The Syndicate

Well that's not ideal.

There's still a bunch of people who haven't voted, and like half an hour for them to show up. You might be fine.

S~V~S wrote:If I am trying to save myself I am doing a pisspoor job.

Like I said, if I get lynched, look at my role, look at host posts, look at who wanted me dead. That is as clear as I can make it.

You are so very wrong, bwt.

What would host posts have to do with anything? The hosts are impartial, they wouldn't just drop hints about people's roles. I feel like you're trying to make out there's some grand conspiracy against you when really people just think you're bad. I am going to *Vote SVS* now because in addition to my pre-existing suspicion of you, your defenses are doing nothing to make me feel better.

Canucklehead wrote: Bullz (responding to the part in green): I did vote for some of the same reasons you and bwt outlined (i.e. to get to the bottom of the Made thing). I did not vote for him for the reasons "everyone else" did. "Everyone else" had many diverse reasons for voting for him. Some of them were common among many people, some not. Voting for a similar reason as you and bwt =/= voting for the same reasons as "everyone else" since you and bwt =/= "everyone".
I don't understand the contradiction that you're trying to point out? By saying that I didn't vote for the same reason as everyone else, I'm not at all denying that I followed the thoughts and brains and reasons of some people (you and bwt among them), nor am I - by saying that I agreed you and bwt- suggesting that I voted for exactly the same reasons as you two did or agreed with every part of your reasoning.
I am gad you see me as fairly civ. I hope you will begin to realize that I am completely civ.

I think for some reason I was understanding your comment as if you were saying your reasons for voting Made were unique and specific to you. My mistake!

thellama73 wrote:

Long Con wrote:You can do what you like, but tagging along with someone else's suspicion, accusing someone based on false evidence, backpedaling, and playing the "no u" card are all baddie behaviour.

I didn't backpedal. I have been consistent. There's nothing wrong with thinking about what someone else says and adding to it. I have never thought the whole "no u" thing is meaningful at all. As Epignosis is fond of pointing out, there is no such thing as defined "baddie behavior" because baddies behave in all sorts of ways.

\These are all bogus, trumped up charges and you know it.

I do think your point about Canuck posting like someone who has btsc was ridiculous but this is a reasonable thing to say. There are no specific and exclusive things baddies 'do' because that would mean they were obviously bad.

thellama73 wrote:SO bear with me here for a moment, folks. I have had a thought.

In typing my last post in which I noticed that LC is doing the very thing that SVS ALWAYS jumps on me for doing, and noting her lack of response, I began to wonder. And wonder pretty hard.

Long Con has done a good job of portraying himself as SVS's greatest adversary, but is he really? Let's look at the votes.

Day 1: Long Con cast the third vote for SVS after MP had seven. No danger to SVS there.
Day 2: Long Con voted for juliets. SVS took 0 votes. No danger to her there.
Day 3: Long Con cast the only vote for SVS after Made had three. No danger to SVS there.
Day 4: Long Con cast the 13th vote for Made. SVS took three votes. No danger to her there.
Day 5: Long Con, after talking about no one but SVS for ever, suddenly abandons his suspicion of her to come after me HARD for what seems to me to be no reason at all.

Now, it is possible SVS is keeping quiet just because she is thankful that attention has shifted away from her, but I submit to you that Long Con and SVS have been on a team this whole time, and engaging in some very clever distancing.

This is based on a) Long Con being vocally against SVS, but not actually voting for her when it could have made a difference. and
b) SVS staying silent about behavior that she consistently goes bananas over when others do it.

I would love to hear others' opinions about this, but as for me, I am going ahead and trusting my gut. Voting for SVS now.

I hadn't really thought much about LC, but this is an interesting theory. Especially when you bring his votes into it. I have been trusting SVS less and less as days have gone on based on the way she pursued Made so hard and pushed the idea that even if he flipped civ he was probably just a seemer anyway. The emotion-based defenses that came out recently strike me as bad too.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: 2)Canuck: I think llama's case on why Canuck is bad is based more off assumption. And it's not an assumption I agree with. While it's certainly within the realm of possibility, I think it more likely that Canuck is bad because I felt like she glomped onto my reasoning for voting Made:

Canucklehead wrote:Keterman, I'm not voting Made "because everyone else is". That's a pretty reductive and manipulative reading of my explanation.

