The Syndicate

Quick, without thinking about it too much. What Is your opinions of these reeds?

At a birthday party, afk
Dana say words

Hedgeowl wrote:
Long Con wrote:
juliets wrote:
Long Con wrote:
juliets wrote:Yeah Made, I didn't play Misfits but i read enough of it to know your playstyle is whack. Nevertheless, I agree with Bullz. I have also started to wonder if you are making up these wild theories to keep the eye away from others. I have believed in your civviness but I am starting to have doubts or as Bullz brings up maybe I'm just confused by you. I know I'm confused by some of those theories.
Hmm...

Ping. I don't buy the "keep the eye away from others" thing. Sounds contrived. Then add "I'm confused" and it's more suspicious to me.
That's interesting. Maybe I didn't say it right. I have started wondering if some of the things made has said have been attention getters, to pull us away from others who may be bad. Also, I don't think I've fully understood one theory made has put out there. I may understand part of it but usually there is a line or two i don't understand. I'm not saying a general "I'm confused" or even a general "I'm confused about everything made has said". But I am confused by some of it, which is what I thought I said.
So, you think Made and his baddie teammates have a plan where the rest of them escape suspicion through Made's demand for attention? Made is just a sacrificial lamb in the hopes that his team won't get suspicion because of it?

I don't really think that's credible. Ping remains on Juliets.

Didnt Canuck mention this theory first? If not her then someone else posted that Made was distracting the whole thread for possibly bad reasons...

I don't think it was canuck, but SVS did. SVS used my confusion of what she was talking about with LC as an example of me derailing the thread. I later find out they were talking about another game entirely.

juliets wrote:
bea wrote: JC. Mafia's way better than that other thing you've got going on.
Ha Ha Ha bea! I just noticed this. We confiscated your husband and had a good time with him! Draft party is at your house next year!

I swear is everyone here like best friend in real life?? I'm honestly kind of jealous.

Oh shit, Correction
I think he's getting shit on so that he'd be persuaded to full out denounce me rather than just voice suspicion like he has been.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:
S~V~S wrote: Made, do you still distrust Enrique? Or did you back off of that?
In light of recent events, Enrique has my strongest civvie read, second only to you.

Honestly I think he's getting shit so he'll conform with the Made baddy theory
That sounds like a baddie move to me, to conform like that. Or do you know Enrique well enough to predict his actions?

I talk to him daily on irc. He may say nothing in irc matter in mafia, but everything he's said sounds too much like his normal train of thought to think otherwise.

Edit: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 400#p79870

Thanks MM

Read from this post: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 400#p79824

To this post:http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 400#p79870

This isn't the full page, but it's all the relevant parts of the page.

S~V~S wrote:Page 36? I only have 25 pages (my settings are 60 posts per page). Can you give us a link?

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... start=1400

Not sure if this will work, if it doesn't hmu.

Voting for Juliets. My reasoning can be very quickly summed up by reading page 36.
Still very wary of MR.

Note the above post is a continuation of my previous post.

Of course he's given his opinion on me, both postive and negative. People who say other wise have garnered my suspicion (see MR being on my "short list")

Linki-I have no intentions to vote llama

Linki- oh, pronouns suck. The fact so many people could hide in this WIFOM is why I don't want to vote based on llama being silenced.

S~V~S wrote: Made, do you still distrust Enrique? Or did you back off of that?

In light of recent events, Enrique has my strongest civvie read, second only to you.

Honestly I think he's getting shit so he'll conform with the Made baddy theory

If you're referring to when I said "boogs, bulls" I was continuing the list of people I hadn't gave strong opinions on day 1.

People who me or llama hadn't gave strong opinions on would be the last people thought to silence llama

Bullzeye wrote:
Made wrote:After thinking it over further, I think it might be in our best intrest to ignore llama's mutenessness.
Think about it like this. Anyway you cut it, the best person to mute would be Llama. For example, let's say there's a team of Dana, Bea, canuck, squid, a person, space daisy, and anyone else i haven't stated strong opinions for this game. They're aware of the amount of how much flack i've gotten, but they're also aware of how little i've accused them this game. So, even if they don't use this to get me lynched, they'd use it to get anyone i've accused lynched. it a win win for way too many people; boogs, bullz (as he would of been silenced before i quoted him). I don't like these odds.
Why would it be 'win win' for me?

