The Syndicate

Btw FZ my post doesn't reflect on you. I'm not accusing you two of being teamies because of what Turnip said (although I do think you two could be teamies). I'm just baffled why someone wouldn't try to defend, say it would be best to remove them from the game, but then deny the same exact thing be done to you, who has also voted poorly.

Also, to be fair. I latched onto Sorsha's "case" on MM without even considering him before, and I was forced to vote sig, so I may have had just a bad a voting record as the two of you had unforeseen circumstances hadn't arisen.

I just can't believe Turnip's not even trying to defend himself! If you're town, dude, that will not be cool.

Turnip Head wrote:

Matt F wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

FZ. wrote:TH, look me in the eye :P
Are you bad?

I would never play this sloppy if I was. I do think it's worth lynching me though, from a numbers perspective we can afford it and I don't deserve to win this game. And otherwise I'm just gonna be a question mark the whole game and continue to derail the game with my bad decisions.

At least this will prove that I can play shitty as a civ :P

IF you feel you don't deserve to win as a civ because of your votes, would you say the same about FZ?

I would never say that about FZ, I <3 her and she always gives 100%.

If you think you don't deserve to win because you've voted Floyd in two lynches while defending bad guys, this is exactly FZ's behavior. What's the difference? Calling yourself a shitty civ, saying you don't deserve to win, "might as well lynch me and move on", but denying the same be done to FZ despite the same voting style...

I think I do encourage a TH lynch today over bea. Sorry my vote doesn't show that.

Turnip Head wrote:

FZ. wrote:TH, look me in the eye :P
Are you bad?

I would never play this sloppy if I was. I do think it's worth lynching me though, from a numbers perspective we can afford it and I don't deserve to win this game. And otherwise I'm just gonna be a question mark the whole game and continue to derail the game with my bad decisions.

At least this will prove that I can play shitty as a civ :P

IF you feel you don't deserve to win as a civ because of your votes, would you say the same about FZ?

bea wrote:Matt. I've said before all the polls end during dinner rush. Go back and look at my day 1 posts again. I got to the thread VERY late. I was trying to catch up and make a decison. No one was answering my questions and I did the best thing I knee to do since I didn't agree with the zebra vote and I had No clear understanding why the others were taking votes.

I'm at work now but trying to hold onto my vote as long as I can in case I have to save.

I hear ya but I still feel bad about you. I'm not going to write out millions of posts though as I usually do, but I do believe you're on team Harkonnen.

Understandable about holding onto your vote in case you have to save, but in a scenario that wasn't the case, who are you looking at today?

Btw Mac, I don't count my "self vote" as a real self vote. Nobody else in either game can possibly tell if this is for real (for all I know peeps suspect us of having btsc in one of the games), but I was frustrated with your actions and acted rashly Day 1.

Had you not have done what you did, I wouldn't have self voted. And if the vote was changeable in this game, I would've changed it.

MacDougall wrote:

Matt F wrote:I was about to vote for Turnip, but he already has a few votes and I believe he'll most likely be lynched today.

If people want an alternate candidate, I suggest bea.

One self-vote, one no vote, and a day where she was pushing to save sig, in my eyes.

Happy to see either of them lynched today.

I agree with your candidate but your thought process to get there is a head scratcher considering you self voted and also didn't want sig lynched despite being vote forced. A lot more than bra have missed votes. I would like to see her lynched too but if these are your only reasons I question your authenticity. If you are lynching someone for voter behavior how can you go past TH or FZ?

It isn't just missing votes. On Day 1, bea self voted when she could've quite possibly pushed sig into a three way tie with the other two candidates. On Day 2, she wasn't around all day (although she does say it was because of work, I'll admit) when MM was lynched. On Day 3, she made about 6 or 7 posts practically screaming at people to tell her why sig was bad.

On top of that, I have non-thread related reasons to suspect bea, but I don't blame you for not trusting those.

Again, I would be happy with a TH lynch as well. His comments today regarding "It may be best if ya all just lynch me" do not say "civvie" to me.

I was about to vote for Turnip, but he already has a few votes and I believe he'll most likely be lynched today.

