Dr. Who Mafia - Night 12

#501

I was all ready to say I agree with MP on much of his thinking, and Turnip Head just came in and put a decent case out there. Something to consider.

TH, do you have any thoughts on others?

#502

Other than MP nothing really concerns me much yet. I do agree that it got strangely quiet after we moved on from Day 0, but maybe people are just busy.

#503

I thought votes were stated to be changeable but I don't see that option

#504

What do you make of epignosis voting enrique then?

#505

Turnip Head wrote:I thought votes were stated to be changeable but I don't see that option

MP did move his vote to himself earlier. But now it's stuck there.

#506

Turnip Head wrote:I thought votes were stated to be changeable but I don't see that option

Oh dear, I only voted MP last night because I thought the deadline was then, not today.

#507

zeek wrote:What do you make of epignosis voting enrique then?

Coming from Epi nothing surprises me, though I don't remember seeing Ep's explanation. I myself haven't looked into Enrique much yet, I never saw there to be any good evidence, but maybe Epi's seeing something I'm not.

As for what it means to Epi's alignment, I have no idea yet.

#508

<SNIP>

MovingPictures07 wrote:Okay, I did a re-read skim. Unfortunately, nothing really stuck out to me. A few players that are making me a bit wary but I don't know that I'd vote for them include S~V~S and juliets. S~V~S has had a surprising mix of being in the background and yet posting a lot without really saying much of anything. Definitely ringing bells for me. BUT I can't really read her for crap 90%+ of the time, so... I don't know there. juliets latched pretty quickly onto TH's thoughts against me and then backed off saying there was still much time left in the lynch, but she's been especially latching onto others for opinions and I know she can do that often regardless of alignment, but it strikes me as a bit too much and the timing of her "vote" (but not really a vote) post seemed opportunistic.

You're right MP, early in games I tend to go with something logical I've seen in the thread regardless of my alignment. It's only when the game thins out that I begin seeing things myself. It's just my game.

I don't understand your point about my non-vote. I thought the vote closed last night and I was voting close to the end. Noticed it wasn't til tonight and of course didn't vote. What is "opportunistic" about that? I haven't really understood this word "opportunistic" since it's become a mafia word. It seems to be a word someone uses when they just didn't like what someone did but doesn't have anything concrete to say. If you can explain what you mean by my timing being opportunistic maybe i will understand.

#509

I just changed my vote to bass and back to the mod thing easy peasy. Can someone else try to see if I effed something up? I'm sorry -I'm still getting used to doing polls. I think this is the 3rd one I've done and the firsto ne that's had the changeable option on it.

Worst case senario - if you can't change them on the poll itself, change them in the thread! Just bold and red your posts so I can see them!!!

#510

Thanks bea

#511

Well Zeek if you were to change your vote who would you be considering?

#512

Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.

#513

juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.

I also want to understand this. epig seems confident but I don't get it.

Turnip Head wrote:Well Zeek if you were to change your vote who would you be considering?

I don't know, but I'm not sure about MP. I don't know whether I'm being objective about him given our history in this game.

#514

I don't feel suspicious of either Enrique or MP, so I don't think I'll vote for either of them. I don't have a strong suspicion atm, so for now I'll vote myself and see if I want to change it before the poll closes if I get a chance. I haven't been able to get into full swing yet. :/

*Votes DF*

#515

Turnip Head wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:@MP: I've seen glimpses of your civvie game in some games recently. Not a large sample size, but I've picked up on a few things I've seen you do as a civvie compared to things I've seen you do as a baddie (which is a much larger sample size for me).

I can go into more detail if you wish, and I'm sure you'll want me to But, I'm curious what do you think are the differences between your civ game and your bad game? What do you think I'm missing?
Which games? Are they all the speed games where I've had a track record of being civvie lately?

