Mafia: A World Reborn Game Thread - Game Over

#1301

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace Zebra
Metalmarsh89 wrote:More officially, Turnip Head, Turnip Head.

It's a placeholder. It's a placeholder.

Why do you need a placeholder vote? So if you conveniently forget to vote, you have a built in excuse if TH gets lynched?

Time to reread Zebra.

#1302

rip zebra, and surprised you're still alive sig
im behind on the thread, but in response to golden's belief about me being bad, wrong~! he of ALL PEOPLE would be able to tell if i was mafia and the fact that he's accusing me as well as nutella makes me believe he's shady and nutella is at least not his teammate and probably not mafia

#1303

Possibly a stupid question but are we able to cast one vote now and add the second later or do both have to be cast at the same time?

Note: I'm not asking if it's allowed, I'm asking if it's possible.

#1304

Votes are changeable, so casting one vote now and another one later should be fine.

#1305

Awesome. In that case: *Voting Sig* now and gonna go look at the group 2 members to decide which one of them I also want to lynch.

#1306

My top three suspects are in Group One -_-

#1307

A necessary alteration has been made to the Win Conditions of the Civvies and both baddie teams. It is no longer required for these teams to kill The Darkness in order to fulfil their Win Conditions.

#1308

Just a reminder: if you enter a square with an Item on it, you gotta tell me you're picking it up, or you don't have it.

#1309

S~V~S wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace Zebra
Metalmarsh89 wrote:More officially, Turnip Head, Turnip Head.

It's a placeholder. It's a placeholder.
Why do you need a placeholder vote? So if you conveniently forget to vote, you have a built in excuse if TH gets lynched?

Time to reread Zebra.

It is my duty to check if votes in polls are changeable. I had no reason to vote Turnip Head twice, other than his name being on the poll twice.

I have no qualm with you.

#1310

Tiny you voted for both me and Golden both are in option one? Why did you votefor me anyway?

#1311

RIPIYWG zebra, I hope you will come back and play with us again.

#1312

I'm keeping one of my votes on TheFloyd73 for now. Floyd, who would you have voted for if you hadn't missed the Day 2 vote? What do you make of BUGLABUSH's and Luke11646's recent posts?

BUGLABUSH wrote:Luke is mafia

Luke11646 wrote:
BUGLABUSH wrote:Luke is mafia
Yeah, I'm mafia and I have BTSC with you.

BUGLABUSH wrote:Haha knew it

#1313

Tranq wrote:I'm keeping one of my votes on TheFloyd73 for now. Floyd, who would you have voted for if you hadn't missed the Day 2 vote? What do you make of BUGLABUSH's and Luke11646's recent posts?

What do you make of literally anyone else in the game? You have 8 posts, and they're all about Floyd, Bugla, and Luke.

#1314

I have a couple of hours to spare, might do a bit of a read-through of the group 2 members to see if I turn anything useful up. My group 1 vote is almost definitely staying where it is, though I do have two other potential suspects in there.

#1315

Canucklehead wrote:Sorry I missed the vote. Probably would have voted for Mac.
Not particularly caught up thus far....still in the too much going on phase of the game, so nothing for me to really sink my teeth into yet. But I did find the back-and-forth with Epi and a2z quite humourous.....

Canuck, I know you are probably quite busy but do you have any reads on any of the other people that have been talked about? A great deal has been said about several people and I'd like to hear your thoughts on whatever has caught your eye even if you haven't been able to sink your teeth in yet.

#1316

Turnip Head wrote:
Tranq wrote:I'm keeping one of my votes on TheFloyd73 for now. Floyd, who would you have voted for if you hadn't missed the Day 2 vote? What do you make of BUGLABUSH's and Luke11646's recent posts?
What do you make of literally anyone else in the game? You have 8 posts, and they're all about Floyd, Bugla, and Luke.

Lies. My first 4 posts are about rocks and lizards and falling asleep

As for my Group 1 vote, i like Golden's lie detector theory on nutella and TinyBubbles so that might be something worth looking into.

