The Syndicate

If "silent days" is what it takes for you guys to see how incredibly idiotic this plan is, sure lets do it.

I vote for silent days.

I vote for silent days.

If you're going to ask me to try and continue to contribute, Don't dismiss everything I contribute.

See you guys when the night post comes up.

The point of the codemaster is that

A) We elect someone we trust

B) If we elect someone on rump's team, they'd be outing themselves if the code is compromised.

@ Anchorete - Lol.

Bronwyn Mightyfeet wrote:But if we decide the code at night Rumpel can just use one of the words we decide on since he picks the word at night, unless you had something else in mind.

Oh, I just thought of something. Rumpel has to pick a word. What if we substitute smilie faces for some of the more common words we want to use like civvs, baddies, vote, suspicion, etc.

If nobody knows the code until the very end of the night Rumple will not be able to send in a PM. If we elected a codemaster, whose responsibility it was was to post a link to the code Every night at the end of the night, we would virtually eliminate Rumple from the equation.

"Using anagrams for common words that shift every night."

"Signu granamas ofr conmom dsorw hatt shtfi verye ginth" - Night 1

"gisun anamargs rof moncom sword ahtt fitsh revey thign" - Night 2

THAT is clever.

Grutfud Orangesprite wrote:

Queran Gloomsoul wrote:1. Gobnait, a lie detector, has been gunning for you pretty much all game.
2. What are your thoughts on Carmen? Would you be willing to put a lynch vote on her tomorrow?
3. As far as I remember, you were one of the three players who voted Gobnait yesterday. Considering the lynch divert, wouldn't it be reasonable for the town to assume that you are one of the Rumpel gang, and therefore had to switch only four votes to get a majority?

1. I can't deny that, but I can't think of anything I've said that would be a lie big enough to warrant constant aggression.
2. I would put a vote on her, as I'm convinced at this point she's part of the party that set me up.
3. I made a huge case on Gobnait, and I believe it would have been a dick move not to vote for her, given the case I presented. It would have made me look 100% more suspicious if I voted for Carmen instead of going with the case I myself presented, and I'm sorry but I'm not the sort of player to do something underhanded like that.

Linki - It's cowardly to limit discussion to one day just because you're afraid Rumplestiltskin will have free run if you actually play the game and discuss things for 48 hours.

There is a difference between giving up and being clever. Being clever is using words that don't make sense, or devising a code that changes every night so it's impossible for Rumple to steal votes. Clever is not "You know what lets just shut up and vote."

To me, you just sound like an angry, caught baddie. Insulting us isn't going to change our minds. And voting Carmen again for the 9000th time is not a better alternative in my opinion.

I am frustrated. But I am not bad.

Not like it matters anyway. When I am lynched by the silent majority, you guys will see the truth in that you allowed the baddies to force you into a tight, volatile space and make a stupid cowardly decision.

1. Gobnait, a lie detector, has been gunning for you pretty much all game.
2. What are your thoughts on Carmen? Would you be willing to put a lynch vote on her tomorrow?
3. As far as I remember, you were one of the three players who voted Gobnait yesterday. Considering the lynch divert, wouldn't it be reasonable for the town to assume that you are one of the Rumpel gang, and therefore had to switch only four votes to get a majority?

1. I can't deny that, but I can't think of anything I've said that would be a lie big enough to warrant constant aggression.
2. I would put a vote on her, as I'm convinced at this point she's part of the party that set me up.
3. I made a huge case on Gobnait, and I believe it would have been a dick move not to vote for her, given the case I presented. It would have made me look 100% more suspicious if I voted for Carmen instead of going with the case I myself presented, and I'm sorry but I'm not the sort of player to do something underhanded like that.

Linki - It's cowardly to limit discussion to one day just because you're afraid Rumplestiltskin will have free run if you actually play the game and discuss things for 48 hours.

There is a difference between giving up and being clever. Being clever is using words that don't make sense, or devising a code that changes every night so it's impossible for Rumple to steal votes. Clever is not "You know what lets just shut up and vote."

Well clearly anything I say at this point is moot, as the pitchforks are out and the torches are lit. But, rather than go silently into the night (I just thought of that),

Consider this: You're all cowards.

