The Syndicate

And by behind I mean, behind in school... and the game.

Oh. Cwap. I missed the poll.
Sorry everyone!! The host has great mercy, so no harm done apparently. I just survived most of my first week of my last semester ("Aaaah, my most of me!!"). Let's just say that I already feel behind.
Thank goodness there's a weekend, so I should be able to pick back up.

I'm trying to outdo your quoting, MP.

Ok, back at my looking back again... Am I missing something, or have the Teen Girls failed to kill twice? It appears they didn't kill anyone on night 2 either. Is that correct? Someone, I think Alex, asked me a while back what I think. All I can say is that it seems unlikely that they failed by targeting someone who couldn't die TWICE. Thoughts?

thellama73 wrote:I've got a few people I'm looking at. The daylight should reveal more of the direction I want to go.

Meaning you have something to do in the night first?

Mongoose wrote: CBK: Are you a killer of bunnies that's a captain OR a bunny who is a captain and a killer?

I am the nickname Sawyer gave Ben for supposedly killing a bunny. Basically, I just love Ben. But I have no idea which people in this game are LOST fans.

Ok, wait. Is Mongoose removed?? For the love. Ok, well, I don't have time, so llama it is. Man, if you know something and I'm just blind as a bat (in more ways than one ), I'm sorry.

What?! I must have missed something. I am totally willing to hear the original argument against gleam, which I don't think I get. But I can't believe it is not suspicious to anyone that llama just jumped on gleam with an early vote and little to no explanation at first (and he calls me illogical) and everyone followed along with almost the same wording even about gleam's unlynchable comment. Weren't we all discussing the possibility that llama was unlynchable a couple of days ago? I am by no means defending gleam. I just don't see what you guys are seeing. Either someone has info or someone bad is leading us again.
Honestly, I was just thinking that I don't know how to feel about llama. I have been trying to figure things out, and I was beginning to see possibilities for his civviness, but now I'm really confused. I feel suspicious of him, but his position has been so weird in this game that I feel like I need to look at all the evidence more. And it doesn't help that a couple of the people I have thought also suspicious have followed on this gleam thing: juliets and MP for example. Did Mongoose weigh in yet?
I am about to start my semester today, and I did not complete my review of the thread. With that said, I need another day at least to come up with something more complete. But I think I can say that I will NOT vote for gleam. I would gladly wait for an explanation, but I need to get ready to go to school. So, i will just have to pick between my old suspicions again. Considering my reconsideration of llama needs more examination, I might just go with Mongoose. Some of what she has said caught my attention in the past, but most of it was silly. But I feel like I'm noticing a pattern of diversion. I don't know for sure yet.

All kinds of linki! I hope I'm not missing something.

Mongoose wrote:There are two different baddies with *Secrets*, so I wonder if one baddie group (inadvertently?) blocked the other.

Why would they inadvertently? Trying to block something civ? Maybe if they thought they were targeted (which wouldn't be inadvertent)? I don't know. This seems pretty far out there speculation. We have no idea what the secrets mean.

I think someone mentioned earlier that it could be a block or protect or someone targeted the Cheat or a Blue Laser? I think if it were the Cheat, Strongmad would know. Is a failed kill somehow indicated to be a protect or block?
I feel pretty certain it was not just a whole baddie team failing to pm.

And I would note that those two people were MP and llama... Old suspicions die hard.
But, yes, looking back... here we go.

This is the second time someone has called me illogical/contradictory without examples. Care to explain?

linki: Thanks, bea.

MP and Juliets, I really feel like I need to review a little bit, in light of stepping back from MP. I have some old, standing suspicions, but they need reconsideration.

And don't get me wrong. I am all for attempting to figure out who Trogdor might be, especially based on who's missing. But I just think missing people are the starting point, not the conclusion. We need more evidence before we go out with pitchforks after potential civvies. Plus, my susggestion is that, since the Teen Girls were probably stopped by someone, somebody knows something. And I would guess that a baddie team has at least one posting member, someone who's regular. So, I'm just careful about jumping on a bandwagon with little to no evidence, when it could be another misdirection.

