Battlestar Galactica Mafia - GAME OVER

#2301

Vote Long Con

Im going to bed soon, so I want to get my vote out there. I chose Long Con above anyone else because disrupting our plan "for fun" seems like such a lame excuse, and JJJ´s case was alright.

Nutella strikes me as genuine. Inconsistent maybe, but genuine. Long Con seems more manipulative in comparison imo.

#2302

I hope to get more to you, indi and everyone else. Please don't vote for me, I am human and I'm a good guy. I just have to get some dinner ready right now and then take my son to hockey. I managed to speed-catch-up what happened while I was working, but I don't have any more time right now. We still have over 6 hours left in this lynch, and I will get back to it in... 3 hours.

Again, I'm not a baddie, please do not vote for me, and I disbelieve most of those anecdotes about evil jokes-that-were-hiding-baddie-plans stories, I don't remember that stuff. You think I would go ahead with a PLAN to delay the B2-sector by a shift or two?? Why?? No one died during that time. That's not dying time.

#2303

There it is. The PLAN.

#2304

Nerolunar wrote:Vote Long Con

Im going to bed soon, so I want to get my vote out there. I chose Long Con above anyone else because disrupting our plan "for fun" seems like such a lame excuse, and JJJ´s case was alright.

Nutella strikes me as genuine. Inconsistent maybe, but genuine. Long Con seems more manipulative in comparison imo.

For disrupting the plan, huh? Ridiculous. THAT'S how you catch a baddie now? You are that much more likely to be bad and going for the low-hanging fruit you think you see. What a crock. "OH and JJJ's case was alright." Alright. Nice. FoS Nerolunar.

#2305

Nerolunar wrote:There it is. The PLAN.

Yeah, capitalized like the big deal was made for before!

Think I'm on a secret mission with JJJ? (It was JJJ, right?)

#2306

indiglo wrote:
Vompatti wrote:Greetings comrades! Have we decided whom to vote for?
We decided on reverse alphabetical order.

Ok, I'm still hoping to hear more from LC before EoD... however, my EoD will come in 2.5-3 hours, and real EoD will be later than that, so I am resigned to realizing that I may not hear from him by my EoD.

I can also understand the nutella votes, and...

SW I agree with you that quick switch vote from Zeebs doesn't sit well. That was super weird, which is why I asked her why she voted so quick... but no response, so either she didn't see my question or something...

or maybe she doesnt want to answer though I'm inclined to give her more time. I agree that the quick switch vote was odd.

#2307

If you think Im going for low hanging fruit, look at the players voting for Nutella.

#2308

Long Con wrote:
Nerolunar wrote:There it is. The PLAN.
Yeah, capitalized like the big deal was made for before!

Think I'm on a secret mission with JJJ? (It was JJJ, right?)

Honestly no. After all I believe in the case that he made on you.

#2309

Yeah, juliets, I don't think it'll be a problem. Just try again in an hour, you'll be good. Being in Central TZ myself, I also had to calculate it multiple times... I wish there were an easier way to write the schedule, like using a time chart or something.

@ LA - For me, my ping came from your earliest posts. You seemed (to me) to be awfully irritated and gruff with the whole thread situation, and made multiple posts in that mind set. Once I see someone post like that, it's hard for me to read them as civ, because being grumpy seems "bad" to me. (Just my annoyingly chipper personality maybe? I'm not sure where that comes from for me.) I can also understand a certain amount of irritation at what was going on (casting no stones, to be sure) but it is kind of akin to SD's posts coming on here and saying how confused she is. It's like... posting just to be posting, but not adding anything to the discussion - if that makes sense?

Beyond that, it boils down to the reads/pings/so forth on you that people whose opinions I currently trust and respect in the game have expressed. I know that may be shitty... but for the sake of transparency that's where I'm at. But I am definitely reading and trying to absorb your answers to them, because my mind is open and I don't want to make a mistake if I can help it.

Atm, I'd much rather vote LC over you, but I may be in the minority. And I may still go that way, if nothing else at least for FoS reasons, and to vote with my own conscience.

Does that make sense?

Bunch-o-linki, posting then reading

#2310

So Say We All!