This is the part of bwt I was saying I agreed with. Sorry I didn't quote it.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Bullzeye wrote: I said that on Monday, it's now Saturday. A lot can happen in the space of a week. The seemer thing has made me distrust you because as I've said a few times I'm always wary of people who fall back on seemer accusations after civ lynches so the fact you're doing it before he's even been lynched is just grabbing my attention like crazy. It's not that I don't take you seriously, it's just that I find some of the things you're pushing to be a bit shifty. Not only the seemer thing but also the "let's lynch the people around Made before we lynch him" which you must admit can be taken to look as if you're his teammate trying to buy him some time. I did trust you at first but I always want to trust you. Now I trust you less. If we finally lynch Made today (who I'll probably vote for unless something crazy happens) then the outcome of that will affect how I see you. At this point I'd probably still vote MM over you just because of my gut telling me he's bad. Maybe JC too though I'm beginning to turn away from her I think.

Sorry to chop off the rest of the quote, but the bolded part is pretty much the conclusion I have come to. How I view SVS really comes down to what Made is. And while I like it or not, I don't see any other way to get past this mental roadblock until we deal with Made.

So that being said, I'm sorry Made, but given your case on MR which I didn't believe, the general confusion you've caused (either intentionally or unintentionally), this thread needs to move on. And it cannot be with you. I've waffled on you many times in this game, so here's to hoping that my bad read of you is correct.

Votes Made

I agree w/ bwt and Bullz that we're not moving on to anything else until made is gone. Yes, I think Made is civ (I'm not sure, I don't have your preternatural ability to feel sure about things, Keterman), but I think so. But I've been expressing that opinion for days. No one else thinks so. Therefore, I'm willing to consider that I'm wrong. If it would make you feel better about me, I could ineffectually vote for Mongoose again, because that empty gesture would totally avoid the inevitable lynch of Made today. I think we need to move on. A townie might die. I hope that's not the case, but I've done what I could to sway popular opinion away from that and have been unsuccessful. The civiness of Made is not a hill I'm prepared to die on, so yeah. I'm going to concede this one, vote with the majority, and take my share of the blame if he turns up civ.

Your playstyle is to trust yourself more than you trust anyone else and stick to your guns no matter what. That is not my playstyle....and that's OK.

She claims she isn't voting Made for the same reasons as everyone else, but this post doesn't read as genuine to me. I think she was going for an easy, blendy, opportunistic vote here.

What's interesting to me is that in one of those quotes she essentially says she's voting for the same reasons as you and I voted but then apparently wasn't voting him for the same reasons as everyone else. Perhaps I'm misreading that but I agree it comes off shady. I had been seeing her as fairly civ though.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: Oh, and we also don't even know if baddies have BTSC.

Really? Why wouldn't they?

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

This is a really weird thing to say. People's lives don't revolve around this site, we all have other things to be doing.

LoRab wrote:One of the reasons I play in this extended community is because, historically, we don't call each other scum. I'm really not liking that not being the case in this game and it's making me not want to post.

Also, since when is "meta" a dismissive term?

I think scum can sound quite mean sometimes regardless of context but ultimately I try to remember that some players come from communities where it's just standard practice and isn't meant to be taken that way. At least I'd hope it isn't.

Dana wrote:

juliets wrote:Dana, I can understand the civ vote or even if there were civ votes, but can you explain why you missed the vote 3 times ? That's a lot for as few days we have been playing.

The first day I didn't know we had moved threads, so I was about 10 pages or so behind and I didn't want to vote without knowing the story. The other two times I was unsure and didn't want to unintentionally contribute to killing a good guy. I felt pretty sure about MR and that didn't turn out well at all.

It was day zero you missed, and I remember you voted in the team poll right at the end because there was a thing about how you were supposed to vote the other option so the teams would be balanced. Nothing happened at all on day zero that was noteworthy and nothing you missed was ever brought up as a reason to suspect a person. By the time day one and the first lynch rolled around you definitely did know where the thread was.

fingersplints wrote: bullz - Since you will rightfully ask, it was the comment about the recruit and the subsequent comments about how you were seeing how I would react. I understand that that may be what you were doing, but I tend to overreact a lot so a part of me wonders if you were trying to set me up to react a certain way to make me look bad. I do not feel strongly about you, so I think you are just on a watch list atm for me.

Fair enough. I haven't played with you in ages and honestly don't really remember much about your style so I can promise I wasn't trying to set you up at all. When Enrique's role was first revealed I remembered someone had said something about a recruit but I remembered it sounding more nefarious (in hindsight) than your comment so I went back to check what it was. I found yours and just thought "Ha, what a funny coincidence" but knew that if I were bad and had made a comment like that, and then someone pointed it out, I would get really defensive. So I brought it up partly just to say I found it funny but with the intent that if you'd gotten defensive or been awkward in your response I'd have had someone new to suspect. As it happens you've yet to give me a reason to find you suspicious.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:I'm not sure how you missed that, tbqh. Or am I misunderstanding your exchange with LC?