Metalmarsh89 wrote: I agree that llama is not a bad option for silencing, but why do you have to involve yourself in the reasoning? Tbh, I think you would be prime target for silencing.
FWIW Llama could have been silenced to draw attention to Made or anyone else he'd discussed. But I do think for Made to just assume that that's definitely it is a bit odd

Just reread llama, he persued me almost solely. It's not odd, it makes sense. The arguement I'm making is that anyone who hadn't been brought into the middle of llama/made would be pretty much safe from any fallout If we decided to lynch based on why he was silenced.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:After thinking it over further, I think it might be in our best intrest to ignore llama's mutenessness.
Think about it like this. Anyway you cut it, the best person to mute would be Llama. For example, let's say there's a team of Dana, Bea, canuck, squid, a person, space daisy, and anyone else i haven't stated strong opinions for this game. They're aware of the amount of how much flack i've gotten, but they're also aware of how little i've accused them this game. So, even if they don't use this to get me lynched, they'd use it to get anyone i've accused lynched. it a win win for way too many people; boogs, bullz (as he would of been silenced before i quoted him). I don't like these odds.
I agree that llama is not a bad option for silencing, but why do you have to involve yourself in the reasoning? Tbh, I think you would be prime target for silencing.

I involved myself because llama v made was probably the biggest thing that happened on day 1, or at least the most talked about thing. How would I be a good person to silence?

After thinking it over further, I think it might be in our best intrest to ignore llama's mutenessness.
Think about it like this. Anyway you cut it, the best person to mute would be Llama. For example, let's say there's a team of Dana, Bea, canuck, squid, a person, space daisy, and anyone else i haven't stated strong opinions for this game. They're aware of the amount of how much flack i've gotten, but they're also aware of how little i've accused them this game. So, even if they don't use this to get me lynched, they'd use it to get anyone i've accused lynched. it a win win for way too many people; boogs, bullz (as he would of been silenced before i quoted him). I don't like these odds.

S~V~S wrote:

Yeah, I remember this scene. loved this movie

Regardless, do people just avoid thinking about WIFOMs or do they attempt to cypher the circular logic?

S~V~S wrote:FWIW, discussing who silenced who and why is a total exercise in WIFOM. I have silenced people who suspected me as a baddie, and when people would say, "Hey that silenced person suspects SVS", I would say, "Right, and that's why I would never silence them cause it's too obvious". I have silenced people to frame other people, to shut them up if the suspected a teammate. It really could be anything. There could be a role like Alisha, or there could be a civvie silencer.

Civvie silencers generally silence in order to protect, not always, but often.

So I just googled what WIFOM means. Does WIFOM have a positive or negative conntation or neither?

As for the situation in front of us, I think you're on to something by trying to determine motives to figure out who it was

If to protect (via civvie)- No idea who it might be, he seemed pretty safe from being lynched.
If to deflect- It's someone who wants me dead.....actually let's roll with this one.... Everyone knows that i play a very unorthodox game. That's kinda my thing. Maybe the goal is to convince civvie i'm the type to put the wine infront of myself? So whoever muted Llama (by this logic) is a mafia who wants me dead.
If to really fucking deflect- Mafia is pretending that Llama is muted to give him some civvie cred.

I personally find my second point, to deflect, the most likely.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:llama hasn't posted today after almost 48 hours. I'm going to go out on a very short limb and guess that he's been silenced.

Now that makes me wonder who'd have done it.
Would it be logical to think the reason he was silenced was to make it seem as if someone who is civvie is guilty?

I mean you're not gonna mute someone because they're on to you. I mean, come day 3 llama would come forward and just continue talking.

