The Syndicate

DrumBeats wrote:

Scotty wrote:I'm curious as to whether heavily suspecting a player before they are night killed is a civ look or a bad look. In SVS' case, Drumbeats drove that tunnel home. (JJJ did to an extent as well. In JJJ's case he claimed indie, which I'm choosing to believe)

But i think it's a smart move to be an antagonist of someone right up until the edge of the night so that when that player is killed you can throw up your arms and go "woah! I'm sorry guys, I was totally wrong!" It gives you more options to lynch the next day. Plus, those people that were defending her civiness look worse.

What I can't understand (and I thought about it last night) is why on satan's red earth as a baddie you would kill a prime lynch candidate. My BIGGEST suspicion of Drumbeats was predicated on the assumption that SVS was civ, and now we can't know for sure. But I strongly think she was civ.

It might be confirmation bias at this point, so I'd like other people's opinion on this. We still don't know if she was forced to vote Quin, or who forced her, but I have this nagging feeling that Drumbeats set up SVS to get lynched by jumping right on her after the Quin lynch as confirmed bad.

Or maybe you're setting me up for a mislynch by killing SVS so you can claim she's a civ? I tunneled SVS because I was, and still am, relatively sure she was mafia. I've detailed my reasoning on this about a thousand times, so if you find any of it disengenuine feel free to point it out. From what I've heard, the reasoning for killing ScumVS is actually more sound than a civilian SVS, but I do agree that both are possible right now.

This is the second time that you have based a suspicion on me on an unknown alignment of a nightkill. I'm starting to think that you have more information than you are letting on about their alignments

Nice NO U.

I don't know if SVS is civ. I believe she is, and I'm gonna follow that conviction until I know more info.
Do you think I'm disingenuous about my theory or do you have more info about alignments? I felt strongly about leetic and SVS as strongly as you felt about SVS. Could be we're both just stubborn civs throwin out theories. I just think I'm right and you're wrong

Matt wrote:Caught up. Goin' to work soon but if you have any questions for me let me know and I'll get back to you tonight.

RIP SVS.

Lol @ Drumbeats

@ Scumbuddy Scotty

On a scale of 1-scumbuddy, how did you get such a nice smile?

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Scotty, if you really truly suspect Matt I think you should put your money where your mouth is, put your low poster crusade on pause and vote for him. Let's see what kind of support it generates.

Fine.

vote Matt

Have you read what I wrote about Drumbeats and motivations of baddies to gun for someone only to have them find their demise?

Out of all the SVS haters, DrumBeats felt the most genuine to me. If SVS was indeed the mafia's intended target, I think it was because they realized an SVS lynch would be more problematic for them than they originally thought. They would have been forced to give an opinion one way or the other, and after the flip they'd have to own up to those opinions. DrumBeats was already on the record, he didn't have much to gain from SVS being night killed as opposed to following through with his suspicion.

Ok so let's say hypothetically speaking someone had vehemently defended SVS and went head to head with anyone that opposed her. She gets NK'd. Now is your instinct to go after that person for defending SVS? If they were bad, they would have known she was good.

Scotty wrote:

fingersplints wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:Hey @Matt! What do you make of SVS dying? Would you join Drumbeats, myself and others in lynching you today?

I was just about to ask where your Matt suspicion went. You just paying lip service to it?

Convenient, isn't it?

Isn't what convenient?

Your "suspicion"? Do you not see how it could be perceived as distancing?

Matt wrote:Caught up. Goin' to work soon but if you have any questions for me let me know and I'll get back to you tonight.

RIP SVS.

Lol @ Drumbeats

@ Scumbuddy Scotty

Yup, let's lynch this mofo.

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:[snip]

Ok so let's say hypothetically speaking someone had vehemently defended SVS and went head to head with anyone that opposed her. She gets NK'd. Now is your instinct to go after that person for defending SVS? If they were bad, they would have known she was good.

Why are you asking me this?

I'm voting Matt, Scotty, Sorsha, or Serge.

