The weather's crappy, the kids are napping, and I've got some free time to actually read back and say stuff in the thread. Yes!
I know I've been totally phoning it in this game, coasting along, and I hate that it's come to that. I was really excited to play this game, but it happened to start at a rather busy time for me, so I haven't been able to be as involved as I'd like. Anyway, enough of my excuses.
My votes look...well, you know what? Not as terrible as people are making them out to be. I stand by what I said to TGG about not voting on bandwagons I didn't believe in. Reywas says I subtly defended LC; I wasn't subtle about anything. I believed at the time that people were jumping on a case that I didn't find sound about him/her, but the things that I already mentioned that were brought to light in the last voting period that were not mentioned before (or I didn't notice them, which is likely) changed my mind. I suppose, as it's been going in the thread, that one must just take my posts how they want - organically or not. I suggest organic. But enough about me. Let's look at other things.
Still of the opinion that Synonym is good (especially assuming who he is behind the sock and my previous experience with him in-game). I don't really understand why others are adamant about him, except for perhaps the theatrics covering up baddiness? But my opinion stands.
Hmmm. As I write this, I see I have now gained the lead in votes, so I may have to hold mine to save myself. Of the people garnering votes, I'm most likely to vote BR - I've said my point about Synonym, I haven't gotten any particularly fishy vibes from Lacey (I think the back and forth between Syn and Lacey looks civ on civ), and I'm certainly good I like the points made about BR keeping her options open in the last lynch (Syn, Blooper, LC) and being relatively late with the vote (but that's not as compelling, as I was late, too). And if we're looking back at the no-kill Night 1 and the possibility of a missed PM from an inactive baddie, the fact that BR had to be replaced would fit that bill. But as I said, holding for now.
I suspect boo the most, but I doubt a vote there would make any difference. Of the three with multiple votes, I still suspect synonym and not either of the other two. So I'm voting synonym.
2) I've said my share already about the players who might have meta bussed "LC" as an act all along. I personally feel this concerns "Cobalt" and "Sig" more than it does "Syn", but sure, him as well. My "10% credence" to this theory is nowhere near appropriate to push for any lynch on them right now. I'll look for other clues regarding where they stand, after more flips.
3) On some of the other players that voted "LC" on Day 3:
a] "Black Rock" the First gave us nothing to work with, "Black Rock" the Second joined on Day 2 and got in the game properly starting Night 2. Her first feel of the situation is that both "LC" and "Syn" could be civs pressured by events. She somehow leans more on "Syn" than "LC" with her analysis at that point. Tin foil version of this would be a nuanced way to show that she's studying both, but try to move the center of attention on "Syn". Day 3 she questions my flip, chats with "LC" on "Blooper" although that post by "LC" was also a defensive one and "BR" never questions or addresses that part. Only after all this does she go back to being "torn" on "LC", whilst her "Syn" vibes die down. She finally votes "LC" because she's uncomfortable with his "die-hard" claims.
The juggling between "LC" and "Syn" that I pointed out gives me pause and, I'd say, fair baddie read. She might have tested the waters, whilst the "LC"-"Syn" vote trains were balanced, then corrected her stances when the weight dropped on "LC" for good. I believe this is pretty much what "Lipsticklacey" also brought up (although I don't get behind some other points of hers: "BR" the First's Day/Night 1 absence is, indeed, not indicative of the mafia failing to kill; plus, I don't follow her "behavior quote" angle too well).
b] Elohcin. Day 1, dismisses both leads on "LC" and "Syn", votes "MM" for unreasoned vote on "Syn". Day 2, continues on this path, elaboates on "LC" sounding like a easy lynch to hop on. I like, however, her rebuttal to "TGG" on not breaking their tie on Day 1, it is consistent with her dismissing both those vote trains. Votes "MM" again, which frankly reads to me a bit convenient tunnelling. Day 3, her opinion on "LC" is completely changed due to the lynch switch, "LC"'s explanations on it and such.
Yeah, the tin foil version of this can be very bad for "Eloh": staying away from all the "LC" hounding, staying away from "Syn" too, turning on "LC" when it was inevitable. However, this could also be some unfortunate distancing and undecided tone, if "Eloh" is not a mafia member. It's not very substantial, based on less than 9 posts of material (not all of them are on topic), but I'm going to say a slight baddie read, because she might fit the low-poster distancing baddie member profile.
c] Scotty hasn't made any progress with his activity rhythm. He got my eye for joining the "Syn" lynch on Day 1 - for a case that seemed a bit "faux", built so late. Day 3 he joins the "LC" side, just as late, but without any words. Eye still locked on him, tbh.
d] All the others I didn't address I feel either good ("SVS"), neutral ("Epig", "rey") or see "Timmer" below.