If people want an alternate candidate, I suggest bea.

One self-vote, one no vote, and a day where she was pushing to save sig, in my eyes.

Happy to see either of them lynched today.

FZ. wrote:

Matt F wrote:FZ - Well duh you're on there

You think bea, Turnip, and Zeebs are on the up and up?

I don't know about Bea. If SVS is good, I want to trust her on Bea, even though she's wrong about me.
I think TH is a better player than just saving all his baddie team so obviously.
Zebra, I started out thinking she was okay, then went to bad, and back to good lately. I don't really know why I've gone back and forth with her, but at the moment, that's how I'm feeling.

Ask me again in two hours

Per the underline. In the recent games I've been playing, players always say stuff like "Why would they so blatantly defend so and so?" My feeling on the matter, is that blatantly defending your teammates is the new smart move to make, because nobody will think you did.

But that isn't just it. Turnip's recent comments like "Maybe it'll just be best for the game if I die" and such does not say civvie to me.

Linki - I can see what you're saying, Zeebs. I've tried to keep an open mind after my play in TH. Trying not to tunnel so much.

Back in the day, I guarantee you I would've been all over SVS simply for refusing to listen to reason regarding me, but again, trying to play a little differently.

I swear I'm a good egg, though! Swearsies!

FZ - Well duh you're on there

You think bea, Turnip, and Zeebs are on the up and up?

Lol

Why do you think I'm bad? Cuz I keep twirling my mustache?

Zebra!! I just realized you listed me as bad.

FZ. wrote:By the way, so did you, TH. You wrote fail


linki: I'm still trying to figure out whether SVS' suspicions are just tunnelling and bad or is she bad herself. For some reason, I tend to look at people suspecting me as civvies. It's stupid, but I'm biased that way.

When I'm a civvie, I tend to think everyone suspecting me as baddie. One of my flaws.

I'm giving SVS the BOTD because I have been asking some weird shit.

Turnip Head wrote:

FZ. wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Turnip Head

indi

You broke the rules

She couldn't bring herself to name her partner bad.

Linki Zeebs - Sweet.

So what do we do now?

Sorsha - Was surprised you listed SVS as bad. Just a feeling or anything else to go with that?

a2thezebra wrote:S~V~S

TheFloyd73

Turnip Head

GOOD BUT WRONG

GOOD

BAD

a2thezebra wrote:NANANANANANA_BANANA

nijuukyugou

Sorsha

GOOD

UMMMMM GOOD

SUPA GOOD

a2thezebra wrote:Golden

Luke11646

MacDougall

Matt F

UMMMM GOOD

GOOD

GOOD

BEST THEORIST EVER

a2thezebra wrote:a2thezebra

bea

Elohcin

FZ

BAD

BAD

GOOD

BAD

Lol Already 3 baddies

Zebra, if you're using the poll as a roster, don't forget to include Golden.

Lol @ Turnip

I'm down. Who's here? Zebra, FZ, Turnip? Is Sorsha still around?

Turnip Head wrote:I'm not quitting FZ, I just really don't know how to defend my actions and don't have much energy to try. I feel like everyone has a better grasp on this game than I do and I don't know if I'm even helping. Maybe the best thing for the game is to lynch me and move on.

Okay. I'm having a hard time seeing you as civvie with these continued comments.

Holding my vote for now, but Turnip just shot to the top of the pack of my suspicions.

Turnip Head wrote:Yes, it is truly hilarious how badly I've played this game. I would not even know where to start defending my actions. I would not be surprised if I were unanimously lynched today, and that's what I deserve.

Turnip Head wrote:This has got to be Top 5 in my worst civ performances of all time. I'm not a player who earns a lot of trust so I know I'm always on a short leash. I can't be this wrong about everything and expect people to still trust me.

This is the worst game I've ever played if I'm scum. I've left no wiggle room when I've been on the wrong side of two scum lynches when they were both practically handed to us, and I point blank defended both of them.

So I've made my peace with being lynched for my sins. My body is ready.

Underline 1 - If you are civ, you better start soon.

Underline 2 - If you are civ, you are hurting the town by giving up.

