The Syndicate

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 4:26 pm**

MetalMarsh89

Day Two [1st vote out of 26, sideline vote / 1st vote on zebra, whichever way you want to count it]

~ [Night One] banter interaction with nutella (on her missing the salute, I reckon)
- zero take on nutella as a lynch candidate
~ [post-lynch] dives into judging some connections between players and nutella
~ detail of nutella using "scum" vocabulary

Day Three [25th vote out of 25, 9th vote on Nerolunar, technically creating a tie in number of votes received between LoRab and him]

- nothing on LoRab
- nothing on Nerolunar, but intent to vote him to maybe get a second Cylonclaim out of the current wagons
- derp vote on Nerolunar

Well.

I remember saying that MetalMarsh89 treated Days One and Two with zero intention to actually contribute, which is clearly shown in there being nothing to tie him with either nutella or LC cases and wagons. There is nothing substantial in his move to vote Nerolunar, it all had rather to do with the mechanics of the lynch, post LoRab's Cylonclaim. I challenge anyone to try to squeeze a strong baddie read out of all this, although I equally challenge everyone to try to claim that all this slipperino act is supposed to be civilian.

Matt

Day Two [9th vote out of 26, 2nd vote on zebra/sideline vote, Long Con was leading 3-1]

~ says he can't read nutella

Day Three [3rd vote out of 25, sideline vote, all votes were scattered at that point]

- nothing

Abso-fraking-lutely nothing. Although no wonder that with a player so erratic, lore-obsessed and theory-driven, his votes are total scatters and his input on major talk (unless it intersects with his interests) is inexistent. Didn't even stick around to witness LoRab's claim changing the dynamic of the lynch. Wag of Finger by default.

ObscureAllure

Day Two [13th vote out of 26, 4th vote for nutella, pushed her 4-3 vs Long Con]

~ [Night One] picks up vibe of LoRab and nutella synchronizing posts
~ talks of potential BTSC between the two of them, although doesn't label as it as bad
(~ notably suspected LC a lot, for post vibes and noticing "a pattern"; come vote time, unsure of his status)
~ votes nutella after her rebuttals aggravate the vibe she had on her

Day Three [13th (oo, spooky!) out of 25, 1st vote for Nerolunar, LoRab had already claimed]

+ [Day Two] considers LoRab likely nutella candidate
- nothing on Nerolunar until voting him

Well, there is the issue of her having been insmileyfied on Day Three and her ways of communicating weren't as masterful as JJJ's back in another game, I'm afraid. But let us disseminate what we have. His angle on nutella was minor, but important enough for him to influence his views on nutella looking gradually worse and wanting to vote her. He had more bad vibes from LC, it seems, which makes it sound a bit implausible that he would have had no space for manuever to push LC's lynch, if her were nutella's teamie. LoRab suss also stayed consistent, stemming from nutella. Unfortunately, yet again Nerolunar has been pushed into lynch by someone without any background motive or reasoning. Quite the shame for Obscure's track record thus far. While this is probably her biggest offense in this equation, I still wouldn't count close to needing to reflect again on her status. It could be a typical moment of a civilian getting egg on the face for an unreasoned move. I find this evidence not sufficient for a suspicion.

Polo

Day Two [18th vote out of 26, sideline vote, Nutella was leading 5-3]

- uuuh nothing
~ [post-lynch] gets busy ISO'ing nutella and possible connections, gets wary of Nerolunar and Spacedaisy

Day Three [5th vote out of 25, 1st vote on LoRab]

+ votes LoRab based on connnection with nutella
+ angery at some of the Nerolunar late voters
+ [post-lynch] pushes for suspects in combo with nuttela lynch and Nero mislynch

A man of his own will on Day Two, it seems. I'm almost inclined to suss his Day Two, for obvious details, such as his spreaded vote amidst Nutella getting in real trouble and even his second wind to start looking at suspects, post-lynch. Luckily, I find his Day Three more favourable. LoRab case looks acceptable and early vote on LoRab doesn't strike as first-to-buss delivery. He's becoming growingly more involved and vocal about finding the right connections from the lynches that happened, which can strike more as a town initiative.