#1317

Bullzeye wrote:Awesome. In that case: *Voting Sig* now and gonna go look at the group 2 members to decide which one of them I also want to lynch.

Are you really just going to tunnel down this road?

If so, then I'm really just going to tunnel down the road of trying to prevent sigs lynch, again.

#1318

Golden wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:Awesome. In that case: *Voting Sig* now and gonna go look at the group 2 members to decide which one of them I also want to lynch.
Are you really just going to tunnel down this road?

If so, then I'm really just going to tunnel down the road of trying to prevent sigs lynch, again.

Tell me why I shouldn't.

#1319

Bullzeye wrote:
Golden wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:Awesome. In that case: *Voting Sig* now and gonna go look at the group 2 members to decide which one of them I also want to lynch.
Are you really just going to tunnel down this road?

If so, then I'm really just going to tunnel down the road of trying to prevent sigs lynch, again.
Tell me why I shouldn't.

Because you are incorrect, even though I believe you are sincere.

#1320

S~V~S wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace Zebra
Metalmarsh89 wrote:More officially, Turnip Head, Turnip Head.

It's a placeholder. It's a placeholder.
Why do you need a placeholder vote? So if you conveniently forget to vote, you have a built in excuse if TH gets lynched?

Time to reread Zebra.

I use placeholders all the time, since I'm often unable to make it back before the end of lynches. I don't see anything shady about that.

In fact, I'm going to vote for Bubbles and Sig right now as placeholders. I think Golden raised some good points on Bubbles, and I don't feel that Sig has done much of anything to acquit himself.

EBWOP: Sorry if I missed it, Golden, but what makes you so sure about Sig? If it's just the bandwagon, that happens all the time in Mafia, and it's not necessarily an indicator of the targeted player's alignment.

#1321

Golden wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:
Golden wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:Awesome. In that case: *Voting Sig* now and gonna go look at the group 2 members to decide which one of them I also want to lynch.
Are you really just going to tunnel down this road?

If so, then I'm really just going to tunnel down the road of trying to prevent sigs lynch, again.
Tell me why I shouldn't.
Because you are incorrect, even though I believe you are sincere.

But that isn't a real explanation. I've already pointed out the flaws in your argument against Sig's lynch and to be honest, your claim to be the only one defending him (when probably a third of HB's posts are doing the same) makes me wonder about your intentions.

#1322

@DF - it is all of the factors of the game coming together. If sig is bad I'll eat my hat. He is such an easy person to railroad, and he is being continually railroaded in this game.

I will admit I was surprised by his survival on day two and it briefly threw me for a loop, but I still think he is good.

I can't force people not to lynch him, all I can do is give my opinion.

#1323

Golden, please explain to me in your own words the main points in the case against Sig. I genuinely believe you don't either properly understand it or have deliberately misrepresented it in the past.

#1324

Bullzeye wrote:Golden, please explain to me in your own words the main points in the case against Sig. I genuinely believe you don't either properly understand it or have deliberately misrepresented it in the past.

The main points in the case against sig are:

Incorrect, no matter how good they may look to you or anyone else.

Thats it, in my own words.

#1325

Golden wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:Golden, please explain to me in your own words the main points in the case against Sig. I genuinely believe you don't either properly understand it or have deliberately misrepresented it in the past.
The main points in the case against sig are:

Incorrect, no matter how good they may look to you or anyone else.

Thats it, in my own words.

Lol

#1326

Well, I mean, I'm not going to rehash the entire case. If Bullz really believes I am doing it for my own reasons, I think it's very hard to convince him otherwise.

But there is a lot going on in this game, and all sorts of ways for people to get insight and connect dots. Could I be wrong about sig? Yes, I could. But I don't think I am. I think people chased sig down a rabbit hole and I don't think any of the stuff he was saying was that indicative of him being bad. I think he has been an easy vote all game as people just keep pushing and pushing and never letting up on him. I think people are so stuck in their tunnel that they are ignoring what normal civ sig looks like... DF, bullz and zebra was too, people who just won't let up. From that perspective, maybe in one sense it's better to lynch sig and just get the distraction out of the way.