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:[snip]

Ok so let's say hypothetically speaking someone had vehemently defended SVS and went head to head with anyone that opposed her. She gets NK'd. Now is your instinct to go after that person for defending SVS? If they were bad, they would have known she was good.

Why are you asking me this?

It's really a question for anyone. But since you're responding to me, im asking you.

bea wrote:kk I'm srrsly honest on thisl.

TH- follow up because I'm sure I can't -

Lorab, indi, Spinltsy were all non voices in the eternal night of svs dying.

I am still out of town with extremely limited internet time. (To boot my brain is for real fried after doing ~language~ all day long.) I'm working on catching up on the thread, but if I can do that tonight, I'll be doing good. There will be no major analyses or revelations coming out of me until well after I'm home and rested. I've said this many times, so not sure why the suspicion over it? Unless I'm an easy target due to being out of town? (And thus less participatory.)

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:[snip]

Ok so let's say hypothetically speaking someone had vehemently defended SVS and went head to head with anyone that opposed her. She gets NK'd. Now is your instinct to go after that person for defending SVS? If they were bad, they would have known she was good.

Why are you asking me this?

It's really a question for anyone. But since you're responding to me, im asking you.

Well, you quoted me, so

It's not a question I'm interested in answering, because it's a loaded question. I see what you're doing.

bea wrote:I guess what I'm saying is it's easy to think the early thing. But you and I know how well we all work together.

And maybe it's differently.

Indi - splintsy - lorab

I'm hard pressed to find a reason they didn't land how I did re: svs

Because I don't share a brain with you?

Though, I'm not 100% sure what you're referring to here, tbh. Your heavy suspicion of me, and continually mentioning my name right now is extremely strange to me.

The responses to bea seem unnecessarily hostile... which is odd because it's sweet thang bea.

Sorry, I am completely, utterly exhausted physically and mentally. I also feel like she was bringing up things that I've mentioned numerous times, so it strikes me as odd to bring them up still. Plus I am slightly frustrated not to be able to mafia the way I prefer. (But again, that's something I've already said too.)

Sorry if my responses are hostile. It is due to pure exhaustion. I will now log off, try to wash the day off, and basically pass out... before doing it all again tomorrow.

Sorry bea, if I am grumpy. I think I probably really am, so that part is genuine. But so is the apology and the hug.

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:[snip]

Ok so let's say hypothetically speaking someone had vehemently defended SVS and went head to head with anyone that opposed her. She gets NK'd. Now is your instinct to go after that person for defending SVS? If they were bad, they would have known she was good.

Why are you asking me this?

It's really a question for anyone. But since you're responding to me, im asking you.

Well, you quoted me, so

It's not a question I'm interested in answering, because it's a loaded question. I see what you're doing.

That's fine.

Turnip Head wrote:

Matt wrote:Caught up. Goin' to work soon but if you have any questions for me let me know and I'll get back to you tonight.

RIP SVS.

Lol @ Drumbeats

@ Scumbuddy Scotty

Yup, let's lynch this mofo.

And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

Civilians are going to lose this one.

If you think it's a no u, then that's fine Scotty, but I find you way too certain that Leetic is mafia and that SVS is town. Neither of their alignments have been revealed, yet you are confident enough to develop reads based upon it.

@ Matt - What is your current stance on Scotty? Do you think SVS was a civ or mafia? What are your top three scum reads?

Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

Because I plan to vote for espers.

DrumBeats wrote:If you think it's a no u, then that's fine Scotty, but I find you way too certain that Leetic is mafia and that SVS is town. Neither of their alignments have been revealed, yet you are confident enough to develop reads based upon it.

@ Matt - What is your current stance on Scotty? Do you think SVS was a civ or mafia? What are your top three scum reads?

Drumbeats, don't you see the hypocrisy of that? What are you making reads from? Because surely SVS isn't confirmed bad? We have 3 confirmed lynches. The rest is running through the dark with a flashlight containing 14-year-old-batteries.