Obviously 10-24 hours of thinking things through is worse than 48 hours of thinking things through. All you're doing by deciding to shut your mouths and vote for me during the day is helping the baddies not have to

A) Worry about tomorrows lynch
B) Worry about coming up with legitimate sounding cases
C) Blend in for another 48 hours.

I'm all for discussion, but "lets discuss everything for 24 hours and then just vote during the day" is a bit of a misnomer, isn't it? It's more like "Lets talk about how bad Queran is and then just vote". This is frustrating as all get out because I KNOW I'm not bad, and I KNOW this is a set up, and I have a ton of egg on my face right now, and to top that all off, you've decided to give me a shortened window of time to convince you even marginally that I'm good. We might as well hold the vote now.

"Lets not talk at all during the day because big bad scary Rumplestiltskin might steal our votes." Is the wrong way to look at it, because by NOT talking throughout the day, by voting with a hair trigger of just under 10 hours to talk things over and come to a reasonable conclusion, ALL Baddies win, not just Rump's team.

I will have to carefully read all the discussion, but I did see the "lets all talk at night and shut up during the day" thing being kicked around and I hope that doesnt turn in to 24 hours of talking and then just a flood of votes for me. Giving me less than 24 hours to adequately defend myself is a touch unfair.

I believe that I was set up. Rump's team obviously had a good idea that Gob/Me was civ/civ so they switched the lynch to Gob so they wouldn't have to switch tomorrows lynch, just watch me catch the votes.

Linki - See?

For the record, the "lie" can't contain any obvious words like "civvie", "baddie" etc, and I haven't once lied in the game.

I voted for Grimms because

A) Aesopes fables suck

B) Duh.

Also why was Gob even lynched and not Carmen? Another save?

RIP Gob, I was sure I had something there

Worst. Haiku. Ever.

Well thanks Fane

Grutfud Orangesprite wrote:Well I haven't been playing long enough to be as sure as most of you seem. However, I will say that it sure seems odd how easy it appears to be to lynch Carmen, almost with no opposition. I'm going to just vote my gut since that's about all I have to go on here.

I'm going to vote Queran. She/he was still in here when I posted my last post and I waited quite a while to see if she'd (he'd) say anything in response, while still in here for a while, no response. I have a bad gut feeling about voting Carmen, I don't know why exactly, just do. So I'm not gonna.

I went to go eat dinner and take care of some chores.

Izett Cruelsinger wrote:

Queran Gloomsoul wrote:Following that logic, I assume you think a split vote would be better?

I'd say you didn't follow that logic one bit. Or else you're kidding around. Dunno.

I thought when you said a unanimous lynch wasn't sitting well with you, you were implying you'd feel better if the votes were spread a bit more? Sorry if I was wrong :P

That vote doesn't make any sense, if Carmen was trying to save herself (if she was bad) wouldn't it make more sense for her to put a vote on someone who already has one (i.e Gobnait?) This is the sort of thing that is making it very hard for me to pin down what you're playing at Carmen. You're really all over the place recently.

Following that logic, I assume you think a split vote would be better?

I'd feel like a tool if I didn't vote for Gob, so I will do that. I will also offer my thoughts on Carmen however:

My failed theory that she was a baddie connected to Mainchin did not pan out, and her role hinting had given me pause in terms of voting her in the past, however she denies having role hinted, so that scratches that.

Whether she was saved or not is irrelevant in my opinion, Rumplestiltskin and Friends could have chosen to save a civvie just as easily as they might have saved one of their own, as evident by the Finnian lynches. I feel like I'm having difficulty putting what I think about this down in words, but what I'm trying to say is that Given the scope of Rumple's power, and the results of the Finnian lynches, it's not possible to determine legitimate saves vs. confusion causing saves.

HOWEVER: That being said, the way Carmen has been posting recently has set off more than a few bells in my brain. The tone/content of the posts reads almost as a sort of ingenuine "Oh my gosh I had noooo IDEA you guys thought I was hinting that is SOOOOOOOOOOOO FUNNY!"