===

Getting tired and have a few more things to attend to. Can't guarantee I'll manage to finish all reads.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 4:32 pm**

Silverwolf wrote:Juliets is someone I also am suspicious of due to very safe, under the radar play very similar to nutella. She seems too cautious to be town.

Silverwolf, this isn't something I would expect you to know because we haven't played together but I am always a cautious player. I always look (or try to always look) at both sides of an issue when a suspicion comes up about someone. This analysis side of me often pushes me to go around in circles and can lead to indecision. If there is a case made on someone I like to hear the response before I make up my mind. I usually get better as the game goes on. It is a play style issue though I recognize it can cause people at times to be suspicious.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 4:36 pm**

juliets wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Juliets

Day Two [20th vote out of 26, 6th vote on nutella, pushing her away from Long Con, 6-4]

~ plans to read into JJJ's case on nutella; wants to hear from her; wants input from others
~ planned to BOTD nutella, but she ended top suspect among a few others, so went ahead with voting her

Day Three [16th vote out of 25, 3rd vote on Nerolunar, LoRab already claimed]

- wants to know what makes LoRab so suspicious ("other" evidence besides a potential save vote for Long Con)
- votes Nerolunar without reasoning and background

Back on Day Three, I judged juliets favourably purely by the timing of he vote (taking nutella from 5-4 to 6-4), because it looked like too cruel of a buss move. But content-wise, juliets' game is taking a turn for the worse I'm afraid. Day Two stance on nutella comes out very wishy-washy in writing, indeed. Zero input + questioning other's input on LoRab looks awful. Two mentions of Nerolunar in the entire game, both being in her vote post for Nerolunar, which happened out of simply following Epignosis and Obscure's votes, looks awful. Most deserving of a Wag of the Finger.

You must not know me very well. I always ask questions like the question I asked about Lorab. I didn't understand the full reasoning for the Lorab votes so I asked. There is no harm in that and I wanted to understand. Also, first you say you judged me favorably by my vote on Day 3 but then you go back to address something you saw on Day 2. Why didn't you bring that up when you judged me favorably?

Sorry, that should have been "vote on Day Two". And that time when I judged you favourably was purely when I looked at the votes and their timing. This right now has been a full read, vote, posts, context, everything.

juliets wrote:As for the Nerolunar post here is my quote that came right before that vote:

I have no idea what to do now. sig has convinced me to back off him at the moment and I can't go to Lorab as a second choice. G-Man's case was pretty good but I need to see Glorfindel's response.

I didn't have anyway to turn but I felt good about OA and Epi at that time so followed them in their vote. Not the best reason to vote someone but I didn't feel like I had another choice out there. This is not the first time someone has followed someone else's vote.

And this tells me what about you voting Nerolunar with any purpose whatsoever? Simply following players you trusted is exactly what I said you did.

Wishy washy defense. A lot of "oh that's normal of me" and "I did something because I had to do something" and "I wasn't the only one doing this". For the record, yes, I recall that this kind of play can make you look bad, in different games, under different guises. But right now, all this evidence is growingly disconcerting, nonetheless.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 4:43 pm**

Vote LoRab

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 4:59 pm**

Yes Scotty I won't do it right now it wasn't a slip it was a purposeful word choose, I won't do it for a few reasons. One I don't agree with it in fact it seems to be pushing role/info claiming and I'm surprised Golden allowed it. Two if people are going to vote for me they will whether I claim or not a portion of players have already decided I'm mafia and plan to lynch me.The fact nobody is batting an eye at people for setting up tomorrows lynches so early though isn't good.
If you will lynch me based on little to nothing except tunnely people fine I won't fight it since I don't feel like getting yelled at or having to deal with people who won't build a case. Espaiclly since I said pre game I'd be busy and people are now trying to use my activity against me. You're tunneling with no reason or case behind it. The other main pusher of my lynch is zebra who has like 200 posts of nothings.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:00 pm**

Oh and since Lorab is going to get lynched anyway I'm voting for zebra.

