubbles lynch switch and the team uzi itself. These posts are literally only minutes apart.

[DharmaHelper]

I don't understand why we're not lynching SVS.

[DrWilgy]

DrWilgy

Gonna just cut to the chase here, Wilgy is #1 contender for my vote today. In the interest of fairness, I'll look at his posts by themselves and evaluate him, but I think through reading other people's posts already I know what I think of him. Fairly zany of a player, it's definitely fun to read back over him. He was pretty quiet up until day 3 - literally the first of his four pages of post span day 0-3. Does anyone who knows Wilgy's style think that might mean something? Sorry if I missed a legit explanation like him having been busy, I skimmed most of the green after a while tbh.

Started day 4 by saying he'd be voting Sorsha and here's where things get interesting. He never really seemed to make a case on Sorsha, or at least I don't see one anywhere around the time of his vote but he does ask MM & Unfurl to "help" him by voting for her. Then seemingly changes his mind and flips to Boom, calling him a comfortable placeholder. Says he was surprised where the Sorshawagon came from and acts surprised at Unfurl's vote for her despite the fact he himself had asked her to vote Sorsha.

On day 5 one of his first comments is to call the idea of a Bubbles lynch "dumb". Then he goes on the defensive for her, and says he chose to defend her because he didn't believe anyone else would (I would argue TH did too). Why so invested? If you're neutral it literally doesn't matter and it's not like Bubbles was an innocent who people jumped on for no reason. If you're not neutral and she's not on your team then again... why? Furthermore, if this is an accurate portrayal of his case on SVS then it's the biggest chunk of bullsuit we've seen all game. Do bulls have a relative that's impressively larger? Because that's what this is the suit of:

So Doc, talk to me about your vote on SVS. What's your reasoning? I caught DH's thoughts, but I don't recall yours.

I'm not going to type out everything again, here's the short and simple version.
1. Past history shows SVS has a thing for being a baddie
2. SVS was one of the leaders in lynching Golden
3. SVS was one of the players who survived day 1, meaning they had immunity (Ububuzagoon)

FWIW I think we're seeing Good-SVS here and won't be NO Uing her any time soon. But that's not the current topic. Regardless only one of these points is relevant. #1 means nothing and #3 could at best be described as clutching at straws. As I understood it the lynch was just completely stopped, and it didn't matter who had how many votes. I could be wrong, that is a thing that happens from time to time. Anyway, I don't think it's unfair to call Wilgy Bubbles' biggest defender. He gets 8/10 suspicion points (while nobody is getting 0, nobody is gonna get 10 either) and *My Vote is also going to Dr Wilgy*, at least for now.

Oh good, now I come to some of the highest posters in the game, and they've all made a lot of posts as well!

Explanations of me being busy wasn't in green...

I was drunk for half of that... I did want to pressure Sorsha though, I felt inclined to after her post on framing. My fear for Unfurl being bad was triggered by something she had said, not her vote.

Read my responses to Scotty.

In regards to me voting SVS, there's smores than that. I've repeated myself too many times to care and or go through it anymore. Nothing SVS has said has convinced me that she isn't bad like I first thought, so I see no need to change my thoughts here. Do look over what I've had to say though.

I miss JJJ, and his wonderful ISO's.

[Synonym]

@Ricochet Hopefully this does not get lost~ my expectation of the Exec trying to kill me is based on DH insisting that I am Uzburger, and last night was a night the Exec could kill a Warrior. So I thought the Exec might try to prove the point in that fashion. It is probably what I would have done had I been the Exec.

I'm reading and voting, just haven't been participating much in the thread. To be honest I still don't really understand this game but I'm trying to keep up.

I've been voting for the various Positions and lynches.

Yo dawg, I know you from JTM and I know you're capable of being super helpful as a civ. But even in a massive game like this one, you gotta have some sort of opinion.
I've been reading too. Just finished the One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish saga. Took me a few days. And I can say that on page 17 the narrator says that he wishes he had 11 fingers, and that's bullshit. Who wants 11 fingers? That's just my opinion.

So you've voted SVS, so you obviously have some sort of opinion by now, however small.

Yeah, this.

I see Bullz posted some opinions, I have to read those over more carefully. I will also read the other cases on people getting votes. If I have to switch my vote to protect myself I will, but would rather it be to someone I feel less positive about, and hopefully don't have to worry about that at all.

And I am glad I am not the only one who thought JJJs sudden case of the *mehs* and a major posting style change a bit odd.

Question for you SVS, how would you describe your play style? I.e, do you see yourself more as an antagonist pursuing leads?

[DrWilgy]

I miss JJJ, and his wonderful ISO's.

I just had an Idea... A theory! but I need to know rules first. If JJJ was silenced, would that appear in the write up?

[Sorsha]

Real talk tho why are we not lynching SVS for being seriously bad

SVS suspects me to be bad. I have this weird “thing”: When I’m not bad and someone thinks I am, a lot of the time that just puts them in a bad light to me, whether they are or not. So I am trying to stay objective on the SVS case. I think you and Wilgy have both made some good points about her. I may not agree with them 100% but I think they are worth considering.

I've looked over you reasons for voting bubbles on day 4 but then not on day 5 and I don't really find you suspicious for it. Especially in light of your SVS suspicions, you at least have a good reason for changing your vote IMO.

[S~V~S]

@ Synonym~ No not really. I am an observer. I watch for things that get my interest, and once something has, I can be fairly dogged about pursuing them. But I don't view myself as an antagonist, no.

@Wilgy, some hosts post small taretings like silencing, i don;t thise LC & BR do, though.

[S~V~S]

yikes,

@Wilgy, some hosts post small targetings like silencing, i dont think LC & BR do, though.

fixed

[Bullzeye]

Explanations of me being busy wasn't in green...