No you understood correct. Maybe because it was so oblique that I didn't notice the allusions before.

That's interesting, if some people thought it likely, why vote for Made anyway?

I personally thought there was a small chance but that it was based on a big assumption. It occurred to me that if Made had been bad, and his team had switched the lynch, then the Lancelot theory would be something they'd either propose themselves or strongly promote as fact. There was also the matter of Made's behaviour throughout the game being wild and suspicious. I weighed the good against the bad and felt that it was more likely for him to be a baddie.

How have I seemed blendy?

Voting for what is your quest. Today apparently my quest is to wait for an email that doesn't look like it's coming. Fun times.

Well. That happened.

Made wrote: MM, Canuck, BWT, LC, and Bullz: Either admit I am mafia and vote for me, or vote who you think mafia is.

You realise I already voted for you right? As of the last lynch I think the arguments for you being bad outweigh the arguments for you being good.

juliets wrote:where is everyone today? You can post and watch college football!

No I can't. That would require me to know what college football specifically is and be capable of/interested in watching it. :P

To be completely honest and serious for a moment I don't see the point of holding my vote in like I usually do so I'm just going to slap it on Made now. I can always change it later, but in the absence of an accident involving baddies and banana skins or ice I don't see why that would happen.

S~V~S wrote:Well, the person around Made I wanted to lynch most was Enrique, and he has turned up bad. So

My point was that I do not want to accord people cred for being able to say, "Oh I trusted him" when he may not be as he appears. It was driving me crazy that so many people were overtly defending him, and that was the best reason I could come up with; the scenario for all that support that made the most sense to me. As one of the people I thought was overtly defending him, can you come up with a different reason why that may be so?

I haven't really felt like I'd defended Made much. I've admitted at least one he looks bad to me. The only issue I had was that he, in my mind, was 100% guaranteed to be bad in Misfits and then flipped civ after acting much the same as he has here. If it weren't for that I'd have been right there with you and Llama going after him. Maybe I'd been too willing to give him the BOTD based on past experience and maybe I'm not the only one.

S~V~S wrote:You missed the post like 3 or 4 posts up where I said you are on my permarecruit list, lol. And why do you specifically distrust me, I don;t recall you saying it before, although I could have missed it; I will look.

You said this on Monday:

Bullzeye wrote:
I still mostly feel like SVS is civ. I think I basically agree with your judgement here.

Your other references to me have to do with the Seemer thing. Even if you do not take me seriously, you cannot see that *I* may take me seriously without being bad? You think that an overt flop is something i would do as bad? A day or two ago I asked Dana her opinion on you, based on you & her coming out to defend Made on the whole "derail the thread" thing. Does this have anything to do with that?

I said that on Monday, it's now Saturday. A lot can happen in the space of a week. The seemer thing has made me distrust you because as I've said a few times I'm always wary of people who fall back on seemer accusations after civ lynches so the fact you're doing it before he's even been lynched is just grabbing my attention like crazy. It's not that I don't take you seriously, it's just that I find some of the things you're pushing to be a bit shifty. Not only the seemer thing but also the "let's lynch the people around Made before we lynch him" which you must admit can be taken to look as if you're his teammate trying to buy him some time. I did trust you at first but I always want to trust you. Now I trust you less. If we finally lynch Made today (who I'll probably vote for unless something crazy happens) then the outcome of that will affect how I see you. At this point I'd probably still vote MM over you just because of my gut telling me he's bad. Maybe JC too though I'm beginning to turn away from her I think.

Made wrote: My dude Dennis with the sick suggestions that people apparently enjoy ignoring....

List of Smelly to Bath and Body Works' Fall collection
1. SVS
2. Mongoose
3. Bullz

What puts me at number 3? I don't recall you mentioning me as particularly suspicious before so I'm not sure how I'm suddenly the bronze medal winner.

S~V~S wrote:Maybe if everyone votes early, we can actually talk about something else

Linki @Dana~ if he comes up as a friend of Concorde, yes. Otherwise, i waffle. That was why I wanted to check out his support group before him, if they were bad, he likely is too. I was going to try to lynch Enrique or LC today, but fate/ninja/whatevs intervened and killed Enrique. So I am OK with moving forward with Made.

