The Syndicate

Belshazzar wrote:

Rachel wrote:you know what i don't like?
the "uzzaiah might not be bad, but at least we'll get rid of uzzaiah" trick going on.

same tbh

Rebecca wrote:

Belshazzar wrote: I am also considering voting for Mary Magdalene for her instant vote on Rachel. I know it was my suspicion she latched unto, but after Rachel's admission of oversight, I have no more claims about it and I believe everyone should have waited for such a reply first. Mary hasn't really addressed this or her move, instead giving a different angle to the debate (the contribution weight on a player's alignment), which is frankly sort of evasive.

^This

*voting Mary*

And lo, the Lorb said to Rebecca, she shall have more time the next day phase! For the busy year will be over! And she shall build more cases. And it will be good.

Nicodemus wrote:

Belshazzar wrote:
Are you really ok with this train of thought, however:
if Uzziah flips bad, yay,
if Uzziah flips civ and another civ is killed as well, eh, at least we discarded Uzziah.

I would prefer not to lynch a civ.

Mary Magdalene wrote:So what you're both saying is contribution determines alignment.

How well did that work in lynching Samson? And Cain?

Jephthah wrote:

Balaam wrote:Why the shift in opinion on Bathsheba?

I shortened the post because it was huge, so I only left the question. It's not a shift but more like: while nothing screams baddie to me, nothing really makes me feel good about her either. And if she continues this evasive low posting trend, I have no problem voting for her.

Jephthah wrote:And Mary Magdalene is continuing her bandwagoning style. No problem voting there either.

While I think there was a good point made on Rachel, I also agree that she's at least seemed to try looking for bad guys, so I think we should give her the BOTD for now.

Mary Magdalene wrote:

Jephthah wrote:And Mary Magdalene is continuing her bandwagoning style. No problem voting there either.

While I think there was a good point made on Rachel, I also agree that she's at least seemed to try looking for bad guys, so I think we should give her the BOTD for now.

What does that have to do with Rachel not being a baddie?

A baddie can contribute a little or a lot.

I have not had time to devote to this game, I recognize that. I am sorry. I should be able to soon. But this is very suspicious of you.

Belshazzar wrote:And I see Ruth has again implied she wasn't able to vote on Day 2, whilst being silenced, although if she claims she was silenced the same way Paul, (presumably) Cain and myself were, then she would have been able to vote.

Esther wrote:

Belshazzar wrote:And I see Ruth has again implied she wasn't able to vote on Day 2, whilst being silenced, although if she claims she was silenced the same way Paul, (presumably) Cain and myself were, then she would have been able to vote.

This concerns me as well. I mean, from my experience, when you are silenced, you can still vote. It just makes me wonder a bit. If you are civ, why lie about being silenced?

Jonathan wrote:I don't understand why Ruth is not answering your question and it's making me queasy.

Mordecai wrote:Did Lot explain his vote or did I miss it? I was wondering about it yesterday but I didn't see the explanation, unless he voted out of nowhere.

Lot wrote:This is the only time I will be talking in the thread today, so I'm going to make it count as much as I can.

Jephthah wrote:Went to read Batsheba. Didn't find anything unsual there. She posted 5 posts, which desrves a lynch by itself, but other than that, I don't see much there.

Jephthah wrote:

Belshazzar wrote:I am also pleased that we have an extra day for this phase, because I've had a pretty busy weekend myself.

First off, I'd like Isaac (or perhaps The Host) to clarify what he meant by him being "technically Isaac 2.0"? I don't think we got any Host post about a replacement or a switch of any sorts.

Also, Isaac, I think you said you see nothing wrong with Uzziah's posts. It's certainly contrary to how Uzziah has been perceived throughout the game, thus far, so could you elaborate on that?

Welcome back, Esther, and nice to see you focused on the game, but could you perhaps give us any leads you may have so far? I think we need more reads from different people, right now, even if you personally don't feel ready to rule a verdict on anyone or such.


I really need to read back on everything posted by Absalom or Balaam, to see if I didn't miss anything dubious, but as far as Absalom's posts today go, I find it clear that he has received some kind of curse with his bad-tempered comments and the "bah"s, which makes his post about Paul's death totally influenced by the curse, meaning Mordecai's accusation that no civ would speak of a night kill this way is misguided, at least.

Re: Balaam's lists, I have seen this kind of criticism towards such list making and analysis before and it has never led to any serious charge or an indication of that person being bad. I personally don't disapprove of his lists - I'm not getting any significant lead out of them either, but it doesn't feel like he is faking helpfulness with them.

