The Syndicate

Thanks for the game, Dom! And congrats to the winners! I'm glad I was able to block a few kills early on, but as usual when I'm a civ with a good power, I died early...

Thanks for a fun game, Dom!

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
timmer wrote: See you next time, BR! No hard feelings, I hope!
Can I trust what you say?

Is there a reason you shouldn't? I'm not going to wrap myself up in the Captain Civviepants cape like Cobalt or anything, though I absolutely am one. But I like to think I nailed this case, at least?

See you next time, BR! No hard feelings, I hope!

What the hell? Why is my vote on Epig? I went out for a quick bite with friends but that vote should have been for BR.

Have to head out the door, gotta vote quick, should be obvious.

In fairness to Golden, I wrote my bit about him late yesterday and it may not make as much sense as I thought at the time. I will revisit that later.

Black Rock wrote:I haven't done a big response to the "case" against me because I've been busy and frankly, this whole thing is giving me a headache. Lynch me, and I will turn up as a Civ.

One of the baddie roles, not perhaps coincidentally from the team that BR suggests I am trying to pin her on, has been revealed:

"Jekyll & Hyde - If I could reach you, if I could guide and teach youIt’s the classic tale—musicalized! Targets one player a night who must attempt to lynch another player. If that player is not lynched in three days, the targeted player will receive one extra vote in every lynch against them. Will show up as civilian upon lynching."

I find BR's lack of a true defense coupled with this new "I'll be a civ" statement very interesting based on this role reveal.

And BR, YOU are the easy lynch? ?? Bubbles was easy. Covalt is easy. Not you.

@Golden, while I concede that my thoughts on you are less certain than my thoughts on Black Rock (who essentially just NO U'd me again), a number of your defences are a bit problematic. Yes you survived a kill but you seem content to just state that it was known who tried to kill you and build your defense around that while in fact we have aciv ninja role exposed in the front page and we have seen mafia kills show up on what seem like the wrong nights. So I do not see how you can brush off any chance of you being bad because you survived a kill. Also I have not started that I think you are on one team or another, but both you and Black Rock defend from the stance of Mafia 2. I dont try to s lot people into specific roles I just find what seems scummy.

I won't be cutting for you any time soon, but when Black Rock flips bad I will be studying you quite a bit add a potential teammate. I'm at work now so my posting will be sporadic.

In fact, I will take things one step further.

Day 1 Golden moved his vote at the last possible second, just as Long Con did, to SVS. Those two votes, made in the LAST MINUTE, swayed that lynch off of Long Con.

Day 2 Golden voted for Black Rock, but only after Cobalt was at 7 votes already.

Day 3 Golden jumped on the sig train.

Day 4 Golden did not vote for Long Con.

Day 5 Golden started the obvious G-Man train.

Day 6 Golden jumped on the Tiny Bubbles lynch, saving Black Rock.

Day 7 Golden has now voted for Cobalt, today's easy choice for lynch.

Quotes from Golden, regarding Black Rock:

"I could see myself shifting my vote to Black Rock, but for now I like it on Cobalt."

"I'm going to vote bubbles, because the way she flips could help me figure out how I feel about cobalt. But I really don't mind if its BR, either way works."

"Cobalt - I agree BR is bad and I don't mind if she ends up being lynched. I say this mostly for your benefit."

"Right now, my preferences for lynch would be in this order (for purposes of where this leaves ninja in my thinking)

1) Cobalt
2) BR
3) bubbles
4) ninja"

"Yeah, you are seeing what I'm seeing on BR timmer, I'm glad someone else sees it."

In short (too late), Golden talks up BR being bad, but too often ends up voting someone else.

Black Rock is bad, Golden is her teamie. It's right there.

Add Epignosis to the list of possible teammates based on his Cobalt vote, but I'll consider that a lesser chance for now.

And today, Black Rock promised to address the points I made against her, and has posted twice since but neither time did she address my points like she said she would. Instead, she is attacking cobalt, the easiest choice for her to try to remain out of the limelight today.

I feel it is a good time to reiterate my case against Black Rock:

timmer wrote:I've just reread Black Rock, and I'm not liking what I read.