I will come back with a specific suggestion or two, based on what there is. I just need time.

Well, I totally understand the MP break. After that last burst of frustration (which I understand could be frustrating), I get it.

I'm a little unsure about just picking absent posters without further evidence. BWT, I'm not sure how that would "get us on the right track" beyond the lucky chance that we do get Troggy. It would certainly be safer around here, but finding the serial killer gets us no closer otherwise to finding the other baddies. And, with the number of people who have appeared to have reasons for low posting (I would emphasize appeared), it seems more dangerous to just attack low posters willy nilly.

So, why are we not asking questions about why the Teen Girls didn't make a kill? Was it two missing PMs, or is it possible their kill was stopped somehow? It just seems unlikely that a whole team would miss the PM. So, someone here is sneaking back into the discussion.

So, as a brief answer to MP, I'm not sure how I've been blendy. I do take a while to come to a decision, but I've pretty much been on the same track the whole time. And, I'm also not sure what I've said that's been illogical. I guess if you're really concerned, you'll have to elaborate when you get the chance.

Yeah, so, that didn't really help your cause in my mind, MP.

Did anyone else notice the contradictions here?

MovingPictures07 wrote:I didn't manufacture a fake case against llama; it was what I sincerely believed....

That said, I didn't build a case on llama quite like timmer is building on me. I didn't do my fancy old pulling quotes and all of that stuff. But yes, I did build a case against llama, and I did it out of... I don't know, shortsidedness, or dare I say it, rash stupidity. I'll be the first to admit that.

It is possible timmer is just very wrong about me, but I am not so sure. What bugged me so much about it was how timmer had such a turnaround and as such it felt especially fake to me. I suppose it helps make it feel fake considering that I know it all to be incorrect as well.

Also, it is NOT a switcheroo. Lest you forget, I actually discussed timmer with llama before timmer even came back from vacation. I said he seemed suspicious due to his most recent vote for llama, but that I was holding final judgment to see what he would post. I said that specifically because I had a feeling he might come in the thread and try to railroad me, but I didn't want to say that at the time as it would have defeated the purpose of my speculation. I needed to see what he'd do.

Then he came in the thread and gunned against me HARD. And Devin was killed last night. Just cannot be a coincidence in my mind.

One minute you say you sincerely believed your case against llama. The next minute it was rash and stupid. Yet you suspect timmer because a sudden flip seemed fake? I seem to recall that your words directly after your sudden change of heart about llama were "I knew it sucked balls." Yeah, gross. And so telling.

And the whole paragraph about a switcheroo sounds strikingly like a baddie not copletely committing while preparing a defense beforehand.

And, yes, I will go back for your other posts. I apologize if I missed something there.

And, as a funny sidenote, the lady I rent from has family from France staying with her right now, and I found myself reading the whole thread in a French accent in my head. It's pretty great.

Ok, I still had to skip over 4 pages, but I think I got the gist of the debates.
As llama so nicely summarized, I am probably nowhere near the most insightful player (no offense taken). Please don't discount me though on the basis of my low vision. Honestly, I just have had little time, becuase I just moved. I'm sore, tired, and getting used to renting a room in someone else's house (awkward and time-consuming). I'm hoping I can be more regular and hang on until I can be more useful.

On that note, here's a summary of my thoughts:
Part of the reason I may be less useful is that I am too overwhelmed to present exact evidence from quoting posts, so this will be general.
I may be as dumb as a brick mafia-wise, but I still cannot get over the whole llama/MP thing. One or both of them is bad. So to the couple of you who think you're alone, you're not. They've just exhausted the conversation so much that it feels ridiculous to contiinue... which is obviously to their advantage and makes looking at everyone else seem less suspicious. And yes, I do find the sudden cease fire too convenient, like others have suggested. Given the possibility that only one is bad, it looks worse for MP, because llama seemed clueless when Matt F tried to confirm whatever guess he made. Of course, if llama was acting clueless but was really playing along, MP could really be just fooled. Either way, something underhanded was going on there on someone's part. It may be way too obvious a move for a baddie, but this also doesn't rule out Matt F playing along with someone to be the supposedly mistaken suggester again.