IAWY, Let me get this straight... You say:

Inawordyes wrote:Okay, so I'm here!

I ISO'd Go,den to make sure I could post, I got through the first 1,200 posts but I really don't have the time to be able to catch up completely so from the ISO I know the flips, but I don't know anything about what's happened for the rest of Day 1 + any of Day 2 so far.

And follow it up with this...

Inawordyes wrote:I didn't like Glorfindel's posts that I read post-entrance. He seemed fine in his first, but - and this may be a result of his wanting to play differently like he mentioned in sign-ups - he did not sound like himself in the others. I saw people saying he was being fluffly in them. I didn't really see much of that, but tonewise he was a mess haha. I've never played a game with Matty where he was scum, so I don't have know,edge of the differences in his attitude between town and Mafia, but the jarring tone shift makes me wanna say he's Mafia because it's not like town!Glorf at all.

I'm sorry but I'm finding it VERY hard to take you seriously... Especially following your Day 1 post...

#2311

Long Con wrote:
Nerolunar wrote:Vote Long Con

Im going to bed soon, so I want to get my vote out there. I chose Long Con above anyone else because disrupting our plan "for fun" seems like such a lame excuse, and JJJ´s case was alright.

Nutella strikes me as genuine. Inconsistent maybe, but genuine. Long Con seems more manipulative in comparison imo.
For disrupting the plan, huh? Ridiculous. THAT'S how you catch a baddie now? You are that much more likely to be bad and going for the low-hanging fruit you think you see. What a crock. "OH and JJJ's case was alright." Alright. Nice. FoS Nerolunar.

Hmmmm................this seems like a rather panicked and OMGUSy reaction. If LC is bad, Nerolunar likely is not. And if Nerolunar turns out to be bad, LC likely isn't as well. I usually don't do associations before flips but this one seems rather obvious.

I will give you the time you asked for Long Con.

#2312

Long Con wrote:I hope to get more to you, indi and everyone else. Please don't vote for me, I am human and I'm a good guy. I just have to get some dinner ready right now and then take my son to hockey. I managed to speed-catch-up what happened while I was working, but I don't have any more time right now. We still have over 6 hours left in this lynch, and I will get back to it in... 3 hours.

Again, I'm not a baddie, please do not vote for me, and I disbelieve most of those anecdotes about evil jokes-that-were-hiding-baddie-plans stories, I don't remember that stuff. You think I would go ahead with a PLAN to delay the B2-sector by a shift or two?? Why?? No one died during that time. That's not dying time.

Nuts. I'll have to vote within 2 or 2.5 hours because I'm leaving then and won't be back in time. So it looks like I won't get to hear more from you before my own EoD. Sadness.

I want to say right now that if I am wrong about you, I am truly sorry for mis-reading you and misinterpreting your actions. Also, if I am right about you, and you are tricking me into doubting myself, well played you!

So I'm still not sure what to do, but still leaning more towards LC than nutella. Blergh.

#2313

Metalmarsh have you made any reads on people? If not, could you do so now? I could have just forgotten if you did.

#2314

So Say We All!

G-Man wrote:As for Glorfindel, he's my Lazy Rotten Debra of the game so far. He's made 13 posts and a few of them are of the "catching up " variety. He posts a few civvie vibes, agrees with a lot of other people's thoughts, gets sidetracked into lore/mechanics discussions, and tells us who he won't vote for. What's missing is independent thought and any mention of his own suspicions. That's almost exactly what Debra did in Biblical Mafia, hence the term Lazy Rotten Debra.

So we're resorting to 'name calling' now? THAT'S mature...

When I have to wake up of a morning to ten pages of posts, damn straight I'm going to complain about it (like half the players in this game but I assume you don't find them suspicious?). If my behavour this game appears different to my past games here, I can assure you that you are correct. I find it particularly imprudent to go throwing my vote around when I don't even know who it is that I'm supposed to be voting for - otherwise I'd simply vote for Epi right now (following the theory that all Cylons are Mafia) and I've spent a large part of this game coming to terms with that.