I'm making my most educated guesses. I think I graduated middle school, at least. Sometimes I don't know.

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

Because I plan to vote for espers.

Ah, yes. Of course.

Scotty wrote:

DrumBeats wrote:If you think it's a no u, then that's fine Scotty, but I find you way too certain that Leetic is mafia and that SVS is town. Neither of their alignments have been revealed, yet you are confident enough to develop reads based upon it.

@ Matt - What is your current stance on Scotty? Do you think SVS was a civ or mafia? What are your top three scum reads?

Drumbeats, don't you see the hypocrisy of that? What are you making reads from? Because surely SVS isn't confirmed bad? We have 3 confirmed lynches. The rest is running through the dark with a flashlight containing 14-year-old-batteries.

I'm making my most educated guesses. I think I graduated middle school, at least. Sometimes I don't know.

None of my suspicions are based on an assumption that SVS is bad. I think SVS was bad, but I have many other reasons for suspecting you and Matt, individually and together. I will not base any suspicions on SVS until I see more role flips that can confirm or deny whether SVS's vote was forced. So probably late game.

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

Because I plan to vote for espers.

Case please.

I voted Sorsha ha ha

Crap. I just realized I will not be able to be online before EoD again.

Quick poll, that will have to close within the next 30-45 minutes. Would it be preferable for me to vote now, uninformed and not having solid thoughts? Or miss the vote today and give my vote next day phase to Meredith?

I'll check back soon to see if there's a consensus, because I will have to pass out soon. Sorry for being lame this weekend.

DrumBeats wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

Because I plan to vote for espers.

Case please.

I mean, where do I even start?

Turnip Head wrote:

DrumBeats wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

Because I plan to vote for espers.

Case please.

I mean, where do I even start?

Why do you suspect espers?

I'm going to do a lame self-vote this time so as to not miss the vote this day phase.

See y'all on the flip side.

DrumBeats wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

DrumBeats wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

Because I plan to vote for espers.

Case please.

I mean, where do I even start?

Why do you suspect espers?

Maybe because every one of his 6 posts has the words "I AM SCUM" written in big red letters across it? Wake up sheeple.

Here's a link to his post history, take a look for yourself.

fingersplints wrote:Do you understand where Bea is going? Why am I required to see SVS exactly as she does?

Not required. I just want to hear more from you. I don't feel like I have a decent feel for you yet and I'm a bit troubled by that. Where was your day 0 suspish again? I am fail at remembering.

Hey all, sorry i've been busy busy, but work ought to be super slow tomorrow so I will get caught up during my shift!

indiglo wrote:

bea wrote:kk I'm srrsly honest on thisl.

TH- follow up because I'm sure I can't -

Lorab, indi, Spinltsy were all non voices in the eternal night of svs dying.

I am still out of town with extremely limited internet time. (To boot my brain is for real fried after doing ~language~ all day long.) I'm working on catching up on the thread, but if I can do that tonight, I'll be doing good. There will be no major analyses or revelations coming out of me until well after I'm home and rested. I've said this many times, so not sure why the suspicion over it? Unless I'm an easy target due to being out of town? (And thus less participatory.)

Not major just the overly paranoid bea.... you know how I get when I start freeking myself out. Also I figured if I mentioned people's names a bunch of times they would talk.

indiglo wrote:Sorry, I am completely, utterly exhausted physically and mentally. I also feel like she was bringing up things that I've mentioned numerous times, so it strikes me as odd to bring them up still. Plus I am slightly frustrated not to be able to mafia the way I prefer. (But again, that's something I've already said too.)

Sorry if my responses are hostile. It is due to pure exhaustion. I will now log off, try to wash the day off, and basically pass out... before doing it all again tomorrow.

Sorry bea, if I am grumpy. I think I probably really am, so that part is genuine. But so is the apology and the hug.

Sorry I missed you saying you were out of town.

DrumBeats wrote:@ Matt - What is your current stance on Scotty? Do you think SVS was a civ or mafia? What are your top three scum reads?

