The Syndicate

Cobalt wrote:AFTER ALL THAT SHIT YOU GUYS LET LONG CON'S TEAM WIN

GIOESHDFFIODAHOFWGRSFIOVHBWEKNGBFSODWEDGJSFV

Oh, hey Cobalt - I almost forgot that this was the same game you were in! Thanks for the congrats!

S~V~S wrote:LAs Twilight game. You made a list of roles and discussed them as you do, and I was like (with my own role, lol) "Hey, you shouldn't blow that role off. It's really powerful". Lord was I weak

I remember that one specifically becasue it was the Coxie game, the one where the civvies kept her alive (she was my teammate) so the kill would not pass.

If we could find someone (since danhm is just not gonna do it) who knows SQL, then there's a chance we could get The Piano back online. Even just as a historical reference.

S~V~S wrote:It was my fifth or sixth, maybe. And I got lynched Day One, lynch led by Long Con

I was so horrible, lol.

HOW DO YOU REMEMBER THIS STUFF?? Which game was it?

I think I had to wait until my 8th or 9th game to be bad.

Dom wrote:I want to thank everyone who has said they enjoyed the game.. I'm glad you all enjoyed it!

Why did our killed get redirected on Night 2?

Epignosis wrote:There's more to it than that, but I will keep the rest to myself.

Fair enough. I know you have excellent Mafia instincts, and that I'm often a pretty sloppy player... I just know that when I wrote the statement that you saw as a way to implicate you and MP, that such a thing was not on my mind when I said it.

Epignosis wrote:

Long Con wrote:

FZ. wrote:If it makes you feel better, I get killed almost every game, and never win when it happens. But I feel bad for you knowing that every time you put so much into being a civ, you end up losing late in the game. This is Flash all over. The annoying part is, we did take out all the active mafia players. It's hard to judge players who substitute a non active player so late in the game. In my opinion, the Flash win was more impressive.

The Flash win was one of the most impressive wins in Mafia history, to be quite honest and to toot our own horn. A baddie team that won without a kill. Next to impossible.

Epi, I don't know why they NK you. The difference between your first and second version was striking. I thought you did a good job making sure it was obvious.

I don't know why Webber killed Epi on Night 1, but we tried to kill him on Night 2 because he was after me hard on a whim on Day 1, and we were happy to see him go because of it. Only some crazy random happenstance allowed him to keep breathing on Day 3 and beyond. If Epi wants to survive longer, the first step would be not to come after Long Con hard for no real reason on Day 1. People die for that. Good to know for the future.

You used empty rhetoric ("I find the MP / Epi thing interesting and would like to see how that plays out.")

That indicated to me that you were bad, and pushing it confirmed that for me. It wasn't a whim. It was observing your language. It wasn't something you would ordinarily say. It gave you license to vote either MP or me if things went that way, then you could fill in the blank later.

To you tell you the truth, I was a little shocked that you were that obvious.

That was something I would have said were I Civvie, Indy, baddie, or something else. You could come after me every time for a statement like that, and you will end up getting lucky some of the time. It was simply my thoughts on the very few things that had happened on Day 0, not some setup for "a license" to come after either of you at some point.

Scotty wrote:Can't wait to try and take you down a peg or two the best game we play.

I look forward to it - both of us, our best games!

That analogy is pretty bang-on. I love to gaze upon my accomplishments. I mean, this was by far S~V~S' game, but I made a significant difference for my own smaller part. My signature is supposed to be a rotating Flash banner of my past winner's banners, but the Syndicate and the Flash loading thing aren't agreeing right now.

I get pegged down often enough.

FZ. wrote:If it makes you feel better, I get killed almost every game, and never win when it happens. But I feel bad for you knowing that every time you put so much into being a civ, you end up losing late in the game. This is Flash all over. The annoying part is, we did take out all the active mafia players. It's hard to judge players who substitute a non active player so late in the game. In my opinion, the Flash win was more impressive.

The Flash win was one of the most impressive wins in Mafia history, to be quite honest and to toot our own horn. A baddie team that won without a kill. Next to impossible.

Epi, I don't know why they NK you. The difference between your first and second version was striking. I thought you did a good job making sure it was obvious.

I don't know why Webber killed Epi on Night 1, but we tried to kill him on Night 2 because he was after me hard on a whim on Day 1, and we were happy to see him go because of it. Only some crazy random happenstance allowed him to keep breathing on Day 3 and beyond. If Epi wants to survive longer, the first step would be not to come after Long Con hard for no real reason on Day 1. People die for that. Good to know for the future.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Long Con, how did you like Cobalt and I going after your bacon on Day 0/Day 1?

Hilarity.

Also hilarious that you jerks had to wait until you knew I was not going to be around to lynch me.

It's like you knew that, had I been around, I would have never let you vote me out. You know it's true. I don't blame you folks for taking the coward's way out. Too bad I didn't have to survive to win. My ghost literally saved S~V~S' life and subsequently secured our baddie win.

Next time, you'd better kill me so hard that my identity gets erased from the forum.

My Day 1 vote was a grudge vote from Flash. :P

My Day 1 case was fabricated as hell. I even backed off of TinyBubbles before you were lynched.

But hey, after a couple days, you still weren't looking so hot, so I figured I must be right.

OH yeah, I wasn't "looking so hot". You must mean the awesomely real cases that connected me to TinyBubbles, sig, Cobalt, or whoever the other player was that I had no connection to.

Every single case made against me was made up and wrong. The only people who can even come close to saying they had a legitimate case against me were the people who suspected me "on gut".

Golden wrote:

Oh, another thing LC - did you legitimately think I was on team webber, or were you thinking it was simply an advantageous feud?

I think we knew you were Indy at that point. By the way, we never targeted you for the kill on Night 2. We targeted Epignosis, and somehow it was redirected to you while you were protected. Just in case Scotty thinks he has great instincts for predicting the baddie team's kill... well, not that time. Pure, crazy luck.

Golden wrote:I have to admit, the Flash popped through my mind in that final day as I was thinking about the fact that whatever decision I made could determine whether LC/BR backed up and won another game together.

I still can't get over the fact that somehow every baddie team Bass is in wins.

Bass was Indy in Flash, not part of our team. This is the third game this year that Black Rock and I have gotten to a win together and basically brought Bass along for the ride. It's crazy!

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Long Con, how did you like Cobalt and I going after your bacon on Day 0/Day 1?

Hilarity.

Also hilarious that you jerks had to wait until you knew I was not going to be around to lynch me.

It's like you knew that, had I been around, I would have never let you vote me out. You know it's true. I don't blame you folks for taking the coward's way out. Too bad I didn't have to survive to win. My ghost literally saved S~V~S' life and subsequently secured our baddie win.

Next time, you'd better kill me so hard that my identity gets erased from the forum.

Golden wrote:(And LC - I think you winning with me is kind of fitting, all things considered, eh?)