That being said, these two posts do not make me feel good about you at all. I was leaning more towards FZ and zebra (oh and bea, but it looks like peeps will be trusting SVS on that one), but I think another look at your ISO is needed after these two posts.

Luke11646 wrote:

bea wrote:Luke! You are here! What do you think about...well...everything....

Linki sorsha. That's a fair point as well.

I think that one of the forced voters is the one that forced the other two to vote and voted to make it look like they were forced to vote as well, also Bea really wanted to save sig and he turned out to be bad, Matt F made a good case on her pointing that out.

Lol

I like Luke

Golden, funny you said that. I've been secretly struggling, hoping to goodness that Sorsha wasn't just bussing MM this whole time lol. I don't think so though.

bea wrote:God knows this wouldn't be the first time I was a fool in a mafia game...

I'm waiting for the first time I'm not a fool in a mafia game.

In case SVS cares to discuss this...
If not, she can go on hurting the town by refusing to acknowledge that her case if seriously flawed.

Mac, is this how it feels to deal with me?

S~V~S wrote:

Elohcin wrote:Dear God this autocorrect. I think TH and bea ARE bad. There.

I very seriously think Bea is not bad; on a scale of 1 to 10, I would give it a nine. I do think Matt is bad, though.

(not much I can do since you won't answer my rebuttal)

bea wrote:Matt. I have no reason to believe any of those things because I have no nefarious intentions. If I was blocked last night, that wasn't the reason there weren't any kills.

In the case you seem to be implying (that I am a killer who was blocked - let's not dance around it k? I like plain, clear and simple.)
A + B does not = C.

If you believed I was blocked, maybe I was. The host did not inform me if I was or not. But my potential blocking has nothing to do with the lack of kills last night.

Who's dancing around? I feel I'm being pretty straight forward.

Anywho, your willingness to answer my inquiries is cool beans. I did not take into consideration that you were working the pizza/football storm.

Who are your top suspects today?

Besides you, I like FZ, zebra, TH in that order.

S~V~S wrote:

Matt F wrote:Btw, Happy Birthday dudette

Okey dokey. Subtlety is a word I've yet to find in my dictionary, but I will reread to see what's up. I do believe I remember you predicting there would be more votes for sig later in the day, and then SVS comes in with the vote change, so there's that.

Yes, and the host confirmed that he allowed it~ he had to change the poll options to allow it

Lol. i wasn't suggesting anything nefarious on your part. Just stating Eloh's "prediction".

bea - I knew you were in the restaurant biz, but it didn't register with pizza/football storm. M'bad.

bea - Do you have reason to believe your target was protected last night? Do you have reason to believe that someone may be blocking you?

I didn't realize...did you mean you were working via "pizza/football storm" ? I took that to mean you were chillin' out at home, watchin' football and eatin' pizza.



Be back in a bit.

Btw, Happy Birthday dudette

Okey dokey. Subtlety is a word I've yet to find in my dictionary, but I will reread to see what's up. I do believe I remember you predicting there would be more votes for sig later in the day, and then SVS comes in with the vote change, so there's that.

bea wrote:

Matt F wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

No one has been killed.

It is now Day 4. You have 48 hours to lynch someone.

bea, does this outcome surprise you? Who do you think was targeted, if anyone?

I'm pretty happy about no kills. I'm not sure why you ask if that suprises me? It's not completely uncommon for a pm to not get sent in or for a kill to get blocked. Are you asking who I think was targeted for a kill? I have no idea.

I would think the target is Sorsha. How could it not be? Especially after all of the target painting.

Looking forward to your thoughts on my case. Why does SVS vouch for you?

Elohcin wrote:And I see no mention of MM in her posts whatsoever.

At one point, I believe she "channels MM" and asks a player (forget which one) if they are bad or not. Otherwise, no, she didn't mention him to my knowledge either. And was also conveniently absent all day for his lynch.

Eloh - Why do Golden and Sorsha vouch for you?

Rereading SVS "I am not" (considering a bea vote) and "I feel very strongly bea is not on a baddie team"



If you are basing that on more then a hunch, then I will listen to reason (I know, unheard of right?). If you are basing that on me making a case on her, and you thinking I'm bad, then I would ask that you reconsider.