Then it must have been in a colour I'm apparently completely blind to because I've even just gone back through your posts and other than committing crimes against humanity on your own family members (and then tutoring them) I genuinely haven't seen anything. Sorry

I was drunk for half of that... I did want to pressure Sorsha though, I felt inclined to after her post on framing. My fear for Unfurl being bad was triggered by something she had said, not her vote.

I have had three cans of Scrumpy (because I'm classy) in the course of my read-throughs this evening. I'm not begging anyone to vote you The Sorsha/Unfurl thing is kinda minimal regardless.

Read my responses to Scotty.

In regards to me voting SVS, there's smores than that. I've repeated myself too many times to care and or go through it anymore. Nothing SVS has said has convinced me that she isn't bad like I first thought, so I see no need to change my thoughts here. Do look over what I've had to say though.

I miss JJJ, and his wonderful ISO's.

I have read your responses to Scotty. They didn't convince me.

These bits in particular were very unconvincing:

Because lynching someone I believe to be neutral or civ is wrong. If I see and believe that we are about to kill a neutral or civ, I will defend them. Similarly, so everyone knows i'm not talking out of my ass, I stated that I would use my vote to save Golden (which ended up failing). The difference between day 4 and day 5? Unfurl's death. I explained it many times, but I still think, Unfurl's death was meant to frame Bubbles. It didn't sit right with me, it also didn't sit right with me how no one would defend Bubbles, so I thought there had to be something wrong.

I also said I'd have tried to save Golden. We're not alone in that. Not a unique train of thought by any means. You posted this night 5, so Bubbles was already dead. How can you say you still think Unfurl's death was a frame? Also you weren't alone defending Bubbles, you were just one of the least subtle.

I don't think I can express the fact that I thought she was neutral any harder. Why would I allow a neutral die, over someone I thought to be a baddie?

There's thinking one case is not as good as another and then there's going to great effort to defend another player. One looks more suspicious than the other, especially when it turns out you've defended a baddie.

[Sorsha]

Bea

Voted for bubbles on day 3:

ok - so here's the thing with me personally about tiny bubbles.

she got a vote from llama day one that she never really addressed except to say "OMG obviously I was joking! Silly llama." (I'm of course paraphrasing) - then got 3 more votes day 2 for kinda dropping out.

Comes back day 3 and jumps into omg I can't vote golden 2 days in a row, I'll vote the person he says I should because he said I should even though I voted him the day before. Never once in her posts today does she acknowledge that she got 3 votes yesterday or why she got them. If I got 3 votes, I'd be looking at why. That's just me.

My point - rox - is not that I'm jumping on this one thing she said - it's that she's new to me and I have no idea how to read her. I've asked for more of her thinking, and voted her to try to get her to give me more of her thinking and she's ignored that despite the fact that I was one of the 3 people that voted her. That causes me to think that she's playing he "If I don't acknowledge votes, they'll go away" blend in stratigy. I don't know if it's true or not, but I can't know if it's not addressed. Ya dig?

And day 4:

Went with bubbles. This thread blew the eff up. Work crazy almost missed the vote. Omg I need dinner!!

Here she agrees with timmer on his thoughts about why unfurl was chosen.

Frankly Doc, I think aapje is correct. A baddie had a chance to switch a lynch. Why wouldn't he? It sows chaos and confusion. It's entirely likely that neither unfurl or Bubbles have any relevance to that player and they were chosen just 'coz.

I am more piqued by those who seem to think they understand the motivations behind the switch, because it could suggest background knowledge.

I agree with this.

Missed the day 5 vote.

I am so sorry. The power to my store came up literally 30 minutes before poll closing time. I am the boss of that store I HAD to direct my crew to what needed to get gone tonight so we can be open tomorrow. I had to deal with trying to figure out when we are geting our cold food delivery and make plans for it not being there first thing in the am to be open for business. Those needs HAD to take precitdent to the game. I am SO SO SO SORRY.

LINKIE - omfg!!! I was right about tinybubbles111???!!!

I’m 50/50 on bea here, nothing really shouts out that she is a baddie to me but I thought I'd post this anyway in case something jumps out to anyone else. She gets a +1 from me for having voted for bubbles on day 3 but missing the vote day 5, regardless of the reason, makes me feel a little icky about her. Between her and timmer I feel a little bit stronger about timmer.

On to jjj now…..

[DrWilgy]

Explanations of me being busy wasn't in green...

Then it must have been in a color I'm apparently completely blind to because I've even just gone back through your posts and other than committing crimes against humanity on your own family members (and then tutoring them) I genuinely haven't seen anything. Sorry

I was drunk for half of that... I did want to pressure Sorsha though, I felt inclined to after her post on framing. My fear for Unfurl being bad was triggered by something she had said, not her vote.

I have had three cans of Scrumpy (because I'm classy) in the course of my read-throughs this evening. I'm not begging anyone to vote you The Sorsha/Unfurl thing is kinda minimal regardless.

Read my responses to Scotty.

In regards to me voting SVS, there's smores than that. I've repeated myself too many times to care and or go through it anymore. Nothing SVS has said has convinced me that she isn't bad like I first thought, so I see no need to change my thoughts here. Do look over what I've had to say though.

I miss JJJ, and his wonderful ISO's.

I have read your responses to Scotty. They didn't convince me.

These bits in particular were very unconvincing:

Because lynching someone I believe to be neutral or civ is wrong. If I see and believe that we are about to kill a neutral or civ, I will defend them. Similarly, so everyone knows i'm not talking out of my ass, I stated that I would use my vote to save Golden (which ended up failing). The difference between day 4 and day 5? Unfurl's death. I explained it many times, but I still think, Unfurl's death was meant to frame Bubbles. It didn't sit right with me, it also didn't sit right with me how no one would defend Bubbles, so I thought there had to be something wrong.

