Day 12 ~ 2015 Game of Champions

[MacDougall]

I dunno bout you guys but that pretty much confirms Dom as bad to me.

wot

Why else would you intentionally break the thread? It's a distraction.

[MacDougall]

Before you go red in the face I am joking.

[Dom]

Before you go red in the face I am joking.

o
i never can tell when you are

[Epignosis]

My suggestion is that Dom repost without spoilers. That would get his message across without issue.

[DrWilgy]

I've come to the conclusion to ignore a majority of what Mac states. Life is better that way.

[Dom]

Why can't they be on opposite bad teams?

Whoever cursed Boomslang is not on Zebra's team, unless it's normal here for scum teams to have two of the same role. LoRab and Zebra have the same red 'BADDIE' text, so I'm assuming they are on the same team. Jimmy wouldn't have built a big case against Boomslang if he could know about the curse, so therefore he wasn't on LoRab or Zebra's team... wait, I'm arguing your point.

Regardless a lot of my earlier case was built on Jimmy being on the same team as Zebra. Additionally, we don't have definitive evidence that another bad team exists similar to the LoRab/Zebra/whoever else team. So actually I think overall it looks even harder to imagine Jimmy being on a bad team, unless he's an indy.

I didn't think the text would vary for different bad teams if there are any.

-SNIP FOR READABILITY?-

I didn't respond to a confirmed civ's case on me because that confirmed civ's case on me is really dumb, if you ask me.
I'm not bad. You only suspect me because I suspect you. I made a wrong call on LoRab in terms of priority, but you've pulled a NO U on me.

I do think it is abit less likely that you are bad now, but I also don't think this lynch exonerates you.

I'm super-duper down for Dom tomorrow.

....for what reasons again?

[Epignosis]

Beautiful.

[S~V~S]

It's broken tags somewhere in that godawful fuckly mess. It's a hanging quote tag from too many tags. You can only spoiler so much

[Dom]

fixed anway!

[MacDougall]

I've come to the conclusion to ignore a majority of what Mac states. Life is better that way.

The feeling is mutual.

[Epignosis]

Thelma and Louise. They just drive on...

[Black Rock]

I am not caught up and I am interested to see how this lynch went down. I just came in to see the result and Fing Right! A beautiful result. My gut is happy I stuck with it, and so am I. My head was wavering there but my gut saw me through.

I really need to move on now. I hope this lynch will be helpful. I imagine with such a close lynch there must be something to go on when I catch up.

[HamburgerBoy]

I didn't think the text would vary for different bad teams if there are any.

That would be kind of weird. It'd give scum teams more info about each other than we're privy to. Is that normal here?

....for what reasons again?

1. Your stated intent as early as day 0 to vote llama, predicting that he would become one of the more-voted candidates day 1, which reads like BTSC put out in public as to the planned goings-on involving him
2. Your early post history shows suspicion of LoRab, but not conviction; you basically +1 a post of Epi waiting for LoRab's response (exactly what Black Rock had done too btw), then later when Epi asks why people are resistant to voting LoRab, you come in again saying "Oh don't forget me!", like you were torn between defense-by-silence without distancing too far
3. Your vote history 3.0/3.5, and especially the way you dropped your vote on Jimmy early both times as if to stay away from argument near the deadline
4. You've gotten kinda dismissive/NO U when pressured at points, like the stuff Jimmy posted above, or a bunch of your responses to Rico here, which doesn't look good

And while I didn't want to put too much stock into Rico's "suspish" thing, since he mentioned that LoRab was one of two others that had used it, and considering her flip, I'll even add that to the list.

[S~V~S]

Any baddie from any team will be shown as "BADDIE"

[MacDougall]

re whoever is wondering why lots of people voted lorab yesterday but not today...

It's because yesterday, lots of us were finding a consensus candidate to save jj.

I'll vote lorab to the same end of it comes to it, but I think mm is a good bet. He really is playing like dune mm.

Just reading back and saw this.

So Tranq and Motel Room were trying to find a consensus candidate to save Jimmy?

Yeah, right.

[timmer]

Psstt.... [spoiler]you spelled Garfunkel wrong in the poll...[/spoiler]

[MacDougall]

I don't believe it. We actually went to a four way tie.

Officially the stupidest lynch I have ever seen.

I'm actually with fz. Considering asking for a replacement. Are the civs even trying to win? I feel alone.

You should.

[MacDougall]

Ties are stupid.

Depending on your confidence. I'd be a little relieved to see any of the four be lynched just to see things really start to move.

Lynching civvies just to see the game "move" is such a counter civ thing to want.


It's so easy to enjoy this when you're not among those on the lynch trains. Scum, if I don't die, please NK me. This is the shittiest game ever.


linki: I think Golden is playing a more civ game than any of you

Why don't you marry him then.

[Golden]

re whoever is wondering why lots of people voted lorab yesterday but not today...

It's because yesterday, lots of us were finding a consensus candidate to save jj.

I'll vote lorab to the same end of it comes to it, but I think mm is a good bet. He really is playing like dune mm.

Just reading back and saw this.

So Tranq and Motel Room were trying to find a consensus candidate to save Jimmy?

Yeah, right.

Lots and all mean the same thing now?

[MacDougall]

Yay!

He says while clenching his buttcheeks and a forced grin with teeth bared.

I'm actually quite pleased to have been wrong. Not sure where this leaves me in terms of suspects, but I'll have a look and see what pops out

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't your first sentence kind of not need to be said? Like, why on Earth would you be anything BUT pleased to be wrong here?

[MacDougall]

re whoever is wondering why lots of people voted lorab yesterday but not today...

It's because yesterday, lots of us were finding a consensus candidate to save jj.

I'll vote lorab to the same end of it comes to it, but I think mm is a good bet. He really is playing like dune mm.

Just reading back and saw this.

So Tranq and Motel Room were trying to find a consensus candidate to save Jimmy?

Yeah, right.

Lots and all mean the same thing now?

Lots and 2 mean the same thing now?

[MacDougall]

Hmmm... I guess I did buddy there. I suppose the reason why is because at the time, it's your thoughts I felt were the most well constructed, giving me a civvy vibe.

While you do have a civvy vibe though, I don't think I've ever played an extended game with you HBB, meaning I don't know your potential for these well constructed thoughts in different environments.

OK! best summary of what is going on in my head: I have very little information on the game other than recent events and hosts posts, because of that I went with the most well constructed thoughts at the time. They seemed logical and rational to me. With that in mind, my rainbow list so-to-say would look something like this:
Rico
JJJ and FZ
LC and You
Everyone else
My views on everyone are pretty neutral with the exception of Rico, so I suppose you being slightly higher in my mind than everyone else lead to it looking like buddying.

[MacDougall]

Not sure why this would change whether you suspect JJJ or not.

The biggest worry would be that JJJ and LoRab really were on the same team, that 3.0 was a proper lynch cancel, and JJJ's roleclaim a fake one to satisfy those of us trying to work out the motive for canceling the lynch. You have to admit that the odds of two scum from the same team being the top two candidates is lower than the odds of them being on different teams. This flip at least bumps Jimmy into the yellow-ish zone for me.

Fragment (Consider Revising)

[Golden]

re whoever is wondering why lots of people voted lorab yesterday but not today...

It's because yesterday, lots of us were finding a consensus candidate to save jj.

I'll vote lorab to the same end of it comes to it, but I think mm is a good bet. He really is playing like dune mm.

Just reading back and saw this.

So Tranq and Motel Room were trying to find a consensus candidate to save Jimmy?