But whatever happens today, I won't be voting to lynch sig.

#1327

Golden: If Sig is civ I am going to think you're a baddie going for the civ cred of having defended such a poor innocent bandwagon victim. I think that's why you claimed you were the only person defending him and it's why you won't simply respond to my questioning whether or not you actually understand the case.

#1328

Bullzeye wrote:Golden: If Sig is civ I am going to think you're a baddie going for the civ cred of having defended such a poor innocent bandwagon victim. I think that's why you claimed you were the only person defending him and it's why you won't simply respond to my questioning whether or not you actually understand the case.

Think what you want. There are two baddie teams, so if I'm so ignorant of the case on sig and he is civ then I guess I got lucky he wasn't on the other baddie team, eh?

#1329

Also lucky he wasn't one of the 7 independents, which he is also not.

#1330

But I love the way you have now set me up 'oh, I'll lynch sig anyway. But if he's civ, YOU just be bad for defending him. Not me, for tunneling him so bad and not listening to anyone else who is against it'.

I do not believe sig is on the circle of decay, the team that killed timmer. I do, however, believe that tinybubbles and nutella are.
I think it would be stupidly odd if sig is on the team that killed zebra. I don't think sig would be this dumb.

#1331

It's not a solid theory, I'll grant you. But you could be hoping he's civ, you could even be completely genuine in your belief he's civ and still be defending him to gain credit. If he's independent (and not blatantly civ-unfriendly) then I'll still be sorry to have gone after him because indies aren't baddies and I'm in the business of lynching baddies.

Linki - I don't see why he couldn't be on the team that killed Timmer. In fact that was the basis of my initial ping which he overreacted to. I also don't see why he wouldn't have killed Zebra - arguably she was pursuing him more aggressively than I was. It takes away some of the heat and now there's only one voice arguing for his death and three arguing against it. Perhaps they did want to kill me and I just wasn't in range for any of them to get me. Either way he benefits from her death and nobody wants to get into the WIFOM pit of would he or wouldn't he kill someone who suspected him.

I'm not setting you up and I don't think I'm tunneling. I have a suspicion and I'm sticking with it because I haven't seen any reason not to. You yourself admit I'm sincere. All you've given me in Sig's defense is "don't lynch him because I say so" and misrepresentations of why I suspect him in the first place as well as obviously false statements about being the only person to defend him.

As far as Nutella and Bubbles are concerned, I vaguely suspect Nutella (for possibly outdated reasons so I'll be returning to her later/tomorrow) and haven't got up to Bubbles in my read yet.

#1332

TinyBubbles wrote:rip zebra, and surprised you're still alive sig
im behind on the thread, but in response to golden's belief about me being bad, wrong~! he of ALL PEOPLE would be able to tell if i was mafia and the fact that he's accusing me as well as nutella makes me believe he's shady and nutella is at least not his teammate and probably not mafia

Tiny Bubbles why do you say Golden OF ALL PEOPLE should be able to tell if you're mafia? And why does his accusation of nutella make you believe he's shady?

Golden, I know Bubbles does not come around a lot so I'll also ask you - do you have any idea why she said you of ALL PEOPLE would be able to tell if she's mafia. Maybe I missed this answer as I went through but I looked and couldnt find it.

#1333

Here are a handful of opinions on the various members of group two. I will get around to doing group one as well either later tonight (depending on how long this takes) or tomorrow).

BUGLABUSH

Almost nothing at all to go on. Would like to see more content from him which is actually useful. I know he's new, but I feel like if he were bad he'd be being coached a lot better than this. Bugla, if you do need help understanding the game feel free to ask questions in the thread no matter how stupid you think they might be. None of us are total dicks who will laugh at a newbie trying to get into the game. Your current lack of content makes it difficult to get a read on you and eventually many of us will be forced to assume that's deliberate.

