[ENDGAME] The Office Mafia

[Enrique]

Do you suspect bea, timmer, and TH or are they your town reads?
Now that there are only 6 unrevealed roles and no explanation, do you believe it is possible that SVS's vote was not forced and could be scum?

Those are my strongest civvie reads, I can usually get behind their posts and feel comfortable putting my trust in them (to a healthy degree). I recognized I may be a little biased because here and in past games I agree with them a lot (Bea and TH at least, I'm not sure I've played with timmer), but I'm usually right to and I like to think I'd be able to tell if they weren't being genuine. I haven't played many games here and my memory is faulty, but I think they're playing pretty accordingly to their meta which involves a lot of challenging opinions and keeping a cool head. As for timmer, he (she? I always thought she but people are using he) just reads very genuine to me, and I'm getting a big "lynch a civvie for little to no reason" vibe from this day. Controversial opinion: we're all kinda hypocrites, and I don't think doing the same thing that you sus someone for is as much a baddie tell as just a little dissonance (especially considering how uninvolved timmer has been). It just feels like an easy and misguided wagon to fall on. Even a little lazy.

Bea suspecting me feels pretty natural but it's wrong. It's interesting that the Hedville players are being targeted, but I'm not sure I understand the motive? I was in Hedville and all, but I wouldn't think of myself as belonging more there than LP/Piano/others. There's a lot of new folk here and I do like playing with familiar people

TH is confusing me at this point. I was shocked to see how easily Scotty bullied him into voting timmer. Maybe he's holding back, maybe it's sincere, I'm not sure but it is eyebrow raising. Then pledging his vote to me... yeah I don't know how comfortable I am with that, lol. I was hoping he'd explain a little but no dice so far. Whatever, he'll be back.

Your second question: I don't know if she was forced although I really doubt it, but I'm convinced she wasn't bad and no one threw her under the bus. Unless one of the secret roles has post-mortem powers I'm not going to change my mind.

bbl im boarding a plane BUT expect content on splint and serge kbye

[timmer]

Voted for INH. he's still my #1 suspicion.

[Spacedaisy]

I have not kept up well at all in the last 36 hours unfortunately and I am about to go to close t aowrk so I am randomizing my vote.

Sorry Drumbeats.

[juliets]

Epignosis and Bea - what are your reasons for voting Sorsha? Did either of you do a case and I missed it or were there just enough reasons you saw in the thread?

I see why people are voting for timmer but I'm worried his lacking is due to RL so I don't especially want to vote him.

There are others to consider but these two are the leading vote getters at this time.

RIP indiglo. You may have been bad but I wasn't seeing yet. Hopefully see you next game.

[Epignosis]

Epignosis and Bea - what are your reasons for voting Sorsha? Did either of you do a case and I missed it or were there just enough reasons you saw in the thread?

I see why people are voting for timmer but I'm worried his lacking is due to RL so I don't especially want to vote him.

There are others to consider but these two are the leading vote getters at this time.

RIP indiglo. You may have been bad but I wasn't seeing yet. Hopefully see you next game.

It's tough to make a "case" against fifteen posts, but I'll pull the exchange I had with her:

Spoiler: show

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.

How is saying I'm keeping an eye on TH throwing him under the bus? When reading his defense of SVS my mind immediately went to AWR where he staunchly refused to believe she was bad even though evidence pointed to it. Here it didn't even seem like he was considering her to be bad... which he would have no way of knowing that was the case, unless he was bad.

If I'm reading this correctly, Sorsha suspects Turnip Head, but the reasons she's providing- in my mind- would be points in his favor, not against him. Unless Sorsha is supposing two mafia teams (which I see no evidence of, because of what I highlighted in yellow), how does Turnip Head's opinion of S~V~S in a game when they were on opposing factions have any negative bearing on him here? In a two-mafia world, you're all hunters and it helps to figure out the other competition.

And how do we both know that she wasn't bad? I don't want to be hung up on was she/ wasn't she since I don't see a way to find out for sure at this point, but it is possible she was bad. I don't think it's as far fetched as some people seem to be thinking. I don't know if SVS was bad or not. Do you bea?

In the red text, Sorsha asserts that if S~V~S were a civilian, then Turnip Head is her #1 suspect (which I don't understand, since Turnip Head would have been right about it). Yet Sorsha is unconvinced that the killed S~V~S was a civilian. What does this do to her position on Turnip Head? She doesn't say.

I was at the beach all day. I took a good shower, but I'm still finding sand and bits of shell in my crevices.

I'm not going to reply to every single person who has a problem believing that svs might have been bad & killed by her own team. Maybe it makes more sense to me because I was on a baddie team who did that exact thing in the past It wouldn't be a dumb idea.

My suspicion of TH relied solely on how svs would flip at lynch so at this point I have no suspicion of TH. I never know what to think when it comes to Matt. I didn't see anything wrong when looking through indiglo' posts, since bea asked me about her, except that her suspicions seemed pretty safe to me- finding the usual suspects that everyone else is talking about suspicious but nothing beyond that. Looking at splints it seemed like most of her posts are giving info about the tv show and how it might reflect into role/team mechanics and also a few safe suspicions. Didn't get to lorab or anyone else yet.

I think I'm going to vote for inh I noticed he finds me suspicious but he hadn't said why, unless I missed it. I have the feeling it's because I named him earlier + the adversity to my thoughts about svs? I dunno. He could let me know I guess.

I'll vote inh for now, not sure if I'll be back later tonight or not. I've got a lot going on this weekend & tomorrow. Tomorrow is my birthday so who knows when I'll be around.

You dropped that line right on top of a big paragraph about other things. I'm not satisfied. Your suspicion of Turnip Head was, according to you, based on S~V~S getting lynched. That didn't happen, because she got killed. Ninety times out of a hundred, killed people are good people. You now say you have "no suspicion" of Turnip Head. I do not see how that follows.

I even said back then if svs flips civ then I would suspect th, not that I actually suspected th at that time.

I don't get what is hard to understand about that.

Mmm. Let's see.

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.

How is saying I'm keeping an eye on TH throwing him under the bus? When reading his defense of SVS my mind immediately went to AWR where he staunchly refused to believe she was bad even though evidence pointed to it. Here it didn't even seem like he was considering her to be bad... which he would have no way of knowing that was the case, unless he was bad.

And how do we both know that she wasn't bad? I don't want to be hung up on was she/ wasn't she since I don't see a way to find out for sure at this point, but it is possible she was bad. I don't think it's as far fetched as some people seem to be thinking. I don't know if SVS was bad or not. Do you bea?

If you didn't suspect Turnip Head, then there was no reason to bring him up in this context.

What's your take on this, juliets?

[DrumBeats]

Your second question: I don't know if she was forced although I really doubt it, but I'm convinced she wasn't bad and no one threw her under the bus. Unless one of the secret roles has post-mortem powers I'm not going to change my mind.

This is an interesting opinion, can you elaborate on it please? What motivation do you see for a civilian SVS whose vote was not forced to vote Quin that early, and then pretend that it was forced afterwards? Just trying to follow the logic and see if I'm missing anything.

[DrumBeats]

Epsers ISO

Spoiler: show

Hello, people. Haven't read through the thread yet, will do so after lunch. If anyone has any questions for me, let me know.

Fluff just after subbing in. Very understandable thing to say after subbing in but not alignment indicative.

You know what helps a lie detector? Quietly making a statement that you know will help them see that you are civ.

You know what doesn't help them? Getting all players to say it and getting the whole thing thrown out as unusable.

And what really really doesn't help is then winking and saying you knew that, Muhuhaha. Because now day 1 is about you.

not a fan. Maybe you won't care. And because of course you will ask. I am town aligned.

I thinkyou're talking to me so I'll respond. I wasn't going to ask anybody else to say it because the point's already been made that saying 'I am town aligned' isn't worth a damn to a lie detector. It was unusable from the start, so there's no reason why I can't find a use for it myself.

-wink-, muhuhaha.

Muhuhaha indeed, lol!

People who know Quin, how likely is it that he would read that role and miss the part about not using blanket statements? I'm rusty, and have lost track of who plays like what...

This post reminds me of what I've done in the past as scum, asking about someone's meta to look like you're producing content and shift the focus onto others if they bite. timmer is hedgy with this, not committing to a stance.

Also, it seems pretty inaccurate to say that quin missed that part of the role when he acknowledged it in the post timmer was referring to here. Bad look.

Interesting stance on timmer, who was not a point of contention at the time.

So the thing we voted on, Personnel won and now roles have been revealed? Why only townies? If we voted management would have that revealed the roles of the management? I seem to recall a post here wherein the management is a separate group.

Checking out!

This is suspicious at surface level, none of these questions have a hope of producing substantive content if i'm right in my interpretation of the infodumping rules.

Serge, do you have any thoughts on the game's progression so far? Any suspicions of players?

linki: i had this written up before going to do some vacuuming, then when i came back it turned out people have mentioned him

Calls out Serge early for his lack of post-content.

Sorry all I'm doing construction (of all things lol) all day today and zipping over on a date to see Independence Day right after. So I'm not gonna be around much at all leading up to EoD

I've skimmed the past few pages and only have a few things to say:
-Where is Matt? People have been answering for him, which he has expressly said he doesn't like other people doing for other people.
-Wilgy, don't you think that acting the same way as your bad self in another game could be perceived as alignment indicative? Like, just a little? This is like bubble gum bursting in your face, looking in the mirror and going, "I'm still beautiful", tossing back that lock of hair back and saying 'screw the haters!' In other words, this could just be Wilgy being Wilgy. Or it could be Wilgy misspeaking himself into a corner.
-Goldy has yet to check in, and honestly that is where my vote is going right now. Day 1's gonna Day 1, and I think suspicions will make more sense when we see a flip.

vote Goldy

I hope to check back in before EoD, but can't promise it

Goldy was the person I replaced. Others have mentioned it recently, I'd also like to see it clarified. How would my role being flipped make suspicions "make more sense"?

Questions Scotty on the same basis that I was.

I always feel bad about birdwithteeth because he gets lynched so early all the time.

Are you saying you don't think he should be lynched? Not really sure what you're going for here.

Questions Epi

Hi, sorry for missing the vote. Had the deadline wrong in my head, won't let it happen again.

Fwiw I'd have voted BWT.

Fluff, also Espers's last post.

Between Night 1 and Night 2
Fluff: 2
Content: 4

I have to say, what I saw from espers I liked, but the fact that Espers has not checked in since Night 2 makes me wonder what's up with him. The huge streak of inactivity makes me very skeptical.

My rating:

5/10

Questions:
Where are ya?
What are your thoughts on QuinGate (SVS's "forced" vote of Quin)?
Who are your top scumreads as of now?

[DrumBeats]

This one I had to split up the types of mechanical discussion and different types of it.

LoRab ISO

Spoiler: show

hey, y'all! Excited for the game. So you all know, I'm in the middle of a 2 week intensive for a graduate program I'm starting--the program is mostly online, but we're in the midst of our first in person seminar--I will not be able to be playing a whole lot. But after that i'm all good. So, I'll be around when I can, but my days and nights are both a bit insane right now.

Day 0 Fluff - prefacing that she might be inactive due to a graduate program which is definitely a good thing to do. Not alignment indicative at all imo.

Are votes changable?

LoRab -3 doesn't have a muppet avatar anymore

Beware the meeping angels is both muppet and Who, so I'm still muppety--only better.

Day 0 Mechanics and fluff. I'll categorize it as mechanics due to the vote question.

Voted memo, at least for now. Don't want to not get a chance to vote tomorrow.

Night-vote.

Ugh.

And Creed is listed on the first page under civies, so I'm thinking that's a pretty clear indication that he was civ.

Sorry for missing the vote--I thought I'd be back to my computer in time to vote, but dinner took longer than planned.

I'd have likely voted for Quin, because he is encouraging people to post statements that from my read of Dom's answer, Pam wouldn't be able to check--as they are not based on factual information that the poster has, but on opinion. Theorizing incorrectly and not telling the truth are not at all the same thing.

Missed all of day one. Points out that Creed was civ and apologizes for missing the vote. Then begins her mechanical suspicion of Quin, which was a popular opinion at the time.

Ugh.

And Creed is listed on the first page under civies, so I'm thinking that's a pretty clear indication that he was civ.

Sorry for missing the vote--I thought I'd be back to my computer in time to vote, but dinner took longer than planned.

I'd have likely voted for Quin, because he is encouraging people to post statements that from my read of Dom's answer, Pam wouldn't be able to check--as they are not based on factual information that the poster has, but on opinion. Theorizing incorrectly and not telling the truth are not at all the same thing.

Because this is predicated on my answer to a question, let me clarify my answer.

"The Theme Song is a secret role" is a checkable statement.

"I think The theme Song is a secret role" is not a checkable statement.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm finding this confusing, but my brain is fried and I'm exhausted, so I'll trying thinking this through again in the morning.

Mechanical clarification with Dom

Voted customer service.

Night-vote.

1. People suspect Quin for saying there's more to Mafia than hunting baddies.

This is not why I, personally, suspect Quin. I actually see his point. What makes me suspect Quin is his actively encouraging the LD to check uncheckable statements, which would cause a useful civ role to waste their power. That drumbeats has been actively pursuing this with very long selections of such statements makes me wonder if drumbeats is just following what has been presented as a good idea, or if they are teammates.

Suspicion on Quin based upon how she perceives the lie detector to work.

1. People suspect Quin for saying there's more to Mafia than hunting baddies.

This is not why I, personally, suspect Quin. I actually see his point. What makes me suspect Quin is his actively encouraging the LD to check uncheckable statements, which would cause a useful civ role to waste their power. That drumbeats has been actively pursuing this with very long selections of such statements makes me wonder if drumbeats is just following what has been presented as a good idea, or if they are teammates.