Yeah, right.

Lots and all mean the same thing now?

Lots and 2 mean the same thing now?

Jimmy, fz, me... That accounts for three. Out of the 'so many people not voting for her again' that accounted for at least half, since at least two others were repeating their lorab vote at that time.

You can play the semantics game if you want, but is it helpful? What is your point in calling out that post?

[MacDougall]

re whoever is wondering why lots of people voted lorab yesterday but not today...

It's because yesterday, lots of us were finding a consensus candidate to save jj.

I'll vote lorab to the same end of it comes to it, but I think mm is a good bet. He really is playing like dune mm.

Just reading back and saw this.

So Tranq and Motel Room were trying to find a consensus candidate to save Jimmy?

Yeah, right.

Lots and all mean the same thing now?

Lots and 2 mean the same thing now?

Jimmy, fz, me... That accounts for three. Out of the 'so many people not voting for her again' that accounted for at least half, since at least two others were repeating their lorab vote at that time.

You can play the semantics game if you want, but is it helpful? What is your point in calling out that post?

Jimmy doesn't count.

My point is... well I don't have a point I was just annoyed at you from the thing you said in the other game tbh.

[Ricochet]

Lorab twirled, she just loved to twirl.

Everywhere she looked, there were more people fighting for their lives. She twirled past JJJ, and MM, and FZ. and past DH. She ignored their struggles and just ... kept ... twirling

She was twirling so fast, she did not notice the group of people with sickles and pitchforks until she plowed right into them.

She finally stopped twirling.

Lorab has been lynched. She was:

Spoiler: show

Ozymandias - Watchmen BADDIE
Every time two civilians in a row are lynched, Ozymandias can force the game into the Position of his choice. If he cannot use this ability, he may spy on a player to see who they target.

It is now Night 3. You have 23 hours to get in your night actions.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO



Great result otherwise. I have some idea of what may have happened, and it's not that it was a tie.

So can we lynch Dom now?

[Ricochet]

Also, I have 3 pages to read now. *karma police* Laters.

[Ricochet]

So to me it looks like LoRab and zebra could be placed in one team - either that, or there is simply one big mafia team. There's no point for LoRab to have forced a position, without having a teammate with position powers - she would have forced positions blindly otherwise. Granted, there could be other baddies with position powers, not just zebra, but this is the easiest connection to make right now.

[HamburgerBoy]

New suspect/re-evaluation: Draconus. I realize I had just defended him earlier, but looking more closely at his day 1 actions/vote, I think he may look the worst out of it. He gave a very soft defense of LoRab (Long Con pointed this out earlier and I dismissed it, sorry) about accidentally getting her wrong the last time she was a civ, and then doesn't really mention her at all after. Although Rico was obviously dominating discussion, the poll was apparently something close to a 3-3-3 split (depending on how many votes shuffled between those candidates), and Draco's vote appears to be the first to put Rico back in the lead. This is especially noteworthy because the LoRab wagon had built later and faster than the others, and could be a scummate hoping to fight that back. Worth noting that after Draco placed his vote, the next six consecutive votes (in the final poll) were all for Rico as well, and zebra was among them (so was Dom; I still have my eye there). Because there's the issue of people potentially not declaring all their votes, and because I haven't super-thoroughly made note considering it's 10+ pages of Mac/Zebra/Rico bullshit to wade through, the actual poll results at the time may have changed a little, but I think it still holds that Draco comes out of it looking bad.

Also, more of a "I'm dumb for not noticing" moment, but Black Rock had actually cast her vote a fair bit before Sorsha, so while that doesn't preclude my suspicions about Black Rock's approach in voicing her own against LoRab, taken together with the fact that multiple regulars have told me she seems on her towngame, and the fact that LoRab did flip scum, I'll put her closer to a town read now. Basically, I feel Dom, Draco, DrWilgy, maybe niju (she also looks bad based on day 1, and I like JJJ's earlier point about her inconsistencies in casing him vs LoRab) are all nice suspects at this point.

[HamburgerBoy]

Oh, and one more thing, do you guys feel DharmaHelper would be the kind of guy to stick his neck out, defending a scummate and attacking the alternative so aggressively as he's done? In spite of the LoRab flip I'm still getting a civvie gutfeel from him, because at least I feel the mindset he's used to express his cases so far is what I would expect from a Syndicater (regarding his general dislike of counter-wagons building so rapidly and all that).

[JaggedJimmyJay]

LoRab and Black Rock

Spoiler: show

Ugh. Just got home from a long day at work during which I had no time to mafia--so just read through everything since last night. Waiting for dinner to get here and will then answer the points made about me. In short, I'll say I'm not bad. I have nothing to hide. Eye me all you want. *twirls*

But, yeah, I'll go back and quote posts and make an actual defense when I'm on a full stomach.

Oh good, I've been waiting on you all day. I look forward to seeing what you have to say, the twirl stopped meaning anything to me years ago.

Fell asleep on the couch about 5 minutes into the episode I started of Making of a Murderer. Now I'm up and groggy and cranky. Sorry you have to wait until morning.

And I know my twirling means nothing to you. Although I do believe that you were the person that called me out one time for not twirling, which is more or less why I always do it now. Can't remember what game and if I was bad or not then.

I'm voting Rico for today. I am travelling tomorrow an dmight check in. NYC for the weekend. SEeing Hamilton and Spring Awakening (again).

So envious!! I need to get Hamilton tickets. Did you hear they broke the internet the other day, kind of like Star Wars did when those tickets went on sale? And I'm bummed I didn't get to this production of Spring Awakening. I saw Deaf West Productions do Big River years back and they were amazing--I was hoping to see what they'd do with SA, a show I love. Alas. No time before they close. Have a great trip!!!

Btw, everyone going after Lorab for her twirl is awkward. Lorab's twirl is fun, IMO, whether she's good or bad. I've never once thought she was good or bad because of it, but it's fun, you meanies!

Good luck making a case on her, then. I'd literally pay money to watch.

She is building the case herself. As far as I'm concerned she is making excuses and avoiding answering anyone's questions or concerns. That sounds like baddie LoRab to me.

Although I enjoyed your twirlaholic funs, LoRab. I'm not impressed that you didn't address anything last night. It's been a long time since I have had such strong baddie vibes from you.

I fell asleep last night. Did I miss questions in my post a little while ago? What haven't I addressed? Seriously, please let me know so I can answer. I answered the posts I saw that had specific things to say about me. I didn't see any other posts that raised anything else. What else can I address?

Your vibes about me are wrong.

linkitis: Fair enough. I was a bit confused that you said I didn't answer anything.

AAAAAHHHHH WHOOOOO DEEEEEEEEEY

Now I feel bad for voting you.

Actually no I don't.

I just voted for LoRab... because she is bad. I see you have switched your vote to yourself. I hope in my future reads I see a damn good reason.

No, she is not. If you could make a case on me, so that I can explain my actions and defend myself, please do. If you think you have info on me, it isn't accurate. I'm not bad, and I'd like to be able to defend.

I have put my vote on LoRab. Not to sound like a broken record or anything. I thought I might vote for JJJ but I found some of his more recent posts to be compelling and I am less sure he's a baddie. I work tomorrow before and during the deadline so I want to make sure I have a vote in just in case.

You continue to be wrong about me.