So in summary, I can see the suspicion of Carmen, as Carmen a few days ago sounds completely different than Carmen does right now, but I made a big post and a big case on Gobnait and would be foolish not to put my money where my mouth is.

linki - Beat to the punch

Gobshite?

Well on that Anchorete I guess we'll agree to disagree :P

By the way "What about this was unclear" was a genuine question.

Anchorete, this is the second time Gob has used a faulty conclusion based on an incorrect quote to implicate me.

Once is a mistake, twice is a pattern.

As for my Ginormous post being suspect.. Tough Tentacles bro, If I see faulty logic and no uing and deviousness, I'm gonna point it out. Bolding etc was used to make things easier to see and read, if that bugs you, Tough Tentacles :P

What about that was unclear?

Well, you're wrong, but I guess you're entitled to your opinions as long as you don't intentionally misuse quotes to support that opinion. :P

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:

Queran Gloomsoul wrote:I'd be more convinced you were genuine and not trying to bamboozle us if those links were not to the same post, which they are.

Hah! Be honest, no you wouldn't.

There are actually 4 or 5 posts of you getting on Bac's case. Here is where he accuses Bac of "faulty logic and no uing and deviousness". Keep in mind, this is right after Bac said your Day 2 post about me was suspiciously long and quote-riddled. Here it's "your recent aggressiveness after I hinted at having you under my microscope a bit more" and Bac's supposed evasiveness regarding me. Here Bac is "base covering". After that there's a back-off post here, ostensively because no one else has mentioned Bac this entire time.

The next day you can't decide whether Bac is good or not.

Then yesterday he suddenly is good, and I'm "buddying up'" to him, instead of the other way around. Here and here.

Are the links right, there?

Linki: You seem to have beaten me to this. Really, "less than aggressive"?

There are tales told to the children of the Moonlit Tropics Krackens of a great, fearsome, stoney beast with a distorted sense of truth, that will eat them in their sleep if they do not do their chores and pay homage to Don Cheadle-Kracken.

The first post you quoted, the "faulty logic, no-uing, and deviousness" was in reference to you, as is obvious, because we're talking about my big post, which is directed at you.

The second post you quoted, I'm explaining to Bac that the post he made here read to me as being a little aggressive and slanted in your (Gobnait) favor.

The third post, he does the whole "If Jorhan is good, whatever it doesn't matter case-wise, but if he's bad then it strengthens my cases" thing, which as I've explained I'm not a fan of, so of course I pointed it out.

Fourth quote: I'm explaining, not backing off :P


As for the last two quotes, If you read back and look at all the times you've said something along the lines of "Wow Bac I agree" vs. the times Bac's said "Wow Gobnait I agree", it is clear who is buddying to who.
---

Your misuse of the first quote is once again another point against you and your knack for making cases that fit your agenda despite the facts.

EBWOP: The "Bac Attac" (I just thought of that.) links are to the same post. Which I will address right now. To insinuate I went after him aggressively is a bit silly and overblown, though I guess when you ask Gobnait the Gorgeous for a case, you are going to end up with some silliness.

Queran Gloomsoul wrote:

Bac Wunderelin wrote:

Queran Gloomsoul wrote:You seem awful defesive of ol' Gobby recently Bac.. Are you sure you're not redirecting a tad yourself?

My Good Kracken, no. I have not defended him once. I said that, like you, my thoughts on Gobnait depend on how Jorhan flips. That would make a weak defense, and indeed, could also be applied to yourself as well as Gobnait.

His theories, like yours, need further development based on how they play out. I am not sure what I would be redirecting from; as soon as the last lynch ended, I said I suspected Jorhan, I enumerated why, and that is the person who received my ballot. I have been the epitome of consistency. And my suspicions after this day will be built on today; one day at a time, as information is revealed.

So I am not sold on Gobnait (or yourself) being naughty or nice.

Fair play. Though I'm just intrigued at your recent aggressiveness after I hinted at having you under my microscope a bit more. When I say "defensive" I mean that aggressiveness, plus your initial evasion of my post, etc. I might have sounded a bit confusing there.

Queran Gloomsoul wrote:

Bac Wunderelin wrote:I am fairly small, so putting me under a microscope is rather an everyday occurence for me, it is the best way to see my many expressive expressions, so I have no fear of that.