1. Scotty.

Well, I can understand his frustration with everyone calling us scum buddies (even I said it haha) since we're not, but other then that, I dunno. I still think my suss of him and FS was valid, considering SVS was in the thread at the time I was asking her questions, but whatevs.

Also, Drummy, you were wrong on BWT. You were...potentially...wrong on SVS. I know you're wrong on me. Sooo since you suss Scotty, that leaves me inclined to lean civ on him.

2. SVS

Unless we see her resurrected, I'm going to assume she was civvie. If she were to be resurrected, it doesn't mean she's auto bad either, but if the baddies have some kind of rezz thing, then I can totally see a team nuking one of their own only to revive them later. But for now, civvie.

3. Top Scum Reads

Hmmm

1. INH
2. Splintsy
3. Turnips.

Turnip, have you ever hosted me in a game outside of GoC? I could be wrong, but I was a baddie in that game and as a baddie with teammates, I don't often PM my hosts all that much, so earlier when you said "In my experience hosting him, he would usually PM the host with such a question", I wanted to know where you came up wit dat.

But it's true, tho, I usually do PM my hosts lots and lots, but I want to know what other game(s) Turnips has hosted me in where he came up with such a conclusion.

Also Drummy, thanks bro, I bet I got blocked last night cuz of you. Killin' da town, man, killin' da town.

Matt wrote:Turnip, have you ever hosted me in a game outside of GoC? I could be wrong, but I was a baddie in that game and as a baddie with teammates, I don't often PM my hosts all that much, so earlier when you said "In my experience hosting him, he would usually PM the host with such a question", I wanted to know where you came up wit dat.

But it's true, tho, I usually do PM my hosts lots and lots, but I want to know what other game(s) Turnips has hosted me in where he came up with such a conclusion.

Umm, there is no other game(s), my experience hosting you is the GoC where you PM'ed me and SVS a bunch of questions.

Nice to see I've suddenly made your suspicion list though

Matt wrote:Also, Drummy, you were wrong on BWT. You were...potentially...wrong on SVS. I know you're wrong on me. Sooo since you suss Scotty, that leaves me inclined to lean civ on him.

lolololol

I'm looking for help because I'm behind and still have a bunch of posts I haven't read prior to coming into the thread. So, I have the following questions I hope to get answers to:

Matt did you do a case on INH or if not could you just bullet the points against him for me?
Who did a case on Epi or do we have just things that have popped up on him?
I haven't noticed a bad streak in Scotty but it feels like you guys have. Is there a case on him or again just some points that have popped up?

I think I already told the thread I am out of town through the weekend with a bunch of kids and barking dogs(for those of you from other countries this is a holiday Independence Day weekend) and then we have the drive home. I hope to be able to get on and read some more but I'm not sure how much time I'm going to get. I'll try my very best though. Thank you for any help you can give me on these suspicions above will be helpful. I want to vote for the right person.

Sorry to everyone about me being AWOL since about halfway through the neverending night, I kinda wanted to wait for the dust to clear on the whole SVS kerfuffle.

I'm in the SVS = Good camp, but only because of her NK. I don't think the mafia would've killed her if she was bad simply because she was nowhere near completely condemned at that point.

DrumBeats is still aggressively beating the 'SVS = scum' drum, but I don't buy it at all.

That leaves us with a few motivations to choose from as for why scum decided to do her in. 1. They wanted to frame DrumBeats, Matt, and all the other people who went after SVS. 2. It was a double-bluff, and they wanted us to think that scenario 1 was the truth when in reality it was a fake-out. 3. They wanted to change the conversation, as it was potentially revealing too much about and attracting suspicion towards some of its members.

People I've Gotten Good Vibes From: bea

People I've Gotten Conflicting Vibes From, And Therefore Don't Especially Trust: Drumbeats, Epignosis, Turnip Head, Scotty (Yes I just named the four most currently active players.)

People I've Gotten Bad Vibes From: Timmer, Sorsha, Matt

Matt wrote:
1. Scotty.

