The Syndicate

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:40 pm Wilgy sent me a PM shortly before he was lynched, telling me about all the hijinks he'd been up behind the scenes. He told me to pay attention to how SVS reacted to his flip. This is all I could find at a quick glance:

S~V~S wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 6:56 pm OK, what he told me was that he was an Indy with no win condition. He asked if I was bad, and told me that if the baddies targeted him, he would join the baddie team. And if I was a baddie, to NK him so he could become a baddie.

Now he appears to have been lynched without an affiliation, so I am going to assume he was being truthful about that and he actually thought I was bad.

It does seem a bit passive and I don't see why this information had to be kept secret until after his death. I had moments of slight doubt about the sincerity of SVS's suspicion against Wilgy but I was distracted and neglected to mention it in the thread (sorry), but it's something I wish I would have followed up on. I'm bringing up here just to frame my vote for SVS.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:24 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:40 pm Wilgy sent me a PM shortly before he was lynched, telling me about all the hijinks he'd been up behind the scenes. He told me to pay attention to how SVS reacted to his flip. This is all I could find at a quick glance:

S~V~S wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 6:56 pm OK, what he told me was that he was an Indy with no win condition. He asked if I was bad, and told me that if the baddies targeted him, he would join the baddie team. And if I was a baddie, to NK him so he could become a baddie.

Now he appears to have been lynched without an affiliation, so I am going to assume he was being truthful about that and he actually thought I was bad.

It does seem a bit passive and I don't see why this information had to be kept secret until after his death. I had moments of slight doubt about the sincerity of SVS's suspicion against Wilgy but I was distracted and neglected to mention it in the thread (sorry), but it's something I wish I would have followed up on. I'm bringing up here just to frame my vote for SVS.

Your assessment of this doesn't pass muster either.

If S~V~S is bad, then she would have either kept quiet about this or tried to kill Wilgy in accordance to his wishes.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:19 pm I was "treading carefully" because I scum player voting to protect another play on Day/Night 1 is a steaming pile of WIFOM. I gave it a "for now" because I'm in the beginning stages of my formulation of reads. I'm not jumping to a conclusion about Quin/Llama because literally all I've read of their interactions is llama's vote to protect Dyslexicon. What treasure troves of information should I pretend to have gathered from that?
I currently have zero information on their interactions. I hope to find new information by reading things that have already been said, if I feel like that's a thing I should do. Do you think that's a thing I should do?

I know this is nearly-end-game for you, but my thought processes are still in Day 1 mode. You seem to be treating me as if my reads should be as developed as yours.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:26 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:24 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:40 pm Wilgy sent me a PM shortly before he was lynched, telling me about all the hijinks he'd been up behind the scenes. He told me to pay attention to how SVS reacted to his flip. This is all I could find at a quick glance:

S~V~S wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 6:56 pm OK, what he told me was that he was an Indy with no win condition. He asked if I was bad, and told me that if the baddies targeted him, he would join the baddie team. And if I was a baddie, to NK him so he could become a baddie.

Now he appears to have been lynched without an affiliation, so I am going to assume he was being truthful about that and he actually thought I was bad.

It does seem a bit passive and I don't see why this information had to be kept secret until after his death. I had moments of slight doubt about the sincerity of SVS's suspicion against Wilgy but I was distracted and neglected to mention it in the thread (sorry), but it's something I wish I would have followed up on. I'm bringing up here just to frame my vote for SVS.

Your assessment of this doesn't pass muster either.

If S~V~S is bad, then she would have either kept quiet about this or tried to kill Wilgy in accordance to his wishes.

How so? If SVS is bad and holds onto this message, then Wilgy can publicly call her out for withholding critical information. I said on Day 1 that I would expect any player, regardless of alignment, to have reacted the way SVS did.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:32 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:26 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:24 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:40 pm Wilgy sent me a PM shortly before he was lynched, telling me about all the hijinks he'd been up behind the scenes. He told me to pay attention to how SVS reacted to his flip. This is all I could find at a quick glance:

S~V~S wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 6:56 pm OK, what he told me was that he was an Indy with no win condition. He asked if I was bad, and told me that if the baddies targeted him, he would join the baddie team. And if I was a baddie, to NK him so he could become a baddie.

