The Syndicate

If TH + Lorab get DF lynched, and he flips civ, they're gonna be my top two suspects for tomorrow.

Just putting that out there.

Epignosis wrote:It's amazing to me how such little activity there is. How does anybody find out who is bad around here?

Good question. I'd like to know the answer myself.

Because I'm a NO U'ing scumlord, I've decided to vote for timmer.

Enrique wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Enrique wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:I can see an INH vote, but I haven't had time to seriously look into it. I don't have time for a full ISO but I'll take a gander at the history. Of the three wagons, I think Sorsha is the best, and Serge's is decent as well. I'm not really feeling the timmer wagon right now, but I would also be comfortable switching my vote to LoRab, if we could get enough.
The case on me is just all the old Wilgy stuff + Timmer and Sorsha not liking me talking about them, and viewing any suspicion I have of them as inherently disingenuine and suspicious because they said earlier that they find me inherently disingenuine and suspicious.

If anyone wishes to engage me on either of those things, feel free to do so, and I will respond.
Will you vote for one of timmer and Sorsha?
Timmer and Sorsha have set up a kind of Catch-22 here. If I vote for either one, it clearly means that I'm bad and the only thing behind my cases against them is my apparent seething rage at having them throw my name around.

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

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

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

So I'm kind of stuck.
I really, really don't understand this. Why would it be so bad to lynch the players he suspects?

Because they'd discredit my suspicion of them and use it as rope to try and lynch me with.

Your own suspicion of me seemingly comes from the whole "me apparently attempting to discredit Matt by voicing my opinions on his tactics." Which was a case of people trying to lynch me because of me voicing my opinions on mafia itself. From about the middle of Day 1, I've been on blast from about 7 or 8 people simply for voicing my opinion on game mechanics.

You can guess why I'm apprehensive about voicing my opinion on other people.

I interrogated timmer a little over his Day 1 vote for me, and his response was to then suspect me for caring about Day 1 votes, as they're somehow automatically impervious to any and all questioning and mean nothing.

Then he agreed with me about Quin.

Then he said that he could see some truth in some of my posts, after which he disappeared for a little while.

During this time, I posted what was really a rainbow read list, with certain people I didn't feel great about and that I wanted to look into. It wasn't a condemnation or even me suggesting I may vote for them. Sorsha and Timmer were both under the "Bad Vibes" category, which Sorsha used to vote for me, saying that I was obviously trying to NO U her because she said some stuff about me earlier in the game, and there was no way I could have found any other valid reasoning.

Timmer pops back into existance so he can agree with this post:

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

A: I didn't say that I suspected you. B: No, not really, but that doesn't matter to you. Plus it doesn't apply here.

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

Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo-stick, I didn't NO U you! All I said was that you were someone I was getting bad vibes from. This is why I really fucking hate GTH reads.

At this point, timmer shows up in the thread much less frequently. But he keeps voting me. In fact, he's voted for me every single day except for Day 2 (Vote for BWT) and "Day 3," when SVS was the only voter.

Enrique wrote:
Scotty wrote:
Enrique wrote:
Scotty wrote:I would also suspect that Spacedaisy was forced to vote Drumbeats on top of bea voting Sorsha and espers voting serge. In case anyone is counting.

In reading back through the votes from yesterday, here's some notes:
Drumbeats looks slightly better.
espers looks slightly worse.
Turnip Head looks worse.
Epi looks slightly better.
Enrique looks slightly worse.
Timmer looks slightly better.

I'm not sure how those compare with the GTH reads from last night.

Everyone else is pretty much in limbo. I have a few people I trust more than others that I don't feel like painting at this time.

I would acknowledge that I wouldn't mind my own office, but im not actively campaigning.
Didn't Drumbeats vote the exact same way as TH... three times last night?
Yes? Wouldnt you like to respond to my criticisms of your vote?
Okay. I think INH is bad.

At this point, it feels like you and Timmer are both deeply suspicious of me, and there's literally nothing I can do to stop you from being so. Timmer, I've come around on, and began to view as genuine, although I'd like to see some more non-INH opinions.

I don't like how TH and DB are both falling back to their respective pet cases with DF and Scotty, both of whom I actually trust more than I do TH and DB.