To honor Solomon's message is to look into what he has pointed out: Cain's voters from Day 1 and 2, plus Bathsheba in particular. The former are Absalom, Balaam and Deborah. Absalom didn't like Cain Day 1 and felt even worse about him on Day 2, making a case on him and voting accordingly; Cain flipped civ, Absalom expressed sorrow over it. Looks like a hunting gone bad to me. Balaam pushed for Cain to be "second wagon" on Day 1, treated him as "leftover" Day 2, Cain's lurking felt suspicious to him, he voted. To be honest, Deborah looks least good of all thre: she didn't maintain her focus on Cain during Day 2, she talked about other suspects instead, yet she resorted to vote for him again in the end, saying she did not find any better suspect.

Re: Bathsheba, I would only reiterate for the third time how his reasoning for voting Cain reads like. I'm more interested right now why Jeph and Mordecai have, instead, found nothing dubious about it Sure, it may not mean for certain that she is the blendy, wagony Heathen that we're looking for, nevertheless her reasoning was very blendy and wagon-like.

Batsheba was the last to vote for Cain. She didn't really have to do it, because it was the end of the day and he was getting lynched anyway. So to me, it's more likely that she's either a civvie who believed Cain was bad, or a baddie who thought he was another type of baddie, out of her group, if the horsemen are bad for example. Either way, it seems as though that's what she believed. Otherwise she just ends up looking like the worst bandwagoner.
In any case, I didn't say she isn't bad, just that I don't see anything that looks more evil then any other of the voters. I thought the reasons for voting Cain were bad, so none of them felt good to me.

I'm more leary of the early voters for Cain, and the later voters for people with only a few or no votes. For example, Lazarus, who also latched on the Absalom suspicion, and Rebeca who voted for me, even though this may look as a NoU. They were the 17th and 18th voters. What good would their votes have done. So easy to come in late and vote. You can always say you didn't have time to convince others not to vote for the person who was lynched. My vote might be going to one of them

Jephthah wrote:And I too can see myself going with Batsheba if she only comes in and throws a vote like that.
Rachel needs to explain why she accuses Absalom for something she did herself.

Belshazzar wrote:Balaam, I don't know if I can find the quote you pulled on Lazarus that dubious, because he wasn't the only player to have assumed Cain's lurking was a possibly signal of being silenced. So he simply doesn't stand out to me from the rest for this. I think Mordecai disapproved of another post Lazarus made (one in which he lashed at Absalom for the case he built on Cain)... although that also basically boils down to Lazarus' assumption that Cain was silenced, anyway.

.....

linki @ Mary:
"I will contribute as soon as I can... but in the meantime, thank you active player for helping me skip all that and vote right away"

Deborah wrote:And to Rachel, here is how I work. I read the thread in general, but I prefer to click the "in topic" button and read a player's post in order. It is easier to see apathy, suspicious tendencies, over-posting about useless crap to hide a lack of real content, etc. So I read through the people who hd acted on the poll and those getting votes, and Cain pinged me.

Deborah wrote:I'll tell you what. Prove to me Cain is civvie and I'll admit to being misguided.

Judah wrote:I've been trying to keep up however, there hasn't been anything to stick out to me. I recall reading there being two lynch candidates but I haven't found anything that sheds light on why. Is it possible for someone to give a breakdown on what has occured? I want to make a better informed decision.

Lazarus wrote:The reason I assumed Cain was silenced is because Cain's name was in the thread lurking and not saying anything while taking votes.

Lot wrote:This is the only time I will be talking in the thread today, so I'm going to make it count as much as I can. Expect a lot of words.

Job wrote:Everyone, I am on V/LA today thru Monday. I'll have really limited access to the thread but I'll try to pop in. Please try not to lynch a third civ and invoke divine judgment while I'm gone.

Epignosis wrote:

Balaam wrote:HOST: Does God only inflict divine judgement on a random civvie while Noah is still alive? Or is divine judgement a permanent fixture and only a few people can be protected from it while Noah is still alive?

Divine judgement will occur whether Noah is alive or not.

Jephthah wrote:So Paul couldn't talk but could vote, yet Cain couldn't do either, I assume, becuase he didn't vote. Ruth as she claims, could do neither as well. We're looking at two different kinds of silencing. Even if there was a mass silencing, it's more probable that those silenced would be able to at least vote, so I'm puzzled by the fact that both Ruth and Cain could not vote.

As for Ruth, I don't remember much of her, in the first day, she voted for Cain, so I don't think it's likely she was silenced by Herod. Was Cain? He voted for Absalom before he was silenced.
There is also Jonah. Where on earth is he? He was quite active on day 1. Was he silenced?

Absalom wrote:Also, I want to lodge a complaint about Balaam's long, irrelevant lists. They make me want to vote for him, frankly.

Rachel wrote:Absalom, wanna elaborate on how that might make him bad? Or are you going to continue to act irrationally and condemn others for doing the same.

