[ENDGAME] Triskaidekaphobia Mafia

[rabbit8]

I did it because I was providing cop cover. sig correctly guessed that himself, and it's a big reason why I thought he might actually be a cop. This kind of thing is so ordinary in cultures where infodumping is legal. Unfortunately I've had to blow that cover over the course of this dialogue, but it is what it is.

Providing cover means what? That the baddies might kill you for the peek thinking you're possibly the cop? I might have missed this explanation reading through everything.

Cop does role checks, yes? This has been my assumption at least.

[G-Man]

Bullsuit and condescend all you want. I know you're wrong. In fact, I think you're now the lazy option for the quiet folk to pounce on today. I'm glad we got this all out of the way early so we still have 24+ hours to make additional progress.


2.20

You've taken a side without saying why you took it. I agree that I'm the easy way out right now and you're currently more guilty of taking it than anyone.

Believe me when I say I haven't made my mind up on you. I have not taken sides. I merely called your bluff.


2.21

If you haven't taken a side why do you think JJJ is bluffing? Calling a bluff is accusatory in nature, yes?

Because I made an educated guess that JJJ could not possibly have a night peek power. I'm not on the JJJ-is-bad bandwagon yet because his meta is one that promotes bold action to move the civvies forward. His actions could be something to expect out of him.

6. Killing him does not earn me town credit either (nobody is rushing to hand me any as you can see). Because of our association, any kill on sig is by default going to draw scrutiny to me.

I made sure nobody had the time to hand you any town credit. Maybe I'm wrong and forcing the issue cause the civvies irreparable harm but I decided to take your go-big-or-go-home approach.


2.22

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I did it because I was providing cop cover. sig correctly guessed that himself, and it's a big reason why I thought he might actually be a cop. This kind of thing is so ordinary in cultures where infodumping is legal. Unfortunately I've had to blow that cover over the course of this dialogue, but it is what it is.

Providing cover means what? That the baddies might kill you for the peek thinking you're possibly the cop? I might have missed this explanation reading through everything.

Cop does role checks, yes? This has been my assumption at least.

A cop does alignment checks.

The purpose of cover is two-fold:

1. If enough people provide peeks, the real cop has the ability to put their true peeks into the thread without secrecy. It's obscured by all the fake peeks. In the event that the cop is killed, his or her true peeks are then readily visible in the game thread with no need for special interpretation. This prevents confirmed townies from being stupidly lynched and can also be a way to identify true baddie peeks.

2. If a fake peek is believable enough, the baddies will kill the faker instead of the real cop -- prolonging the cop's life and improving town's win chance.

Idon't know for sure if sig meant provide cover, and if he did he chose a different method. Instead of fake peeking, he staunchly refuted my peek and made it look like he was the alignment checker himself.

In a closed setup this is all the same, except the objective is to protect the unknown power roles instead of specifically only the cop.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

G-Man, I can always respect go big or go home. I can also understand distrusting me. Stew over it and take whatever stance you may.

[Elohcin]

Also, completely ignoring it is itself a reaction and something I was looking for.

Please. You're playing the Mastermind and flailing at it at that.

I never claimed to be any kind of "mastermind". I only claimed to do what I did. And I already said it.

Everyone who has visited this thread without commenting on the matter at hand is more suspicious than before.

Elohcin and S~V~S were around but did not comment on the claimed red peek or the discussion stemming from it.

Well, I actually did comment on it when I saw it. Remember me telling G that I understand his point of view, but I saw yours as well. I said I wasn't sure which side I thought to be true and that I was on the fence about it. I didn't say anything right after you posted b/c even though I was shown as being in the thread, I wasn't on my computer. See...I stay logged in at all times and unhidden. Added to that, when I am in a game, I keep the game thread up in a tab at all times.

Okay, I still have TWO pages to read so I am posting this now and will read more.

2.05

[JaggedJimmyJay]

That's true, Eloh. I'd forgotten about your comment re: G-Man and I. I'll rescind that gripe for you.