No listed Day 1 vote.

Night 1 posted this:

"I think Golden brought up Hedgeowl and I do what to look more into what he was saying there and where it went from there. I will be looking more seriously at Cobalt and I will read LC. I also want to look an nutella and TH. nutella because some of her earlier day 1 posts seemed too agreeable and TH because."

That's a big Night 1 net to cast. I note not only the number of people she listed, but the wording difference between Cobalt and Long Con. "will read Long Con" vs "looking more seriously at Cobalt". The LC comment feels passive, secondary.

Also night 1: "I have no real suspicion of LC."

And also: "I have some suspicion of Cobalt, he is new to me but he seems to be basing his LC suspicion on a different game and some things he says seem off. I'm watching Bass as well."

So we've got Cobalt, Long Con, Nutella, Turnip Head And Bass, all night 1 to be watched.

Day 2: "I'm voting Bass now. I am certain he is bad."

Also: "When you are asking me about Bass have you taken the time to read his posts. Particularly when he does and doesn't mention LC and the context. If you notice he asks Epig a few questions abput LC on day 0 and doesn't again bring him up until night 1. Then he comes in and gives some vague suspicion about vibes and doesn't follow through on anything. From there it only gets worse. His thoughts are the threads thoughts. He's hiding behind everyone elses ideas. The more I read his posts the more certain I am."

Some minor comments about TH.

So Day 2 there is NO talk about Long Con (except for once indirectly, referring to how Bass mentions him). NO talk about Cobalt. NO talk of Nutella. Mild talk of TH, much of it banter. And then full on CERTAINTY about Bass.

So we went from five names to 2, and really just 1.

I'LL PUT THIS IN CAPS FOR EFFECT. THIS WAS THE DAY COBALT GOT ALL OF THE VOTES AND TRIED TO APPARENTLY LYNCH LONG CON. BR said she would look into them, the Cobalt/Long Con shitstorm a-brewed, and she never mentioned any of it.

Day 3: "Just did a huge catch up. Why is TH so forgettable this game. I can't think of any of his opinions." Starts right into another of her listed suspicions that no one is really on, note that TH is absent from the game clearly already at this point.

Nutella mentions sig looking bad. BR: "I missed that, I didn't read the green text. Switching my vote now." Never mentioned sig before this point, but just jumps right on there.

Later same day when listing her suspicions to Golden: "I have several people on my not so naughty list. I haven't seen a reason to mention them because I don't suspect them. I do however believe Gman should be lynched, as well as Bass. I think Gman should probably go first. I however don't believe LC killed Epignosis. It's not his style. I have been trying to stay out of the whole LC thing though. I want to hear enough out of TH to believe him to be good. (I know you technically didn't want to hear about TH and Bass but I don't want them to think I forgot about them.) I'm not seeing what FZ is seeing in Splints. Not sure what to make of you yet Golden. I always lean civ so I have put you in neutral to be on the safe side. I am a personal reader so these newer guys to me "

Look at how many people she's mentioned in there, but doesn't even bother to mention sig who she just jumped on? Also, that's another defence of LC.

Later: "I don't think LC was in on shenanigans with Cobalt. I read it as genuine frustration on both their parts." Another defence of LC.

BR voted sig. So here we had a day where she jumped on an easy bandwagon without hardly any thought. Supported Long Con. And still talked about the absent TH and Bass and now G-Man who was already clearly imploding.

Day 4: states right away she is voting G-Man. REMEMBER THIS LYNCH WAS BETWEEN LONG CON AND G-MAN.

Spends the day picking little fights with MM and FZ. Still lists Bass as her main suspect.

"MM, mostly I want to lynch Gman and Bass in that order. That will give TH plenty of time to come back and explain his absence and non-involvement." Not really mentioning Long Con at all.

Day 5: easy peasy voted for G-Man. We all did.

Day 6 has begun with BR making a sort of comment about TinyBubbles maybe being suspicious.

I encourage people to read her posts. I strongly believe BR is bad. She's barely mentioned the baddies who were lynched while they were alive except to defend them. Except for G-Man who was too obvious, but even there, he made a nice way to try to defend Long Con.