Belshazzar wrote:Balaam, I don't fully understand the point of your third list. For instance, since I was silenced, of course I had 5 or less posts on Day 2. In fact, I had zero...which you pointed out in the second list...

Rahab wrote:Balaam, you keep posting all of these lists, but you say nothing to go along with them except labeling them. Are you planning on analyzing and commenting on this "data" later on? Do you suspect people on them? I am curious.

Ruth wrote:I don't believe you guys lynched a silenced person. Didn't anyone notice him lurking in the thread? That was weak.

Had I been able to vote, I probably would have voted Uzziah.

I skimmed along a bit, but still need to finish catching up. RIP Cain

And I'm not sure I think Paul was also silenced; this is his last post. It was made on Sunday, before Day 1 even ended. He did not post Night One, either. Plus how many silencers are there??

Paul wrote:i have already made my vote today it will be interesting to see how everyone talks and votes

i know i talk a lot (lol) but i try not to unless i have a reason to so you know i really do not think i have anything else to add atm

d2 will be more fun

wake me when d2

Linki; You were silenced, too?

Barnabas*
Cain
Esther*
Gideon
Hagar
Isaac
Jacob
Jephthah
Jonah
Judah*
Mary Mag
Mordecai
Nicodemus
Pilate
Ruth
Samuel

* indicates their second missed stoning vote

Barnabas
Belshazzar*
Cain*
Gideon
Hagar
Jonah
Judah
Paul*
Ruth*

* indicates this player claims to have been silenced (Cain presumed to be silenced)

Barnabas
Belshazzar
Cain
Deborah
Esther
Gideon
Hagar
Isaac
Jacob
Jonah
Judah
Mary Mag
Paul
Pilate
Rahab
Rebecca
Ruth
Samuel
Stephen

Absalom wrote:

Nicodemus wrote:A good name is better than fine perfume, and the day of death better than the day of birth.

What is this nonsense? It's nonsense, and I hate it. Bah.

Absalom wrote:Why would someone kill Paul? That's lame. I disapprove of that decision and I hate it. Bah.

The Seven Seals
6 Then I saw the Lamb open one of the seven seals, and I heard one of the four living creatures call out, as with a voice of thunder, “Come!”[a] 2 I looked, and there was a white horse! Its rider had a bow; a crown was given to him, and he came out conquering and to conquer.

3 When he opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature call out, “Come!”{b} 4 And out came[c] another horse, bright red; its rider was permitted to take peace from the earth, so that people would slaughter one another; and he was given a great sword.

5 When he opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature call out, “Come!”[d] I looked, and there was a black horse! Its rider held a pair of scales in his hand, 6 and I heard what seemed to be a voice in the midst of the four living creatures saying, “A quart of wheat for a day’s pay,[e] and three quarts of barley for a day’s pay,[f] but do not damage the olive oil and the wine!”

7 When he opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature call out, “Come!”[g] 8 I looked and there was a pale green horse! Its rider’s name was Death, and Hades followed with him; they were given authority over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword, famine, and pestilence, and by the wild animals of the earth.

9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given; 10 they cried out with a loud voice, “Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?” 11 They were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number would be complete both of their fellow servants[h] and of their brothers and sisters, who were soon to be killed as they themselves had been killed.

12 When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and there came a great earthquake; the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, 13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree drops its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. 14 The sky vanished like a scroll rolling itself up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. 15 Then the kings of the earth and the magnates and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, 16 calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one seated on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb; 17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”

The 144,000 of Israel Sealed
7 After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth so that no wind could blow on earth or sea or against any tree. 2 I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, having the seal of the living God, and he called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to damage earth and sea, 3 saying, “Do not damage the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have marked the servants[a] of our God with a seal on their foreheads.”

4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed, one hundred forty-four thousand, sealed out of every tribe of the people of Israel:

5 From the tribe of Judah twelve thousand sealed,
from the tribe of Reuben twelve thousand,
from the tribe of Gad twelve thousand,
6 from the tribe of Asher twelve thousand,
from the tribe of Naphtali twelve thousand,
from the tribe of Manasseh twelve thousand,
7 from the tribe of Simeon twelve thousand,
from the tribe of Levi twelve thousand,
from the tribe of Issachar twelve thousand,
8 from the tribe of Zebulun twelve thousand,
from the tribe of Joseph twelve thousand,
from the tribe of Benjamin twelve thousand sealed.
The Multitude from Every Nation
9 After this I looked, and there was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, robed in white, with palm branches in their hands. 10 They cried out in a loud voice, saying,

“Salvation belongs to our God who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb!”
11 And all the angels stood around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 12 singing,

“Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom
and thanksgiving and honor
and power and might
be to our God forever and ever! Amen.”
13 Then one of the elders addressed me, saying, “Who are these, robed in white, and where have they come from?” 14 I said to him, “Sir, you are the one that knows.” Then he said to me, “These are they who have come out of the great ordeal; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

15 For this reason they are before the throne of God,
and worship him day and night within his temple,
and the one who is seated on the throne will shelter them.
16 They will hunger no more, and thirst no more;
the sun will not strike them,
nor any scorching heat;
17 for the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd,
and he will guide them to springs of the water of life,
and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.”

