The Syndicate

Lazarus wrote:Here is the problem Absalom my gut is pretty good at fining baddies. So what if you are a horsemen and I'm right wouldn't that help the civvies? I might give you the BOTD this lynch . I'm not sure yet. Also before I forget, if I had the role you think I have I would not like having a super powerful vote it makes you more of a threat to the mafia team.

Lazarus wrote:The shady day one vote. Day one can tell a lot about someone . You have been helping find heathens this is true but have you found any horsemen? Do you have any leads on who might be a horsemen? Who do you think is more dangerous the heathens or the horsemen??

Lazarus wrote:Wow bass really? Come on dude get it together.

Absalom I understand you might not be a heathen but you still could be a horsemen.

Belshazzar wrote:Is anyone getting worried that Lazarus might arrive and just dump a (potentially sextuple) vote on Absalom yet again?

Jacob wrote: Absalom no don't betray me I'm hesitant about Jonathan too as I said, I think he might be genuine. But if I have to vote him to save myself I will, because I know how valuable I am for the civvie cause.

Lot wrote:Because Isaac's voting record IS the most suspicious. Doesn't mean I find HIM most suspicious. Just that his voting record is, in my opinion, the worst. Jacob's second worse. But Isaac's posts alleviated my view on Isaac somewhat, and Ruth's lynch made me feel worse about Jacob.

Lot wrote:Jacob. Votes + Ruth stuff yesterday. I think Jacob is a cinch. Jephthah second, Deborah third, Isaac fourth. Jonathan a distant fifth, or possibly even sixth after Pilate.

But I don't know why people keep inventing the wheel on vote analysis.

Lot wrote: @rachel - Isaac is the one I actually genuinely feel might have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. But the evidence is still strong enough that, if others like Jacob, Deborah or Jonathan didn't pan out, Isaac is worth considering.

Lot wrote: Isaac's vote on day three was also incredibly damning.

I'm still looking harder at Jacob's vote yesterday, but honestly until then I think Isaac looked the worse of the two.

Rachel wrote:

Absalom wrote: What do you guys think of the "don't lynch me, or other people will think you're bad and you'll be next" defense he gave? Did no one else find that incredibly weird?

I have been questioning him pretty hard... why are you ignoring me?

Balaam wrote:
And yeah, the "just you wait and see what they'll do to you" defense is always weird. I can't knock it too much though, because I lobbed that one at you and Nicodemus on Day 4.

Balaam wrote:

Lot wrote:I could not be further from agreeing with the reasons for voting for Jonathan. Jonathan would be more of a last ditch vote if the other options failed, for me. I'm not sure how our eyes have fallen off seriously poor voting records (Jacob, Isaac, Deborah) for one that is average at worst. I don't understand why people aren't looking at Jonathan's day three vote and seeing what a terribly bad vote it would be if he was Uzz's teammate. Not sure how it is seen by Absalom as justifying their connection?

Let's chat about that, Lot. I agree that Jacob and Deborah look worse than Jonathan still. I plan on doing more review work tomorrow before the lynch. I won't jump the gun on anybody. We're too darn close nabbing a third one to get hasty.

Balaam wrote: Dude, Absalom, I floated that theory already. I said you were Horseman at worst. Chillax bro.

Rachel wrote:Let's also just remember that Heathens might not be our only problem. While I highly doubt Absalom is a Heathen, he could be a Horseman, and we don't know how much of a threat they are.

Jonathan wrote:I've looked at my past thoughts about Absalom and can't find anything that's a baddie read for me. But I know not everyone agrees with me on that. If he's good I don't know why he has chosen to attack me without reading my posts. There is a running diary of why I voted some people and not others and Uzziah is mentioned throughout the days - maybe not everyday I haven't checked that but his name pops up a lot in my thoughts about the game. He would get a fuller perspective if he would consider the two in concert.

Jonathan wrote: And you don't believe me that I was giving Uzziah the benefit of a few days? Then why did I come back and vote him later? 4th, not last or next to last.

Jonathan wrote:

Jephthah wrote:Bring out the cheeze. They're here.


Jonathan, if Cain is bad, you just encouraged him not to post anything

I know but I had to explain my reasoning. I preferred not to. Besides, I think Cain is going to have enough votes without mine.

I also can't believe we don't have others voting.