Canucklehead

Fewer posts than Bugla but more content. Interestingly, her day 1 bandwagon vote for Banana (who was already leading the lynch with 2 votes against a random selection of 1s) had possibly the weakest reason to vote for a newbie on day 1:

Canucklehead wrote:
Golden wrote:I'm looking through ISOs to try and find some pings to actually work off and I'm getting a really clear picture.... so many people are not giving much, it's no wonder there is little to go on.

So, I'm going to ask some specific people some specific questions, and I really want these people to answer these questions. It's time to start generating content.

Bubbles, Canuck, dfaraday, Timmer, splints, rey?

Where are you guys? Are you civilian-aligned? Do you have any opinions on people you think are town? Do you have any opinions on who you think are bad?

I'm here on my couch with my dog, about to leave for curling in about 10 minutes. I support the civ cause. I do not. I do not.

I'm voting banana for having an obnoxious username.

This is then her only defense after the lynch:

Canucklehead wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:nutella, explain to me what you mean by "pseudo-random" and then tell me why she shouldn't be my number one suspect. I have played with her before and granted, it's been a while, but I am familiar enough with her meta to understand how lightheartedly she plays, which is why I made clear that if her throwaway vote was on a throwaway candidate, or even herself, I could understand. But Banana, after two votes at that point? Hell no. That is inexcusable.
I don't actually think we've ever played together....
I also can't fathom why in the world you'd think I needed my vote to be "excusable".

Odd post, this.

I can't fathom why in the world she'd think she didn't need to excuse her incredibly flimsy bandwagon vote. This doesn't look good for Canuck, IMO.

Dom

Yay, somebody with content to read! I don't think I agree with Epi that Dom's day 1 posts are full of bet-hedging. I think he went about asking a reasonable set of questions for someone trying to find something to sink his teeth into the way Dom does. Some of his later day 1 posts come off as annoyed, but understandably so IMO. Self-preservation vote on the Bananawagon is forgivable - everyone would've done the same. It also didn't make any difference since he was last to vote and Banana was already 1 ahead, so I don't think it means much at all. I don't think this post makes much sense though:

Dom wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:What are your top, say, three or four scum reads Epi? This question is open to SVS as well. And Floyd. And anyone.
Dom, S~V~S, and nutella.
So anyone who disagrees with you?

TBH, Epig, your suspicion of me boils down to the fact that you like to suspect people and you needed someone to latch onto-- and it hasn't been me for awhile. I'm not bad and you STILL haven't told me if you are or not.

Llama would be rolling in his grave (as should you).

Why would Epi tell you if he was bad? It makes me think of the urban legend that undercover cops have to be honest if asked whether or not they're a cop. It's not a damning point against Epi that he hasn't (at that point) denied being bad.

As far as the stuff between him and Mac goes, I'm not sure exactly how I feel yet. If someone told me one of them was definitely bad I'd lean towards Mac just based on Dom's content. I don't think I've ever seen a baddie Dom but what I'm seeing here isn't wildly different from his attitude in many of the games I've played with him as a civ. Ultimately though, I'm not 100% sold either way. Going with neutral for the time being.

Elohcin

All I can really say about her based on her 8 posts is that her vote for Banana seems pretty well justified. It was because of his actual behaviour (ie his vote) and not his name or out of self-preservation. Need more content before anything more can be said of her, but then that's not too unexpected of a civ Elo.

Fingersplints

Anyone want a good example of why low poster =/= low content? 10 posts here but a decent amount to look at. She's clearly putting in some effort and that alone makes me think well of Splints here. Fairly blendy though, especially with regard to the Sig case which she apparently "sees" despite there being a couple of different perspectives. What do you like/dislike about the case?

This:

fingersplints wrote:I'm not sure "no one is sticking up for him" is the great indicator of civvieness that Golden is making it out to be. Baddies bus each other all the time. Especially early and when a potential slip is involved.

Is a good point but Golden wasn't telling the truth anyway and anyone familiar enough with the Sig case should've known that since one of the major points is HB's constant defenses. She does read a little blendy but also like she's trying to get involved and have her voice heard, if that makes sense. I'm not too sure how to feel about her.