I also said I'd have tried to save Golden. We're not alone in that. Not a unique train of thought by any means. You posted this night 5, so Bubbles was already dead. How can you say you still think Unfurl's death was a frame? It goes back to my recruitment theory, I still believe TinyBubbles was recruited after Unfurl's death, be it accident or not. It was an easy way to keep the lynch on TinyBubbles while she wasn't on the team of Ubzolygon. Also you weren't alone defending Bubbles, you were just one of the least subtle.

I don't think I can express the fact that I thought she was neutral any harder. Why would I allow a neutral die, over someone I thought to be a baddie?

There's thinking one case is not as good as another and then there's going to great effort to defend another player. One looks more suspicious than the other, especially when it turns out you've defended a baddie.Yes, because I was tired of framing. I also expressed this earlier. I looked at the play, and I saw a pattern. With what we had, TinyBubbles seemed like an easy set up for a frame.

[birdwithteeth11]

Ok, I don't know why no one is talking about this, but I will. Llama, the Bubbles lynch flip makes you look incredibly bad. You came out of the gate on Bubbles for something ridiculous. And yet when it came down to her lynch you didn't vote for her. Not only did you not vote for her but you made two separate posts talking about how Uzbarg would have no reason not to use his power, one time saying that we learn zero information from the switch. The last time you said anything negative about Bubbles was in Night 4 and all it said was everything bubbles said read insincere to you. That is it. So you go from being after her hard at the start and then you barely say anything about her lynch? Then after her flip you come out yelling about how you knew it and you were right, etc. taking credit for a lynch you played absolutely no part in at all. Your only explanation about why you didn't vote for her was to say you didn't think your vote would matter so you put your vote somewhere else. And if that was why you were doing it, why wouldn't you say that in your vote. Why wouldn't you express your approval of the lynch train that was forming? Instead you tried to convince people who were waffling to vote for DH instead. I think you are Uz and you recruited Bubbles. I think today's dog and pony show about looking for Bubbles teammates is your way to hopefully direct attention anywhere but you.

I find the bolded points here most interesting. I shall consider this.

[Bullzeye]

It goes back to my recruitment theory, I still believe TinyBubbles was recruited after Unfurl's death, be it accident or not. It was an easy way to keep the lynch on TinyBubbles while she wasn't on the team of Ubzolygon.

That'd be one hell of a coincidence. Stranger things have probably happened but that'd be right up there.

Yes, because I was tired of framing. I also expressed this earlier. I looked at the play, and I saw a pattern. With what we had, TinyBubbles seemed like an easy set up for a frame.

Sorry but this just doesn't ring true with me.

[Synonym]

@ Synonym~ No not really. I am an observer. I watch for things that get my interest, and once something has, I can be fairly dogged about pursuing them. But I don't view myself as an antagonist, no.

@Wilgy, some hosts post small taretings like silencing, i don;t thise LC & BR do, though.

Thank you. I've been reading you this game and the majority of posts I've seen have been defensive on your behalf.

Not necessarily defending against suspicion but the majority of them have been referring to yourself, either to explain actions or to clarify why others are targeting you.

I don't know you well enough as a player to get a meta read from that, but from past experience posting styles like that are usually guilty.

[DharmaHelper]

Every game I practically hand you people the baddies and you ignore me. Not cool. Lynch SVS and these other scrubs can come afterwards.

[DrWilgy]

It goes back to my recruitment theory, I still believe TinyBubbles was recruited after Unfurl's death, be it accident or not. It was an easy way to keep the lynch on TinyBubbles while she wasn't on the team of Ubzolygon.

That'd be one hell of a coincidence. Stranger things have probably happened but that'd be right up there.

Yes, because I was tired of framing. I also expressed this earlier. I looked at the play, and I saw a pattern. With what we had, TinyBubbles seemed like an easy set up for a frame.

Sorry but this just doesn't ring true with me.

[S~V~S]

@ Synonym~ No not really. I am an observer. I watch for things that get my interest, and once something has, I can be fairly dogged about pursuing them. But I don't view myself as an antagonist, no.

@Wilgy, some hosts post small taretings like silencing, i don;t thise LC & BR do, though.

Thank you. I've been reading you this game and the majority of posts I've seen have been defensive on your behalf.

Not necessarily defending against suspicion but the majority of them have been referring to yourself, either to explain actions or to clarify why others are targeting you.

I don't know you well enough as a player to get a meta read from that, but from past experience posting styles like that are usually guilty.

I get defensive when i am needing to defend myself but that has not been the case most of this game.

Can you give me some examples of what you mean, especially since you seem to be charcterizing my whole game like this? i have really only needed to defend much since DH & Wilgy decided I killed Unfurl. I felt the need to explain my thoughts on Golden, but, for me, this has been a pretty non defensive game. In the past I have let people who know how to push my buttons push them, and I am trying to avoid that.

Am I think only person you have gotten a similar read like that on? Or just me?

[Sorsha]

Day 4 he votes for bubbles, switches to boomslang but ultimately ends up switching it back to bubbles.

I am not feeling the bubbles lynch, she is usually a low posting player, I haven't played with her that much but I don't see the inconsistency that others are claiming. That's why I went with DH instead.

I'm not super comfortable lynching Bubbles either, but you don't think she was inconsistent in her dealings with Golden?

Yep, I can see how she went back and forth. However, it looks more to me like someone who felt indecisive about it, first one way then another. If she were bad she would do either one or the other I would ink. To me she reads like normal Bubbles, what little I know anyway. you looked at Sorsha's posts and said you didn't have trouble seeing a neutral/civ mind set in it, try looking at Bubbles with the same detachment and tell me if you don't find the same with her posts?