I would appreciate more detail; that's a good question though. I think it's sort of difficult to self-evaluate tells, but I think my baddie and civvie games differ between full and speed games at least just a bit, and here's what I think:

As a baddie, especially in full games, I constantly feel the need to prove to everyone I'm actually baddie hunting, and in doing so, I go a bit more over the top in soliciting others' opinions, I also tend to come across more confident, because I know the members of my team, at least early on, (I can be confident as a civvie once I feel I've found something), and I tend to make blanket statements that appear helpful but don't really say much of anything.

Speed games -- the difference comes in more with my civvie game, IMO, as I feel more paranoid in full games than in speed games, due to the more players, higher depth, and my much poorer track record.

There's probably more, but that's a succinct version of what I've surmised anyway.
Interesting. Here's your first big on-topic post, post #13 ... I hadn't brought it up yet... it concerned me early on and it's doing one of the things you say you do when you're bad. In the first two parts of your post you respond to zeek and bullzeye's speculation on roles and secrets, but don't really say anything new yourself, except to get on Zeek's case wondering what his motives were for being the first to speculate. And here's the last part of that post:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm curious what this poll means... but I would bet maybe voting certain options leads to certain events? Or maybe we become members of groups corresponding to the doctor numbers? But I don't know. I decided I wasn't going to overthink it and just answer the question straight up, but sometimes I can't help myself.
Does anyone have any ideas as to what this poll might cause game-wise?

I know it could be unlikely we'll guess correctly, so it probably is sort of pointless to speculate, but there's really nothing wrong with discussing it, especially since it appears we can change votes.
I didn't write that wrong, you quoted an earlier post of yours within Post #13 and responded to yourself lol. In the first part you're speculating on the poll, and I think it's telling that you're a bit open with your thought process here. You show that you're overthinking your actions a bit, wondering whether you should be speculating for the benefit of the group or just chiming in with your individual answer. Then you repeatedly ask for others to speculate about it. This part seems helpful but really isn't saying much at all.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
zeek wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:And thanks for the explanation, zeek, I misread your post, my bad. I thought you said Epig not Enri. And I can complain about that because you'd be wrong, but at least I understand why you're doing it. It doesn't make it any less frustrating, but I suppose I get it. I should have probably approached things differently, but whatever, I just play to have fun and I still stand by creating discussion to get emotional tells on players. It's just disheartening because not only do I suffer this but I've seen it happen to SO many players -- in mafia, more people get lynched over people not understanding where they're coming from than they do from truly being "suspicious".
Well, thats not really my fault now is it? If you are a civ, you scapegoated me on Day 0. How can I trust you?
You may completely disagree with my style, but you can't appreciate that I'm genuinely baddie hunting?
MP, bro, there was nothing genuine about how you came at Zeek. You got on his case for speculating about some secrets, asked if anyone else felt the same as you, and then when there was some backlash there you retracted and said you did it to set a trap for Enrique. You expect Zeek to recognize that as "genuine baddie hunting"?

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Canucklehead wrote:Hey, y'all.
I'm here and reading and ready to get my head in this game, now that my Terrible No Good Very Bad week is winding down (only, of course, to rev itself up again tomorrow. FML). Nobody commented on my vote for Turnip Head.....including Turnip Head.
This makes me feel very sad and inconsequential.

I know MP expressed some concerns about TH's opportunistic push on him, but does anyone else have TH thoughts?

I'm also interested in looking at people who were super hyped up and active during the Day 0 phase (indicating that they've been around and involved and excited to play), but who have dropped off the radar since some actual discussion started (which might suggest that they're taking advantage of having the heat on someone else and doing the usual baddie thing of hiding in the shadows of the overwhelmin volumed of players for the first few days until the herd is culled a little). I'm going to go and look back and see if anything strikes me as kooky in that respect....
I find myself agreeing with this. I could possibly get behind a TH vote, but really, I'm not sure yet. He could be a civvie.
Why do you agree with Canuck about this? Do you agree with her when she says my push on you is "opportunistic"? She's used that word twice, and you're agreeing with it as are others, so I'd like to know what you mean by saying my case against you was opportunistic. Why could you "possibly get behind a TH vote"?

MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't know about Enrique, honestly. I'm not really eyeing him for a D1 vote anymore.

That wasn't why I was really looking at Enrique though, it was mainly over the zeek thing, though I did think it was weird how noncommittal he was, so I can understand why that doesn't make sense to you. I never said it made sense.

Can you summarize your suspicion of Enrique?
And now you're flip-flopping some more on the Enrique issue, citing only that his recent posts read genuine. I saw you do this exact same dance with FZ in The Hobbit!

linki Alright you gave some more thoughts on how you felt about me... I wanna let that slide for now because you complimented my civvie skills but maybe that's exactly what you hoped to accomplish by writing that

But yet here you are going even more the other way re: Enrique, now you're leery of a vote for him and you might vote a low poster? Something is seriously fishy with you sir!

Okay, so I don't bring something "new" to the table with every single post I make, that's only logical, or else I wouldn't post nearly as much. I express agreement or disagreement, that's my opinion, and that's new information.

Lol, I know I quoted myself, because no one was speculating on the D0 poll, and I was curious what people were thinking. I overthink my actions all the time, not even just mafia, so that's just a side effect of how my brain works, not whether I'm bad or not, and I never even stated that to be one of my baddie tells.

You're attempting to say there was nothing genuine about how I came after Zeek, but I wasn't necessarily hunting for a baddie in Zeek, I was hunting for information to catch baddies, in gauging everyone else's responses. I've explained this already. It was all genuine baddie hunting. And you misrepresent what I said here too w/ regards to Enrique: I didn't "set a trap" for Enrique specifically, but I was hoping I would catch someone latching onto suspicion of zeek or trying to suspicion monger him so I could turn around and accuse them of following bullshit logic, because baddies bandwagon onto other people's cases all the time.

I agree with Canuck because the timing of your suspicion on me was stirred up in a way that you could seriously have gotten me overwhelmingly lynched (and you still might be able to), but after that you received some backlash from others stating opposite opinions. Before that, no one had really come to actually defend me at all, so yeah, it was opportunistic.

I'm not flip-flopping on Enrique recently, I backed off of that suspicion after he responded to me originally.

In conjunction with how people have jumped onto voting for him, I do feel leery about it, yes. Because I don't really know if he's bad or not.

I don't know what else to say, TH, but you're wrong.

Turnip Head wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:I paid specific attention to Turnip Head and I can't tell if he was genuinely attempting to baddie hunt and thought I was bad or whether he was a baddie opportunistically trying to get me lynched, hoping I was not on his team...
A... a baddie opportunistically trying to get you lynched? 0_0 And you think I'm a baddie on the opposite team as you... which team would that be, MP?

If I'm a baddie trying to get you lynched, why would that be opportunistic of me? No one else was really on your case until I showed up. Shouldn't I, as a baddie, not really care who gets lynched? You're really stretching to force an accusation here to set yourself up as a victim...

Are you kidding? A baddie getting a baddie from an opposite team lynched is PERFECT civvie cred. Of course it can be opportunistic. But sadly for you I'm not bad.

No one was on my case until you showed up? False. You were just the first person to present a case, as such.

Baddies care who get lynched, as long as it's not someone on their team, but even then that can benefit. It's all about the civvie cred.