And yes, I'm not as good at this game as you obviously are and I'll admit I suck at accusing people of Mafia. So what I am attempting to do this game is more of a 'process of elimination' but identifying the players I am comfortable with so I can look more closely at those who remain. Certainly, it might take me a while longer to get there, but I'm confident that it will yield better results

#2315

Long Con wrote:I hope to get more to you, indi and everyone else. Please don't vote for me, I am human and I'm a good guy. I just have to get some dinner ready right now and then take my son to hockey. I managed to speed-catch-up what happened while I was working, but I don't have any more time right now. We still have over 6 hours left in this lynch, and I will get back to it in... 3 hours.

Again, I'm not a baddie, please do not vote for me, and I disbelieve most of those anecdotes about evil jokes-that-were-hiding-baddie-plans stories, I don't remember that stuff. You think I would go ahead with a PLAN to delay the B2-sector by a shift or two?? Why?? No one died during that time. That's not dying time.

I would be willing to help you even if you want me dead. I still have hope that you'll have a change of heart.

My willingness to help you isn't perpetual, however.

#2316

Can't say much at the moment. Just following along and I want to say that I'm not suspicious of Glorfindel.

#2317

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Matt wrote: I'm seriously inclined to follow Marmot's joke vote again. No offense Zeebs.
I didn't perceive it as a joke vote, how do you know it was a joke vote?
How do you know it wasn't a joke vote?
I didn't say or even remotely imply that I did, nice try though.
"I didn't perceive it as a joke vote"

Yeah you did.

Wow. I didn't know that the line between having an opinion and claiming to know something was so thin to you. I just got done with a real-life semantics argument (about the word "semantics" itself lmao) I really don't need one here. You either know what I meant or you don't.

#2318

Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
G-Man wrote:Linki: The whimsical vote-ninja snark-marmot strikes again.
I've gotten used to MM's haphazard votes by now, I'm not much more predictable myself. It doesn't rub me the wrong way.
I was surprised at your lack of response until someone else mentioned it.

If you had voted for me in such a way, I think I would have at least rolled my eyes or something.
I'm still burnt out from that time where you voted at the beginning of the day, I tried to get you lynched for it, and no one would listen to me because no one was surprised that you did that. I have joined that club of not being surprised by your antics, I just hope that one day I will get a club of my own that's never surprised when I do or say unexpected things.
That's when you learn to look beyond those things.

What do you mean by this post?

#2319

rezz me

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #2320

Thanks indi for responding. Like I said I tend to express whatever is on my mind when I post and on Day 1 there wasn't much to go on. I may have come across as "grumpy" but that doesn't automatically mean I'm bad. I have tried to contribute as much as possible among the chaos in here but on day 1 as usual I really didn't have any substantial opinions/reads on anyone.

As much as I don't want to be lynched, I would also be sad to see LC go. I have been pretty inclined to trust him and he really seems like he's trying to help in his own zany way. He stands out as really having his own voice in the thread and has given lots of valuable perspective about show lore/possible game structure stuff etc. I would be pretty surprised and disappointed if he were to flip bad tbh.

I wish more people were interested in a Zebra lynch today. She's really the strongest candidate imo, I don't think her motivations are good at all.

Linki: Hi Zebra, still waiting on a response from you. I'll give you a chance to do so before I vote.

#2321

Response to what? Hold on I'll find it.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #2322

I made two posts about you, one last night and one a couple hours ago. Just click on my in topic posts

#2323

nutella wrote:Oh, I misremembered, only OA talked about zebra, zebra never responded. I was thinking of Zebra's odd vote for BR -- I don't think she ever acknowledged that BR had in fact posted before then, and she never conceded to others' (including myself) claims that BR tends to be quiet at first.