Well, I can understand his frustration with everyone calling us scum buddies (even I said it haha) since we're not, but other then that, I dunno. I still think my suss of him and FS was valid, considering SVS was in the thread at the time I was asking her questions, but whatevs.

Also, Drummy, you were wrong on BWT. You were...potentially...wrong on SVS. I know you're wrong on me. Sooo since you suss Scotty, that leaves me inclined to lean civ on him.

I understand why either of you as civ or scum would be frustrated with me calling you guys scum buddies. I apologize for the frustration there but it doesn't change that I believe it to be true.

This statement is a bit ridiculous. I've had one suspicion confirmed wrong in BWT. SVS is still a toss up right now imo, since we have yet to see anything else that could've controlled her vote. I will be 100% willing to swallow my words if I see something, but right now it seems incredibly likely SVS is mafia.

You previously had a suspicion in Scotty that wasn't at all related to mine, and yet you seem to be using mine as a cop out. Night 2, you were set on voting Scotty the following day. What has changed?

2. SVS

Unless we see her resurrected, I'm going to assume she was civvie. If she were to be resurrected, it doesn't mean she's auto bad either, but if the baddies have some kind of rezz thing, then I can totally see a team nuking one of their own only to revive them later. But for now, civvie.

That's fair. What is your current theory on how her vote was forced?

3. Top Scum Reads

Hmmm

1. INH
2. Splintsy
3. Turnips.

What's your case on INH?

Also Drummy, thanks bro, I bet I got blocked last night cuz of you. Killin' da town, man, killin' da town.

This statement in conjunction with previous ones makes me curious:

Off to work, but I need to vote in the night poll.

Gotta love dat Christmas!

Peace out, good luck tonight town!

@DOM, right now it says "Night 3.1". Does that mean the next night phase will be "Night 3.2" or will it be "Night 4" ? Thanks!

Linki - Ummmm k lol

See ya later town!

Linki - 3J, ummm yes. That's actually a very important question, IMO, in my particular case. See ya later!

We know that Matt's role apparently matters which day it is used. So far, we have seen three that depend on this, though there could be more:

Stanley – Stanley is apathetic and it’s contagious. He will block on odd nights so he can rest on the even nights.

Jo – Jo is very convincing. She can control someone’s vote each odd night.

Gabe – Gabe is infinitely awkward. He blocks one person each even night.

I'm not sure whether Night 3.2 would count as night 3, making it an odd night, or if the .2 at the end would technically make it even, so I am going to assume it could be either.

Matt suspects he was roleblocked by one of these roles, and that it is my fault. It could be my fault for one of two reasons:
Me making somebody suspicious of him could have caused Stanley to roleblock him.
Me pointing out that he was likely Stanley, Jo, or Gabe caused either Stanley or Gabe to roleblock him.

Gabe could only have roleblocked him if it counted as an even night, but there is no reason why a mafia roleblocker would want to roleblock Stanley on an even night because it would have no effect on him.

This statement makes me believe that it is highly unlikely that Matt is Stanley. Based on the roles currently available, he is likely Jo, Gabe, or an unrevealed time-based role.

-----

Tl;dr - Voting Matt

Dom wrote:

Night 3.2 - A Mexican Stand Off

SVS has been killed.
It is now Day 4. You have 48 hours to find a baddie.

LOL the baddies really got a sense of humor

Yo peeps. Gotta get to work, let's get this farce of a day phase over with...

Votes Indiglo

If I'm dead when I return, I will miss all of you and apologies to 3J for not returning the favor yo.

Peace

Sorsha wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Sorsha wrote:Also TurnipHead. His constant defense of SVS reminds me of AWR when we had quite a few circumstantial pieces of evidence that SVS was bad and he still refused to believe it. (She was bad, so were TH and I, on the opposite team, ftr). I'll be keeping an eye on him for now, if SVS were lynched and came back civ he would jump up to #1 for me.