[Elohcin]

I showed Epignosis why his case doesn't work, and instead of stepping back to reconsider or even expanding his argument to compensate, he doubled down on the attacks that I've shown to be invalid. Then instead of showing me why I'm the illogical party in the exchange, he posted a bullshit meme to give himself a pass for unreasonable stubbornness.

Please remove him from the premises.

You are bad.

You may THINK you showed him how it doesn't work, but I don't think you did.

**Voting JJJ**

Elo: you seem more involved in this game than previous ones. Epi said you were more inclined to be preoccupied during games which is why you avoid the big jobs. This game you seem...eager, I guess? Dunno if there's anything to read from that.

I AM eager. I love playing Mafia when I can actually keep up and know what the hell is going on I am playing catch up today though. I have had a crapton of stuff to do today and this evening I am going out with the girls. So I am sitting here with a pile of laundry in front of me that I intended to sit down an fold, and instead I am talking to you and reading the thread

I'm voting Dr Wilgy for now.

Why?

I'm in legacy mode now. I don't give a crap whether people buy what I'm saying now because they will buy it when I'm dead.

If you flip town, I will still not understand your game-play this game. And, I'm not sure how it will impact my thoughts on Epi.

That's true, Eloh. I'd forgotten about your comment re: G-Man and I. I'll rescind that gripe for you.

Thank you.
Okay, now for the mountain of laundry. And I say mountain b/c it literally resembles a mountain. It is the kids' job to get the clothes from the dryer so I can fold them. They always try to see how tall and narrow they can make the pile

2.06

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I just laid out my logic again Eloh in six points. Show me where I have failed to meet the demands of Epi's case and justify your vote.

[Elohcin]

i'll try again Epi, just in case my points were unclear.

1. Whether there is a cop in this game is irrelevant. There could be, and there are almost certainly some kinds of power roles. When a vanilla civilian provides "cop cover", he or she attracts a night kill thereby protecting the cop or any other non-vanilla civilians.

2. sig's very own posts display a consciousness of cop cover. That's plenty of evidence on its own to suggest he might have had the intent to provide cover himself. Moreover, his staunch refutations of my peeks may have made it look like he had the power to make peeks instead, thus rendering my claim doubtful. That's the proposed method of cover.

3. That his understanding of a cop role differed from mine has no logical bearing on whether he meant to provide cover. You keep bringing this up and it's still irrelevant.

4. That I waited until his death to express my thought that he might be providing cover is a product of not wanting to expose him -- I thought he might actually be a cop. His cover was solid whether he intended it or not.

5. Wilgy associating us as team mates is not sufficient motive for a night kill. If my gambit is to green peek sig as a baddie, I'm smart enough to realize that some people might find that curious and associate the two of us -- especially in this culture where that is foreign. So to say I killed him because I wanted to break that theory is to say I didn't think my peek through in the first place. I'm a very calculated baddie.

6. Killing him does not earn me town credit either (nobody is rushing to hand me any as you can see). Because of our association, any kill on sig is by default going to draw scrutiny to me.

Where is my logic faulty?

I see these points, but I don't think they defend the fact that you could be bad.

2.07

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Okay then.

*Jackie Chan WTF meme*

[Epignosis]

I have multiple tabs open and will be posting as I finish my business in each one.

[Epignosis]

3J:

Spoiler: show

I think I've just illustrated with sig's own posts that he was conscious of the concept of covering for the cop, which means it's perfectly plausible he was doing it himself.

JJJ the fake cop thing is going a wee bit to far. :P


It is clear JJJ is providing cover for the real cop whoever he is, I'm not sure if Wilgy is doing the same or not.

I will most likely vote for Wilgy or SVS today.

I disagree nothing wrong with players who aren't cops peeking since it covers for the real cop, neither are the cops and I think it will be clear in awhile if one is lying or not.

I think JJJ makes a good point about Vomp, but I'm still eyeing SVS for the reasons that Rabbit stated. If needed I'd vote for Vomp over a no lynch, but would prefer someone else.