You simply appeared to possibly be setting up a distraction to me, so I pointed that out. Sorry if that came across as rude, my first post on the subject was somewhat snide. Or perhaps pushiness is overcompensation for my size, it is not the first time I have been told this. When one is a tiny pixie in a room full of large powerful Trolls, Krackens etc., one must do what one must in order to be heard and to be held to be of Account in such a gathering.

I am not Rajah for nothing.

Crosspost: And you are reaching again. It is saying that even if he comes up civ, that clears no one, since I think there are possibly 2 naughty groups. Which I have been trying to remind folks about since the number discrepancy was first noted.

Fair's Fair. I've heard worse snide/etc so no worries. As for me reaching, I'm just saying in the past I have seen people (baddies mostly) say stuff like "FYI even if Joe flips civvie, that doesn't clear John" when their case for John is connected to the suspicion of Joe, for example. Not sure if that is in fact the case here, just pointing out the precedent.

I was far less than aggressive in my questioning Bac. Interesting you didn't quote that, Gob.

As for voting record, you voted for the same civ 3 times in a row. So you know, glass houses and all.

Making a large post when it's clear who will die also gives pretty easy outs, and sets up for being able to build a case on anyone you mentioned the next day when the lynch results are out. Other than that, most of his posts (and since there are a lot, you'll either have to read back through them or trust me) from Day 3 on are either back-and-forth with me or throwing out the names Dierdre, Eurolyvn, and Laine, as well as the now deceased Etain and Finnian. My theory is he's trying to see if something sticks. Oh, and he theorized that we would have 2 days in a row, which ended up happening. So either good guess there or good info, I'm not sure which.

We're back to this again :P

Gobby continues to ignore the fact that I was unavailable for most of that time (see my case re: refusal to acknowledge any view that doesn't fit her own), and when I came back I did as she asked. And she suspects me for it? As for "sets up for being able to build a case on anyone you mentioned the next day." I do believe building cases on suspects is the point of the game. As for throwing names out, Those are called suspects, theories, discussion. I didn't just toss out names, I participated in discussion that just about everyone seemed to be keen to.

And the two days in a row thing was based on the host post a while back, wherein it says "day looked like it would last a while" or something to that effect. Yes, I guessed.

I'd be more convinced you were genuine and not trying to bamboozle us if those links were not to the same post, which they are.

Another thing I didn't mention in my case post (because of time and space) Is Gob's more recent exchange, which I'll quote here:

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:RIPIYWG Bac and Etain. I'm pretty sure Bac was, and was starting to lean that way on Etain.

My favorite Grimm character my be the Big Bad Wolf. "The better to eat you with" is one of the all-time great bad guy lines. And his plan, while nonsensical, is sort of brilliant.

Bronwyn Mightyfeet wrote:Gobsuit, I saw where Queran says he's going to present a case on you today so we can see why he thinks you're suspicious. Will you also layout for us why you are suspicious of him?

I can do this if people want. I have reservations. First, I likely die either way. Either folks believe him and I "win the popularity contest" or he flips bad, everyoje believes I'm civ, and it gets me NKed. Second, why ask me to write a super long and detailed case now, right after Rumplestiltskin comes back into play, after we've had 3 rl sunny periods without him? That super pings me.

That said, if people are set on deciding between the two of us and too lazy or busy to read up themselves, I'll go for it. Anyone else have input on this?

This does not sound like very civvie friendly behavior to me. At the least, it's overly defensive and reactionary to imply that Bronwyn was trying to get you to say the secret word by asking you to present a rebuttal to my impending case. At the most, it reads as a sort of "I really don't ACTUALLY have a case, but if people are too lazy to read the thread themselves I *guess* I could whip one up..."

In any case, I eagerly await her response.

Bronwyn, I was addressing this post, sorry if that wasn't clear

Grutfud Orangesprite wrote:

Fane Winebattle wrote:Thanks for that imense post, Queran. You have been most helpful. I will go through it and give it some time to sink in before voting, for sure.