I like how you didn't exclude my "dunno" for myself

Epignosis wrote:
Enrique wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Did you guys know I didn't vote for Gabe?
I need to hear some strong opinions from this man.
Kansas is the greatest rock and roll band ever.

i wish to redact my vote

Enrique wrote:inh you know exactly who's good and who's bad why u playin

what's this supposed to mean?

are you saying that you think I'm bad and know everyone's alignment and you're disappointed that I'm not coming out and admitting it? wat?

or are you saying that every human being thinks in strict binary terms, and that nuance and complexity is really just a lie we tell ourselves to give us a hollow sense of egalitarianism and justification?

or are you saying that you suspect I have some sort of psychic ability that allows me to connect with other people through a type of comprehensive spiritual empathy and envelopment, and you're disappointed that I'm not using it in this game, ignorant of the fact that if I did in fact use it, it would be ungamesmanly and cheapening of the entire experience?

(this is what happens when I read Infinite Jest for four hours straight.)

DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Scotty wrote:Not gonna lie: I'm excited to do my first GTH but without JJJ I'm not sure what anyone's gonna make of it.
it's almost as if these are really arbitrary and meaningless and provide scum with good ammunition to suspect civs.
Worst case scenario they give more points of analysis, which honestly is nice. 3J needs to write us up a guide on analyzing these though so we can do it better without him. I'll try to look back at his methods and see what he does.

I just see them as empty opinions with nothing behind them; more or less useless data points. Although I haven't had the glory of seeing 3J the GTH guru in action.

Golden wrote:gth reads for golden. Go! i dunno

DrumBeats wrote:@ linki INH - Why good on Spacedaisy instead of I dunno? Just curious.

I'm not about to go back SD a cake, I'm not Elochin, but I haven't really gotten bad vibes from her posts, even the ones Enrique called "shallow."

It's less that I feel strongly about her civilian-ness, and it's more that I feel less ambivalent towards her in comparison with my feelings on everyone else.

Scotty wrote:Not gonna lie: I'm excited to do my first GTH but without JJJ I'm not sure what anyone's gonna make of it.

it's almost as if these are really arbitrary and meaningless and provide scum with good ammunition to suspect civs.

DrumBeats wrote:GTH:

Spacedaisy good

timmer i dunno, wanna analyze his reactions to the EoD before considering him for a vote tomorrow

Juliets i dunno

Epignosis wrote:Did you guys know I didn't vote for Gabe?

WELL

might as well cast my vote right now

DrumBeats wrote:GTH:

Scotty i dunno, but i feel kinda good about

Serge i dunno, but i feel kinda good about

Turnip Head i dunno, not a huge fan of the vote shuffling near the end of the day, and his relationship with DB, wanna ISO

Scotty wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Scotty wrote:Linki: no "I dunno's" INH in this. If you're playing, play
I reserve the right to have nuanced opinions
Yeah but to criticize the GTH exercise while not committing to it is like playing hockey with a beach ball. THATS FOR THE BEACH NOT THE RINK

i dunno, i'd pay money to see NHS teams play hockey with beach balls

Scotty wrote:Linki: no "I dunno's" INH in this. If you're playing, play

I reserve the right to have nuanced opinions

DrumBeats wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:Humor them INH.

GTH

espers

insertnamehere

LoRab
Town

Mafia

Mafia

is this the part where I ask why, and then you suspect me for being "defensive," and we spiral into a conversation about mafia mechanics until everyone skims over our posts?

DrumBeats wrote:Humor them INH.

GTH

espers i dunnno

insertnamehere i dunno, wanna ISO

LoRab i dunno

DrumBeats wrote:GTH:

enrique i dunno, wanna ISO

Epignosis i dunno, feel kinda good towards

fingersplintsi dunno, feel kinda good towards

DrumBeats wrote:@ linki INH - fair. The divisions were mostly to show how much meat was actually in them.

DrumBeats wrote:Gun to Head:

bea

DFaraday

Drumbeats
Town

Town

Town

lol

DrumBeats wrote:Gun to Head:

bea good

DFaraday i dunno

Drumbeats you really wanna know everyone's opinion on you, huh? "i dunno," with a chaser of "I want to ISO and go over your posts"

would you really hate me if I said that I thought GTH reads were more useless and annoying than helpful?

I'm beginning to feel like an old man yelling at a social network.

DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:INH, if I don't get a response, I am voting you.
oh gee wilikers the ol' "If you don't answer my question in the next 20 minutes, that gives me probable cause to vote for you, because of reasons"
Its EoD, and I need to decide, and you were around. No apologies there, you said to ask questions and I did. Don't like the defensive attitude.
i just think that answering questions is completely and utterly irrelevant to whether or not someone is scum. plus i think its easy for scum to try and trap people into these types of things that they can point back to and say that they had justification.
So you don't like reaction baiting or asking questions. What do you like?
I like asking questions to find out information, I don't like voting for someone because they didn't answer my questions.

Picture me as Lester Freamon from The Wire. I don't go in for flashy gimmicky tactics or emotion based votes.

I vote based on clear reasonings, ISO's, and good solid po-lice work. By the way, I am enjoying your thread ISO's, thank you for doing them.
You were on and promised to answer questions. If you didn't you'd have been dodging them imo.

And which ISOs do you agree with, and which do you not?

I think the post counting and sorting into Fluff, Mechanics, and whatnot to be kinda arbitrary, and I don't necessarily agree with you on some interpretations of actions, but I'm glad someone's doing the work.

If you want me to respond to and analyze each and every ISO you did, give me some time to do so. I can have it done by sometime tomorrow. Don't try to lynch me for "dodging the question," please and thank you.

this lynch is like a bunch of blind men stumbling around in the dark

Enrique wrote:Turnip Head are you... okay? This has been a really weird day for you.

This LoRab thing stinks.

linki- no read on LoRab, I have no idea what's up with this. I'm voting inh.

can i ask why?

10 points to Gryffindor if you avoid the words "read" and "NO U"

DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:INH, if I don't get a response, I am voting you.
oh gee wilikers the ol' "If you don't answer my question in the next 20 minutes, that gives me probable cause to vote for you, because of reasons"
Its EoD, and I need to decide, and you were around. No apologies there, you said to ask questions and I did. Don't like the defensive attitude.
i just think that answering questions is completely and utterly irrelevant to whether or not someone is scum. plus i think its easy for scum to try and trap people into these types of things that they can point back to and say that they had justification.
So you don't like reaction baiting or asking questions. What do you like?

I like asking questions to find out information, I don't like voting for someone because they didn't answer my questions.

Picture me as Lester Freamon from The Wire. I don't go in for flashy gimmicky tactics or emotion based votes.

I vote based on clear reasonings, ISO's, and good solid po-lice work. By the way, I am enjoying your thread ISO's, thank you for doing them.

Enrique wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Enrique wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:I can see an INH vote, but I haven't had time to seriously look into it. I don't have time for a full ISO but I'll take a gander at the history. Of the three wagons, I think Sorsha is the best, and Serge's is decent as well. I'm not really feeling the timmer wagon right now, but I would also be comfortable switching my vote to LoRab, if we could get enough.
The case on me is just all the old Wilgy stuff + Timmer and Sorsha not liking me talking about them, and viewing any suspicion I have of them as inherently disingenuine and suspicious because they said earlier that they find me inherently disingenuine and suspicious.

If anyone wishes to engage me on either of those things, feel free to do so, and I will respond.
Will you vote for one of timmer and Sorsha?
Timmer and Sorsha have set up a kind of Catch-22 here. If I vote for either one, it clearly means that I'm bad and the only thing behind my cases against them is my apparent seething rage at having them throw my name around.

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

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

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

So I'm kind of stuck.
You don't seem to be considering the possibility that they are bad at all. Just that they're "suspicious".

Because I don't have enough info on ANYONE to call them bad. They're just the people I find most suspicious at this time.

call me evasive or wishy-washy or whatever, but I just don't like to categorically claim someone's alignment.

DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:INH, if I don't get a response, I am voting you.
oh gee wilikers the ol' "If you don't answer my question in the next 20 minutes, that gives me probable cause to vote for you, because of reasons"
Its EoD, and I need to decide, and you were around. No apologies there, you said to ask questions and I did. Don't like the defensive attitude.

i just think that answering questions is completely and utterly irrelevant to whether or not someone is scum. plus i think its easy for scum to try and trap people into these types of things that they can point back to and say that they had justification.

DrumBeats wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Chinese Fire Drill ---> LoRab anybody?
Yes I am down. Switching vote there now, will move off and onto another sus if we don't have enough.

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

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

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

DrumBeats wrote:Quick questions:

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

Why did you state that you were "interested to see what SVS had to say" about QuinGate, but never commented on QuinGate until way after the fact when popular opinions were established?Lemme quote my response when you asked me more or less the same question earlier:
[quote="insertnamehere"]Because both sides had cogent points that made sense, and were both being espoused by people I don't necessarily trust. It seemed also seemed like the entire thing was becoming a bit of a clusterfuck, and I wanted to wait for the night to end and for more info to become available before I jumped in.