Epignosis: if you're going to look at these posts and then tell me that I'm full of it for suggesting sig was covering the cop himself, I'll assert that you're the one who is full of it. It's right here, in plain sight, in posts by sig himself which you did not acknowledge in your attacks on me. It's still possible he wasn't trying to provide cover, but there is nothing absurd about me saying he might have been. He has shown here that he understands the concept of covering for the cop, some methods of covering for the cop, and the advantage of covering for the cop.

Everything you've said about sig and cop cover is over. Ended. Bye. If you hold to it you're bad.

Those quotes you pulled came after the most relevant one, and after you explained how the mechanics supposedly worked here.

I think rabbit makes valid points. There is a degree of ambiguity in S~V~S's wording which would enable her to move either direction on sig depending upon circumstance.

sig won't be mislynched in this game anyway because he was my n0 town peek.

2

I agree with Gman (I think) why would you pick me if you had a n0 peek, I highly doubt that you have a n0 peek unless it was a random peek given to a vanilla. Unless you're mafia who knows I'm a civ and faked a peek.


I really dislike that we have so many no lynch votes right now, I understand Quin's reasoning but I don't see why Wilgy, , inh, or Vomp are doing it. If it comes down to it and it is close with the no lynchers, I suggest we lynch one of the no lynchers.

To those watching at home: Does this post look like sig was providing cover?

If you hold to it you're bad.

Well, I'm holding to it.

So what are you going to do about it?

Your logic is shit. sig can think a cop functions differently to the way I think a cop functiins and still be covering for the cop.

I'm going to vote for you. You're not this stubborn that you'd ignore a clear-cut argument.

You claim I am bad. That means I was responsible for killing sig.

Spoiler: show

Awesome cover, sig. It sucks to lose you on night 1, but your sacrifice is appreciated.

Spoiler: show

JJJ... What was Sig cover for?

Me, though he probably didn't know exactly who. By conclusively rejecting me as the cop he made himself look like the cop.

Guess who has a red peek?

I'll just let y'all stew on that one for a while and reveal the name later.

Your reaction to sig's death indicates that you believe sig fooled the mafia. Since you say I am mafia, that means you are asserting that sig fooled me. Do you believe that sig fooled me?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

@Epignosis

That's one possibility among a few if you're bad.

1. You thought sig was the cop and killed him, and your refutations of sig's potential cover since that kill have been dishonest.

2. Your team mates thought he was the cop and overruled you.

3. Your team killed him for a different reason -- perhaps since he was under no pressure to be lynched, or because of his connection to me.

[Epignosis]

@Epignosis

That's one possibility among a few if you're bad.

1. You thought sig was the cop and killed him, and your refutations of sig's potential cover since that kill have been dishonest.

2. Your team mates thought he was the cop and overruled you.

3. Your team killed him for a different reason -- perhaps since he was under no pressure to be lynched, or because of his connection to me.

I wasn't asking for the gamut of possibilities.

3J:

Spoiler: show

I think I've just illustrated with sig's own posts that he was conscious of the concept of covering for the cop, which means it's perfectly plausible he was doing it himself.

JJJ the fake cop thing is going a wee bit to far. :P


It is clear JJJ is providing cover for the real cop whoever he is, I'm not sure if Wilgy is doing the same or not.

I will most likely vote for Wilgy or SVS today.

I disagree nothing wrong with players who aren't cops peeking since it covers for the real cop, neither are the cops and I think it will be clear in awhile if one is lying or not.

I think JJJ makes a good point about Vomp, but I'm still eyeing SVS for the reasons that Rabbit stated. If needed I'd vote for Vomp over a no lynch, but would prefer someone else.

Epignosis: if you're going to look at these posts and then tell me that I'm full of it for suggesting sig was covering the cop himself, I'll assert that you're the one who is full of it. It's right here, in plain sight, in posts by sig himself which you did not acknowledge in your attacks on me. It's still possible he wasn't trying to provide cover, but there is nothing absurd about me saying he might have been. He has shown here that he understands the concept of covering for the cop, some methods of covering for the cop, and the advantage of covering for the cop.