I believe BR is bad and she will get my vote today, most likely. Sorry for the length of the post.

Since I made this case, Tiny Bubbles was lynched. Look at the poll results. (People with no votes omitted)

Black Rock
3
timmer (2), Cobalt (4), DFaraday (10) 20%
Bullzeye
1
Bullzeye (8) 7%
Cobalt
2
Metalmarsh89 (3), Epignosis (15) 13%

nijuukyugou
1
Sloonei (9) 7%
Nutella
1
TinyBubbles (14) 7%

TinyBubbles
5
Canucklehead (6), Scotty (7), Golden (11), nutella (12), nijuukyugou (13) 33%

Black Rock was likely saved by the late push against TinyBubbles, so when she flips bad, and I'm pretty close to certain she will, her teammates will be found among Golden, nutella or nijuu. I'm going to have to read up on them, but that can wait until BR is lynched.

Also, the new push against Cobalt just reeks. I'm not touching it. It's yet another attempt to make a weak case against someone for meta-reasons "abrasive, cocky" etc. to save Black Rock.

And, sorry, but it's Day 7, right?

Time to catch up in this game.

I'm not going to be around much today, I'm seriously hungover. I think more than ever that BR is bad.

im feeling pretty good about this lynch. I'd rather see br go as i like my case and her responses were weak, but tiny bubbles has been problematic all game sop a tiny Lynch will answer some questions for sure.

Black Rock wrote:
So am I on LC's team or Sig's? Sorry I had no suspicion on Sig until he was outed by himself. I don't think I defended LC ALL game. I did say I didn't think he killed Epig and I was right. Who are you trying to lead the lynch away from today Timmer?

Oh BR, you aren't going to... NO U me.... are you?

I'm not honestly sure which team to place you on, the fact is that your output in this game screams baddie to me. i think I've made a pretty strong case against you, the best I've put together against someone in awhile. And the fact that your response to my case is to instantly start insinuating that I'm trying to protect someone is... well, let's just say this: votes Black Rock

Yeah, I'm almost certain BR is bad. The sig vote is what did it for me. So much going on, so much to comment on and post about, and she doesn't, but right in the middle of the day just jumps on the vote with no preamble despite saying she is CERTAIN Bass is bad.

Golden wrote:@Timmer - interesting thought about a role stealer. My thoughts on it:

Singer 1 and singer 2 have their songs combined. If your theory about that was correct, then G-Man's theory that Dom is writing the singers entries seems more likely, and it would mean the rolw is simply the ability to get the host to publish your suspicions in the post. Possible, but also possible that the singer just chose to write it that way because the original song had two singers?

Also, I doubt we would see them manage to steal two abilities in one night, but that isn't impossible... and if I was mafia 2, and had the ability to steal something, I would probably aim to get a kill. The idea of Bonnie and Clyde, specifically, being able to 'steal' an ability seems very in character too. So if there is a stealing ability I think it's more likely to be the kill than the song.

Good point. Looking back, the "singer" songs have sometimes mentioned multiple players, so the fact that Singers 1 and 2 each list people may not mean anything. It def. could be colour. But the Clyde kill must be Bonnie & Clyde, no? It would be strange for Dom to list it as "Clyde" if it wasn't that role, as it would be a direct misdirection by the host? Unless that's built into something, but I'm prob overthinking it.

We've had a ton of failed baddie kills, so it's definitely possible one was stolen somehow, but the timing is weird and it may be a simplistic guess or assumption.

I think I will leave it at the fact that SOMEHOW Clyde got what appears to be a bonus kill.

Main points for me.

1. Despite posting quite a bit that day, BR's vote post against sig is the only she mentioned him all game. She hadn't ever mentioned him before, she didn't technically even mention him when she voted him, and she never mentioned him after. Search "sig" through her posts, he will only appear in the posts of people she quoted in a reply. Yet she voted for him to be lynched AFTER saying she was CERTAIN Bass is bad.