Dom confirmed in the thread that the statements I was making were fashioned in a way that could be checked by a lie detector.

No, he did not.

If Pam is able to detect lies in all statements (excluding the obvious), I wonder whether it matters if the statement is made by someone who knows whether or not its the truth themselves. I'm going to ask Dom about it, and if he says it's right, it might be a good idea to just stockpile a whole bunch of hypotheses so she can gather information.

If a statement can be rendered true or false (i.e. Factual not opinion based) and does not break the alignment rule I gave earlier then it is check able.

Ugh.

And Creed is listed on the first page under civies, so I'm thinking that's a pretty clear indication that he was civ.

Sorry for missing the vote--I thought I'd be back to my computer in time to vote, but dinner took longer than planned.

I'd have likely voted for Quin, because he is encouraging people to post statements that from my read of Dom's answer, Pam wouldn't be able to check--as they are not based on factual information that the poster has, but on opinion. Theorizing incorrectly and not telling the truth are not at all the same thing.

Because this is predicated on my answer to a question, let me clarify my answer.

"The Theme Song is a secret role" is a checkable statement.

"I think The theme Song is a secret role" is not a checkable statement.

Here, LoRab. But it looks like you already saw these. Did you just forget?

I did not forget. You claim to have misinterpreted his statements and multiple explanations in the thread. I even pm-ed him to ask for further clarification. Theorizing is not lie detectable. Claims are. There is a difference. Making up a statement to check if it is accurate is not lie detectable, as a false theory is not a lie--it is simply false. Your claiming a role is something different--that is a claim. I think you undersatnd the role perfectly well, but are pretending to not understand how a lie detector works.

More suspicion into Quin based upon LoRab's opinion on how Pam works.

He was pretty clear about it in this post. Maybe you missed it--or did you just forget?

Ugh.

And Creed is listed on the first page under civies, so I'm thinking that's a pretty clear indication that he was civ.

Sorry for missing the vote--I thought I'd be back to my computer in time to vote, but dinner took longer than planned.

I'd have likely voted for Quin, because he is encouraging people to post statements that from my read of Dom's answer, Pam wouldn't be able to check--as they are not based on factual information that the poster has, but on opinion. Theorizing incorrectly and not telling the truth are not at all the same thing.

Because this is predicated on my answer to a question, let me clarify my answer.

"The Theme Song is a secret role" is a checkable statement.

"I think The theme Song is a secret role" is not a checkable statement.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm finding this confusing, but my brain is fried and I'm exhausted, so I'll trying thinking this through again in the morning.

I am getting further questions via PM, so let me clarify further.

If someone frames something as a theory, it is NOT checkable. The context matters.

If someone claims something, that is checkable.

Quoting Dom's statement about the lie detects, claiming that it supports her theory when it really could go either way imo.

That is not how LD roles work. And I clarified with the host that it doesn't work that way in this game.

If you post a theory, that is not checkable, because it is not a matter of telling the truth or a lie. If you post a claim, it is either truth or a lie. The LD is not a fact checker--it is exactly what it says it is, a lie detector.

@Drumbeats: That is not what the host told me when I asked, or what he said in his follow up post. Again, it is not fact checking it is LIE detecting.

@Dom: Please clarify in thread.

Further pushing that her idea about Pam is right.

LoRab, while we wait, care to give some reads that aren't mechanics related?

@ linki Quin - its just as useless then though. If items are in play, people will find them. That's confirmation of items without Pam wasting a shot.

A player encouraging a civ to waste their role is, IMHO, not mechanics related.

And I don't have many other reads. With limited time to devote to reading through this game, that is the only ping I've really had at this point.

Claims that suspicion on Quin is not mechanics related. This post however is the only one so far where the push on Quin seems like it could be more than just mechanics, so I'll give LoRab this one for content.

So basically I was right. Cool.

New rule: We should all present everything as fact. Get rid of any "I think" or "Maybe" statements in order to allow everything we say to be checked by Pam.


@ linki Quin - you've given me worse reasons to push you than that, but INH is my current vote. You're a close second though, and LoRab is working his way up to third

@ linki LoRab - What are your thoughts on the following people? :

INH
3J
Scotty
Matt
Indiglo
birdwithteeth11

No, you were not right. You were presenting conjecture. That is not a claim. That is not checkable. You apparently missed the "context" part of Dom's explanation.

And, as I said, I have barely had time to spend reading this game. I do not have opinions on most things or players at this point. I like to think about things and come to some conclusions before I form suspicions. I don't often give opinions by request.

Very adamant that she is right about Pam. Also refuses to provide any other reads.

LoRab, while we wait, care to give some reads that aren't mechanics related?

@ linki Quin - its just as useless then though. If items are in play, people will find them. That's confirmation of items without Pam wasting a shot.

A player encouraging a civ to waste their role is, IMHO, not mechanics related.

And I don't have many other reads. With limited time to devote to reading through this game, that is the only ping I've really had at this point.

What is your perspective on me now knowing what you now know?

Dom has confirmed what I said, so my opinion has not changed.

Adamant about the Quin suspicion and that Dom has confirmed what she believes.

I am thoroughly confused by this discussion between Quin and LoRab. They seem to be saying the same thing and disagreeing vehemently over it.

Quin has been listing conjectures for Pam to check in the thread, claiming that those conjectures are checkable by Pam as lies or not.

This is not accurate.

I believe she is intentionally trying to get Pam to waste her role. I find it hard to believe that she doesn't understand the difference between claims and theories and why one would be checkable and the other not.

Still pushing that Quin is wrong and bad and she is right. Nothing new either, just restating the same suspicion.

I am thoroughly confused by this discussion between Quin and LoRab. They seem to be saying the same thing and disagreeing vehemently over it.

He earlier called me out for feigning ignorance as to the LD's limitations, and right now I'm kind of seeing the same thing here in that he's pretending not to realise he's wrong in the hopes he can latch onto the possibility of voting me later. Or maybe he's misinterpreting what Dom said. But I think it's the former.

Dom was clear. You are not understanding what Dom has said. I believe that you are feigning ignorance. I am not wrong--you are.

Having played in many, many games with LD's, I cannot even begin to comprehend why what you are claiming would begin to make sense. If I thought you were being accurate, I would probably quit the game because it wouldn't make sense in terms of game set up--but I trust that Dom hasn't changed the idea of an LD so much as to make it an entirely different role (which would be an interesting role, but isn't what an LD does or should be able to do).

Does anyone else who has ever played with an LD think that an LD can determine if a conjecture is correct or not, especially when posted in a list of conjectures listed for the explicit purpose of being checked?

Also, I'm female.

linkitis: I will link momentarily.

Yawn. Still pushing it along with the Quin suspicion. Asking for other opinions at least.

I am thoroughly confused by this discussion between Quin and LoRab. They seem to be saying the same thing and disagreeing vehemently over it.

Quin has been listing conjectures for Pam to check in the thread, claiming that those conjectures are checkable by Pam as lies or not.

This is not accurate.

I believe she is intentionally trying to get Pam to waste her role. I find it hard to believe that she doesn't understand the difference between claims and theories and why one would be checkable and the other not.