Everything you've said about sig and cop cover is over. Ended. Bye. If you hold to it you're bad.

Those quotes you pulled came after the most relevant one, and after you explained how the mechanics supposedly worked here.

I think rabbit makes valid points. There is a degree of ambiguity in S~V~S's wording which would enable her to move either direction on sig depending upon circumstance.

sig won't be mislynched in this game anyway because he was my n0 town peek.

2

I agree with Gman (I think) why would you pick me if you had a n0 peek, I highly doubt that you have a n0 peek unless it was a random peek given to a vanilla. Unless you're mafia who knows I'm a civ and faked a peek.


I really dislike that we have so many no lynch votes right now, I understand Quin's reasoning but I don't see why Wilgy, , inh, or Vomp are doing it. If it comes down to it and it is close with the no lynchers, I suggest we lynch one of the no lynchers.

To those watching at home: Does this post look like sig was providing cover?

If you hold to it you're bad.

Well, I'm holding to it.

So what are you going to do about it?

Your logic is shit. sig can think a cop functions differently to the way I think a cop functiins and still be covering for the cop.

I'm going to vote for you. You're not this stubborn that you'd ignore a clear-cut argument.

You claim I am bad. That means I was responsible for killing sig.

Spoiler: show

Awesome cover, sig. It sucks to lose you on night 1, but your sacrifice is appreciated.

Spoiler: show

JJJ... What was Sig cover for?

Me, though he probably didn't know exactly who. By conclusively rejecting me as the cop he made himself look like the cop.

Guess who has a red peek?

I'll just let y'all stew on that one for a while and reveal the name later.

Your reaction to sig's death indicates that you believe sig fooled the mafia. Since you say I am mafia, that means you are asserting that sig fooled me. Do you believe that sig fooled me?

For someone who likes straight answers, you haven't been forthcoming with them lately.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I'm not going to give you a hard answer to a question for which I don't have a hard answer. Your premise is faulty:

"You think I'm bad, therefore you think sig fooled me."

Untrue.

Do I think it's a reasonable possibility that sig fooled you? Yes I do. I don't struggle to believe that.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

My phone is dying and I'm out of the house.

All y'all: whether you suspect me or not, I encourage you to maintain focus on the full field of players. I don't want the whole day wasted talking about me, even granting that it's partially my own fault.

Gone for a while.

[Epignosis]

i'll try again Epi, just in case my points were unclear.

1. Whether there is a cop in this game is irrelevant. There could be, and there are almost certainly some kinds of power roles. When a vanilla civilian provides "cop cover", he or she attracts a night kill thereby protecting the cop or any other non-vanilla civilians.

Or it inadvertently narrows down the list of people the mafia should kill. I don't want to get into a debate with you about how these setups work- you have far more experience than I do. Your turf. That isn't the issue. The issue is that you were the only one to claim anything, and then a few other people piped in when you bitched about nobody providing you any cover. That's not how it works, usually, does it?

2. sig's very own posts display a consciousness of cop cover. That's plenty of evidence on its own to suggest he might have had the intent to provide cover himself. Moreover, his staunch refutations of my peeks may have made it look like he had the power to make peeks instead, thus rendering my claim doubtful. That's the proposed method of cover.

I don't agree. sig initially seemed confused, and even accused you of being bad, but then sig's posts after you corrected him about mechanics were weak if they were intentional covering. That's my entire point. sig never once made me think he was successfully covering for anybody, let alone any actual cop himself, and you are the only person who has said you thought sig actually could have been the cop.

3. That his understanding of a cop role differed from mine has no logical bearing on whether he meant to provide cover. You keep bringing this up and it's still irrelevant.

We went over this last night. Hopefully people understand my position, so here it is again: If you are trying to provide cover, then looking ignorant of what the cop does doesn't accomplish that.