4) Of those who didn't vote "LC" on Day 3 (and, it so happens, on any other Day!), I only have the strength left to focus on "Cookie", since she also has been brought up. I remember well her post where she barked at the "Scum Con"ers, but didn't think much of it at that time. For one, it was also a rebuttal/defensive post towards "Cobalt" calling her scum. I think Dom called her defending of LC "mama bear" like and I agree it can happen - I even have a real player in mind for that, although I can't say I have "Cookie" locked on as that player.
Overall she went from "LC" giving her the "heebie jeebies" early on to finding him "wrong on a case that he can be later framed on if/when his case flops". Keeps that mindset on Day 2, alongside her voting for "Sig". Day 3, her "both are civ" stance on "LC" & "Syn" is starting to shake, but she's leaning on "Syn" with the suspicions. She ends voting "Sig" again and calling the "LC"/"Syn" deal still inconclusive for her.
So there's possible distancing and possible defending to incriminate her with. I agree she looks a bit suspicious, but there's also a part of me doubting if she'd do all this, as a mafia, without any self-awareness that the blowback will be tremendous, once "LC" flips. Torn on her.
5) "Timmer" has not returned yet with some reasoning, in fact he seems to have voted as soon as he made the "lynch 'Syn'" post. Of all the players flying low, he's making me the most uneasy right now.
I'm gonna spend an extra 10 minutes on deciding where to vote today, otherwise there you have it.
Ricochet 2 wrote:I suspect boo the most, but I doubt a vote there would make any difference. Of the three with multiple votes, I still suspect synonym and not either of the other two. So I'm voting synonym.
Bummer. I might have followed your vote on that. I still might actually. I have a slight baddie read on him, and the point you brought up was compelling.
Ricochet 2 wrote:I suspect boo the most, but I doubt a vote there would make any difference. Of the three with multiple votes, I still suspect synonym and not either of the other two. So I'm voting synonym.
Bummer. I might have followed your vote on that. I still might actually. I have a slight baddie read on him, and the point you brought up was compelling.
Why do you find the case for him being civilian so compelling?
Take away the thick layers of panda rage and his actual defense/rebuttal posts tend to check out (factually) and sound genuine, in my opinion at least. Plus, of the "Scum Con" bunch, I still feel he was more reasonable at first in his rebuttals to "LC", then got fed up and judged "LC" as pushing it (which, turns out, was true).
Epignosis 2 wrote:Assuming he is Cobalt, why is he bad?
I'm not sure whether or not linking to past mafia chat is allowed here, but this is something Cobalt does when he is bad. I can copy and paste from that chat, but I don't want to post against the rules.
Also, this statement ignores a little bit of truth. Cobalt (the real one) may be willing to bus players as baddies, but this is also eerily similar to how he played in my BoB game when he went after Long Con hard for several days until he got him lynched. Cobalt was a civilian in that game.
Why do you find the case for him being civilian so compelling?
Take away the thick layers of panda rage and his actual defense/rebuttal posts tend to check out (factually) and sound genuine, in my opinion at least. Plus, of the "Scum Con" bunch, I still feel he was more reasonable at first in his rebuttals to "LC", then got fed up and judged "LC" as pushing it (which, turns out, was true).
But my point was moreover: of the four votes for him right now, one was unreasoned, one was "because meta", you are locking your vote on him and the fourth "because I'll tell you later". How am I suppose to feel good about this vote train, in addition to feeling "Syn" reads civ?
Why do you find the case for him being civilian so compelling?
Do you think the baddie teams would have a role with a lynch pardon, and a role with a lynch switch?
If there are two teams, it would be a form of symmetry, which I could see.
If there is one team, that does sound unlikely, and is a pretty good argument for why synonym was not bussing. I still don't take it at face value that synonym has a lynch pardon, though. He might just survive his first death or something.
the case against Syn is that we don't know how many baddie teams there are, and his actions, while definitely anti-LC2, sort of read as bad and/or shifty, thus the thinking is that he is either on a second baddie team, or was going after his own teamie?
The case against eloh 2 is that there was some subtle defending of LC2?
Why do you find the case for him being civilian so compelling?