Could you please show me the conjectures you're referring to? Much of the context here is lost on me, because it looked like he was promoting a concrete statement be checked.

~~~

Separate note: I don't care about the bloody lie detector role and I encourage Pam to just do her thing.

Here you go:

Here is where Quin first brings up the idea:

If Pam is able to detect lies in all statements (excluding the obvious), I wonder whether it matters if the statement is made by someone who knows whether or not its the truth themselves. I'm going to ask Dom about it, and if he says it's right, it might be a good idea to just stockpile a whole bunch of hypotheses so she can gather information.

She even says that they are hypotheses (which is the same thing as conjecture or theories). Then, when given an answer, she posts a list of theories, posted for the sole purpose of Pam checking them, as opposed to making claims.

And it is clear that Quin knows what a claim is, as she made one regarding her role.

I made sure to get up super dooper early this morning to catch up, even if it is freezing cold.

If Pam is able to detect lies in all statements (excluding the obvious), I wonder whether it matters if the statement is made by someone who knows whether or not its the truth themselves. I'm going to ask Dom about it, and if he says it's right, it might be a good idea to just stockpile a whole bunch of hypotheses so she can gather information.

If a statement can be rendered true or false (i.e. Factual not opinion based) and does not break the alignment rule I gave earlier then it is check able.

So, let's come up with some hypotheses for our good pal Pam.

There are items in this game.
We will eventually receive a complete role list.
Voting for either of the three options on Day 0 would have had had a different effect on the game.

Add your own.

linkitis: @drumbeats: I happen to be online now. And I'm arguing because I'm cranky and because I strongly believe that I am correct and that this is indicative of Quin being bad. I'm less convinced aobut you. But because you are posting those lists for the purpose of them being checked--not because you are making a claim, I do not think that they are checkable. And I disagree that there is no harm in Pam submitting a statement that cannot be checked. In general, if a statement cannot be checked, then the LD is not able to submit a follow up statement, at least in my experience (as player and host). So it wastes the role for that night. That is why I think Quin's intentions are not good. And why I hope Pam has the sense to use her brain to check actual pieces of posts for truth/lies.

linkitis: @Quin: That doesn't make sense. What you posted, and encouraged others to post, was not presented as fact/claim--it was presented as theory and hypothesis.

Mentions arguing it so hard due to being cranky, which is definitely a possibility. The certainty expressed in that if Pam checks something that isnt checkable Dom will not let her resubmit feels like it might be an attempt to scare Pam away from asking Dom if she could check any of the statements I provided. Keeps pushing Quin.

I can appreciate that.

Can appreciate 3J's theory that they are both wrong. We will see if this changes anything later.

My program has ended, so I'm here for real now. I am way too tired to fully process anything right now. So, need to reread the past couple of RL days and ponder to form opinions. But wanted to let y'all know I'm around and I'll be able to play for real now.

Disappears for a while after that. First post is fluff and promise of future activity. Normal enough but not alignment indicative. Currently has not mentioned Quin's civ flip, but we will see.

German.

Who needs a better theme?

I've read too much Jewish philosophy this past week, mainly of Germans, to want that as a theme. I'm going with jazz. It makes my brain hurt less.

Night-vote

Catching up. Headache. But trying to get through and ponder everything.

I think SVS is more than capable of a crazy gambit, but why I don't think she did this in this particular case is that it wouldn't make any sense for her to post about it. It would be far more strategic to just quietly vote without posting before ending day. And then post about it later. It just doesn't seem like SVS to play this out like she's being accused of.

Takes a civilian stance on SVS but acknowledges the possibility of the alternative. Still yet to mention Quin. Reasoning for SVS civ read feels very forced to me because it makes no sense imo since we can just go back and look at the polls.

I don't work that way DB. I work backwards.

tbh, I usually need a few days on SVS and you see I keep finding scenarios where she could still be bad, but honestly, if I use Occum, she reads and feels more civ to me than most.

I'm sad Wilgy died now that I know he was the tracker. Go back and look at my answer and ask yourself, would I have been talking about anyone but SVS? Or maybe Wabbit and Epi?

I felt good about JJ before he claimed/notclaimed indi. JJ - the students of Lorab are watching you. I currently see no reason to not keep him around. But I will flip a bitch as fast as you if make me think you are not working with the civs. As long as he's helpful he's ok. There will - if he lives - a long enough time where his survivial won't be ok. I reserve the right to lynch him when it's time for the potential indy to go. I think deep in his heart he is a civ leaning indy. I'm ok with letting him prove me right or wrong.

I trust a few others. Reading my posts will help you figure out who.

I'd like to hear more from indi and lorab and splintsy just cuz it's all us!! And come on -this is a fun time!!!

sig's still playing right? And he's the low poster I *remember* is playing. I"d like to hear from anyone who has less posts than sig.

linki - what the fucking fuck. Ok - more backtracking.

Other than the fact that "students of LoRab" made me guffaw, I'm confused by this post. You speak as if JJJ is still alive, even though this came after the night post (and I know you post as you catch up, so that's fine), but then you talk about the fact that he might not make. And i don't think you ever went back to correct yourself on him not surviving the night. This almost reads as if you knew he was going to die.

This is my favorite post by LoRab so far. Calls suspicion to bea for unique reasons. I'm not sure I agree on the suspicion but it feels more genuine than the mechanical tunnelvision on Quin.

Catching up. Headache. But trying to get through and ponder everything.

I think SVS is more than capable of a crazy gambit, but why I don't think she did this in this particular case is that it wouldn't make any sense for her to post about it. It would be far more strategic to just quietly vote without posting before ending day. And then post about it later. It just doesn't seem like SVS to play this out like she's being accused of.

That's... oddly specific. And I'm not sure I agree that it would be any more strategic.

It was what I thought when I read through that section. Why announce that you're voting if you're trying to be sneaky and end the lynch? Maybe I'm wrong that it would be any more strategic. I still don't think it's a scenario that SVS would play out either way.

More SVS defense on the same logic that I don't get. Now says that she doesn't think SVS would do it either way, despite previously saying that she thought SVS was capable of it. Odd imo.

Noted about timmer. The one I suspect most is Lorab. One mechanics-based suspicion on Quin, who happened to be the person who the mafia benefitted from lynching. I also don't like Lorab's thoughts on SVS because they seem forced regardless of how SVS flips. Acknowledges how SVS is capable of a gambit like this, but then says probably not because SVS announced the vote rather than silently voting (which would be a terrible move for ScumVS).

Sorry you don't like how I play. I can't really do anything about that. I get caught up in mechanics that I think are important--more importantly, when I think another player seems to be bad based on those mechanics, I go after them. As for SVS, I was (probably poorly) expressing why I didn't think she was bad--and I still don't. I know how she plays--I've been playing with her for a long time. The way things played out, specifically how she played them, doesn't feel to me how she'd play out that scenario--at all.

That I disagree with you does not mean that I'm bad. Simply that I think about games differently than you do.

I'll read their posts and let you know where I am with those three, I'm leaning bad on LoRab so far though. The whole "not having time to give reads but having time to argue about the LD" is my basis.

I've barely had time to play. When I did have time, that happened to be the topic that struck me. I often find one thing to latch onto and stubbornly argue about that one piece. And I did form suspicions based on that--Quin (whom I was wrong about) and Drumbeats, who I'm still unsure about and is still pinging my suspiciometer. The way you are describing my play, as someone who has played many games with me, and knows how i play, seems disingenuous, tbh.

Self-defense based mostly on meta. Says that I'm pinging her, but doesn't say why or when, and NO U's Sorsha. Finally mentions Quin and acknowledges being wrong about him.

Voting Matt. Was unsure of him based on what other said about him, but that he hasn't really defended makes me suspicious of him.

Vote on Matt with no specific reasoning other than that he is not defending himself.

Voted no for the tie, just because I'm in that kind of mood. Also, what if the question is, "should we reveal no more roles this entire game." Seems just as likely as all the roles, tbh.

Night-vote.

Voted no for the tie, just because I'm in that kind of mood. Also, what if the question is, "should we reveal no more roles this entire game." Seems just as likely as all the roles, tbh.

Yeah, should we reveal no more roles doesn't roll off the tongue like should we reveal the remaining roles :P

Exactly. If the question is: Should we reveal no more roles, I think the answer is no. Given we don't know the question, I felt a tie was a good choice.

Defends the night-vote.

Day 0:
Fluff: 1
Mechanics: 1
Night-vote: 1

After:
Mechanic Speculation with suspicion based upon it: 7
Mechanical Clarification: 1
Night-vote: 4
Mechanical Speculation without suspicion based upon it: 3
Content: 5
Fluff: 1
Defense: 1
Day vote: 1

I feel just about as I expected about LoRab. I could be a bit biased, since both of the only real stances LoRab has taken I disagree with, but I just find the content ratios so out of whack for LoRab. LoRab was way too invested in the Pam case and was VERY confident she was right about her opinion. That certainty + interest is something I read two ways, which is that LoRab could have been mafia who interrogated Dom to know how to word her own posts. Or the other option I see is that LoRab is Pam, which would also explain her interest and level and certainty of knowledge. My only thing that makes me feel otherwise is that LoRab has not taken many hard stances that I would suspect from a lie detector. LoRab has provided very few reads outside of the Quin push, the vote on Matt felt off when the only other suspicions that LoRab mentioned were of Sorsha and myself. I'm getting a scum read on LoRab, the only thing that is giving me pause is that I can see a situation in which LoRab is Pam.

My rating:

3/10

Questions:

How do you feel about Quin's flip?
What is pinging you about me? Point out where please.
Why do you suspect Sorsha?
What was your reasoning for voting Matt in your own words?
Who are your top three suspects and why?

(I'm low on time right now, so I'm going to skip over Serge since he has a lot of posts and hit someone with less to read before I go. I want to hit Sorsha and timmer at least by EoD since they are the other two top votes. I currently want a LoRab lynch though)

[DFaraday]

Bea suspecting me feels pretty natural but it's wrong. It's interesting that the Hedville players are being targeted, but I'm not sure I understand the motive? I was in Hedville and all, but I wouldn't think of myself as belonging more there than LP/Piano/others. There's a lot of new folk here and I do like playing with familiar people

That's how it feels to me as well. You all HVers were just as active on LP, RM, Piano, etc. And the majority of players in this game (myself included) were never on HV, so I don't buy that someone would try to frame a player by targeting players that were on one of the same sites as them a long time ago. If anything, it felt like Bea spent too much space defending herself against that one offhand comment from Splints.

I think Timmer is being truthful re: being busy, and I do know he's at his best when analyzing data, so I don't feel confident voting him. Nor do I see the case on Sorsha. For now I'll vote Serge because it feels like he's trying to avoid putting out too much suspicion or make bold claims.

[DrumBeats]

Sorsha's ISO

Spoiler: show

Hi. I'm voting for memorandum, who doesn't like getting a good memo?

Day 0 night-vote.

Sorry I haven't been around. I've been busy doing summer stuff outside and haven't had time, I will catch up soon.

Fluff

I'm not even caught up to the end of day one yet but I need to come in to vote so I don't miss it like I did day one. Voting for drumbeats. Back later.

Fluff, and a vote for me that was likely forced by Meredith.

Rip deadies

I agree with this: I'll wait to see what svs has to say but she might just be taking one for the team.

Voting SVS. I do not recommend that she be lynched, unless of course further information comes to light that would support it. Either way, don't take my vote to mean I even suspect SVS, as I do not.

Quin you know where I am coming from. I am voting for you, and I don't expect to be changing it.

Forced votes. S~V~S isn't guilty unless she faked being forced.

SVS is not generally an early voter. Ever. So that in itself is mega ping worthy to me. I'm open to listening, but I'm definitely leaning bad on her. And yes, I could totally see her doing that. But I really prefer to hear her excuse / reason for what happened. Defending her at this point seems odd to me, but also not shocking, because... Matt.

I will go find the quote from another game (I think it was spirited away) where svs says she waits until the eod to vote if she has been forced.

I'm about as caught up as I'll be I think, I did just start skimming after a while as my eyes began to glaze over. I'll work on getting my suspicions straightened out asap

Stance against SVS. Claims suspicions will be straightened out soon. Let's see if they are.

RIP Quin

There is a vote forcer in this game, a civ. When *I* am vote forced to vote for someone I don't think, or don't know, is bad, I generally vote not unlike G Man did. No one else was going to be lynched when he voted.

This lynch actually makes LC look better to me, and Faraday and Soneji worse. But I need to read again, you don't read as well when you are a bear. Big claws, small brain.

And the link back so you can read it in context: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 75#p260075

The highlighted section is referring to voting last minute.

Pulls up a relevant quote from another game against SVS.

Sorsha currently has 5 posts. This is her last:

RIP Quin

There is a vote forcer in this game, a civ. When *I* am vote forced to vote for someone I don't think, or don't know, is bad, I generally vote not unlike G Man did. No one else was going to be lynched when he voted.

This lynch actually makes LC look better to me, and Faraday and Soneji worse. But I need to read again, you don't read as well when you are a bear. Big claws, small brain.

And the link back so you can read it in context: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 75#p260075

The highlighted section is referring to voting last minute.

What are your current thoughts based on what SVS has said?

Who else do you suspect right now?

One thing nagging me about SVS's response is this post:

I am appalled that anyone thinks I am enough of an idiot to do this. I mean, I can be an idiot, but I am a player whose best use to a bad team is via manipulation & talking in thread, not out of self sacrifice. But whatevs, if you want to lynch me Drum, go for it. You will be dissappointed if you really expect me to flip bad.

Also, re the use of the word "forced"; has it occurred to you that I am not allowed to directly say I was targeted?

What other factual checkable statement would you like me to make?

Linki @Faraday, what do you think of my factual remarks? We have 2 nights in a row for Pam to check me. What factual questions would you like to ask me?

Making it out that anyone who suspects her thinks she's an idiot when no one who has played with her would really think that. It's been pointed out already that it wouldn't be an idiotic move, trading one mafia life for what amounts to four civ's is a decent trade off.

I feel like I'm 51/49 in favor of lynching her. To me it comes down to a mafia gambit with SVS in on it or a mafia gambit that was relying on a bit of luck- with someone who could end day early around at the right time. A third option could be a civ ended the day early who thought Quin was bad but his claim makes me think that is really unlikely.

Another suspicion I have is inh- I want to look over his and jjj's conversation again. I only skimmed it so far but I wasn't getting great feelings about inh from it. Seemed like he kinda faded to the back ground since the Quin lynch but I think he would be my #2 pick for lynch. His mea culpa post didn't give me the same change of heart it did to jjj.