Anyway, my next suggestions are much less obvious and fall into the potential baddie-side-kick categories. But again, I would have to dig up more exact evidence to make these cases sure in my mind. I felt a little suspicious of Juliets for a long time, but I put it on hold and the evidence is stale (I would have to look back). And, possibly since I just am not good a letting go of an idea, I still withhold exoneration from Mongoose. Basically, after the early wacky theories (which mean nothing on their own) and the apparent jump to blanket immunity for a bunch of poeple listed on the animal sanctuary, I just still keep my eye on her. Like I said, I guess I just don't let go.

Sorry if I'm not more helpful (although, I have to admit that all the dismissing of the kinds of things that I was affirming and the saying that I'm not helpful only adds to my suspicion of said llama and others...).

Oh, and, all that being explained, I am going to continue with my lines of thinking this whole game and vote for MP.

Well, the last few days have been a whirlwind, but I am settling in, so I will attempt some catch up tonight.

Well, friends, I'm sorry I can't be more faithful/helpful with analysis here. Pretty much the last time I was able to get on was when the whole everyone-now-switched-everything-they-used-to-think thing happened. I don't get it, so I'm just going to have to vote llama. It's still pretty early, so I am not expecting it will decide anything and it doesn't seem fair to just vote randomly. I thought in the first day that things would be a little more lucid by now, but it seems we're back to Day 1, at least as far as a completely spread vote is concerned. Anyway, I will be on the road for 8ish hrs today starting in an hour or so, so if you comment in my direction, I'm afraid I will miss it.

I am seriously at a loss here. Thanks, Bea, for your input on me, though I'm in the dark about your alignment too. Thanks for your understanding, everyone, although it should not change your mind about me as far as anything other than length of time between my posts. It just takes me way longer than normal to read things. For example, it took me over 2 hrs to catch up between my first post from today and my last... and the posts have just kept piling up. And, I'm about to enter my last semester of my BA, w/ an undergraduate thesis and applications to grad schools... In other words, I hope this gets simpler soon.

Matt F wrote:
I can't explain it, but I'm suddenly getting a civvie vibe from Llama. MoPi, let me ask you a question,
how do you suppose we were picked for the football team? What connects us?

Obviously, both of us have suspected Llama. I don't see anything else, really.

Maybe someone is trying to send us a message?

Even though I could be wrong, I usually am, I find it interesting of all the players, we got the call.

Silly me, being all cryptic and whatnot.

What? Cryptic is right. Somehow you've made a conclusion without explanation, appeared to get a response from llama's confusion, and suddenly turned on someone else other than llama? Could you explain/quote what you mean by being picked for the football team? And if you recognize here that you're probably wrong, why do you then pretty much threaten anyone who continues to suspect llama? I'm just really confused why anyone should be so sure of what you're saying.

As a side note, I've already mentioned that I dont trust llama or MP. I voted for llama, because I didn't get any of the stuff against Devin at the time, and I thought llama was bad even before the vote came down.

Honestly, I'm pretty confused by Devin. He wasn't even on my radar at first, which is why the votes against him came across as suspect to me. I may have to look back for details.

I really don't know either about the Snow/Bullz/info/rezz thing. (It took me a few posts even to realize what was going on when he came back, haha). I could see how coming out w/ "info" would be too big a risk for a baddie, but I could also see how taking advantage of the info assumptions could be a cover for looking good. I really don't know, and the rezz makes it more complicated. The fact is, we don't know the exact conditins of either the info or the rezz, so it's all speculation. It would take examining posts/motives again.

Other than llama, I have really started to suspect MP, but I don't fully understand it yet. I just don't know. Some of his points make a lot of sense to me, so it seems really suspicious that other poeple are completely poopooing them. For example, MP made one point about the people that llama was accusing and then dropping, like they were diversions. That was a good point, but no one seemed to recognize that. And I have already mentioned that I just don't trust the level of groupthink that seemed to be happening about the time of the animal sanctuary. Maybe I should go back and look at that. And I am glad that someone suggested that MP and llama could be totally playing off each other, because that would make all this make more sense to me. Either MP is civvie and is taking a huge risk by hounding llama, or MP and llama are both baddies and MP knows it/ they both know it.