Thanks, Queran. I wonder about that "slip" too. Quite a compelling argument. Any ideas on why the stony one would have you in his sights?

The only one I can think of, Grutfud, is her initial panic after I brought her up as a suspect drove her to make the flawed case, and after that fell apart, she thought any wiff of backing entirely off would bring suspicion onto her.

The Illustrious Me, Purveyor of Angry Birds, Duke of Downton Not-Too-Shabby, Pant's on The Ground, Pant's On The Ground, Lookin' Like a Fool With My Pant's on The Ground, The Feebler Elf, Does herein present the evidence against Her Stoniness, The Ironic Giant, The False Faced Frogurt, Gobnait Gingeruite.

Firstly I have collected evidence to suggest that her Rockhood, The Statue That Will Mount the World, sought to cover her own granite ass at every possible turn.

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:I have to go to bed and thus will be responding to the other things happening in the thread later on, but I thought that the "If Jorhan is bad so is Queran, if he is good then Gobnait is bad" idea that seems to have come up among a few of us needed to be addressed.

It's definitely true that if Jorhan shows bad it strengthens my theory about Queran (and all Caillic voters) a great deal. However, I don't think Jorhan being good would necessarily clear his voters, as I think the vote pattern at the end of the Day 1 lynch still looks pretty suspicious.

I don't see in any way how Jorhan's innocence or guilt has any bearing on mine. I mentioned him very briefly in my original large post as probably being bad if some of Caillic's voters were bad. I personally haven't seen thread activity from him that worries me as much as the people we know are guilty of lynching a civ on Day 1 are. He certainly may be bad, but he could also be good; I have no idea on that point right now, nor have I ever claimed to.

I noticed Queran and Ameerah saying Bronwyn's post I have been quoting was directed at Caillic and not Ameerah like I thought? That actually makes a lot of sense, and I understand Bronwyn's post much better now. I thought (partly because of Caillic's troll avatar, which struck me as manly but apparently isn't) that Caillic was a male name. Google informs me that's not true. I sincerely apologize for my misreading of Bronwyn and will be glad to reexamine my case against her in light of it tomorrow when I log back on. Thanks to Q&A for pointing that out to me. I will point out that that has no bearing on any point I've made about Queran himself, but I do think I need to read through all Day 1 Caillic voters to make sure my reads so far have been right.

I have (and will continue to) highlighted the parts of Gobnait's posts I will address in this case. As you all can clearly see:

Gobnait admits that if Jorhan flips bad, it will give her case more merit. She is however unwilling to admit the converse, that if Jorhan flips good, it would give her case less merit. She also does the classic "He may be bad, he may be good" argument, which I have seen many a mafia do when they want to cover their ass if they know or strongly suspect they are about to lynch a civvie. The final highlight in this post is in regard to her false claims about Bronwyn and myself, which I have rebuffed here She admits that a fundamental part of her bookish post (the linking of myself and Bronwyn) was in all actuality inaccurate. And yet refuses to admit that the lack of a link between myself and Bronwyn (a major factor in her bookish post) diminishes the validity of that case in any way. Her base covering is a recurring thing as you shall soon see, and her refusal to see both sides of the coin is troubling and suspect.

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:

Bronwyn Mightyfeet wrote:Gobnait, could you share what you are still seeing about Queran? I thought the suspicion was based on her vote for Caillic in that it was supposedly saving a bad Johran. Since that turned out to not be true I'm curious what you are seeing at this point.

Yeah, my original case against Queran carries next to no weight now. Basically my ping now is that I wasn't at all satisfied by his defenses from the morning of Day 2 on. In fact, they've reeked of insincerity to me. The most notable example is his accusation that I was "NO U"ing him and then later deciding to vote me after I had voted him, when it was already clear Jorhan was going to die. That, plus continuous efforts to call me a liar and characterize my statements using mafia jargon (ie NO Uing, backtracking, and others, iirc) instead of having a reasonable discussion about why he's not bad, make me think he is.

However, I think that for today I'll have to look elsewhere for my vote, since others don't seem to share my thoughts and I'd prefer not to throw mine away.

Welcome, Etain! Good to see you, Feline Diviner of Things Undone.