2. Has defended Long Con all game.

3. Has focused her attentions more on talking about players who aren't around (Turnip Head) or secondary to any of the game's main story lines (Bass) and avoided talking about the main points, unless defending Long Con (never talked about Cobalt/Long Con the day Cobalt took all of the lynch votes).

She's bad.

I've just reread Black Rock, and I'm not liking what I read.

No listed Day 1 vote.

Night 1 posted this:

"I think Golden brought up Hedgeowl and I do what to look more into what he was saying there and where it went from there. I will be looking more seriously at Cobalt and I will read LC. I also want to look an nutella and TH. nutella because some of her earlier day 1 posts seemed too agreeable and TH because."

That's a big Night 1 net to cast. I note not only the number of people she listed, but the wording difference between Cobalt and Long Con. "will read Long Con" vs "looking more seriously at Cobalt". The LC comment feels passive, secondary.

Also night 1: "I have no real suspicion of LC."

And also: "I have some suspicion of Cobalt, he is new to me but he seems to be basing his LC suspicion on a different game and some things he says seem off. I'm watching Bass as well."

So we've got Cobalt, Long Con, Nutella, Turnip Head And Bass, all night 1 to be watched.

Day 2: "I'm voting Bass now. I am certain he is bad."

Also: "When you are asking me about Bass have you taken the time to read his posts. Particularly when he does and doesn't mention LC and the context. If you notice he asks Epig a few questions abput LC on day 0 and doesn't again bring him up until night 1. Then he comes in and gives some vague suspicion about vibes and doesn't follow through on anything. From there it only gets worse. His thoughts are the threads thoughts. He's hiding behind everyone elses ideas. The more I read his posts the more certain I am."

Some minor comments about TH.

So Day 2 there is NO talk about Long Con (except for once indirectly, referring to how Bass mentions him). NO talk about Cobalt. NO talk of Nutella. Mild talk of TH, much of it banter. And then full on CERTAINTY about Bass.

So we went from five names to 2, and really just 1.

I'LL PUT THIS IN CAPS FOR EFFECT. THIS WAS THE DAY COBALT GOT ALL OF THE VOTES AND TRIED TO APPARENTLY LYNCH LONG CON. BR said she would look into them, the Cobalt/Long Con shitstorm a-brewed, and she never mentioned any of it.

Day 3: "Just did a huge catch up. Why is TH so forgettable this game. I can't think of any of his opinions." Starts right into another of her listed suspicions that no one is really on, note that TH is absent from the game clearly already at this point.

Nutella mentions sig looking bad. BR: "I missed that, I didn't read the green text. Switching my vote now." Never mentioned sig before this point, but just jumps right on there.

Later same day when listing her suspicions to Golden: "I have several people on my not so naughty list. I haven't seen a reason to mention them because I don't suspect them. I do however believe Gman should be lynched, as well as Bass. I think Gman should probably go first. I however don't believe LC killed Epignosis. It's not his style. I have been trying to stay out of the whole LC thing though. I want to hear enough out of TH to believe him to be good. (I know you technically didn't want to hear about TH and Bass but I don't want them to think I forgot about them.) I'm not seeing what FZ is seeing in Splints. Not sure what to make of you yet Golden. I always lean civ so I have put you in neutral to be on the safe side. I am a personal reader so these newer guys to me

"

Look at how many people she's mentioned in there, but doesn't even bother to mention sig who she just jumped on? Also, that's another defence of LC.

Later: "I don't think LC was in on shenanigans with Cobalt. I read it as genuine frustration on both their parts." Another defence of LC.

BR voted sig. So here we had a day where she jumped on an easy bandwagon without hardly any thought. Supported Long Con. And still talked about the absent TH and Bass and now G-Man who was already clearly imploding.

Day 4: states right away she is voting G-Man. REMEMBER THIS LYNCH WAS BETWEEN LONG CON AND G-MAN.

Spends the day picking little fights with MM and FZ. Still lists Bass as her main suspect.

"MM, mostly I want to lynch Gman and Bass in that order. That will give TH plenty of time to come back and explain his absence and non-involvement." Not really mentioning Long Con at all.

Day 5: easy peasy voted for G-Man. We all did.