The most important thing we need to do with BR is determine how realistic the possibility is that her aggression against LoRab was a continued bussing effort. I think the best way to approach that question is to see how LoRab handled BR's accusations. For the most part it's a lot of "no, you're wrong", which doesn't say much. However, I did yellow-highlight one bit in the above quotes that I find telling. LoRab asked BR for a substantive case and tried to shake her from any possible "information" she might have. This looks to me like a mafioso struggling to get around the hounding of a non-team mate and displaying frustration/almost desperation at a lack of avenues to defend and maybe escape it. That's a nice look for BR.

Spoiler: show

Now that I have quoted the post deleted the twirls and previewed it I can be satisfied.

Interesting back and forth between Rico and LoRab.

I haven't read the 11 pages before page 20, and I won't be unless I think I missed something important. Ricos posts don't count.

My opinion is all though Rico has been distracting and posting a lot of crap (all the way up to page 8) I don't find him that suspicious. Would he really want that much attention? I was thinking he had a neutral role, if those exist in this game.

He did have a point about LoRabs original post. Seemed easy and even her Matt points were wishy washy at best. Not the best example of LoRabs mafia play. Is she bad? or just not that into it?

I am going to vote for LoRab for now. Her posts reek of her mafia self. I look forward to seeing what she has to say to Epig.

I read your response LoRab (not quoting because it is so huge) you always have a way of making things seem so rational and I usually can be swayed to see things how you see them. I'm going to stick with my gut for today though and vote for you.

I've not had enough time (and won't before poll closes) to catch up over the past few pages but I'll be able to over the weekend and hopefully have some stronger suspicions then.

votes LoRab

That's how I feel. Her responses are so clear and convincing. I have myself questioning my gut. I have been fooled by this LoRab before. I am leaving my vote where it is for right now while I finish my catch up.

AAAAAHHHHH WHOOOOO DEEEEEEEEEY

Now I feel bad for voting you.

Actually no I don't.

I just voted for LoRab... because she is bad. I see you have switched your vote to yourself. I hope in my future reads I see a damn good reason.

I'm still on Lorab. I said she cracked under pressure. I applied pressure. She disappeared. When she came back, she was sweet as sugar. I think her twirly behind got the jitters when I called her out so early.

*thumbs up*

Ok, I have basically caught up.A quick answer to Juliets and HB.

I did not respond to LoRabs responses to her suspicion because I saw no point. She took her time, made her excuses, and as far as I am concerned, carefully crafted her response so it was 'just perfect'. The fact that she was under suspicion because of her wording means she was careful to try and debunk that theory. LoRab is not a player to be underestimated. She is smart. She is crafty. She is a damn good mafia player. She is also one that is hard for the masses to suspect because of that. Mostly I am running on gut. If I were a baddie trying to take down LoRab for no good reason, I would have dropped it after it didn't work. LoRab is a personal friend of mine and I won't go after her unless she twists my gut (except for the brief period I always thought she was bad). I also have played with her for 7 years and know for a damn fact she is not an easy target to get lynched. This is not baddie BR trying to take out an easy target. This is BR acting on her gut. When I act on my gut I cannot give you the proper reasons, the reasons some of you need to make sense of all. I have not built a case because there will be no good case to build. LoRab was accused early and she will be careful.

Could I be wrong? Damn right I could. I didn't role check her and I can't know with certainty. Am I questioning myself? Yes, because I am starting to wonder is HB has information I do not. If HB does not tell me he knows without a doubt she is civ then I will not trust LoRab this game.

I will go back and address any other concerns juliets and HB have.

I'm so behind. Life kicked my ass yesterday and I just got time to post this today.

I just wanted to say that I didn't miss the vote yesterday, I was unable to vote at all. I will do a big catch up after my three year old goes to bed, he's being a demanding... and is requiring I move away from the computer as I type this. Because he's being rude to mommy I think I will take my time.

Ok, so that's the late sig, Golden and BR being incapacitated so far - I don't remember Boomslang or LoRab having voted on 3.0 though. Is it possible to start correlating who might have wanted one less vote on the tally from these three players? Who do you think w/could have incapacitated you, BR?

I felt like the person who blocked my ability to vote was afraid I was going to vote for LoRab, I'm on the fence if it was a baddie power or a civvie one. I would have likely voted for JJ, but I'm not completely caught up so that may have changed.

So far from page 70-74, I am completely ok with a JJ lynch and would have for sure voted for him because it does look like a push for LoRab.

Not saying I don't suspect LoRab still. They are likely on two different teams.

I'm also ok with a Tranq lynch. I'm not going to give him a pass, by saying that's just Tranq. He's much more devious than that.

Golden, why do you feel so strongly about JJJ?

I have put my vote on LoRab. Not to sound like a broken record or anything. I thought I might vote for JJJ but I found some of his more recent posts to be compelling and I am less sure he's a baddie. I work tomorrow before and during the deadline so I want to make sure I have a vote in just in case.

Obviously BR put extensive effort into pursuing a LoRab lynch and got a very early start. I think almost all of this looks authentic. Some might be unamused by this WIFOM, but I honestly completely believe BR when she says this.

~~~

BR missed the first JJJ/LoRab poll war, but expressed willingness to lynch both.

She voted for LoRab the second time.

~~~

I feel pretty strongly that Black Rock is not on LoRab's team.

LoRab and Boomslang

LoRab did not mention or engage Boomslang.

Spoiler: show

Alright, I have to go record some music and must vote. I don't think Rico is mafia, I think Llama is civ, and haven't really considered the Lorab arguments. Therefore, I'm going to leave a protest vote on Mac: as has been noted previously, his playing is not that different from Rico's, but he's being very defensive of it and was blatantly hypocritical when he compared his own baseless accusation to the one MM made about him. *votes Mac*

Linki w/Rico: Tranq should speak up, true facts.

I'm running low on time before class, and I don't think I'll be able to vote after that. Quite disappointed in Drac's lack of posting today. I think the JJJ case is overblown; his effort with the smiley curse alone, when as a baddie he could have safely played it cool, makes me lean civ on him. Lorab's defense seems genuine, while sig is much more flippant. I don't like the games he played with smileys in a recent post, in particular; it's self-conscious, not natural. I'll put my vote *on sig* unless I find time on a class break to read more and change my mind.

Linki w/Golden: Good illustration of the difference between civ read/buddying. Worth keeping in mind, imo.

I did a search of Dom's entire post and have found only a dozen of posts in which the word suspish appears. He himself has used it only once before, in Star Wars.

I now believe Dom is in team with someone who is inadvertedly influencing his word use during their private chatter.

Players who so far who used this word in this game are llama and LoRab.

I... kind of like this theory. It's just crazy enough to make sense, and I know I often find myself using the language of the group I'm talking with. Does this necessarily make him bad, though? I'm not pinged super hard either way. On the civ end, I like his pressure on Tranq and the way he's been skeptical of Mac throughout the game. On the mafia end, I don't like the way he's expressed support for off-wagon candidates and then circled back to the main wagon for all of the lynches thus far; feels just a touch too blendy.

GTH, I guess I'd say bad. The connection of "suspish" with Lorab, combined with his consistent but low levels of aggro toward her, could make the case for mafia teammates.