I for one am satisfied by Mainchin's reply to my query, and since I haven't been pinged by anything other than his switch he's out of contention for my vote for the time being. I don't know what to make of Rhinfrew's case on Miyuki since I had been reading them both civ; I think for now it just means he(?) will bear a bit of watching.

I'm frustrated, disheartened, and pinged by Finnian's refusal to contribute suspicions, or really anything of use. Same goes for Laine, to a slightly lesser degree. I also wish Fane would show up and say something. I know he says he's new and seemed to be lacking some confidence, but I think he could contribute to the discussion. The timing of people mentioning pings about him and him disappearing from the thread doesn't give me warm fuzzies, though I don't think it's a major ping yet.

At this point I could see my vote going to Queran if others share my suspicions, or to Carmen or Finnian. I don't think that it's surefire that either Carmen or FInnian is bad though, and my own lack of confidence worries me.

For reference, the above post was after Jorhan was lynched. Having lost the last remaining pillar of here case, Gobnait switches gears completely, inventing a whole new reason to suspect me. I shall address the issues she brings up now: Firstly, I do believe she was No Uing me after I briefly brought her up as a ping of mine and she immediately followed up with her (now debunked, and at the time clearly incredibly flawed and rushed) case. As for lying, you only have to look at her original case, her defense of that case, etc, to see that she was deliberately twisting the truth to fit an agenda.

And again at the end of this post she does some nice base covering.


Now I want to address another issue, Gob's affinity for blending into the crowd.. Her affection for Bac's posts pinged me because, in my experience, it's very easy for someone to attach themselves to someone else, whom the believe to be civvie, in an effort to appear also civvie. To cut down on the size of this post I will not cite every time Gob did this with Bac, but sufficed to say if you read back through her posts, you will notice the pattern. I will however point this out:

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:Wow, I just realized I hadn't absorbed any of Page 15 since I read it at 5am. There's some good stuff in there. Mainchin, you say you're sure your read on Laine is right?

Eurolyvn, very insightful analysis about Carmen and Fane. I'm now also surprised she never gave Fane a closer look. In my personal opinion, Finnian is still a slightly better candidate for lynching tomorrow, but if you and others want to go for Carmen instead then I'm with you.

For someone so opinionated, so focused on discussion and theories, Gobnait's proposal to "follow the herd" here strikes me as odd..

Now I'd like to address the aggressiveness with which Gobnait has attacked my posts.

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:

Queran Gloomsoul wrote:

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:But not even willing to venture the slightest guess about anyone else?

When my attentions are less distracted I'll offer my thoughts on others. Probably later this afternoon.

Maybe I should be more clear about why I'd like to hear your thoughts. The first reason is my suspicion of players who haven't contributed to discussion (see Finnian). You haven't contributed since Day 2 other than to say "I'm not evil, you're evil!". I thought I'd give you a chance to try to help the civs instead of just defending yourself. A shame you're too distracted.

The second reason was that if you're bad as I believe, your posts may give some clue as to who your teammates are. Unfortunately, while all of your posts are directed at me we're unlikely to get anywhere useful. We need good lynch candidates today, and I believe you're using our argument as a distraction to stop others from discussing and to stall giving any opinions that could later incriminate you.

Either way, I think it's apparent neither of us will be lynched today, so how about we drop our differences together and work on something mutual instead of beating a dead horse?

Something you will see repeated here is Gobnait's extending an olive branch with one hand and smacking me in the face with another. I believe this is an attempt to antagonize me whilst appearing genuine in nature.

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:I just need to decide. Going with Finnian, because his total unwillingness to provide any suspicions whatsoever reminds me a lot of Queran. Speaking of whom, he never did come back and mention those other names he said he'd bring up, despite the fact that this lynch is vital if Bac's numbers are right and has required a lot of discussion.

I'm holding onto hope that Carmen may say something useful once the rl concerns she mentioned clear up.

Linki: Oh no, Mainchin! If you're civ we can't afford to have you throwing away panic votes because of clock errors! Can you give further insight into what made you go with Etain, who just joined us, rather than someone about whom we have information to go on?