Day 6 has begun with BR making a sort of comment about TinyBubbles maybe being suspicious.

I encourage people to read her posts. I strongly believe BR is bad. She's barely mentioned the baddies who were lynched while they were alive except to defend them. Except for G-Man who was too obvious, but even there, he made a nice way to try to defend Long Con.

I believe BR is bad and she will get my vote today, most likely. Sorry for the length of the post.

Back home, finally.

So have we had any indication, through decoded roles or otherwise, that there is a role that steals other roles' powers?

I just read the latest night post and this is the first time we've had a Singer 1 and a Singer 2. Every other night post has just featured "singer". Singer 1 mentioned nutella and TinyBubbles, while Singer 2 mentioned Epignosis. This also seems to be the first time we've had two kill shots, and one of them specifically by "clyde".

Have we had anything from decoding Bonnie & Clyde? I haven't written any of the decodes down. I wonder if B&C could somehow steal people's powers and use them, causing a bonus kill of they stole from the other mafia, let's say?

Hey all, I'm sorry for the lack of output on my part, I've just been away from my laptop quite a bit. I'm glad to see G-Man's threat of whatever turned out to be a dud, lol until next time, buddy!

I'll be catching up a bit right now, but I won't be full-blown back into the game until Thursday. Like any good Canadian, I'm celebrating Canada Day by... going on a road trip to the United states, lol?

Sorry for not mentioning my vote earlier, G, I thought it was fairly obvious, I guess. You haven't made a single effort to convince anyone that you are civ all game, and I think you've just been having fun waiting to die, really.

Back from camping, and yay for no death!

I'm going to get the kids cleaned up and recover a bit and catch up will begin by this evening.

In briefly from work. BIH Long Con!! Picking Miss Saigon, it's easily the more annoying of the two.

You know what, I'm happy to do just that. I'm going to bed, and I'm camping out of internet range tomorrow, so no time like the present.

votes long con

Sig's tone re: LC is pretty damning.

Sloonei wrote: I took his waffling to be more of a bandwagon effect than anything else. It looked like he got on Cobalt because everyone else was, but then hopped on others as well and accidently let a town read slip out on Cobalt.
What did you make of sig's behavior towards Long Con?

I think odds are better than good that one of Long Con or Cobalt is his teammate. I just can't see a likelihood of both being civ.

Looking at the Day 1 lynch poll, sig's vote came at a time that could have been a save of either Cobalt OR Long Con.

His thoughts on SVS and Cobalt, at one point: "I really would rather not lynch SVS it is a gut feeling, but I think this is either a mafia misdirect or just a mislynch. However, if SVS is lynched and flips civ it would provided information about potential mafia. But I want to know Cobalt why switch from a LC lynch to SVS when over half the players haven't voted yet? This seems awful strange to me." Followed by: "I'm here but I'm unsure to vote for I will wait a few minutes, from my brief experience with CObalt he always seems like mafia to me, I would have gonewith him on a LC vote but his switching votes has given me a pause. I will be voting for Cobalt/SVS/LC SVSvoted forherself she doesn't want to play?"

He seems to directly talk about cobalt more, and Long Con more in a passive way, like in reference to Cobalt, so from that I'd say maybe Long Con is the teammate, not Cobalt. But it's a tough call.

Day 2 lynch, he voted for Cobalt very early. I could see a possibility where Cobalt is bad, knew he had a lynch save/lynch switch/whatever it was in his pocket, played the big "I'll lynch long con" card, and sig voted him early to get that ball rolling.

After that, I note that sig's mentions of Long Con never really come with a suspicion tag at all, they are more conversational: "One thing I noticed LC list and I disagree I don't find Sloonie suspicious I think his questioning is that of a good civilian even if he finds me suspicious.

LC why is SLooni mafia read to you?" is a good example.

the more I read this, the more I actually think LC may be the teammate, not Cobalt.

I just read through sig's post history, and I feel the need to point that he built up suspicion towards Cobalt and then waffled on it, even admitting that he waffled in his posts. This makes me feel more ping-y of Cobalt. Baddies don't waffle on their suspicions about civs. They waffle when they were talking about a teammate.