I forgot to respond to this. I don't really understand the connection you're drawing. I'm sure I've defended SVS just as often as I've accused her, I'm probably batting .500. I feel okay about your motives though so feel free to keep an eye on me

It means I question your ability to read SVS and I feel like you lean civ on her a bit more than is warranted.

ripiywg SVS... it's not unheard of for the mafia to kill one of their own. Especially if they thought she would be getting lynched today, plus it saves her team from having to defend her. And it makes everyone go WTF.

It's not?

insertnamehere wrote:Sorry to everyone about me being AWOL since about halfway through the neverending night, I kinda wanted to wait for the dust to clear on the whole SVS kerfuffle.

I'm in the SVS = Good camp, but only because of her NK. I don't think the mafia would've killed her if she was bad simply because she was nowhere near completely condemned at that point.

DrumBeats is still aggressively beating the 'SVS = scum' drum, but I don't buy it at all.

That leaves us with a few motivations to choose from as for why scum decided to do her in. 1. They wanted to frame DrumBeats, Matt, and all the other people who went after SVS. 2. It was a double-bluff, and they wanted us to think that scenario 1 was the truth when in reality it was a fake-out. 3. They wanted to change the conversation, as it was potentially revealing too much about and attracting suspicion towards some of its members.

Why did you want to wait for the dust to settle?

But I agree that she was not near completely condemned and find the kill odd regardless.

I'm not trying to aggressively beat it, I'm just saying that I'm not clearing SVS as a civ until I see an explanation for her "forced vote" revealed in the role list. People have mentioned that scum teams have killed their own members before, and the reasoning in those situations seemed pretty relevant here as well. The key to SVS's alignment is in that role list, we'll just have to figure it out with time imo.

@ number 3, what do you suspect the conversation was revealing about the mafia/drawing suspicion to if SVS was indeed a civ?

Sorsha wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Sorsha wrote:Also TurnipHead. His constant defense of SVS reminds me of AWR when we had quite a few circumstantial pieces of evidence that SVS was bad and he still refused to believe it. (She was bad, so were TH and I, on the opposite team, ftr). I'll be keeping an eye on him for now, if SVS were lynched and came back civ he would jump up to #1 for me.

I forgot to respond to this. I don't really understand the connection you're drawing. I'm sure I've defended SVS just as often as I've accused her, I'm probably batting .500. I feel okay about your motives though so feel free to keep an eye on me

It means I question your ability to read SVS and I feel like you lean civ on her a bit more than is warranted.

ripiywg SVS... it's not unheard of for the mafia to kill one of their own. Especially if they thought she would be getting lynched today, plus it saves her team from having to defend her. And it makes everyone go WTF.

Pressed send too quickly. These theories around SVS are insane. Her team could just... not defend her... and just get her lynched instead of wasting a kill. It's moot now but wha???

DFaraday wrote:I'm not sure why people are trying to figure out Epi's alignment based on SVS' remarks. It seems she only said he was bad once during the Eternal Night, and with very little reasoning given. I don't see that as cause for a frame-up or a kill to protect Epi.

What do you think, DF? Was she bad, was she good? Who killed her?

DrumBeats wrote:

Scotty wrote:I'm curious as to whether heavily suspecting a player before they are night killed is a civ look or a bad look. In SVS' case, Drumbeats drove that tunnel home. (JJJ did to an extent as well. In JJJ's case he claimed indie, which I'm choosing to believe)

But i think it's a smart move to be an antagonist of someone right up until the edge of the night so that when that player is killed you can throw up your arms and go "woah! I'm sorry guys, I was totally wrong!" It gives you more options to lynch the next day. Plus, those people that were defending her civiness look worse.

What I can't understand (and I thought about it last night) is why on satan's red earth as a baddie you would kill a prime lynch candidate. My BIGGEST suspicion of Drumbeats was predicated on the assumption that SVS was civ, and now we can't know for sure. But I strongly think she was civ.