I couldn't be happier. I've been here all along, discussing things with S~V~S as we went along.

S~V~S wrote:I had 2 powers; a role check/power steal (hee hee) and a protect. Once the rest of the team was dead, I protected myself every other night. I was going on the wrong night due to just the way it worked out before Bass died, but LC suggested I skip a few nights and reset the protect schedule so i would be protected when the other team killed like right before they tried to kill me.

I had to protect my own interest... in winning!

Golden wrote:I figured she had won the role check, seen I was indy, and realised she didn't need me dead to win.

Nope... that was us!

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:What I want to know is how all the survivals came about?

Mafia can't win without kills. That was insane.

Not true. We won Flash Mafia without kills.

Golden wrote:If there is one thing this game has taught me, its that as a mafia some thought should actually be given to nightkilling inactives. It's always going to be hard to justify, though, but it's made me realise there are potential benefits to it.

Agreed! After we killed MM and Ninjablooper was talking about how Devin and Gumshoe couldn't be the baddie that was left, I thought we had made a terrible mistake. Fortunately, there was just enough doubt left out there to squeeze this victory out!

On Night 4, we targeted our teammate Bass for a kill while protecting him, to get him some cred. That was the night that Dom was feeling rushed or something, and he just made a post where "no one died". We were like "WTF?!" because why faux-kill a teammate if it won't even be known that we did it? So Dom made up for it by posting Bass' kill-survive on Night 5. It confused people a bit.

Great job, team! Black Rock was key because she didn't change her views on TH (aka S~V~S) when she got recruited by us on Night 3, and that factored into some key analyses later on. S~V~S was fantastic as well, thank you for getting our team to the win!

Hey, gamers! I'm going away to a cottage until Sunday. I'm going to vote for G-Man right now since sig is off the poll (ha ha just kidding). I hope I don't get lynched while I'm gone, but if you have to do it, then so be it. Going away isn't a safety any more than getting silenced or insanified, so just play as you would... I just won't be able to respond to anything. It will probably be a relief to some of you for me to shut up for a bit.

Happy Mafia-ing! *votes G-Man* Sorry, friend.

Linki: MM, BR was talking to FZ. with that comment.

Maybe try posting thoughts instead of bible verses or whatever? Do you think you'll be lynched today, G?

G-Man wrote:

Long Con wrote:I'm happy now, G-Man. I don't think it will get you out of contention for today's lynch, though.

I do think G-Man is a good lynch candidate today, I also like Bass, TinyBubbles, sig, or Cobalt.

Um, methinks you forgot that is that a piano? was lynched yesterday.

D'oh! Yes, I forgot. Chalk it up to posting first thing in the morning. How lame.

I'm happy now, G-Man. I don't think it will get you out of contention for today's lynch, though.

I do think G-Man is a good lynch candidate today, I also like Bass, TinyBubbles, sig, or Cobalt.

Sloonei... was targeted and survived? Way to go, Sloon!

Golden wrote:

Black Rock wrote:I however don't believe LC killed Epignosis. It's not his style.

I actually agree with this.

*dies*

I think TGG is a forceful personality who quite likes to get his own way though, and if Epi's theory about Cobalt is right then make that two forceful personalities. I don't think LC would have chosen to kill epi, he would be advocating for someone who couldn't be traced back.

One thing I think LC would do, though, is be up for shenanigans with Cobalt to distance them from each other, so I can actually see epi's point on that front.

I'd love to do something that extreme. I can't recall ever doing something like that before, definitely not anywhere close to that extreme. That Cobalt stuff is all too sadly real.

Gotta go to work now. I'm not on a team with any of those people, or anyone at all. Glad to chat more after work.

FZ. wrote:LC, why are you calling me Splints? Is that a joke? If so, I missed it. I'm just trying to figure out what's going on, that's it.

I don't know why my mind told me fingersplints posted that when it was you.

And since it WAS you, what gives? Why would you say I "went after" Cobalt, when you already had the answer I quoted?

Golden wrote:How would avoiding the question and sending you back to read my posts possibly help if I was being so subtle? If I expected you to come back with nothing and say it was unclear, how would that be helpful to me as a baddie? What would it achieve in a nefarious plot? Because I honestly can't see your angle here.

Here's the scenario: You killed Epi to frame me/Cobalt. You want the frame to be successful. You don't want to be "the guy that accused LC" because my lynch will make you seem suspect.

There's a separate case against me in the thread. You build up the TGG's-team-killed-Epi case, and then you slide the other case in alongside it, dropping Tiny from it. What this accomplishes: Golden wasn't the one who brought LC's name up, it was already out there. Now someone else can pick it up and make the connection that "Hey, maybe LC is a baddie, maybe he killed Epi!" and you barely had to say anything to get it going. Quality frame-up.

A problem arises: LC is asking questions directly of Golden, when the idea is to keep Golden as more of a sidelines guy in the Epi-kill. Give a couple of non-committal non-answers to LC. Long Con won't let it go. Situation explodes.

How is it subtle when it is is the only conclusion that can be drawn from my posts, and even the conclusion you drew in your first attacking post?

You are not differentiating between saying "LC is TGG's teammate" and saying "this is why I think he's TGG's teammate: blablabla". You did the first one, and you didn't do the second one. My conclusion in my "attacking post" (really? THAT post was attacking you?) was that you thought the first one, and clarified nothign about the second one.

How would it not be tracked back to me when I'm the one who was putting it together? Even taking as truth that it was not clear, why put together my theory at all if I don't want it tracked back to me?

I think I covered this fully above.

I don't understand how you can't see that that (very simply explained) case on me just doesn't make any sense from a baddie perspective. No sensible baddie would do it. It doesn't achieve what you say I would do it to achieve, it couldn't achieve it. It would be, frankly, stupid - and even stupider to follow that up by not asking questions directly so you would have your attention drawn to the apparently intentional subtlety of it.

Hindsight is 20/20. Looking at it from the way I laid it out above, it makes total sense.

And also - this is something we are going to have to agree to disagree on - but I cannot accept what you keep saying, even in your civilian case here, that the point was 'completely unclear'. That's your opinion, but it's not mine. Other people responding and discussing with me in the thread at the time appeared to understand what I was saying just fine. That's why I asked you to read the thread in context, but oh well. It might be unclear to you, and if so c'est la vie, but please stop making it an objective truth. I honestly do not agree that it was either unclear or, for that matter, subtle. I don't think there was any other way in which you could interpret my series of posts.

Maybe someone else said "Oh Golden is saying TGG and LC are a team because LC is a top suspect for killing Epi!" I'll try to go back and look for that other person. YOU never said why you grouped us.

Try this: replace my name in your oft-quoted series of posts with someone else. DFaraday, for randomness. Then show me how it's clear that you think DF killed Epi.