Jonathan wrote:After giving more though to a Uzziah vote again today I have decided to wait and give that another day or two to develop. He has been silent today (at least I didn't see anything from him) but I don't know if he is laying low or legitimately silenced. I have chosen to go with Lazarus today for the reasons that Mordecai and Balaam brought up today. One thing that does concern me is that maybe he has been silenced but I'm going to take the risk in his case.

Jonathan wrote:Each of those votes was a reasonable vote on the day of the vote. You pointed out I voted Uzziah 4th - that was well before it was obvious he was going to take the day. I also voted him another day because I was suspicious of him. Did you read my posts? Did you see what I was thinking about uzziah? I would bet that you didn't.

You may have caught Ruth and you may get me lynched which will convince some people that are on the fence about you where your allegiance lies.

Jonathan wrote:

Absalom wrote:Jonathan, why are you so bad?

I am not bad. What would make you think I am?

Balaam wrote:

Absalom wrote:

Balaam wrote: Lots of spreading going on with the votes for Rachel, Jacob, and Pilate. Does anyone honestly have a strong positive read on any of the following:
-Deborah
-Esther
-Isaac
-Jacob
-Jonathan
-Mordecai
-Rahab
-Rebecca

I bet there are two Heathens in that list. But who?

Jonathan, and I'm not sure of the other. Maybe Mordecai. I don't think Jacob is bad, but it's just a gut read, so I might be wrong.

Jonathan is on my must re-read list. Not sure I feel your gut read on Jacob. After all, you had a gut read on me once...

Pilate wrote:Epignosis is bigger than Jesus!

Absalom was part of Uzziah's scheme, as I laid out before. He is a Heathen teammate. That's how these schemes work. *votes Absalom*

Pilate wrote:Go ahead and vote me, Isaac, if you wish. I'm a Civ.

Deborah wrote:@Pilate, I'm still catching up, but can you expand on your vote post? So Uzziah says he thinks you and Absalom are civvie, so you think they are bad for it? That's quite confusing, tbh.

Uzziah has no reason to think I'm Civ. How could anyone "read" me as Civ with the way I've been playing. Hardly here, and when I am here, I say sketchy things.

He knows I'm Civ because he is bad. He's planting seeds so that if I get lynched and flip Civ, he looks good... and if he gets lynched and flips bad, I look bad.

If Uzziah were lynched and flipped bad, the intention is for people to return to this post and read it with the knowledge that he's bad. So then Absalom and I look bad. I'm more likely to be lynched than Absalom, that's my opinion anyway. So then I flip Civ, and Absalom isn't an instant target anymore. Maybe even thought of as Civ for it. Could be a distancing thing between Uzziah and Absalom, both baddies. Maybe not, it's my theory.

And yeah, I forgot to vote in the poll earlier. I saw the 'suaded post, and I was like "damn, I forgot!" and went and completed the vote as I had intended to.

Lot wrote: But clearly this is what you call 'addressing my substantive case', since you claim that's what you did. So, if this is you addressing my substantive case, and even if you only thought my case was the one post you responded to...

Why did you ignore it when I said 'either the first or second highest vote getter'? Why did you only mention who was actually lynched?

Lot wrote: Why did you ignore what I said about NKs.. it even implied the rest of my case about you from the day before?

Lot wrote: Why is it relevant that the people you didn't suspect flipped civ, and that you made no mention of them being bad? How does that add in any way to my statement that on three of those days, you voted for a civ? When the highest two vote getters are civ/civ, why should it be a virtue you didn't vote for the person who actually got lynched?

Lot wrote: What I did ask was this:

Lot wrote:I'm sorry - what part of your post in any way goes against what I said?

You could put this another way - I effectively asked "tell me how what you just wrote is a defence against my substantive case..."

Your response:

Absalom wrote:

Lot wrote:I'm sorry - what part of your post in any way goes against what I said?

You claim that I pushed civilian lynches HARD. That is simply false. Pull those quotes. I said who I suspected, gave my reasons, and voted. Only one of the people I have voted for is a confirmed civ. The other three lynches I had nothing to do with. I don't understand how you can say I'm constantly leading lynches against civs based on the facts.

The other interesting thing you said is "people are still following you." Yeah, so what if they are? Can I control who follows my vote? What exactly are you accusing me of, having teammates who follow my vote? Do you honestly think I'm saying "hey fellas, let's all vote the same way"? Do you think I would do that if I were bad?