This puts Cobalt neck and neck with G-Man today, for me.

I'm feeling pretty good about Golden and sloonei. Surviving kills does that for me, plus they've been actively scum hunting.
FZ confuses me a bit; FZ was fairly supportive of me, but then when I didn't post for awhile due to life business, suddenly there was the thought that I had self-silenced? I wouldn't say I've got a ping form that, but more accurately that I'm just a bit mystified at the leap.

Other than that, there's just a big mess of people who aren't really making an impact on me one way or the other.

The Tiny Bubbles/ Long Con stuff is still present in my brain, but I feel like it hasn't progressed, and I'm liking the G-Man thing better for today, at least.

And what about Cobalt changed, in people's views? We had the whole "lynch me, imma lynch LC muhuha" thing and then I feel like everyone sort of has given Cobalt a pass? I can think of one reason why, but I still feel like everyone's thoughts just evaporated on him.

Re: Bass.

I just read back through the whole thing, I see Black Rock has been adamant about his baddieness since night 1, as in before any night actions went through, so she seems to have a powerful gut feeling about this. But I don't see her proofs, just a continuing insistence that he is bad. Reading through his posts, I could go either way, he seems to be quite active, or at least was until he said he had internet issues and disappeared. But I could read his posts as "baddie trying to sound helpful" etc.

I just wish I understood better what the case actually is, besides just the chance that he was posting for the sake of posting.

I don't see myself voting his way today.

Okay, so I think G-Man either realizes that he is toast and is just gaming a curse for shits and giggles, or he honestly is trying to make us feel so annoyed that we won't lynch him or something. Either way, his play hasn't been pro-civ since the second he subbed in, AND there is still the interesting point Golden?i think? made about G-Man's predecessor being angry about subbing deadies in. All of that to say that I am happy to see G-Man lynched today.

More in a bit.

FZ. wrote:
Where did Timmer disappear to? He's been much less involved in the last day. I'm worried. I guess the show business isn't for everyone :P

Busy few days! I'm catching up right now, though.

Hey all, I'm in the middle of a sport busy stretch at work, I won't pay much until tonight when I will catch up.

I'm going to be going back out soon and won't be able to change my vote from here on out.

I'm comfortable with my Bubbles vote, but I don't think the Sig case is bad, either. I think this lynch has a good chance at success. My one concern is that we do not tie, but if some players plan to sit around to move their vote as needed in the dying seconds, maybe they should shout out about that now to avoid multiple vote moves in the last minute. Two people breaking a tie can cause... a tie, after all.

@Sig, where you normally play mafia, do they have silencer roles?

I'm tuning out mafia for the night.

I've moved my vote to Bubbles, I feel like I've got a bit more to work with there than BR/LC others I've discussed. I'll be at work for much of tomorrow but will try to sneak a peek into the thread when I can.

To those who have played with TinyBubbles on other sites, how do you feel about her self-voting pity party? If she is a civ, and takes heat, does she do this sometimes? Is this indicative of anything in terms of her alignment?

@Bubbles, don't quit the game, please. Whatever your alignment, taking heat is a fact of life in mafia. I am being a bit of a hypocrite I guess, because I've thrown a few pity parties of my own, some of them recently tbh, but still, playing mafia means you are going to take on suspicions sometimes, it can't be avoided. Defend, please, I'd rather be convinced of your civvieness then find it out after lynching you after you threw in the towel!

Long Con wrote:we can continue this in the morning, because it's getting weird to me.

Let's all remember that this is fun... It's fun, right?

@Long Con, sorry if you didn't like going through my posts, lol? I'm a lover of reading people's posts in order using the "in topic" button, so I sometimes just assume others like doing that as well.

Your breakdown of my thoughts on you was correct but incomplete, as it is missing the first part of the Tiny Bubbles case. Like I had said, unlike some people I'm looking at Bubbles more than you rather than the other way round. The piece you missed is the way Tiny Bubbles glommed onto my earlier case against Cobalt. I had read his posts, and missed any post where he actually explained his suspicions of you. Without that post, I felt that his post history read as massively scummy and I posted and voted about it.