Which one?

a2thezebra wrote:

Matt F wrote:I know this is going to sound crazy guys, but believe it or not, I have actually used my computer, eaten food, AND watched TV at the same time.

Right, but have you ever felt obligated to?

Listen, I'm not saying bea does not have the right to a pizza/football storm. We all have that right. It just seems curious that the day after she self votes, she doesn't vote at all. Also, I'm very much leaning civ on SVS right now, but considering she was absolutely wrong on me, I'm not inclined to simply trust her on bea.

For real.

On top of that, does nobody think it odd that bea was asking me to divulge more information regarding Sorsha/lie detector ("Why do you think she has a lie detector?"), then a day or two later infers I was "crossing a line" ?

Anyway, not gonna get crazy on this. I really feel like I want to, but then Mac might have an aneurysm. I've laid out my case. I would like bea to respond to it.

Looking over the polls...

bea self voted Day 1. If I'm correct, the only confirmed meta we have on Bea, re: self voting, is a game where she was bad, right? I believe Mac asked her for a game where was civ and self voted, and bea said...

bea wrote:I honestly feel like my time would be better spent looking at this game than searching all the games I've played to find an example.

On Day 1, the leading candidates were Zebra 1.0 (civvie), Eloh (currently Golden/Sorsha believe her to be civ aligned, correct?) with three votes a piece, and sig with two votes. So, one civvie, one potential civvie, and one baddie were bea's choices. She self-votes instead.

On Day 2, bea missed the vote completely. This is the day that MM was lynched. In response to missing the vote...

bea wrote:I'm very sorry I missed the vote. My sunday got away from me in a storm of football and pizza.

Did anyone challenge bea on this? The day phase after she self votes, she misses a vote where Mafia is successfully lynched. Because of the football/pizza storm. I know this is going to sound crazy guys, but believe it or not, I have actually used my computer, eaten food, AND watched TV at the same time. I know it sounds wild, but it's true.

On Day 3, bea pushes Floyd into a tie with sig. But I'm not surprised, after all, this is what bea had been saying about sig all day...
The above looks like a bea who really does not want sig lynched. Like, really bad doesn't want him gone. Before hearing "Why would bea cry so hard over a teamie?", can I at least get an agreement that this looks like a bea who really does not want sig lynched?

You know what else interests me about bea, btw?

After our convo last night, where bea was telling me how I crossed the line "target painting" Sorsha, I found this post...

NOVEMBER 3RD, 3:44 AM

bea wrote:

Matt F wrote:Where's Sorsha? Hey Sorsha, since for some inexplicable reason the Harkonnen didn't kill you, here are a couple of quotes for you...

I am civ. I don't have btsc. I am town aligned. I root for the townies. Townies are my best friend.

Take any or all of those and report back so Golden and Mac can get off my back, please.

I'm sorry if this has been addressed, but it stands out to me.
Why do you think Sorsha has a lie detector role?

Am I dreaming? This looks like bea asking me why I think Sorsha has a lie detector role. She even apologizes if it's already been addressed, but in case it hasn't, she'd like to know why I think Sorsha has a lie detect role. By asking me that, I'm assuming she expected me to answer and give her the reason why I thought that?

What a weird question from someone, who two days later would tell me I "crossed the line" in regards to Sorsha. I mean, you would think, bea would not have asked me to dive further into my reasoning regarding Sorsha and having a lie detect. Right?

Anyway, the self-vote Day 1, the no vote Day 2 because of pizza/football storms, and the push tie vote for Floyd Day 3 really make me wonder where bea stands.

Tomorrow I will look up ISO's on sig and MM to see where they were on bea, unless someone would like to help me with that? Anyway...

Toodles!

Golden wrote:The return of matt f and his oddly specific questions

Epignosis wrote:

No one has been killed.

It is now Day 4. You have 48 hours to lynch someone.

bea, does this outcome surprise you? Who do you think was targeted, if anyone?