Looking at her ISO, I do in fact get an odd vibe from zebra, right from the start with her gung-ho "hey matt let's chat" and general eager, almost flippant tone. She participates in the "could some cylons be good"/win condition debate and I actually agree with everything she said on that topic, but otherwise I don't feel great about her. She also said "don't lynch me because I'm town" verbatim two separate times, unprompted, here and here. Does she usually do that? It feels off to me.

nutella wrote: If anyone's ignoring suspicions against her it's Zebra. I made a post about her last night and she hasn't acknowledged it, and she continues to post in her odd, spontaneous, minimalist manner, barely responding to anything. I found it strange just now how she said she would vote for BR, was told that BR had responded, asked/said she would look for the response and reassess, and then spontaneously voted for Ricochet before even seeing BR's responses. She didn't give a reason for her sudden vote on Ricochet and when asked she said he was "trying too hard" and explained that a bit more, but her vote post just felt so out of the blue.

I will most likely be voting for Zebra today. I would like to see her respond to this and my earlier post about her.

I don't know if this is what I'm supposed to be obligated to respond to or not since you haven't asked me any questions or anything. Um...I disagree? You haven't mentioned anything about my behavior this game with either of these posts that I feel is alignment-indicative for any player, so I don't have anything to deny or clarify. I find it a little suspicious that your focus is on me for elements that are consistent with my play style regardless of alignment.

#2324

a2thezebra wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
G-Man wrote:Linki: The whimsical vote-ninja snark-marmot strikes again.
I've gotten used to MM's haphazard votes by now, I'm not much more predictable myself. It doesn't rub me the wrong way.
I was surprised at your lack of response until someone else mentioned it.

If you had voted for me in such a way, I think I would have at least rolled my eyes or something.
I'm still burnt out from that time where you voted at the beginning of the day, I tried to get you lynched for it, and no one would listen to me because no one was surprised that you did that. I have joined that club of not being surprised by your antics, I just hope that one day I will get a club of my own that's never surprised when I do or say unexpected things.
That's when you learn to look beyond those things.
What do you mean by this post?

It means exactly what it says- that you don't take such nonsense into account. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that- were my semantics off?

#2325

Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
G-Man wrote:Linki: The whimsical vote-ninja snark-marmot strikes again.
I've gotten used to MM's haphazard votes by now, I'm not much more predictable myself. It doesn't rub me the wrong way.
I was surprised at your lack of response until someone else mentioned it.

If you had voted for me in such a way, I think I would have at least rolled my eyes or something.
I'm still burnt out from that time where you voted at the beginning of the day, I tried to get you lynched for it, and no one would listen to me because no one was surprised that you did that. I have joined that club of not being surprised by your antics, I just hope that one day I will get a club of my own that's never surprised when I do or say unexpected things.
That's when you learn to look beyond those things.
What do you mean by this post?
It means exactly what it says- that you don't take such nonsense into account. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that- were my semantics off?

No, it's your modus operandi. I still don't get what point you're trying to make.

#2326

just fyi i am here. I'm going to ask that everyone stop posting at 5:45 so I can get my message ready and be able to post at 5:49 on the dot. Then resume posting after i post the sortie. Thank you for those who help me out with this.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #2327

OK, probably some of it is your usual style and I'm unfamiliar with it (I've played with you a couple times but I don't really remember how you played) but I, as well as a few other people, have pointed out that your posts this game have felt kind of... detached? and kind of give off a vibe of ultra-confidence and carelessness. I'd really like to see you participate more in interactive discussion, and explain your stances a little more. I guess the closest I came to asking you a question is about your quick vote on Rico after saying you'd vote for BR, and quite a few other people thought that was weird too. Can you explain that a bit more?

#2328

a2thezebra wrote:No, it's your modus operandi. I still don't get what point you're trying to make.

You're putting too much into this. All I am saying is that I look for other things besides whether MM makes a weird Day 1 vote or Vompatti sets the thread on fire. Those other things exist.

#2329

Send sortie to B3

#2330

ok everyone its done. Thank you for holding posts.

#2331

Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:No, it's your modus operandi. I still don't get what point you're trying to make.
You're putting too much into this. All I am saying is that I look for other things besides whether MM makes a weird Day 1 vote or Vompatti sets the thread on fire. Those other things exist.

Oh, well yeah. That's why MM's vote didn't bother me. Your use of

threw me off since I thought you were trying to say that my post was suss.