The first two posts here show Boom acknowledging that people are suspicious of LoRab and explaining why he's voting for someone else. The first one is a rather blatant "I haven't considered the LoRab arguments" and the second is a positive read on her. I won't make significant judgments about this kind of limited content, but I will say the first one doesn't strike me as a conscious effort to ignore the case against a team mate -- it looks like an authentic shrug. The third post here is the most interesting to me, in which he lends some support to Rico's "suspish" theory and implicates Dom and LoRab as possible team mates. I find myself wondering whether any of LoRab's team mates could bring themselves to distancing from their team mates based on that case -- it's so easy to discard and not take seriously.

~~~

On Day 3.0 Boom missed the vote I believe.

On Day 3.5 he voted for FZ in that 4-way tie madness. I hate this vote, but I'd have to look deeper than the scope of this analysis to understand it better.

Generally it's not enough for any confident read, but I would lean slightly towards a non-team mate relationship.

DharmaHelper and LoRab

Spoiler: show

What's with the hesitation on Lorab? I suspect her because of her wording regarding Ricochet, and her response was too measured, too kind. Black Rock claims to read Lorab well and says she's bad (and I believe her, because Lorab's tone is a mystery to me and I've only played a handful of times with her). Is that not a one-two punch? What's the deal? Lynch her already and be done. Then see where we stand.

That's my position. Still.

Even her very first post regarding LoRab is actually one of suspicion built on agreeing with Rico's case on her, and as you have said yourself, Rico was spewing bullshit. BR's next post was basically (if indirectly) agreeing with your case on LoRab. She then said a couple things about wanting to see LoRab address points to her, and then ignored that LoRab actually did later. After that, she then proceeded to agree with Sorsha's post against LoRab. Sorry, not a one-two punch to me, it looks like for the better part of day 1, her only concern was agreeing with people that found LoRab suspicious.

In fact, in light of the Rico-LoRab thing I had overlooked before, what do you think of the possibility that Black Rock was bussing? I don't find BR's case on LoRab to be coming from anywhere genuine.

This ain't the first time ol' HB took up the fight for the Not Too Shabbi Rabbi. Is that offensive to say? LoRab. I'm referring to LoRab. Whom I adore.

For my part, I'm not sold on a case that in the course of Night 0 to Day 3 has not evolved past "I got the heebies"

Not too shabbi rabbi...I kind of like it.

This is LoRab's only acknowledgement of DH's existence. It's a chummy statement that doesn't touch on the content being quoted -- in which DH expressed some light suspicion of Burger for his anti-BR stance (which wasn't necessarily a pro-LoRab stance).

Spoiler: show

Why not. Let's talk RadicalFuzz and LoRab

Yay, I get to talk about a Vocaroo post!

The second half of the recording is about her, so skip ahead to about 1:20 if you want. He asserts that on Night 0 he hasn't seen anything from her that he'd characterize as abnormal. He also grants that the people who have expressed concern that her posts looked a little rehearsed (Mac and I primarily) weren't wrong to say so, that he understood our perspective. He didn't think it was inherently suspicious for LoRab to have a few posts that sounded rehearsed though, and even suggested it could be normalcy for him in typed content rather than spoken content.

His read was off obviously, but that's not necessarily a big deal. I would take some issue though with the fact that DH covered such a wide range of the spectrum of the LoRab conversation in this recording without really disagreeing with anyone. He agreed with those suspecting her that her posts looked rehearsed, or that they could look reheared. He stood in LoRab's corner though too by maintaining a non-suspicious perspective of her in spite of that.

Spoiler: show

Let me see if I can cover what I said with any level of efficacy.

1. I find the discussion around RadicalFuzz more suspicious than RadicalFuzz. Seems like an easy place to start a train and place a copout Day 0 vote.

2. I don't think LoRab is suspicious, and I don't think the argument that her posts are "careful/crafted" holds up. I can see the thought process behind it, I just don't think it is solid.

3. I questioned Golden at one point regarding why he would trust Mac's gut if he finds Mac to be suspicious.

4. I slammed Rico some more regarding his rainbow list, and I posited to Golden that the purpose of the list and Rico's general behavior was in an attempt to look civvier than he is and to hide behind humor, basically.

What's with the hesitation on Lorab? I suspect her because of her wording regarding Ricochet, and her response was too measured, too kind. Black Rock claims to read Lorab well and says she's bad (and I believe her, because Lorab's tone is a mystery to me and I've only played a handful of times with her). Is that not a one-two punch? What's the deal? Lynch her already and be done. Then see where we stand.

That's my position. Still.

Even her very first post regarding LoRab is actually one of suspicion built on agreeing with Rico's case on her, and as you have said yourself, Rico was spewing bullshit. BR's next post was basically (if indirectly) agreeing with your case on LoRab. She then said a couple things about wanting to see LoRab address points to her, and then ignored that LoRab actually did later. After that, she then proceeded to agree with Sorsha's post against LoRab. Sorry, not a one-two punch to me, it looks like for the better part of day 1, her only concern was agreeing with people that found LoRab suspicious.

In fact, in light of the Rico-LoRab thing I had overlooked before, what do you think of the possibility that Black Rock was bussing? I don't find BR's case on LoRab to be coming from anywhere genuine.

This ain't the first time ol' HB took up the fight for the Not Too Shabbi Rabbi. Is that offensive to say? LoRab. I'm referring to LoRab. Whom I adore.

For my part, I'm not sold on a case that in the course of Night 0 to Day 3 has not evolved past "I got the heebies"

Ok, I have basically caught up.A quick answer to Juliets and HB.

I did not respond to LoRabs responses to her suspicion because I saw no point. She took her time, made her excuses, and as far as I am concerned, carefully crafted her response so it was 'just perfect'. The fact that she was under suspicion because of her wording means she was careful to try and debunk that theory. LoRab is not a player to be underestimated. She is smart. She is crafty. She is a damn good mafia player. She is also one that is hard for the masses to suspect because of that. Mostly I am running on gut. If I were a baddie trying to take down LoRab for no good reason, I would have dropped it after it didn't work. LoRab is a personal friend of mine and I won't go after her unless she twists my gut (except for the brief period I always thought she was bad). I also have played with her for 7 years and know for a damn fact she is not an easy target to get lynched. This is not baddie BR trying to take out an easy target. This is BR acting on her gut. When I act on my gut I cannot give you the proper reasons, the reasons some of you need to make sense of all. I have not built a case because there will be no good case to build. LoRab was accused early and she will be careful.

Could I be wrong? Damn right I could. I didn't role check her and I can't know with certainty. Am I questioning myself? Yes, because I am starting to wonder is HB has information I do not. If HB does not tell me he knows without a doubt she is civ then I will not trust LoRab this game.

I will go back and address any other concerns juliets and HB have.

Still catching up on last night, but I got to this post and felt the need to address it, because it set off several red flags.