Yeah it's not impossible. And the point you make that I highlighted might be quite valid. Bubbles is a difficult read because I think "normal Bubbles" is something that wouldn't be hard to do as "bad Bubbles". Her style is pretty malleable, and I don't want to give her a pass for suspicious content just because of who she is.

But I am not confident about her lynch. I've moved my vote to Boomslang. I'd probably move it back if necessary to prevent a Sorsha lynch, who I view as more genuine than Bubbles.

This could be exactly what the bts conversation boiled down to:

Or the lynch was switched to make us lynch Bubbles again

If that's the case, why not just let her be lynched the first time?? I'm with SD on this one.

Because if you have a lynch switch power, why not use it?

I guess.

I think it's clear cut honestly -- that lynch switch gets used regardless of Bubbles' alignment. If she's bad, it delays her death. If she's not on the team responsible for the switch, then it ensures someone else dies instead AND Bubbles remains a highly likely lynch after that. Two for the price of one.

Here he could be seen as trying to turn the lynch from bubbles but with 11 votes it’s unlikely. It also seems like he thinks the bubbles lynch is inevitable so :meh:

There's still time to do something else with this lynch. Even if we still do lynch Bubbles, the total landslide in the tally is the coziest possible position any baddie could ever want. Holding anyone among the current 11 voters accountable for any potential undesirable flip is going to be difficult by default simply because there are so many.

Day 5 vote for TH:

Vote registered for Turnip Head

I'm underwhelmed by his being glued to Roxy's suspicion of me. I also think some of the criticism often directed toward DH could also be directed at TH. He is less blatant and transparent about his approach, but the content doesn't seem that much more productive. I'll do an ISO to gauge this vote against thread data.

Not particularly feeling very suspicious of jjj… a few of the comments seem off. I’m also unfamiliar with him as a player.

I'm not sure who to vote for. I'm thinking between bea and timmer right now, jjj a third option, but those are only of my own suspicions on the bubbles lynch and team uzi. I'll hold off my vote for now but I have to run, time for work...

[Synonym]

Spoiler: show

So after days of saying I was sincere, now I am being intentionally false?

I probably would have bought the frame theory if you had not made that one post after Epi died. I believed then, and still believe now, with all my heart, that a baddie made that post.

Linki, I will cross that bridge when I come to it. But I don't think I will ever come to it. I doubt you will be lynched, you talked your way out of it. Then tomorrow I will be NKed probably, and it will be another attempt to frame poor Golden. And if you are lynched, I dont think you will come up good.

I skimmed it for my name

You are confusing me with someone else. I did not semantically nitpick him. I am talking about his meta and his tone as well as my assessment of the kill itself. And "some" (you?) may think he has defended beyond what is necessary, but I do not say that since I think he is the one who killed Epignosis, as in Azuma or her teammate. Believe me, I have been where Golden is, and I have happily killed Epignosis night one in past games when he was on my back figuring I could WIFOM my way out of it becasue being on the receiving end of his schtick can be hurtful & maddening. When you are somewhat intellectually vain (as many of us who play this game are), Epis tone can be infuriating. He is condescending and pretty much calls people fools and their defenses against his "arguments" ridiculous. It may be fun to watch when it isn't *you* but not so much when it is. Golden is someone who does not suffer being called a fool well.

Plus I do not think the baddies would have accommodated him so easily. Baddies love nothing more than a huge one on one civ fight. It keeps everyones attention off of them and talking about the arguing parties. Why the hell would they kill Epignosis? To frame Golden? I considered that as well, but with Epi alive and focused on Golden, why waste their kill? The end result would be Golden dead and Epi marginalized. The only way it makes sense for me is if Golden was on the team that killed Epi.

This is how I play; I watch & I listen until something catches my eye, and then I settle in to dig the Holland Tunnel.

When Golden is not bad, he is like a Knight in shining armor. He is good and brave and true; he does what is right even if it is not necessarily what is in his best interests. This is why i have said "pod person" more than once. I don't know who this is right now wearing that Golden suit, tbh. I firmly believe that if Golden were a neutral, he would be playing for the civs. And I don't see that at all.

OK. I guess the way you read to me is as a thread steerer, someone who tries to push the thread in the direction he wants it to go. That takes a strong person, and you appear to be such a person. But steerers make me very very nervous, especially in a game like this with switching affiliation. I am a radical, a protester. I like to push against people who it feels like may be pushing me. Steerers can turn into stiflers, and ask Llama how I feel about stiflers :P

So take me with a grain of salt. But expect me to push back. I like to challenge authority

Linki @ Llama, I am sorry if I was too broad, every host is different.

Golden made his doomed comment fairly immediately, so there was no window for players to feel "sorry about Golden being hounded by Epig". His comment split the players right away into those finding him nonchalant and bad and those finding him genuine and possibly framed.

So when was Golden a lynch target for killing Epignosis (or the WIFOM around it)? As I've said, only you converted your suspicion into that late on D3 and I think rey did it as well at one point (without having brought it up before at all). I'd have to double-check about others, don't recall.

Am I misunderstanding something? Did you mean DH implied people (easily) suspected and lynched Golden for killing Epig? Because I don't see where he implied that.

No, lol. How are you reading it this way? I am sorry I am not being clear. During the day before Epi died, I was sorry for Golden; I would imagine anone on the receiving end of Epis assuredness was.

I was asking why anyone would think it was an easy lynch, the "for killing Epignosis" part was rhetorical. Like how would someone people felt sorry for be an easy lynch?

@DH, um, I am not being combative? I am defending myself here.[/quote]

There are over 24 hours between this post and Epis death, and Goldens subsequent remark. 24 hours in which I continued to not think Golden was bad.