As an alternative theory what if llama has a role that allows him to visit people and he visited someone who silences you for the day.
I actually don't think you did it, for that exact reason. Why do you assume that? Anyway, I'm trying to think of who else would, that is where I am becoming confused.

And to your thought that he visited someone and was silenced, that not only implies that he has a proactive role, but that there is another role that silences visitors. I've never seen such a role exist before, so I don't believe it is a role used in this game.

Hmm, I figured it was a pretty common role, Ik this was a role in misfits, the current felt game, and in mp's hip hop game. I have a very small pool of games to draw from.

quotes are hard, responces are colorful

Mongoose wrote:Made, that's a very creative explanation, but my guess is it's something more straightforward and someone silenced him on Night 1.
my theory 1 covers this. I just skipped to figuring out why he might of been silenced.
Day 2 is seeming so long. Anyone else?it's a three day "day" rather than 2 because labor day.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:llama hasn't posted today after almost 48 hours. I'm going to go out on a very short limb and guess that he's been silenced.

Now that makes me wonder who'd have done it.

Would it be logical to think the reason he was silenced was to make it seem as if someone who is civvie is guilty?

I mean you're not gonna mute someone because they're on to you. I mean, come day 3 llama would come forward and just continue talking.

As an alternative theory what if llama has a role that allows him to visit people and he visited someone who silences you for the day.

Also because I never responded to bea- yeah pretty much, she seemed too denfensive too fast, and then her remark about MR seemed to come out of no where. Her hesistation to talk about made/llama seemed kinda off.

juliets wrote:Why you suspect me is not speculation it is you presenting evidence for why I am bad. You seem to be trying everything you can to avoid explaining. Do you not have a real reason?

Made wrote:Pretty colors on dark backgrounds!
DFaraday wrote:As someone who also takes awhile to get going in games, I can't be too harsh towards JC. I don't really have strong opinions yet either, and she seems genuine enough to me. I also don't know what to make of the Made/Llama thing, so I'll just...

*vote MR* because why not.
The JC(that's Juliet right?) comment is intresting, but to defend a teammate like this seems like a really bad move? As a counterarguement, was anyone else defending her? Maybe he felt he needed to speak up for the sake of her longevity. Also, Probably voted MR for a reason.

[/quote]

And

Made wrote:
juliets wrote:
Made wrote:
juliets wrote:MR -
So you non-nonchalantly left us, 3 of us, on our own to do that whole challenge? Do you know how hard that was? So really what I get out of what you're saying is you didn't care - you had no desire to help the team out. This explanation just doesn't help me with my uneasiness about you. I think there is a fair chance you not only didn't care you planned to not help us after you checked out who was there and saw we were not your teammates. No one else who was part of our group did this and some people like bwt and mp came in as soon as they could after they found out about the event. So bottom line, you intentionally didn't help us and as a result we struggled and ended up here. I am uneasy about you so you get my vote today -

votes MR
This one.
Thats MR not MP. And what do you find suspicious about this post?
While I agree that we were short on people and disorganized and things were chaotic, this just seemed to come out of no where.

And

Made wrote:
Made wrote:Indepth read of Juliet-
Very early on put on the defensive by a joke (that im pretty sure llama said) but previous to that, the only thing of substance she said was reiterating SVS's No Lynch is a bad idea Remark.

I'm starting to come to the realization that responding to all arguements/points that anyone makes towards you is a very easy way to avoid suspision.

Noted for when i actually am mafia :P (read on Movingpicture incoming)

Linki- I haven't met you either, hello Dfareday!
Thought about Juliet further. The fact that she was put on the defensive so easily with so little accusations or theories is pretty intresting. While it could be interpreted as on the defensive, it could also be interpreted as not posting to slide under the radar, and appearing to make sure that all thoughts against her are surpressed. Is she normally this jumpy?

linki- oh, read DH, yeah, DP and Roxy are my dudes.

So yeah... I think I've been pretty specific...