Epignosis wrote:

FZ. wrote:The thing that bothers me about LC is that he basically went after each person that went after him, minus Epi maybe. First it was Cobalt, and then it was you. I'd like to see him point out some other suspicions. Did I miss any?

Not minus Epi.

1. You can't find anyone that suspected or accused me that I haven't "gone after"?

2. You can't find any of my suspicions besides those three guys?

3. Where did I "go after" Cobalt? Wasn't... wasn't it you, splints, that asked Cobalt and I why we suspect each other? *checks* No, it was the other "F" lady, FZ. Pardon me. Anyways, this is what I said to her:

I haven't had any particular case against Cobalt, all I've really been able to do is react to his vendetta against me. I think it's reasonable to believe that he's a Civ with his own motivations in mind, but I sure as hell was not against his lynch. I want to win the game, and if I can't support the lynch of someone who won't rest until I'm dead... that's not a challenge I particularly need in front of me when I'm trying to, like, play Mafia. He also could be bad and pursuing the vendetta for similar singular reasons. One way to look at it is whether you believe that the night 1 Epi kill was a frame-up or a pseudo-tricky-frame-up - did Cobalt kill Epi to shut him up, or did someone do it to frame a Civ Cobalt?

Now that I think about it, Cobalt seems like the kind of player who would straight-up kill someone who was coming after him, rather than resort to double-thinking misdirection... just based on how he's dealing with me, and with his (supposed) power. So, to answer your question, that's the only reason I suspect Cobalt - I think he would have killed Epi. It's only a mild suspicion, and most of my support for his lynch should be considered as me wanting a threat to myself out of the game.

This is not an accurate analysis of my game at all, fingersplints.

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:Though I was frustrated, I kept my shit together, and said "Why?" No response, so I asked again, "Why, because you think he's my teammate?" and you still don't tell me why, you just give a post about what information you think you'd get. So I ask a third time, "You didn't answer me yet as to why you are connecting us at all?" And you still won't answer the question! And I still keep it cool, even though by this time my frustration level is rising higher.

You don't have to stop suspecting me, but I want you to acknowledge that I was feeling frustrated, because it's the truth and it's bugging me to have you shrug it off as fake. Can you do that for me, old friend?

I don't understand how you could possibly be frustrated in that time frame, but hey, we all get frustrated over things at times that we might not usually, and I do get you'd been taking a lot of heat this game. If it is that important to you for me to understand and acknowledge it's real, then yes, you are telling the truth about that. I can't see any reason you'd ask that of me and lie.

Now - you have to understand where golden is coming from.

You blew up in my face, dude. The second answer was the truth as well - I had already said I thought sig AND G-man were your teammates, so by reading the question 'why, because you think he is my teammate', the truthful answer was not 'yes' - because I thought sig was too. The truthful answer was because I felt stronger about TGG/G-Man being your teammate than about sig being, ergo 'because I think it's more likely to tell me your alignment'. But here is the thing - if you were reading the thread, why shouldn't I be able to assume that you already knew that I thought both of them were your teammates?

I'm in end of financial year here. I have a hell of a lot to do. I worked an 11 hour day yesterday. 19 minutes is not always enough for me to make meaningful answers, and honestly you were about the third person to ask me to repeat stuff I'd already said. People use me in this way - they ask me to do things again because they know I will. And I'm kind of a little sick of it. I shouldn't have to give the same answers over and over.

I didn't see your first question, and I answered the next two with honest answers, and you come in and call me a liar? C'mon, can't you see how bad that looks? Especially when you follow it up with, well, what you've followed it up with. You came at me out of nowhere, with something which looks like a crock.

So, can I see that your frustration is real? Sure. Does that mean I have to believe you meant every word of your case against me? No... because I still think you keep changing what your case actually is, and have been very inconsistent about it.

Don't see the frustration as a 19-minute frustration, see it as a game-long frustration.

I already knew you said you thought G-Man and I were teammates. You just never made it clear why.

I wasn't asking you to repeat anything you had already said, because you hadn't said it yet. You never said WHY you thought I was the teammate. Just that you thought I was.

I wasn't asking you to go back and make a big research post or anything. If you had simply answered "because I suspect you killed Epi" then none of this would have happened. I wasn't asking you to "do anything".

Maybe you thought the answers were honest, but they were not. You said it was fairly clear why you chose me as TGG's teammate, but it wasn't. You had neglected to justify it by telling the thread you thought I killed Epi.

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:Wow, Golden. We can't keep doing this. You're focusing on things that aren't relevant, and I can't make you stop. I asked about your last-minute vote for S~V~S, explicitly saying I don't find it suspicious, and you go back and dredge it up like it's a case against you, and proceed to punch holes in it.

You are the one who accused me of no u because 'you suspected me first', but that suspicion of me first is now irrelevant? And you say you can't make me stop? You know what might make me stop? If you actually self-evaluated. You don't seem able to see how inconsistent you are being.

That wasn't, and wasn't ever, a suspicion of you. It wasn't when I said it, and it hasn't been at any point in this conversation. Asking about the poll was just that - asking about the poll. I knew I had voted at literally the last minute, and it surprised me to look back at the poll and see you voted after me.

I hope that we can consider this avenue of thought closed - it was never a suspicion or an accusation, case closed. Ok?

The problem here is - you can't decide what you think is relevant or not. You have thrown so many different allegations at me as to why I'm bad, but if I defend them I'm pulling up irrelevancies and , and shift the goalposts for why you say I'm bad. So... what am I supposed to do?

I can't believe you keep saying this over and over...

Long Con wrote:"If I was trying to be subtle and imply it, why put your name in the team at all?" Already said why - to plant the seed and get someone else to run with it, so the frame-up doesn't get traced back to you after I get lynched.

When you also keep saying you don't believe I did it on purpose.

You say I'm bad, but you admit that 'it was probably clearer in your mind than in the thread' and say things like 'I'm calling you a liar, but I don't think you did it intentionally'...

If I didn't do it intentionally, if it probably seemed clear in my head, how the heck was it that I was also 'trying to be subtle and imply it'.. . you want to have it both ways and you have made it literally impossible to defend to.

You want me not to tunnel you, to have an open mind, right? You accused me of tunnelling you, I assume that you consider that a negative and unproductive thing to do.

All you are describing in this post is me trying to work through everything you've done.

IF you are a Civ, then you simply didn't realize how completely unclear it was why you included me in your G-Man suspicion. You had nothing to do with Epig's death, and you were accusing me of it from an honest perspective. That's where "I don't think you did it intentionally" and "clearer in your mind than the thread" come from.

IF you are a baddie, then your absolute subtlety in adding my name and your following failures to answer my questions about it were because you didn't want to be associated too closely with the tracking of "who killed Epig?" - it's too obvious who set up the frame job if you do it and then start pointing fingers at who you are trying to frame.

This is the question about you at this point. Civ or baddie? Either you were doing it intentionally, or you really thought you had said more about the suspicion than you did. I have looked at things both ways because I don't know which is true. Do you want me to tunnel you, or to have an open mind?