#2332

nutella wrote:OK, probably some of it is your usual style and I'm unfamiliar with it (I've played with you a couple times but I don't really remember how you played) but I, as well as a few other people, have pointed out that your posts this game have felt kind of... detached? and kind of give off a vibe of ultra-confidence and carelessness. I'd really like to see you participate more in interactive discussion, and explain your stances a little more. I guess the closest I came to asking you a question is about your quick vote on Rico after saying you'd vote for BR, and quite a few other people thought that was weird too. Can you explain that a bit more?

There is no greater indication that I am civ than the underlined portion.

My Rico vote is simple. I have been gut-reading him as bad for some time now and since the BR suspicion had gotten stale I bumped up the Rico one to first place.

#2333

You found no resurrection ship in sector E1.

#2334

a2thezebra wrote:
nutella wrote:Oh, I misremembered, only OA talked about zebra, zebra never responded. I was thinking of Zebra's odd vote for BR -- I don't think she ever acknowledged that BR had in fact posted before then, and she never conceded to others' (including myself) claims that BR tends to be quiet at first.

Looking at her ISO, I do in fact get an odd vibe from zebra, right from the start with her gung-ho "hey matt let's chat" and general eager, almost flippant tone. She participates in the "could some cylons be good"/win condition debate and I actually agree with everything she said on that topic, but otherwise I don't feel great about her. She also said "don't lynch me because I'm town" verbatim two separate times, unprompted, here and here. Does she usually do that? It feels off to me.
nutella wrote: If anyone's ignoring suspicions against her it's Zebra. I made a post about her last night and she hasn't acknowledged it, and she continues to post in her odd, spontaneous, minimalist manner, barely responding to anything. I found it strange just now how she said she would vote for BR, was told that BR had responded, asked/said she would look for the response and reassess, and then spontaneously voted for Ricochet before even seeing BR's responses. She didn't give a reason for her sudden vote on Ricochet and when asked she said he was "trying too hard" and explained that a bit more, but her vote post just felt so out of the blue.

I will most likely be voting for Zebra today. I would like to see her respond to this and my earlier post about her.
I don't know if this is what I'm supposed to be obligated to respond to or not since you haven't asked me any questions or anything. Um...I disagree? You haven't mentioned anything about my behavior this game with either of these posts that I feel is alignment-indicative for any player, so I don't have anything to deny or clarify. I find it a little suspicious that your focus is on me for elements that are consistent with my play style regardless of alignment.

These two quotes you post look like she is looking for a reason to vote for you, manufacturing a suspicion, to look like she has one.

The first one especially, "Well she talked about this non-suspish topic, and I totally agree with her, but otherwise, meh".

More than anything this makes me want to vote for her.

#2335

So first of all, status on past suspects:

zebra - lynch candidate. Stuff that made me wary from Day One heightened by pattern of what she might try to pull when bad. Late show up toDay only to moodswing from insisting to the same candidate she had a Day ago to me. Her two votes now stand as "vote for a player with no activity, because I know that's the meta of that player when it has no/low activity" and "vote for a player for tryhardism, because I know that's what I'd do". Weaksauces all around.

MetalMarsh89 - gives me the impression of being more focused and preocuppied during Night One, compared to having to plow through banter and reasonless votes during the two Day phases so far. For the life of me, I can't find this trustworthy. FoS

SVS - suss matter from previous Day seems defused, in which at least in one half of the story we seemed to arrived to some idea that it was all strange interpretation, nevertheless I haven't quite completely shaken the feeling of her knitting me into a lynch, with misrepresentation thrown in the mix and everything, and I don't remember her actually ever addressing that part eloquently. If this is perhaps on a personal interaction level, on a game level, I had to resort to ISO, because I didn't remember seeing her post much or any major input in her posts, and indeed her Day Two looks sparse, reads are sparse, except when she rather made use of G-Man's list to cover everyone herself in at least a few mentions. Don't know what to make of this. I'd somewhat have expectations of a more resolute SVS, even at this stage already, with at least one or two elaborated leads. I'd keep the FoS on her as well.

oh my frak so much linki

#2336

S~V~S wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
nutella wrote:Oh, I misremembered, only OA talked about zebra, zebra never responded. I was thinking of Zebra's odd vote for BR -- I don't think she ever acknowledged that BR had in fact posted before then, and she never conceded to others' (including myself) claims that BR tends to be quiet at first.