The Seventh Seal and the Golden Censer
8 When the Lamb opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. 2 And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and seven trumpets were given to them.

3 Another angel with a golden censer came and stood at the altar; he was given a great quantity of incense to offer with the prayers of all the saints on the golden altar that is before the throne. 4 And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, rose before God from the hand of the angel. 5 Then the angel took the censer and filled it with fire from the altar and threw it on the earth; and there were peals of thunder, rumblings, flashes of lightning, and an earthquake.

Lot wrote:I've looked back at the voting record, and...

Actually, it was Uzziah who was up to two votes when all the Samson votes suddenly started coming in, not Cain. Possibly Samson was a save on Uzziah.

I dunno, I'm not going to vote for the guy who seems silenced at this stage. I don't personally feel comfortable with that. Later in the game, when there is more of a body of work? Sure. But it's awfully convenient at this point that the guy with the second most votes is MIA - both if he is bad, but also if he isn't bad.

I'm going to vote Uzziah. The case on him is good too, he is actually talking, and considering I felt the Samson votes felt like a save, and I've looked back at the voting pattern... if they were a save, they were a save on Uzziah.

Uzziah

Absalom - I take your point completely, by the way. No-one should have a pass just because they are silent. Nevertheless, it is something which I am torn over, particularly because I know how upsetting it can be to be civilian and be lynched when you can't defend yourself. There are about 13 people who haven't posted today, and I personally believe that points to some massive silencing event, so I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that people not speaking today are silenced.

Jonathan wrote:See underlined. The fact that I commented on Pauls silence because i wanted to hear from Paul before making up my mind is an outright lie. Here is what I said about wanting to hear from Paul:

Jonathan wrote:I just want to see his (Pauls) response to Martha's death. Does he believe Absalom could have done it? What is his response to people who think he might have done it? I don't see his quietness as suspicious though since there is a way to explain it (Herod). Then again, maybe I'm just naive to believe that.

And now that we know Herod didn't silence him I want an explanation for that too.

I did post a couple of times after I said this about Paul.

Jonathan wrote:

Malchus wrote:

Jonathan wrote:

Malchus wrote:

Absalom wrote:For the record, I did not kill Martha. I'm tough enough to handle a little accusation. I can't say I blame people for wanting to vote Uzziah. He hasn't exactly done much to inspire confidence, but I am still nervous about Cain.

For the record I don't believe you.

Jonathan wrote:When Uzziah first posted that he was rooting for scum I thought for sure he was someone on our site who always says things like that but they rarely speak to his alignment. As I read over his posts this morning though I'm starting to have some doubts that he is that person thus I am starting to look his way. I know meta is not supposed to play into this game but you just can't help it when a comment that unusual is made, and I can tell at least one other person had the same thought I did. So I have my eye on him today.

I'm inclined to agree that killing Martha may have been an attempt to frame Absalom or Paul. True it could have been just the opposite, one of them killed her because she was too close but I don't think either would have been worried about Martha getting people to vote them.

I'd like to hear or see more from Paul today regarding his thoughts about the Martha kill and other things.

Really regarding Uzziah? Who admits they are bad like that? You are actually considering this a baddie tactic? Not that I think Uzziah is a civvie but good lord what a stupid reason for suspecting someone.

I'm a little confused. Whats the stupid reason for suspecting someone?

Your reason.

If Uzziah is the person I first suspected he was he would definitely say something like that even if he's bad. Trouble is, he says things like that whether he's bad or good. It's hard to describe unless you've personally experienced it. I don't know though that Uzziah is the person I suspected. The fact that he has said more makes me start to doubt. The person I'm thinking of is somewhat quiet except for saying crazy things. I've begun to suspect it's someone else, someone who's identity I don't know and for all I know that person could be trying to emulate the person I thought Uzziah was, in which case I can't tell anything about their alignment. Thus I'm going to keep an eye out on Uzziah. Maybe that helps clarify. In any case, fyi its bad form here to use stupid to describe a person, their opinions, their thoughts or their point of view as it expresses disrespect for the person, so I will ask you to please not do it again.

Balaam wrote:And only three people have pondered Paul's silence or mentioned wanting to hear his thoughts: Jephthah, Job, & Jonathan.

Is it the number 3 that bothers you or their proximity to each other in the thread?