Take away the thick layers of panda rage and his actual defense/rebuttal posts tend to check out (factually) and sound genuine, in my opinion at least. Plus, of the "Scum Con" bunch, I still feel he was more reasonable at first in his rebuttals to "LC", then got fed up and judged "LC" as pushing it (which, turns out, was true).
But my point was moreover: of the four votes for him right now, one was unreasoned, one was "because meta", you are locking your vote on him and the fourth "because I'll tell you later". How am I suppose to feel good about this vote train, in addition to feeling "Syn" reads civ?
OK, that makes sense... less 'how could anyone vote syn' and more 'why are the syn voters not explaining themselves'.
Why do you find the case for him being civilian so compelling?
Do you think the baddie teams would have a role with a lynch pardon, and a role with a lynch switch?
If there are two teams, it would be a form of symmetry, which I could see.
If there is one team, that does sound unlikely, and is a pretty good argument for why synonym was not bussing. I still don't take it at face value that synonym has a lynch pardon, though. He might just survive his first death or something.
If there are two teams, I suppose so.
Last time Roxy hosted a full game with a closed setup (Monty Python), there were two baddie teams. It's certainly plausible.
Sig 2 wrote:Hey all, help me with some catching up.
the case against Syn is that we don't know how many baddie teams there are, and his actions, while definitely anti-LC2, sort of read as bad and/or shifty, thus the thinking is that he is either on a second baddie team, or was going after his own teamie?
The case against eloh 2 is that there was some subtle defending of LC2?
I noticed "BR"'s plea for lynch, but I'm wondering if it's not disenchantment at the end of conducting a big ISO travail on Cookie and finding herself up in the tally.
This appeal notwithstanding, I'm feeling both her and "Eloh" can fit a certain baddie profile in relation to "LC" , but that "BR" might have weaved her stances and interactions regarding "LC" and "Syn" a little more carefully, a little more attentive with the overall swing of the phases. I'm not excluding that "Eloh" might be the low-post distancing type, but right now I'm leaning on "BR".
This looks like as good a time as any to vote. This is so hard, I really am resistant to it even though I think it's the right way for the civs to go. I will go ahead and vote myself but its not because I'm bad. And its not because i did an ISo on cookie and then saw I was suspect. I saw I was suspect as I started the second half of the ISO, but it would have been unsportsmanlike to not complete it. Ok voting myself.
BR2, how is getting yourself lynched helping, if you are civ?
Like, let's say you are civ. You figure, by being lynched, everyone will see I was telling the truth. But then what? Would the fact that you were civ neceaasrily mean that your voters are bad? What if this is civ on civ? Then you would a) be helping kill yourself and b) pointing an accusatory finger at other civs, thus helping the baddies.
So again I'll ask, if you are civ, what is the point of this?
Timmer post was strange but not one a mafia would make, if Synonym 2 flips civilian he is on the chopping block. Rereading Elohcin's post and then Llama 2 reasons for voting Synonym 2 I found that to be a better lynch then either Black Rock or Elohcin. Out of the three I'm more confident with a Synonym 2 lynch then Black Rock or elohcin especially after elohcin last post. However, I could just as easily see Elohcin and Synonym being on the same team assuming there is two mafia teams or even if there is one though that seems more unlikely.
Only a bit of time left in this phase and then night phase right?
Apparently Black Rock 2 is lynching themselves, I will be reading over her argument on cookie as well as cookies post.
Sig 2 wrote:BR2, how is getting yourself lynched helping, if you are civ?
Like, let's say you are civ. You figure, by being lynched, everyone will see I was telling the truth. But then what? Would the fact that you were civ neceaasrily mean that your voters are bad? What if this is civ on civ? Then you would a) be helping kill yourself and b) pointing an accusatory finger at other civs, thus helping the baddies.
So again I'll ask, if you are civ, what is the point of this?
"I was telling" being in your voice, of course, not mine.
Sig 2 wrote:@BR2, you are currently a vote behind with half an hour to go. Do you honestly want me to vote you? But, you are civ? Please clarify?
Yes I am civ. If you are a civ you will benefit from my lynch. I don't think it's the only way - if I don't get lynched I will still try and find a way for civs to benefit. I can't be any more specific without breaking the rules, I'm sorry.
And Sig 2, Golden voted for me not Bass and I think since he said me in the thread they will give him the vote for me making this a tie - several of us are tied.