4. That I waited until his death to express my thought that he might be providing cover is a product of not wanting to expose him -- I thought he might actually be a cop. His cover was solid whether he intended it or not.

I think you killed him. Of course you thought he was the cop. You were the only one really bothering about peeks, and complained when nobody was generating any cover. You flushed sig out and killed him.

5. Wilgy associating us as team mates is not sufficient motive for a night kill. If my gambit is to green peek sig as a baddie, I'm smart enough to realize that some people might find that curious and associate the two of us -- especially in this culture where that is foreign. So to say I killed him because I wanted to break that theory is to say I didn't think my peek through in the first place. I'm a very calculated baddie.

This is moot.

6. Killing him does not earn me town credit either (nobody is rushing to hand me any as you can see). Because of our association, any kill on sig is by default going to draw scrutiny to me.

I don't think you had that much scrunity until I brought it.

Where is my logic faulty?

Finding mafia isn't about finding who is using faulty logic. Most of the time, it's the civilians.

[Epignosis]

I'm not going to give you a hard answer to a question for which I don't have a hard answer. Your premise is faulty:

"You think I'm bad, therefore you think sig fooled me."

Untrue.

Do I think it's a reasonable possibility that sig fooled you? Yes I do. I don't struggle to believe that.

That isn't a premise. That is a premise followed by a conclusion, and you left out the other premise. Here is the full syllogism:

Premise A: You think I'm mafia.
Premise B: You think sig fooled mafia (your reaction was to his death was to congratulate his cover).
Conclusion: You therefore think sig fooled me.

That's as cut and dry as it gets. I didn't make up the premises. They come from your own posts. Your response to my question, "Do you think sig fooled me?" was to parade out possibilities that let you ignore what you yourself said (my premises) and yet still continue to be right about me.

I'm having none of it.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I'm not going to give you a hard answer to a question for which I don't have a hard answer. Your premise is faulty:

"You think I'm bad, therefore you think sig fooled me."

Untrue.

Do I think it's a reasonable possibility that sig fooled you? Yes I do. I don't struggle to believe that.

That isn't a premise. That is a premise followed by a conclusion, and you left out the other premise. Here is the full syllogism:

Premise A: You think I'm mafia.
Premise B: You think sig fooled mafia (your reaction was to his death was to congratulate his cover).
Conclusion: You therefore think sig fooled me.

That's as cut and dry as it gets. I didn't make up the premises. They come from your own posts. Your response to my question, "Do you think sig fooled me?" was to parade out possibilities that let you ignore what you yourself said (my premises) and yet still continue to be right about me.

I'm having none of it.

Here's why this doesn't suit the reality of how a town mind tends to operate (or at least mine):

You're combining separate assertions into a complex image to qualify what my perspective "must" be to make sense. That's not how it works.

I don't have all the answers. I see certain things in the game thread and I assess them individually.

Assertion 1: I think sig may have intended to provide cover and it could have caused the mafia team to be fooled into killing him.

Assertion 2: Epignosis is suspicious.

You're telling me that the only sensible frame of mind is to combine these assertions into a unified theory. That's untrue. They are separate thoughts.

They can be checked against each other for compatability. I believe they are compatible. That doesn't mean they're both coclusive and cooperative reads, it only means they are compatible.

If I felt they were incompatible, then that'd be reason to doubt either or both. But I don't feel that way.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I'll have to adress the six-point post numerically again.

1. No it isn't how it usually happens. That sucks. Maybe next time people will be better prepared. They have to see it somewhere first I guess.

2. There's the rub. You disagree. Okay, congratulations. I think he made it very clear that he was in a frame of mind that could facilitate cop cover. I think the evidence is right in your face. If you really don't see it, I don't know what to tell you. I don't think you're really looking.

3. You keep saying he was confused. Or he was wrong. His version of a cop is no less valid than mine. You also seem to be acting under the assumption that if sig meant to provide cover, then every single sig post should reflect that. His posts reflect it when he decides to do it.