Jephthah wrote:I like Job. Will not be voting there. Maybe Ballam, maybe Uzziah, maybe someone else. I still have time.
I wonder if Jonah was silenced, because he was quite talkative last day, and maybe killing him would have been too obvious, so the baddies silenced him, which would make me believe we were right about Mary Magdalene

Rachel wrote:I might vote for you just because you are trying so so hard to be helpful without doing anything helpful.
I also infer that you want to sweep aside any discussion I tried to spur earlier.

Absalom wrote:

Balaam wrote: CAIN- He was 2nd in the stoning poll. Made a vote threat if someone didn't stop trying to unsock the game. Claimed to not be very into the game and hadn't spent time to get caught up. Admitted to playing 4 other games besides this one. Completely absent today. Absalom- can you add anything more to this? You seem to still have him on your radar.

Not really much to add. I still suspect him for the same reasons as yesterday, with the added "disappearing to try to get people to forget about him" ping. I really think most of the bad guys are laying low this game.

That being said, I think Jeph (Jeff, Geoff) has a good point about long analysis that doesn't really add anything but appears to be helpful.

Jephthah wrote:

Balaam wrote:

Mordecai wrote:I very much dislike being ignored. I asked you a question Job. I expect an answer.

If uzziah isn't setting up Meta for a future game, why would he be so obviously bad? What do you think the probability of him being a horseman with a death activated ability is? Your initial non response to my question makes me wonder if you know that its true, and that you're trying to push his lynch for specifically that reason. Which would explain why you ignored that part of my post to avoid the issue.

I apologize if you answered me earlier and I missed it.

Good idea and very chilling. Let's look at the possibilities for the Job v. Uzziah conflict:

1) Job is civvie and sincerely believes Uzziah is Heathen and Uzziah really is Heathen. Lynching Uzz would help the civvies and lend cred to Job, possibly even Paul via extension because Paul and Job seem to be okay with each other.

2) Job is a civvie and sincerely believes Uzz is Heathen but Uzz is really civvie. Lynching Uzz hurts the civvies and forces us to take Job's opinions with a grain of salt just like Paul. We would also be a civvie stoning away from another civvie being struck down via divine judgement.

3) Job is a civvie and sincerely believes Uzz is Heathen but Uzz is really a Horseman. Uzz may have made that statement to get attention and possibly to get lynched to activate some kind of Horseman shenanigans. Lynching Uzz would play into his plot with unforeseen consequences. Gets us no closer to eliminating the Heathens but also avoids a civvie stoning. Might call into question those trying to brush aside Uzz's "root" comment.

4) Job is a Heathen and is trying to get us to waste another lynch on someone who is not Heathen. Results could be similar to #2 and #3.

5) Job is a Heathen and suspects/knows Uzz is a Horseman. If the Heathens perceive or understand the Horsemen to be threats and they've found one of them somehow, why not have the civs dispatch him for them instead of using their kill.

6) Job and Uzz are both Heathens and this is an early attempt to gain credibility for Job and potentially any teammates that may align with job in the thread. It's never too early for a baddie team to sacrifice one of their own but I've seen this tactic more often when there is a larger baddie team.

7) Job and Uzz are both Heathens and there is major discord among their team. It's rare, but sometimes personalities conflict so much that the rest of the team decides to take out a member that wants to march to a beat of a different drum. It gains one of more of them cred while diminishing their numbers.

8) Job is a Horseman and thinks Uzz is Heathen. Without knowing what the end goals of the Horsemen are, all we can do is speculate. If the Horsemen have a team win condition, they need to eliminate the Heathens. This works in favor of both the civvies and the Horseman.

9) Job and Uzz are both Horsemen and it's a ploy to wreak a little havoc with Uzz's death and/or gain a fellow Horsemen some cred.

10) Job and Uzz are both Horsemen and it plays out kind of like #7.


The big flaw to all this though is that no matter who we analyze like this, there are always more ways to rationalize a player as bad than there are ways to rationalize them to be good.

What exactly is the point of this post except to appear like someone who's putting a great effort to analyze things?
In addition, it has nothing to do with what Mordecai said, because he was referring to the lack of response to a question, not to the possibilities of the Uzziah vs. Job fight off.

I didn't like this post one bit. You just took a whole lot of space without saying anything.

Mordecai wrote:I very much dislike being ignored. I asked you a question Job. I expect an answer.

If uzziah isn't setting up Meta for a future game, why would he be so obviously bad? What do you think the probability of him being a horseman with a death activated ability is? Your initial non response to my question makes me wonder if you know that its true, and that you're trying to push his lynch for specifically that reason. Which would explain why you ignored that part of my post to avoid the issue.

I apologize if you answered me earlier and I missed it.