It might be confirmation bias at this point, so I'd like other people's opinion on this. We still don't know if she was forced to vote Quin, or who forced her, but I have this nagging feeling that Drumbeats set up SVS to get lynched by jumping right on her after the Quin lynch as confirmed bad.

Or maybe you're setting me up for a mislynch by killing SVS so you can claim she's a civ? I tunneled SVS because I was, and still am, relatively sure she was mafia. I've detailed my reasoning on this about a thousand times, so if you find any of it disengenuine feel free to point it out. From what I've heard, the reasoning for killing ScumVS is actually more sound than a civilian SVS, but I do agree that both are possible right now.

This is the second time that you have based a suspicion on me on an unknown alignment of a nightkill. I'm starting to think that you have more information than you are letting on about their alignments

Explain in your own words.

Enrique wrote:

DrumBeats wrote:

Scotty wrote:I'm curious as to whether heavily suspecting a player before they are night killed is a civ look or a bad look. In SVS' case, Drumbeats drove that tunnel home. (JJJ did to an extent as well. In JJJ's case he claimed indie, which I'm choosing to believe)

But i think it's a smart move to be an antagonist of someone right up until the edge of the night so that when that player is killed you can throw up your arms and go "woah! I'm sorry guys, I was totally wrong!" It gives you more options to lynch the next day. Plus, those people that were defending her civiness look worse.

What I can't understand (and I thought about it last night) is why on satan's red earth as a baddie you would kill a prime lynch candidate. My BIGGEST suspicion of Drumbeats was predicated on the assumption that SVS was civ, and now we can't know for sure. But I strongly think she was civ.

It might be confirmation bias at this point, so I'd like other people's opinion on this. We still don't know if she was forced to vote Quin, or who forced her, but I have this nagging feeling that Drumbeats set up SVS to get lynched by jumping right on her after the Quin lynch as confirmed bad.

Or maybe you're setting me up for a mislynch by killing SVS so you can claim she's a civ? I tunneled SVS because I was, and still am, relatively sure she was mafia. I've detailed my reasoning on this about a thousand times, so if you find any of it disengenuine feel free to point it out. From what I've heard, the reasoning for killing ScumVS is actually more sound than a civilian SVS, but I do agree that both are possible right now.

This is the second time that you have based a suspicion on me on an unknown alignment of a nightkill. I'm starting to think that you have more information than you are letting on about their alignments

Explain in your own words.

Disorienting the town, not allowing SVS's alignment to be revealed, and stopping any reads that could be developed based on SVS's alignment as well as allowing new false ones to be formed based on an assumption that SVS is a civ.

Apparently in another game, scum killed their own in a situation like this and it disoriented the town for two days. I believe it was Sorsha who linked it.

Does she have to be bad for any of that?

That's true. She doesn't. I'm just not wanting to write SVS off as a civ until the role list reveals a method by which her vote could have been forced.

Okay, seriously, how ridiculous is this? It's on par with Golden saying I threw Nero under the bus in Arkham. Some people actually believe this:

SVS is part of a baddie team~ said team has the power to end one day early, and they find out that killing Quin will give them two nights of funsies. Only a few minutes into the say, SVS takes matters into her own hands (because she doesn't want to play anymore? do we have any indication of that?) and decises, on day frickin three of the game, to pull some stupid manouver to out herself that early into the game. The argument is, well, she can still talk her way out of it or play it as a setup... right? Haha no they decide the best way to spend their extra kill is on her In two nights and a day, two civs and a baddie died. So that's... completely standard. They get absolutely nothing out of it. "But it throws the town off".

While, you know, THEY COULD HAVE KAMIKAZEED QUIN AT ANY TIME, AND NOT KILL THEIR TEAMMATE.

I can hardly trust anyone who is framing it differently. It's not some huge complicated issue. They killed a civvie because that's their job, and having the pick of people to blame for it is only an extra.

oh christ sorry for all the typos ive been catching up in my spare minutes between leaving my plain, going through customs, checking baggage etc and getting on a bus

Next 2-3 hours should be gucci.

plane jfc lol

DrumBeats wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:Sorry to everyone about me being AWOL since about halfway through the neverending night, I kinda wanted to wait for the dust to clear on the whole SVS kerfuffle.