4. If I was mafia I may have killed him. I thought he looked like a cop candidate. I believe DrWilgy said the same thing. Besides, if the baddies did kill him with this in mind, they're not going to say it -- especially not after I opened the day with immediate commentary avout cop cover. I didn't kill him though. This one people will just have to take or leave.

5. It's not moot. It's a refutation of an argument you presented. If you don't address it, you give me no chance.

6. G-Man got there first. You came immediately after. That was a pretty seamless transition and this day phase is still relatively young. I've been under scrutiny for nearly 100% of it. And if you don't think I'd expect that as a bad guy killing sig, that you can take that "he don't know me" meme right back sir.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Wilgy post I referenced above:

JJJ... What was Sig cover for?

Me, though he probably didn't know exactly who. By conclusively rejecting me as the cop he made himself look like the cop.

Guess who has a red peek?

I'll just let y'all stew on that one for a while and reveal the name later.

Odd because I was thinking the same thing.

JJJ what are your thoughts on Elohchin?

Gman who did you see? I checked SVS, you'll never guess her color.

[Epignosis]

Assertion 1: I think sig may have intended to provide cover and it could have caused the mafia team to be fooled into killing him.

sig may

He may. He also may not.

And it could have

It could have. It could have not.

That's a lot of wiggle room in one assertion. What's the point of making it? It serves no purposes at all.

Assertion 2: Epignosis is suspicious.

When am I not?

You're telling me that the only sensible frame of mind is to combine these assertions into a unified theory. That's untrue. They are separate thoughts.

That isn't what I said. You replaced what I said with one statement that contains two separate examples of weasel words ("may have," "could have," respectively), and one statement that is never false.

You said two things that must logically lead to a conclusion. You congratulated sig for providing cover, and you said I was bad. Ergo, sig fooled me.

The only wiggle room you have are the possibilities you gave:

@Epignosis

That's one possibility among a few if you're bad.

1. You thought sig was the cop and killed him, and your refutations of sig's potential cover since that kill have been dishonest.

2. Your team mates thought he was the cop and overruled you.

3. Your team killed him for a different reason -- perhaps since he was under no pressure to be lynched, or because of his connection to me.

1. I got fooled. Do you think I got fooled?

2. Do you believe I was overruled? Do you know what I'm like on a team?

3. That represents the gamut of reasons ("none of the above") which really doesn't say anything. Do you believe I killed him for his connection to you so I could have this kind of Friday?

They can be checked against each other for compatability. I believe they are compatible. That doesn't mean they're both coclusive and cooperative reads, it only means they are compatible.

If I felt they were incompatible, then that'd be reason to doubt either or both. But I don't feel that way.

I don't work like that. Rarely is anything conclusive. You said what you said. You tried to wiggle out of what you said while maintaining your conclusion about me.

I want you strung up before sundown and taken down before sunup.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

You telling me those assertions must logically lead to a conclusion doesn't make it true. You're wrong.

You've already made your stance clear. You've chosen to spend your Friday this way regardless of whether you're bad. If your mind is made up the again: stop wasting my time. Find my "team mates". If I'm going to have a dialogue with someone, I want it to be with someone who can listen.

[Quin]

I'm not voting to lynch either Epi or 3J. I think it's civ on civ. I'd like an alternative.

Have a vote Polo, tell me about your vote for Wilgy.

[Quin]

This is post 21. I'll fill it with some GTH reads.

wilgy - civ
elohcin - civ
epignosis - civ
gman - civ
INH - bad
3j - civ
polo - bad
rabbit - bad
scotty - civ
spacedaisy - bad
svs - civ

[Epignosis]

You telling me those assertions must logically lead to a conclusion doesn't make it true. You're wrong.

You've already made your stance clear. You've chosen to spend your Friday this way regardless of whether you're bad. If your mind is made up the again: stop wasting my time. Find my "team mates". If I'm going to have a dialogue with someone, I want it to be with someone who can listen.

You fucked yourself in two ways. You congratulated sig on getting killed. You called me bad.