Looking at her ISO, I do in fact get an odd vibe from zebra, right from the start with her gung-ho "hey matt let's chat" and general eager, almost flippant tone. She participates in the "could some cylons be good"/win condition debate and I actually agree with everything she said on that topic, but otherwise I don't feel great about her. She also said "don't lynch me because I'm town" verbatim two separate times, unprompted, here and here. Does she usually do that? It feels off to me.
nutella wrote: If anyone's ignoring suspicions against her it's Zebra. I made a post about her last night and she hasn't acknowledged it, and she continues to post in her odd, spontaneous, minimalist manner, barely responding to anything. I found it strange just now how she said she would vote for BR, was told that BR had responded, asked/said she would look for the response and reassess, and then spontaneously voted for Ricochet before even seeing BR's responses. She didn't give a reason for her sudden vote on Ricochet and when asked she said he was "trying too hard" and explained that a bit more, but her vote post just felt so out of the blue.

I will most likely be voting for Zebra today. I would like to see her respond to this and my earlier post about her.
I don't know if this is what I'm supposed to be obligated to respond to or not since you haven't asked me any questions or anything. Um...I disagree? You haven't mentioned anything about my behavior this game with either of these posts that I feel is alignment-indicative for any player, so I don't have anything to deny or clarify. I find it a little suspicious that your focus is on me for elements that are consistent with my play style regardless of alignment.
These two quotes you post look like she is looking for a reason to vote for you, manufacturing a suspicion, to look like she has one.

The first one especially, "Well she talked about this non-suspish topic, and I totally agree with her, but otherwise, meh".

More than anything this makes me want to vote for her.

I wouldn't go that far (I mean I'm already voted so there's that) since it's common for people that aren't deeply familiar with my meta to find my behavior suspicious by default, even when none of it is alignment-indicative. It definitely could be a contrived suspicion but I'm not sold on that idea yet. I'll watch her as the game goes on but I wouldn't vote for her today if I still could.

#2337

I'm I've

#2338

Ricochet wrote:Weaksauces all around.

Indeed, both of my votes so far are weaksauces. It's almost like I'm not pretending that there's anything actually conclusive to base a vote off of this early in the game, so I'm not trying to hide that my votes aren't terribly justified.

Unlike you.

#2339

Ricochet wrote:So first of all, status on past suspects:

zebra - lynch candidate. Stuff that made me wary from Day One heightened by pattern of what she might try to pull when bad. Late show up toDay only to moodswing from insisting to the same candidate she had a Day ago to me. Her two votes now stand as "vote for a player with no activity, because I know that's the meta of that player when it has no/low activity" and "vote for a player for tryhardism, because I know that's what I'd do". Weaksauces all around.

MetalMarsh89 - gives me the impression of being more focused and preocuppied during Night One, compared to having to plow through banter and reasonless votes during the two Day phases so far. For the life of me, I can't find this trustworthy. FoS

SVS - suss matter from previous Day seems defused, in which at least in one half of the story we seemed to arrived to some idea that it was all strange interpretation, nevertheless I haven't quite completely shaken the feeling of her knitting me into a lynch, with misrepresentation thrown in the mix and everything, and I don't remember her actually ever addressing that part eloquently. If this is perhaps on a personal interaction level, on a game level, I had to resort to ISO, because I didn't remember seeing her post much or any major input in her posts, and indeed her Day Two looks sparse, reads are sparse, except when she rather made use of G-Man's list to cover everyone herself in at least a few mentions. Don't know what to make of this. I'd somewhat have expectations of a more resolute SVS, even at this stage already, with at least one or two elaborated leads. I'd keep the FoS on her as well.

oh my frak so much linki

I "used" his list because I had also suspected him, and I was pleased to see him post reads. So easier to use an existing list than make my own.

Any opinon on Nutella or LC?

Linki, but I have known her for a looong time Zebra. I know I tend to think that she is bad, but that looks like grasping at straws Nutella to me.