Looking at the polls, I see both FZ and Turnip Head voted for Floyd on the days that MM and sig are lynched (both days these votes helped push Floyd into a tie with the Harkonnen folk).

Do we think one of these players is on Harkonnen or is it just unfortunate voting on their part? I will ISO both, but as we all know, who knows what kind of crazy shit I'll come up with, what does everyone else think?

S~V~S wrote:Matt, I am sorry, but your tone was pretty condescending IMO, so I reacted to it that way. I dislike being condescended to in the extreme, so sorry if i got snarky. Just becasue I dislike something is no reason for me to behave poorly.

"There are alot of flaws with your case. Do you see what they are?" is like you're talking to a little kid, though.

And no, I like my "case" (and it isn't a case, I seldom make cases, I make observations, which is not the same) just fine. It is based on what I know of this game; based on day & night results, and knowledge of my own role. I am not asking other people to follow it, but I do plan to do so.

Well, I didn't think I was talking to a little kid. I pointed out to you what I felt was wrong with your "case", and then I asked if you saw it too. Didn't know that meant I was implying you were a little kid. Really I have no idea where that came from. Just in this very thread, bea and Golden are saying "Don't you see what we're saying?" to me regarding target painting, that does not mean I believe they are calling me a little kid.

Anyway, you continue to refuse to answer questions about your "case" or "observations"...

If I'm correct, you believe I'm Team Harkonnen because you think I had knowledge of MM poisoning you. You also believe that poisoning would take a few days to kill, not just on one night. And yet, you originally were pinged by my question of you "Were you secure in the knowledge that you wouldn't be killed N1?". How does my question (asking you about surviving on N1) correlate with a poison role that takes a few days to kill you? How? Please, answer this, and without resorting to acting like I'm calling you a little kid. How does this make sense in your case or observations?

You also are one of the folks accusing me of target painting Sorsha. Again, if your name is not Floyd, Luke, or Banana, then if you've been keeping up with the thread, you absolutely knew Sorsha had an info role, and she was using it to kill the bad guys. She brought that on herself. Did I add onto it? Perhaps, but only when I felt I was backed into a corner by Golden and Mac, who were accusing me of whoknowswhat because I dared to take an educated guess that there may be other kills then on Team Harkonnen. It's not as if I said "Oh hey Sorsha, nice lie detector power, that must be useful." In defending myself against Golden/Mac's (IMO) baseless accusations, I rashly wrote up a quick post asking Sorsha to check me. Was it dumb? Yes. M'bad. Did I "target paint" her? No way she did that to herself.

So, these are two things from your "case" or "observations" about me that I find flawed. Do you agree or not, and please, why?

Woke up and saw this, wanted to quickly respond.

bea wrote:
ok matt. you are right. you did nothing wrong and I'm a silly fool for trying to point out how I think other people could misconsture your potential civness. You absolutely did nothing wrong and I was completely wasting time and barking up the wrong tree to try to say at all how I think you are civ and that you also MAY have maybe overstepped. That was my bad. I should know by now to let everyone just play their own game. Forgive me please.

I don't know why you're pulling this, I've said several times I see your and Golden's point. I don't think you're a silly fool, where did that come from? Feels like earlier when SVS implied I thought she was an idiot. For real?

But, in Sorsha's case, I do not believe I personally "target painted" her. By the time I said anything, anyone who is paying attention this game figured she had an info role. In fact, anyone who says "after MM was lynched, I had no gosh darn clue that Sorsha may have an info role", whoever says that is a liar unless their names are Floyd, Luke, or Banana. Plain and simple. It is unwarranted to say I target painted her. Whether you are trying to point out my civvieness or not.

Anywho, I get what you and Golden are saying. I have stupidly "target painted" before, I believe, in the TH game regarding Elohcin's role. After awhile I realized what I was doing and by that point, I already did it like 7 times so eff it. But in this game, regarding Sorsha? Unwarranted. She target painted herself.

bea wrote:I agree Golden. The last game on her site we played together, we were both civs being manipulated by other baddies. I still want to give her the chance to respond, but at this point, I don't see how today can't be about talking about her. Or blooper tbh.

linki - matt- I don't see how you don't think you did it? If she implied something - she did that, you assigning a role to her hint makes the target bigger. I don't see why you don't think you did that? And matt, I say this as someone who's crossed the line more times than she can count, if she has that role and if you said something that could have outed that role, you did not do her more subtle hint service. Even if you correctly assume the baddies saw the same things you saw.

