The Syndicate

juliets wrote:So made, I'm just dense. What are you saying with that pastebin? And I agree with MM, can we keep everything in the thread? I know your practice testing - at least I think thats what you said - so you can't answer now but maybe when you are finished with the test.

Basically, my goal was to artifically create a scenerio similar to that of Me v Llama from "yesterday" to see who comes out against who, and who doesn't. I fIgured me vs Enrique was weird enough to really throw people off.

Catching up with everything now.

Enrique wrote:Yeah, Made... why would you make that assumption in the first place?

Honestly, because assumptions are fun. They also allowed me to get a theory. When SVS pointed out I assumed even, I edited my theory to account for additional people.

Since no one''s called me on it yet, I also assumed that if someone critizied Hedge they weren't teammates. I just assumed this because i would help is get a smaller group of candidates for questioning

As for your other comment about questioning you Enrique...

Ignore the last line of that,
I'm taking an Practice ACT so I wouldn't be able to post this when the timer in my Signature ends. The forum's been too slow to day to try to alarm everyone anyways :/

bea wrote:yes - what goosey said re: hedgy - the vote and suspish of svs seemed to come out of left field from her. At the time it wasn't quite enough for me to want to day 1 vote her (I can't even remember if she was on the poll yesterday now. It's hell getting old kids) - but it definately made me "wait? what? a minute. It didn't help any that I thought her list was somehow a JC post.

Just checked, She was not on yesterday's poll

reywaS wrote:
Made wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Do you have an opinion on HIS opinion of Hedgie? All you said was that he was replying to you.
Blending in, no one was defending hedgie so it makese sense to hide there. I'd also suspect his teammate didn't have an opinion on Hedgie in chat as to not appear buddie with his teammate
What reason do you think he had for voting MR, since you think he had one?
well let's think about it two ways
If he voted to distance: His teammate probably voted MP (one hides very well the other hides in plain sight
If he voted to protect: His teammate is probably Juliet. Make her appear more likeable (this sounds less likely now that i've typed it out, but still possible)
So the overlap between people who voted for MP and those who are nudgie, or Juliet seem like a good place to start looking for teammates.
I could go back and forth on some of it~ distancing, or protecting teammates?
Samezies
The more i think about this^^^ the more suspicious it looks. I have seen no evidence to suggest that there are 2 person baddie teams. Two person baddie teams are a rarity in mafia. It's quite possible that Made knows a lot more about the baddie team(s) than he should if he was a civvie.

Nah, I just worked off the assumption that there was one teammate
In a later post i evaluated how my post would stand up against a team of two, an even number of teammates, and an odd one.

juliets wrote: Is this all that is out there or did I miss a big suspicion on her about something else?

Nah, that was pretty much it, it was bandwagoned pretty hard tho (myself included in the bandwagon.)

Night!

S~V~S wrote:I dunno, Made, could be, but I like trying to extrapolate from the posts of the known baddie. Juliets is afk for most of the weekend~ and Enrique put a lot of time into defending YOU, Made. If you turn on him, my reason for not trying to lynch you is out the window.

Anyhow, night

What ever, civvies gotta persue leads. He was just acting really off espeically when he was talking about me. he acknowledged his offness, but still...iunno

Epignosis wrote:First consider:

Like everyone else, the foes in this scenario would not have known that upon their demise at Night, they would be exposed as foes. Some pretense may be thus revealed.
...
I encourage people to look at all the names DF dropped, understanding that he most likely would NOT know that, were he killed, his alignment would be revealed.

My vote will go to one of those people.

Strong point, but I perfer to think mafia, regardless of if they think they're going to die soon, would asscociate themselves so closely.

"Today" I want to here from Enrique, and Juliet.

Also, in regards to the cross section between people who:
1. Voted nudge nudge
2. Voted MP
3. Didn't Critzies Hedge ( on pages 24 or 25 anyways...)
are BTW, SpaceDaisy, Canuck and MR.
When i was looking for people who critized hedge i found this, which pinged me really hard

Mister Rearranger wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Same question as for Enrique, MR, do YOU think the people who voted for MP are bad? Or do you just think they might be cause they voted for MP?
That block of BWT, Daisy, and Canuck is coincidental, to say the least. So they might be, but it'd be a very ballsy move by Daisy to push that strongly against MP so my thought (and vote) relied on me doubting that she's bad.