Now he appears to have been lynched without an affiliation, so I am going to assume he was being truthful about that and he actually thought I was bad.

It does seem a bit passive and I don't see why this information had to be kept secret until after his death. I had moments of slight doubt about the sincerity of SVS's suspicion against Wilgy but I was distracted and neglected to mention it in the thread (sorry), but it's something I wish I would have followed up on. I'm bringing up here just to frame my vote for SVS.

Your assessment of this doesn't pass muster either.

If S~V~S is bad, then she would have either kept quiet about this or tried to kill Wilgy in accordance to his wishes.

How so? If SVS is bad and holds onto this message, then Wilgy can publicly call her out for withholding critical information. I said on Day 1 that I would expect any player, regardless of alignment, to have reacted the way SVS did.

But Wilgy didn't.

According to you, he sent your a private message.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:33 pm Phase 2 in Sherlock Mafia was "There are no more teams it is LMS now"

FWIW

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:31 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:19 pm I was "treading carefully" because I scum player voting to protect another play on Day/Night 1 is a steaming pile of WIFOM. I gave it a "for now" because I'm in the beginning stages of my formulation of reads. I'm not jumping to a conclusion about Quin/Llama because literally all I've read of their interactions is llama's vote to protect Dyslexicon. What treasure troves of information should I pretend to have gathered from that?
I currently have zero information on their interactions. I hope to find new information by reading things that have already been said, if I feel like that's a thing I should do. Do you think that's a thing I should do?

I know this is nearly-end-game for you, but my thought processes are still in Day 1 mode. You seem to be treating me as if my reads should be as developed as yours.

It's Day 4. Your opinions should not be in Day 1 mode. If you had a problem keeping up (and I genuinely am sorry for your illness), you should have sought a replacement.

DyslexiQuin right now is my top suspect, and you gave him a pass because thellama73 voted to protect him because of "WIFOM City," as you put it. Isn't that what that is supposed to do? Why not look at Dyslexicon and Quin on your own and make a decision?

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:33 pm Phase 2 in Sherlock Mafia was "There are no more teams it is LMS now"

FWIW

I would like a little more effort from you.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:37 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:33 pm Phase 2 in Sherlock Mafia was "There are no more teams it is LMS now"

FWIW

I would like a little more effort from you.

I mean I caught Llama like days before anyone else so.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:38 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:37 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:33 pm Phase 2 in Sherlock Mafia was "There are no more teams it is LMS now"

FWIW

I would like a little more effort from you.

I mean I caught Llama like days before anyone else so.

Was he the only bad guy?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm
How do you know what Wilgy was or was not thinking? There was nothing in the PM he sent me which contradicts any of this. Also, it's not even Wilgy's thoughts that matter here. It's SVS's. I think she would have reacted that way as scum or as town.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:38 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:37 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:33 pm Phase 2 in Sherlock Mafia was "There are no more teams it is LMS now"

FWIW

I would like a little more effort from you.

I mean I caught Llama like days before anyone else so.

Was he the only bad guy?

I would assume not.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:31 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:19 pm I was "treading carefully" because I scum player voting to protect another play on Day/Night 1 is a steaming pile of WIFOM. I gave it a "for now" because I'm in the beginning stages of my formulation of reads. I'm not jumping to a conclusion about Quin/Llama because literally all I've read of their interactions is llama's vote to protect Dyslexicon. What treasure troves of information should I pretend to have gathered from that?
I currently have zero information on their interactions. I hope to find new information by reading things that have already been said, if I feel like that's a thing I should do. Do you think that's a thing I should do?

I know this is nearly-end-game for you, but my thought processes are still in Day 1 mode. You seem to be treating me as if my reads should be as developed as yours.

It's Day 4. Your opinions should not be in Day 1 mode. If you had a problem keeping up (and I genuinely am sorry for your illness), you should have sought a replacement.

DyslexiQuin right now is my top suspect, and you gave him a pass because thellama73 voted to protect him because of "WIFOM City," as you put it. Isn't that what that is supposed to do? Why not look at Dyslexicon and Quin on your own and make a decision?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:42 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:38 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:37 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:33 pm Phase 2 in Sherlock Mafia was "There are no more teams it is LMS now"

FWIW

I would like a little more effort from you.