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'll try to be back around later to give my thoughts on others but I'm at work now so don't hold your breath. If anyone has any specific player they want my thoughts on let me know.

voting Gabe and other

Stances against TH, INH, and SVS, each with unique reasoning.

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.

Further discussion with TH and instantly suggests that SVS may have been mafia. I think that idea is geniune coming from Sorsha, who has claimed to be on a scumteam who made that move.

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.

Is mafia killing their own common here? Can someone provide me with some games when this has happened?

My team did it in Downton Abbey mafia. http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... =27&t=1002

I thought someone else mentioned another time here in this thread but I don't remember who or what game it was.

I wouldn't say its common here... We only did it because Long Con was toast anyway and it made the civs all

Links a thread when this happened but also mentions that it is not common.

Whats the case on Matt? Can someone point to it for me?

Asks for a case on Matt.

Sorsha currently has 5 posts. This is her last:

RIP Quin

There is a vote forcer in this game, a civ. When *I* am vote forced to vote for someone I don't think, or don't know, is bad, I generally vote not unlike G Man did. No one else was going to be lynched when he voted.

This lynch actually makes LC look better to me, and Faraday and Soneji worse. But I need to read again, you don't read as well when you are a bear. Big claws, small brain.

And the link back so you can read it in context: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 75#p260075

The highlighted section is referring to voting last minute.

What are your current thoughts based on what SVS has said?

Who else do you suspect right now?

One thing nagging me about SVS's response is this post:

I am appalled that anyone thinks I am enough of an idiot to do this. I mean, I can be an idiot, but I am a player whose best use to a bad team is via manipulation & talking in thread, not out of self sacrifice. But whatevs, if you want to lynch me Drum, go for it. You will be dissappointed if you really expect me to flip bad.

Also, re the use of the word "forced"; has it occurred to you that I am not allowed to directly say I was targeted?

What other factual checkable statement would you like me to make?

Linki @Faraday, what do you think of my factual remarks? We have 2 nights in a row for Pam to check me. What factual questions would you like to ask me?

Making it out that anyone who suspects her thinks she's an idiot when no one who has played with her would really think that. It's been pointed out already that it wouldn't be an idiotic move, trading one mafia life for what amounts to four civ's is a decent trade off.

I feel like I'm 51/49 in favor of lynching her. To me it comes down to a mafia gambit with SVS in on it or a mafia gambit that was relying on a bit of luck- with someone who could end day early around at the right time. A third option could be a civ ended the day early who thought Quin was bad but his claim makes me think that is really unlikely.

Another suspicion I have is inh- I want to look over his and jjj's conversation again. I only skimmed it so far but I wasn't getting great feelings about inh from it. Seemed like he kinda faded to the back ground since the Quin lynch but I think he would be my #2 pick for lynch. His mea culpa post didn't give me the same change of heart it did to jjj.

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.
u

voting Gabe and other

I officially think you are bad sweet sorsha. You were so quick to thow TH under the buss cuz it furthers the sus that svs was bad. But we both know she wasn't.

How is saying I'm keeping an eye on TH throwing him under the bus? When reading his defense of SVS my mind immediately went to AWR where he staunchly refused to believe she was bad even though evidence pointed to it. Here it didn't even seem like he was considering her to be bad... which he would have no way of knowing that was the case, unless he was bad.

And how do we both know that she wasn't bad? I don't want to be hung up on was she/ wasn't she since I don't see a way to find out for sure at this point, but it is possible she was bad. I don't think it's as far fetched as some people seem to be thinking. I don't know if SVS was bad or not. Do you bea?

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.

except this - way back at the beginning of eternal night - you and splintsy and indi and lorab and no one was talking to *me* about svs.

I'm not sure what you mean in this post.

I'll read their posts and let you know where I am with those three, I'm leaning bad on LoRab so far though. The whole "not having time to give reads but having time to argue about the LD" is my basis.

Self-defense from Bea, a stance against the dead SVS, and a baddie lean on LoRab.

I'm not going to reply to every single person who has a problem believing that svs might have been bad & killed by her own team. Maybe it makes more sense to me because I was on a baddie team who did that exact thing in the past It wouldn't be a dumb idea.

My suspicion of TH relied solely on how svs would flip at lynch so at this point I have no suspicion of TH. I never know what to think when it comes to Matt. I didn't see anything wrong when looking through indiglo' posts, since bea asked me about her, except that her suspicions seemed pretty safe to me- finding the usual suspects that everyone else is talking about suspicious but nothing beyond that. Looking at splints it seemed like most of her posts are giving info about the tv show and how it might reflect into role/team mechanics and also a few safe suspicions. Didn't get to lorab or anyone else yet.

I think I'm going to vote for inh I noticed he finds me suspicious but he hadn't said why, unless I missed it. I have the feeling it's because I named him earlier + the adversity to my thoughts about svs? I dunno. He could let me know I guess.

I'll vote inh for now, not sure if I'll be back later tonight or not. I've got a lot going on this weekend & tomorrow. Tomorrow is my birthday so who knows when I'll be around.

This post feels fishy for me. Drops the suspicion on TH based upon it being dependent on SVS's flip. Combined with the fact that SVS did not flip either way, and Sorsha has killed a teammate before, this makes me wonder about a TH, Sorsha, and SVS scumtrio. Probablt a bit far-fetched but the TH suspicion now feels like distancing to me. The INH vote feels random and out of nowhere.

I was at the beach all day. I took a good shower, but I'm still finding sand and bits of shell in my crevices.

I'm not going to reply to every single person who has a problem believing that svs might have been bad & killed by her own team. Maybe it makes more sense to me because I was on a baddie team who did that exact thing in the past It wouldn't be a dumb idea.

My suspicion of TH relied solely on how svs would flip at lynch so at this point I have no suspicion of TH. I never know what to think when it comes to Matt. I didn't see anything wrong when looking through indiglo' posts, since bea asked me about her, except that her suspicions seemed pretty safe to me- finding the usual suspects that everyone else is talking about suspicious but nothing beyond that. Looking at splints it seemed like most of her posts are giving info about the tv show and how it might reflect into role/team mechanics and also a few safe suspicions. Didn't get to lorab or anyone else yet.

I think I'm going to vote for inh I noticed he finds me suspicious but he hadn't said why, unless I missed it. I have the feeling it's because I named him earlier + the adversity to my thoughts about svs? I dunno. He could let me know I guess.

I'll vote inh for now, not sure if I'll be back later tonight or not. I've got a lot going on this weekend & tomorrow. Tomorrow is my birthday so who knows when I'll be around.

You dropped that line right on top of a big paragraph about other things. I'm not satisfied. Your suspicion of Turnip Head was, according to you, based on S~V~S getting lynched. That didn't happen, because she got killed. Ninety times out of a hundred, killed people are good people. You now say you have "no suspicion" of Turnip Head. I do not see how that follows.

I even said back then if svs flips civ then I would suspect th, not that I actually suspected th at that time.

I don't get what is hard to understand about that.

Suspicion of TH just feels like distancing to me still imo. It dropped too conveniently with the SVS nightkill.

I'm not going to reply to every single person who has a problem believing that svs might have been bad & killed by her own team. Maybe it makes more sense to me because I was on a baddie team who did that exact thing in the past It wouldn't be a dumb idea.

Not an especially convincing rejoinder.

My suspicion of TH relied solely on how svs would flip at lynch so at this point I have no suspicion of TH. I never know what to think when it comes to Matt. I didn't see anything wrong when looking through indiglo' posts, since bea asked me about her, except that her suspicions seemed pretty safe to me- finding the usual suspects that everyone else is talking about suspicious but nothing beyond that. Looking at splints it seemed like most of her posts are giving info about the tv show and how it might reflect into role/team mechanics and also a few safe suspicions. Didn't get to lorab or anyone else yet.

I, along with Epig, noticed the total tailspin in regards to our Turnip scalped compadre.

I think I'm going to vote for inh I noticed he finds me suspicious but he hadn't said why, unless I missed it. I have the feeling it's because I named him earlier + the adversity to my thoughts about svs? I dunno. He could let me know I guess.

I listed your name as one of many people I read convincing cases against, mainly bea's condemnation of you. It honestly wasn't a set in stone type of list, more rainbow reads than anything else. I don't like that you just keep dragging my name up, apropos of nothing. I'm inclined to go with Epig and Enrique in giving my vote to you.

Matt's been acting in the way I more or less expected from his reputation, and I'm not sure I can be 100% objective with my reads on him, simply because our playing styles are so different. Plus he already has a shitton of votes, so I'm inclined to diversify the voting records.

I'll vote inh for now, not sure if I'll be back later tonight or not. I've got a lot going on this weekend & tomorrow. Tomorrow is my birthday so who knows when I'll be around.

This is crap there is no convincing case against me. Is bea suspicious of me? It looked like she was and then wasn't. Or maybe she wasn't at first and then was? All you are doing is parroting the weak justifications others are giving for voting me.

This post is way too defensive imo. "There is no convincing case against me"

That is showing exactly what I am talking about Epi.... IF svs were lynched and came back civ I'd be looking at him. She wasn't lynched so it's the end of that story.

More self-defense. Really... convenient for Sorsha that SVS was killed.

Yes, but at this point in time I don't have any reason to suspect him. If things had gone differently, I would have.

Null-read on TH. Fluff at this point honestly.

Day 0:
Night-vote: 1

After:
Fluff: 2
Vote: 1
Content: 8
Asking for a case: 1
Defense: 2

I felt really good about Sorsha in the first half of the posts, but the back half were pinging me hard. It is too convenient for Sorsha that SVS was nightkilled, and makes me think that the suspicion on TH was just a distancing attempt.

My rating:
3/10

Questions:
Where do you lean on TH? Town or Scum?
Who are your top three suspects and why?
What was your reasoning for the vote on INH?

[espers]

Voting serge to make things interesting. Will fully catch up and answer DrumBeats' questions later, should be able to check in again before day end.

[juliets]

Epignosis and Bea - what are your reasons for voting Sorsha? Did either of you do a case and I missed it or were there just enough reasons you saw in the thread?

I see why people are voting for timmer but I'm worried his lacking is due to RL so I don't especially want to vote him.

There are others to consider but these two are the leading vote getters at this time.

RIP indiglo. You may have been bad but I wasn't seeing yet. Hopefully see you next game.

It's tough to make a "case" against fifteen posts, but I'll pull the exchange I had with her:

Spoiler: show

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.

How is saying I'm keeping an eye on TH throwing him under the bus? When reading his defense of SVS my mind immediately went to AWR where he staunchly refused to believe she was bad even though evidence pointed to it. Here it didn't even seem like he was considering her to be bad... which he would have no way of knowing that was the case, unless he was bad.

If I'm reading this correctly, Sorsha suspects Turnip Head, but the reasons she's providing- in my mind- would be points in his favor, not against him. Unless Sorsha is supposing two mafia teams (which I see no evidence of, because of what I highlighted in yellow), how does Turnip Head's opinion of S~V~S in a game when they were on opposing factions have any negative bearing on him here? In a two-mafia world, you're all hunters and it helps to figure out the other competition.

And how do we both know that she wasn't bad? I don't want to be hung up on was she/ wasn't she since I don't see a way to find out for sure at this point, but it is possible she was bad. I don't think it's as far fetched as some people seem to be thinking. I don't know if SVS was bad or not. Do you bea?

In the red text, Sorsha asserts that if S~V~S were a civilian, then Turnip Head is her #1 suspect (which I don't understand, since Turnip Head would have been right about it). Yet Sorsha is unconvinced that the killed S~V~S was a civilian. What does this do to her position on Turnip Head? She doesn't say.

I was at the beach all day. I took a good shower, but I'm still finding sand and bits of shell in my crevices.

I'm not going to reply to every single person who has a problem believing that svs might have been bad & killed by her own team. Maybe it makes more sense to me because I was on a baddie team who did that exact thing in the past It wouldn't be a dumb idea.

My suspicion of TH relied solely on how svs would flip at lynch so at this point I have no suspicion of TH. I never know what to think when it comes to Matt. I didn't see anything wrong when looking through indiglo' posts, since bea asked me about her, except that her suspicions seemed pretty safe to me- finding the usual suspects that everyone else is talking about suspicious but nothing beyond that. Looking at splints it seemed like most of her posts are giving info about the tv show and how it might reflect into role/team mechanics and also a few safe suspicions. Didn't get to lorab or anyone else yet.

I think I'm going to vote for inh I noticed he finds me suspicious but he hadn't said why, unless I missed it. I have the feeling it's because I named him earlier + the adversity to my thoughts about svs? I dunno. He could let me know I guess.

I'll vote inh for now, not sure if I'll be back later tonight or not. I've got a lot going on this weekend & tomorrow. Tomorrow is my birthday so who knows when I'll be around.

You dropped that line right on top of a big paragraph about other things. I'm not satisfied. Your suspicion of Turnip Head was, according to you, based on S~V~S getting lynched. That didn't happen, because she got killed. Ninety times out of a hundred, killed people are good people. You now say you have "no suspicion" of Turnip Head. I do not see how that follows.

I even said back then if svs flips civ then I would suspect th, not that I actually suspected th at that time.

I don't get what is hard to understand about that.

Mmm. Let's see.

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.

How is saying I'm keeping an eye on TH throwing him under the bus? When reading his defense of SVS my mind immediately went to AWR where he staunchly refused to believe she was bad even though evidence pointed to it. Here it didn't even seem like he was considering her to be bad... which he would have no way of knowing that was the case, unless he was bad.

And how do we both know that she wasn't bad? I don't want to be hung up on was she/ wasn't she since I don't see a way to find out for sure at this point, but it is possible she was bad. I don't think it's as far fetched as some people seem to be thinking. I don't know if SVS was bad or not. Do you bea?

If you didn't suspect Turnip Head, then there was no reason to bring him up in this context.

What's your take on this, juliets?

Epignosis, you said you were going to throw up an exchange you had with me but what you threw up is an exchange you had with Sorsha. Do you want me to comment on your exchange with sorsha?

[juliets]

Epi never mind - I see what you are talking about now. Comment coming up.

[juliets]

Epignosis and Bea - what are your reasons for voting Sorsha? Did either of you do a case and I missed it or were there just enough reasons you saw in the thread?

I see why people are voting for timmer but I'm worried his lacking is due to RL so I don't especially want to vote him.