So, I can't really add anything specific as far as quotes and stuff right now. Honestly, I still haven't dropped some of my earlier suspicions, but some of them have just been eclipsed by this nearly one-to-one fight to the death. I have to say, I don't trust either llama or MP as far as I could throw them, and it's not just because they're going at each other. I've seen MP make statements that seem too assuming about "our cause" and "us civvies." Yeah, I just don't ever believe statements that just come across as "of course you're going to go along with me." Hopefully that's not a lame argument that I'll get over, but it just seems forced (and he's not the only one who's done it).
Anyway, llama has just seemed all over the place. And he's not alone. I just feel like a lot of this main conversation is really directed, as in people are definitely working together to drive things. Maybe it's bc you guys know each other, but sometimes there's just group assumptions that I totally missed--ie: who was in the animal sanctuary, which I'm guessing was partly joke as well. But it also seemed to show up in the rapid-fire tangent suspects that came up between the big talkers right after the whole Mongoose/llama/I don't who else debates. Gosh, I hope this makes sense to someone, because I am freakin tired and need to pack my whole life up tomorrow.

Quick update: I am tentatively hoping my computer is recovering from its deadly illness. So, I'm catching up just a tiny bit (just a few pages). But I am moving back to college Tue/Wed, so life will definitely be hectic soon.
I have been keeping up for the most part though, and frankly I feel like I don't know which way is up. More thoughts soon... hopefully.

Ok, just so everyone knows, things are really bad for me regarding computers right now. I started getting the blue screen of death repeatedly but sort of on and off. I'm working from my kindle right now, which is kind of trying. I will follow closely, but posting often might be hard until I get a computer/solution in the next week.

thellama73 wrote:I see two civ roles that can survive lynches, plus one with secrets.

So, you had to check? And you don't know how you survived, which which could only be true if you're not one of those roles. To be fair, it's actually kind of a hard place to be. You could just be trying to avoid revealing your civ role, not that that's what I have concluded.

Ok, last minute thoughts.
I would like to recognize two astute observations
thanks, Bea, for your input. I actually don't think the distancing theory is wacky. In fact, I'm really thinking that two of the more obvious players are playing against each other.
I also think that although Matt F was adding some major speculation, he also made a very good point. All the apparent conclusions about who is an isn't on the animal reservation seemed too much like unexplained group think. I Think Matt was right that the suspicions are being redirected.
My vote is still between the three I mentioned, probably llama
More after I vote

Ok, last minute thoughts.
I would like to recognize two astute observations
thanks, Bea, for your input. I actually don't think the distancing theory is wacky. In fact, I'm really thinking that two of the more obvious players are playing against each other.
I also think that although Matt F was adding some major speculation, he also made a very good point. All the apparent conclusions about who is an isn't on the animal reservation seemed too much like unexplained group think. I Think Matt was right that the suspicions are being redirected.
My vote is still between the three I mentioned, probably llama
More after I vote

Sorry, I meant no offense. I definitely talk too little, since I have such a hard time decidiing/keeping track of everything.

That said, it's not necessarily contradictory. If you bring out a defense you never explained before you were questioned, it is easily seen as suspicious, even if you do tend to express yourself more fully.

Oh, wow. For the love! I have been reading and reading, but this thing is so convoluted I am really unsure (I know everyone says that, right?)

Here's the thing. I am not convinced we can rule out the 3 mentioned: Mongoose, llama, and MP. I already mentioned before that I suspected Mongoose and llama from the beginning, though I felt the evidence was still unconfirmed. Honestly, as a still-newbie, I am not able to buy anyone's "he always acts that way" or "she never posts that way" because that'd just be going on trust (and experienced players seem to disagree anyway). And it would be easy to change the way you post or continue the way you post as it serves you. And since there are a lot of accusations going around based on that, I would guess there's intentional patterning of posting.