Linki x2: Carmen, I think others found random votes for Jorhan strange as well. If I'm understanding Ameerah's point here, I think she's asking why vote him on Day 2 if you thought he was the target of a plot on Day 1, as you are implying?

Highlighted here again is two things:

1. Despite me saying I'd be back in the afternoon to give my thoughts (which I did) Gobnait takes advantage of my absence to once again twist things to fit her vendetta. Sprinkling a nice bit of "this lynch is vital to the civ cause, Queran isn't here to contribute, hense Queran does not care about the civ cause" in there just for flavor.

2. Once more we see Gobnait's unwillingness to compromise, as she mentions she hopes Carmen will speak up once RL concerns clear out. Now, I mentioned that I would be back in the afternoon and offer my thoughts when I was less distracted, but Gobnait was unwilling to allow me the time she was willing to allow Carmen.



Finally, the weakest bit of my case I will admit, yet something that caught my eye as I was reading back and preparing this post:

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:

Rhinfrew Flowingrass wrote:

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote: And Rhinfrew, if I'm reading you right you've been talking about Grutfud, not Finnian, right? Grutfud is the one who participated in the democratic process on Sunny Period 2 but not 1 or 3. I suppose it's a remote possibility that they are the SKs and that, having both not participated, were unable to kill, but it just seems counterintuitive somehow. Personally I doubt that that explains the lack of NKs, especially since there should be two groups doing them per moony period.

2

No Gobby, I'm talking about Finnian. But I had not noticed Grutfud. According to Shand's chart, Grutfud missed the odd ones, after which followed peaceful evenings. Good catch.

Say, how do you know who is supposed to kill when?

7

I don't know who is supposed to kill when; I am making assumptions based on past games, which I admit could be totally wrong. I am used to SKs NKing each moony period, and, if there are 2 teams of evildoers, one killing every even moony period and one killing every odd moony period.

There are too many inactive players, I can't even venture guesses on enough players to come up with numbers of who should be evil and who shouldn't that I have any confidence in....

Miyuki, I still think both Carmen and Finnian may be bad. I don't think Carmen's posts last moony period redeem her yet, but at least she's cited specific reasons for absence (field trips and doctor's appointments) and seems willing to play along a little bit.

I guess on reflection, part of me just wants to lynch Finnian because of his contrariness. That's not really fair of me, because it has no real bearing on his win conditions, and if I thought he was on our side I'd try to be patient with him. But if they're both evildoers, as I believe, it seems just as good a reason to choose him first as any.

And thanks for your answer, Izett. That clears things up.
2

Keep the highlighted portion of that post in mind:

Bronwyn Mightyfeet wrote:

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:
Thanks Fane. I have been musing a bit on these three as well. There's just so little to go on. I agree that the timing of Dallon rejoining is pingy, but I think for now it's probably wisest to give him a chance to establish a thread presence while looking at candidates I have a better feel for.

I also agree that I would almost feel bad putting Lyel up for lynch because of the difficulties he's mentioned. If he's lying to hide baddieness then it's extremely poor form, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that's the case. However, if it is true I still have no idea whether he's good or bad. Same with Grutfud. I think these baddies have shown they're too powerful and too tricky to take a chance lynching someone we can't read (or slightly better, since baddies now outnumber us, but my point still stands).

What are people's thoughts on leading lynch candidates for tomorrow? I know Carmen has still been getting some attention, but who else do people think is on the chopping block, as it were.

Oh! And as a side note for the folks keeping tally at home, I believe Queran has now voted for 5 straight civs. 4 are confirmed and then 1 vote for me. Just sayin'.

Gobnait, I count 11 civvs and 7 baddies that we know of. What makes you think the baddies now outnumber us? WARNING: Still on my first cup of coffee so may be missing some obvious logic.

Also, I agree with your thoughts on Lyel, Dallon and Grutfud for today.

Gobnait Gingeruite wrote:Bronwyn, you're right. I was counting both NK victims as civs and assuming the info that there are 3 unrevealed baddie teammates for the witch and one Indy is true. Your count is the correct official one, but my more speculative one puts it at 9-10, assuming the indy is civ-aligned.

This exchange is perhaps a slip, that Gobnait lets on she knows more than she is sharing with us?