Why are you so sure of that though? I would assume that if Made is a civ (though I doubt it) all the baddies would be in love with him for keeping them safe for so long. We're on day four of him being a number of people's top suspect yet he's still alive and two civs have died instead of him so far.

juliets wrote:Here is my list - there has been some movement since the last list I made. Listed from most suspicious to least. Some of these are just gut vibes at this point and the numbers may not be exact. It's better to look at this as a bottom group, a middle group, and a top group. Some toward the top there has just been nothing so far on them but they are newish to the game:

1. made
2. boogs
3. reywas
4. bwt

I'm actually glad you've posted a list because it flies in the face of my main reasons for suspecting you. Have you ever mentioned why Boogs and Rey share the podium with Made, or what makes BWT number 4? I feel like you did mention Boogs at some point, or someone else did and I'm misremembering it as you, but I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on Rey and BWT. FWIW I'm not seeing BWT as bad. I feel like his baddie game is quieter and blendier than he is here.

thellama73 wrote:My ego refuses to let me believe that SVS would not have recruited me, so I think you are the recruiter, Made.

Hey guys, remember the last time Made was up for a lynch and he totally weasled his way out of it? Yeah, let's not let that happen again.

I agree with all of this. I also feel like SVS would've recruited me early if she could since I spent all of Fight Club wanting to get recruited and it only happened right at the very end of the game. Not that that confirms anything about her for me, just that she probably isn't a recruiter.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:^ This. Sorry, Dennis. But I'm not going through with making a list either.

Someone mentioned that the current debate probably isn't going away until either Made or SVS goes away. And while I'm eager to stick away from Made right now and look elsewhere, I think I have to admit that that is probably true.

However, I'm conflicted. Because Made's defense sounds to me like he's reached desperation mode, which normally reads baddie to me. But I also wonder why SVS flipped so quickly, and/or why she wasn't willing to vote for Made back on Day 3. In other words: was Enrique's alignment what really made her change her stance, or did she think Made was no longer useful to her cause.

Basically, I think there's a strong chance both of them are bad. But I can't decide which one I think is more bad.

I think we need to lynch Made tbh. I've gone back and forth on him all game and when I decided to trust him for a minute I ended up helping to lynch a civ. So much of the game has revolved around him that I think if we find out who he is, and he is bad, we will almost be guaranteed to lynch one of his teammates tomorrow. If he's civ, I think the baddies probably still wanted to keep him alive so it's possible even that will give us some good leads on where to go next.

As for a list, I'm not making one for the reasons others have said. I don't want to paint targets on the people I trust. I will however mention those I have little to no trust for: Made, JC, MM, SVS. In no particular order. I also feel like I've forgotten someone from that list so I shall double check and mention again if there is a fifth.

Dana wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:How about the other reasons to suspect JC that are floating around? The blendiness and such?

I trust Juliets quite a bit so we should probably lynch her, haha.

Hey you trusted me in Misfits as well and you weren't wrong!

S~V~S wrote: She's right though. Rox loves her some crazy mechanics, and Indies, and yeah, recruits.

I was 50% pointing out a funny coincidence and 50% seeing if Splints would overreact to me pointing out said coincidence and make me suspicious of her. I wasn't really saying it meant anything.

SVS wrote:And this is amazing, another baddie, no civvie NKs yet Bai Rico~BIH Baddie! so, then this means when Rico started defending Made, he was still a civ. That might lend credence to the notion that a baddie team with Made would recruit him.

This game is sort of backwards. Baddies are killing baddies at night and we're killing civvies by day. How about all the groups just agree to kill baddies from now on?

SVS wrote:Linki, is Juliets at the top of your list, Bullz? What about Made?

And lots of people might recruit Enrique, Dana. You, Made, Splints or JC, all from IRC. LC, me, Canuck, anyone who played back in the day. Or, and this is more likely, someone may have recruited him for strategy purposes, especially if Made was on the baddie recruiting team.

I think Dennis will be unhappy with my list because it might not be a list in the traditional meaning of the word. Spots will be shared. I'm not sure who I think is the most suspicious but JC will have a high up spot. Do you think Enrique could be the only recruit or might there be others? Sir Robin isn't a traitor in the film, just a coward, so I can't think of why he specifically would turn bad which makes me think it was a free choice rather than a 'find role x' type of recruit.

fingersplints wrote:

Dana wrote:

Mongoose wrote:I wanted to do a little watchful waiting after how the first attempt at a Made lynch went vote before last, but the MR mislynch didn't exactly inspire confidence. And as much as I hate to admit it, I think llama's searing indictment of Made is unsinkable.

