The Syndicate

Quin wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Quin wrote:Meh. I'm basically Dom in Mad Max right now

I'm 2 for 2 on the count of throwing untimely defenses for flipped baddies and I've had a now-dead civ role blocker call me out on the night nobody died. I'm sure there's a point where even a civ just needs to put his hands up and say 'get it over with'. I've hit that point. I'll probably join 3J on the legacy front tomorrow.

This is the second game in a row I've suggested my own lynch. God damn.
Yeah, I'm feeling a Quin or INH lynch.
Is this INH suspicion new?

It's certainly the first I've heard of it.

I will say that the last second flood of Wilgy votes once it was clear 3J ain't going nowhere rustles my jimmies a little bit. Couple of folks really wanted some credit, methinks.

jesus i'm playing like garbage this game

thellama73 wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Scotty wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Scotty wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:I still think our triple lettered friend is bluffing.

Even if he won a one-time lynch immunity, I doubt he'd use it today.

I can definitely see him using it tomorrow, though. That's partly why I want him out today.

I also don't understand the Wilgy case.
I want to vote you tomorrow
Cool. Call me when you vocalize your reasons.

I'm a cat person, myself.

I thought you were supposed to be a Llama.

Wow, it's just lie after lie with you.

Scotty wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Scotty wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:I still think our triple lettered friend is bluffing.

Even if he won a one-time lynch immunity, I doubt he'd use it today.

I can definitely see him using it tomorrow, though. That's partly why I want him out today.

I also don't understand the Wilgy case.
I want to vote you tomorrow
Cool. Call me when you vocalize your reasons.

I'm a cat person, myself.

Scotty wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:I still think our triple lettered friend is bluffing.

Even if he won a one-time lynch immunity, I doubt he'd use it today.

I can definitely see him using it tomorrow, though. That's partly why I want him out today.

I also don't understand the Wilgy case.
I want to vote you tomorrow

Cool. Call me when you vocalize your reasons.

Sorsha wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sorsha wrote:I'll most likely be voting for jjj also today. I'd hate to see a no lynch but I'm going to hope that he's lying about either his prize or what happens.

If Wilgy is the second most vote recipient that would be good I think. Hopefully if jay does have immunity it'll just go to the next highest and I've got no reason to believe Wilgy is civ.
Why don't you just vote Wilgy today and Jay tomorrow then? Why risk an actual no lynch happening?
Ok.

I dislike both parts of this interaction.

I still think our triple lettered friend is bluffing.

Even if he won a one-time lynch immunity, I doubt he'd use it today.

I can definitely see him using it tomorrow, though. That's partly why I want him out today.

I also don't understand the Wilgy case.

I got tired of waiting.

Quin wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Quin wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:huh. well. looks like I need to re-assess some things and watch La Jetee on Flimstruck.

I'm not gonna lie, the result of this day left me breathless. Hopefully Llama forgives the contempt from earlier. Not sure what to think about the band of outsiders who voted alongside me for Llama. But still, it's my life to live, and my vote to give, so I'm still gonna defend the logic I used when I wrote a case against Llama. Anywho, I'll have more to say over the course of the week end.
The highlighted shows that after DDL's flip you had some sort of change of heart about llama. You did flip-flip. Almost everybody has been attesting to that. I wanted to know why you did. Is 'two baddies are unlikely to be on the main wagons D1' your final answer?
No.

I didn't.

Stop spreading the nonsense opinion that I did.

A: I was attempting to work in the phrases "Contempt" and "Band of Outsiders" into two sentences.
B: I felt like I was a little too hot on Llama. Hence the forgiving of contempt.
C: I was entertaining the notion that members of the D1 Llama wagon had impure intentions.
D: The sentence after those highlighted post says that I still think the logic against Llama is sound, which isn't something someone posts if they think a person is 100% civ.

Join us again next week for another episode of "Quin Tells INH What His Opinions Are!"
I do not know what Contempt and Band of Outsiders has to do with anything. Without that knowledge, you just came across as though you'd weaned off of your llama read.

They are both films by Jean-Luc Godard, who Mongoose referenced in her EOD post.

Well, you can keep your opinion on what I was thinking, and I'll just, you know, remember what I was thinking.

Are you willing to vote Llama or 3J today?