[/quote]

Enrique wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:I can see an INH vote, but I haven't had time to seriously look into it. I don't have time for a full ISO but I'll take a gander at the history. Of the three wagons, I think Sorsha is the best, and Serge's is decent as well. I'm not really feeling the timmer wagon right now, but I would also be comfortable switching my vote to LoRab, if we could get enough.
The case on me is just all the old Wilgy stuff + Timmer and Sorsha not liking me talking about them, and viewing any suspicion I have of them as inherently disingenuine and suspicious because they said earlier that they find me inherently disingenuine and suspicious.

If anyone wishes to engage me on either of those things, feel free to do so, and I will respond.
Will you vote for one of timmer and Sorsha?

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

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

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

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

So I'm kind of stuck.

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

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

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

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

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

Scotty wrote:this guy:
timmer wrote:Read through Matt's posts, not seeing the baddieness. Anyone care to elaborate on the case?
Soft defending of Matt.

timmer wrote:For the moment I'm voting LoRab. I don't really have a lot to go on, and I've been pretty absent, but reading through her posts, when someone spends that many posts on mechanics but then fails to really talk about suspicions except in a surface way, I get twitchy.
An out of nowhere suspicion and vote for LoRab. I can't remember him ever talking about LoRab before this. Why pick out her, of all people? And if it's a semantics thing about superfluous mechanics, look no further than Serge!

"Fails to really talk about suspicions except in a surface way"
Timmer, I can't remember who you have suspected all game.

timmer wrote:Interesting point about INH in your linked post. I had cast an eye on INH early on, and I notice he's recently listed me as someone who he doesn't get civ vibes from. When someone suspects the people who suspect them, does that tend to indicate alignment? I'm not sure.
I had to look back to see who timmer was even referencing, and I dont even know.
Anyway, he is swayed by this post on INH, but also throws in that INH has suspected him, and asks [the thread?] if that is alignment indicative. Timmer, this isn't your first rodeo. Suspecting someone for suspecting you is called a NO U, and civs and Mafia use it alike.
I suspect you too, why not vote me?

timmer wrote:That's enough for me to vote INH. He's sitting on other people's work and targeting the people who eyed him. Moving my vote over.
Wait wait wait. You vote INH because he is sitting on other people's work and targeting people who eyed him?

This describes you, my man.

You don't understand Matt's suspicion, you vote LoRab because you don't have a lot to go on, and she's asking mostly mechanics questions, and then you see INH has suspected you so you find it suspicious. So you essentially make a useless NO-U vote at the end of day on INH which gives him 2 votes.

Vote timmer.

Guys, timmer is playing a hypocritical game and he is bad.

am I allowed to agree with this case without people coming after me for "NO U"ing? (a term which I think is way over-used in today's mafia climate.)

voted yes due to cowardice

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

Not an especially convincing rejoinder.

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

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

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

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

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

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

DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:Sorry to everyone about me being AWOL since about halfway through the neverending night, I kinda wanted to wait for the dust to clear on the whole SVS kerfuffle.

I'm in the SVS = Good camp, but only because of her NK. I don't think the mafia would've killed her if she was bad simply because she was nowhere near completely condemned at that point.

DrumBeats is still aggressively beating the 'SVS = scum' drum, but I don't buy it at all.

That leaves us with a few motivations to choose from as for why scum decided to do her in. 1. They wanted to frame DrumBeats, Matt, and all the other people who went after SVS. 2. It was a double-bluff, and they wanted us to think that scenario 1 was the truth when in reality it was a fake-out. 3. They wanted to change the conversation, as it was potentially revealing too much about and attracting suspicion towards some of its members.
Why did you want to wait for the dust to settle?

Because both sides had cogent points that made sense, and were both being espoused by people I don't necessarily trust. It seemed also seemed like the entire thing was becoming a bit of a clusterfuck, and I wanted to wait for the night to end and for more info to become available before I jumped in.

But I agree that she was not near completely condemned and find the kill odd regardless.

I'm not trying to aggressively beat it, I'm just saying that I'm not clearing SVS as a civ until I see an explanation for her "forced vote" revealed in the role list. People have mentioned that scum teams have killed their own members before, and the reasoning in those situations seemed pretty relevant here as well. The key to SVS's alignment is in that role list, we'll just have to figure it out with time imo.