I'm not forcing anything... so obviously you're either trying to get me lynched or you're misreading my intentions.

juliets wrote:<SNIP>
MovingPictures07 wrote:Okay, I did a re-read skim. Unfortunately, nothing really stuck out to me. A few players that are making me a bit wary but I don't know that I'd vote for them include S~V~S and juliets. S~V~S has had a surprising mix of being in the background and yet posting a lot without really saying much of anything. Definitely ringing bells for me. BUT I can't really read her for crap 90%+ of the time, so... I don't know there. juliets latched pretty quickly onto TH's thoughts against me and then backed off saying there was still much time left in the lynch, but she's been especially latching onto others for opinions and I know she can do that often regardless of alignment, but it strikes me as a bit too much and the timing of her "vote" (but not really a vote) post seemed opportunistic.
You're right MP, early in games I tend to go with something logical I've seen in the thread regardless of my alignment. It's only when the game thins out that I begin seeing things myself. It's just my game.

I don't understand your point about my non-vote. I thought the vote closed last night and I was voting close to the end. Noticed it wasn't til tonight and of course didn't vote. What is "opportunistic" about that? I haven't really understood this word "opportunistic" since it's become a mafia word. It seems to be a word someone uses when they just didn't like what someone did but doesn't have anything concrete to say. If you can explain what you mean by my timing being opportunistic maybe i will understand.

I don't doubt you seriously believed that, so that's not what I was saying.

I was saying your intent was obviously genuine to vote for me, and it was at a time when TH just came in and made his great case so you were like "well, this is all I got, because TH made such a good case", and then you stated you still had time to make up your mind, and you haven't committed to hardly any other thoughts, so to me it just seemed like you were jumping on a bandwagon, especially since earlier you said you didn't think I was bad for my behavior. Correct?

#516

zeek wrote:
juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.
I also want to understand this. epig seems confident but I don't get it.

Turnip Head wrote:Well Zeek if you were to change your vote who would you be considering?
I don't know, but I'm not sure about MP. I don't know whether I'm being objective about him given our history in this game.

What did you think of my observations regarding juliets and S~V~S?

#517

Also, zeek, it appears I can change my vote; if the poll looks like it still has circles to the left of the numbers then you can still change it.

#518

DFaraday wrote:I don't feel suspicious of either Enrique or MP, so I don't think I'll vote for either of them. I don't have a strong suspicion atm, so for now I'll vote myself and see if I want to change it before the poll closes if I get a chance. I haven't been able to get into full swing yet. :/

*Votes DF*

What do you think of Turnip Head?

#519

MovingPictures07 wrote:Also, zeek, it appears I can change my vote; if the poll looks like it still has circles to the left of the numbers then you can still change it.

Think thats because you're a mod, I can't change mine.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Okay, I did a re-read skim. Unfortunately, nothing really stuck out to me. A few players that are making me a bit wary but I don't know that I'd vote for them include S~V~S and juliets. S~V~S has had a surprising mix of being in the background and yet posting a lot without really saying much of anything. Definitely ringing bells for me. BUT I can't really read her for crap 90%+ of the time, so... I don't know there. juliets latched pretty quickly onto TH's thoughts against me and then backed off saying there was still much time left in the lynch, but she's been especially latching onto others for opinions and I know she can do that often regardless of alignment, but it strikes me as a bit too much and the timing of her "vote" (but not really a vote) post seemed opportunistic.

I agree with your point on SVS, she's been posting enough to avoid being called quiet but there's not many posts actually saying anything at all. Don't know about juliets, there are a lot of people who play that way and not everyone can be considered opportunistic.

#520

Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.

#521

MP the fact that I didn't think you were bad doesn't mean I thought you were a civ. I was still open to thoughts about you. The points TH made resonated with me while nothing else had. I had choice to make which I didn't articulate but it was either random the ones who are not even contributing feelings or vote for you based on the ping of TH's post. I decided to vote for you. That's all there was to it. I think one other person had voted for you so it certainly wasn't a bandwagon.

#522

zeek wrote:Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.

It's her first game, she probably doesn't know it's customary to say who you're voting for in chat.

#523

Made wrote:
zeek wrote:Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.
It's her first game, she probably doesn't know it's customary to say who you're voting for in chat.

She hasn't post any suspicions, no thoughts, nothing.