HamburgerBoy

Okay so I should admit I'm coming into this one already biased since I suspect HB is a Sig teammate. These defenses actually started on Day 1, where he criticised my practically-a-throwaway Sig vote and eyed Epi for questioning him. If Sig does flip bad, I'll be voting HB next.

When he talks about things that don't involve the Sig case, he actually comes off fairly genuine. However, I really don't trust him and any analysis of his posts is going to be affected by that, so I will leave him for others to read over and make their own choices. I will say that I do think he's onto something with Golden though. More on that in a later post, but the gist is I also think Golden is potentially bad just not on the same team as Sig and/or HB.

As HB is only a suspect of mine depending on Sig's alignment, I don't think I'll be voting him today.

Luke11646

Slightly more talkative than his fellow new players (not too surprising given one is dead), I will extend the same invitation to Luke that I did to Bugla earlier in this post: If you're struggling, ask people questions. He has been doing that a little and his posts feel reasonable. I'd say Luke looks more civ than Bug does. He comes off as someone who is genuinely alone in the game and trying to find his feet IMO.

reywaS

3 posts. No content, nothing to form an opinion on. I seem to recall LC saying he was getting replaced? Kind of a shame, I like playing with Rey

S~V~S

I always want to trust SVS. I don't understand her day 1 vote though. For someone who dislikes voting newbies on day 1, it seems a fairly weak reason to break this tradition. Not to mention, I'm not seeing how Banana's vote was "opportunistic" in any way given that it was the very first vote of the game. Her vote also broke the three-way tie between Banana, Bugla, and Dom. Could be significant later on if either of the other two turn out to be bad - I could see a baddie SVS voting a newbie and hating having done it just to save her own teammate's neck. This is all completely hypothetical though and I don't currently suspect either of the other two. That's also the only point I really see against SVS here, otherwise she looks relatively clean IMO. Not the best looking in the group, not the worst either.

TheFloyd73

Having seen Floyd's baddie play at work, I don't think I'm seeing that here. It was no lie that he was lost in TH. Here he seems to have a better grasp on things, and looks more confident in his position. I don't think I'm seeing his baddie game here, but I would like to see more content from Floyd in general.

TinyBubbles

I do think it's suspicious that she seems to imply she isn't bad in this game because she has yet to be a baddie in other games. Not saying "I'm not a baddie" is not an inherently suspicious thing - nobody is going to honestly say the opposite so it's a meaningless gesture really. But to say that she's a civ because she always is isn't right at all. I'm 99% sure LC didn't think while assigning the roles that he'd best give Bubbles a civ one as is tradition.

I also find it suspicious that she NO U's Golden saying that he of all people should be able to tell she's not mafia. Why should he? This makes no sense and does not make Bubbles look good.

Turnip Head

He has a fair amount of posts but I don't have an awful lot to say about him. He seems legit enough to me, I don't think he's bad.

Typhoony

Not seeing a lot to make me suspicious of Typh here. His Bugla vote on day 1 feels weird to me even with the explanation but I don't think that means much.

Conclusion

Overall this hasn't really achieved much. Most of the people here are neutral to civ reads for me atm. I think the people who look most suspicious in group 2 are:

HB (mostly for reasons related to my Sig suspicion)
Bubbles (for implying we shouldn't suspect her because she's never been bad before)
Canuck (terrible reasoning for her day 1 vote, refusal to explain)

Splints would be a very distant fourth because she does slightly come across as blendy. I think she's significantly less suspicious than the other three though. Everyone else I'm either neutral or leaning civ. I will vote for Bubbles or Canuck as my group 2 vote since my suspicion of HB depends on my being right about Sig.

2 hours of linki - mostly with myself!

#1334

Going to make a start on Group 1 as well now - Since that last post took 2 hours and 20 minutes at least, I might end up cutting it short and carry on in the morning.