As has been presented in this case, I believe the evidence against Gobnait Gingeruite is exceedingly concrete in nature and most certainly eyebrow-raising. Thank you for your time!

My Gob Case will be in my next post. This is a warning that the post will be rather large as it contains a number of quotes throughout the whole of the game.

RIPIYWG Bac and Etain.


My favorite Grimm Character hmm?

Iron John, hands down. The guy starts off looking all fierce and deadly, but as the story goes on he becomes a sort of guardian angel for the prince that set him free. And he has a LEGION of Iron soldiers that he just gives to this guy. He's

A) Misunderstood
B) Powerful
C) Sweet

EBWOP: Welcome Lyle 2, I wish Lyle 1 all the best <3

Caught Twisting Facts Again? wrote:4 are confirmed and then 1 vote for me.

So if you really meant "civs 5 times" and not "five straight civs" as you claim after being grilled by me because you once again twisted things to fit your vendetta, why did your math add up to 5 individual people?

Yeah sure :P

If you can't stand the heat, etc.

Oh I see, so when the tables are turned, it's "I voted for civs three times, I did not vote for three civs." But as it fits your case, you'd go so far as to say "You voted for FIVE STRAIGHT civs."

EBWOP: Counting me and the three Finnian votes :P

So you'll admit to voting for 4 civs then.

I plan to, yeah.

Above is the voting records up until the most recent vote. We'll focus on my voting record since Gob saw fit to bring that into question.

Day 1 - Calliac, I saw a pingy post and acted on it. I don't random vote on Day 1's, I try to get at least one reason for my vote because as I've explained in the thread here, random voting is lame. Sucks that I was wrong, but Day 1's usually suck.

Day 2 - Gobnait, I've made a couple posts on this, and I'll make a couple more hopefully when the Blazing Hot Ball of Terror We Kracken's Dare Not Name arises from it's slumber.

Day 3 - Mainchin, I was following my suspicion that Mainchin and Carmen were linked and were bad. Again, I was wrong, but if anyone knows anything about how frequently one can be wrong, it is Gobnait Queen of Irony.

Day 4 - Finnian, His aloofness, and lack of regard, combined with the tactic of "not ME, the other inactive people" seemed to me (and to others, if you take a look at the votes for day 4 and day 5) as suspect. So I voted there.

Day 5 - Finnian, see Day 4 Finnian.

So by my count that's .... 3 civs, not 5. Although I guess "five straight civs you guys! FIVE STRAIGHT" sounds alot better when you're making a case, especially after every other attempt has pretty much shown how desperate and false you are.

So Gob, we'll discount you counting yourself amongst the civ's because of course you would do that, you're a liar :P

Care to explain why you once again twisted the facts regarding me, and made it look like the Finnian Day 5 vote (which I believe everyone voted for Finnian Day 5, so well done to you Gob for lynching a civvie as well.) was worth 2 seperate counts in your backhanded sneaky sneak way of getting people to ignore facts and just go along with you?

There's more I want to expound on but again I will wait until tomorrow.

Linki @ Fane -

To be perfectly honest, I was afraid I might have slipped into tunnel vision, so I decided to seek out new suspects.

Gob's infatuation with me is getting really annoying.

Linki - Bronwyn assuming I survive the night, I'll gladly lay out the case against Gob. Which is, I might add, actually full of facts and not backhanded straw-reaching jibs.

RIP Finnian.

Picked Characters because I think Characters drive the Story.

We get alot of Spongebob episodes down here. It's pretty much the only show on AtlantisTV

The Illustrious Me, He Who Takes One Lick To Get To The Center of A Tootsie Pop, Don Cheadle-Kracken's Secret Admirer, The "I" In Team, Conveyer of Belts, Heart Breaker, Dream Maker, A Small Town Boy Born and Raised in South Detroit, does herein decree:

Fun? What is "fun"......

F is for Friends who do stuff together!

U Is for you and meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

N Is for Anywhere and any place and time, right here in the deep blue seaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Sorry, busy weekend, though it looks like I'm not alone in that regard. Also, voting Finnian, once again seems I'm not alone.