#524

Neither have bass or eloh. I do know Nikki was looking for some help on the game of mafia.

#525

OK, regardless of allignment, I feel i understand everyones angle accept for SVS'
Juliet- question game
Epi- lynch me, you won't
MP- Excited to be here, but everyone hates me and i have no clue why
Enrique- Excited to be here, but everyone hates me and i have no clue why
Zeek- Take no bullshit
Turnip- "MP sucks"
Everyone else- Lol, wait, what's a mafia??

SVS is playing a very meek game, I think ik what she's attempting, but I can't be sure until she tries something.

It should be noted, this is not a read list, but an angle list. Any angles ya'll don't agree with?

Linki- Sabie was the same way her first game, Iunno if that's usual new people behavior, but that's how i see it.

#526

*except

#527

zeek wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Also, zeek, it appears I can change my vote; if the poll looks like it still has circles to the left of the numbers then you can still change it.
Think thats because you're a mod, I can't change mine.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Okay, I did a re-read skim. Unfortunately, nothing really stuck out to me. A few players that are making me a bit wary but I don't know that I'd vote for them include S~V~S and juliets. S~V~S has had a surprising mix of being in the background and yet posting a lot without really saying much of anything. Definitely ringing bells for me. BUT I can't really read her for crap 90%+ of the time, so... I don't know there. juliets latched pretty quickly onto TH's thoughts against me and then backed off saying there was still much time left in the lynch, but she's been especially latching onto others for opinions and I know she can do that often regardless of alignment, but it strikes me as a bit too much and the timing of her "vote" (but not really a vote) post seemed opportunistic.
I agree with your point on SVS, she's been posting enough to avoid being called quiet but there's not many posts actually saying anything at all. Don't know about juliets, there are a lot of people who play that way and not everyone can be considered opportunistic.

Huh, I just checked the poll and it appears it is checked to allow changed votes, so not sure what's happening there.. let me look into that. Lol.

Hmmm, that's fair.

juliets wrote:MP the fact that I didn't think you were bad doesn't mean I thought you were a civ. I was still open to thoughts about you. The points TH made resonated with me while nothing else had. I had choice to make which I didn't articulate but it was either random the ones who are not even contributing feelings or vote for you based on the ping of TH's post. I decided to vote for you. That's all there was to it. I think one other person had voted for you so it certainly wasn't a bandwagon.

Thanks for explaining. I don't think I'll be voting for you today anyway.

#528

I'm not sure what to make of Nikki, it is her first game. I hope she gets the hang of it soon though!

Made wrote:OK, regardless of allignment, I feel i understand everyones angle accept for SVS'
Juliet- question game
Epi- lynch me, you won't
MP- Excited to be here, but everyone hates me and i have no clue why
Enrique- Excited to be here, but everyone hates me and i have no clue why
Zeek- Take no bullshit
Turnip- "MP sucks"
Everyone else- Lol, wait, what's a mafia??

SVS is playing a very meek game, I think ik what she's attempting, but I can't be sure until she tries something.

It should be noted, this is not a read list, but an angle list. Any angles ya'll don't agree with?

Linki- Sabie was the same way her first game, Iunno if that's usual new people behavior, but that's how i see it.

Lol, this cracks me up.

What do you mean re: S~V~S?

#529

Made, questioning is my normal state in a mafia game, so I guess if you want to call it an angle you can.

#530

Hey zeek, can you change your vote now?

#531

Made wrote:
zeek wrote:Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.
It's her first game, she probably doesn't know it's customary to say who you're voting for in chat.

I think we're supposed to say who we're voting for in the thread. "Chat" is where you do all your talking about killing civs and ruling the world.

#532

I can change my vote now, MP.

Interesting list, Made. Didn't look at it like that before. I don't know how SVS plays, so it's good to hear that her play doesn't seem that normal given you can't see her angle in this game. I thought I was the only one how saw something odd about her posting until MP and now you.

juliets wrote:Neither have bass or eloh. I do know Nikki was looking for some help on the game of mafia.