1. Refusing to engage the person you suspect in discourse regarding those suspicions is pingy as Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. The reasoning you give here also doesn't make sense to me. You say her response was measured and careful in order to debunk the theory that she was being too measured and careful? Dunno, that doesn't click with me. I'm wary in general of anyone who outright refuses to back up their suspicions of someone. That tells me you know you're standing on thin ice and would rather ignore the person you suspect (in this case LoRab), than have your suspicion debunked. If a suspicion cannot stand up to scrutiny, it is either false in nature or faulty in nature.

2. This is fear mongering to me. You're not arguing the facts of the case, you're propping LoRab up as this "big scary boogie woman" as justification for why you refused to engage. Using a player's skill at the game as a reason to A) Want to lynch them and B) Ignore the holes in your suspicion does not sit well with me.


3. Explicit WIFOM. And especially faulty WIFOM as well.

4. I find this particularly amusing. There won't ever be a good case to build on LoRab ever in the whole game? That's just patently false. Anyone can build a "good case" on anyone given enough time and content and effort. But you don't want to put that effort forward because why? Because you know that if you do, your "gut read" starts to turn into something entirely different?

Looking at this post, I'm seeing a majority of emotional appeals rather than factual statements and evidence. That tells me that you have no evidence, and indeed no desire to acquire any such evidence. It comes down to you just wanting to lynch LoRab because she's a "good player", which is a motivation I'd associate with baddies.

Mac, no, I'm not trying to create conflict. I have reason to believe Epig is a big bad and I wanted your thoughts on him. Which I'm not sure I even got, you pretty much just kept turning it back on me, I see. Just to be clear, though, you no longer suspect Lorab?

Llama - Thanks.

FZ - I was immediately pinged by you when you said that you had never played a game with bad sig. You have, though, in Dune. I suppose we could chalk that up to plain forgetfulness regardless of affiliation, I dunno. Also, in one reply to Rico, you say something to him like "Way to twist my words" or something, which I thought was funny because Rico is civ so you think Rico is twisting your words? Then, a few posts later, you comment that there is no reason for you to guess about Rico because you know his affiliation...makes me feel that at some point between those two posts, your potential teamies reminded you that Rico is a civvie and therefore accusing him of twisting your words ain't cool.

DH - If you think Black Rock is fibbing about Lorab, does that mean you also think Epig and others are BSing their cases on Lorab? Or is it just BR?

How would that make sense? Black Rock's suspicion of LoRab to me looks disingenuous, but that has no bearing one way or the other on Epi or anyone else. My comment on Epi's side of things was that I don't hold much stock in a case that hasn't evolved in 3+ days of discussion beyond what I don't see as a smoking gun. I don't recall "anyone else" having thoughts drastically different from Epi or BR in the case of LoRab.

If I got into all the problems I see with Epi's play we'd have another Mac/Rico/Zebra situation, or more accurately, another DH/Epi situation of taking up the thread for no good reason.

This. DH's colour posts really bug me. Not because of the colouring. Because I find myself thinking his attempts feel blown up to seem like he's so engaged in scum hunting. And I find myself disagreeing with his reasons for suspecting people. For example, if someone can't back up their suspicion with a great "case" like people expect, it doesn't make them bad. If anything, when I'm bad, I try to really back up my suspicions as much as I can. Just like he's doing here. It's so easy to find these easy reasons to suspect people. By easy I mean, not doing what is expected by the book (like backing up suspicion).

1. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since you haven't read the rest of the thread apparently. I am not "attempting to seem like I'm scum hunting." I'd like to know what gave you that vibe. I try in every game I play to be verbose and thorough in who I suspect.

2. If we disagree, we disagree.

3. Let me be absolutely clear. not being able to back up your suspicions and not being willing to back up your suspicions are two different things. Building and presenting a poor case does not make a person bad, I agree. What I found suspicious was not that BR built and presented a poor case though. What I said was that BR did not build a case, she did not engage LoRab, and she did not make an effort to pursue her suspicion of LoRab. In my view, this means that she knew that if she did, the case would fall apart and not be as strong as what she'd presented. Two different things.

DH, to spare us all another long post quote, I'm answering without it.

It's not that I don't think you're not attempting, I'm just not sure I buy the sincerity of your suspicions. Yeah it could just be disagreeing I guess, but I'm not sold on it yet. You seem like a logic person and the way you play as a civ, from what I've seen, is something I find easy to relate. The fact that I find myself disagreeing with you so much bothers me.

I get how that's different, but in what way did she not pursue her suspicion? She voted for her twice. I perceived it as a gut feeling more than a solid reason, thus her answer that she can't really build a case. Again, I can only judge by how I play when I think of what a baddie would do (unless I know that person's bad game really well), but if I were a baddie, I would try to build the case, just so I look like I can back up my votes and not look bad.

Uhm, she literally said "I won't bother to respond to LoRab's defense because it's too perfect."

What kind of fuckboy wagon is this?

Which one?

Because honestly, I'd agree with you that the JJ wagon is.

Bruh if you can't look at these LoRab votes and see some kind of fuckery, I can't help you.

@FZ Instead of pissing down my back why don't you actually address my suspicion?

1. Why did you actively participate in the lynching of someone you had come around to believing to be genuine? Why not place your vote on a third party that you suspected?

2. Why did you immediately point the finger at JJJ voters rather than LoRab voters? What do you think of the LoRab train in general? Do you think Tranq's vote or Motel Room's vote look civ motivated?

The first post shows DH reasserting the bit I mentioned above from the Vocaroo post. This time it should be noted that he's clearer about disagreeing with Mac and I about LoRab's posts being rehearsed even though he understands the thought process. Otherwise the remaining content leaves us a ton of opportunity (and challenge) in reading DH's motivations. The color-heavy discussions he has around BR's suspicion of LoRab and FZ's suspicion of him for that are very substantive. While it's obviously not the best look for DH to work so hard to shoot down a BR gut read that has proven to be rock solid, it must be acknowledged that the points he made don't appear manipulative or fake. I can understand a civilian having the mindset that he is espousing in this many-colored post.

I'm curious what DH thinks of BR now in light of LoRab's baddie flip. Please talk about that if you haven't already, DH.

Then there's also the end of Day 3.0 madness in which DH appeared in the thread, observed the quick wagon mounting on LoRab, and then slammed on the brakes before leading people back onto my wagon. I've asserted that his behavior in this stretch appeared disingenuous to me, because it required him to believe things that I think would indicate he did very little critical thinking (that a quick wagon is inherently a problem, that I am mafia and my entire team tried to save me all at once). I maintain that this is a bad look. It might be a matter of me disagreeing severely with DH's entire perspective of what a townie in a Mafia game is supposed to be doing (which would also stem from his view on rainbows which I think is completely wrong). This is where I feel I have to defer to people who know him better to help me get a grip on what he's done.

General questions to all non-DharmaHelper players who know him well -- is it typical of him to resist end of day bandwagon shifts as a civilian? Is it typical of him as a civilian to think an entire mafia team would expose themselves in a pie-eyed stupid strategic move? Help me out here.