Quin wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:huh. well. looks like I need to re-assess some things and watch La Jetee on Flimstruck.

I'm not gonna lie, the result of this day left me breathless. Hopefully Llama forgives the contempt from earlier. Not sure what to think about the band of outsiders who voted alongside me for Llama. But still, it's my life to live, and my vote to give, so I'm still gonna defend the logic I used when I wrote a case against Llama. Anywho, I'll have more to say over the course of the week end.
The highlighted shows that after DDL's flip you had some sort of change of heart about llama. You did flip-flip. Almost everybody has been attesting to that. I wanted to know why you did. Is 'two baddies are unlikely to be on the main wagons D1' your final answer?

No.

I didn't.

Stop spreading the nonsense opinion that I did.

A: I was attempting to work in the phrases "Contempt" and "Band of Outsiders" into two sentences.
B: I felt like I was a little too hot on Llama. Hence the forgiving of contempt.
C: I was entertaining the notion that members of the D1 Llama wagon had impure intentions.
D: The sentence after those highlighted post says that I still think the logic against Llama is sound, which isn't something someone posts if they think a person is 100% civ.

Join us again next week for another episode of "Quin Tells INH What His Opinions Are!"

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:I didn't mean that I thought Llama was civilian, simply that I had to re-assess my reads.

In fact, Llama is nowhere near off my radar and is currently my number two suspect, after Mista J.
Now that you've reassessed your reads, what has prevented you from changing your perspective of llama?

Lack of a stronger suspect, other than yourself, and nothing else contradicting my D1 view of him.

To be frank, I'd rather lynch you today, as I think you're bluffing, but I could get behind a Llama-mobile wagon if others don't share my views on your tomfoolery.

Quin wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Quin wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:huh. well. looks like I need to re-assess some things and watch La Jetee on Flimstruck.

I'm not gonna lie, the result of this day left me breathless. Hopefully Llama forgives the contempt from earlier. Not sure what to think about the band of outsiders who voted alongside me for Llama. But still, it's my life to live, and my vote to give, so I'm still gonna defend the logic I used when I wrote a case against Llama. Anywho, I'll have more to say over the course of the week end.
Why does a baddie DDL flip clear llama? I don't see the posts in either guys ISO's that would point to that.
I don't think Llama is cleared by any means, but I'm not quite as hot on him as I was before DDL's flip-eroo.
This what I posted after the D1 EOD.

I personally don't see this a turnaround, and I dislike that people have miscatergorized it as such. I didn't mean that I thought Llama was civilian, simply that I had to re-assess my reads.

In fact, Llama is nowhere near off my radar and is currently my number two suspect, after Mista J.
Okay, but why have you singled out llama and inferred that your read has changed at all based on DDL's flip?

What do you mean "why have I singled out Llama?" I still suspect him for the reasons I suspected him on D1 for.

I just think, more often than not, two baddies aren't the two leading co-wagons on any D1. It was the first real point in Llama's favor.

Frankly, your insistence that it means nothing, and your pushing the "INH did a flip-flop on Llama" narrative makes me raise an eyebrow in your direction as well.

Part of the reason why I'm willing to lynch Llama is that I feel his alignment would directly affect my read on a few others in this game. I put you into that category.

PEOPLE I'D BE WILLING TO VOTE FOR TODAY:
JJJ
Llama

PEOPLE I FOR SURE WOULDN'T BE WILLING TO VOTE FOR TODAY:
LC
Boomslang

insertnamehere wrote:
Quin wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:huh. well. looks like I need to re-assess some things and watch La Jetee on Flimstruck.

I'm not gonna lie, the result of this day left me breathless. Hopefully Llama forgives the contempt from earlier. Not sure what to think about the band of outsiders who voted alongside me for Llama. But still, it's my life to live, and my vote to give, so I'm still gonna defend the logic I used when I wrote a case against Llama. Anywho, I'll have more to say over the course of the week end.
Why does a baddie DDL flip clear llama? I don't see the posts in either guys ISO's that would point to that.
I don't think Llama is cleared by any means, but I'm not quite as hot on him as I was before DDL's flip-eroo.

This what I posted after the D1 EOD.

I personally don't see this a turnaround, and I dislike that people have miscatergorized it as such. I didn't mean that I thought Llama was civilian, simply that I had to re-assess my reads.