Can't say anything about them until they show up. Nikki, however, voted. Looking through the signups it appears Dana knows her, so perhaps she might shed some light on how versed Nikki is on how to play mafia.

linki - interesting point, Canuck

#533

Canucklehead wrote:
Made wrote:
zeek wrote:Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.
It's her first game, she probably doesn't know it's customary to say who you're voting for in chat.
I think we're supposed to say who we're voting for in the thread. "Chat" is where you do all your talking about killing civs and ruling the world.

Lol, this is really funny, but I don't think it's a slip or anything.

#534

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm not sure what to make of Nikki, it is her first game. I hope she gets the hang of it soon though!

Made wrote:OK, regardless of allignment, I feel i understand everyones angle accept for SVS'
Juliet- question game
Epi- lynch me, you won't
MP- Excited to be here, but everyone hates me and i have no clue why
Enrique- Excited to be here, but everyone hates me and i have no clue why
Zeek- Take no bullshit
Turnip- "MP sucks"
Everyone else- Lol, wait, what's a mafia??

SVS is playing a very meek game, I think ik what she's attempting, but I can't be sure until she tries something.

It should be noted, this is not a read list, but an angle list. Any angles ya'll don't agree with?

Linki- Sabie was the same way her first game, Iunno if that's usual new people behavior, but that's how i see it.
Lol, this cracks me up.

What do you mean re: S~V~S?

I'd expect a seasoned player to put up some sort of front or something. Make herself appear a certain way, but she hasn't. She's making her presence know but she's not taking point, or moving conversation in any direction. This is not to say she's flying under the radar, she seems to be on most everyones. Just not sure what she's doing yet anyways.

Just realized i need to reread Dom....
Linki- Meh, it's not the first time i've called the thread chat. IRC for lyfe tho.

#535

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Canucklehead wrote:
Made wrote:
zeek wrote:Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.
It's her first game, she probably doesn't know it's customary to say who you're voting for in chat.
I think we're supposed to say who we're voting for in the thread. "Chat" is where you do all your talking about killing civs and ruling the world.
Lol, this is really funny, but I don't think it's a slip or anything.

Agreed.

I need people to show up soon to talk this through cause I'm a sickly Brit and I doubt I can stick around until 2am to see this out. Need to vote soonish.

#536

Interesting point, Made. Do you find S~V~S suspicious then or not?

zeek wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Canucklehead wrote:
Made wrote:
zeek wrote:Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.
It's her first game, she probably doesn't know it's customary to say who you're voting for in chat.
I think we're supposed to say who we're voting for in the thread. "Chat" is where you do all your talking about killing civs and ruling the world.
Lol, this is really funny, but I don't think it's a slip or anything.
Agreed.

I need people to show up soon to talk this through cause I'm a sickly Brit and I doubt I can stick around until 2am to see this out. Need to vote soonish.

Hope you feel better!

Well, I know I made the wrong impression on you, and I realize it probably was incredibly unfair to unilaterally use you to see what other people would do, but it was haphazardly put together and I still stand by trying to start discussion, even if it was in a pisspoor fashion. Lol. I hope you reconsider and realize it doesn't make me bad. But if you do vote for me, then I understand, and I'll raise you a

.

As to where I'm thinking about voting, I hope the same thing, because I'm unsure too. I really thought I caught something with Enri but his defenses have been seemingly genuine and I just don't buy that.

What do you think of TH for that matter? I'm torn completely between the civvie who thinks he's found something and a baddie who wants to keep attention away from his teammates.

#537

Looking through that player list there are so many people who simply haven't been around. Starting to really think the baddies are just sitting back but unless they start posting where do you begin to unravel their alignments?

Turnip Head seems like a civ unhappy with your methods.