Golden, I'm just going to try and give you my point of view on something, so you can understand.

The idea that I'm in league with TinyBubbles was getting a lot of attention. There's a couple of reasons, namely that some didn't like my post about TinyBubbles, and that Tiny voted for me at... I guess an opportune time would be the way to put it? Some people are liking these reasons enough to act pretty confident that we're linked.

Golden, you start making posts about TGG, that he was upset about Epi's return and it likely meant he was the killer or on the killer's team. This stuff makes sense to me, but then you're making a post about TGG and throwing in the TinyBubbles-LC suspicion along with it. There's nothing about the TB-LC suspicion that lends itself to connection with the Epi-killing accusation or TGG, you just kind of staple it on to your TGG theory and make us all one team. Then in the next post, you basically just repeat what you said earlier, except suddenly it's just me and TGG, with TinyBubbles getting a pass from you for now.

You never say why you chose me. You could have put ANY other name in the game where you put my name in that post, and it would have been equally justified... because there was no justification. I know you have clarified now that you meant that I was one of the people that Epi was after on Day One, and you thought I was the most suspicious of his murder, but back then you had said nothing even remotely close to that. You just put together a suspicion of TGG, and then dropped me into it.

Then I asked why, and you made some posts without responding to that - and I get that you missed it, that's ok, it was one little word - but understand where I was at that time in the thread. I'm already trying to weather this connection-suspicion to Tiny, and then you come along making a lot of sense with TGG and then adding my name in suddenly and with no explanation.

Like, dude... try playing as Long Con sometime. Look at my game so far. Day 0 tag team assault from Cobalt and Epi, with Metalmarsh laughing along and voting only me. Cobalt only steps it up, and gives me a death sentence. Then this TinyBubbles thing catches hold of the thread. I want you to really understand the frustration I was already feeling, fighting for my life since the very beginning. I want you to stop acting like you don't believe that it was very frustrating to me when my name showed up like that with no real explanation, because it was.

Though I was frustrated, I kept my shit together, and said "Why?" No response, so I asked again, "Why, because you think he's my teammate?" and you still don't tell me why, you just give a post about what information you think you'd get. So I ask a third time, "You didn't answer me yet as to why you are connecting us at all?" And you still won't answer the question! And I still keep it cool, even though by this time my frustration level is rising higher.

You don't have to stop suspecting me, but I want you to acknowledge that I was feeling frustrated, because it's the truth and it's bugging me to have you shrug it off as fake. Can you do that for me, old friend?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Vig Kill Long Con

Die you.

No me die.

Canucklehead wrote:Forgive me, LC! It was my autocorrect. Stupid American computer brain.

I was shocked and dismayed, if it were Day my vote would be on you for at least three hours.

Linki: LOL

Wow, sorry that was so big.

Canucklehead wrote:Your desire to be insanified, and your strange insistence that this would be the peak of hilarity and silliness, are troubling not only in regards to your alignment, but also in your understanding of thru workings of humor :P

Canucklehead wrote:your understanding of thru workings of humor :P

Canucklehead wrote:of humor :P

Canucklehead wrote:humor

Wow, Golden. We can't keep doing this. You're focusing on things that aren't relevant, and I can't make you stop. I asked about your last-minute vote for S~V~S, explicitly saying I don't find it suspicious, and you go back and dredge it up like it's a case against you, and proceed to punch holes in it. You list a whole string of posts (yet again) that are clear about your views on TGG, but very unclear about why you list me as his teammate. Once again, the only post in that series that has ANYTHING to do with me being suspected as Epi's killer is the underline one, and even that one is as "saying it without saying it" as it possibly caqn be.

"If I was trying to be subtle and imply it, why put your name in the team at all?" Already said why - to plant the seed and get someone else to run with it, so the frame-up doesn't get traced back to you after I get lynched.

I can't explain to you again about the "lying" thing. You have to go back and take your pick of one the posts where I have explained it. You're still acting like I'm accusing you of being a liar. Like that's why I suspect you. I guess that's why you want me to be suspicious of you, so it's easier to defend.

And there's no "schtick", so you can "schtick" that right up your ass. Anyways, I have to go, so I can't continue with this.

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:I don't see how you can see that post as contrived at all. That post is a genuine reaction to the situation, and it really did look like you were lying about having brought it up before. Except for a scant six words in the middle of a paragraph... you were. I wasn't wording it a specific way to win hearts and minds, I was talking to you. It was strongly worded because at that point, I needed to hear what you actually had to say, and I was already frustrated by getting no answers from you after asking, twice. Friendly wording wasn't cutting it, so I tried strong wording to get your attention.

OK, I've spent some time this morning reflecting on this, and...

I think I am holding you to a double standard. In Biblical mafia, I looked past the fact that I thought Pilate's case on me was terrible. In this game, I'm not looking past it. And it's because I know you are you, and I'm expecting more of "long con" than I did of "Pilate".

Reasonable, but comparing my play in any game to the play of Pilate is not the most relevant of comparisons.

BUT

Then I read a post like this.

You still say I'm lying which, honestly, I don't believe that you believe even for a second, You even said yourself 'I think it was clearer in your mind than it is in the thread' - those are not the words of someone who believes I was setting out to lie. But whats more, this is the bit where I say you know me better than that. It would be a pointless, stupid, lie, with absolutely no benefit to me if I was bad (can you think of a way it benefits me if bad?).

I think we have a different definition of lying. It doesn't matter whether it was intentional or not - you said it was clear why you connected me with TGG, and that was not the truth. I understand that you thought it was the truth, but it wasn't. And my suspicion of you is not based on the accusation that you were lying - like I said, I said that to make you answer me about why you grouped me with him, because you were not. It doesn't matter whether it's 20 minutes or 2 days, I asked you twice, you were around and posting, and you wouldn't answer.

I fully accept that you may have thought you said something you didn't, but the fact is, instead of giving me a simple answer, you said the answer was already clearly out there in the thread. That was not true. The fact that it was a lie, intentional or not, isn't the case against you. Calling it out as not true finally forced you to clarify for me what I had been asking you for, so I'm glad I said it.

And seriously, you even focused on the wording I used. Look at it again, something like "I don't want to call you a liar, but how do you explain that the truth is different than what you said?" You're all like "HE'S CALLING ME A LIAR, AND USING WORDING TO MAKE EVERYONE THINK I AM!" But if you look at the post, and understand exactly why I phrased it that way, then you should get it. It was a bit sarcastic, because I was peeved to have gone through every single one of your posts back to Day One, looking for where you explained the TGG-LC connection, and found nothing. And it was a bit prodding, like "now you have to answer the question that you weren't answering for me!"

You could have said "Whoa, I wasn't lying, it's right here in this one post!" But you instead went into full counter-attack mode, and here we are.