Here is Bubbles' reasoning for voting Cobalt:

"Anyway, what timmer said about cobalt revenge voting makes some sense, im gonna go ahead and trust his instincts, and vote for cobalt now. "

Two things. One, the insistent part of my case was actually the way I thought Cobalt had hedged against explaining his suspicion of you (which turned out to be completely wrong). Two, while I did technically mention the way Cobalt talked about revenge voting you, I never based my case on it.

So Bubbles' post and vote feel all kinds of wrong, to me. It sound alike she didn't really go and read up on what I said, but just skimmed around for something to jump onto to get a vote in.

So that bugged me. I then take that, and combine it with her vote on you after the lynch shenanigans started in the thread, and suddenly, you look like a potential teamie. You see?

But to make this clear, I believe in lynching the person with the bigger case against them over the person who might be their teammate if I'm right. So while you are on my shortlist of suspicious characters right now, I won't vote for you until I've got the ability to show that I'm right about Bubbles.

I never replied to LC about that. @LC, I just don't like the interaction between the two of you (you and Bubbles). I've explained why in previous posts. Unlike some other people, though, I feel like there is a bit more of a vibe against Bubbles than you.

Black Rock wrote:I had to go back and find a reason why you would put a "placeholder" vote on me.

Is this the reason why?

The reason the post wasn't submitted was after 24 hours sitting in linkitis my internet crapped out and I lost the post. Otherwise, like you said it is my early game and if that's how you feel you should be more on the fence. Do I have it all wrong here?

I've got a small handful of names I'm interested in today - you, Bubbles, Long Con, G-Man, Cobalt - all of whom have a few things going against them but nothing supa-solid. As of this moment, a vote sitting on you is as good as on any of them, imo. Plus, votes placed = more reactions = more to chew on.

Re: G-Man, I don't care if the guy wants to post in pics the entire game, any annoyance or stress that comes from such a technique will be felt only by him, so he can have at 'er as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not sure that I like the fact that he has admitted to not planning to read back through the game. I can understand if someone said they were going to sort of skim through a game, or something like that, but he's kind of had an air of disdain about the prospect which, combined with the meta-case against Gamer Guy regarding deadies subbing in may put G-Man is an awkward light. My point is, I don't plan to vote G-Man today, but if others do I will sort of understand. It's only halfway through Day 3. It's not that hard to skim back and catch the flavour of the game to this point. Not wanting to feels indy/bad more than civ.

@FZ, yeah Dom's clarification certainly helps a bit, but it doesn't take away from Cobalt's play overall.

I put a placeholder vote on Black Rock for now. I am likely to move it to Bubbles in the end, I just want to let the day flesh out a bit and see what some people say.

Dom wrote:
Coablt's discussion has been totally about role descriptions.... you can choose to believe or disbelieve him.

You obviously have the final say on this, Dom, so I'll move along. I'll just say that I don't like his play, and that if he is a civ, his actions have more likely hurt than helped the cause, imo.

FZ. wrote:
And can anyone please sum up the LC Cobalt duel? or at least point to a post that did that? Someone must have done something to make this easier

Just click on Cobalt's posts and start form literally Day 0, he went after Long Con from minute 1.

FZ. wrote: I thought he claimed it was fake and he only did it to see what will happen and not because it was true. Do you not believe him? It strikes me as genuine because what would he have to gain by info dumping that?

But look at what happened in the lynch. He had the most votes and did not die. Exactly how he said. That Long Con also did not die is a bit more ambivalent, I suppose.

But if Cobalt were lying, and did NOT have a lynch switch or some similar power, what are the odds that something else happened to cause the lynch to fail? IMO, he was telling the truth, realized too late that he had broken rules, tried to recover by passing it off as a joke or gambit to see who would bite, and now we've got a no-lynch.

It's not 100%, but there are a LOT of coincidences in play if he was making it all up.

Golden wrote:Cobalt has been insanified

I just to that part. Sometimes, an insanifier is just the right thing, isn't it?

Search found 97 matches