~~~

DH voted for me on Days 3.0 and 3.5.

~~~

Overall there's a lot to think about. I agree with HamburgerBoy that it's hard to say his defenses of LoRab against BR's suspicions looks disingenuous. That appears sincere to me. But his conduct at the end of the Day 3.0 lynch looks highly insincere to me. I'll wait for feedback.

[Dom]

I didn't think the text would vary for different bad teams if there are any.

That would be kind of weird. It'd give scum teams more info about each other than we're privy to. Is that normal here?

....for what reasons again?

1. Your stated intent as early as day 0 to vote llama, predicting that he would become one of the more-voted candidates day 1, which reads like BTSC put out in public as to the planned goings-on involving him
2. Your early post history shows suspicion of LoRab, but not conviction; you basically +1 a post of Epi waiting for LoRab's response (exactly what Black Rock had done too btw), then later when Epi asks why people are resistant to voting LoRab, you come in again saying "Oh don't forget me!", like you were torn between defense-by-silence without distancing too far
3. Your vote history 3.0/3.5, and especially the way you dropped your vote on Jimmy early both times as if to stay away from argument near the deadline
4. You've gotten kinda dismissive/NO U when pressured at points, like the stuff Jimmy posted above, or a bunch of your responses to Rico here, which doesn't look good

And while I didn't want to put too much stock into Rico's "suspish" thing, since he mentioned that LoRab was one of two others that had used it, and considering her flip, I'll even add that to the list.

1. This is bogus TBH. I said who I was suspicious of. Not sure how else you'd like me to speak. I had reasons to vote him.
2. I can see this reason but it's wrong. I was mildly suspicious of lorab but wasn't as convinced as others. That can look like distancing but it's not.
3. You men me voting around my work schedule? And voting for someone I think was bad?
4. I've gotten no u??? What???????? no! That is exactly what JJJ has done. He has yet to say a single reason to suspect me and thought I was civ until I continued pressuring him. But you ignore that because that doesn't fit your narrative. I haven't pulled a single No U and the only thing I'm dismissive of is a case built around a word that I only used once before on this site but was extremely common on others. It's wrong, in comprehensive, and flawed. I've explained why and not even dismissed it all that much. You are straight up lying here.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

4. I've gotten no u??? What???????? no! That is exactly what JJJ has done. He has yet to say a single reason to suspect me and thought I was civ until I continued pressuring him. But you ignore that because that doesn't fit your narrative. I haven't pulled a single No U and the only thing I'm dismissive of is a case built around a word that I only used once before on this site but was extremely common on others. It's wrong, in comprehensive, and flawed. I've explained why and not even dismissed it all that much. You are straight up lying here.

I like the part where you say things that are blatantly false.

[Dom]

4. I've gotten no u??? What???????? no! That is exactly what JJJ has done. He has yet to say a single reason to suspect me and thought I was civ until I continued pressuring him. But you ignore that because that doesn't fit your narrative. I haven't pulled a single No U and the only thing I'm dismissive of is a case built around a word that I only used once before on this site but was extremely common on others. It's wrong, in comprehensive, and flawed. I've explained why and not even dismissed it all that much. You are straight up lying here.

I like the part where you say things that are blatantly false.

Your "in which" post?
Because that's as close as you get. And I think it's a pretty ridiculous post of unconnected points and incorrect information. Your first post against me was simply because I didn't immediately think FZ was civvie and didn't warm up to you when you buddies me.

I said things that are blatantly false? Where did I pull a NO U? Where? Someone point it out to me. Why do you only care when I don't post things that are "truthful"? Why do HBBs posts get no such treatment? I sit because you're bad? Are you looking for someone to help you out and you don't care who goes down in the process?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Also I'm just gonna go ahead and say this:

OMGUS/NO U -- just not that suspicious in general. It can often evidence a faulty mindset, but not necessarily a malevolent one. Chew on that current and future townies.

[Dom]

You also say that I haven't responded to RIcos "case" when I have. It's almost like....you're... Doing the thing..... You accused me of?????? Wow

[Dom]

Also I'm just gonna go ahead and say this:

OMGUS/NO U -- just not that suspicious in general. It can often evidence a faulty mindset, but not necessarily a malevolent one. Chew on that current and future townies.

This did nothing to address my post and only excused yourself while not granting me the same privilege even though I didn't even do that. Nice.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

4. I've gotten no u??? What???????? no! That is exactly what JJJ has done. He has yet to say a single reason to suspect me and thought I was civ until I continued pressuring him. But you ignore that because that doesn't fit your narrative. I haven't pulled a single No U and the only thing I'm dismissive of is a case built around a word that I only used once before on this site but was extremely common on others. It's wrong, in comprehensive, and flawed. I've explained why and not even dismissed it all that much. You are straight up lying here.

I like the part where you say things that are blatantly false.

Your "in which" post?
Because that's as close as you get. And I think it's a pretty ridiculous post of unconnected points and incorrect information. Your first post against me was simply because I didn't immediately think FZ was civvie and didn't warm up to you when you buddies me.

"As close as I get" to doing exactly what you just said I never did. It's false, it's misinformation, and if you really feel that way then you're not paying enough attention to this game.

I said things that are blatantly false? Where did I pull a NO U? Where? Someone point it out to me. Why do you only care when I don't post things that are "truthful"? Why do HBBs posts get no such treatment? I sit because you're bad? Are you looking for someone to help you out and you don't care who goes down in the process?

I never said you pulled a NO U. I don't care about NO U's. I don't agree with everything Burger has ever said, but I think he has presented truthful information much more consistently than you have. Sometimes interpretations differ. I can understand why he might think you're NO U'ing me even I don't think you actually are. You're going after me relatively hard now after my "in which" commentary and I don't struggle to believe that Burger is perceiving the exchange in that light. I do grant that your suspicion came first, but I don't think that makes any difference at all.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Also I'm just gonna go ahead and say this:

OMGUS/NO U -- just not that suspicious in general. It can often evidence a faulty mindset, but not necessarily a malevolent one. Chew on that current and future townies.

This did nothing to address my post and only excused yourself while not granting me the same privilege even though I didn't even do that. Nice.

It was a linki. I rarely bother to type "linki".

[JaggedJimmyJay]

You also say that I haven't responded to RIcos "case" when I have. It's almost like....you're... Doing the thing..... You accused me of?????? Wow

You've never cased me. You've poked at isolated moments in my posts that you've claimed not to like and I've responded to those things in isolation. If you have a substantive case, put it together in one place and I will dismantle it in short order. Not much you have said about me is grounded in logic and much of it is grounded in falsehoods.

[Dom]

You don't care that I didn't pull a no u but don't condemn HBB for lying?

[Dom]

You also say that I haven't responded to RIcos "case" when I have. It's almost like....you're... Doing the thing..... You accused me of?????? Wow

You've never cased me. You've poked at isolated moments in my posts that you've claimed not to like and I've responded to those things in isolation. If you have a substantive case, put it together in one place and I will dismantle it in short order. Not much you have said about me is grounded in logic and much of it is grounded in falsehoods.

no u

[JaggedJimmyJay]

You don't care that I didn't pull a no u but don't condemn HBB for lying?

"Wrong" and "lying" are not the same. "Lying" implies a sincere intent to mislead. I don't get the impression that's what Burger did. I'll leave him to respond to your commentary though, I'm not in his head.

I am currently doing my Dom/LoRab review, so I'll see what I come up with.

[Tranq]

Death to Dom!

[JaggedJimmyJay]

LoRab and Dom

Spoiler: show

I did a search of Dom's entire post and have found only a dozen of posts in which the word suspish appears. He himself has used it only once before, in Star Wars.

I now believe Dom is in team with someone who is inadvertedly influencing his word use during their private chatter.

Players who so far who used this word in this game are llama and LoRab.

I don't have BTSC with Dom. We are not on a baddie team together. If he is civ, then we are on the same team.

I will say that suspish is a word that was used a lot on LP and TP, which is where Dom learned to mafia. So it doesn't strike me as odd language from Dom. He also could have picked it up from me during our BTSC time in the last game.

All that said, it's not a word I'd expect to hear from Llama...so...an interesting note to keep in mind.

This is the only non-OT post in which LoRab acknowledges Dom, but it's a fantastic post for analysis.

She straight up said Rico's "suspish" thing should not implicate Dom. Of course she'd say that because it also implicated her, but that doesn't inherently mean she's lying about this.

This is the most interesting sentence in the entire game so far, in my opinion. I feel like llama's relationship with LoRab, and perhaps even Dom's by association, can be found in this content.

We've confirmed that LoRab was a baddie. She pooh-poohed Rico's "suspish" point as a point against Dom. She encouraged it as a point against llama. This has to mean something. Pool your minds upon this post and tell me what you think. Is she protecting team mate Dom and redirecting attention to non-team mate llama? Is she buddying non-team mate Dom and redirecting attention to team mate (but unlikely-to-be-lynched) llama? What inspired her to say this about llama? I feel like this is a billboard sign with a fluorescent light perimeter and blinking text on a busy highway that reads: "EITHER DOM OR LLAMA IS MY TEAM MATE."

Now I don't think LoRab did this on purpose of course. I'm asserting this would be a significant error by her. Y'all talk to me about this. I'm excited.

Spoiler: show

Lorab has interacted more with Ricochet than any other person so far, so why does the possibility of her vote hinge on what others have pointed out? Her stance is disingenuous. That's why.

This is a good point.

I await LoRab's response.

Oi real quick before I clock out tonight, Anybody wanna talk about why the fuck the thread says "Day 3.0" and not "Day 3"

you could read the thread and find out!

What's with the hesitation on Lorab? I suspect her because of her wording regarding Ricochet, and her response was too measured, too kind. Black Rock claims to read Lorab well and says she's bad (and I believe her, because Lorab's tone is a mystery to me and I've only played a handful of times with her). Is that not a one-two punch? What's the deal? Lynch her already and be done. Then see where we stand.

That's my position. Still.

I suspected LoRab earlier, so I'll look into those reasons again.

Sorsha, I do think it's weird. It's almost like the pile on of votes on Lorab was a paper thin save attempt on JJJ.

I could have included more quotes/content here, but they're all related to Dom's suspicion of the LoRab wagon relative to FZ and I. Check his ISO if you want to see more of them -- it's also a heavy component of current discussion. I've left them out so the spoiler isn't unnecessarily huge.

Dom lent a little support to one of Epi's earliest points against LoRab, but he didn't seem to revisit this suspicion later. He acknowledged it again on Day 3.0 and pledged to revisit the case, but after that he went full speed ahead against me instead. He never voted for her either as far as I can tell. That's not the best look. He really didn't do much of anything with LoRab other than accuse other people for their votes on her based upon the notion that I was saved. This means he wasn't necessarily defending LoRab, he was just attacking me. That could mean he was genuinely perturbed by her wagon similarly to DH, but if that's the case I'd ask the same questions about his willingness to critically think that I've asked about DH.