I mean I caught Llama like days before anyone else so.

Was he the only bad guy?

I would assume not.

Cool, then let's find the others. Why are you voting for me?

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm
How do you know what Wilgy was or was not thinking? There was nothing in the PM he sent me which contradicts any of this. Also, it's not even Wilgy's thoughts that matter here. It's SVS's. I think she would have reacted that way as scum or as town.

Look, I'm not voting S~V~S based on what Wilgy told you privately days ago. You could have said something to incriminate S~V~S then if you wanted to, but you didn't. You've posted every Day as far as I can see, and Wilgy was lynched ages ago. You could have said something. Now it just looks like you're trying to jumble together a case based on a PM a dead man sent you that nobody else can know if he sent or not. It's all very wild and full of hearsay. No thank you.

timmer wrote: ↑Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:59 pm My catch-up took all of about 3 minutes, but when I read my role PM it made it pretty clear that I'm a good guy, thus I too am skeptical of LC not knowing there were civs and others in the game. Barring developments, that is a pretty sizeable Day 1 ping.

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:43 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:31 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:19 pm I was "treading carefully" because I scum player voting to protect another play on Day/Night 1 is a steaming pile of WIFOM. I gave it a "for now" because I'm in the beginning stages of my formulation of reads. I'm not jumping to a conclusion about Quin/Llama because literally all I've read of their interactions is llama's vote to protect Dyslexicon. What treasure troves of information should I pretend to have gathered from that?
I currently have zero information on their interactions. I hope to find new information by reading things that have already been said, if I feel like that's a thing I should do. Do you think that's a thing I should do?

I know this is nearly-end-game for you, but my thought processes are still in Day 1 mode. You seem to be treating me as if my reads should be as developed as yours.

It's Day 4. Your opinions should not be in Day 1 mode. If you had a problem keeping up (and I genuinely am sorry for your illness), you should have sought a replacement.

DyslexiQuin right now is my top suspect, and you gave him a pass because thellama73 voted to protect him because of "WIFOM City," as you put it. Isn't that what that is supposed to do? Why not look at Dyslexicon and Quin on your own and make a decision?

Do you really think this?

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:47 pm

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:43 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:31 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:19 pm I was "treading carefully" because I scum player voting to protect another play on Day/Night 1 is a steaming pile of WIFOM. I gave it a "for now" because I'm in the beginning stages of my formulation of reads. I'm not jumping to a conclusion about Quin/Llama because literally all I've read of their interactions is llama's vote to protect Dyslexicon. What treasure troves of information should I pretend to have gathered from that?
I currently have zero information on their interactions. I hope to find new information by reading things that have already been said, if I feel like that's a thing I should do. Do you think that's a thing I should do?

I know this is nearly-end-game for you, but my thought processes are still in Day 1 mode. You seem to be treating me as if my reads should be as developed as yours.

It's Day 4. Your opinions should not be in Day 1 mode. If you had a problem keeping up (and I genuinely am sorry for your illness), you should have sought a replacement.

DyslexiQuin right now is my top suspect, and you gave him a pass because thellama73 voted to protect him because of "WIFOM City," as you put it. Isn't that what that is supposed to do? Why not look at Dyslexicon and Quin on your own and make a decision?

Do you really think this?

Now, would I lie?

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:45 pm Epignosis is probably a civilian since he would have to be the dumbest bastard on earth to claim to have killed llama when he knew the person who actually did it.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:43 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:42 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:38 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:37 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:33 pm Phase 2 in Sherlock Mafia was "There are no more teams it is LMS now"

FWIW

I would like a little more effort from you.

I mean I caught Llama like days before anyone else so.

Was he the only bad guy?

I would assume not.

Cool, then let's find the others. Why are you voting for me?

Because I feel pretty sure most of the other options are civs and it's a double lynch so I'm trying to maximize the chances of nailing a mafia

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:46 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm
How do you know what Wilgy was or was not thinking? There was nothing in the PM he sent me which contradicts any of this. Also, it's not even Wilgy's thoughts that matter here. It's SVS's. I think she would have reacted that way as scum or as town.