I do think it's also very possible that Made would have recruited Enrique. It could also explain his defending of him at the start of the game and then distancing if they had become teammates. Though I'm still not entirely convinced Made is bad, and he also might not have taken the risk of recruiting someone we all know he knew well. It's probably also worth looking into who Enrique had played with years ago, because I think that's also pretty likely for a recruiter.

My first thought was juliets, from irc stuff. But I don't want to suspect her just because I think it's likely she could have recruited him.

How about the other reasons to suspect JC that are floating around? The blendiness and such?

fingersplints wrote: With the amount of players this game I would bet money that there are two teams. The last time I remember we tried to do a large mafia team (Pirates on TP - 5 person team) I think we both felt it was a little too easy for the mafia. I would say the mafia teams maybe START with 3. You are forgetting her love of recruits. Although, there is no reason the team numbers have to be the same. The last role copy list for AHS I saw I'm pretty sure had different numbers on each team with one of them having slightly better abilities to even out the extra member.

If two indies (SK like) have been killed, I'd say there are a couple neutrals alive. (good chance they might not stay neutral though).

Interesting coincidence. You mention Roxy's love of recruits then a little while later a recruit dies. Looks like you were right.

Wow, that's a surprising kill. Good result though, the baddies seem to be doing our work for us. Though, there are recruits in this game? That's ominous...

Canucklehead wrote:What is even happening.

Things. Also stuff. That's all I can tell.

Keterman wrote:Disguising, or as reality deems it, DISTRACTING from the complete lack of defense with a monumentally false provocation of sub-superiority awakened by the glamorous, aesthetically unwise boasts of a higher brow, all above the inevitable looming, closing shadow of cyberdeath. Well played, SVS.

Yes. I understand this. Definitely.

juliets wrote:S~V~S I'd like to hear a bit about how you think a seemer role would work in a game like this where you don't know any of the roles.

I would also like to hear about this. It seems to me that a seemer in this game could just make up any role they pleased. The format doesn't lend itself to such a role.

She won't kill you. The fire will.

Haha for some reason I thought I was replying to a post in the other game. My guess is Roxy will set you on fire for hinting at anything :P

Made wrote:For future note, is hinting that you have a curse/were forced to vote allowed?

Generally speaking, ask the host first. Sometimes you don't need to hint that you're cursed, me and Vomp were pretty obvious. MP hosted a game once where people whose votes were forced would die if anyone so much as guessed at it. So it varies from host to host basically, some will be more okay with it than others. MR allowed me to say I'd been forced in Misfits.

thellama73 wrote:Where did this whole seemer speculation even come from? Did I miss something, or was this just a completely random idea thrown out there for no reason that people are somehow taking seriously?

SVS decided Made is a seemer. Who is taking it seriously? No one but SVS seems to be in my opinion.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
I don't think you understand. I DO agree that there is more than one baddie team. The problem is that I'm being unjustifiably ridiculed for saying so while the same people, including you, are on board with the idea. Can you explain that one?

Where are you being ridiculed? I haven't seen anything like that.

Made wrote: Just a questions about Seemers (which i am not one of). Would they have a role that doesn't exist in the game or any role of their choosing? Because if they have the latter, they'd also need to know every single role that's in this game, which sounds a bit overpowered.

Seemers tend to appear as a civ role rather than their own. Generally they get to choose, but you bring up a good point here. A seemer presumably wouldn't know any civ roles (aside from the ones revealed so far which includes some that are alive). There is the possibility they'd just show up as a random civ but I don't think there is any reason to believe a seemer exists in this game. Personally I tend to only be open to the possibility if we're told one exists and don't like people assuming any old lynched civ is a seemer unless there's very good reason to because I think it's a weak as hell way to justify killing a civ.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Made wrote:hmm... I just realized something. If MP killed on even nights, and I'm correct in assuming there's only one mafia, then we might not have a kill tonight.

The Knight who says Ni might have a baddie partner who does the killing. Somebody killed Epi last night. Or there's a second mafia.

...here comes the French speculation...

Linki: Ok Enrique, first my post about the French pings you, and now you propose there is another mafia team to balance the game.

To be fair, most full games these days (and even a lot of speed games) feature more than one baddie team. It's not a huge leap to assume that here, especially when a baddie was NKed on the first night and we don't know exactly who by.

thellama73 wrote:I am actually stunned that you people let yourselves be manipulated so easily when the truth is staring you in the face.

Must be nice to always be right about everything and never make a single mistake. Obviously you're just better than everyone else.