I still don't think you are necessarily bad, but you have to see what I'm saying right?

In any event, at the moment, I'm more concerned about finding the things we agree on than finding the things I think you might have played wrong. Focusing on the latter feels like civs running in circles tbh. We can philosophically agree to disagree and let shorsha and svs chime in about how they feel they have been treated. Sound good?

One last post.

Yes, I've stated, and again I will state, I see what you're saying. I think Sorsha would agree that most of the players (assuming they are paying attention, you got me there though who knows?) figured she had an info role, and she used it to get a bad guy. Before I "target painted" her by "assigning her a role". Which I did not btw, I assigned her a role power. For all I know, she could be a bad guy that isn't Harkonnen.

Alright tired now. Peace

Golden and Zebra are besties again. Lol.

On that note, I'm out. Peace

Golden/Bea - I understand what you mean by target painting, I just don't think I did it. In fact, I would say Sorsha target painted herself, not only by her "case" on MM, but also the direct hinting of her role power in the thread (I think Sorsha knows what I'm talking about, and I won't show what I mean unless she disagrees). I think it's extremely unfair to say I target painted anyone.

The cases are in my ISO, bea, but the gist...

FZ - Strongly opposed MM and sig lynches. Like, strongly. So much so that it makes you think there's no way she's bad. But I dunno.

Zebra - The opposite, at least with MM. Ignored case completely, then 20 minutes before the vote ends, pipes in with a "MM prolly ain't bad". Painted sig bright green on rainbow list. Said the "only way" sig is bad is if his team did this to sig on purpose to try and throw us off, then called that "silly".

Turnip - I don't even remember, that seems like ages ago lol.

It's all in the ISO, though, if ya get drunk enough.

Also, this isn't just to bea, but to everyone. Can we all agree that long before I "target painted" Sorsha, it was clearly known (or at least pretty much figured) that she had some kind of info role? I know that happened, I'm not imagining it. Thanks.

a2thezebra wrote:I've already acknowledged all those things. The possibility of bussing seemed to slip your mind.

No, it didn't slip my mind. It's 100% untrue, though, so that's why I don't consider it.

As for acknowledging all of those things, that's fantastic, but IMO, you're right behind FZ as far as top suspects go.

Not sure what to make of your Team Fremen comment, and if that's true, we are not against each other in this game, but I would suggest that your behavior towards the two confirmed mafia is a lot more suspect then mine, even with bussing existing.

a2thezebra wrote:Bussing exists, Matt.

Yes, it does. You know what else exists? My case regarding you and MM earlier, as well as you painting sig bright green on your rainbow list.

bea wrote:1 I can maybe believe that you had no idea that nefarious things were happening to SVS. But really svs is a pretty standard N1 target for like all SORTS of things. Civ and baddie alike.

2 That said, you asked her a specific question about her safety and you refuse to answer why you asked it of her. You ask her and everyone else to just believe and trust you. Can't you see why we might be a little suspicious of it?

3 I don't think you are so dumb as to have targeted her then asked her about it when it failed. BUT, I think pressing her about it, if it was a failed target - is trying to make her out herself in ways I'm not sure I'm comfortable wih - and if you wanted to know about failed targets - you prolly should have asked The Host - first. In the thread. So you had something to work with or not.

4 But - between your specific role assignment to sorsha and your specific questions to svs - I can't shake the feeling that you are asking for info neither of them prolly should give without breaking the game. And I can't see why anyone would do that.

5 If you are town aligned and you want to focus on someone - focus on people you have thread evidence you think might be bad. I swear I'll read it at least once and if I don't understand it I'll ask you questions.

Bea, I'm not sure what you're getting at with some of this, let's go through it.

1 I didn't know SVS was a standard night1 target. My second game back after two years, first being THeads, and SVS didn't play that one. But yes you can absolutely believe I knew nothing about targeting.