And I get that way at pretty much any accusation, DH, as you well know. I recall games where you intentionally tried to upset me. And I have been using caps all game for emphasis.You just know how to upset me, just look at when we first started playing D & D.

You're stretching here.

This is my point; it is day 6, you have over 100 posts and I bet no one can come up with any opinion you have held. That is the definition of "blendy".

Rest in peace all ye deadies. Bloody night.

Caelia's message could be one of those "Some of these are true and some are false" sorta deals.

It doesn't say she gets info. Its her opinion because I know that at least one name in there is not bad. At least we now know DH isn't Caelia since he would have only put my name in there

And Bullz, no not lots of strong opinions. But not even one?

In a game that coincides with the deadline of the biggest and most important piece of work I've ever done? My activity quickly slowed down because I was working hard. I do feel like I made a decent contribution to the Bass discussion, and if day three hadn't locked the thread while I was catching up I'd have been more involved then but since around that time I've had to focus on more important things. Busy = not enough time to read in much depth, especially with lynches ending at 4/5am so I sleep through hours of important discussion. As it happens, I've got today completely free and intend to do some reading here. But I'm still not seeing your point.

Also you mention my post count and positioning overall, but what's so special about it? Seven posts below TH's post count and 8 above both Bea and LA. Why are they not scrutinised in the same manner?

Because I can remember things that they have said. I can't remember much of anything you've said without reading, and I have been watching you, lol. You know you caught my eye day one, and I would have pursued it further sooner, but I got distracted by Golden via Epis death

If SVS were good, I would be dead right now. Her team didn't NK me because it would have led right back to her.

If I am wrong then you can go ahead and lynch me right after.

You seem to be saying I am on Team Uzburger. Azura killed last night. Make up your mind.

Also @ Wilgy, I did not kill Unfurl, and I would not have killed Unfurl. She raises the level of every thread she is in, and God knows we need that sometimes. Even if I were bad, which I am not, i would have hoped to recruit her rather than kill her.

Linki, I am not misrepresenting you, DH. This was a good point really, and if it makes you happy I will change it from "DH" to "those who suspect me" and insisting to "possibly". I still think it's a good point and it stands.

This is just a random sample I took from your posts this game. The majority of these posts occurred post night 2. This is one of the contributing factors for me believing you to be guilty.

It is entirely possible that the correlation between these two events (the end of a recruitment night phase and the start of your overwhelming self-centric posts) but I still think it's worth investigating.

[Synonym]

So after days of saying I was sincere, now I am being intentionally false?

I probably would have bought the frame theory if you had not made that one post after Epi died. I believed then, and still believe now, with all my heart, that a baddie made that post.

Linki, I will cross that bridge when I come to it. But I don't think I will ever come to it. I doubt you will be lynched, you talked your way out of it. Then tomorrow I will be NKed probably, and it will be another attempt to frame poor Golden. And if you are lynched, I dont think you will come up good.

I skimmed it for my name

You are confusing me with someone else. I did not semantically nitpick him. I am talking about his meta and his tone as well as my assessment of the kill itself. And "some" (you?) may think he has defended beyond what is necessary, but I do not say that since I think he is the one who killed Epignosis, as in Azuma or her teammate. Believe me, I have been where Golden is, and I have happily killed Epignosis night one in past games when he was on my back figuring I could WIFOM my way out of it becasue being on the receiving end of his schtick can be hurtful & maddening. When you are somewhat intellectually vain (as many of us who play this game are), Epis tone can be infuriating. He is condescending and pretty much calls people fools and their defenses against his "arguments" ridiculous. It may be fun to watch when it isn't *you* but not so much when it is. Golden is someone who does not suffer being called a fool well.

Plus I do not think the baddies would have accommodated him so easily. Baddies love nothing more than a huge one on one civ fight. It keeps everyones attention off of them and talking about the arguing parties. Why the hell would they kill Epignosis? To frame Golden? I considered that as well, but with Epi alive and focused on Golden, why waste their kill? The end result would be Golden dead and Epi marginalized. The only way it makes sense for me is if Golden was on the team that killed Epi.

This is how I play; I watch & I listen until something catches my eye, and then I settle in to dig the Holland Tunnel.

When Golden is not bad, he is like a Knight in shining armor. He is good and brave and true; he does what is right even if it is not necessarily what is in his best interests. This is why i have said "pod person" more than once. I don't know who this is right now wearing that Golden suit, tbh. I firmly believe that if Golden were a neutral, he would be playing for the civs. And I don't see that at all.

OK. I guess the way you read to me is as a thread steerer, someone who tries to push the thread in the direction he wants it to go. That takes a strong person, and you appear to be such a person. But steerers make me very very nervous, especially in a game like this with switching affiliation. I am a radical, a protester. I like to push against people who it feels like may be pushing me. Steerers can turn into stiflers, and ask Llama how I feel about stiflers :P

So take me with a grain of salt. But expect me to push back. I like to challenge authority

Linki @ Llama, I am sorry if I was too broad, every host is different.

Golden made his doomed comment fairly immediately, so there was no window for players to feel "sorry about Golden being hounded by Epig". His comment split the players right away into those finding him nonchalant and bad and those finding him genuine and possibly framed.

So when was Golden a lynch target for killing Epignosis (or the WIFOM around it)? As I've said, only you converted your suspicion into that late on D3 and I think rey did it as well at one point (without having brought it up before at all). I'd have to double-check about others, don't recall.

Am I misunderstanding something? Did you mean DH implied people (easily) suspected and lynched Golden for killing Epig? Because I don't see where he implied that.

No, lol. How are you reading it this way? I am sorry I am not being clear. During the day before Epi died, I was sorry for Golden; I would imagine anone on the receiving end of Epis assuredness was.