You were apparently 'getting frustrated after asking me something twice and getting no responses'. But you asked me twice within twenty minutes, and got TWO responses, they were just responses you claim to not like. And what's more, this is apparently what 'frustrated' LC sounds like...

Long Con wrote:Ok, no prob, I just went through all of Timmer's posts to get my own answers, now I'll go through yours. You just chill, I'll rejoin this conversation after.

Was this really supposed to sound to me like someone who was frustrated? You hadn't indicated to me anything which suggested frustration, I had no idea you had a problem with reading back on me from this....

I was a little, like, "Goddammit!" when I found that I was going to have to search your posts right after I had just searched Timmers, and I do think it is reflected in the "Ok, no prob" post. That was me biting my tongue and accepting that sometimes I have to do more work than I need to... and then when I found nothing of you connecting me to TGG, that frustration said "ok, I played nice, I looked at all his damn posts, and there's nothing there, he wasted my time, why? What is his deal? Why did he say it was there when it wasn't? Why is he lying?" And the rest is history.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

sig wrote:MetalMArsh why if we were on the same team would he ignore my questions? If anything he would answer them since Iwouldn't ask them unless wehad something going on. Please explain this.

He wouldn't ignore them, he just wouldn't notice them. I've seen it done between teammates before (and LC was involved there as well, except he was the one asking the questions). But if you two are teammates, and he knows you aren't interested in getting him lynched, then he would pay more attention to other players' posts, and less attention to yours.

I don't know what game you're referring to here, chum, but I don't recall ever participating in anything like you describe here. Perhaps you could clarify?

*********************************************************************************************************

And now I'm fully caught up - excellent result, glad to have lynched sig! I probably would have switched my vote to him, not that it was necessary. BUT, I was at work. So I di'int.

I'm surprised and relieved to see that Golden is still analyzing whether or not I'm bad, instead of tunnelling on me because of our exchange. Golden, I hope that you can reread the whole thing from my perspective and see that I wasn't trying to create a point of view about you, I was just trying to get answers and feeling frustrated. I don't know if you backing off me should make me feel better or worse about you. One one hand, it could show an open mind, which is Civvish... and on the other hand, maybe you just don't want to get further into this with me, because I'm right about you being a baddie and it's hitting too close to home.

Like I said back when Cobalt was crying out about the frame-up job on Epi 1.0, I wanted to watch the thread and see who pushed the accusations, and how. Golden, you pushed the accusation in as subtle a way as possible (so subtle that I truly didn't even get it when I read the post, bla bla been said already a few times), and that post seemed designed to get someone else to pick up the connection and make the accusation. I'm sure you can understand that point of view - in fact, I think it's a pretty solid way to find the real killer... as long as it's done discreetly, which I can't say can happen from here on out. This is one of the main ways I catch baddies - to put myself in their shoes and ask what I'd do in their position. The Epi frameup provided a good base from which to do that.

However, I have to admit (begrudgingly) that some of the posts you've made in our exchange have sounded like a Civ perspective. But I also think you're that damn good at this game, that you can fool me by knowing how to act Civ... like, method-acting, where you really put yourself in Civ shoes and the posts flow from that. I can't let go of this suspicion, because a) you're the only result I really have from the Epi 1.0 frameup, and b) I'll feel like a real idiot if I drop it and you turn out to be Mafia. I think maybe an alignment checker should put us both on their list if they haven't already.

Anyways, night time now, hope the baddies kill the baddies tonight! Good night, going to bed. For real.

Golden wrote:But yeah, I'm thinking my theory was probably wrong (is calling out an entire team that early ever going to be correct?)

Aldo did it before, I saw it. It caused a lot of upset baddies, and some accusations. But he did it. I've also seen BR do it pretty well as well.

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:If you really believed I killed Epig, then you would have made it known before. You killed Epig, and are trying to push forth the frame-up on me.

At what point would have I made it known? Before I had figured it out?

Golden wrote:It took me a while to connect the dots. I've been mulling over why he would not be completely truthful in this thread while making it very obvious in another. It suddenly occurred to me that he might do it so as to not drop his replacement in it, because being honest about his reasons here would connect it directly to epi.

That's the point at which I started thinking it might have something to do with epi. That is shortly before I didn't die, so just before the dawn of today. Shortly after the dawn of today, I had you in my team. This is why I cannot believe your 'frame job' posts are legit - even this post from you, it's just not legit.

But then I even bring up biblical myself and I remember that... you weren't reading the thread then either. So maybe I am expecting more of you than I should be. I just don't like when people raise theories which don't actually make any sense... but then you are the guy who thought I could be Isaac's teammate after pursuing him solidly for 7 days.

Ugh, I dunno LC. I said, even when this all began, that I wanted to lynch OTHERS to test my theory, not you. But I still think your post after going back and searching my posts was incredibly strongly worded so as to get people to think a certain way about me, and that just does not feel good to me.

I don't see how you can see that post as contrived at all. That post is a genuine reaction to the situation, and it really did look like you were lying about having brought it up before. Except for a scant six words in the middle of a paragraph... you were. I wasn't wording it a specific way to win hearts and minds, I was talking to you. It was strongly worded because at that point, I needed to hear what you actually had to say, and I was already frustrated by getting no answers from you after asking, twice. Friendly wording wasn't cutting it, so I tried strong wording to get your attention.

Golden wrote:I have to say at this point that I am not reading, nor will I read at all, any of LC's responses to me over night. I simply have no interest in them.

LC came after me in bibilical. He didn't know what he was talking about, but I looked at the content and said 'this is a civ'. This time I feel the opposite. I don't like the way he came after me. I don't believe it was legit.

That's all I have to say on it, because I literally zero interest in revisiting it any more.

That's fine, I don't want to continue a thread-dominating slugfest where we keep repeating ourselves at length. I think we have both both everything out there that needs to be said, and we can leave it to the rest to read and decide what they think.

If you really believed I killed Epig, then you would have made it known before. You killed Epig, and are trying to push forth the frame-up on me.

Golden wrote:What sense does that make? My plan was take you out by saying I have no desire to vote you?

Do you not see how, even in the things I've highlighted in this post, your case on me keeps changing? Whatever it is you think I'm up to, you can't even keep straight.

Nothing in this post indicates a "changing case". You think or know that TGG was bad, and you were trying to link me to him so that I'd go down when he turned up bad. The fact that you have been so "I don't want to lynch LC until I get more info from lynching other people" is just setup for a) pushing an easy lynch on me if G-Man turns up bad, and b) wiping your hands clean after I turn up Civ.

Also, I would like to point that while LC said I 'made' him go back into the thread and 'wasted his time', this is what he had to say about it at the time...

Long Con wrote:Ok, no prob, I just went through all of Timmer's posts to get my own answers, now I'll go through yours. You just chill, I'll rejoin this conversation after.

And despite that, I STILL gave him half of what I was saying in this post...