That combination condemns you.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

This is post 21. I'll fill it with some GTH reads.

wilgy - civ
elohcin - civ
epignosis - civ
gman - civ
INH - bad
3j - civ
polo - bad
rabbit - bad
scotty - civ
spacedaisy - bad
svs - civ

It'd be swell if you'd throw up a little analysis as time permits for those bad reads.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I get the feeling the back-and-forths I've had this phase have promoted stagnation from some people, perhaps on both sides. I'm going to calm down and give other people a chance to get a word in.

[Epignosis]

I get the feeling the back-and-forths I've had this phase have promoted stagnation from some people, perhaps on both sides. I'm going to calm down and give other people a chance to get a word in.

It's fine letting other people talk.

You're still bad, and they shouldn't forget that.

I am here. I will be here. You will be gone.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

If there's to be a counter to my wagon, I'm not enthralled by it being Polo. If not Epignosis, I could go for Spacedaisy. I'm open to discussion.

[Quin]

This is post 21. I'll fill it with some GTH reads.

wilgy - civ
elohcin - civ
epignosis - civ
gman - civ
INH - bad
3j - civ
polo - bad
rabbit - bad
scotty - civ
spacedaisy - bad
svs - civ

It'd be swell if you'd throw up a little analysis as time permits for those bad reads.

I will, but not right now. I've got stuff and things to do.

[Elohcin]

Well, as much as I think JJJ is bad, I agree with him that we have several hours left of today and we should make the most of it by talking about other things/people.

Scotty and Quin, why did y'all vote for Polo. If you mentioned it, I missed it among all the Epi/JJJ drama

[Elohcin]

and I forgot my numbers. that was 2.08 and this is...

2.09

Sorry for the spamming rico, but you brought it among yourself

[Ricochet]

With a little under 12 hours to go, a reminder to some that there are some participation score guidelines.

[Quin]

Well, as much as I think JJJ is bad, I agree with him that we have several hours left of today and we should make the most of it by talking about other things/people.

Scotty and Quin, why did y'all vote for Polo. If you mentioned it, I missed it among all the Epi/JJJ drama

I'd like him to elaborate on his vote, primarily. I've said some stuff about him in my GTH reads which I'm in the middle of doing which will elaborate my thoughts as to why he could be bad. It's not a great case against him, so ideally I'd like him to do so so I can move on.

[Quin]

Ignore basically that whole thing because he did address his reasoning in an earlier post. But I'm writing about that in my coming post, so give me a minute.

[Quin]

This is post 21. I'll fill it with some GTH reads.

wilgy - civ
elohcin - civ
epignosis - civ
gman - civ
INH - bad
3j - civ
polo - bad
rabbit - bad
scotty - civ
spacedaisy - bad
svs - civ

It'd be swell if you'd throw up a little analysis as time permits for those bad reads.

INH - In my earlier summary where I pretty much just listed everything of interest to me, INH was definitely in my head the most. His aggressiveness in particular towards you is what I'm basing the bad read off. Unfortunately he hasn't posted today (he could be silenced?) so I can't really update my read.

Polo - Firstly, his inactivity leaves him as the only player left to make an impression and so that way, either he's a baddie skirting the sidelines, or he's just an unhelpful civ. It may be an unpopular opinion, but I'm comfortable lynching either. I did originally put my vote down on him because he didn't say why he was voting Wilgy, but an ISO corrected that. Even so, I'm not impressed with his case. On Day 1, his case was just 'he's different than he was in a previous game', and it's not really pushed, nor did he even vote there at the time (he didn't vote at all). Even now his vote is supposedly 'for now' so he's not asserting his opinion very strongly.

I can put SD and rabbit into pretty much the same thought process. I dislike their reasons for voting Vompatti because it feels like they just wanted to lynch someone regardless of whether it was someone they actually thought was bad or not. I'd rank SD slightly higher than rabbit though, because SD addressed me and made a decent case for herself where rabbit just tried to poke fun at my opinion on no lynching.