I was asking why anyone would think it was an easy lynch, the "for killing Epignosis" part was rhetorical. Like how would someone people felt sorry for be an easy lynch?

@DH, um, I am not being combative? I am defending myself here.

There are over 24 hours between this post and Epis death, and Goldens subsequent remark. 24 hours in which I continued to not think Golden was bad.

And I get that way at pretty much any accusation, DH, as you well know. I recall games where you intentionally tried to upset me. And I have been using caps all game for emphasis.You just know how to upset me, just look at when we first started playing D & D.

You're stretching here.

This is my point; it is day 6, you have over 100 posts and I bet no one can come up with any opinion you have held. That is the definition of "blendy".

Rest in peace all ye deadies. Bloody night.

Caelia's message could be one of those "Some of these are true and some are false" sorta deals.

It doesn't say she gets info. Its her opinion because I know that at least one name in there is not bad. At least we now know DH isn't Caelia since he would have only put my name in there

And Bullz, no not lots of strong opinions. But not even one?

In a game that coincides with the deadline of the biggest and most important piece of work I've ever done? My activity quickly slowed down because I was working hard. I do feel like I made a decent contribution to the Bass discussion, and if day three hadn't locked the thread while I was catching up I'd have been more involved then but since around that time I've had to focus on more important things. Busy = not enough time to read in much depth, especially with lynches ending at 4/5am so I sleep through hours of important discussion. As it happens, I've got today completely free and intend to do some reading here. But I'm still not seeing your point.

Also you mention my post count and positioning overall, but what's so special about it? Seven posts below TH's post count and 8 above both Bea and LA. Why are they not scrutinised in the same manner?

Because I can remember things that they have said. I can't remember much of anything you've said without reading, and I have been watching you, lol. You know you caught my eye day one, and I would have pursued it further sooner, but I got distracted by Golden via Epis death

If SVS were good, I would be dead right now. Her team didn't NK me because it would have led right back to her.

If I am wrong then you can go ahead and lynch me right after.

You seem to be saying I am on Team Uzburger. Azura killed last night. Make up your mind.

Also @ Wilgy, I did not kill Unfurl, and I would not have killed Unfurl. She raises the level of every thread she is in, and God knows we need that sometimes. Even if I were bad, which I am not, i would have hoped to recruit her rather than kill her.

Linki, I am not misrepresenting you, DH. This was a good point really, and if it makes you happy I will change it from "DH" to "those who suspect me" and insisting to "possibly". I still think it's a good point and it stands.

This is just a random sample I took from your posts this game. The majority of these posts occurred post night 2. This is one of the contributing factors for me believing you to be guilty.

It is entirely possible that the correlation between these two events (the end of a recruitment night phase and the start of your overwhelming self-centric posts) but I still think it's worth investigating.[/quote]

Forgot my train of thought halfway through that sentence. Should read: It is entirely possible that the correlation between these two events (the end of a recruitment night phase and the start of your overwhelming self-centric posts) ***is unfounded*** but I still think it's worth investigating.

[DharmaHelper]

It happened again.

[S~V~S]

You aren't including any of the posts I am replying to.

[Scotty]

You are right scotty - I should not be surprised where you are concerned. You have already proclaimed JJJ not worth looking at.

What the hell are you talking about? Now I just know you're making shit up for the sake of stirring the pot.

Show me. Anywhere in my post history me proclaiming anything close to defending him.

Because I don't like being accused of random shit and it going unchecked.

[Scotty]

Hey Sorsha, what do you think of DrWilgy right now? I mean, you guys did have a spat that ended very abruptly if I recall in Day 4.

[S~V~S]

Like this one, Synonym, that you quoted in your first post:

So after days of saying I was sincere, now I am being intentionally false?

I probably would have bought the frame theory if you had not made that one post after Epi died. I believed then, and still believe now, with all my heart, that a baddie made that post.

Linki, I will cross that bridge when I come to it. But I don't think I will ever come to it. I doubt you will be lynched, you talked your way out of it. Then tomorrow I will be NKed probably, and it will be another attempt to frame poor Golden. And if you are lynched, I dont think you will come up good.

I was replying to these two posts:

He is trying to imply persecution of him when, hello, its a Mafia game. Discussion of and defending against suspicions is how the game is played.

And I will say this is the thing you've said which I find most difficult to see eye to eye with you on.

When I defend against cases made against me that I do not think stack up, and I defend against them day after day (literally a week at this point?) but those who allege those things choose to ignore every word I say and stand stubbornly against me, apparently I am 'implying persecution'.

I think there has been PLENTY of discussion of and defending against suspicions against me. That is me playing mafia, right?

But I also think there has been plenty of discussion AT me, continually, post after post, the number of times you have posted just to say the same thing again and again - that you have no interest in doing anything other than voting for me without any further thought - it actually does surprise me.

SVS, I want to know what your reaction will be in this game, in the event you get me lynched. I am not going to flip bad. When I do not flip bad, what will your reaction be?

Now Golden's saying any argument that arrives at a conclusion that he could be bad is illogical and fallacious. [/u][/b]

I have never said or implied that. In fact, I have acknowledged that some of them are not.

I think yours is fallacious, because I have provided you with a whole lot to go on here but you have closed your mind to even listening to it.
I think reys is... whats the word when you take advantage of a situation that arises? I can't think of it right now. My brain says fortuitous, but thats wrong.
I think DH's is playing intentionally aloof, and that its insincere. Its hard to call it illogical or fallacious because it isn't based on a case against me, he just seems to be 'scared of me'.
I think epi's was deliberately obtuse.

BUT: I think boomslang, Dom, Lorab, and timmer have all expressed suspicion of me that I think is entirely genuine (despite the fact I think boomslang might be bad). I think BWT's suspicion on me was genuine. I don't think any of these people have demonstrated that their view of me is illogical or fallacious. I'm not a fan of Lorab saying that I'm a distraction and anti-civ despite being neutral, but I understand it.