I'm in the SVS = Good camp, but only because of her NK. I don't think the mafia would've killed her if she was bad simply because she was nowhere near completely condemned at that point.

DrumBeats is still aggressively beating the 'SVS = scum' drum, but I don't buy it at all.

That leaves us with a few motivations to choose from as for why scum decided to do her in. 1. They wanted to frame DrumBeats, Matt, and all the other people who went after SVS. 2. It was a double-bluff, and they wanted us to think that scenario 1 was the truth when in reality it was a fake-out. 3. They wanted to change the conversation, as it was potentially revealing too much about and attracting suspicion towards some of its members.

Why did you want to wait for the dust to settle?

Because both sides had cogent points that made sense, and were both being espoused by people I don't necessarily trust. It seemed also seemed like the entire thing was becoming a bit of a clusterfuck, and I wanted to wait for the night to end and for more info to become available before I jumped in.

But I agree that she was not near completely condemned and find the kill odd regardless.

I'm not trying to aggressively beat it, I'm just saying that I'm not clearing SVS as a civ until I see an explanation for her "forced vote" revealed in the role list. People have mentioned that scum teams have killed their own members before, and the reasoning in those situations seemed pretty relevant here as well. The key to SVS's alignment is in that role list, we'll just have to figure it out with time imo.

Enrique had some very good counterpoints here, including the simple idea that, if SVS was bad, they could have easily tried to lynch SVS instead of NK'ing her. Yes, her lynch wasn't a sure thing AT THAT POINT, but all of the scum members could have started heavily lobbying/building cred and managed to both get rid of a civ the night before, and remove a possible lynch that could target one of their own.

@ number 3, what do you suspect the conversation was revealing about the mafia/drawing suspicion to if SVS was indeed a civ?

Tbh, I'm not entirely sure. I'd have to re-read the thread with an eye towards that to be 100% on it. The SVS debacle became more or less the sole point of conversation in the thread, eclipsing most others. This could be seen as a bad thing by the mafia, I dunno. That point was more me spitballing for some explanation than me setting up a case on someone.

Enrique wrote:Okay, seriously, how ridiculous is this? It's on par with Golden saying I threw Nero under the bus in Arkham. Some people actually believe this:

SVS is part of a baddie team~ said team has the power to end one day early, and they find out that killing Quin will give them two nights of funsies. Only a few minutes into the say, SVS takes matters into her own hands (because she doesn't want to play anymore? do we have any indication of that?) and decises, on day frickin three of the game, to pull some stupid manouver to out herself that early into the game. The argument is, well, she can still talk her way out of it or play it as a setup... right? Haha no they decide the best way to spend their extra kill is on her In two nights and a day, two civs and a baddie died. So that's... completely standard. They get absolutely nothing out of it. "But it throws the town off".

While, you know, THEY COULD HAVE KAMIKAZEED QUIN AT ANY TIME, AND NOT KILL THEIR TEAMMATE.

I can hardly trust anyone who is framing it differently. It's not some huge complicated issue. They killed a civvie because that's their job, and having the pick of people to blame for it is only an extra.

The only thing is that if they killed their scummate, it would never be revealed that she was scum.

The fact that it has apparently happened before makes me think it might happen again here. Do I think that for certain? No. But do I think it is worth considering? Yes. And we can find the answer later, through what the role list reveals. If there is a method by which SVS's vote could have been forced, SVS is likely a civ. If not, then there is no reason a civilian SVS would have had a forced vote, and thus SVS would likely be mafia.

My thought : Why argue over what alignment SVS is right now, when:
1) She's already dead.
2) It will be revealed in time due to the role list in the OP.

Let's focus on lynching baddies, who are your top suspects enrique?

Also @ Serge - I see the ghost vote. Explain it please.