#1335

Nice analysis Bullz. I agree with you on almost everything. I'm currently looking at sig for my group 1 vote and not sure for group two. I did put some questions out to Tiny Bubbles and Canuck though because I need to get a little bit better read on both of them. They are both considerations for my vote in the group 2 category.

#1336

EBWOP: I went ahead and put a vote on sig.

#1337

juliets wrote:Nice analysis Bullz. I agree with you on almost everything. I'm currently looking at sig for my group 1 vote and not sure for group two. I did put some questions out to Tiny Bubbles and Canuck though because I need to get a little bit better read on both of them. They are both considerations for my vote in the group 2 category.

I saw your questions to Bubbles in the linki, JC, and the phrase 'great minds think alike' came to mind :P I'm torn between deciding who looks worse of those two (though it is possible to vote both since Bubbles missed the night vote) and am hoping for them both to post today so I too can get a better read on the pair. I don't honestly know which I'd vote for right now if there were only 10 minutes left on the poll.

#1338

Bullz, I haven't "refused to explain" my banana vote...I thought it was pretty obvious that it was a throw away vote? Why does that need explaining? If you'd like me to retcon an "excuse" for the vote, I can do so (I'm pretty creative), but I don't see the point of such an exercise.

I voted banana for silly reasons. I have never denied that. I also think it's pointless to try and make a punts in out of this particular molehill, but that's because I have the benefit of knowing my own role and alignment, which you lack. So you'll just have to either take my word for it (silly vote, no ulterior motive) or vote for me.

Juliets: I don't have strong thoughts or reads on anyone, which is why I haven't offered any. I like to wait until deeper into the game/once the herd is culled before I really dig in. Also, the tone of the thread has made me choose to peace out until it gets a little friendlier.

#1339

I put votes on bugla and Elo as my placeholders, since they need replacing anyway

#1340

Yes your vote was silly Canuck, but it was also a silly vote smack in the middle of a civ bandwagon and you must admit that looks suspicious.

#1341

Canuck, I sympathize with not having good reads on people until later in the game. Unfortunately though, you have to vote for people in the process of getting to that place. Have you any idea who you will vote out of the two groups we have today?

#1342

Sorry Canuck I missed your post in linki.

#1343

Bullzeye wrote:Yes your vote was silly Canuck, but it was also a silly vote smack in the middle of a civ bandwagon and you must admit that looks suspicious.

No, I don't admit that. I do admit that it looks careless and attention-causing, which is not a usual baddie MO....but odder things have happened, I guess.

#1344

Bullzeye wrote:It's not a solid theory, I'll grant you. But you could be hoping he's civ, you could even be completely genuine in your belief he's civ and still be defending him to gain credit. If he's independent (and not blatantly civ-unfriendly) then I'll still be sorry to have gone after him because indies aren't baddies and I'm in the business of lynching baddies.

Linki - I don't see why he couldn't be on the team that killed Timmer. In fact that was the basis of my initial ping which he overreacted to. I also don't see why he wouldn't have killed Zebra - arguably she was pursuing him more aggressively than I was. It takes away some of the heat and now there's only one voice arguing for his death and three arguing against it. Perhaps they did want to kill me and I just wasn't in range for any of them to get me. Either way he benefits from her death and nobody wants to get into the WIFOM pit of would he or wouldn't he kill someone who suspected him.

I'm not setting you up and I don't think I'm tunneling. I have a suspicion and I'm sticking with it because I haven't seen any reason not to. You yourself admit I'm sincere. All you've given me in Sig's defense is "don't lynch him because I say so" and misrepresentations of why I suspect him in the first place as well as obviously false statements about being the only person to defend him.

As far as Nutella and Bubbles are concerned, I vaguely suspect Nutella (for possibly outdated reasons so I'll be returning to her later/tomorrow) and haven't got up to Bubbles in my read yet.

I know him being on the team that killed timmer is the basis of your original suspicion. It's also the basis for me saying the case doesn't stack up. Because I am all but certain sig is not on the team that killed timmer. That is why I'm so strong on defending him.