There are others to consider but these two are the leading vote getters at this time.

RIP indiglo. You may have been bad but I wasn't seeing yet. Hopefully see you next game.

It's tough to make a "case" against fifteen posts, but I'll pull the exchange I had with her:

Spoiler: show

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.

How is saying I'm keeping an eye on TH throwing him under the bus? When reading his defense of SVS my mind immediately went to AWR where he staunchly refused to believe she was bad even though evidence pointed to it. Here it didn't even seem like he was considering her to be bad... which he would have no way of knowing that was the case, unless he was bad.

If I'm reading this correctly, Sorsha suspects Turnip Head, but the reasons she's providing- in my mind- would be points in his favor, not against him. Unless Sorsha is supposing two mafia teams (which I see no evidence of, because of what I highlighted in yellow), how does Turnip Head's opinion of S~V~S in a game when they were on opposing factions have any negative bearing on him here? In a two-mafia world, you're all hunters and it helps to figure out the other competition.

And how do we both know that she wasn't bad? I don't want to be hung up on was she/ wasn't she since I don't see a way to find out for sure at this point, but it is possible she was bad. I don't think it's as far fetched as some people seem to be thinking. I don't know if SVS was bad or not. Do you bea?

In the red text, Sorsha asserts that if S~V~S were a civilian, then Turnip Head is her #1 suspect (which I don't understand, since Turnip Head would have been right about it). Yet Sorsha is unconvinced that the killed S~V~S was a civilian. What does this do to her position on Turnip Head? She doesn't say.

I was at the beach all day. I took a good shower, but I'm still finding sand and bits of shell in my crevices.

I'm not going to reply to every single person who has a problem believing that svs might have been bad & killed by her own team. Maybe it makes more sense to me because I was on a baddie team who did that exact thing in the past It wouldn't be a dumb idea.

My suspicion of TH relied solely on how svs would flip at lynch so at this point I have no suspicion of TH. I never know what to think when it comes to Matt. I didn't see anything wrong when looking through indiglo' posts, since bea asked me about her, except that her suspicions seemed pretty safe to me- finding the usual suspects that everyone else is talking about suspicious but nothing beyond that. Looking at splints it seemed like most of her posts are giving info about the tv show and how it might reflect into role/team mechanics and also a few safe suspicions. Didn't get to lorab or anyone else yet.

I think I'm going to vote for inh I noticed he finds me suspicious but he hadn't said why, unless I missed it. I have the feeling it's because I named him earlier + the adversity to my thoughts about svs? I dunno. He could let me know I guess.

I'll vote inh for now, not sure if I'll be back later tonight or not. I've got a lot going on this weekend & tomorrow. Tomorrow is my birthday so who knows when I'll be around.

You dropped that line right on top of a big paragraph about other things. I'm not satisfied. Your suspicion of Turnip Head was, according to you, based on S~V~S getting lynched. That didn't happen, because she got killed. Ninety times out of a hundred, killed people are good people. You now say you have "no suspicion" of Turnip Head. I do not see how that follows.

I even said back then if svs flips civ then I would suspect th, not that I actually suspected th at that time.

I don't get what is hard to understand about that.

Mmm. Let's see.

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.

How is saying I'm keeping an eye on TH throwing him under the bus? When reading his defense of SVS my mind immediately went to AWR where he staunchly refused to believe she was bad even though evidence pointed to it. Here it didn't even seem like he was considering her to be bad... which he would have no way of knowing that was the case, unless he was bad.

And how do we both know that she wasn't bad? I don't want to be hung up on was she/ wasn't she since I don't see a way to find out for sure at this point, but it is possible she was bad. I don't think it's as far fetched as some people seem to be thinking. I don't know if SVS was bad or not. Do you bea?

If you didn't suspect Turnip Head, then there was no reason to bring him up in this context.

What's your take on this, juliets?

My take on this is I didn't get it. Why would TH be the number one suss if SVS had flipped good? Also, this line of yours Epi I agree with entirely:
You dropped that line right on top of a big paragraph about other things. I'm not satisfied. Your suspicion of Turnip Head was, according to you, based on S~V~S getting lynched. That didn't happen, because she got killed. Ninety times out of a hundred, killed people are good people. You now say you have "no suspicion" of Turnip Head. I do not see how that follows.
I can see why you think Sorsha is bad.
bea, what about you?

[juliets]

Voting serge to make things interesting. Will fully catch up and answer DrumBeats' questions later, should be able to check in again before day end.

Why are you voting serge? It looks like he has quit the game.

[Sorsha]

I really don't have much to say in the way of defense other than what I have said already.

If I do get lynched today I urge players to look over 3j's posts. I believed his neutral claim and I'm sure he knew what my role was based on his gth good read of me.

If I had my way today epignosis would be getting lynched, 3j thought he was bad and he's been hung up on getting me lynched for days. I will not flip bad, I 100% guarantee it. As of right now I'll be holding my vote since I'll probably need it to save myself.

I also think inh is bad based on his interactions with 3j. Not really sure on anyone else, I've been busy and I have out of town guests coming in a couple days so I don't expect to have more time in the near future.

If you guys want to lynch me go ahead, it won't do anyone any good but don't let those just going along with epi to get away with it after you see my flip.

[DrumBeats]

I really don't have much to say in the way of defense other than what I have said already.

If I do get lynched today I urge players to look over 3j's posts. I believed his neutral claim and I'm sure he knew what my role was based on his gth good read of me.

If I had my way today epignosis would be getting lynched, 3j thought he was bad and he's been hung up on getting me lynched for days. I will not flip bad, I 100% guarantee it. As of right now I'll be holding my vote since I'll probably need it to save myself.

I also think inh is bad based on his interactions with 3j. Not really sure on anyone else, I've been busy and I have out of town guests coming in a couple days so I don't expect to have more time in the near future.

If you guys want to lynch me go ahead, it won't do anyone any good but don't let those just going along with epi to get away with it after you see my flip.

Can you quote 3J's case on Epignosis, and provide your own personal reasoning? If you believe 3J to have known your role (a la Bandit) then how would he have info on Epi that would make his suspicion be enough to suspect Epi?

Going to ISO timmer, compare it to Sorsha's and place my vote then. I'll try to get the others out as we proceed, but I will be busy later this week so it'll be slow.

[Sorsha]

As far as I know he didn't make a case on epi. He gave a gth read of bad and then later was asked what he thought again and said again he thought he was bad.

I don't think 3j was the bandit role, I think there is more than one role that is "neutral" aligned and that his knowledge of my role was dependent on his roles mechanics.

[Epignosis]

News flash: 3J was bad. I believe that.

[Enrique]

Sorsha, this is the case on you: SVS dying allows you to wash your hands clean of TH. That's not hard to understand either. That's why baddies kill people, because letting them live isn't convenient. If her death is good for anyone, it's you, because you don't have to deal with the consequences of her flip. You won't even admit you were wrong. It all just goes away.

Also, sorry guys, I was busy today reuniting with family etc. I promised a post a while ago and I'll get working on it.

[Enrique]

Your second question: I don't know if she was forced although I really doubt it, but I'm convinced she wasn't bad and no one threw her under the bus. Unless one of the secret roles has post-mortem powers I'm not going to change my mind.

This is an interesting opinion, can you elaborate on it please? What motivation do you see for a civilian SVS whose vote was not forced to vote Quin that early, and then pretend that it was forced afterwards? Just trying to follow the logic and see if I'm missing anything.

... oh did she say it was forced? I don't remember that part. Does it matter? Not really. There doesnt't have to be a motivation, votes are changeable, and if she was forced then maybe just get it out of the way. I definitely don't think it was to kamikaze Quin and get absolutely nothing out of it.

[DrumBeats]

timmer iso almost done

@ linki Enrique - But wouldn't you agree that SVS had to have a motive to play it off as forced. If it ends up being proven that it was not forced, why would a civilian SVS do that?

[Sorsha]

Sorsha, this is the case on you: SVS dying allows you to wash your hands clean of TH. That's not hard to understand either. That's why baddies kill people, because letting them live isn't convenient. If her death is good for anyone, it's you, because you don't have to deal with the consequences of her flip. You won't even admit you were wrong. It all just goes away.

Also, sorry guys, I was busy today reuniting with family etc. I promised a post a while ago and I'll get working on it.

Oh yeah... That's working out great for me then hey? It all just went away

If I was bad and planning on killing svs why bring up the th suspicion on the condition of her flip? That makes no sense to do it that way.

[DrumBeats]

Timmer ISO

Spoiler: show

Hello, all, this is le me, checking in. I'll be working a lot for the next few days, but c'est la vie Happy to be in a game again!

Day 0 Fluff

I was going to vote management until I saw this. It makes sense, so I will vote personnel.

Good to see you timmer!!

Thanks, glad to be back!

My experience with The Office is/was pretty sporadic. I've never seen the British show at all, and only watched episodes of the American one every now and then, but when I did, it was always pretty solid. I'll never forget Michael "declaring" bankruptcy, lol...

Day 0 Fluff

Well, the world didn't need a healthy economy anyway, so no worries England. Jesus, what a disastrous day.

Day 1 Fluff - but very understandable given events that occurred. Not alignment indicative.

You know what helps a lie detector? Quietly making a statement that you know will help them see that you are civ.

You know what doesn't help them? Getting all players to say it and getting the whole thing thrown out as unusable.

And what really really doesn't help is then winking and saying you knew that, Muhuhaha. Because now day 1 is about you.

not a fan. Maybe you won't care. And because of course you will ask. I am town aligned.

Mechanical statement against the lie detector check thing. I can see this working either way alignment-wise, but I'd like to see something more content heavy soon.

You know what helps a lie detector? Quietly making a statement that you know will help them see that you are civ.

You know what doesn't help them? Getting all players to say it and getting the whole thing thrown out as unusable.

And what really really doesn't help is then winking and saying you knew that, Muhuhaha. Because now day 1 is about you.

not a fan. Maybe you won't care. And because of course you will ask. I am town aligned.

I thinkyou're talking to me so I'll respond. I wasn't going to ask anybody else to say it because the point's already been made that saying 'I am town aligned' isn't worth a damn to a lie detector. It was unusable from the start, so there's no reason why I can't find a use for it myself.

-wink-, muhuhaha.

Muhuhaha indeed, lol!

People who know Quin, how likely is it that he would read that role and miss the part about not using blanket statements? I'm rusty, and have lost track of who plays like what...

Questioning stuff about Quin.

I feel like you're the one who wanted to make Day 1 about me, timmer. But even so, let's do it. I'll do a good job of it.

If by that you mean I want to focus on your little gambit, then absolutely. I'll be taking advisement from the players who know you best

Leaving advice on Quin in the hands of other people. Reasonable approach for civ or mafia, but could be an easy way to vote Quin without taking blame for it. I'll see how the rest of timmer plays out here, but if it ends with a Quin vote without original reasoning I'm going to be suspicious.

So... anyone able to tell me if this seems like Quin being Quin?

More questioning about Quin meta.

@Timmer, I don't see anything specifically abnormal about Quin, what are you seeing?

Just didn't like the whole "hey Scotty, say I'm town aligned" thing, after admitting that it is useless. Why pick a useless angle that can only serve to draw attention on a day that traditionally is all about people getting lynched for getting unwanted attention, etc.

Basically, if this were, say, Epig or MP7, I wouldn't look twice because I know how they can be, but I don't really know Quin, so I'm just trying to get a sense of him from anyone who has played a lot with him.

Takes a personal Quin stance without meta, while still asking for it. Makes me feel a bit better since timmer is now not able to only blame somebody else for the suspicion.

I feel like you're the one who wanted to make Day 1 about me, timmer. But even so, let's do it. I'll do a good job of it.

You guys move fast. What am I supposed to take from this exchange? Where's the meat? Where did you think you were headed with... any of it, really? Where did you land?

I think he was just replying to a borderline-too-aggressive post from me. What else could it be?

An odd answer to an odd question. I don't know what to get out of either the question or the answer.

Hmm...

I think Quin and INH are on a team. I also think INH and Matt are on opposite teams. I also don't think bad Matt woud gimmick this early, unless he is strictly copying another game. He compared this point system to transistor, but I don't think he's copying what he did there.

Why is that question strange bullz? Feep free to answer the question yourself.

All of this sounds like somebody who needed something to say coming in and saying something. Why do you think these things? What posts brought you to these conclusions? Why are you defending Matt?

I'd like to hear answers to these, as well.

Join's Epi's push on Wilgy.

I think I'm getting too rusty. Wilgy's post, though it sounds like Wilgy, reads as pingy. But then INH's replies read as pingy, as well. Basically, my brain is seeing people sort of jockeying for position as if they feel the spotlight on them and don't like it, but I'm unsure of where to go with it. Going to wait a bit to see how things play out.

Wilgy, in direct reply to you, your post just made too many statements that seem unsupportable this early in the game, and I'm not a big fan of that.

Post against Wilgy and INH, but seems to lean more against Wilgy with the second paragraph.

I think I'm going to vote for INH. There is this handful of players who posted a few things that have been commented and critiqued upon, and the rest of the players are picking those posts apart on a lightweight basis, but there seems to be a slight vibe leaning towards Wilgy and away from INH, which, if all of these Day 1 posts are roughly equal in mini-pinginess, is enough for me to go the other way. Nothing will become clearer in the next few hours, so it's enough for me.

A vote for INH, which is an odd one imo based on timmer's posts. I don't understand the reasoning timmer put forth on INH here. It seems like the Wilgy wagon was what made him switch to INH, but I'm not sure.

I think I'm going to vote for INH. There is this handful of players who posted a few things that have been commented and critiqued upon, and the rest of the players are picking those posts apart on a lightweight basis, but there seems to be a slight vibe leaning towards Wilgy and away from INH, which, if all of these Day 1 posts are roughly equal in mini-pinginess, is enough for me to go the other way. Nothing will become clearer in the next few hours, so it's enough for me.

If you have any questions or problems or what have you for me, I'd love to hear them. I'd also love to hear some concrete reasons instead of you just hinting at "pinginess," if that's not too much trouble.

It's day 1. You were in the small cluster of people who promoted the whole "let's say we're civs for the lie detector" thing. You also jumped a bit forcefully on Wilgy for my liking. Then there is Wilgy himself, whose posts haven't been great, either. But you, and the cluster who were involved with the lie detector thing, are all earning light mentions that could be read as a teammate making sure to namedrop you while simultaneously moving onto a civ target, while those mentioning Wilgy don't seem to be doing the same thing.