In fact, Llama is nowhere near off my radar and is currently my number two suspect, after Mista J.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:I guess I don't see the civilian logic behind saying that you're immune to votes, and warning people away.

If I was civ, and I had this power, I just wouldn't say anything and help develop a case against someone else, in order to sway one or two people. Then, at EoD, I'd be safe and my top suspect would have a date with the noose.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, idk.
If I don't reveal what I've done, on a day phase immediately after receiving 6 votes, then there's still a high chance that I'll end up lynched instead of any other suspect I try to lynch -- and if that happens, the civilians have wasted a lynch on me to learn nothing.

I don't consider this day phase a good one if I am lynched and don't die. That's very wasteful play and the entire point of my move is to prevent that. Instead of that now we can give ourselves an opportunity to use this lynch productively.

I really don't think a lynch immunity is a great asset for a civilian in the first place unless there is a way to isolate that to a specific role (like with the Denim Shirt). Very often when a civilian is lynched and it is prevented, it just leads to that civilian being lynched again.

So, your obviously not made up and totally 100% real lynch exemption will cause a no lynch if you receive the most votes?

Or will the second most vote getter get the noose?

I guess I don't see the civilian logic behind saying that you're immune to votes, and warning people away.

If I was civ, and I had this power, I just wouldn't say anything and help develop a case against someone else, in order to sway one or two people. Then, at EoD, I'd be safe and my top suspect would have a date with the noose.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, idk.

This is made even more bizarre due to 3J having the most aggressive suspicion of LC that I've seen from him in the few games we've played together.

His case against LC isn't very convincing in my opinion, mostly due to it reminding me of the couple times 3J has mislynched me, often for the same reasons. Stuff like LC saying that MM was obviously joking and 3J going ballistic and insisting that it was a serious accusation on LC's part, feels a stretch too far.

Aaaand most of the other stuff case is OMGUS malarky where 3J feels LC misrepresented him by using hyperbolic language in his posts that's so derogatory that LC must have nefarious intentions. Meanwhile, 3J is hyping up his own suspicion of LC to the point where it's almost surprising when he makes a post that doesn't mention him.

Like James Joyce's great novel Ulysseys, or the album Trout Mask Replica, 3J's case against LC only makes perfect sense in the mind of its author. Anyone else is left scratching their head.

Sorsha wrote:
Quin wrote:Might make cheese toast. What's in store for everyone else's day?
Currently in the drive thru ordering a gyro, then going home.

I wish I lived near a drive thru gyro place

Long Con wrote:9pm here... watching A Series of Unfortunate Events. Rye and coke.

ooh, what episode are you on? I finished it earlier today.

When I said that I wanted Sock to post more, I didn't mean it like this.

Quin wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:huh. well. looks like I need to re-assess some things and watch La Jetee on Flimstruck.

I'm not gonna lie, the result of this day left me breathless. Hopefully Llama forgives the contempt from earlier. Not sure what to think about the band of outsiders who voted alongside me for Llama. But still, it's my life to live, and my vote to give, so I'm still gonna defend the logic I used when I wrote a case against Llama. Anywho, I'll have more to say over the course of the week end.
Why does a baddie DDL flip clear llama? I don't see the posts in either guys ISO's that would point to that.

I don't think Llama is cleared by any means, but I'm not quite as hot on him as I was before DDL's flip-eroo.

Mongoose wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:huh. well. looks like I need to re-assess some things and watch La Jetee on Flimstruck.

I'm not gonna lie, the result of this day left me breathless. Hopefully Llama forgives the contempt from earlier. Not sure what to think about the band of outsiders who voted alongside me for Llama. But still, it's my life to live, and my vote to give, so I'm still gonna defend the logic I used when I wrote a case against Llama. Anywho, I'll have more to say over the course of the week end.

<3 I saw what you did there

There's actually five Godard references in that post. I'll award five hundred meaningless INH Points™ to whoever can find them all.

huh. well. looks like I need to re-assess some things and watch La Jetee on Flimstruck.

I'm not gonna lie, the result of this day left me breathless. Hopefully Llama forgives the contempt from earlier. Not sure what to think about the band of outsiders who voted alongside me for Llama. But still, it's my life to live, and my vote to give, so I'm still gonna defend the logic I used when I wrote a case against Llama. Anywho, I'll have more to say over the course of the week end.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
thellama73 wrote:How many lines does it take you to make a case, Sorsha? I haven't heard one from you yet.
When have you ever heard me make a case? In any game?
Why are you answering my question with another question?
Are you and Sorsha mafia teammates?