Look, I'm not voting S~V~S based on what Wilgy told you privately days ago. You could have said something to incriminate S~V~S then if you wanted to, but you didn't. You've posted every Day as far as I can see, and Wilgy was lynched ages ago. You could have said something. Now it just looks like you're trying to jumble together a case based on a PM a dead man sent you that nobody else can know if he sent or not. It's all very wild and full of hearsay. No thank you.

huh? No. I'm hardly using that PM to justify my vote. Pay more attention to the post I made highlighting SVS and llama's interactions. That's what I'm actually basing my vote on. I brought the Wilgy PM up now because, like you said, we're getting toward the end of the game. I didn't want to bring it up earlier when I wasn't fully involved in the game because I wouldn't have been able to follow up in any way, and I wasn't sure what would have been going on around me at the time. I'd honestly forgotten the contents of the message anyway. I had to check it after I had made my first couple posts about SVS. At that point I took an additional look at her posts to see what I could find that was relevant to what Wilgy had said to me on Day 1. That is all. It's not a crucial point and I never intended it to be so.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:50 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:46 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:35 pm
How do you know what Wilgy was or was not thinking? There was nothing in the PM he sent me which contradicts any of this. Also, it's not even Wilgy's thoughts that matter here. It's SVS's. I think she would have reacted that way as scum or as town.

Look, I'm not voting S~V~S based on what Wilgy told you privately days ago. You could have said something to incriminate S~V~S then if you wanted to, but you didn't. You've posted every Day as far as I can see, and Wilgy was lynched ages ago. You could have said something. Now it just looks like you're trying to jumble together a case based on a PM a dead man sent you that nobody else can know if he sent or not. It's all very wild and full of hearsay. No thank you.

huh? No. I'm hardly using that PM to justify my vote. Pay more attention to the post I made highlighting SVS and llama's interactions. That's what I'm actually basing my vote on. I brought the Wilgy PM up now because, like you said, we're getting toward the end of the game. I didn't want to bring it up earlier when I wasn't fully involved in the game because I wouldn't have been able to follow up in any way, and I wasn't sure what would have been going on around me at the time. I'd honestly forgotten the contents of the message anyway. I had to check it after I had made my first couple posts about SVS. At that point I took an additional look at her posts to see what I could find that was relevant to what Wilgy had said to me on Day 1. That is all. It's not a crucial point and I never intended it to be so.

Fine, but I don't care about your S~V~S-llama interactions either. They're all circumstantial. There is no substance to them. If I need to go through breaking them down, I will, but I would rather not.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:52 pm

Spoiler: show

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:48 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:43 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:42 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:38 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:37 pm

I mean I caught Llama like days before anyone else so.

Was he the only bad guy?

I would assume not.

Cool, then let's find the others. Why are you voting for me?

Because I feel pretty sure most of the other options are civs and it's a double lynch so I'm trying to maximize the chances of nailing a mafia

That doesn't answer the question. Why me? Your vote being on me suggests that I am the best option to you. Why? Who are these multitudinous civs?

I'm pretty much just winging it, mate. I don't think I'm mafia. I don't think LC is mafia because he made six different LMS deals and allegedly thought the game was LMS, which he would not have if his role PM included "Hey LLama is your teammate". Epi is probably a civilian. That closes the window significantly. Of those left, I haven't really seen anything to indicate suspicion. And it's a double lynch.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:54 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:52 pm

Spoiler: show

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:48 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:43 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:42 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:38 pm

Was he the only bad guy?

I would assume not.

Cool, then let's find the others. Why are you voting for me?

Because I feel pretty sure most of the other options are civs and it's a double lynch so I'm trying to maximize the chances of nailing a mafia

That doesn't answer the question. Why me? Your vote being on me suggests that I am the best option to you. Why? Who are these multitudinous civs?

I'm pretty much just winging it, mate. I don't think I'm mafia. I don't think LC is mafia because he made six different LMS deals and allegedly thought the game was LMS, which he would not have if his role PM included "Hey LLama is your teammate". Epi is probably a civilian. That closes the window significantly. Of those left, I haven't really seen anything to indicate suspicion. And it's a double lynch.

So that leaves myself, speedchuck, quin, nutella, timmer, and SVS as suspects, correct? Can you think of anything substantial to say about any of those names?