Balaam wrote:
And for good measure, those who missed the D1 vote:
Barnabas
Bathsheba
Esther
Judas Judah
Lazarus

Anyone see anything to infer from this data?

Job wrote:Sorry but I'm not buying it. She was starting to get people's eyes. Scum love to keep suspicious people around so they can be mislynched. She wouldn't have lasted past day 4 if she kept it up.

Job wrote:I think that is a stretch. Those definitions of the word are far less commonly used in the context of his sentence.

Rachel wrote:

Deborah wrote:

Balaam wrote:Not going to lie, the number of people pulling the "aw shucks, trying is too hard for Day 1- randoms! " irks me. Vote spreading is to be expected but so is some level of participation. I've got my eye on all of you.

In the interest of keeping things interesting, I'm going to vote for Cain. Don't try to play five games at once and think it's okay to give us sass about why you're ignoring one of them. You're probably a civvie but oh well. So it Samson I bet. Nice bandwagon set up there btw.

Okay, I do not like this post at all. Balaam, you actually managed to scold people for throwing away their votes in the same post where you threw away yours! That's incredible. You tell me, please, how voting for someone who says they are overstretched but who is "probably a civvie" is any better? And since then, all you have done is discuss how Paul is not around. I read you as someone who is trying to sound like they are participating in the game but who really isn't very invested in finding baddies.

I find this post half good and half bad because voting Cain was NOT throwing your vote away.

Nicodemus wrote:In other words, not drawing Credibility for themselves, but for Paul.

Nicodemus wrote:

Balaam wrote:

Rachel wrote:I have to admit, the amount of people calling for him to speak and his lack of response, is suspicious AF

Three thoughts on this:

1) If Paul was kidnapped by Herod, there's certainly the possibility that one of the "Where's Paul?" posters is Heathen and messing with us.

2) If Paul wasn't kidnapped and just busy IRL, then the "Where's Paul?" posters could be sheep and waiting for Paul to run the show a second day.

3) If Paul was kidnapped by Herod, he could actually be a Heathen and it's a plot to make him look even more civvie. This is silly to try now though because Paul wasn't likely to get many votes today anyway. Sure, he was wrong about Samson, but Day 1 lynches take out a civvie a majority of the time.

Is there not a 4th possibility?

4) If Paul wasn't kidnapped, and is pretending, some of the "Where's Paul" posts could be Heathens drawing attention (and cred) to that?

Rachel wrote:I have to admit, the amount of people calling for him to speak and his lack of response, is suspicious AF

Rachel wrote:Everyone seems to want to hear from Paul. :hmm:

Job wrote:Speaking of Paul.. Why you so quiet?

Jonathan wrote:I'd like to hear or see more from Paul today regarding his thoughts about the Martha kill and other things.

Epignosis wrote: Herod Antipas
Herod shall imprison someone; the imprisoned may not post nor vote the next Day.

Jonathan wrote:RIP Martha. This seems like such an odd kill to me. Martha was brought up as a possible lynch so why would the baddies kill her?

Job wrote:Scum don't kill you because you're annoying, the reasoning is always thought out.

Uzziah wrote:

Job wrote:RIP darlin.

Public enemy number one is obviously uzziah. He point out blank said he's rooting for the scum.

I also suspect absalom. Why else would Martha be dead? She gained more than her fair share of suspicion day 1 IMO.

Why weren't you attacking me this bad until I figured out your plot? I can't say I'm surprised that Martha is dead either.

I would strongly advise the civilians to take my imminent demise as evidence against Job and Paul.

Long Con wrote:Whhops, I accidentally voted in this poll. I'm not playing this game. Please disregard my Uzziah vote, and ignore me altogether. I thought I was in Flash and it was a weird Night Poll.

Lot wrote:No, you didn't say lynch. That's why I used the word imply. So, if you wouldn't lynch him, you would have us debating Paul's actions and following Paul's lead... for what? You clearly agree it proves nothing about Paul, since you've now clearly stated you wouldn't lynch him for being wrong. So what would you be trying to achieve? You want Paul to be quieter? Why? You think if Paul is wrong about one person, his words should no longer hold weight? What if he is right about the next one?

Lot wrote:I honestly - and again, self-interest here probably plays a part - but I can't see any civilian reason for you to suggest that we just follow Paul blindly and then stop listening to him if he is wrong. But imagine, for instance, you know Paul is wrong about Samuel and me but right about Nicodemus, or about other people he might have mentioned but not pushed today - might it not be in your interests to lynch a civilian and discredit Paul in one go?

Lot wrote:I'm willing to listen to Gideon today, and take heed of the shot he made across my bow. He essentially vouched for you, and I'm willing to put a lot of trust in that for now. But I'm just saying - to me your idea looks like it can achieve nothing good, and didn't seem to me like a very civilian thing to say.