Vote a2zebra.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:03 pm**

sig wrote:Yes Scotty I won't do it right now it wasn't a slip it was a purposeful word choose, I won't do it for a few reasons. One I don't agree with it in fact it seems to be pushing role/info claiming and I'm surprised Golden allowed it. Two if people are going to vote for me they will whether I claim or not a portion of players have already decided I'm mafia and plan to lynch me.The fact nobody is batting an eye at people for setting up tomorrows lynches so early though isn't good.
If you will lynch me based on little to nothing except tunnely people fine I won't fight it since I don't feel like getting yelled at or having to deal with people who won't build a case.

You mean like this one?

sig wrote:Espaiclly since I said pre game I'd be busy and people are now trying to use my activity against me. You're tunneling with no reason or case behind it. The other main pusher of my lynch is zebra who has like 200 posts of nothings.

Please show me two (preferably three) instances of this happening.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:07 pm**

Silverwolf wrote:Oh you mean when someone is right for the wrong reasons. That's frustrated the hell out of me before as a baddie. I've also been genuinely frustrated as hell at being suspected when I'm good. Still trying to decide which one Long Con is. I will agree he is frustrated, no doubt. I will agree he's putting a lot of effort into the game. I agree he is addressing the concerns against him and not blowing people off. If he is bad, he's playing a good game. Similar to what MP did in the Championship game where I couldn't get anyone to go along with me to suspect him. All I had against him was his tone and a couple awkward posts, and a major gut feel. He got out of it by putting in a ton of effort and convincing other, falsely, that effort is indicative of alignment when it really isn't. So, I'm paranoid the same thing is happening here. However, my big suspicion has to do with something that I very well may have been for a fool over so that throws me for a loop as well. So fuck me if I now what the hell to make of Long Con right now. I do appreciate how he re-addressed my concerns and tried to make things right-that seems more civ like than not. I just don't want to drop my suspicion and find out I was right or get him lynched and be wrong when if he is good, he's an active and engaged player who would be helpful to the civ cause. So fuck if I know. Also, am I the only person besides ika who swears on this site?

Oh, I get it.

*raises hand

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:16 pm**

SVS

Day Two [9th vote out of 26, 2nd vote on nutella, Long Con still leading 3-2]

~ plans to re-read nutella in light of JJJ's case
~ comments on G-Man's listing of nutella, calls it a case of always reading her bad
~ in reply to zebra's rebuttal to nutella, finds angle of potential suss manufacturing from nutella
+ votes nutella over LC (who came off more sincere)
~ unconvinced by nutella rebuttal
+ keeps lobbying for nutella lynch

Day Three [9th vote out of 25, 5th vote on LoRab, LoRab yet to claim]

~ votes LoRab for being the "save-iest" in the Day Two vote moves

I find the vote timing and the constant push for nutella's lynch highly favourable for SVS, unless, again, we're talking some serious quality boss novella (maybe not as Pulitzer as JJJ's, but enough for a Bear Oscar, for instance). Minor gripes still persist, like I mentioned before: case on nutella took a while to shape up, as if G-Man's and zebra's takes or jabs at nutella aided her to find an angle, but I don't feel it makes her vote and stance topple. Final stance on LoRab was also rather sudden, up until then she had only focused, for instance, on bea judging LoRab.

Scotty

Day Two [14th vote out of 26, 5th vote on nutella, pushing her 4-3]

~ ping on nutella, keeps her in check, finds himself not dissuaded by further developments

Day Three [2nd vote out of 25, sideline vote]

~ nothing on LoRab, but votes sig out of previous suspicions

Ech. I find this evidence inconclusive at best. His part in the nutella lynch was rather minor leg work, after all. Consistent, but above any possible interpretation that he might have had to stay with his suss on her. Vote timing is, however, as favourable as any of the previous four that turned things around and put nutella in serious crisis. Disappointing lack of activity on Day Three, but I don't feel there's anything to pinpoint full context during which he swiftly came, voted and left. Overall, nothing to be crazy about, nothing to suss him intensely for. Null.