I know this is not necessarily a stroke of genius, but I'm willing to bet one of those three is bad. It may be triggered by my tendency toward the overly-talkative, but there has just been too much confused connections between these three points to me.
I don't necessarily buy Mongoose's just nervous about the rules part of her argument, since that never came up in the thread itself and no one would have a reason to hide that sort of concern. My original suspicion was just due to Mongoose's jumpiness in wild suggestions, but I guess now it's more the conversation which seems to be conveniently balancing them all out.

For example, when Mongoose came under suspicion.... (Ok, side note, I forgot how to quote on this thing, since my special settings to read the computer makes buttons invisible / sorry for the janky quoting method)...
...llama came in with a redirect to begin the accusations against Hedgeowl.
"I have been a little suspicious of Mongoose ever since Day One with her crazy, distracting theories. I am looking at a Hedgeowl vote today because I believe she was trying to save Elo with her vote timing, but I would not oppose people voting for Mongoose as well."
It could be a nice redirect plus a bit of token suspicion to make no connections obvious. Then it would be easier to make that stronger once there were good arguments in her favor.

Plus, I know what llama is getting at with claiming to not be consistent on purpose, but I also don't buy this part of his defense:
"To be honest, I'm having a bit of analysis paralysis. There are so many roles with so many powers, I'm having a hard time coming up with plausible explanations of what is going on without descending into baseless speculation. I am trying to keep it simple, hence my intention to vote for Hedgeowl."
It seems to not make sense with how aggressive he seems to me. Although, again, I am not experienced with observing anyone's behavior here.

Anyway, I feel like this is kind of garbled, because my thoughts are still incomplete. I'm just concerned about giving all three a you're-probably-ok pass right now, and I really had to just jump into discussion.

linki: Matt F - I do have to say that I felt the same way about MP's openness. That's probably why I hesitate the most about him.

Ok, so I haven't made it all the way through the new posts, but I thought I would go ahead and vote for a hut. I figure it would make sense individually to go with the most voted place. It should increase the odds of survival considerably to have more hut-mates.

Oh man! That was close. So, I only had old suspicions which I didn't have time to re-examine. I mentioned Mongoose and llama earlier. Honestly, I'm really not sure about either, but that's because I'm not sure about anything right now. I know you explained, Mongoose, that it was not really what you would have done, but it just seemed way too out there to jump on randomly lynching someone on a really stretch connection to a number in the video/poll.
And sorry I voted first. The internet went down, and I didn't realize I only had minutes to reset it and vote!

Ok, still had to skip over a significant chunk. Sorry.
I feel like I need a little more observation to go on. There were just so many crazy things said for this day. It's ironic that I was suspicious for silence, because I tend to be wary of people who jump on something quickly. I know there are plenty of reasons to do this, but I've got nothing else to go on right now. That being said, I felt some suspicion of Mongoose and llama earlier. Some of that came from the crazy suggestions about what the poll could mean, so again not much to go on.
I think I'm going to have to sleep on it, so hopefully I won't just have to pick one of them.

linki: bea - yes! I just like Ben. Weird, I know.

No worries, llama. Part of it is just busyness.
Thanks, bea.
And, yay for daisy adding my avatar!

Ok, back to skimming.

Hi, friends!
So, I heard there were some suspicions floating around due to my silence. I apologize. I actually have been trying on and off to catch up today, but I've been busy hanging out with a certain sister whom you all know.
Anyway, just a heads up. I'm a bit slow at keeping up on the reading, because I'm legally blind (also, I'm completely colorblind, in case that becomes an issue with font colors). I'm just going to have to check often in order to not get backed up. I will be better.
Speaking of which, I think I will go do a little more skimming, because I was beginning to wonder about a few out-in-left-field lynch ideas. But maybe we're past all that. Be back with more thoughts.

So, I have no idea what this vote means. I just picked whatever struck my fancy. And, I need to catch up on what's been said now.