Like I say, I could be otherwise wrong that sig is not on the other bad team or not indy, but I know that case (that he is on team circle of decay) is bad. That's why I'm defending him so hard.

And I do agree you are sincere and if I thought you were just doing this from a baddie mindset I wouldn't be putting this much effort into convincing you.

#1345

juliets wrote:Golden, I know Bubbles does not come around a lot so I'll also ask you - do you have any idea why she said you of ALL PEOPLE would be able to tell if she's mafia. Maybe I missed this answer as I went through but I looked and couldnt find it.

I know bubbles game inside and out, she is one of my favourite people to play the game with but also someone I keep a close watch on. I defend her when I believe she is civ, and there has been a lot of that in our mafia history. I've played every game she has played except Frisky Dingo, I believe. Despite that, I do not think she has ever been mafia, and she has been amazingly consistent as a civ. That's why her odd posts stick out so far, because they are like nothing in her meta.

#1346

Golden wrote: I know him being on the team that killed timmer is the basis of your original suspicion. It's also the basis for me saying the case doesn't stack up. Because I am all but certain sig is not on the team that killed timmer. That is why I'm so strong on defending him.

Like I say, I could be otherwise wrong that sig is not on the other bad team or not indy, but I know that case (that he is on team circle of decay) is bad. That's why I'm defending him so hard.

But WHY are you so sure? You've given me nothing to work with. If you're right then I want to be convinced by you. I have a lot of respect for you as a player and value your opinion if you're civ but you are not helping me at all here. All you're saying is Sig isn't bad and you know it. HB put more effort into defending Sig than you have tbh and yet you've claimed to be Sig's only defender, which does not sit well with me. What exactly is so bad about the case? Don't say it's because of the word 'currently' either. I've already said that if you remove the word from the sentence it still implies knowledge of the baddies' motives. Besides, it's Sig's (over)reactions to the suspicion that are why I suspect him. That and HB's continuous defenses.

#1347

Will catch up in the game tonight!

#1348

Perhaps we could lynch bubbles and it might give you some insight into, at least, whether or not my ideas as to who killed timmer can be trusted

I've given you everything I can, bullz. I've made it clear that the problem with my case is that I do not believe sig killed timmer, and I will never believe that. It's not the word 'currently', although I do think the entire case revolves around that because it's sigs responses to the conversation which make him look bad to you, but just like normal civ sig digging his own grave to me.

But primarily it's because for sig to have insight he would have to be on the team that killed timmer, and I do not believe he is.

#1349

juliets that is quite the opportunistic vote what happened to this view that you had yesterday?

juliets wrote:
sig wrote:I wasn't really trying to get zebra lynched in the last few posts, it was two things I was trying to ever so stealthy say something but it kinda flew over her head and I was messing around it doesn't seem we will be lynching someone today so I'm joking around slightly more then usually but most of even these posts have points to them.

Or maybe she knows what I was trying to say and is really scum right know I'm leaning scum on her but we will see soon enough if my hunches are correct.

There is a very slim possibility she could get lynched with fewer votes but if I was trying to change the lynch I would push Mac/juilets they are more likely to get last minute lynched then

Linki: juliets this whole wagon was started based on a small word choice to when I posted why I thought Timmer was killed. I was accused of giving horriblhy defense etc but keep in mind I've been being pushed and forced to defend myself for an entire phase, with multiply people accusing me and jumping on my wagon very early. I've had few other people chime in for me and has had multiply people attack me rather aggressively those that havent have dropped votes and that was it. This is a scum wagon I don't think your post is genuine but if it is think about it from my perspective. I've made long posts defending myself pieces of those posts were then nitpicked at to find more "evidence" against me. People DEFENDING Bulls when he twisted and changed the words then said I said them. When I mentioned this and actually made posts not only defending myself but also looking at other peoples post to prove it was made by scum and prove when people mainly Bulls changed my wording and made it seem more sinister my points were ignored. If you can't see this is a scum created wagon then vote for me.
I have the feeling you already decided to vote for me though and am simply asking this to look better if I flip civ.
sig your post gives me pause because it sounds so sincere but as the day ends and after looking through your posts especially the ones in these last few hours you look like you are really scrambling. So at the end of it all I'm going to take my chances that this is not a scum wagon and if it is I will take my punishment.