S~V~S wrote: And no Llama, not on Mades team. Have you read my posts? I think he's bad. I also think Made's a Seemer. So I DON'T want to lynch him until we lynch someone around him, becasue he is still gonna be the main topic of conversation if he dies and flips civ. MR flipping civ convinces me of it more than ever. LC was more a placeholder vote for me (resetting the poll is a bitch on phone) becasue while I DO think he is bad, I have nowhere near the case built I would need to have. Besides you KNOW I hate hard distancing with a purple passion ever since WWE. I did it there against my will, and it helped me, but I hated it~ total WIFOM argument, but a true one. Between work, and getting a new tablet last night (squeeeee) I have not had as much online time as I would like, but have nothing better to do this weekend, other than my Saturday D & D game.

I feel like this whole seemer argument of yours is just so that when we inevitably lynch Made, if he flips civ you can say "I told you so, look, seemer through and through!".

Boogs wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Um I am not defending him. I want to start a discussion about his defenders tbh.

So you want us not to vote for Made (your teammate) and talk about the other defenders that probably will be the ones not with you two's team either and not about you too? Got cha SVS.

I am beginning to lose trust in SVS, but I think if both she and Made are bad they're probably on different teams. I think she's telling the truth when she talks about her hate for distancing.

thellama73 wrote:I've been suspecting SVS for some time now, but her attack on Made gave me pause, so I wanted to see how he flipped before coming out and exposing my feelings about her. In light of her not wanting to lynch him now (I don't know what evidence this "seemer" role theory is based on) and in light of the way the last lynch went down, I am absolutely convinced that she is bad. In fact, I would rather lynch her than Made tomorrow, because at this point I am more sure about her than I am even about him.

The evidence is SVS knows she's gone hard against Made so if he flips civ she wants to give herself something to fall back on, but if the 'theory' came out after his lynch it'd be too obvious.

Keterman wrote:I was the second to vote MR, blatantly providing reasons so vague it might as well have been a gut read. SVS shortly after switched her vote to MR. In her posts she was against Made, in her vote she was for Made. It's simple. They're teammates.

Hmm... This is an interesting point.

Keterman wrote:Why would SVS, an experienced mafia player, put her faith in the confidence of a player who had been almost completely inactive up until that very point, and with no evidence or solid reasoning to back up that confidence? Because she was looking for an opportunity to find a counterwagon so her teammate doesn't end up lynched. The obviously fake "awwww but Keterman was so confident" post after MR flipped town seals the deal.

I also agree with this. I did bring up with her that I hadn't thought you'd been as 'spot on' as she said in Misfits earlier. It does seem like she was putting the blame for her vote onto you as if it's your fault.

GOD wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:MERRILY MARVELOUS MYSTERY MOMENT

What is the sum of all people who got Zoot, Galahad, or Robin in the survey?

PM both hosts your guess.

I'm trying to respond to posts, and you and the LORB are distracting. grrr

Bullzeye wrote:
Sup God? I thought you didn't like grovelling? Thanks for the boon I find there are no words adequate enough to praise the glorious, wonderful, magnificent overlords that are our lovely hosts in this game.

The LORB may have a change of heart. Today I want groveling. And toast.

Well I'm out of bread and no shops are open at quarter to one in the morning so you'll have to ask someone else for toast.

I am going to vote for Magnificent Mountains because I enjoy going on walks and a mountain would be more fun for me to walk on than a meadow.

GOD wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:I wonder if the good Lord will show up tonight. I'm super tired so I hope I don't miss him. Or her. Whichever.

Ask and you shall receive

The LORB is returned. Having perused your offerings from the other night, I have decided to shine my light upon YOU, Bullzeye. I have granted you a boon. You will not know what it is until games end, but with luck you will benefit from it.

Since the only LORBS more Magnificent than I, DP & Roxy, have graciously allowed me to be here, I would like to see some words of praise for them. It may be in any form you like, but the more praiseful, the better. The next night I have a boon, I will extend it to the best praise of our Hosts.

THE LORB HAS SPOKEN

You may now grovel.

Sup God? I thought you didn't like grovelling? Thanks for the boon I find there are no words adequate enough to praise the glorious, wonderful, magnificent overlords that are our lovely hosts in this game.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: The way it went through my head was much different than you explained it here. Before I voiced a suspicion of Epi, I made a joke to him and he gave me a virtual finger. That bothered me, but then I thought that I may have taken the joke too far? I don't know. Then I made my statement later about his lack of activity, and again, a blunt response, and so I took it kind of emotionally and just left it alone. Then after seeing Epi's role after his death, I decided that maybe I was actually right, and had no reason to feel bad.