sig

Day Two [11th vote out of 26, sideline vote, nutella and Long Con were tied, 3-3]

- doesn't see any reason for a nutella vote
~ only interacts with nutella to Cylon civvieness
~ criticises Daisy's take on nutella
- finds late EoD nutella votes worrying

should be also noted that he agreed with suspecting LC, but suddenly went with voting Epignosis, thinking there might be a connection between the two of them

Day Three [17th vote out of 25, 4th vote for Nerolunar, LoRab had already claimed]

~ asks what the case on LoRab is
- says he can't properly read LoRab, but that mafia likelihood exists
~ gut read vote on Nerolunar, plus odd "actions surrounding nutella"

still wouldn't oppose LC lynch, but calls for unity around Nerolunar instead

I find this evidence to be quite infernal for anyone in sig's situation. Opposition towards nutella lynch looks clear. No sense in him voting Epignosis over LC, instead of the other way around, the way he phrased the link between them. No initial involvement in profiling LoRab, only to afterwards insert second-thought-like comments. On the spot Nerolunar suss and vote.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:25 pm**

Thing is, if Long Con would flip bad, sig would look terrible from all sides of the story.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:27 pm**

And what if JaggedJimmyJay got lynched and was bad?

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:29 pm**

Ricochet wrote:
juliets wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Juliets

Day Two [20th vote out of 26, 6th vote on nutella, pushing her away from Long Con, 6-4]

~ plans to read into JJJ's case on nutella; wants to hear from her; wants input from others
~ planned to BOTD nutella, but she ended top suspect among a few others, so went ahead with voting her

Day Three [16th vote out of 25, 3rd vote on Nerolunar, LoRab already claimed]

- wants to know what makes LoRab so suspicious ("other" evidence besides a potential save vote for Long Con)
- votes Nerolunar without reasoning and background

Back on Day Three, I judged juliets favourably purely by the timing of he vote (taking nutella from 5-4 to 6-4), because it looked like too cruel of a buss move. But content-wise, juliets' game is taking a turn for the worse I'm afraid. Day Two stance on nutella comes out very wishy-washy in writing, indeed. Zero input + questioning other's input on LoRab looks awful. Two mentions of Nerolunar in the entire game, both being in her vote post for Nerolunar, which happened out of simply following Epignosis and Obscure's votes, looks awful. Most deserving of a Wag of the Finger.

You must not know me very well. I always ask questions like the question I asked about Lorab. I didn't understand the full reasoning for the Lorab votes so I asked. There is no harm in that and I wanted to understand. Also, first you say you judged me favorably by my vote on Day 3 but then you go back to address something you saw on Day 2. Why didn't you bring that up when you judged me favorably?

Sorry, that should have been "vote on Day Two". And that time when I judged you favourably was purely when I looked at the votes and their timing. This right now has been a full read, vote, posts, context, everything.

juliets wrote:As for the Nerolunar post here is my quote that came right before that vote:

I have no idea what to do now. sig has convinced me to back off him at the moment and I can't go to Lorab as a second choice. G-Man's case was pretty good but I need to see Glorfindel's response.

I didn't have anyway to turn but I felt good about OA and Epi at that time so followed them in their vote. Not the best reason to vote someone but I didn't feel like I had another choice out there. This is not the first time someone has followed someone else's vote.

And this tells me what about you voting Nerolunar with any purpose whatsoever? Simply following players you trusted is exactly what I said you did.

Wishy washy defense. A lot of "oh that's normal of me" and "I did something because I had to do something" and "I wasn't the only one doing this". For the record, yes, I recall that this kind of play can make you look bad, in different games, under different guises. But right now, all this evidence is growingly disconcerting, nonetheless.

What I said in my response was the truth. I can't do anything more to satisfy you except tell you the truth and do my best to provide more thoughts and input in the game.

And since my question went unanswered I assume it is ok to go ahead and vote.

Vote Lorab

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:29 pm**

Epignosis wrote:And what if JaggedJimmyJay got lynched and was bad?