You voted for me thinking I was sincere and civvie but voted EOD not the biggest eye raiser YET today your voting for me as well? Please explain when you said I sounded sincere why you'd vote for me today as well?

Notice Bulls is know setting up for a Golden lynch? As well as his post yesterday which preemptively defended himself.
In this post.

Bullzeye wrote: If he is a civ, it will be a shame for him to be lynched. However, I alone will not be responsible for such a thing. I've not even voted yet. I'm probably going to vote Sig when I do, yes, but unless everyone else's vote doesn't count mine alone won't kill him.

So right here, already ready to cast blame and suspicion on anyone else who voted for me, saying he isn't the one responsible for it and hadn't even voted. He leaves his options open to not vote for me in case the wagon doesn't take off or if he thinks it would be better to lynch a different civ. Again is ready to castblame on anyone else with the last sentence and diminish his role in my lynch.
Also notice after my post calling this post out he places his vote, this was done since I called him out and he needed to look genuine in his suspicion and not scummy.

Bullzeye wrote: Plenty of people are wrong in their suspicions every game. I think the case against Sig is strong, and if he flips civ it will still have been a strong case. A wrong case, yes, but not one that was inherently bad.

After setting up the other people who voted for me he says this.
Well many people are wrong so it isn't a big deal. He then defends his case and says even if I'm civ the case isn't bad. Right here is enough to prove alone I'm civ. He defends not only himself but also his case, so when I flipped civ he could quote back to this and say well it was a strong case to bad it was wrong, but not a big deal since many people get mislynched.

Bullzeye wrote: I don't think he is a civ though. I think he is bad for his reaction and for the fact that you are so adamantly defending him despite having no obvious reason to do so. I don't think his points have any validity to them. He acts as if I'm doing some terrible malicious thing by replacing a word with one of its synonyms and claims I'm a nitpicking baddie all because I'd made one post saying his choice of words looked strange.

Know he is back on the attack on this, reconfirms he thinks I'm "bad' and diminishes my point when he changed my wording to argue for my lynch. Make it seem like I'm being erratic when he makes my wording seem more negative after I called him out on it, and defends that he isn't nitpicking.
Another thing about this he minimizes his own suspicion of me making it seem like I'm acting strange when I already had a vote and a few people saying they would vote for me.
He also attacks HB in this post with a classic scum attack saying he will target HIM next unless he drops the defense much like he is know doing with golden.

Bulls knows I won't flip mafia this post especially proves that, as he prematurely sets up his own defense for when I flip.

#1350

Golden wrote:Perhaps we could lynch bubbles and it might give you some insight into, at least, whether or not my ideas as to who killed timmer can be trusted

I've given you everything I can, bullz. I've made it clear that the problem with my case is that I do not believe sig killed timmer, and I will never believe that. It's not the word 'currently', although I do think the entire case revolves around that because it's sigs responses to the conversation which make him look bad to you, but just like normal civ sig digging his own grave to me.

But primarily it's because for sig to have insight he would have to be on the team that killed timmer, and I do not believe he is.

I can't say I mind lynching Bubbles, but that won't tell me an awful lot about you given that she is a generally suspicious person this game. As for Sig, it's entirely possible to me he's on the team that didn't kill Timmer and just overreacted to people discussing suspicions of him and saying that there was a decent case to be made. I've already explained why I don't think it's unreasonable for his team to have killed Zebra.

Linki Sig - I don't know what you'll flip but strongly suspect it will be mafia. I'm not prematurely defending myself. I haven't twisted anyone's words (and have proven, with dictionary definitions, that it wasn't wrong of me to replace 'shocked' with 'surprised') and I'm quite within my rights to suspect people who defend people I suspect. That is a reasonable and logical thing for a person to do.

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

Who to lynch? 24 hour day!