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:54 pm I could move off Sloonei onto someone else. I'm kinda wondering how far Speedchuck is going to take the "I do what DH Does" schtick. I had my suspicions of Dyslexicon but I thought they might be an Indie and not a mafia. IDK. Quin might be a good vote. IDK.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:00 pm See now statistically between the two of you someone's got to be blowing smoke.

Quin wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:31 pm llama did not vote for alignment reveals.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:09 pm I figured I'd take a look at llamas posts to see what's going on there. I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another. I do notice that he mentioned making a deal, and I don't know what's up with that.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:13 pm I don't reject the idea that a distracted llama might kill a heavily suspected person, but with 6 votes on him already, I'm not inclined to vote there. My other top of mind options are Epignosis or LC.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.

A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:

Quin wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:31 pm llama did not vote for alignment reveals.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:09 pm I figured I'd take a look at llamas posts to see what's going on there. I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another. I do notice that he mentioned making a deal, and I don't know what's up with that.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:13 pm I don't reject the idea that a distracted llama might kill a heavily suspected person, but with 6 votes on him already, I'm not inclined to vote there. My other top of mind options are Epignosis or LC.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.

A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.

First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:05 pm Sprityo
Ricochet
Spacedaisy

All three kills, all three pretty much useless. The mafia (even without llama) are not paying attention and/or have no idea who to kill.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pm

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:05 pm Sprityo
Ricochet
Spacedaisy

All three kills, all three pretty much useless. The mafia (even without llama) are not paying attention and/or have no idea who to kill.

This is a good reason to suspect me, I don't object. It also seems like it could be a good reason to suspect SVS and Quin. Cool.

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:

Quin wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:31 pm llama did not vote for alignment reveals.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:09 pm I figured I'd take a look at llamas posts to see what's going on there. I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another. I do notice that he mentioned making a deal, and I don't know what's up with that.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:13 pm I don't reject the idea that a distracted llama might kill a heavily suspected person, but with 6 votes on him already, I'm not inclined to vote there. My other top of mind options are Epignosis or LC.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.

A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.

First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?

I don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:13 pm I subbed in after sprityo was killed, and Dizzy wasn't inactive on Day 1. So explain why these set of night kills makes me look bad, Sloonei.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:15 pm

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:13 pm I subbed in after sprityo was killed, and Dizzy wasn't inactive on Day 1. So explain why these set of night kills makes me look bad, Sloonei.

Have you not stated elsewhere that you're having trouble getting caught up in this game?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:14 pm

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:

Quin wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:31 pm llama did not vote for alignment reveals.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:09 pm I figured I'd take a look at llamas posts to see what's going on there. I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another. I do notice that he mentioned making a deal, and I don't know what's up with that.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:13 pm I don't reject the idea that a distracted llama might kill a heavily suspected person, but with 6 votes on him already, I'm not inclined to vote there. My other top of mind options are Epignosis or LC.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.

A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.

First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?

I don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.

The bolded text is where I got the idea that you dropped your suspicion of llama. Where I come from, "I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another" is not a statement of suspicion. Your post trajectory reads like this: Mildly suspicious of llama -[2 days pass]-> Neutral on llama -> opposed to lynching llama -> quietly return to original suspicion of llama an hour later.

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:16 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:15 pm

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:13 pm I subbed in after sprityo was killed, and Dizzy wasn't inactive on Day 1. So explain why these set of night kills makes me look bad, Sloonei.

Have you not stated elsewhere that you're having trouble getting caught up in this game?

No. I just stated that I wasn't going to play catch-up.

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:14 pm

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:

Quin wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:31 pm llama did not vote for alignment reveals.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:09 pm I figured I'd take a look at llamas posts to see what's going on there. I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another. I do notice that he mentioned making a deal, and I don't know what's up with that.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:13 pm I don't reject the idea that a distracted llama might kill a heavily suspected person, but with 6 votes on him already, I'm not inclined to vote there. My other top of mind options are Epignosis or LC.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.

A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.

First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?

I don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.

The bolded text is where I got the idea that you dropped your suspicion of llama. Where I come from, "I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another" is not a statement of suspicion. Your post trajectory reads like this: Mildly suspicious of llama -[2 days pass]-> Neutral on llama -> opposed to lynching llama -> quietly return to original suspicion of llama an hour later.

His posts didn't give me any reason to read him one way or another. Does that help you?