Enrique had some very good counterpoints here, including the simple idea that, if SVS was bad, they could have easily tried to lynch SVS instead of NK'ing her. Yes, her lynch wasn't a sure thing AT THAT POINT, but all of the scum members could have started heavily lobbying/building cred and managed to both get rid of a civ the night before, and remove a possible lynch that could target one of their own.

@ number 3, what do you suspect the conversation was revealing about the mafia/drawing suspicion to if SVS was indeed a civ?

Tbh, I'm not entirely sure. I'd have to re-read the thread with an eye towards that to be 100% on it. The SVS debacle became more or less the sole point of conversation in the thread, eclipsing most others. This could be seen as a bad thing by the mafia, I dunno. That point was more me spitballing for some explanation than me setting up a case on someone.

Sorry to everyone about me being AWOL since about halfway through the neverending night, I kinda wanted to wait for the dust to clear on the whole SVS kerfuffle.

I'm in the SVS = Good camp, but only because of her NK. I don't think the mafia would've killed her if she was bad simply because she was nowhere near completely condemned at that point.

DrumBeats is still aggressively beating the 'SVS = scum' drum, but I don't buy it at all.

That leaves us with a few motivations to choose from as for why scum decided to do her in. 1. They wanted to frame DrumBeats, Matt, and all the other people who went after SVS. 2. It was a double-bluff, and they wanted us to think that scenario 1 was the truth when in reality it was a fake-out. 3. They wanted to change the conversation, as it was potentially revealing too much about and attracting suspicion towards some of its members.

People I've Gotten Good Vibes From: bea

People I've Gotten Conflicting Vibes From, And Therefore Don't Especially Trust: Drumbeats, Epignosis, Turnip Head, Scotty (Yes I just named the four most currently active players.)

People I've Gotten Bad Vibes From: Timmer, Sorsha, Matt

voted Micheal + other.
I've fallen behind on the thread over the course of the last couple days. If I make it through the neverending night, I'll go back and catch up.

Voted for some nice smooth jazz

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:How about this for something completely different:

I'm not a townie.

I'm independent. I've been approved to say that.

Townies: lynching me does not help you win this game.

Baddies: killing me does not help you win this game.

Just leave me be and I'll play Mafia in peace.

Y'all should call me Prisoner 509378.

Before 80 people ask the same question: "Why did you decide to reveal this now, JJJ?"

~ Because these repeated night phases terrify me. If I am one of those poor people who is slaughtered, I'm screwed.

If you really are an independent-ass independent who's win condition has nothing to do with either team, what incentive does the mafia have to keep you around? So far, you've been uber-active player who's worked double-time giving reads and tried to help catch baddie.

I just don't buy your reasoning for revealing this now.

Epignosis wrote:Holly – Holly is just as weird as Michael, but more balanced. If she is killed, two days will follow. If she is lynched, two nights will follow.

Welcome to the neverending night, pull up a chair.

I can't wait to hear what SVS has to say.

fixed my spelling error

insertnamehere wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Quin you know where I am coming from. I am voting for you, and I don't expect to be changing it.
Did SVS have some kind of instant lynch end power?

Depending on Quin's alignment, is she now a confirmed civ?

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

Did SVS has some kind of instant lynch end power?

Depending on Quin's alignment, is she now a confirmed civ?

so....yay...?

went with corporate and payroll.

If we can't select 2, and that's just an error, I'd go with Corporate.

DrumBeats wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:aaaand leetic self-voted...

maybe his role has powers that only become unlocked after he's lynched?
I know once on Bulba, he won a game as scum by being so scummy that nobody ever bought that he was actually scum.

And with that, leetic is now my new hero in life.

aaaand leetic self-voted...

maybe his role has powers that only become unlocked after he's lynched?

Re-reading BWT makes me think that he's less wishywashy and more unlikely to commit wholesale to suspicions he doesn't completely buy, which is an attribute I respect in this game, and I'm not superlikely to throw my vote his way.

Meanwhile, here's the only post of any substance I've been able to find from leetic:

leetic wrote:
Quin wrote:
leetic wrote:Alright, so is this starting?
It has! Say a thing!
A thing

Ya, this plus his backwards Day 1 vote plus his backwards meta means that he's who I'm going to cast my ballot for.

Sorry to be boring and predictable.

Search found 174 matches