Black Rock 2 wrote:And Sig 2, Golden voted for me not Bass and I think since he said me in the thread they will give him the vote for me making this a tie - several of us are tied.
Remains to be seen. Vote blunders, depending on the Hosts, can be "punished" to remain as such.
Black Rock 2 wrote:And Sig 2, Golden voted for me not Bass and I think since he said me in the thread they will give him the vote for me making this a tie - several of us are tied.
Remains to be seen. Vote blunders, depending on the Hosts, can be "punished" to remain as such.
Black Rock 2 wrote:And Sig 2, Golden voted for me not Bass and I think since he said me in the thread they will give him the vote for me making this a tie - several of us are tied.
Remains to be seen. Vote blunders, depending on the Hosts, can be "punished" to remain as such.
fingersplints and Roxy were concerned with the deaths of their friends JJJ 2 and Wilgy 2, but they were more concerned with what was going on over at the mountain since Golden 2's return.
Cobalt 2 decided that him and all the others should go on an unexpected journey to the Lonely Mountain to check it out.
As they started to the mountain, lipsticklacey 2 began to be a little wary of Black Rock 2. He played with his precious on his finger. She was sounding too careful. A bit too nice.
When questioned, she felt backed into a corner, which caused the others to gather in on the chant.
"LYNCH SCUM ROCK! LYNCH SCUM ROCK!!"
Black Rock 2 roared fire and spread her wings. But as she tried to fly away, Cobalt 2 shot her down with a black arrow.
I am a little behind on current posts, but I did just see this for the first time.
Dom 2 wrote:boo 2
boo's first suspicion. Boo calls out Gamer Guy's post suggesting what roles are around. The problem that I have with this suspicion is that it is also a way to stifle discussion. It is an original suspicion, but it is one that dissuades a player from discussing a certain topic. Gamer Guy flipping civ doesn't help either.
One thing I cannot stand for is when somebody misconstrues and twists my thoughts and meanings to fit their own agendas. It pisses me off greatly. So congratulations. You have my undivided attention for the remainder of the game.
Do not misunderstand me, Dom. As I've said before in response to Golden, I am very straight forward, and I dislike cutting corners. If I wanted to stifle discussion or a specific topic, I would do so with a concise "Shut the fuck up." and that would be the end of it.
If someone thinks my analysis of their posts is reason enough to stop talking about something, then they really do have something to hide. As a civilian, one should not stray from discussion of any sort regardless of scrutiny or suspicion, unless that suspicion is well founded and correctly calling out your bullshit. If it is not well founded, you should continue unhindered as such responses should be worthless in your eyes and not able to shake you. But if a simple response has you quaking in your boots, you should reevaluate how you play the game.
It was not my intention to make Gamer Guy 2 shut up with my response to him. It was a read of what I assumed were the true intentions behind his posts, which unfortunately turned out to be wrong.
And the whole "This person flipped civ so that looks bad for this person." shit that happens around here all the time is baseless garbage. I am sorry. I shouldnt have called out Gamer Guy 2 because I very clearly knew he was civilian prior to my post correct? It's not like I had any way of knowing. That line of thinking has largely proven to be inaccurate and unreliable on multiple occurrences, and I suggest you step up your game in the future. If anything, most of the time the person who brings up that point knows more than the average player.
Despite Gamer Guy 2 flipping civilian, I still stand by my opinion. His speaking of possible roles was not beneficial to civilians. End of discussion. Not knowing our own roles is it's own advantage. "The enemy cannot predict you, if you yourself do not know what you are going to do.
Epignosis 2 wrote:Okay so she must have tracked someone and gotten something then?
She means her asking Golden if he's civ, I think. He clearly guessed she was the real tracker and "slipped", voting for the name above hers, LOL. Juliets has handed us a baddie rather handily, I think.
RIP though, "BR"/jules. I technically voted you, so sorry.
linki - yeah dog, I slipped. "Bass" is literally one place above.
And care to comment on how both of you are listed as trackers? Hmm? And how it's a pretty big coincidence that you "goofed" on voting for BR2, who maybe you were the only person to realize who she was before she was lynched? I mean, come on, man. Own up.
I like the points made about BR keeping her options open in the last lynch (Syn, Blooper, LC) and being relatively late with the vote (but that's not as compelling, as I was late, too). And if we're looking back at the no-kill Night 1 and the possibility of a missed PM from an inactive baddie, the fact that BR had to be replaced would fit that bill. But as I said, holding for now.