These accusations make no sense to me, especially since they seem to have come out of nowhere. Are you cursed?

So, at the moment, your entire substantive response to my posts is that you didn't push for the lynches HARD. So I'll go back and look at that, happily.

Lot wrote:Oh, Absalom - you didn't know I was about to do that, but what poor timing for you to claim that was the entire substance of my case. I had a feeling that was going to be your angle. Now THAT, above, is the entire substance of my case.

Absalom wrote: Day 1: I voted for Cain, I expressed no suspicion of Samson. Somson was lynched and flipped civ.
Day 2: I voted for Cain, he was lynched and flipped civ. My bad.
Day 3: I voted for Uzziah, expressed no suspicion of Mary Magdalane. Mary was lynched and flipped civ.
Day 4: I voted for Balaam. I actively and repeatedly said I didn't think Job was bad. Job was lynched and flipped civ.

Lot wrote:So the list against me from Absalom today currently stands at:

I'm laughable
I'm embarrassing myself
I'm a hypocrite
I'm a liar

This is way better than aiming at the substantive aspects of what I've said about him. Let's see what's next, shall we!

Lot wrote:I'm sorry - what part of your post in any way goes against what I said?

Lot wrote:Silver linings time - not much of one though.

Job wasn't an activated disciple, so there is no clear reason for his Uzziah fixation (since he appears to be vanilla). Doesn't mean Uzz is good - but Job didn't have a whole lot of time to get info about him through some non-role-related manner before he went after him. The horseman theory, then, isn't a terrible one. Although clearly his vote for Rachel proved he was not required to vote Uzziah.

@Absalom - we've had four lynches, three of which have had either the first or second highest vote getter be a civilian where you pushed for their lynch HARD. The fact you haven't always quite succeeded is by the by... people are still following you each day. I still haven't forgiven you for lynching a silenced man. And it hasn't escaped my attention how interesting the NKs continue to be either. Gideon? Why, the only thing I remember about Gideon is how he vouched for Balaam so hard that when I suspected Balaam for even a second, Gideon voted for me...

Stephen wrote:

Absalom wrote:

Lot wrote:Absalom the heathen, trying to lynch men of God.

Okay, well you seem pretty sure of yourself. Such clarity must be nice. The rest of us have no idea what you're talking about though.

This doesn't sound like a genuine defense. Why aren't you outraged over such a vague suspicion?

Lot wrote:Absalom the heathen, trying to lynch men of God.

Nicodemus wrote:Balaam is so bad.

Nicodemus wrote:Rachel, here let me elaborate:

Pointless, elaborate, massive speculatory distraction, check. - The big posts of Balaam that really don't say much (the Horsemen speculation, for example) that make it look as though he's actively contributing, helping, etc. Wall-of-text posts are easy to hide behind.

Hollow, drop-of-a-dime suspicion on Laz, checkarino. - I don't believe for a second he "forgot" about his Lazarus suspicion. If it were genuine, he wouldn't "forget" it. If he were concerned about finding mafia, he would not "forget" to address a suspect, especially if he genuinely felt that the game was in as much jeopardy as he was saying.

Cavalier attitude in the face of suspicion, waiter, check please. - His response to Absalam has read as "Oh yeah I guess you suspect me that's fine dude." Which I don't associate with a civvie who is interested in preventing a town loss.

Jephthah wrote:

Absalom wrote:

Judah wrote:I apologize my friends for not being available the past few days. I'm going to read some posts by those that have votes and come back with some thoughts, if I have any. If someone wants to give me a quick recap, that would suffice too. lol

Recap:
Job and Uzziah hate each other. Rachel thinks Job is bad for having tunnel vision, although some people have suggested that the feud may be an act of War rather than organic. I think Balaam is bad because of his faux-helpful lists and pessimism about the civvies' chances, and Nicodemus agrees for reasons unclear.

Lazarus thinks I'm bad because reasons.

Everyone is busy and not posting.

Wow, you could have saved me so much time...

What do you think of Nicodemus?

Judah wrote:I apologize my friends for not being available the past few days. I'm going to read some posts by those that have votes and come back with some thoughts, if I have any. If someone wants to give me a quick recap, that would suffice too. lol