Absalom wrote:Gideon's post is an implied BTSC if there ever was one, but I see nothing in the roles about civilian BTSC. Especially not on Day 1 before any night powers have been used. This would imply that he is either a Heathen or possibly a Horseman (not sure if they have BTSC). Am I missing something here? What other explanation is there for a vouch at this stage?

Rachel wrote:

Balaam wrote: As an aside, I have been curious about the Day 0 poll. I can't help but wonder if one of the Horsemen voted for Apocalypse because that is their purpose in the Bible. Normally, one would suggest that the Horsemen would steer clear of voting Apocalypse because it would be to obvious- aka WIFOM. But over time, WIFOM gets so played out that players do the very thing they shouldn't do because it would otherwise seem to obvious. I'm not sure how sock logic plays into the circular logic of WIFOM but I wouldn't be surprised if one of the Horsemen is among the eight who voted Apocalypse. If we come to understand them to be a threat, we can look there.

Balaam, for someone wary of circular logic/wifom you sure embrace it in the paragraph above.

Paul wrote:

Balaam wrote:A little time off, some thinking, and this post:

Paul wrote:basically im being misunderstood b/c its d1 and there is almost nothing to go on so i created stuff to go on

i waited long enough for d1 i can't believe people deal with that

i also can't believe people are taking me so srs i am trying to hunt scum by fishing for reactions to the stuff i say how else do you hunt this early

...gives me a new perspective on Paul. I have not seen such an aggressive, relentless, button-pushing fisher in a long time but now Paul makes a lot of sense to me. Were you really suspicious of Samuel initially or did your lasting suspicion come from the reactions he gave you? After coming out the other side of this issue, it's going to be difficult for me to take you seriously when you go after someone. I will always have to wonder whether you really suspect someone or if you are just fishing for a reaction from them or anyone else.

While I respect your cowboy style of play, I can tell we're not kindred spirits and that may lead us to be at odds as this game progresses (assuming we're both alive come Day 2). For better or worse, I am an empirical observer. I don't care about pings and feelings. Nor do engage in "forcing it" as Paul has done. I simply wait for people to expose themselves to me. This occurs through patterns in voting, process of elimination, and patterns of defensive and supportive behavior in the thread. If I survive past Night 3, I'll let you know what I've come up with.

hey man I am glad

don't get me wrong i understand observation i just was trying to say that if no one made any bold moves during d1 that no information can be gathered

Paul wrote:

Balaam wrote: As I mentioned earlier, I have a better understanding of Paul's tactics now. I have no read on him or anyone because I don't read people well. All I'm saying is give Paul's suspicions a go today and see what happens. If he's wrong, hopefully he'll dial it back a notch until we can get some empirical evidence. I never said anything about lynching him if he's wrong, just getting him to turn the dial back off of 11.

this is scummy, like, why can't you come up with your own opinions on who is scum

it should be obv that when I am speaking that everything that comes out onto the page is my opinion and that I am not infallible so I don't mean to sound like i am

i just like to be assertive at times b/c it gets more telling reactions

also you said something about never knowing whether i am serious with a suspicion or not

don't you always have that question about anyone if you are town? anyone could be lying to you about a suspicion at any time

Jonah wrote:

Balaam wrote:I bear no grudge against Paul at the moment, but the ruthless, unfeeling player in me thinks the best way to deal with an aggressive fisher like Paul is to put him to the test. Let's take him up on his three suspects and lynch one of them. He seems fairly confident that they are bad (though he threw up a smoke screen about not being 100% on anything). We can always call his bluff. If we lynch one of his top three and they're not bad, either Paul will cool it with the gunslinger rhetoric or the rest of us will know to take his words with a grain of salt.

What else do we really have to go on?

Hoooooo boy does this post raise some flags for me. it sounds like you know paul's 3 suspects aren't heathens so youre gonna help him lynch one so you can discredit his gut later.

Jonah wrote:

Balaam wrote:For better or worse, I am an empirical observer. I don't care about pings and feelings. Nor do engage in "forcing it" as Paul has done. I simply wait for people to expose themselves to me. This occurs through patterns in voting, process of elimination, and patterns of defensive and supportive behavior in the thread. If I survive past Night 3, I'll let you know what I've come up with.

Cool sooo you're going to observe for the first three lynches and let everybody else do the hard work.. then join the fray once you've collected a bunch of ammunition on everybody
Got it
Whales love this tactic because if we don't find a heathen early they can run the show and turn on the Lord's disciples for the mistakes they've made
In a sock game I have no reason to trust that this is really how you play and I hope you don't do it. Play the game from the start.

Lot wrote:

Gideon wrote:

Lot wrote:I'm quite surprised at how much heat I'm taking today with very little clear justification. I make one post about balaam, and I'm 'going after him'? By the way gideon, what is it about balaam that makes you so sure he is good?