I realize after the last post that it that it might seem odd, but didn't feel like explaining it unless someone asked. Please don't look to deeply into it, as it was definitely a situation I didn't handle correctly, nor is it important to the game.

Fair enough. I will drop that point from my suspicion of you.

I wonder if the good Lord will show up tonight. I'm super tired so I hope I don't miss him. Or her. Whichever.

That's not good...

S~V~S wrote:Wow. That was not expected. And Keterman sounded so confident, he reminded me of him in Misfits, where he was fairly spot on, I thought.

What was he spot on about in Misfits? I don't really remember much from him in that game. He was a fairly quiet baddie as I recall.

A lot of people seem more convinced by the MR case than I was (though I do admit Made has some good points). I think I will move my vote to MR because my thoughts on MM are much weaker than the case against MR and I think we will learn something from this lynch.

Mongoose wrote:What is this, M is for Mafia? Without a sole exception, all of the vote-recipients have M-names.

Dial M for Mafia? This takes me back to the B is for Baddie days.

Not voting Made (at least for today) after Day 2's lynch debacle. That's a whole plate of shark tail I just can't wifom into right now, y'all.

Scanning like a madwoman and then voting so I can leave work, ha.

Oh god I remember B is for Baddie. That was awful. Didn't realise SVS began with M though :P

Made wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

Keterman wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Keterman voted MR, Teefies.

Does he have anything to add toMades case, I wonder?

Linki fest

You and Long Con are townies under the influence of dark spirrrritual forccces...

What on Earth does this mean?

The obvious interpretation is Long Con and SVS are being pitted against each other.

Well yeah but I feel like they've been against each other for longer than any outside force could make them be.

Keterman wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Keterman voted MR, Teefies.

Does he have anything to add toMades case, I wonder?

Linki fest

You and Long Con are townies under the influence of dark spirrrritual forccces...

What on Earth does this mean?

I'm going to place my vote on MM for now because I just can't shake my gut feeling about him.

So reading through Made's case on MR I think he had some decent ideas and I'll probably keep it in mind but I don't think it really pushes me to follow his vote there.

I also reread Juliets. I still hold that she seemed like she was trying to be blendy early on, she seemed like she was trying to stay under the radar and avoid being drawn into anything. Trying not to get on anyone's bad side in essence. Plus DF seemed to sort of half-heartedly defend her... I feel like she still is blendy actually, albeit to a lesser extent. A thorough readthrough of her posts shows that she seems to ask for opinions quite a lot but very rarely puts in her own. Probably around half of her posts from the past couple of days are "What/Why/Who do you think...". My suspicion of her remains.

As for MetalMarsh, I find his comment about the French to be quite pingy, for lack of a better term. It struck a chord when I first saw it and just gave me a bad vibe. I hadn't really thought of MM before that but the one assumption was enough to set my mind on him for whatever reason. He does seem to have done a fair bit of baddie hunting, and after day one has put himself out there. The only other thing that makes me wonder about him is a fairly minor thing but it's this:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I do not feel bad anymore for my speculation of Epi on Day 1. Goodbye Epi.

Initially I had misremembered this quote as suspicion instead of speculation but I think my opinion of it stays fairly the same. All he said about Epi was that it was strange he was so quiet, and then seemed to accept Epi's explanation for why that was. Throwing out a comment like this after Epi is revealed to have been an indy seems a bit shady to me, like he wanted credit for baddie-hunting or something? I don't know. I am suspicious of MM but the only case I can really come up with is shaky at best - based on vibes and a couple of comments I found relatively strange. It's more gut than anything at this point.

Made wrote:Organized by how much they wanted the booty
1. Canuck
2. Enrique (tho he's trying to separate himself from me might warrant him lower on the list)
3. Bea
4. Bullz
4. reywaS
5. BWT (Barely made the list, his lack of aggression towards me makes me think he think favorably of me, but could be me misinterpreting his caution of put me on the defensive.)

Night 2 is when most of my reinforcements arrived. Fucking fair weather friends...
I don't think i'm forgetting anyone, but iunno.

I still don't particularly trust you. I just think there are a lot of potential explanations and right now you're just as likely to be good as bad IMO so I'll probably stick with JC or take a look at MM after that ping from earlier.

nijuukyugou wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I like your sarcastic tone, Blooper, for what that's worth.

Apparently my students do, too. I think they might think I'm joking

I think it might be the only way I can vent without getting in trouble...

Sarcastic teachers are the best. I'm particularly fond of the ones who don't take shit and will rip into students for being lazy or misbehaving.

thellama73 wrote:Doesn't the fact that Made professes not to understand the theory somewhat undermine the theory?