~~~

Dom voted for me on Days 3.0 and 3.5.

~~~

I think this relationship is team mate-compatible and perhaps even team-mate indicative. My biggest doubt stems from first colorful point I made in which LoRab defended Dom and attacked llama instead. That's a calculated move, because if both of them or neither of them are on her team then I don't know what would inspire her to say that. I want to hear about that component of this analysis from a number of people -- I would really appreciate it. I think it's very useful data and it would be wasteful not to discuss it thoroughly.

I'm going to post this analysis by itself to encourage that.

[MacDougall]

If neither are her teammate then it makes no sense to validate the idea (albeit more softly) by putting some doubt out about Llama but refuting the same points against Dom. I feel like she would have defended them both from the accusation. So I can see why you think it's a shining beacon or whatever you said.

Gut feel on the post is you have it backwards or possibly half right. I think in her position there, to defend Dom but not Llama is indicative of attempting to put space between her and Llama and buddy Dom. I think there is quite a possibility that they are both her teammates but if I had to pick one based solely on the colourful bits you quoted I would guess Llama. I am interested to see if any other potential teammates pop up in your ISO but I am going to sleep now.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

LoRab and DrWilgy

LoRab never said anything to or about Doc.

Spoiler: show

So zebra was mafia, that most likely means JJJ wasn't on her team. I did see the idea that she picked him, but this makes little sense for day 1. I think it is worth looking into the players who after Rico flipped made comments, like saying how they hope he isn't as spammy or it would be better to have lynched a baddie. I find the first group to almost be trying to weaken Rico's credit thus giving him less of an opinion and basically neutering him, and the second group to just be scummy.

I think a few mafia members were on the Rico wagon, however I also think there is a good chance that either LoRab or Llama are scum.

I don't have many civ or scum reads right know, but I do think Long Con is a civilian, and I'm leaning scum on Llama. Know here is my question do you think the early snipping that Llama and Zebra did was fabricated? It was only a little bit, but I'm curious what people think of it.

I think with Zebra's lynch it also makes it less likely that Mac is on her team.

One last thing, if Roger Rabbit was a civ role last game wouldn't it be odd for it to be a scum role this game? Could this be some sort of seemer/prankster thing? Remember Night 0 scum was able to do actions in theory they could have targeted Zebra and then killed her today. This could be a seemer role where it replaces the scum who used it, just switched the alignment, or let the seemer pick a role.
I think the chances of this are low, but then again the chances of hitting a mafia night 1 is also small.

Where does the LoRab suspicion come from?

Something that's interesting is that you and Lorab had the same number of votes day 1 Llama.

Would what you said about her also apply to you?

Ok, I saw alot of good points for why JJJ isn't bad. I'll break the tie and vote LoRab.

Linki - Did I say LoRab? I meant FZ!

The first post here is actually just a small piece of Doc's larger case against sig. I notice here that sig stated suspicions of both LoRab and llama without expanding much on why -- so Doc asked him to expand on one of them. He cared about sig's read on LoRab, but he did not care about sig's read on llama. That's interesting. This weird connection between LoRab and llama (that I'm seeing in analyses of other people) continues in the second post. The third post is another terrible vote, perhaps the worst vote of Day 3.5. There is essentially nothing in his posts to indicate prior suspicion of FZ, and by the time he placed this vote numerous people had already expressed strong town reads on her. So why in the world did he literally try to lynch her? If Golden's LoRab vote hadn't come right when it did, this would be a very different scenario right now.

Addendum: now I see his final vote was on MM. Huh? Doc I'm confused, please translate. Was the vote ever on FZ?