Mister Rearranger wrote:I made Made's shortlist! If I had known that all it took to garner your suspicion was reference Enrique and you, I would have done so waaaay earlier in the thread.

So, is Epi suspicious to you too then?

Nah, just those who think Epi points are logical, but also think my theories are wild and whacky

Juliets wrote: if you are making up these wild theories to keep the eye away from others.

If I were still playing my unorthodox way, I'd post a list of everyone I've mentioned this game and everyone I haven't, but since that would be considered "wacky" someone else can do it for me

.

Speaking of which, I would like to propose a challenge, anyone who says my theories are wacky and make no sense, hmu. I will address every "wild" theory to the point of over explanation if requested.

Now for my reads.

As of now my two main people of suspect are JC and MR. Due to my theories apparently being distracting, nonsensical, illogical, etcetc, I will not provide speculation on these post.

It's funny, while I was trying to post this on my computer(this was all typed from my phone) MR did me a solid and gave me a new top suspious post.

Mister Rearranger wrote: I would be interested to see if Enrique can practice what he preaches here and bring other names to the table. Because all I've seen is him acting as arbiter between Made and various people. Maybe as a protective teammate? Maybe for vindication if Made were lynched and was civ? Maybe just out of his defensive nature (I recall Enrique being quite scrappy and holding his own in LP games )? Of that, I can't be sure.

As for juliets

juliets wrote:MR -
So you non-nonchalantly left us, 3 of us, on our own to do that whole challenge? Do you know how hard that was? So really what I get out of what you're saying is you didn't care - you had no desire to help the team out. This explanation just doesn't help me with my uneasiness about you. I think there is a fair chance you not only didn't care you planned to not help us after you checked out who was there and saw we were not your teammates. No one else who was part of our group did this and some people like bwt and mp came in as soon as they could after they found out about the event. So bottom line, you intentionally didn't help us and as a result we struggled and ended up here. I am uneasy about you so you get my vote today -

votes MR

Also the fact that epi got so little shit for his super vague post, but I stare down the barrel of a gun for making a "genuine effort to scum hunt" ,as the kids say, really pisses me the fuck off.

My computer keeps crashing. As soon as I can stay on long enough to post, I will.

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:Keterman is now replacing Black Rock.

He cannot be targeted at night and Black Rock cannot be voted on the poll.

Oh god, not this kid....

Mister Rearranger wrote: Epi's thoughts today touched on some things that I'd been pondering as well.

What specifically, I'm curious exactly what part of his post spoke to you.

I take back my post(well partly) MM had an arguement against Enrique.

juliets wrote:Who made the case on Enrique? i want to look back at it to make sure I understand it. Even better, can someone summarize what it is about Enrique that is making people nervous?

The only case (to my knowledge) made on Enrique during this day was mine which (intentionally) had no basis.

Intresting that so many others are saying they distrust him all of the suddent...

As there seems to be some confusion, do to labor day weekend, the vote doesn't end tonight, it ends tomorrow.

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

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

Typing this a second time because cellphones suck...

Is my acknowledging theories where I'm bad really that distracting? When it comes down to it, that's what my unorthodox play style is grounded in.

I will attempt to play in a way that ping less people, but still pigeonholes baddies. If this doesn't work, I'll probably revert to how I naturally play.

Also, MM was forced voted/voted hella early?

Made wrote:
Long Con wrote: Sort of. It was the way she repeated the warning, it rang false to me and made me suspect that her purpose for doing so was to have *good, Civvie-intentioned content* in the thread. That's what my gut said. If you don't understand it, then feel free to disregard it. It's my suspicion, my gut, not yours.
I get your suspicion. Twice this game( suggesting no lynch, and trying to determine odds off numbers i couldn't possibly know) SVS has told me thing i was suggesting either benifited Mafia/or were classic mafia moves.

Regardless, I don't currently suspect her as mafia. However, you suspicion has definately warrented another Full SVS read.

Also, there's no reason for SVS to be deserperate, yet anyways. I read her quick succession post as more Angry/Impatience.