2 I can see why anyone would be suspicious of it. Hence the warning when I asked the question, "This is going to sound weird but..." I knew going in asking that question that it was weird. I acknowledged this. However, I didn't anticipate that people would believe I had something to do with SVS, and then think I would straight up ask her about it in the thread. Until she told me she had been poisoned, I didn't even know she had been targeted. As for telling you why I asked it, not gonna happen. Epignosis has already expressed bad things happening with roleclaiming stuff, and even if he hadn't, I still wouldn't say why I asked the question.

3 I didn't press anything, bea! I asked her a question. She answered, I was like "cool beans" and that was that. As for asking the host questions about targeting at that time, I had no reason to because I HAD NO IDEA she had been targeted. No idea. All I wanted to know is if she was secure in the knowledge that she wouldn't be killed on Night 1. She answered. I was like "sweet". No pressing.

4 I know I'm not going crazy, right? I mean, it was greatly speculated in the thread that Sorsha had an info role before I asked her to check me out, right? She even said "I'll probably die tonight now", right, because she had given herself away as an info havin' civvie? I'm pretty sure all that happened before I "target painted" Sorsha. C'mon. As for SVS, again, it was just a question. She answered. I thought it was over, then she started suspecting me. Didn't press her. Didn't know she had been targeted.

5 I have presented cases against Turnip Head, FZ, and Zebra. I also suspect Golden. Not sure why you even said that lol

Anywho, wow I'm tired. For someone who helped vote away two mafia (yes one was forced, but I also expressed my feeling he was bad while it was happening), I'm sure getting a lot of looks my way. That ain't cool, peeps.

Golden wrote:No, civ-aligned civ. CIV. Not indy. Not bad. It's just a maybe, but I'm upgrading you. Pending other things happening. Mac's idea could have merit too, I suppose.

SVS case might be wrong, but I thought it was pretty decent. I don't blame her for feeling the way she does about you. You have done odd things in respect of her and I assume you and she have more info about whatever it is that your questions and responses pertain to than I do.

Oh, my bad. I thought you had a typo when saying "civ aligned civ".

I approve of your upgrade!

SVS' case is wrong. I understand where she's coming from, it was a weird question, and also I had no idea that she had been poisoned. But I did not target her with a kill or poison, and I do not know if anyone else did either.

What really gets me is, I asked her about feeling secure about Night 1 specifically. Then she turns it around, saying that I knew she was poisoned, which would according to her take a few days to kill her. So how does that correlate with me asking about Night 1 specifically? That is the biggest hole, IMO. Waiting on her answers to my questions, though, in case she decides to pursue.

Anywho, I may be back, but I'm gonna go check up on the other game for a sec.

Linki - Mac, I don't know how many enemies there are in the game, I know of one group for sure that needs to be eliminated, and thankfully we''ve already lucked out getting two of them. Also, are you seriously telling me that you never once assumed a different faction besides Harkonnen might have kills?

Again, you're wrong about my role. Wish I could take credit for today, but I can't bub.

Golden - I've been suspicious of him since way back on Day 1, when he said he'd pull back on the Zebra hunch day 2 if it didn't pan out Day 1. Surprised the heck outta me because he was doing everything in his power to get her lynched, if I recall.

SVS - I find it suspicious that she latched onto the MM case without giving him a chance to answer. Yes, before you ask, I realize we caught a bad guy with that one. Then today, before she realizes her mistake I guess, she again votes for someone (me!) without giving them a chance to defend. That doesn't look good, no matter how you cut it. However, she seems to think I was target painting her for the bad guys, and with that defense, I feel she might be civ or civ aligned.

Either way, her case is wrong. Your case is wrong. Golden is the only one who is correct, civ aligned civ.

I'd like to remind people that I voted MM giving Sorsha the BOTD. I also encouraged several players (among them Luke and FZ) to also vote MM.

Today, despite being forced, I also questioned whether sig was even a good guy despite the forced votes. If I recall, the player who called that idea silly was Zebra, who I also still find suspicious btw.

Linki linki linki