#538

zeek wrote:Looking through that player list there are so many people who simply haven't been around. Starting to really think the baddies are just sitting back but unless they start posting where do you begin to unravel their alignments?

Turnip Head seems like a civ unhappy with your methods.

I agree. I don't think you, Epig, or Enri deserve votes today (or myself for that matter

), though I entertain that one of you could be bad and sneaky, but I don't particularly have reason to believe any of you are that way more than anyone not talking as much.

Thanks for the opinion, yeah, that perspective is what's keeping me from believing he's bad.

I just feel I'm not any closer to catching anyone than I was D0, which sucks, but it's probably inevitable since we haven't had a lynch yet.

#539

So what do you think - vote for a quiet player? If so, who?

#540

[quote="MovingPictures07"]Interesting point, Made. Do you find S~V~S suspicious then or not?

I think she should be on everyone's radar, so by that definition yes. Game plan right now, since no one seemed to object with my angles, is to go back and see if there's in conflicts with how a person wants to be perceived and how/what they're adding to the game. Who ever has the most conflicts will get my vote at this point. Like zeek, I'm not going to around when the vote proper takes place- Homecoming game!- so i hope thread speeds up before that point.

speaking of which, Ik someone mentioned that they thought the thread was moving very fast, but to me, the game seems to be really slow. Is this just what a normal game is like?

linki- better yet, no lynch? Bea, BWT?

#541

zeek wrote:So what do you think - vote for a quiet player? If so, who?

I don't know. I feel S~V~S has been off, but I can't ever read her, and I'm not convinced she's been that "quiet" or that she deserves a vote.

So... looking at the player list, I just don't know. I suppose I could randomize, but on a matter of principle I typically hate randomizing and almost never do it, so I don't think that'll happen.

Consequently, I think I'm going to go through the players on the list who I don't remember ANYTHING from and read their posts.

#542

Made wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Interesting point, Made. Do you find S~V~S suspicious then or not?

I think she should be on everyone's radar, so by that definition yes. Game plan right now, since no one seemed to object with my angles, is to go back and see if there's in conflicts with how a person wants to be perceived and how/what they're adding to the game. Who ever has the most conflicts will get my vote at this point. Like zeek, I'm not going to around when the vote proper takes place- Homecoming game!- so i hope thread speeds up before that point.

speaking of which, Ik someone mentioned that they thought the thread was moving very fast, but to me, the game seems to be really slow. Is this just what a normal game is like?

linki- better yet, no lynch? Bea, BWT?

Okay, so I'm confused. You think she's suspicious, but you're considering a vote for anyone on your list? And why not anyone who hasn't been the center of attention?

It is pretty normal pace; the Monty Python game was pretty fast.

And seriously, why suggest no lynch?? What does that tell us?

#543

We need to lynch. It's just a question of who. I'm not comfortable voting MP anymore, so I'm going to move my vote soon.

#544

Made, how will you determine how someone wants to be perceived to compare it with your angle?

#545

juliets, do you think the baddies have sat back thus far?

#546

You know, TH's case doesn't really seem as opportunistic or sketchy as some other players who have been quieter, such as Rox. http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 245#p85245

I tell you what, there are so many people who haven't even or have barely even posted on-topic yet.

Still reading.

#547

juliets wrote:Made, how will you determine how someone wants to be perceived to compare it with your angle?

I'm seriously awaiting a response to this.

#548

Sorry for the double post but I want to correct something I said earlier. Bass and Elo have posted but I can't find anywhere that Gotrees has posted.

linki zeek:
I wouldnt be shocked if one of the talkative ones is bad but I think for the moment the rest of the baddies are just watching. That's imho.

#549

Oh there's gonna be a lynch today! I didn't spend all morning writing for nothing. Make it a good one kids!

#550

Makes sense. I don't know who to vote for. I might go SVS based on her flying the radar. Being around but no really discussing anything.

24 Hour Days?