Btw, as you might have noticed from being the super-expert on my civilian game - often the place where my spidey sense is the MOST well attuned is in figuring out whether those who go after me are being genuine or not.

IIRC, all of those posts you pulled I was replying to someone else who was questioning me. That's why I was talking about myself.

You appeared to have read somewhat out of context. Context ftw

[DharmaHelper]

Deez Nutz 2016

[Bullzeye]

So part 3 of my big read, and we hit the top three living posters. Gonna kick things off with a look at the low poster of the group.

DharmaHelper

Contributions were pretty good early on. Big proponent of Golden's lynch. Seemed like he was after Scotty for a while then that sort of just dropped away. Now he has a bee in his bonnet over SVS. I noticed that before his big case reveal he refers to having an eye on "someone in the background", which seems an unusual descriptor for SVS, currently the 5th highest poster in the game. That whole post just feels funny to me, call it a vibe. His case is fair enough, but it did come up during day 5 - I don't think it's likely to have been intended as a Bubbles distraction though as he's still very much into it today. A few minor pings but otherwise no major opinion either way - 3/10.

MetalMarsh

MM was super involved in the beginning of the game. I quite like the way he put together his vote decision on day 1. He has become more quiet recently, the first four of his seven pages of posts take us as far as night 2. I can relate though. I don't think he's a likely choice for a recruit unless he was someone's first pick. Other than a few very minor things I've not had any pings from him - 2/10

JJJay

Good Lorb, how can one person have so many posts? Like a tenth of this thread is JJJ and he hasn't even posted all day today. I said a while back he'd probably be the best pick for a recruit and I stand by that. I'd be amazed if someone hasn't at least tried to recruit him by now. Civ or bad, I haven't decided but I'm not out of day zero yet in his posts! I felt he was genuine in his questioning of Bass, and felt he had raised a good argument in that particular instance. Clearly he hadn't, but we were both wrong and I won't fault him for that. His points on Boom were decent at the time but my agreement with them has fallen away over the ages. I don't currently see anything to make me think he's bad - 2/10.

Well this last part feels like it was a bit of a waste of time :P Regardless I hope that satisfies SVS' desire to see me have some opinions. Will probably get to everyone else tomorrow, I feel good about where my vote is.

[DharmaHelper]

So part 3 of my big read, and we hit the top three living posters. Gonna kick things off with a look at the low poster of the group.

DharmaHelper

Contributions were pretty good early on. Big proponent of Golden's lynch. Seemed like he was after Scotty for a while then that sort of just dropped away. Now he has a bee in his bonnet over SVS. I noticed that before his big case reveal he refers to having an eye on "someone in the background", which seems an unusual descriptor for SVS, currently the 5th highest poster in the game. That whole post just feels funny to me, call it a vibe. His case is fair enough, but it did come up during day 5 - I don't think it's likely to have been intended as a Bubbles distraction though as he's still very much into it today. A few minor pings but otherwise no major opinion either way - 3/10.

MetalMarsh

MM was super involved in the beginning of the game. I quite like the way he put together his vote decision on day 1. He has become more quiet recently, the first four of his seven pages of posts take us as far as night 2. I can relate though. I don't think he's a likely choice for a recruit unless he was someone's first pick. Other than a few very minor things I've not had any pings from him - 2/10

JJJay

Good Lorb, how can one person have so many posts? Like a tenth of this thread is JJJ and he hasn't even posted all day today. I said a while back he'd probably be the best pick for a recruit and I stand by that. I'd be amazed if someone hasn't at least tried to recruit him by now. Civ or bad, I haven't decided but I'm not out of day zero yet in his posts! I felt he was genuine in his questioning of Bass, and felt he had raised a good argument in that particular instance. Clearly he hadn't, but we were both wrong and I won't fault him for that. His points on Boom were decent at the time but my agreement with them has fallen away over the ages. I don't currently see anything to make me think he's bad - 2/10.

Well this last part feels like it was a bit of a waste of time :P Regardless I hope that satisfies SVS' desire to see me have some opinions. Will probably get to everyone else tomorrow, I feel good about where my vote is.

I have been in the background keeping an eye on someone, not that the someone I have been keeping my eye on has been in the background. Hooked on Phonics bruh

[Bullzeye]

Mafia is hard. Compiling those three big posts took me nearly 7 hours all told. Granted there were breaks and I've been posting to the thread while typing up the last one. It's nearly 2am now!

Linki DH - Fair enough! That makes more sense.

[Scotty]

So I had to scroll past an entire day's worth of posts where you get huffy and pouty to get to the meat of your argument against SVS:

In Recruitment Mafia's, it always pays to look for changes in tone and shifts in opinion. These are SVS's thoughts regarding Golden Day 1:

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 61#p168261

The part where he said he wanted Epi dead or God help him felt fairly sincere to me, Golden being a lay preacher and all. As I said initially, Goldens original line of questioning to me did not feel that odd,

-------

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 59#p168459

Unless Golden started out on someones short list, or is a recruiter himself, I don't see him applying for baddie positions in the various contests that the host is likely to have, based on prior experience with their games. I also think that, based on odds, he is as unlikley to have started out as a baddie recruiter as anyone else,

So I think that the odds of Golden finishing the game as a civ or a neutral are somewhat higher than for most people.

==================

She spent all of Day 2 hounding Golden for "baiting" the Epi kill, ignoring that 24 hours previous, she made some good points about how unlikely he was to be bad. To me, this reads like SVS sees an easy lynch and is going for it. No skin off her back, if he flips neutral early.

I think SVS is the Ubzergan (sp) recruit from the role picture contest, or Ubzergan herself.