Not if he hasn't seen the film.

Long Con wrote: In my scenario, you are a baddie, and you think it's more than likely Made will turn up Civvie... so you had better sow a seed of doubt a la Seemer into the mix. Then when you turn up with your fingerprints among the many others all over his lynch, we are supposed to think "Maybe he wasn't King Arthur/Sir Galahad/Sir Lancelot/whatever... he was probably a Seemer!"

Interesting that you bring this up, because whenever I see someone after a civ lynch saying that the person was probably a seemer I just automatically assume they're bad for some reason. I think it's because it always comes off to me as an hard-to-verify excuse for lynching a civ - "Oh what a shame such an important civ died and I helped kill them. Actually that person was soooo obviously bad, they must have been a seemer! It's okay everyone, don't worry, nobody here is responsible for a dead civ because he was actually bad all along!". That's all I see. I think part of it comes from a game on RM (Rey's one that didn't have a specific theme, just loads of characters he likes from various media) where two or three people in a row were all accused of being seemers and none were.

bea wrote: linki - LC - I would think the connection would have been explained in the *secrets* part for both parties. BTS or not - someone dying for you - or you dying for someone else seems to be something both roles would have been told.

Am I moving too far fetched to think that made could have been some other civ role that had a switch - like a mayor role? switched it to someone else - *that* person was lancolot and a person died? It feels like I'm working too hard to find a reason for Made to be a civ in this scenario.

I'm not saying this is definitely the case but... If you're a civ who knows another civ will die for you, and then that happens in an obvious way (such as them dying when you should have been lynched) might you not pretend to be unsure about what happened for your own protection? This made perfect sense in my head at first but as I type it out I become less certain.

Today I intend to reread MM and JC. I will probably vote for one of the two but I also want to look back on Made's case against MR and the LC-SVS conversation.

Made wrote:Welp, 20 hours are up, and i see we're still pretty much solely talking about me. Baller, didn't know I had you guys hooked THAT hard. Regardless...
Few things:
1. If there are players in this game that think i'm good, the best way to pursue my alivenessness is to question others and bring theories against them.
2. Read the pinging post against MM, as well as last (irl) night's arguments against Mongoose, I'll reread Mongoose and MM today and see where that leaves me.
3. It took me 2 hours to write my argument against MR. Does it seriously not resonate with anyone???

I still think we should listen to dennis and pursue quieter people. You could probably go to any of the 6 pages of post i've made this thread and find something interesting against me. What about those who weren't so talkative? MM and Mongoose are great starts, but we should continue with other quiet type people.

Gonna limit myself to less than 30 post before lynch in hope of facilitating new theories.

Don't feel you have to limit yourself. You might notice things nobody else has and if you're a civ your input is valuable regardless of how any lynch goes - if you get lynched and revealed as civ we will know that your insights were true and valid. Hopefully that doesn't happen though. I would say your best bet right now is definitely to hunt for baddies as much as you can.

juliets wrote:LC see below. This was the thought that got me thinking about made trying to distract from other members on his team. I was wrong about one thing though, this was on the same day that I commented so it was close in time to my comment.

Canucklehead wrote:Hey, all.
Just catching up and posting thoughts as I go.

1) I see Made has become the centre of Attention again. I am having a harder and harder time maintaining my earlier belief that he's just a whackadoodle civ. The main reason for this is because if I was on a baddie team with him, I'd be rejoicing because he's so successful at diverting the thread and keeping everyone's eyes just on him that it would allow his team a lot of freedom (and an easy distancing vote, if it came to that). Of course, the diversionary benefits still apply even if Made is a civ, so I'm back to square one. Basically, Made, if you are a civ, it might not be a bad idea to turn down the crazy and turn up the listening. There are an unknown number of baddies to find, and if you are a civ, you are currently distracting a lot of people from doing so.

LC has a point though. Made acting crazy to distract people from his team only makes sense if his team were already in danger. The whole kerfuffle with him began before anybody else in the game came under any real scrutiny.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Bullzeye wrote: I know they're in the film and aren't friendly. I just think it's odd you seem to assume they're the/a baddie team (and mention them specifically) when the only known baddie role has no affiliation with them.

There are 25 players in this game; the parity has to exist somewhere.

And no I'm not assuming that anyone who has BTSC is bad, I'm putting the idea up for discussion.

It just felt strange to me that of all the possibilities you came up with one specific one for a group of people. Nobody else seems to have picked up on it so maybe I'm just crazy but it's something I felt funny about so I brought it up.