A hat would get eaten.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:32 pm**

voted zebra k

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:39 pm**

Oh God Rico has me figured out...

He's the first to find out...

That I hardly read threads!

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:52 pm**

What happened to JJJ?! It feels like he disappeared?

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:56 pm**

I voted sig.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:58 pm**

Silverwolf

Day Two [10th vote out of 26, 3rd vote on nutella, tied now with Long Con]

+ early suss and vote intention on nutella, for a variety of reasons
+ elaborate case make on nutella
+ further mentions, rebuttals and wrap up

Day Three [incapacitated]

~ [Night Two] read LoRab town Day Two, but that changes with nutella lynch

Her brig time cuts off anything to analyse on Day Three, but vote timing and casemaking on nutella looks solid. Even from the onset on her suspicion, although part of it seemed rather personal (nutella's attacks on ika), it made me doubt that such antagonism can really be created this early between teammates, followed by relentless hunting that would influence nutella's faith. I don't have any pings whatsoever out of this, tbh.

Sokoth

Day Two [missed vote]

...

Day Three [15th vote out of 25, sideline vote, LoRab had already claimed, Nerolunar lynch snowball had commenced with him at 2 votes]

...

Zero content on nutella and LoRab. Day Three vote seems a random roll, but incidentally he suspected JJJ based on "conversations that were had" (can't tell if poetic or vague) and then started reconsidering. He was rather prompt to deal the lynch towards LoRab, by contrast.

Wag of Finger. I have no idea what Sokoth is playing.

Spacedaisy

Day Two [19th vote out of 26, 5th vote for Long Con, bringing the wagon to 5-4 for nutella]

- not seeing baddie nutella, votes Long Con

Day Three [23rd vote out of 25, 9th vote for LoRab, although LoRab had long claimed]

~ realises LoRab vote might be useless, but considers Cylonclaim being a ploy.

Very succint evidence, which is obviously not great, especially in regards to nutella. I can see baddie nutella having tried to give herself a fighting change after Spacedaisy's vote, regardless if she was by her side or civilian. Not deaf however to Daisy's rebuttal on the matter. I'll say that it makes me torn. Re: the Day Three assessment and vote for LoRab, while it can strike as dumping a vote down the airlock of amnesty pointlessness, the way Spacedaisy puts everything into consideration and also doesn't invest in a Nero wagon she had little to say about, makes the reasoning sound a bit judicious. I'm inclined to call for scrutiny in her case.

Vompatti

Day Two [5th vote out of 26, self-vote]

Day Three [7th vote out of 25, 3rd vote on LoRab]

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 5:59 pm**

Epignosis on Night Tres wrote:Lorab tomorrow. No questions.

Epignosis wrote:I voted sig.

Huh.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:04 pm**

ObscureAllure wrote:What happened to JJJ?! It feels like he disappeared?

Hi. Busy few days and entirely too many games at once.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:05 pm**

Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Raise your hand if you've ever been annoyed when you were correctly suspected for incorrect reasons.
*raises hand*

This time: incorrect suspicion following incorrect reasons.

S~V~S wrote:You were waiting for something.
Qualify that. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Just show me and everyone else why you are saying that. I thought that was the norm when making an accusation. I don't understand what about my gameplay was "waiting-style", and when and how my gameplay supposedly changed. I'm still playing the same game I have been all along. Killing Cylons. That's it.

Do you think that I have contributed nothing to the game?

LC,I have said why. It's the gestalt of your entire game. I am sorry I can't give you anymore than I have. Early on you made that post about watching out for people with the second most votes getting lynched, and then it sure did look like you were trying to get lynched. That whole business with throwing a wrench into Indis carefully documented plan that she made with charts and all, your whole game has seemed like you were just killing time and waiting for something to happen, like I said, a holding pattern. Your insistence, even with all your knowledge of the show, that all Cylons had to die. Then suddenly a secret role declares Martial Law (that can't be good), that all cylons must die, actually changes win conditions for at least one civvie, and you suddenly start taking being lynched seriously.

And of course you have contributed, I never said you did not. You are putting words in my mouth.