~~~

He voted for me on Day 3.0 and MM on Day 3.5.

~~~

I need to know what's going on with that vote before I can make a decent judgment. Otherwise I do see a few team mate-compatible pings.

LoRab and Draconus

LoRab never talked to or about Draconus.

Spoiler: show

Hello again! I am here But not quite I promise! Just entered super busy season for work, but I'm going to try and keep up. Sooooo.... FWIW, Here are the people I won't be voting for on day 1 so far:

Radical Fuzz: He's a strange one. But I see what he's trying to do with his initial post.

Lorab: I went after her in A World Reborn for the exact reason people are looking at her now. I regretted it. Nuf said.

I did not realize how short this list would be when I started it. I'm also surprised to see how many people have little to know content in this game (myself included )

Lorab: I went after her in A World Reborn for the exact reason people are looking at her now. I regretted it. Nuf said.

BOTD'ing someone simply because of patterns repeating themselves? Hmm.

*checks how low on the red scale Draconus was placed*

not low enough, it seems

Why is that bad?

Because if X draws baddie role this time (or any future time), X could bank precisely on you feeling that you're seeing the same stuff he did back when he was civvie.

I understand that. But does being uncomfortable with voting for Lorab after lynching her as a civ in the last game we played together for the same reasons being brought up now make me bad? I'm sure I'm missing punctuations in that sentence

Linki: Precisely.

Not much there. He stood in her defense early on based on meta and their prior game together, got some crap for it, responded to that crap, and has since had little/nothing to say about LoRab. I think it's important to qualify that his content is inherently limited by the fact that he had to spend all of Day 1 asking questions -- but I'll also note that LoRab was nowhere in any of those questions. I think his hesitance to lynch her on Day 1 is believable, but I'd like to see what happened exactly in the prior game to decide if the parallel Draconus drew here was actually appropriate. Team mate-compatible but not indicative.

LoRab and Elohcin / FZ.

Spoiler: show

A question for LoRab before I go back and do what I said I would do... What do you think of HB defending you?

Just finished reading up. Will answer this before I go off to sleep. Will answer other things tomorrow. But this is a direct question and came at the end (I may have cut and copied a bunch of quotes to paste into a window to respond to during my read, and then forgot I did, and cut and pasted something else and lost that entire thing).

Quite honestly, I find it suspicious. I think your suspicion of me is misguided but honest. I believe that you honestly think that I'm bad--it's not like you to make that up. And you wouldn't do that against me. I think those points are BS. I know that you're wrong. But I think that it's coming from the right place. You may be bad, but your suspicion of me isn't evidence of that.

HB's posts, though, they feel like they're sucking up. He's being too nice about it, if that makes sense. And it's not like he knows me well enough to know how to read me. The more he defends me, the less good I feel about it. A civ, I think, wouldn't defend another civ that strongly because it would put targets on both of them. A baddie would defend a civ to gain credit. So, yeah, it makes me increasingly uneasy about him.

Unlike BR, this post actually makes me trust you less than I did before. This is exactly the kind of answer I'd expect a baddie to give when asked such a question. I've strongly defended players I believed were good, so many times, that I don't know why it should make you feel bad about him. I don't even think he's defending you that strongly. He's just asking questions and trying to look elsewhere. But your reaction just feels like you thought what would look best in the eyes of others and that's what you came up with. Does not feel genuine to me.

Can't help the way you read my posts, but my response was honest. I generally read posts of one player saying, more than once, that another player is civ as being suspish. When it is about me, even more so.

And I disagree with your analysis of his posts about me. He said, several times and in several ways, that he thought I was civ--at times softening that, but keeping to that general theme. His posts focus too close to comfort for me to think that they are innocuous.

Also, curious how you would imagine a civie would respond to that direct question, since you say that's how you'd expect a baddie to respond. Since I was responding as a civie and honestly, I'm curious what you would have expected.

FZ was not impressed when LoRab answered BR's call for a read on Burger. LoRab voiced suspicion of Burger for his defenses of her, and FZ suggested this was a forced read and not authentic (I agreed). LoRab's effort here to qualify her comments reads to me like a genuine effort by LoRab to reshape FZ's mindset -- something that is unnecessary and hard to fake if they're team mates.

Spoiler: show

Can someone tell me what is the case on Lorab?

Also, JJJ, why is MM your top suspect? Do you find Sig to be good? If not, why are you kind of wasting a vote (unless you think people will join you...not that I'm seeing you try to convince anyone)

I need to go to sleep. I don't have time to go over Lorab, so can someone tell me why he/she has a couple of votes already? Don't want to vote Sig, and am not feeling the JJJ case yet. There are some posts where he comes off genuine, and then there is his vote that strikes me as weird. I might have missed him talking about Sig and the others who already had votes, but of all things, this might be the thing that makes me doubt him the most. Then again, I need to go and find his suspicion on MM and see how strongly he feels about it and voiced that feeling. But I need more time with him to decide.

Sorry, I'm going to sleep.


linki: so you think Lorab is a good vote? Why so? Damn you, I want to sleep

A question for LoRab before I go back and do what I said I would do... What do you think of HB defending you?

Just finished reading up. Will answer this before I go off to sleep. Will answer other things tomorrow. But this is a direct question and came at the end (I may have cut and copied a bunch of quotes to paste into a window to respond to during my read, and then forgot I did, and cut and pasted something else and lost that entire thing).

Quite honestly, I find it suspicious. I think your suspicion of me is misguided but honest. I believe that you honestly think that I'm bad--it's not like you to make that up. And you wouldn't do that against me. I think those points are BS. I know that you're wrong. But I think that it's coming from the right place. You may be bad, but your suspicion of me isn't evidence of that.

HB's posts, though, they feel like they're sucking up. He's being too nice about it, if that makes sense. And it's not like he knows me well enough to know how to read me. The more he defends me, the less good I feel about it. A civ, I think, wouldn't defend another civ that strongly because it would put targets on both of them. A baddie would defend a civ to gain credit. So, yeah, it makes me increasingly uneasy about him.

Unlike BR, this post actually makes me trust you less than I did before. This is exactly the kind of answer I'd expect a baddie to give when asked such a question. I've strongly defended players I believed were good, so many times, that I don't know why it should make you feel bad about him. I don't even think he's defending you that strongly. He's just asking questions and trying to look elsewhere. But your reaction just feels like you thought what would look best in the eyes of others and that's what you came up with. Does not feel genuine to me.

I think that my top suspects currently are DH, Juliets and Lorab. Lorab, mostly for that post where she answered BR. Boomslang is another one I'm looking at. There are a few others that I find myself curious about, but not as much as these at the moment.

I really have to go. I'm set for 6 hours of sleep if I can fall unconscious right... now.

Nope.

Anyway, I'm going to leave my vote on Boomslang. I've decided I prefer him over llama, and I think he's a more viable candidate right now than LoRab (I'd support her lynch too). I encourage y'all to continue having this productive discourse all the way to the final buzzer of the phase. Make EOD exciting, that's when people crack.

G'night folks. Beware shenanigans.

If Golden feels Boomslang is a civ, maybe we should switch to someone else? If you split your votes, you'll end up being lynched

LoRab?

After Sorsha's vote, maybe her?

linki: Fine

I need to go too. I'll go with Lorab

FZ started cool on LoRab, soliciting others to share their reasons for suspecting her. This was soon after she subbed in and she was still catching up. After LoRab presented her "suspicion" of Burger for his defenses, FZ moved against her and for the most part stayed true to that stance. Toward the end of Day 3.0 she did falter some, and needed me to push her to placing her final vote on LoRab. I think this looks like a player who is unsure what a lynchee is going to flip and is feeling reservations -- the mark of an uninformed non-mafioso. I don't think they're team mates.

[Ricochet]

I remember someone saying baddie LoRab buddies up civs, civ causes or civ cases. In the "suspish" scheme, that would indicate that a) she was true to her (baddie) self and buddied Dom (who is not her teammate) and distanced from llama (who is) or b) mastered the complete opposite move and buddied her teammate Dom and put dirt on a non-teammate.

The sensible detail for me is that LoRab went all the way to reference the commonness of the "suspish" word in past forums of mafia playing, completely ignoring my grand theory in itself, which is that 1) Dom never used this word on Syndicate prior to SW and right now 2) Dom was currently influenced by teammates talk to slip up the word in his posts. Instead, she does the opposite in evaluating llama, saying she doesn't recall him using the word much/often (which is, in this case, kind of a precise inversion of my own theory, on someone else).

Then again, I called out Dom, LoRab and llama under the same suspish umbrella, so why not lynch 'em both.

If I were to completely put aside the however masterful suspish theory, right now I'd suspect llama more than Dom. Dom is only now starting to get testy and confrontational. It could still mean that he's in "oh shit I'm in trouble" mode and that his "stay chill" tactic for this game (in contrast with already having won not one, but two consecutive games as Mad Dom) didn't work out - buuut overall I'd feel less wary of his game to this point. Llama, meanwhile, has recently took the leftiest lefty vote route, by voting DH for "bad vibes" on D3.5 (then again, so has JJJ ), which I already pointed out that felt as the changiest change of suspicions in a four-earth-day interval of changey changes in his vibes, leads and cases.

[Ricochet]

Death to Dom!

Hey, buss baddie. You still have unanswered questions.

Are you planning to get more involved, btw?

[DrWilgy]

@JJJ, I was the 6th "ugly" vote on LoRab before it became a 4 way tie. Me voting for FZ was just a joke and I never actually voted her. I swapped off LoRab to MM once only seconds before the timer ended to break the tie, not realizing that Golden had also swapped.