Golden wrote:For what it's worth, I have a theory about you being bad that has nothing to do with any of your actions or things you've said in the thread. You would be quite literally collateral damage in this theory. I have no desire to vote you first or join a bandwagon on you. I'd sooner vote others who I legitimately think are bad to try and figure out if my theories could be correct, and only vote you if I think they've proven to be correct.

Before he decided to come out with his post declaring me a liar.

Despite that, I'm apparently the one who 'made it like pulling teeth'. because that's how hard it is to go back and read a bit?

A simple answer to a simple question was the way that scenario should have played out. You made it like pulling teeth when you refused me that. It's not hard to go back and read, but when I go back and read and I STILL find no clear answers, then I think you must be lying.

Answer me this: if I DID know you had (as vaguely as possible) said why you connected me to TGG, then why would I say I thought you were lying? Was I, perhaps, hoping you wouldn't be able to find the six-word-post-portion that I secretly knew about? What's the plan there, since this is apparently all a scheme I'm hatching against you?

I'm sorry if other people feel it's been uncomfortable to read, but I will say that when I really think I've found a mafia I'm not going to pull any punches. LC hasn't upset me at all, I just don't actually believe anything he is saying. And here are a couple of things he is doing all over the show..

Stating opinion as fact, such as:

Long Con wrote:And when Golden turns up bad, I would start casting votes right on G-Man as well.

And using emotive language - as much as he might like to deny it - that I think is deliberately designed to get others on to his side. Stuff like:

Long Con wrote:I love you Golden, and I know that you feel the same even though I riled you up a bit.

I mean of course, LC is one of the awesomest mafia players I know - but I don't feel any particular need to be acknowledging my positive feelings towards him right now. That's because I know that his feelings won't be hurt in the slightest if he is bad - he knows he's just been caught, and tough luck. Actually I think this one was aimed at getting me to back off a little.

Yeah... YOU know that MY feelings aren't going to be hurt by your accusations. I posted that because I was really getting the feeling that this knowledge wasn't reciprocated. I wanted to make sure that you weren't feeling assaulted by me, because your posts seemed like you were really getting upset, you said I was making the game unfun for you, for Christ's sake! I also PMed Llama at that time to say I hoped you weren't too upset, and that I hoped I hadn't been out of line with anything I had said.

If anyone was using "emotional manipulation", it was YOU, Golden. YOU are the one that made me feel like I was going too far and actually hurting your feelings and sucking the fun out of the game for you.

Final final thing. If we are really talking about deflecting answers to good questions, how about this one that I asked LC and he didn't respond to...

Golden wrote:As for me being G-Man's teammate, then why am I the original instigator of the G-Man suspicion?????

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Looks like I've had it in for the family of Con Rock this game. I really don't like that I turned around on LC so fast, but - sometimes, when someone starts posting about you, you just go 'nah, this is all wrong. It's trumped up. It's not real.' LCs case on me read like a gambit, using strong attack words to get others on to his side and against me. I hope you will really read the posts I've made to see through it.

I think that the idea I had that you are on G-Man's team is not the strongest. It was what I thought at the moment, because it made sense to me. Then you said how you were the originator of the suspicion, and it does seem less likely (though not impossible) that you are his baddie teammate.

I know what you mean about sensing something is wrong when someone starts posting about you. This is why I believe you are bad. You have, at length, tried to get people to focus on things that aren't all that relevant, and trying to make them seem very relevant. You want to get it out there that I'm the top suspect for Epi 1.0's murder, and yet you had done nothing but say you thought I was Civ until very recently. Epi was killed on Night 1 - if you ACTUALLY thought I was responsible, then why wouldn't you say so at some point, instead of saying I'm Civ?

It's because you didn't WANT to be the one to push the frame-job at me. You wanted to try and plant subtle seeds of connection and let someone else pick it up and run with it. You tried to avoid it until I put it right in your face and you couldn't any more. The reason for this is that YOU killed Epi 1.0 and were hoping that the frame-up would run on its own, and it wasn't. And that, more than anything, clinches it for me.

If you thought I killed Epi, then you wouldn't have said you have no suspicion of me for the last two days. Plain and simple. You would have accused me of killing Epi. You dun goofed, Golden, you hid too much from it, and now it's all over you.

Golden wrote:LC's case on me is that...

1) I used the word 'clear' when in fact things were not clear (to LC). He even said himself 'I think it was clearer in your head than in the thread'.

But he himself was subject to epi's case on LC because he used the word interesting. I thought a case based on the use of a single word was misguided then but if it really was misguided and LC was civ, why would LC turn around and do the very thing he knew was wrong back then on me?

Not only that, but the theory was so unclear that... in the very post he called it unclear, he himself was able to imply why I saw him as bad. So how unclear could it be?

Ok, my case isn't "he used the word 'clear' when they weren't". That's silly. That IS why I got frustrated with you last night, it is not the case on you. And it was pretty damn unclear, by the way. You are trying to focus on tiny details to discredit my case on you - trying to equate this situation with the "interesting" thing is deceptive, and poor form.

2) I deflected his question.

LC asked the question at 3.15 PM my time. At 3.34 PM he was saying 'you still haven't answered my question'... as if 19 minutes while I'm at work is a sufficient period of time for me to perform backflips for him.

This then leads to this:

Long Con wrote:you already had your chance to give a quick sentence of recap why. Instead, you used that post to tell me you've already made it very clear why. So I went and looked, and I can't see it. Correct me.

Well, you know, one mans chance is another mans end of financial year. 19 minutes is not a lot of time for me right now. But even putting that aside...

Why deflect? His reason why I would deflect is this...

You could have said you were at work and too busy to respond. But you didn't. And 19 minutes during which you were posting is plenty of time to have responded to me in some way. So quit trying to hide behind work, it's not really that valid when you were posting. If you had been too busy at work, then you wouldn't have been on The Syndicate at all, and I wouldn't have said you were ignoring/avoiding my question.

Long Con wrote:Why is my name even jammed in among your real suspicions at all?

He is claiming my suspicion of him isn't real and that's why I would deflect.

Except, my entire suspicion of TGG - a suspicion very well documented in the thread from before the time I didn't die - is based on the view that epi was killed by TGG because epi was on to one of his teammates. Given that fact, why the heck would I deflect from saying 'I think LC is that teammate' expressly. It's literally 6 words, and it's something that I personally think is CLEAR from my posts beforehand, even though it is implied and not expressly stated. Why on earth would I deflect from that as a baddie? What is the point? It makes literally zero sense that I would do that. There is no reason under this earth for me to avoid giving LC a straight answer 'because I'm bad and my suspicion isn't real'. If I'm bad, a straight answer is exactly what makes sense, since it would still be the truth.

Yup. Implied once (very weakly) and never stated.