I don't have any info, you are acting as if I am info dumping, but I am not. This is my sincere opinion based on watching you very closely. That early post about the person with the second most votes getting lynched got my eye, and you have had it ever since.

I think the case JJJ made was more threatening to you, more fact based,less gut based, so I am not sure why this one is upsetting you so while that one did not.

I am going to vote LoRab. If the win conditions change back, or she lifts Martial Law, maybe Cain is not such a threat

But if they don't, I think she is. And I think you are her.

*Vote LoRab*

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:06 pm**

Ricochet wrote:
Epignosis on Night Tres wrote:Lorab tomorrow. No questions.

Epignosis wrote:I voted sig.
Huh.

Any questions, Ricochat?

You don't mind that I call you Ricochat, do you?

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:10 pm**

If you need a replacement Golden, I'm always good to annoy... everyone. Mainly you though... amiright?

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:10 pm**

I could lynch sig too.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:12 pm**

rabbit8 wrote:If you need a replacement Golden, I'm always good to annoy... everyone. Mainly you though... amiright?

You missed an amazing Batman themed game here a few months ago. Absolutely stellar.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:15 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
rabbit8 wrote:If you need a replacement Golden, I'm always good to annoy... everyone. Mainly you though... amiright?
You missed an amazing Batman themed game here a few months ago. Absolutely stellar.

I do regret that. I needed to step away, for a while...

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:20 pm**

Holy Easter bunny it's rabbit!!!!! Good to see you back. We haven't forgotten you!

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:20 pm**

rabbit8 wrote:If you need a replacement Golden, I'm always good to annoy... everyone. Mainly you though... amiright?

Good to see you

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:23 pm**

Have some gun to head reads:

a2thezebra - good
bea - bad
Black Rock - good
DFaraday - bad
DrumBeats - good
DrWilgy - bad
Epignosis - good
Glorfindel - good
G-Man - good
juliets - good
Long Con - bad
LoRab - bad
Marmot - good
Matt - good
ObscureAllure - good
Polo - bad
Ricochet - good
S~V~S - good
Scotty - bad
sig - bad
Silverwolf - good
SokothQultug - good
Spacedaisy - good
Vompatti - good

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:30 pm**

When I ask myself for a gun to head read on juliets, my brain retreats into a cave. She's so hard to read.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:31 pm**

Has DrumBeats returned toDay?

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:32 pm**

I wouldn't mind a gun to the head if you nkow what I mean.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:34 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Epignosis on Night Tres wrote:Lorab tomorrow. No questions.

Epignosis wrote:I voted sig.
Huh.
Any questions, Ricochat?

You don't mind that I call you Ricochat, do you?

As long as your finger doesn't slip on the "s"...

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:44 pm**

There's a rabbit. I haven't met a rabbit before. Can I eat it?

Actual vote on Sig since he didn't seem too concerned about the difference in me trustin him then wantin to murk him

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:45 pm**

Keep those sig votes comin! We could use another 7 for a strong secondary lynch candidate!

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:47 pm**

I'm poking around Scotty's ISO and I have a note.

Scotty wrote:I do not think Epi should be lynched tomorrow if this resurrection ship is destroyed. I think the chances of him being resurrected again are too high. It would probably serve us better to look for more scum.

Scotty, this post came before the first resurrection ship was destroyed. You asserted that even if the resurrection ship is destroyed, you didn't want to lynch Epignosis because of the "high chance" of his being resurrected again.

This catches my attention because at this point, I don't believe it was public knowledge that there are multiple resurrection ships, meaning you'd have had to know that yourself ahead of the game.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:48 pm**

Scotty wrote:Keep those sig votes comin! We could use another 7 for a strong secondary lynch candidate!

Is your intent to prevent a LoRab lynch right now with a sig lynch, or just to generate a second relevant wagon?

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:48 pm**

Scotty wrote:Keep those sig votes comin! We could use another 7 for a strong secondary lynch candidate!

Why do we need a secondary lynch candidate if LoRab claimed yesterday?

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:49 pm**

Lol, Miss Rab has 10 votes already.