I plan to reread you too btw, thought you might want to know that

.

Long Con wrote: Sort of. It was the way she repeated the warning, it rang false to me and made me suspect that her purpose for doing so was to have *good, Civvie-intentioned content* in the thread. That's what my gut said. If you don't understand it, then feel free to disregard it. It's my suspicion, my gut, not yours.

I get your suspicion. Twice this game( suggesting no lynch, and trying to determine odds off numbers i couldn't possibly know) SVS has told me thing i was suggesting either benifited Mafia/or were classic mafia moves.

Regardless, I don't currently suspect her as mafia. However, you suspicion has definately warrented another Full SVS read.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
Made wrote:
Long Con wrote:Caught up here at Port Perry fair. I didn't click on that pastebin thing, but I don't understand what Made was up to with that "recreate the situation" a stuff. Was the point to make a game part that was offsite as the Chatzy was offsite? And then to argue with Enrique over the contents, which would then be made unavailable, I guess?
Also, some how missed this. My goal with the Enrique pastebin was to get people talking about enrique, and gauge reactions.
My reasoning for using pastebin was because I could post time stamped text text outside the thread so i could late verify that my opinions of Enrique starting a certain time were not how i actually felt.
Please don't do that anymore. We try as much as possible to rely on what is in thread. Basing in game decisions on non thread stuff is frowned upon.

Linki, read all of his posts, or any of them. Read his sig. he suspects me, and I am perplexed as to why.
I have to agree with SVS here. Posting things outside the thread that can be manipulated so that not everyone may be able to see is essentially against the rules. I'm not of the mindset that you would do such a thing, but I don't think that should allow the excuse. There is a perfectly good reason we are not allowed to edit posts, and this is not much different. So for future purposes, I would ask that don't do it again, but just explain yourself in the game thread at the point you want to reveal your thought process.

Signatures are also kind of iffy. I personally don't like the idea of putting game-related content in sigs either for reasons already listed.

Gotcha, will refrain from doing any of those things.

S~V~S wrote:Mainly I want to know why LC persists in suspecting me when i have addressed his points.

I feel like i'm also missing the part where he suspects you.

Long Con wrote:Caught up here at Port Perry fair. I didn't click on that pastebin thing, but I don't understand what Made was up to with that "recreate the situation" a stuff. Was the point to make a game part that was offsite as the Chatzy was offsite? And then to argue with Enrique over the contents, which would then be made unavailable, I guess?

Also, some how missed this. My goal with the Enrique pastebin was to get people talking about enrique, and gauge reactions.
My reasoning for using pastebin was because I could post time stamped text text outside the thread so i could late verify that my opinions of Enrique starting a certain time were not how i actually felt.

Long Con wrote: If anyone can verify S~V~S' claim about how her Roxy challenge warning works, someone who played the game with her, then that would be good. I don't think the specific meaning of the warning, or the claim that Made was doing what she warned against, affects my gut ping, since it was due to the frequency and earnestness of her warnings, as I recall.

I have no clue what you're talking about LC
linki- Redirect what? I misinterpreted the above message apparently. If this message was about another game, then why was i mentioned in it?

The way I understood the message was that you claimed that Roxy gave a warning to me. I didn't remember a warning from roxy, but i did remember one from Dispol.I was curious why you thought I was given the warning I was talking about, so I asked. I'm still not sure what warning you or LC are talking about.

S~V~S wrote:That is not a relaxation. That is a clarification.

Nah, Relaxation. She said "it will cease again." implying that at one point discussing this was against the rules.

Night!

Roxy wrote:
Enrique wrote:BIH DF.

@Hosts: Are we allowed to speculate about why there was only one kill, the teams, and all that stuff? I'm still a little confused by this.
If it pleases thyself to wonder about the universe that is this game then by all means please thyself.

One smidgen of a rolehint/role outing etc it will cease again.

Yes she did SVS, but thanks for the vote!

S~V~S wrote:You are talking about something totally different, Made. What warning?