I've got virtually nothing, it's day 1, but if I've got multiple people who are all getting talked about the same level of weak, and one of them seems to have a "pass" current for some reason while others don't, that's where I invariably want to lean. I wouldn't even try to guess at the odds that either you or Wilgy are bad, but if one of you is, the way the posts are reading, I'd say it's you.

Again, Day 1, but that's as good as I'm going to get.

Provides reasoning against INH. I feel better about the vote now, but I still don't actually fully understand the reasoning.

How do you feel about me right now timmer? I don't think you got much out of your questioning of my play history but if you're up to it I'd recommend you look at some of my previous games here.

Turf Wars, Zodiac, AoT and Futurama (but I was playing a sock there so I was roleplaying a bit and experimenting with new playstyles without having to worry about being meta-read lool)

You're in the same little cluster of people who posted things that made my eyebrow raise a bit, but the bit of feedback I got about it made me feel like I was overreading, so we're good for now. It's Day 1, I don't tend to sweat the small stuff this early.

Dropped the Quin suspicion. Since Quin flipped civ, this can't be distancing so I read it as genuine.

@Quin, way back when I first posted to you regarding your posts, I was kind of touching on what SVS is saying. The things you were saying seemed to not be focused on baddie hunting, which bothers me. That IS the name of this game, no?

Jumps on the controversial Quin statement a bit, but seems to be doing it in hindsight rather than at the time.

It's day 1. You were in the small cluster of people who promoted the whole "let's say we're civs for the lie detector" thing. You also jumped a bit forcefully on Wilgy for my liking. Then there is Wilgy himself, whose posts haven't been great, either. But you, and the cluster who were involved with the lie detector thing, are all earning light mentions that could be read as a teammate making sure to namedrop you while simultaneously moving onto a civ target, while those mentioning Wilgy don't seem to be doing the same thing.

I've got virtually nothing, it's day 1, but if I've got multiple people who are all getting talked about the same level of weak, and one of them seems to have a "pass" current for some reason while others don't, that's where I invariably want to lean. I wouldn't even try to guess at the odds that either you or Wilgy are bad, but if one of you is, the way the posts are reading, I'd say it's you.

Again, Day 1, but that's as good as I'm going to get.

So to summarize...

- I wanted to help the civ lie detector.
- I find Wilgy suspicious, and believe him to be bad.
- People find me suspicious, but not as suspicious as other people.

If that's all you need to be convinced of someone's alignment, then there's a house up in Alaska I want to sell you.

Also, you keep mentioning "people" who were involved in trying to help the civ lie detector, which you seem to find suspicious for some reason, as mentioning me and then ignoring me. Whereas people who mention Wilgy seem to want to stick to Wilgy. Care to name some names instead of speaking in broad terms?

Timmer, I don't know your profession, but if I had to guess, I'd say you were an Olympic long jumpers with all these impressive leaps you keep making.

You are taking my Day 1 vote awful seriously, man. It's Day 1. What kind of case did you expect when you asked me to lay it out? You've got one vote.

Fluffy response to INH. INH's response here really pings me though. I want to look into INH soon too.

Mabye it's just me, but maybe we could just... you know... trust that whoever has the Pam role is probably going to find things to lie detect just fine on their own?

Because here's the thing about "helping Pam"... 1) it makes it sound like a player is participating in the game, when in fact they are posting but not offering up thoughts on any cases/suspicions etc they are posting about a role mechanic so it is a handy way to seem like you are helpful and chatty, and 2) one of the last games I played, our baddie team successfully had a mole planted in a civ circle of trust because of a cleverly worded statement that beat the lie detector rules due to a sneaky technicality. Having seen such things in action in BTSC, it would be VERY easy for baddies to PM Dom, ask him if such-n-such a statement would pass a lie detection due to a technicality that civs wouldn't see, and then post it in the thread as a "helpful" way to check someone.

Pam will be just fine, I think.

Mechanics discussion on Pam. Unique stance that feels genuine.

@INH, I barely have any suspicion of you at ALL. It's day fucking ONE. But the "barely" I've got is just a hair more than I've got for anyone else. Or would you rather I lazily voted for an absentee player, or randomized? Which choice, from a baddie hunting pov, would have been the smarter choice?

I explained my reasons to you. I'm not going to go and pull 30 post quotes for a day 1 vote. It is what it is. Why you are reacting like this, on Day 1, is beyond me?

Defending suspicion of INH to INH, who seems to be getting way too defensive about it.

linki: if you find it best to leave Pams role alone, I won't press the matter anymore.

Hey, do what you want to do, I'm just letting you know, as a game goes on, the more I see someone posting a ton about mechanics, and very little about suspicions, the greater the chance they get my vote. It's a classic baddie move to get a post count up.

More Pam talk.

@Quin, way back when I first posted to you regarding your posts, I was kind of touching on what SVS is saying. The things you were saying seemed to not be focused on baddie hunting, which bothers me. That IS the name of this game, no?

Don't get me wrong, my top priority is on baddie hunting. But at the same time, I wanted to create an advantage for town that may have come in handy at some point. We don't know what Dom has planned for this game, so I figured, why not use the resources we do have?

linki: I get what you're saying. I might be distracting myself, in hindsight. I'LL DO BETTER

Floof

@INH, I barely have any suspicion of you at ALL. It's day fucking ONE. But the "barely" I've got is just a hair more than I've got for anyone else. Or would you rather I lazily voted for an absentee player, or randomized? Which choice, from a baddie hunting pov, would have been the smarter choice?

I explained my reasons to you. I'm not going to go and pull 30 post quotes for a day 1 vote. It is what it is. Why you are reacting like this, on Day 1, is beyond me?

You're awfully touchy whenever someone tries to question your reasoning behind your votes...

I wonder why that is.

Oh, and votes are in fact changeable this game. If you still think your vote for me is justified, leave it. If you don't, remember that you can. Because all I've gotten from you is: "it wasn't a reeeeal suspicion, it was Day 1! You know what it's like in Day 1, nothing means anything!" If your defense of your vote consists mostly of cheap deflection and not actual rebuttals, maybe it isn't a very smart vote.

Also, what makes you not find Wilgy suspicious, if I may ask?

Your reactions to my lone vote against you have pretty much guaranteed that it will stay where it is, thanks

I DO think Wilgy's posts are a bit pingy, same as yours. But he seems to have a larger number of people thinking of voting for him, etc... you know, I swear I've posted this before...

And I'd say you are being far more "touchy" about having a lone vote against you on Day 1.

Brings up INH's defensiveness.

See you next time, Wilgy

Fluff

@ Scotty - The thing is that you directly said that we would get to make more sense of things after the flip and then voted a player with 0 interactions to make sense of post flip. What were we supposed to learn from Goldys flip other than Goldys alignment?

@ Quin - Why do you think INH defended you so hard last phase?

@ Matt - What do you think about INH's defense of Quin last phase?

Just an FYI, I still stand by my defense of Quin, and if you'd like to ask me a question about it, feel free.

I'll actually agree, here. Although Quin's statement about not everything having to be about baddie hunting sounded... poorly worded? I think jumping on it as a baddie slip is a major reach. Of course, it was day 1, so I'm not eyeing Quin's voters TOO much, either, but yeah... that statement does not = much of a case, imo.

Defense of Quin that feels genuine.

Sorry guys, busy busy the last few days...

So, sorry what is the case on lee tic? I missed that, I think.

I'm not feeling an epig lynch, I don't think the posts made by SVS add up to anything substantial.

I'm not as solidly turned around on INH as some of you, and I don't get civvie vibes from BWT, either. That said, INH's post DID at least show a viable set of reasons for why he said the things he said. I concede that there could be truth there.

I will try to find some cases/suspicions to build on the work you guys have done, but today's not the best day for it, I may end up having to judge which case of others I feel best about, today.

Asks for case on leetic, disagrees with an Epi lynch, brings up a light suspicion on BWT but doesn't elaborate, and keeps an eye on INH. Looks reasonable, but if timmer pushes the BWT vote, I expect reasoning.

Thank JJJ, I won't be voting for lee tic if that is what it is based on.

BWT I could get behind. There still isn't much going on in this game, but I'd still lean bad on both INH and BWT if I had to guess.

Doesn't give reasoning on BWT but takes a solid stance against him and INH.

In fact, just in case I don't get back around, I'll place a marker vote on him now.

Vote on BWT. Still haven't seen the reasoning though which I'm not thrilled about.

Leeton self voted?

Fluff, since he could easily check this in the Polls.

Leetic that is.

Fixing previous post

That sucks, BWT. But why didn't you stop the lynch, considering your role, etc???

Slightly relevant fluff. Very normal reaction though for either alignment.

WTF?

First off, DOM!!!, can I request that the thread title be changed with each day/night to make it easier to follow what happened when? with everything sayingDay 1 it's hard to figure anything out in that regard, thanks!!!

I'll digest more of this later, but for now, I again say... WTF?

Fluffy reaction post to QuinGate. We'll see how it develops later.

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!

Busy fluff post, still hasn't stanced on QuinGate or SVS flip.

Read through Matt's posts, not seeing the baddieness. Anyone care to elaborate on the case?

Stance against baddie Matt, asks for case (when real talk there were a ton out there, I alone repeated it way too many times). Feels like it could be genuine if timmer was too busy to read everything though.

For the moment I'm voting LoRab. I don't really have a lot to go on, and I've been pretty absent, but reading through her posts, when someone spends that many posts on mechanics but then fails to really talk about suspicions except in a surface way, I get twitchy.

Vote with a stance on LoRab, but it's weird that he had time to go through LoRabs posts, but it doesn't seem like he did anybody else.

Interesting point about INH in your linked post. I had cast an eye on INH early on, and I notice he's recently listed me as someone who he doesn't get civ vibes from. When someone suspects the people who suspect them, does that tend to indicate alignment? I'm not sure.

Takes a new stance against INH, but is unsure whether a NO U is a good base for suspicion. Feels genuine.

That's enough for me to vote INH. He's sitting on other people's work and targeting the people who eyed him. Moving my vote over.

More of a case on INH.

Sorry guys, I've been too distracted this week to give this game its due.

I think the mafia has done an exemplary job of moving lynches onto easy targets all game, and now a gentle push towards me since I'm barely around just continues the trend.

The fact is, I thrive in mafia after a baddie is caught, as analyzing vote patterns and the specific timing of votes is my bread and butter (see my insta-spotting baddie Epignosis after I broke out of prison recently). At this point, I have nothing to work with, and I'm not around enough to properly study the entire game in the way that many of you do.

As for my INH vote, he NO-U'd me first, so I basically reverse NO-U'd him, which in my mind made perfect sense for a vote.

Self defense. I find his INH vote genuine, because timmer has been consistent about that all game imo.

When you suspect someone, and call them out, and then later in the game that person just starts laying down a "I don't try him" vibe, when really, the only thing they have against you is that you had voted for them earlier... it's shifty. I've felt INH is bad all game, right from day 1, and I'm going to continue thinking that. He subtly NO-U'd me, and I tried calling him out for it with my vote. Unless things change, I'll be voting there again, tbh.

Stance against INH.

Timmer, can you answer in this post who you are talking to?

Interesting point about INH in your linked post. I had cast an eye on INH early on, and I notice he's recently listed me as someone who he doesn't get civ vibes from. When someone suspects the people who suspect them, does that tend to indicate alignment? I'm not sure.

I'd have to look back to be sure, but I think it was indiglo?

Answering a question.

Sorry guys, I've been too distracted this week to give this game its due.

I think the mafia has done an exemplary job of moving lynches onto easy targets all game, and now a gentle push towards me since I'm barely around just continues the trend.

The fact is, I thrive in mafia after a baddie is caught, as analyzing vote patterns and the specific timing of votes is my bread and butter (see my insta-spotting baddie Epignosis after I broke out of prison recently). At this point, I have nothing to work with, and I'm not around enough to properly study the entire game in the way that many of you do.

As for my INH vote, he NO-U'd me first, so I basically reverse NO-U'd him, which in my mind made perfect sense for a vote.

I'm not specifically getting on you because you're "barely around" nor am I making a "gentle" push on you. I'm glad to hear that you think yourself as an easy lynch with 2 votes currently cast against you.

I also thrive after a baddie is caught. More information comes from relationships between killed baddies. We're doing a shit job of catching baddies. But that doesn't mean there isn't something to work with.

Your NO-U on INH is not inherently sus, but NO-Uing him specifically because he was NO-U'ing you is akin to listening to one Creed song on loop for 10 hours. It's a lesson in insanity.

If I suspect someone, and then they NO-U me, it just adds to my vibe against them.

Stance against NO-U'ing as a whole. A bit weird imo, as timmer did technically NO U INH. But at the same time, timmer has been suspicious of INH since early on, so it doesn't really feel like an actual NO U to me.

Oh, it was Sorsha, the posts are pretty much right above mine. Sorsha called out INH for doing the same I had noticed him doing to me.

Fixing the previous answer to Scotty's question.

Sadly splints that's exactly the case. I'm busy to play properly, and there is nothing I can do about it.

Fluff about being busy.

Voted for INH. he's still my #1 suspicion.

Vote

Day 0:
Fluff: 2

After:
Fluff: 8
Mechanics: 3
Content: 22
Vote: 2
Fixing previous post: 2
Defense: 1
Answering a question: 1

Honestly, I feel fine about timmer mostly. The only thing I found decently pingy was Day 4, where timmer had time to look into Lorab who hadn't posted much in forever, but not the Matt case that was on the table. It almost makes me wonder if he was just trying to not be on the Matt wagon. Other than that though, the INH stuff feels genuine.

My rating:

6/10

Questions:
Why did you vote BWT Day 2?
What lead you to look into Lorab Day 4?

(Reminding myself right here that I want to look into INH more tomorrow.)

[DrumBeats]

Sorsha, this is the case on you: SVS dying allows you to wash your hands clean of TH. That's not hard to understand either. That's why baddies kill people, because letting them live isn't convenient. If her death is good for anyone, it's you, because you don't have to deal with the consequences of her flip. You won't even admit you were wrong. It all just goes away.

Also, sorry guys, I was busy today reuniting with family etc. I promised a post a while ago and I'll get working on it.

Oh yeah... That's working out great for me then hey? It all just went away

If I was bad and planning on killing svs why bring up the th suspicion on the condition of her flip? That makes no sense to do it that way.

It would make sense to me as a distancing manuever, or even just to feign content. Either way, it seemed to conveniently negate your INH suspicion.

Voting Sorsha for now. I would also be willing to vote LoRab today.

[Sorsha]

Coulda been but it's not. I had nothing to do with SVS's death. Simple as that. You'll see.

[Turnip Head]

IMO Sorsha only busts out the "Wait til I prove you guys wrong" thing when she's civ. I know that by saying that I'm allowing her to use that against me in future games but I think it's true here.

Despite my early vote for timmer I'm not swayed by the case there either, and I think all the Serge votes are easy, his frustration felt genuine to me.

I'm down to swing this lynch onto INH. No grand unifying reason, I just don't get great vibes from his participation and I don't like the current top three candidates.

[Dom]