I'd buy it.

Scotty wrote:Ok now I'm really off to do a show. Let's lynch made or MP.

If not them, I support an MM lynch I guess.

Let's lynch Llama. (yay for alliteration)

(that's an image of a Llama in a David Lynch movie.)

Long Con wrote: If you want it clean:

~~~ Long Con, TS Graphic Design

Thank you very much sir!

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
thellama73 wrote:To Long Con:
The reason I think there is a lot of civ on civ action this game is because I've seen it too many times before. The active, Gung-Ho baddie hunters attack one another, simply because there is more material there to attack, these attacks lead to NO Us, then confirmation bias, then tunneling, then a bunch fo dead civs. It's a pattern I see over and over again. How many times have SVS and I wasted days attacking each other when we were both civs? How many times has Epignosis done it? Assertive, analytical civilians tend to go after each other. Sure, there's a possibility thta a baddie is hiding among them, but at this early stage in the game, I think we will achieve better results by looking harder at the less active players who may be trying not to call attention to themselves.

To INH:
I'm sorry you don't like my read on Sorsha, but it is genuine. I think little things like tone and emoji use can be baddie tells, especially early in the game, and her posts have just rung incredibly false to me. Why not start off by putting pressure on her and seeing how she responds? So far, her responses have not ben encouraging to me.

You don't like my Hunters/Blenders list that's fine, but I was simply explaining how I view the game these days. In general (not always) I think the people who are making cases and trying to ferret out the bad guys are less likely to be nefarious than the ones trying not to get noticed.

To JJJ:
Regarding your meta analysis, I would just like to add that I went through a period of inactivity through much of 2016 and was unacceptably absent in many of the games I did sign up for. I just didn't have the time or energy to play those games properly. That was a phase that has now ended, so I wouldn't regard it as representative of my style. For more recent examples of me as a FEB, see the Burglaries section.
I like this post. It meshes with the perspective of llama I've had for the most part so far, particularly his reports about how he views the game in general and what motivates his perspectives/behaviors. I don't think it's merely a matter of strategy either, because I have myself adopted and acted upon many of the exact same ideas as a civilian before. He is correct that there is often a tendency for active civilians to gravitate toward suspecting each other because the sample size of their "suspicion-capable" content is larger than it is for less active players.

Once again, you're assuming that there are more active civilians than there are active mafia members, and that's just fallacious thinking.

Active does not equal civ, which is the trap Llama wants you to fall into.

Might as well make the first move. Or the second move, to be more accurate, thanks to Llama's Sorsha vote.

*votes thellama73*

Sorsha wrote:
insertnamehere wrote: Back in game-land, I do find it odd that people aren't agreeing with my case, but failing to raise any real points against it, or suggesting a practical alternative.
It's a well thought out case but what it comes down to for me is: If llama is bad why would he go after me like that? He would know I'm civ and what good would going balls to the wall and lynching a civ like that on day one do?

He didn't expect it to work, and he didn't expect you to be lynched. Most people won't blindly follow a guy who says "LYNCH THIS DUDE" for no reason, and Llama had to know that. "Balls to the wall" seems like an exaggeration.

It's just doing stuff in order to make it look like he's doing stuff.

DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:@LC and Wilgy: Would either of you be down for a Llama lynch?

He's the most solid negative read I have right now, so I'm inclined to vote in his direction.
Mine as well, but my read is entirely tone. What triggers your suspicion inh?

Here ya go

Spoiler: show

insertnamehere wrote:ELUCIDATIONS ON LLAMA:

If we're looking for the person who has talked the talk about catching baddies only to fail at walking the walk, Llama is at the top of the list.

Now, excepting the Denim Mini role which is filled with secrets, and the bizarre super-duper top secret role that isn't even listed on the role list, it's so damn secret, there's no way Llama could start the game with info on Sorsha's alignment. (Which is more or less irrelevant to Llama, anyway.)

Nevertheless, Llama comes out the game swinging at Sorsha. With no real reasoning and no real attempt to convince anyone else of Sorsha's scum-mery.

It's an empty move with an empty meaning that serves to generate empty discussion.

And then you have posts like this:

thellama73 wrote:I tend to view the game in terms of Hunters and Blenders. Some skilled baddies are able to seem like Hunters, but most Hunters are good. A lot of civilians are Blenders because that's just their playstyle, but a Blender is more likely to be bad.

So far:
A Person
Boomslang
Dragon D Luffy
DrWilgy
Elohcin
insernamehere
Long Con
Made
Metalmarsh89
MovingPictures07
ninjuukyugou
and Sorsha are Blenders

Epignosis
JaggedimmyJay
Quin
and Scotty have shown at least some signs of being Hunters.
I always find it funny that the people who make these reductive lists about who is playing the game as opposed to just, y'know, playing the game never deign to put themselves in the less analytical category.

This type of stuff always feels fake and ingratiating to me, like Llama is trying to push a narrative that benefits himself and not the civilians. Plus, I'd say that those four he singled out as "hunters" (as opposed to hunter-gatherers, I suppose) would most likely post frequently and aggressively tackle the game regardless of alignment, making this false hunter/blender dichotomy utterly irrelevant when it comes to actually telling who is good and who is bad.

But, it does clue us into what Llama was trying to accomplish with his throwaway accusation and vote. He's trying to look like a hunter without doing as much hunting as he possibly can. He instantly starts picking on someone who may not necessarily be in the top five post count players in every game they play, (i.e. a "blender") and zeros in on them.

It seems to be working out pretty well for him.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:What I like about llama is that he has drawn attention to himself deliberately and doesn't seem to give a damn. He made the game's first accusation, he assumed a confident posture in that read, and then he placed the game's first vote. At face value I like that kind of behavior.
When these attention-getting maneuvers are pretty hollow and self-serving, it's a bad thing, and something Llama shouldn't get a pass on.

Other hot takes on Llama's posts:

Dislike him discouraging Scotty from inquiring about role secrets and mechanics, could be attempting to hint there.

As LC correctly identified, the "high posters are civs, low posters are sitting back and laughing" post is buddy-buddy and another example of Llama, the gifted writer that he is, inventing a narrative instead of trying to baddie-hunt.

Epignosis wrote:To INH:

I don't know the technical specifications of your avatar. Do what you will.

I don't agree with your case against llama. At the same time, I think you are a civilian for raising it.

The gif is from the final episode of Twin Peaks.

I originally used the gif as my avatar on the NarutoForums where I signed up to play DDL and Soneji's massive game.

Here's the original:

Oddly enough, when I shrunk it in order to make it work on this site, it seemed to glitch out. I honestly quite like it, as it ironically really suits the context of the episode the gif is taken from.

If it does twist other people's knickers, I will change it, though.

Back in game-land, I do find it odd that people aren't agreeing with my case, but failing to raise any real points against it, or suggesting a practical alternative.

@LC and Wilgy: Would either of you be down for a Llama lynch?

He's the most solid negative read I have right now, so I'm inclined to vote in his direction.

Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Is your discussion empty?
No.

Next question.
Are you bad?
No.

Next question.
Would you please change your avatar?
I most likely will, if people are having some kind of problem with it.

Does it annoy you?
Well, it does, but I'm not the kind to ask someone to change anything simply out of annoyance.

Would fixing the glitch end the annoyance, or is it the flashing light?

Also, what do you think of my case against Llama?

Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:It's an empty move with an empty meaning that serves to generate empty discussion.
Is your discussion empty?
No.

Next question.
Are you bad?
No.

Next question.
Would you please change your avatar?

I most likely will, if people are having some kind of problem with it.

Does it annoy you?

Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:It's an empty move with an empty meaning that serves to generate empty discussion.
Is your discussion empty?
No.

Next question.
Are you bad?

No.

Next question.

insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:It's an empty move with an empty meaning that serves to generate empty discussion.
Is your discussion empty?
No.

Next question.

To elaborate: It'd be empty if I was suspecting Sorsha. The discussion about Sorsha is what I'm calling empty, not the one about Llama.

Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:It's an empty move with an empty meaning that serves to generate empty discussion.
Is your discussion empty?

No.

Next question.

Oh, and LC is my townread because I agree with him on things.