I have nothing to say about that.

Fair enough. I'll take it under advisement. I have no intention of voting Balaam today, but it does bother me that he seems to imply we should lynch Paul if Paul is wrong about his suspicions, and I'd like him to clarify that. And he is welcome to make a lot more ass jokes.

Balaam wrote:

Barnabas wrote:

Balaam wrote:No I don't see it but, then again, it's not my style. Who has been forced to show their hands and what makes you say so about them? I'm trying to keep tabs on who you suspect so I can determine whether or not you're actually as good as you're intimating.

I bear no grudge against Paul at the moment, but the ruthless, unfeeling player in me thinks the best way to deal with an aggressive fisher like Paul is to put him to the test. Let's take him up on his three suspects and lynch one of them. He seems fairly confident that they are bad (though he threw up a smoke screen about not being 100% on anything). We can always call his bluff. If we lynch one of his top three and they're not bad, either Paul will cool it with the gunslinger rhetoric or the rest of us will know to take his words with a grain of salt.

Are we going to put every person's convictions to the test each dayphase? I heavily discourage this tactic. Paul will make his case. If any of his cases sound convincing, we may choose to follow his lead. But it's risky to start testing everyone's scumhunting skills just because they're vocal.

No, this isn't something to do every day. This is about Paul. On Day 1. As the game plays out, we'll have empirical evidence to go on. Right now, all this day has been about is Paul and his spider sense. I'm suggesting we give him the chance to prove himself. You know, fish or cut bait. Catch scum or stfu. Know what I mean?

Barnabas wrote:

Balaam wrote:No I don't see it but, then again, it's not my style. Who has been forced to show their hands and what makes you say so about them? I'm trying to keep tabs on who you suspect so I can determine whether or not you're actually as good as you're intimating.

I bear no grudge against Paul at the moment, but the ruthless, unfeeling player in me thinks the best way to deal with an aggressive fisher like Paul is to put him to the test. Let's take him up on his three suspects and lynch one of them. He seems fairly confident that they are bad (though he threw up a smoke screen about not being 100% on anything). We can always call his bluff. If we lynch one of his top three and they're not bad, either Paul will cool it with the gunslinger rhetoric or the rest of us will know to take his words with a grain of salt.

Are we going to put every person's convictions to the test each dayphase? I heavily discourage this tactic. Paul will make his case. If any of his cases sound convincing, we may choose to follow his lead. But it's risky to start testing everyone's scumhunting skills just because they're vocal.

Paul wrote:basically im being misunderstood b/c its d1 and there is almost nothing to go on so i created stuff to go on

i waited long enough for d1 i can't believe people deal with that

i also can't believe people are taking me so srs i am trying to hunt scum by fishing for reactions to the stuff i say how else do you hunt this early

Ruth wrote:My thought was that in this community, we give new players the BOTD their first game, and pretending to be one of those new players would be a smart strategy for a Mafia. We tend not to lynch noobs day one of their first game. It would be a way for a veteran to get to play the noob card. A Get Out Of Jail Free card, if you will.

This goes hand in hand with the other reason people are suspectng me: the thought that I was trying to determine peoples identities. No, I was only trying to see if Paul was what he appears to be. I don't think he is, personally. In other words, I doubt new players would ACT like new players.

Having caught up after a busy Saturday, though, it is also possible there are just "woo hoo fun" reasons for pretending to be new to this forum, especially if Paul has an especially highly recognizable game. But it is something I think needs to be kept in mind if he ever does play the noob card.

Having skimmed the day so far, I need to read more in depth today. I will probably post as I catch up.

Ruth wrote:Also, whoever said that all the avatars look the same, oh my God, yes!

Paul wrote:maybe people should stop focusing on me being new and actual focus on what I am saying and on catching scum

do you see how many people have been forced to show their hands already by issuing opinions on me let alone others? if so why aren't more of you talking? I don't mean this as condescending or
Anything but it's a genuine question

Absalom wrote:

Paul wrote:

Paul wrote: I am curious what everyone thinks of everyone else no joke try to force yourself to make an opinion of those who have posted and share it b/c that's now town wins this game

actually how about everyone instead name their top 3 scum atm

1 Samson
2 Lot
3 Nicodemus

i await your thoughts, wonderful people

Okay, the Paul show is getting a little old. I don't think he's bad, but he's drowning out everything else in the thread, make it hard for me to get a read on others.

I wish Cain would come back. He is my biggest suspect at this point. I am not reading Nicodemus as bad, but it seems like Lot said something to make me nervous a while ago. I will have to reread. I have no reason to suspect Samson.

Rahab wrote:And more biblical jokes based on socks.