#2340

a2thezebra wrote:
My Rico vote is simple. I have been gut-reading him as bad for some time now and since the BR suspicion had gotten stale I bumped up the Rico one to first place.

"For some time now"

0 results of any read on me, prior to splashing a vote on me. Even 0 results of any mention of me, except when you probably munched popcorn at me and ika arguing.

Such bullsuit.

linki @ SVS: Getting to them.

#2341

I, for one, will sell my vote to the highest bidder.

#2342

S~V~S wrote: Linki, but I have known her for a looong time Zebra. I know I tend to think that she is bad, but that looks like grasping at straws Nutella to me.

But since I haven't known her for a looong time, is she more likely to be grasping at straws as good or bad?

#2343

Ricochet wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
My Rico vote is simple. I have been gut-reading him as bad for some time now and since the BR suspicion had gotten stale I bumped up the Rico one to first place.
"For some time now"

0 results of any read on me, prior to splashing a vote on me. Even 0 results of any mention of me, except when you probably munched popcorn at me and ika arguing.

Such bullsuit.

linki @ SVS: Getting to them.

Excuse me, where did I say that my gut baddie read of you was substantiated or even mentioned in-thread? Find a better reason than misrepresentation to call what I say bullshit please.

#2344

a2thezebra wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Weaksauces all around.
Indeed, both of my votes so far are weaksauces. It's almost like I'm not pretending that there's anything actually conclusive to base a vote off of this early in the game, so I'm not trying to hide that my votes aren't terribly justified.

Unlike you.

You don't have to pretend, you have to look into. Since when are you "it takes Days to form conclusive stuff"? This does nothing but enhance my point that you just come in here flinging formless stuff in the thread.

I still have no idea what you're trying to say with me trying hard. Your characterisation fits nothing of what I've done in the game and nothing I try to impress with when bad. Baseless.

#2345

a2thezebra wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
My Rico vote is simple. I have been gut-reading him as bad for some time now and since the BR suspicion had gotten stale I bumped up the Rico one to first place.
"For some time now"

0 results of any read on me, prior to splashing a vote on me. Even 0 results of any mention of me, except when you probably munched popcorn at me and ika arguing.

Such bullsuit.

linki @ SVS: Getting to them.
Excuse me, where did I say that my gut baddie read of you was substantiated or even mentioned in-thread? Find a better reason than misrepresentation to call what I say bullshit please.

Does that make it better? This is old as shit already with me - in fact I spent Day One with another player who wouldn't substantiate his read on me or clarify what he labelled me as - but if you suss me out without reasoning, you get called out by me, simple as that. You did in fact even worse. You voted straight away.

#2346

"I've been gut-reading player X bad for some time now, but hell if I'll say anything for two Days." Yeah, that makes sense in playing Mafia. This makes me remember that you refused any reads when ika asked you on Day One, because "nah not ready", but then 30 minutes later you offered sig your "top civ reads", all of a sudden.

#2347

Ricochet wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Weaksauces all around.
Indeed, both of my votes so far are weaksauces. It's almost like I'm not pretending that there's anything actually conclusive to base a vote off of this early in the game, so I'm not trying to hide that my votes aren't terribly justified.

Unlike you.
You don't have to pretend, you have to look into. Since when are you "it takes Days to form conclusive stuff"? This does nothing but enhance my point that you just come in here flinging formless stuff in the thread.

I still have no idea what you're trying to say with me trying hard. Your characterisation fits nothing of what I've done in the game and nothing I try to impress with when bad. Baseless.

What the hell do you mean since when am I "it takes days to form conclusive stuff"? The only reason I always speak with conviction about my reads is that we have to lynch someone so let's not beat around the bush and go with the best option, even if that best option isn't that great. Did you think my confidence comes from thinking I'm always right? I would have to be pretty stupid to think that after being proven wrong so often. My confidence comes from not finding a good reason to not act confident, simple as that. So to answer your question, I have always been "it takes days to form conclusive stuff".