Focusing on this "jammed in" post by me is just another example of you trying to focus people on useless minutia to make your case look like it has any meat. That post of mine was simple frustration - you wouldn't give a clear reason for why you were suddenly suspecting me, while you had been plenty clear in your other suspicions, like your suspicion of TGG. So yeah - it looks like you were jamming my name in with your other suspicions when you are totally, lengthily clear about them, and as vague as you possibly can be with my name. Stop trying to WIFOM your way out of it.

3) It's hard to see what the rest of his case is. Perhaps he could enlighten us. But it seems to be 'because he suspected me before I suspected him', or something...

Anyway, I'm calling bs on my bs meter because I simply don't genuinely believe anything LC posted this afternoon was honest. I don't think he posts the post where he went back and read my posts as a civ. I think he takes a very different approach. I know this can't have been comfortable to read, but I gotta stick up for myself, especially when I know that there is some fishy stuff going down with the suspicion.

Everything I posted today was honest. I'll take a beloved page from your book: Golden knows me well enough to know that when I get that upset in the thread, it's because I'm dealing with accusations that seem to have no basis. My baddie game doesn't include this kind of thing. Look at Flash Mafia. Or any other recent games where I was bad. Golden knows damn well this isn't my baddie game.

Golden wrote:

nutella wrote:Wow guys that was an uncomfortable exchange to read. Looks like there might have been some miscommunications, hope you've gotten them sorted out and there are no hard feelings or anything.

I honestly don't believe there were any miscommunications at all. LC set out to achieve something, which he achieved. Well done to him. But he doesn't believe I'm bad, not a bit.

I set out to achieve to achieve one thing: to figure out why you suddenly had me grouped with TGG as a baddie. I asked you why, you didn't answer or even acknowledge the question. If you were busy at work, you could have said "I'll get to that later", but although you were still posting, you didn't say anything about it. So I asked you again. You said you had made it "fairly clear", when it was anything BUT clear that you suspected that I killed Epi.

How did I "set out to achieve" what happened last night? How would I know that any of that crap would happen? If you had just given me a simple answer (ie "I think you are bad with TGG because I think you killed Epi") then there would be a lot fewer posts in this thread right now.

But you didn't. Like I said, it's YOU that made it like pulling teeth to get that information out of you. You, not me. And THAT is very clear to anyone who reads our exchange.

Even the 'I think you're being blinded by your own ego'. LC easily knows me well enough to know that if I was legitimately being 'blinded by ego', that's my civvie game.

You think that tossing off statements like that is going to win hearts and minds... and you might be right. Which is why you say things like this, that, I'm sorry, are completely ridiculous under scrutiny. How is this statement even serious? How is my view on your ego something you can even comment about? We have never discussed it. I have never mentioned your ego before, in connection to your Civvie game or baddie. AND YET you know me SO WELL that you can say that I know YOU so well that I know when your ego becomes a factor and when it doesn't.

That's malarkey.

Golden is descending into minutia here to try and make it looks like I have some master plan to make him look bad. I don't want to dominate the thread, but he's going to try and flood this thing with inconsequential little details in order to avoid the main, simpler arguments. Golden believes that finding "inconsistencies" in my posts are going to make you think that I'm bad, but that's illogical. If this were some plan I had, then it would probably be very consistent. As it is, I was only reacting to Golden, and figuring things out as I went along.

I have to go back and do a big response to his "so big I must be right" posts. Sorry if this dominates the thread, I truly have no desire to do so.

I didn't go to bed. I went to other websites and peeked back in before shutting down. And then I had to respond.

Golden wrote:For LC - the way he might have understood the case against him if he had taken my posts and the whole thread in context. All posts below happened in the order I have posted them. This is long, so it's under a spoiler tag....

I don't know why you quoted all those posts. The suspicion that I'm on TinyBubbles' team has no connection to the reason you think I'm on G-Man's team, you just comfortably grouped in with that suspicion. Your post could have looked like this:

I honestly think it's very consistent with someone who was part of a team that killed epi, that they killed them for cause, and was upset when he was able to sub back in and express the particular sentiments that he did. I think G-Man and LC are a team. I feel less sure that bubbles is, but she definitely could be.

...and given the same level of clarification. And you said it in a completely roundabout way that stopped it from being clear, you didn't (and have never before) stated that you think I might have killed Epi. I think YOU killed Epi and are trying to fan the flames on the frame-job that isn't going where you had hoped. I've been on the lookout for "that guy" in the thread, and I think I've found him.

Golden wrote:And LC - take that last quote with the underlined bit there as me definitely seeing you are conflicted in your own posts as to whether I am bad or not - and the reason why I think your posts read that way is this...

You are one of very few people in a unique position to have your first confirmed civ. Because everyone on mafia 1 knows I'm not bad, now.

Nuh-uh, you are not claiming Confirmed Civ off this, put that away. If you are sensing conflict about whether you are good or bad, it's because I don't know which you are. After tonight, I am heavily leaning bad for you.

Golden wrote:And there is certainly no way in heck you are seeing this as my baddie game.

I think you're being blinded by your own ego? I think your baddie game probably looks (intentionally) a lot like your Civvie game. Can you explain further how you believe I see your baddie game? This is a bizarre comment to make, I think you should have gone to bed... when I should have.

Linki: Me, Golden. I am the person who expressed suspicion of you.

G-Man is on the poll, and there is enough suspicion of him to make me believe he's a legitimate possibility for getting lynched.

Linki2: G-Man is clearly not a legitimate possibility for today's lynch.

Ugh, and because I obsess...

Golden wrote:"I don't want to call you a liar here, I only want to imply it."

Yeah, that's how I phrased calling you a liar. Maybe it sounds different in your head than it does in mine, perhaps I should have added a or some sarcastic orange.

timmer wrote:@Long Con, sorry if you didn't like going through my posts, lol? I'm a lover of reading people's posts in order using the "in topic" button, so I sometimes just assume others like doing that as well.

Your breakdown of my thoughts on you was correct but incomplete, as it is missing the first part of the Tiny Bubbles case. Like I had said, unlike some people I'm looking at Bubbles more than you rather than the other way round. The piece you missed is the way Tiny Bubbles glommed onto my earlier case against Cobalt. I had read his posts, and missed any post where he actually explained his suspicions of you. Without that post, I felt that his post history read as massively scummy and I posted and voted about it.

Here is Bubbles' reasoning for voting Cobalt:

"Anyway, what timmer said about cobalt revenge voting makes some sense, im gonna go ahead and trust his instincts, and vote for cobalt now. "

Two things. One, the insistent part of my case was actually the way I thought Cobalt had hedged against explaining his suspicion of you (which turned out to be completely wrong). Two, while I did technically mention the way Cobalt talked about revenge voting you, I never based my case on it.

So Bubbles' post and vote feel all kinds of wrong, to me. It sound alike she didn't really go and read up on what I said, but just skimmed around for something to jump onto to get a vote in.