[Quin]

Now knowing I'm mistaken in thinking Polo's vote was entirely unreasoned, I'd rather not keep my vote there.

I'll likely sleep through EoD so I'm moving my vote to rabbit in hopes people are looking for an alternative to 3J/Epi. He's my worst scumread out of the four.

[Quin]

I ended in a bad spot. I've gotta post a few more times before I go to bed so I don't get boned by the rules. Some questions off the top of my head, I suppose.

SVS, where are you? How do you feel about Wilgy's testimony of your innocence?

27

[Quin]

Scotty, who are the one or two mafia you wouldn't be surprised to be on the Vompatti bandwagon?

28

[Quin]

G-Man, can I have a new list of GTH reads come the end of day?

29, and unless I need to go back to school, I think I'm good.

[G-Man]

G-Man, can I have a new list of GTH reads come the end of day?

29, and unless I need to go back to school, I think I'm good.

Been mulling my list over since the night post. With so many people sitting on the sidelines today during the JJJ fracas, I'm doing a few second look ISO's. I didn't mean to create tunnel vision when I grilled JJJ but that seems to be what happened. Weekends are my family time, so I will try to sneak in the rest of my reads when I can.


2.23

[DrWilgy]

Take your chance JJJ.

I voted Eloh.

[Elohcin]

Take your chance JJJ.

I voted Eloh.

Why?

2.10

[JaggedJimmyJay]

@Quin

I may be biased when it comes to rabbit given my own hatred of a no lynch. I would rather lynch someone blindly than lynch nobody. If there's anything I could call "suspicious" about rabbit it'd be that he's a notably calmer presence in this game than he was in Battlestar Galactica, where he was more abrasive and aggressive. I have no thorough grasp of his metas though.

Has Daisy posted in Day 2 either?

[DrWilgy]

Take your chance JJJ.

I voted Eloh.

Why?

2.10

Because I doubt that you are genuinely reading the thread for scum hunting.

[Elohcin]

Take your chance JJJ.

I voted Eloh.

Why?

2.10

Because I doubt that you are genuinely reading the thread for scum hunting.

Uh... Okay? I'm doing a hell of a lot more than other players around here. I think you just want to pick me out b/c of my interactions with you during the night last night. **rolls eyes**

2.11

[DrWilgy]

Take your chance JJJ.

I voted Eloh.

Why?

2.10

Because I doubt that you are genuinely reading the thread for scum hunting.

Uh... Okay? I'm doing a hell of a lot more than other players around here. I think you just want to pick me out b/c of my interactions with you during the night last night. **rolls eyes**

2.11

You aren't wrong. Eloh, what happens if JJJ flips cop? What happens if he flips civ?

[G-Man]

Best alternative for me right now is also Elohcin. Scotty slid down to #3 on the re-read and I'm very conflicted about my S~V~S suspicion. Having just seen her as a baddie, I know she is committed to a team. Her absence weighs heavily on my mind.




2.JackBauer

[Scotty]

Lol I have 10 min

If there's to be a counter to my wagon, I'm not enthralled by it being Polo. If not Epignosis, I could go for Spacedaisy. I'm open to discussion.

Why, if you don't want to go for the "low-hanging fruit" as you call Polo, would you want to go for Spacedaisy, who has been even more absent than Polo?

You have been soft defending Polo the past few days, and I just don't understand it. You really think SD is more suspicious?

I wouldn't be surprised if you and Polo were brothers in crime. I really wouldn't. I'm nervous to go after you right now in case you ARE the cop, but the connection is there for me. More so validated than your previously proposed INH-Epi-me link.

I'm leaving my vote on Polo.

Quin, was that "explanation" he gave really enough to quench your sus of him? Am I the only one seeing this?

Scotty, who are the one or two mafia you wouldn't be surprised to be on the Vompatti bandwagon?

28

I could definitely see Elo being bad. I wouldn't be surprised if SVS or SD are in fact bad in that wagon either.