#SaveMissRabBecauseLynchingSigSoundsMoreFun

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:51 pm**

With 7 players left to vote (at least by my spreadsheet), I think LoRab is just about out of saving range.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:52 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Scotty wrote:Keep those sig votes comin! We could use another 7 for a strong secondary lynch candidate!
Is your intent to prevent a LoRab lynch right now with a sig lynch, or just to generate a second relevant wagon?

Ooh! Ooh! I have an opinion I think it's the latter!

Someone who just wanted to save Miss Rab coulda just vote Faraday!

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:55 pm**

PSA: playing mafia while driving is unsafe and I recommend against it.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:55 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Scotty wrote:Keep those sig votes comin! We could use another 7 for a strong secondary lynch candidate!
Is your intent to prevent a LoRab lynch right now with a sig lynch, or just to generate a second relevant wagon?

S~V~S wrote:
Scotty wrote:Keep those sig votes comin! We could use another 7 for a strong secondary lynch candidate!
Why do we need a secondary lynch candidate if LoRab claimed yesterday?

Do you all read my posts?

I'm trying to give sig a taste of his own medicine.

His proposition was 'STOP VOTING FOR LORAB' if you recall, for the sole purpose of putting Epi in the lead so that he would have to claim Cylon or else he gets lynched. He's been throwing flak at Epi because he's been withholding his claim, so this snuffs out the rabbit.
Since sig refuses to claim himself, and has even said- just a couple pages ago- that he doesn't want to claim "yet", I was suggesting we put him out front so that he had to say cylon. Because obviously he's saving it. He's said so, in so many words. Why would a human be saving it?

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:57 pm**

Scotty wrote:Do you all read my posts?

Literally no. Well, I don't specifically avoid reading your posts, Mr. Scott. I haven't read quite a few posts in this thread though.

Scotty wrote:I'm trying to give sig a taste of his own medicine.

His proposition was 'STOP VOTING FOR LORAB' if you recall, for the sole purpose of putting Epi in the lead so that he would have to claim Cylon or else he gets lynched. He's been throwing flak at Epi because he's been withholding his claim, so this snuffs out the rabbit.
Since sig refuses to claim himself, and has even said- just a couple pages ago- that he doesn't want to claim "yet", I was suggesting we put him out front so that he had to say cylon. Because obviously he's saving it. He's said so, in so many words. Why would a human be saving it?

I like it. If you answer my previous colorful question satisfactorily, I'll probably hop on your sig wagon.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 6:58 pm**

@ Scotty, No, I read them. I misunderstood what you were saying, I missed the irony angle.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 7:31 pm**

Well I can't wait all day.

VOTE - SIG

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 8:09 pm**

Someone caught me on chat wanting to discuss some music performance for a while now, but really, I should go to bed already. My vote is for

LoRab

I think the discussion around the implications of her claim have not progressed much collectively and sadly I also feel she made no effort herself, apart for the plain I'm-good-because-I-am angle, to inspire a more considerate evaluation.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 8:13 pm**

Also, the reason I kept asking about DrumBeats was because he gave me the impression of breaking the law, early on, by claiming a second time. The first time he did, back on Day Three, it seemed a clear statement, despite the humorous tone. Buut for what it's worth, this is probably of little consequence for our hunt and I am also willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he was merely jesting the first time, way before the talk about exhausting all claims got real serious.

Good night and may this lynch turn out to be in our benefit, after all.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 8:27 pm**

rabbit8 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
rabbit8 wrote:If you need a replacement Golden, I'm always good to annoy... everyone. Mainly you though... amiright?
You missed an amazing Batman themed game here a few months ago. Absolutely stellar.

I do regret that. I needed to step away, for a while...

I missed you. I was afraid you'd disappear forever this time.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2016 8:30 pm**

Just got in from work. Sorry I was mia yesterday I got home and died.

oh look! it's wabbit! hi wabbit! Missed you!

back in a few.....

The Syndicate

Battlestar Galactica Mafia - GAME OVER

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day One

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four

Re: Battlestar Galactica Mafia - Day Four