During the Made/Llama saga, chat started moving really fast and we as a forum were on the subject of roles. Dispor said we were getting close to what could considered role speculating and that we needed to be careful.

Made wrote:
Long Con wrote: or the claim that Made was doing what she warned against
Dispor made the warning while Roxy was away. Roxy is also the one who made the rule system. I don't think anyone's claimed the person who got hit with a warning was me beside me. Regardless, Roxy has since laxed her rules in regards to speculation.

Just reread what LC said, SVS, you thought the warning was directed towards me?

Long Con wrote: or the claim that Made was doing what she warned against

Dispor made the warning while Roxy was away. Roxy is also the one who made the rule system. I don't think anyone's claimed the person who got hit with a warning was me beside me. Regardless, Roxy has since laxed her rules in regards to speculation.

Also in regards to Hedgie Gate, two reasons (i've seen ) make her suspect
1. She said the MP and SVS were both suspicious, but in a way that would of allowed her to bail if SVS or MP flipped civvie
2. She got suspicous of, and then voted for SVS very quickly without giving a strong reason.

S~V~S wrote:What does that even mean?

I'm not saying Bullz is bad. I'm saying his allignment might be able to be deduced from what he's said, specifically in that quote.

Spacedaisy wrote:
bea wrote:Imma go.with.some.combo.of.both. the.Mr f.comparisons are apt methinks.
If we are of the mind that he plays very like Mr. f let me just say that I'm his first game, as his Baddie teammate I watched him play balls to the wall. We warned him certain actions are suspish and he said, screw it I am doing it my way anyhow. So, to be honest this all over the place stuff does not sit well with me because it is easy to write it off as someone being new, but I have see first hand how someone can play people using that newb card.

I have never, and will never play the noob card. I know exactly what i'm doing and i'm calculated. Read me otherwise and you're reading me wrong.

S~V~S wrote:Bullz lives in England, Faraday lives in Texas, so yeah, they probably were not on at the same time. He has not played a "strange game" he has actually given an opinion on everyone. And if you are trying to make a behavior based theory on someone, you can't "exclude" behavior that does not fit your theory.

You can when looking for abnormalities. What i'm saying is that his opinions weren't strong, including his on Me, Llama, You (SVS), Hedge.
Note this theory isn't really saying he's good or bad. Heck, the fact that he was so focused on one/two people might even appear more likely to be civvie. I mean fuck up the only theory you had all game and you wouldn't look too hot. By that logic, mafia would be hesistant to put all of their eggs in one basket.

I think everyone should read this, specifically MP's

Bullzeye wrote:So these are the opinions I have found about the people who are currently on the poll.

MP - I feel like MP started out by saying a lot without saying very much at all. He has a lot of posts with a lot of words in them but doesn't do much with them. Other than SVS he hasn't really came out strongly against anyone. He seemed like he might lean toward Made early on but was never convinced and now seems to have gone away from it entirely, which is fine. Also in my opinion he got quite defensive over Epi's suspicion of him.

SVS - I never know what to think of her in general. She has seemed very focused in her pursuit/suspicion of Made and I think her responses to MP's accusations against her have been quite reasonable. I definitely don't see this 'fabricated suspicion' that MP claims is there, I think she has genuine and understandable reasons to distrust Made. I also think that even baddies usually have genuine suspicions. Furthermore, others are suspicious of him for similar reasons but MP only seems to suggest that SVS' suspicion is the dishonest one. Having read the exchanges between these two I would have to say if one of them is definitely bad and the other civ I'd lean towards trusting SVS. That's not to say I'll vote MP today though but I do have an eye on him so far.

Daisy - It's great to see someone with just three posts after going through SVS and MP's! Only one of her posts is really on topic but I know she's usually very busy so that means little or nothing to me. Her read of MP could be particularly damning for him.