So that bugged me. I then take that, and combine it with her vote on you after the lynch shenanigans started in the thread, and suddenly, you look like a potential teamie. You see?

But to make this clear, I believe in lynching the person with the bigger case against them over the person who might be their teammate if I'm right. So while you are on my shortlist of suspicious characters right now, I won't vote for you until I've got the ability to show that I'm right about Bubbles.

Ok, that's a fair deal. TinyBubbles is on my list too, so it does give me a heavy heart that, if she is bad, you'll think I'm bad. But I'd still vote her if that lynch comes.

Linki: It's always loads of fun to butt heads with a strong Mafia personality like Golden. Now he's going to go back and put together why I should have known why he was linking me to TGG/G-Man. Can't wait to see it, because it will mean that I missed a lot, or a lot of subtext, that I should have been aware of.

Good night!

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Golden wrote:Lol, I don't believe it. The guy who has defended you all game has a 'crew primed for an LC bandwagon'

I'm actually referring to Cobalt and Metalmarsh. And not as "your baddie teammates" crew, but as "your happy-to-lynch-LC" crew.

Oh, what is it. I'm bad, or I'm misguided? Make up your mind.

As for me being G-Man's teammate, then why am I the original instigator of the G-Man suspicion?????

Huh? My post never said you're not bad. Just that you have (possibly) misguided kooks that now share the same goals as you. A ready-made crew. You're reading way too much into it, I think. It was a light-hearted comment, nothing more.

You were trying to link G-Man's guilt to me (without outright saying it) because you saw the G-Man suspicion as a real lynch possibility today, and you wanted to use it to your advantage... maybe to take out one of the only people who had expressed any suspicion of you this game.

Linki: "Emotionally manipulative?" So, I'm not allowed to be upset when I go through all your posts and find nothing of you saying why you were linking TGG and I? Calling you a liar isn't emotional manipulation, it's part of the game of Mafia. Mafia members are liars, they have to be liars, and I think that you are one of them. You're not supposed to get upset at being called a liar in Mafia. "Give me a straight answer" is emotionally manipulative? "...for something that wasn't there" was emotionally manipulative?

I do not understand. I'm going to go to bed, maybe you can also go to bed, and we can continue this in the morning, because it's getting weird to me.

Golden wrote:Lol, I don't believe it. The guy who has defended you all game has a 'crew primed for an LC bandwagon'

I'm actually referring to Cobalt and Metalmarsh. And not as "your baddie teammates" crew, but as "your happy-to-lynch-LC" crew.

Golden wrote:btw, it's pretty funny that you say it's ME doing the no u.

Ok, let's find the earliest posted suspicion of the other. That should settle this.

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:Correct me.

Here is the thing. I inevitably will. I'll inevitably trawl back through my posts, stepping you through what happened piece by piece. I always do. It's what I do. Doing your work for you.

I started it before, but I just cba right now.

For someone who supposedly suspects me, you seemed pretty happy I survived the NK.

"Happy"?

Nice survival, Golden. Your post in dead red does seem consistent with the idea that you were saved by a force other than yourself. If you expected to be still alive, a very different post would have likely been going to Dom at that time.

I don't know about happiness, but I did think that you really thought that you were dead, and that your survival wasn't innate to your role. "Nice survival, Golden." Is that part the "happy times"?

And when Golden turns up bad, I would start casting votes right on G-Man as well.

You would rather give a big No U than address the discrepancies in your own posts. I'm sorry, you made me go and look through your posts, I'm going to move forward from that effort if I'm going to bother doing it. What am I supposed to think when there's nothing? This is is not a rhetorical question!

You're the one who's a baddie here Golden, not me. Go ahead and get me lynched, you have a crew already there with a primed LC bandwagon. And after that's done, I really hope people will start seeing you.

*switch vote to Golden*

Well, when you're someone I suspect, and you suddenly start linking me with people and calling us baddie teammates, without a shred of explanation why... what do you expect?

You are lying about it, if you think I am just not understanding, then I am open to enlightenment on the subject. It's kind of why I asked you in the first place, you already had your chance to give a quick sentence of recap why. Instead, you used that post to tell me you've already made it very clear why. So I went and looked, and I can't see it. Correct me.

Linki: you made this like pulling teeth, not me. Thank you for answering, it was really not nearly as clear in the thread as it was in your mind. I love you Golden, and I know that you feel the same even though I riled you up a bit. I didn't kill Epi, and Cobalt was another person on his suspect list besides S~V~S and myself, if I'm not mistaken.

Golden wrote:I don't believe some of the bullshit that has gone down in this game.

Long Con wrote:So... what gives? It was not the truth that you had clearly laid out why you think G-Man and I are teammates. I don't want to call you a liar here, but how would you explain for the thread this discrepancy between the facts and the things you are saying? Why did you make me waste my time going through your posts for something that wasn't there?! It's frikkin' midnight here, next time I ask, give me a straight answer and don't tell me to go look for it.

I don't even...

What do you mean?

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Golden wrote:Now I definitely prefer to stay on G-Man.

Why, because you think he's my teammate?

Because I think lynching him is more likely to tell me your affiliation than lynching sig.

You didn't answer me yet as to why you are connecting us at all?

I haven't specifically answered your most recent post, but I have set out my reasons fairly clearly before that.

Ok, no prob, I just went through all of Timmer's posts to get my own answers, now I'll go through yours. You just chill, I'll rejoin this conversation after.

No problems.

For what it's worth, I have a theory about you being bad that has nothing to do with any of your actions or things you've said in the thread. You would be quite literally collateral damage in this theory. I have no desire to vote you first or join a bandwagon on you. I'd sooner vote others who I legitimately think are bad to try and figure out if my theories could be correct, and only vote you if I think they've proven to be correct.

"For what it's worth"? It's simultaneously worthless (because it's wrong) and worth everything to me. Why is my name even jammed in among your real suspicions at all?

Here, you think TGG and I are teammates because he was upset that Epi subbed in. I think the unspoken implication is that I killed Epi? But you have never said that out loud, so it's completely unclear why you even have my name in this post.

Here again I'm not suspicious to you, but you jam my name in there with your suspicions anyway.

And those two posts are literally the only things you've said about the Long Con-G-Man connection that you're on about now. You said that you set out your reasons "fairly clearly" why you are accusing me of being G-Man's baddie teammate, but you didn't. Unless it happened back in Day 1, because I stopped reading your posts when it got back that far - I don't believe you had any early TGG-LC connection posts, did you? You've been extra-sweet in your support of me all game until this stuff came up.

So... what gives? It was not the truth that you had clearly laid out why you think G-Man and I are teammates. I don't want to call you a liar here, but how would you explain for the thread this discrepancy between the facts and the things you are saying? Why did you make me waste my time going through your posts for something that wasn't there?! It's frikkin' midnight here, next time I ask, give me a straight answer and don't tell me to go look for it.