I actually see the legitimacy of your argument. I do. I actually voted SVS early on day 1 for something that seemed off in her tone as well. You're saying that since you've played with her a lot, her tell is to get combative. I also get that. SVS seems like a smooth operator when she's bad or good, and I personally haven't seen the switch yet, but I see how it could be a thing-- plus you know her better than me I guess.

I still want to lynch DrWilgy today, however.

There seems to be a few factions of thought out there- DrWilgy seems to be the consensus vote by a margin, followed by llama and SVS. SD made a good point about llama, but the reason I am not voting for him at this time is twofold:
a) I believe more strongly in my linking of both Wilgy (and possibly Sorsha if he were to flip bad)
b) his absence from the TinyBubbles vote seems blatantly obvious if he were bad, and I'd want to give llama more credit
c) The lynch pairings of Uzlongitude's positions to llama's actions in defending Tiny don't really line up imo if he were Uz. He could still be a recruit, but I don't want to believe he is the big bad wolf.

I'm keeping my vote on Wilgy, since I'm still not satisfied with his responses. Like this one:

So, go ahead and inquiry away my friend! I don't appreciate inquiry on things I've stated previous It never made sense for TB to kill Unfurl. That was the premise of my argument. Killing of Unfurl happened between these two posts. Being OK with the TinyBubbles lynch was indifference. I had no strong reads on her, positive or negative.

[Scotty]

Well this last part feels like it was a bit of a waste of time :P Regardless I hope that satisfies SVS' desire to see me have some opinions. Will probably get to everyone else tomorrow, I feel good about where my vote is.

Thanks for sharing Bullzeye. I'll be sure to reference your thoughts when looking at people.
The worst part is getting through it all, reaching for your empty water glass and realizing that you haven't had water for the entirety of the time you sat down to type, and you've probably blinked twice.

[DharmaHelper]

Actually the core of my argument is I'm much smarter than you all and better at the game.

[S~V~S]

Linki @ Synonym, again, out of context. If you go read them in context, not just in iso, they are part of a conversation. My part of the conversation. If you take Goldens posts from the same conversation, he is mostly talking about himself, too.

[Epignosis]

Mod note: I removed the offending spoiler tags from Synonym's post, but I did not edit any other tags or content. It is advisable to preview your posts before posting.

[Sorsha]

Hey Sorsha, what do you think of DrWilgy right now? I mean, you guys did have a spat that ended very abruptly if I recall in Day 4.

He did seem to have a shift a few days ago in his play style. Like he suddenly became more serious about it. Not really seeing him as bad yet though.

Have you played mafia with him before on other forums?

[Draconus]

I'm sorry guys. I'm bowing out of this day with a self vote. My reason is I haven't been around for any of the day's discussion because work has been so crazy this week aND I juse need to relax tonight. But I hope to be in it as much as time allows tomorrow and on. And this isn't in OT green because it's explaining my vote

[timmer]

Ok, one of the players to vote for bubbles on day 4 when it didn't matter and then NOT vote for her on day 5 when it did matter is Timmer.
(Voted Golden day 3)

Now you think bubbles wasn’t on team Uzi? And that last line in this last post can pretty much apply to yourself. You are all over the place in regards to the bubbles lynch switch and the team uzi itself. These posts are literally only minutes apart.

@Sorsha, you make good points, actually. In regards to Bubbles, the reason you see a dichotomy is that I was combining my main thrust in the game (vote for people who seem disingenuous) with commentary on the game from the pov of those who are playing more traditionally. So basically, I was looking at it from two ways simultaneously.

In regards to this lynch, I'm curious to see how Wilgy shakes out if he gets lynched. I've kind of given him a pass because he fits my group of people who seem to be playing in a genuine way. I'd also like to point out that while I am also giving SVS a pass for the same reason, DH's continued insistence about her makes me wonder if perhaps an SVS lynch would be an informative move. If she flipped unrecruited, I would declare that DH is a baddie. If, however, she flipped baddie, it would bolster DH's credentials. It would potentially bust the game open.

So I'm happy either way, is my point.

[S~V~S]

Why?

[timmer]

Why?

Why which? The part about not minding your lynch?

Frankly, I don't want to see either you or Wilgy go, but it seems a bit likely that one of you will, so I'm looking at the situation from the assumption that one of you is toast. A Wilgy lynch wouldn't tell us as much about the players still living after his death as an SVS lynch would, is all. I don't want you guys to die. I think a TH lynch makes more sense; SD's points are quite salient IMO.

But if it's going to be one of you or Wilgy, at least if you go, we can figure out DH. That's all I'm saying, you must see the logic in it. For the record, I'm not suggesting people swing their vote to you, i don't actually wish to see you leave this game, really. I'm just saying that I'm okay with how the lynch seems to be playing out.

[S~V~S]

I meant why do you think DH is worth listening to. (And DH, this is not a dig; quite the opposite, actually). And you played Gotham; DH & I went hard at each other and both were civs. If I turn up not bad, how will that help you figure out DH?

[birdwithteeth11]

Alright. I'm convinced enough from Daisy's reasoning to put a vote on llama. The whole going hard after Tinybubbles thing and then dropping her completely by not voting for her seems really off to me. Like a teammate who's trying to distance, but still think there's is a chance to save his partner in crime.

I'm also not quite seeing the Wilgy case yet. I just don't think his Day 5 defense of Tinybubbles is indicative of him defending a teammate. I think if it was, he would have started defending her much sooner than he did. I also think she was recruited well before Night 4/Day 5 so take that for what you will.

Sorry I haven't been active this day phase. Working retail on a busy holiday weekend does not allow for much free time. I'm hoping to be a bit more involved come next week. Should have a bit more free time once Monday evening rolls around.