It's Day 1, that's as good as it's gonna get.

ELUCIDATIONS ON LLAMA:

If we're looking for the person who has talked the talk about catching baddies only to fail at walking the walk, Llama is at the top of the list.

Now, excepting the Denim Mini role which is filled with secrets, and the bizarre super-duper top secret role that isn't even listed on the role list, it's so damn secret, there's no way Llama could start the game with info on Sorsha's alignment. (Which is more or less irrelevant to Llama, anyway.)

Nevertheless, Llama comes out the game swinging at Sorsha. With no real reasoning and no real attempt to convince anyone else of Sorsha's scum-mery.

It's an empty move with an empty meaning that serves to generate empty discussion.

And then you have posts like this:

thellama73 wrote:I tend to view the game in terms of Hunters and Blenders. Some skilled baddies are able to seem like Hunters, but most Hunters are good. A lot of civilians are Blenders because that's just their playstyle, but a Blender is more likely to be bad.

So far:
A Person
Boomslang
Dragon D Luffy
DrWilgy
Elohcin
insernamehere
Long Con
Made
Metalmarsh89
MovingPictures07
ninjuukyugou
and Sorsha are Blenders

Epignosis
JaggedimmyJay
Quin
and Scotty have shown at least some signs of being Hunters.

I always find it funny that the people who make these reductive lists about who is playing the game as opposed to just, y'know, playing the game never deign to put themselves in the less analytical category.

This type of stuff always feels fake and ingratiating to me, like Llama is trying to push a narrative that benefits himself and not the civilians. Plus, I'd say that those four he singled out as "hunters" (as opposed to hunter-gatherers, I suppose) would most likely post frequently and aggressively tackle the game regardless of alignment, making this false hunter/blender dichotomy utterly irrelevant when it comes to actually telling who is good and who is bad.

But, it does clue us into what Llama was trying to accomplish with his throwaway accusation and vote. He's trying to look like a hunter without doing as much hunting as he possibly can. He instantly starts picking on someone who may not necessarily be in the top five post count players in every game they play, (i.e. a "blender") and zeros in on them.

It seems to be working out pretty well for him.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:What I like about llama is that he has drawn attention to himself deliberately and doesn't seem to give a damn. He made the game's first accusation, he assumed a confident posture in that read, and then he placed the game's first vote. At face value I like that kind of behavior.

When these attention-getting maneuvers are pretty hollow and self-serving, it's a bad thing, and something Llama shouldn't get a pass on.

Other hot takes on Llama's posts:

Dislike him discouraging Scotty from inquiring about role secrets and mechanics, could be attempting to hint there.

As LC correctly identified, the "high posters are civs, low posters are sitting back and laughing" post is buddy-buddy and another example of Llama, the gifted writer that he is, inventing a narrative instead of trying to baddie-hunt.

Long Con wrote:
thellama73 wrote:In my opinion, there's a lot of civ on civ squabbling going on up in here, and a lot of baddie coasting and laughing. Also, a lot of Llama going to bed.
Good night. That opinion makes me feel suspicious, because I do not understand how a Civ could formulate it. In the parlance of our times: how the f*ck would you think that?

IF it's true that the main arguments are Civ on Civ, then there are four players who know that for sure, and correctly identifying such a thing could be a way to get that baddie some buddying-style Civ cred. As in, each Civ in this big Civ on Civ conflict can think "I'm a Civ, so Llama is at least reading me right and trying to steer this game in the right direction!"

This.

I've really only formed two reads as of right now. The rest is loose thoughts floating through my gray matter.

LC is my current townread, and Llama is my current scumread. Will elucidate further when I have time to do so. Hopefully, that'll be in an hour or less.

Long Con wrote:A Person!

Why did you vote for Arizona? Where ARE you?

Arizona, presumably.

thellama73 wrote:
Scotty wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Can you guys stop harassing the host and do some baddie hunting? I found Sorsha. What have you done?
Ok.

I'll bite. What are the odds that a mafia member refuses to play the unspoken Jean pun game?

I'd maybe vote her if I had to vote today.
Good man. My suspicion of you for asking too many questions is diminished.

Why do you not want people asking questions?

I dunno about you guys, but I'm ready to be felt up!

ok, i'll stop now

this game is making me feel things I've never felt before

YEAH TEXTILES!

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Search found 97 matches