BWT - Just after the challenge ended he said there'd been no serious game-related discussion yet, so maybe he ought to be careful what he wishes for!! Seriously though I do share his dismay at having to keep reading a novel's worth of text every time I log in. He is another who is suspicious of MP and shares my view that MP has said a lot without saying much. I also agree with him that we should back off from the Llama/Made fling for now. He seems pretty genuine and in my experience he's more blendy as a baddie so I'm leaning civ on BWT for now.

Juliets - I'm not feeling great about JC. In my opinion she seems to be trying to fly under the radar, not coming out against anyone. Most of her posts say that she isn't suspicious of Made or Llama but she doesn't seem to make much, if any, effort to say who she is suspicious of. The only hint at who might get her vote today is that she says she will vote to save Llama if necessary. My gut says she's not trustworthy and trying to be blendy.

Llama - I was enjoying not having too many posts to comb through He comes off here much like his usual civvie self in my opinion.

Lizzy - Has been missing since Tuesday! Maybe we need to form a search party. Her seven posts are pretty standard Lizzy material. That said, none are on topic or serious in nature but since she disappeared during day zero that's sort of to be expected. I'd like to hear more from her because I know she can be a tricky and dangerous baddie.

LC - I think his point about 'you would know' as a common phrase was good and agree with his view on Made. I'd like to hear more from him though. There isn't enough for me to get much of a feel for where he stands this game. It looks like he might be suspicious of SVS but other than that I'm not sure.

MR - Hasn't posted in a while. The last thing he said was he was joining the 'want to hear more from Made/Rey group' which, as Rey pointed out, he's the founding member of. So I'm not sure what he meant by that. Now that his game is over he might have more time for us so hopefully he makes it in today and can share some of his thoughts.

Canuck - I feel... okay about Canuck. I trusted her for a while in Misfits and was wrong to but here I think she looks quite genuine and I like her point that the baddies could be 'using this insane Made-centric firestorm to stay out of the way and out of memory'. With so much discussion centred around so few people I think it'd be very easy for someone to fly under the radar. She's another I'd like to hear more suspicion from but I feel reasonably good about her.

Dana - Trusted her in Misfits too and I was right for a change. Here she has said a fair bit but, like MP, hasn't really said much. I'm not sure how I feel about her yet.

Made - I doubt I'll vote Made at this point. I think everything that has happened with him here is basically the same as in Misfits, he's just one of those players I guess. I don't necessarily think he's a civ just yet, but I'm not calling him suspicious either.

So overall I guess this is where I stand on the players who are actually on today's poll:

Feel good about: SVS, Llama, BWT, Canuck

Unsure: Daisy, Lizzy, LC, MR, Dana, Made

Feel bad about: MP, JC.

He went on to vote for Juliet.

Based on my reread of him, Bullz has so far played a very strange game. Basically, all he's done (exluding arguements towards Juliet/MP) is attempt to bring accusations and theories to a middle ground.

At this point, the only thing i'm thinking right now is that DF and Bullz weren't on the same time.

Also, Dana needs to say more words.

Killing a thread 101

S~V~S wrote:This is a young man with a future.

Just re-read the first page.... and thought about something....
Two theories based on information that I totally 100% know and is not assumed at all always
1.What if the knight has no BTSC? It wasn't specfically stated that they do, and can't all they say is "NI"? Maybe they can "NI" other team members?
2. What if there's a team of Knights who say "NI" that can't talk to each other all looking for Roger, every night? Their win condition would be killing Roger then finding and destroy hisher shrubbery

(In all seriousness, based on the fact that it's just the knight(no s) that says ni, we can (probably) assume that s/he is a member of a team of no other knights as while a team that all want Roger dead sounds hilarious, it also sounds quite unlikely.)

Any idea of what other characters/roles would be on the same team as The Ni Knight?
Also, Who's Roger (the Character)?

Linki- I see yo' thristy eyes Enri. watch the throne brah

bea wrote: I think there's plenty here in the thread itself to look at as far as Made goes, but of all the day one cases against him, I found SVS's the easiest and most thread based to follow fwiw.

I agree with this.

Search found 340 matches