I've illustrated what I mean about you trying too hard very clearly. Your recent "status on past suspects" post is yet another example. It reeks of the baddie-feigning-supatown approach because you're trying to give off the impression that you reads and opinions are much more well-substantiated than any of them actually are. Actual supatown players do this as well so it helps (to a point) to do it even more if you're trying to look supatown. Also, it's not a characterization. It is what you've been doing and what you're continuing to do in this game. I would be much more justified in calling your suspicion of me baseless than my you are here to call my suspicion of you baseless. That's obviously not the case.

#2348

Ricochet wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
My Rico vote is simple. I have been gut-reading him as bad for some time now and since the BR suspicion had gotten stale I bumped up the Rico one to first place.
"For some time now"

0 results of any read on me, prior to splashing a vote on me. Even 0 results of any mention of me, except when you probably munched popcorn at me and ika arguing.

Such bullsuit.

linki @ SVS: Getting to them.
Excuse me, where did I say that my gut baddie read of you was substantiated or even mentioned in-thread? Find a better reason than misrepresentation to call what I say bullshit please.
Does that make it better? This is old as shit already with me - in fact I spent Day One with another player who wouldn't substantiate his read on me or clarify what he labelled me as - but if you suss me out without reasoning, you get called out by me, simple as that. You did in fact even worse. You voted straight away.

I'm not saying it's "better" (better for what exactly?) I'm saying that it's wrong to say that I'm lying that I have had a gut read of you for some time just because I didn't mention it. You know what a gut read is.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #2349

a2thezebra wrote:
nutella wrote:OK, probably some of it is your usual style and I'm unfamiliar with it (I've played with you a couple times but I don't really remember how you played) but I, as well as a few other people, have pointed out that your posts this game have felt kind of... detached? and kind of give off a vibe of ultra-confidence and carelessness. I'd really like to see you participate more in interactive discussion, and explain your stances a little more. I guess the closest I came to asking you a question is about your quick vote on Rico after saying you'd vote for BR, and quite a few other people thought that was weird too. Can you explain that a bit more?
There is no greater indication that I am civ than the underlined portion.

My Rico vote is simple. I have been gut-reading him as bad for some time now and since the BR suspicion had gotten stale I bumped up the Rico one to first place.

OK, fair. I am willing to concede that I am misreading your style. I'll hold off on my vote since I might need it for self-preservation anyway, but I'm still keeping an eye on you.

As Rico said though, I don't think you had mentioned any suspicion of him at all until you voted for him -- it felt very out of the blue. And if you had a gut feeling that you hadn't mentioned at all in-thread before, why didn't you at least say that when you voted, instead of not giving any explanation until someone asked? And I'm still kind of perplexed at your deciding "the BR suspicion had gotten stale" when you had just said you would probably vote for her, and then when JJJ showed you BR's posts you still expressed suspicion of her. The whole thing is just kinda fishy.

S~V~S wrote: These two quotes you post look like she is looking for a reason to vote for you, manufacturing a suspicion, to look like she has one.

The first one especially, "Well she talked about this non-suspish topic, and I totally agree with her, but otherwise, meh".

More than anything this makes me want to vote for her.

I was not manufacturing a suspicion. I had a bad gut read on Zebra and I looked at her ISO. I included that I had agreed with some of her game-structure-related posts because they were a decent chunk of her ISO but I also pointed out the bits that gave me bad vibes.

#2350

Ricochet wrote:"I've been gut-reading player X bad for some time now, but hell if I'll say anything for two Days." Yeah, that makes sense in playing Mafia. This makes me remember that you refused any reads when ika asked you on Day One, because "nah not ready", but then 30 minutes later you offered sig your "top civ reads", all of a sudden.

Um, yeah, that does make sense in playing mafia. There can be many reasons for withholding suspicion, especially if it's gut-based. You must have an extremely narrow idea of how to play this game if you think otherwise. Hell, I know players that do nothing BUT withhold their suspicions until what they feel is the time most appropriate, which can be days and nights and days after those suspicions first manifest themselves. I only do it sometimes and even then that's just for gut reads, but you still demand more as if it's a civilian tell to always say what's on your mind throughout the entire game. Contrary to popular belief, I don't do that.

Reads can appear in thirty minutes (or five) of skimming and light homework, I don't see what's suspicious about that.

Who be you lynching today?