Sorry if I can't quote a ton of posts, I really don't feel like I'm getting better playing Mafia just on my phone. My mindset can't just get back on my previous way of scumhunting which involves quoting almost every post of every player. So I guess my only real worth in playing these games here are my votes, and I try to use them in the best way I can. Also I have a really bad case of tunnel vision.

I feel your phone posting pain. Back in the day my *only* internet access was a beat down crackberry. I was terminally 6 or more posts behind what was going on and The return key was broken on my phone so everything I *did* say was one long run on paragraph of 11ty millon thoughts.

This post and the one before it help me feel better about where you are in your head space Serge - so from your phone keep doing that.

I will say - you bring up a point that is worth mentioning. It's good that you are keeping who voted where in those early stages alive, and also - we should look at everything else too.

Playing catsup from your phone is hard. I don't often post when I'm reading on my phone for all the reasons you complain about - then when I get home I often forget the details of what I read 8 or more hours ago were.

The best advice I can give you - and me - is when you read, post about it. In as much detail as time allows you to. You might not get the quotes, but the more you can keep us in your head space, the better. Ya know?

Your last couple posts were awesome. More of that please.

I miss the crackberry tbh

[DrumBeats]

I can see an INH vote, but I haven't had time to seriously look into it. I don't have time for a full ISO but I'll take a gander at the history. Of the three wagons, I think Sorsha is the best, and Serge's is decent as well. I'm not really feeling the timmer wagon right now, but I would also be comfortable switching my vote to LoRab, if we could get enough.

[Turnip Head]

LoRab hasn't posted at all this phase, so that's unsettling. Whatchyu thinking, LoRab?

[Enrique]

Sorsha, this is the case on you: SVS dying allows you to wash your hands clean of TH. That's not hard to understand either. That's why baddies kill people, because letting them live isn't convenient. If her death is good for anyone, it's you, because you don't have to deal with the consequences of her flip. You won't even admit you were wrong. It all just goes away.

Also, sorry guys, I was busy today reuniting with family etc. I promised a post a while ago and I'll get working on it.

Oh yeah... That's working out great for me then hey? It all just went away

If I was bad and planning on killing svs why bring up the th suspicion on the condition of her flip? That makes no sense to do it that way.

Because uhh
we're not supposed to know you're bad. I think the most problematic part is how you just shrugged away TH the moment SVS was dead.

[DrumBeats]

Timmer ISO

Spoiler: show

Hello, all, this is le me, checking in. I'll be working a lot for the next few days, but c'est la vie Happy to be in a game again!

Day 0 Fluff

I was going to vote management until I saw this. It makes sense, so I will vote personnel.

Good to see you timmer!!

Thanks, glad to be back!

My experience with The Office is/was pretty sporadic. I've never seen the British show at all, and only watched episodes of the American one every now and then, but when I did, it was always pretty solid. I'll never forget Michael "declaring" bankruptcy, lol...

Day 0 Fluff

Well, the world didn't need a healthy economy anyway, so no worries England. Jesus, what a disastrous day.

Day 1 Fluff - but very understandable given events that occurred. Not alignment indicative.

You know what helps a lie detector? Quietly making a statement that you know will help them see that you are civ.

You know what doesn't help them? Getting all players to say it and getting the whole thing thrown out as unusable.

And what really really doesn't help is then winking and saying you knew that, Muhuhaha. Because now day 1 is about you.

not a fan. Maybe you won't care. And because of course you will ask. I am town aligned.

Mechanical statement against the lie detector check thing. I can see this working either way alignment-wise, but I'd like to see something more content heavy soon.

You know what helps a lie detector? Quietly making a statement that you know will help them see that you are civ.

You know what doesn't help them? Getting all players to say it and getting the whole thing thrown out as unusable.

And what really really doesn't help is then winking and saying you knew that, Muhuhaha. Because now day 1 is about you.

not a fan. Maybe you won't care. And because of course you will ask. I am town aligned.

I thinkyou're talking to me so I'll respond. I wasn't going to ask anybody else to say it because the point's already been made that saying 'I am town aligned' isn't worth a damn to a lie detector. It was unusable from the start, so there's no reason why I can't find a use for it myself.

-wink-, muhuhaha.

Muhuhaha indeed, lol!

People who know Quin, how likely is it that he would read that role and miss the part about not using blanket statements? I'm rusty, and have lost track of who plays like what...

Questioning stuff about Quin.

I feel like you're the one who wanted to make Day 1 about me, timmer. But even so, let's do it. I'll do a good job of it.

If by that you mean I want to focus on your little gambit, then absolutely. I'll be taking advisement from the players who know you best

Leaving advice on Quin in the hands of other people. Reasonable approach for civ or mafia, but could be an easy way to vote Quin without taking blame for it. I'll see how the rest of timmer plays out here, but if it ends with a Quin vote without original reasoning I'm going to be suspicious.

So... anyone able to tell me if this seems like Quin being Quin?

More questioning about Quin meta.

@Timmer, I don't see anything specifically abnormal about Quin, what are you seeing?

Just didn't like the whole "hey Scotty, say I'm town aligned" thing, after admitting that it is useless. Why pick a useless angle that can only serve to draw attention on a day that traditionally is all about people getting lynched for getting unwanted attention, etc.

Basically, if this were, say, Epig or MP7, I wouldn't look twice because I know how they can be, but I don't really know Quin, so I'm just trying to get a sense of him from anyone who has played a lot with him.

Takes a personal Quin stance without meta, while still asking for it. Makes me feel a bit better since timmer is now not able to only blame somebody else for the suspicion.

I feel like you're the one who wanted to make Day 1 about me, timmer. But even so, let's do it. I'll do a good job of it.

You guys move fast. What am I supposed to take from this exchange? Where's the meat? Where did you think you were headed with... any of it, really? Where did you land?

I think he was just replying to a borderline-too-aggressive post from me. What else could it be?

An odd answer to an odd question. I don't know what to get out of either the question or the answer.

Hmm...

I think Quin and INH are on a team. I also think INH and Matt are on opposite teams. I also don't think bad Matt woud gimmick this early, unless he is strictly copying another game. He compared this point system to transistor, but I don't think he's copying what he did there.

Why is that question strange bullz? Feep free to answer the question yourself.

All of this sounds like somebody who needed something to say coming in and saying something. Why do you think these things? What posts brought you to these conclusions? Why are you defending Matt?

I'd like to hear answers to these, as well.

Join's Epi's push on Wilgy.

I think I'm getting too rusty. Wilgy's post, though it sounds like Wilgy, reads as pingy. But then INH's replies read as pingy, as well. Basically, my brain is seeing people sort of jockeying for position as if they feel the spotlight on them and don't like it, but I'm unsure of where to go with it. Going to wait a bit to see how things play out.

Wilgy, in direct reply to you, your post just made too many statements that seem unsupportable this early in the game, and I'm not a big fan of that.

Post against Wilgy and INH, but seems to lean more against Wilgy with the second paragraph.

I think I'm going to vote for INH. There is this handful of players who posted a few things that have been commented and critiqued upon, and the rest of the players are picking those posts apart on a lightweight basis, but there seems to be a slight vibe leaning towards Wilgy and away from INH, which, if all of these Day 1 posts are roughly equal in mini-pinginess, is enough for me to go the other way. Nothing will become clearer in the next few hours, so it's enough for me.

A vote for INH, which is an odd one imo based on timmer's posts. I don't understand the reasoning timmer put forth on INH here. It seems like the Wilgy wagon was what made him switch to INH, but I'm not sure.

I think I'm going to vote for INH. There is this handful of players who posted a few things that have been commented and critiqued upon, and the rest of the players are picking those posts apart on a lightweight basis, but there seems to be a slight vibe leaning towards Wilgy and away from INH, which, if all of these Day 1 posts are roughly equal in mini-pinginess, is enough for me to go the other way. Nothing will become clearer in the next few hours, so it's enough for me.

If you have any questions or problems or what have you for me, I'd love to hear them. I'd also love to hear some concrete reasons instead of you just hinting at "pinginess," if that's not too much trouble.

It's day 1. You were in the small cluster of people who promoted the whole "let's say we're civs for the lie detector" thing. You also jumped a bit forcefully on Wilgy for my liking. Then there is Wilgy himself, whose posts haven't been great, either. But you, and the cluster who were involved with the lie detector thing, are all earning light mentions that could be read as a teammate making sure to namedrop you while simultaneously moving onto a civ target, while those mentioning Wilgy don't seem to be doing the same thing.

I've got virtually nothing, it's day 1, but if I've got multiple people who are all getting talked about the same level of weak, and one of them seems to have a "pass" current for some reason while others don't, that's where I invariably want to lean. I wouldn't even try to guess at the odds that either you or Wilgy are bad, but if one of you is, the way the posts are reading, I'd say it's you.

Again, Day 1, but that's as good as I'm going to get.

Provides reasoning against INH. I feel better about the vote now, but I still don't actually fully understand the reasoning.

How do you feel about me right now timmer? I don't think you got much out of your questioning of my play history but if you're up to it I'd recommend you look at some of my previous games here.

Turf Wars, Zodiac, AoT and Futurama (but I was playing a sock there so I was roleplaying a bit and experimenting with new playstyles without having to worry about being meta-read lool)

You're in the same little cluster of people who posted things that made my eyebrow raise a bit, but the bit of feedback I got about it made me feel like I was overreading, so we're good for now. It's Day 1, I don't tend to sweat the small stuff this early.

Dropped the Quin suspicion. Since Quin flipped civ, this can't be distancing so I read it as genuine.

@Quin, way back when I first posted to you regarding your posts, I was kind of touching on what SVS is saying. The things you were saying seemed to not be focused on baddie hunting, which bothers me. That IS the name of this game, no?

Jumps on the controversial Quin statement a bit, but seems to be doing it in hindsight rather than at the time.

It's day 1. You were in the small cluster of people who promoted the whole "let's say we're civs for the lie detector" thing. You also jumped a bit forcefully on Wilgy for my liking. Then there is Wilgy himself, whose posts haven't been great, either. But you, and the cluster who were involved with the lie detector thing, are all earning light mentions that could be read as a teammate making sure to namedrop you while simultaneously moving onto a civ target, while those mentioning Wilgy don't seem to be doing the same thing.

I've got virtually nothing, it's day 1, but if I've got multiple people who are all getting talked about the same level of weak, and one of them seems to have a "pass" current for some reason while others don't, that's where I invariably want to lean. I wouldn't even try to guess at the odds that either you or Wilgy are bad, but if one of you is, the way the posts are reading, I'd say it's you.

Again, Day 1, but that's as good as I'm going to get.

So to summarize...

- I wanted to help the civ lie detector.
- I find Wilgy suspicious, and believe him to be bad.
- People find me suspicious, but not as suspicious as other people.

If that's all you need to be convinced of someone's alignment, then there's a house up in Alaska I want to sell you.

Also, you keep mentioning "people" who were involved in trying to help the civ lie detector, which you seem to find suspicious for some reason, as mentioning me and then ignoring me. Whereas people who mention Wilgy seem to want to stick to Wilgy. Care to name some names instead of speaking in broad terms?

Timmer, I don't know your profession, but if I had to guess, I'd say you were an Olympic long jumpers with all these impressive leaps you keep making.

You are taking my Day 1 vote awful seriously, man. It's Day 1. What kind of case did you expect when you asked me to lay it out? You've got one vote.

Fluffy response to INH. INH's response here really pings me though. I want to look into INH soon too.

Mabye it's just me, but maybe we could just... you know... trust that whoever has the Pam role is probably going to find things to lie detect just fine on their own?

Because here's the thing about "helping Pam"... 1) it makes it sound like a player is participating in the game, when in fact they are posting but not offering up thoughts on any cases/suspicions etc they are posting about a role mechanic so it is a handy way to seem like you are helpful and chatty, and 2) one of the last games I played, our baddie team successfully had a mole planted in a civ circle of trust because of a cleverly worded statement that beat the lie detector rules due to a sneaky technicality. Having seen such things in action in BTSC, it would be VERY easy for baddies to PM Dom, ask him if such-n-such a statement would pass a lie detection due to a technicality that civs wouldn't see, and then post it in the thread as a "helpful" way to check someone.

Pam will be just fine, I think.

Mechanics discussion on Pam. Unique stance that feels genuine.

@INH, I barely have any suspicion of you at ALL. It's day fucking ONE. But the "barely" I've got is just a hair more than I've got for anyone else. Or would you rather I lazily voted for an absentee player, or randomized? Which choice, from a baddie hunting pov, would have been the smarter choice?

I explained my reasons to you. I'm not going to go and pull 30 post quotes for a day 1 vote. It is what it is. Why you are reacting like this, on Day 1, is beyond me?

Defending suspicion of INH to INH, who seems to be getting way too defensive about it.

linki: if you find it best to leave Pams role alone, I won't press the matter anymore.

Hey, do what you want to do, I'm just letting you know, as a game goes on, the more I see someone posting a ton about mechanics, and very little about suspicions, the greater the chance they get my vote. It's a classic baddie move to get a post count up.

More Pam talk.

@Quin, way back when I first posted to you regarding your posts, I was kind of touching on what SVS is saying. The things you were saying seemed to not be focused on baddie hunting, which bothers me. That IS the name of this game, no?

Don't get me wrong, my top priority is on baddie hunting. But at the same time, I wanted to create an advantage for town that may have come in handy at some point. We don't know what Dom has planned for this game, so I figured, why not use the resources we do have?

linki: I get what you're saying. I might be distracting myself, in hindsight. I'LL DO BETTER

Floof

@INH, I barely have any suspicion of you at ALL. It's day fucking ONE. But the "barely" I've got is just a hair more than I've got for anyone else. Or would you rather I lazily voted for an absentee player, or randomized? Which choice, from a baddie hunting pov, would have been the smarter choice?

I explained my reasons to you. I'm not going to go and pull 30 post quotes for a day 1 vote. It is what it is. Why you are reacting like this, on Day 1, is beyond me?

You're awfully touchy whenever someone tries to question your reasoning behind your votes...

I wonder why that is.

Oh, and votes are in fact changeable this game. If you still think your vote for me is justified, leave it. If you don't, remember that you can. Because all I've gotten from you is: "it wasn't a reeeeal suspicion, it was Day 1! You know what it's like in Day 1, nothing means anything!" If your defense of your vote consists mostly of cheap deflection and not actual rebuttals, maybe it isn't a very smart vote.

Also, what makes you not find Wilgy suspicious, if I may ask?

Your reactions to my lone vote against you have pretty much guaranteed that it will stay where it is, thanks

I DO think Wilgy's posts are a bit pingy, same as yours. But he seems to have a larger number of people thinking of voting for him, etc... you know, I swear I've posted this before...

And I'd say you are being far more "touchy" about having a lone vote against you on Day 1.

Brings up INH's defensiveness.

See you next time, Wilgy

Fluff

@ Scotty - The thing is that you directly said that we would get to make more sense of things after the flip and then voted a player with 0 interactions to make sense of post flip. What were we supposed to learn from Goldys flip other than Goldys alignment?

@ Quin - Why do you think INH defended you so hard last phase?

@ Matt - What do you think about INH's defense of Quin last phase?

Just an FYI, I still stand by my defense of Quin, and if you'd like to ask me a question about it, feel free.

I'll actually agree, here. Although Quin's statement about not everything having to be about baddie hunting sounded... poorly worded? I think jumping on it as a baddie slip is a major reach. Of course, it was day 1, so I'm not eyeing Quin's voters TOO much, either, but yeah... that statement does not = much of a case, imo.

Defense of Quin that feels genuine.

Sorry guys, busy busy the last few days...

So, sorry what is the case on lee tic? I missed that, I think.

I'm not feeling an epig lynch, I don't think the posts made by SVS add up to anything substantial.

I'm not as solidly turned around on INH as some of you, and I don't get civvie vibes from BWT, either. That said, INH's post DID at least show a viable set of reasons for why he said the things he said. I concede that there could be truth there.

I will try to find some cases/suspicions to build on the work you guys have done, but today's not the best day for it, I may end up having to judge which case of others I feel best about, today.

Asks for case on leetic, disagrees with an Epi lynch, brings up a light suspicion on BWT but doesn't elaborate, and keeps an eye on INH. Looks reasonable, but if timmer pushes the BWT vote, I expect reasoning.

Thank JJJ, I won't be voting for lee tic if that is what it is based on.

BWT I could get behind. There still isn't much going on in this game, but I'd still lean bad on both INH and BWT if I had to guess.

Doesn't give reasoning on BWT but takes a solid stance against him and INH.

In fact, just in case I don't get back around, I'll place a marker vote on him now.

Vote on BWT. Still haven't seen the reasoning though which I'm not thrilled about.

Leeton self voted?

Fluff, since he could easily check this in the Polls.

Leetic that is.

Fixing previous post

That sucks, BWT. But why didn't you stop the lynch, considering your role, etc???

Slightly relevant fluff. Very normal reaction though for either alignment.

WTF?

First off, DOM!!!, can I request that the thread title be changed with each day/night to make it easier to follow what happened when? with everything sayingDay 1 it's hard to figure anything out in that regard, thanks!!!

I'll digest more of this later, but for now, I again say... WTF?

Fluffy reaction post to QuinGate. We'll see how it develops later.

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!

Busy fluff post, still hasn't stanced on QuinGate or SVS flip.

Read through Matt's posts, not seeing the baddieness. Anyone care to elaborate on the case?

Stance against baddie Matt, asks for case (when real talk there were a ton out there, I alone repeated it way too many times). Feels like it could be genuine if timmer was too busy to read everything though.

For the moment I'm voting LoRab. I don't really have a lot to go on, and I've been pretty absent, but reading through her posts, when someone spends that many posts on mechanics but then fails to really talk about suspicions except in a surface way, I get twitchy.

Vote with a stance on LoRab, but it's weird that he had time to go through LoRabs posts, but it doesn't seem like he did anybody else.

Interesting point about INH in your linked post. I had cast an eye on INH early on, and I notice he's recently listed me as someone who he doesn't get civ vibes from. When someone suspects the people who suspect them, does that tend to indicate alignment? I'm not sure.

Takes a new stance against INH, but is unsure whether a NO U is a good base for suspicion. Feels genuine.

That's enough for me to vote INH. He's sitting on other people's work and targeting the people who eyed him. Moving my vote over.

More of a case on INH.

Sorry guys, I've been too distracted this week to give this game its due.

I think the mafia has done an exemplary job of moving lynches onto easy targets all game, and now a gentle push towards me since I'm barely around just continues the trend.

The fact is, I thrive in mafia after a baddie is caught, as analyzing vote patterns and the specific timing of votes is my bread and butter (see my insta-spotting baddie Epignosis after I broke out of prison recently). At this point, I have nothing to work with, and I'm not around enough to properly study the entire game in the way that many of you do.

As for my INH vote, he NO-U'd me first, so I basically reverse NO-U'd him, which in my mind made perfect sense for a vote.

Self defense. I find his INH vote genuine, because timmer has been consistent about that all game imo.

When you suspect someone, and call them out, and then later in the game that person just starts laying down a "I don't try him" vibe, when really, the only thing they have against you is that you had voted for them earlier... it's shifty. I've felt INH is bad all game, right from day 1, and I'm going to continue thinking that. He subtly NO-U'd me, and I tried calling him out for it with my vote. Unless things change, I'll be voting there again, tbh.

Stance against INH.

Timmer, can you answer in this post who you are talking to?

Interesting point about INH in your linked post. I had cast an eye on INH early on, and I notice he's recently listed me as someone who he doesn't get civ vibes from. When someone suspects the people who suspect them, does that tend to indicate alignment? I'm not sure.

I'd have to look back to be sure, but I think it was indiglo?

Answering a question.

Sorry guys, I've been too distracted this week to give this game its due.

I think the mafia has done an exemplary job of moving lynches onto easy targets all game, and now a gentle push towards me since I'm barely around just continues the trend.

The fact is, I thrive in mafia after a baddie is caught, as analyzing vote patterns and the specific timing of votes is my bread and butter (see my insta-spotting baddie Epignosis after I broke out of prison recently). At this point, I have nothing to work with, and I'm not around enough to properly study the entire game in the way that many of you do.

As for my INH vote, he NO-U'd me first, so I basically reverse NO-U'd him, which in my mind made perfect sense for a vote.

I'm not specifically getting on you because you're "barely around" nor am I making a "gentle" push on you. I'm glad to hear that you think yourself as an easy lynch with 2 votes currently cast against you.

I also thrive after a baddie is caught. More information comes from relationships between killed baddies. We're doing a shit job of catching baddies. But that doesn't mean there isn't something to work with.

Your NO-U on INH is not inherently sus, but NO-Uing him specifically because he was NO-U'ing you is akin to listening to one Creed song on loop for 10 hours. It's a lesson in insanity.

If I suspect someone, and then they NO-U me, it just adds to my vibe against them.

Stance against NO-U'ing as a whole. A bit weird imo, as timmer did technically NO U INH. But at the same time, timmer has been suspicious of INH since early on, so it doesn't really feel like an actual NO U to me.

Oh, it was Sorsha, the posts are pretty much right above mine. Sorsha called out INH for doing the same I had noticed him doing to me.

Fixing the previous answer to Scotty's question.

Sadly splints that's exactly the case. I'm busy to play properly, and there is nothing I can do about it.

Fluff about being busy.

Voted for INH. he's still my #1 suspicion.

Vote

Day 0:
Fluff: 2

After:
Fluff: 8
Mechanics: 3
Content: 22
Vote: 2
Fixing previous post: 2
Defense: 1
Answering a question: 1

Honestly, I feel fine about timmer mostly. The only thing I found decently pingy was Day 4, where timmer had time to look into Lorab who hadn't posted much in forever, but not the Matt case that was on the table. It almost makes me wonder if he was just trying to not be on the Matt wagon. Other than that though, the INH stuff feels genuine.

My rating:

6/10

Questions:
Why did you vote BWT Day 2?
What lead you to look into Lorab Day 4?

(Reminding myself right here that I want to look into INH more tomorrow.)

OH just remembered too. Timmer never took a stance on the most controversial issue, which I found odd. I forgot about this in my final rating and I would actually flip timmer's score to 5/10 with that. Also add more questions:

What is your stance on QuinGate? (The SVS forced vote on Quin controversy)
What is your reaction to the SVS kill?

Also, I'm still skimming INH, and I do find it very odd that over 50% of posts were in Day/Night 1 when INH was being suspected.

[insertnamehere]

I can see an INH vote, but I haven't had time to seriously look into it. I don't have time for a full ISO but I'll take a gander at the history. Of the three wagons, I think Sorsha is the best, and Serge's is decent as well. I'm not really feeling the timmer wagon right now, but I would also be comfortable switching my vote to LoRab, if we could get enough.

The case on me is just all the old Wilgy stuff + Timmer and Sorsha not liking me talking about them, and viewing any suspicion I have of them as inherently disingenuine and suspicious because they said earlier that they find me inherently disingenuine and suspicious.

If anyone wishes to engage me on either of those things, feel free to do so, and I will respond.

[Enrique]

I can see an INH vote, but I haven't had time to seriously look into it. I don't have time for a full ISO but I'll take a gander at the history. Of the three wagons, I think Sorsha is the best, and Serge's is decent as well. I'm not really feeling the timmer wagon right now, but I would also be comfortable switching my vote to LoRab, if we could get enough.

The case on me is just all the old Wilgy stuff + Timmer and Sorsha not liking me talking about them, and viewing any suspicion I have of them as inherently disingenuine and suspicious because they said earlier that they find me inherently disingenuine and suspicious.

If anyone wishes to engage me on either of those things, feel free to do so, and I will respond.

Will you vote for one of timmer and Sorsha?

[insertnamehere]

I'm down to swing this lynch onto INH. No grand unifying reason, I just don't get great vibes from his participation and I don't like the current top three candidates.

Quick Question for you TH: If someone says they want to lynch you because they get bad vibes off of you, is there any possible adequate response to that? Or do you just have to shrug and say "Sorry that you feel that way," and move on?

[Turnip Head]

I'm down to swing this lynch onto INH. No grand unifying reason, I just don't get great vibes from his participation and I don't like the current top three candidates.

Quick Question for you TH: If someone says they want to lynch you because they get bad vibes off of you, is there any possible adequate response to that? Or do you just have to shrug and say "Sorry that you feel that way," and move on?

The second thing mostly.

[DrumBeats]

Quick questions:

Why did your activity drop after the suspicion on you did?

Why did you state that you were "interested to see what SVS had to say" about QuinGate, but never commented on QuinGate until way after the fact when popular opinions were established?

[Enrique]

I'm down to swing this lynch onto INH. No grand unifying reason, I just don't get great vibes from his participation and I don't like the current top three candidates.

Quick Question for you TH: If someone says they want to lynch you because they get bad vibes off of you, is there any possible adequate response to that? Or do you just have to shrug and say "Sorry that you feel that way," and move on?

When you feel bad about someone, is that grounds to suspect you?

[Scotty]

Sorry I've been gone all, I've missed all of today, reading over thread real fast

[DrumBeats]

INH, if I don't get a response, I am voting you.

[insertnamehere]

I can see an INH vote, but I haven't had time to seriously look into it. I don't have time for a full ISO but I'll take a gander at the history. Of the three wagons, I think Sorsha is the best, and Serge's is decent as well. I'm not really feeling the timmer wagon right now, but I would also be comfortable switching my vote to LoRab, if we could get enough.

The case on me is just all the old Wilgy stuff + Timmer and Sorsha not liking me talking about them, and viewing any suspicion I have of them as inherently disingenuine and suspicious because they said earlier that they find me inherently disingenuine and suspicious.

If anyone wishes to engage me on either of those things, feel free to do so, and I will respond.

Will you vote for one of timmer and Sorsha?

Timmer and Sorsha have set up a kind of Catch-22 here. If I vote for either one, it clearly means that I'm bad and the only thing behind my cases against them is my apparent seething rage at having them throw my name around.

People have so little faith in the concept of objectivity, especially when it comes to other people.

I'm not seeing the case on Serge, mainly because I led a lynch against him in my last game due to his acting more or less the same way as he's doing here. He was a civ, I was embarrassed, and everybody went home depressed. I haven't seen anything that makes me feel he isn't playing the same exact game as he did there, and I don't want to him to get lynched over it.

Yes, I do find T+S suspicious, but I've also somehow become the dark horse for this lynch out of absolutely nowhere, and if I act genuinely, and vote for the people I find suspicious, those same people will use that to suspect and likely try to lynch me.

So I'm kind of stuck.

[Turnip Head]

Chinese Fire Drill ---> LoRab anybody?

[DrumBeats]

Chinese Fire Drill ---> LoRab anybody?

Yes I am down. Switching vote there now, will move off and onto another sus if we don't have enough.

[Turnip Head]

Chinese Fire Drill ---> LoRab anybody?

Yes I am down. Switching vote there now, will move off and onto another sus if we don't have enough.

I joined you.

Sorsha isn't online and never voted, which tells me that she gives zero fucks. I'd expect a baddie Sorsha to fight a little harder in a tight lynch like this.

[insertnamehere]

Quick questions:

Why did your activity drop after the suspicion on you did? RL, embarrassment over getting a civ lynched Day 1, embarrassment/stress over getting into a heated debate with people I don't know who have different opinions about a thing which I used to know fairly well but have been absent from for some time, general frustration, etc.

Why did you state that you were "interested to see what SVS had to say" about QuinGate, but never commented on QuinGate until way after the fact when popular opinions were established?Lemme quote my response when you asked me more or less the same question earlier:
[quote="insertnamehere"]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.

[/quote]

[DrumBeats]

Quick questions:

Why did your activity drop after the suspicion on you did? RL, embarrassment over getting a civ lynched Day 1, embarrassment/stress over getting into a heated debate with people I don't know who have different opinions about a thing which I used to know fairly well but have been absent from for some time, general frustration, etc.

Why did you state that you were "interested to see what SVS had to say" about QuinGate, but never commented on QuinGate until way after the fact when popular opinions were established?Lemme quote my response when you asked me more or less the same question earlier:
[quote="insertnamehere"]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.

[/quote]

Fair enough for today, I'll look into you more later.

[insertnamehere]

INH, if I don't get a response, I am voting you.

oh gee wilikers the ol' "If you don't answer my question in the next 20 minutes, that gives me probable cause to vote for you, because of reasons"

[Scotty]

So Serge never came back to thread after getting huffy. Did he quit? I'm not so sure I believe the dramatics. I want to hear MEAT from him before placing my vote there.

I haven't even really looked at Sorsha, and don't feel comfortable putting my vote on her.

I am keeping my vote on timmer. There's just not enough time for me to place another educated vote for the current leaders, plus timmer is bad, guys.

Timmer did you not try and save himself? A vote for INH at that point was pointless. Though I now see he has votes. Mmk.

Linki: lol why are we doing a CFD?

[insertnamehere]

Chinese Fire Drill ---> LoRab anybody?

Yes I am down. Switching vote there now, will move off and onto another sus if we don't have enough.

you're deciding who you want to lynch like a family decides where they want to go to eat on a late Sunday night when there's no food in the house

[DrumBeats]

INH, if I don't get a response, I am voting you.

oh gee wilikers the ol' "If you don't answer my question in the next 20 minutes, that gives me probable cause to vote for you, because of reasons"

Its EoD, and I need to decide, and you were around. No apologies there, you said to ask questions and I did. Don't like the defensive attitude.