Coincidence is probably VERY likely, but intresting none the less. Most definately should be noted

*correction, not two teammates, making a team of 3, but two people on Df's team

S~V~S wrote:
Made wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Do you have an opinion on HIS opinion of Hedgie? All you said was that he was replying to you.
Blending in, no one was defending hedgie so it makese sense to hide there. I'd also suspect his teammate didn't have an opinion on Hedgie in chat as to not appear buddie with his teammate
What reason do you think he had for voting MR, since you think he had one?
well let's think about it two ways
If he voted to distance: His teammate probably voted MP (one hides very well the other hides in plain sight
If he voted to protect: His teammate is probably Juliet. Make her appear more likeable (this sounds less likely now that i've typed it out, but still possible)
So the overlap between people who voted for MP and those who are nudgie, or Juliet seem like a good place to start looking for teammates.
I could go back and forth on some of it~ distancing, or protecting teammates?
Samezies
Why do you keep saying "teammate" like there is only one?
No reason lol. Yeah, adjusting theories to account for multiple teammates
1.If there's two teammates everything i said is valid
2.if there's an even number of mafia then everything should be valid for at least one teammate of DF
3.If there's an odd number, the nudge nudge vs winky comment is very unlikely to be valid as one team would have more members on it, thus "team DF" would want the team with more of their teammates to win.
Also I have no idea what you are actually saying in the Hedgie part.
Crtizing Hedgie was done so DF would appear more civvie. Therefore those who were openly critizing him are less likely to be his teammate. I mean if you're going to accuse to blend in, you're not going to do with your teammate(s)

ignoring linki, just want to get this out before things get too active

Yeah from now on, do you need me to repaste?

S~V~S wrote:Do you have an opinion on HIS opinion of Hedgie? All you said was that he was replying to you.
Blending in, no one was defending hedgie so it makese sense to hide there. I'd also suspect his teammate didn't have an opinion on Hedgie in chat as to not appear buddie with his teammate
What reason do you think he had for voting MR, since you think he had one?
well let's think about it two ways
If he voted to distance: His teammate probably voted MP (one hides very well the other hides in plain sight
If he voted to protect: His teammate is probably Juliet. Make her appear more likeable (this sounds less likely now that i've typed it out, but still possible)
So the overlap between people who voted for MP and those who are nudgie, or Juliet seem like a good place to start looking for teammates.
I could go back and forth on some of it~ distancing, or protecting teammates?
Samezies

Pretty colors on dark backgrounds!

S~V~S wrote:OK, this is the totality of Faradays posts. The NP said "baddie" not SK or rogue, so I am going to assume he had teammates. Can ANYTHING be gleaned from this?

DFaraday wrote:Yay game! I will vote for wink wink, just because.
Teammate is probably on Nudge nudge ( insight to what the other team is doing/what's going on in the other chat)

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.

DFaraday wrote:
Also, I forgot to mention above, Hedge is looking pretty shady now.
Both this post and the previous are replies to what i said on my read list, they were also posted aroudn the same time. Not sure if this is relevant to anything, but felt it should be pointed out.

That's all i got yo
Thoughts?

S~V~S wrote:Under their avatar, click "in topic"

damn, that's faster. I've been reading using the bottom and organizing by player, then trying to find what page they're on.

S~V~S wrote:
Made wrote:
Roxy wrote: DFaraday has been killed! He was a baddie!!

um.....awesome?

um......conflicted?

nah, just didn't expect the alligment to be released. Honestly I was spetical of it. Not because I thought DFaraday was good, but because getting an allignment just isn't what I expected...

S~V~S wrote:And Made, is it "Made" like "made man" or "I made a cupcake" or is it "Mah-day" or other? I have no hipness when it comes to modern pop culture, so if this is a dumb question that most people know the answer to, sorry about that~

Linki

Although, yeah, vaguebooking sucks. My brother does it, and he is a drama queen :duds:

Made like when you make the cupcakes!

Roxy wrote: DFaraday has been killed! He was a baddie!!

um.....awesome?

because yoldaling

GOD wrote:"Orally"?? "Lust"??

What in My Name has been going on down here while I was on Holiday in Nice?

And no, Metalmarsh, you arse kisser. You know I find the Psalms depressing.

OMY, you got 99 problems, but a psalm ain't one.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: You sure about that? We saw this thread hit 30 pages for Day 1, and there's plenty of people playing who love to talk during the night. Me for starters.

Like who? I've been told talking at night was sort of an unorthodox thing.

juliets wrote:Everyone, we will be driving to the lake for labor day weekend tomorrow so i will be in the car until about 9:00pm. If I'm able to come on tomorrow I know there will be a billion pages to catch up on and thats what I'll do. I'll be on normally, which means in and out, for the time I am there.

You'll probably be fine, can't see people talking too much during night.

Epignosis wrote:Sorry to take you out Day 1 again, MP, but that role sounds horrific. So not sorry, really.

Made wrote:He is either a very helpful civvie, or maybe an independant role? Regardless, he should be watched. He's playing how i like to, and i find that terrifying.
Good God, you must be as talented as Sylvia Browne!

Kinda consider myself a Veronica Mars, but thank you!

Sick reads are in green

Made wrote:
Dana wrote:And don't forget about DP!
not for vote tonight.

Ok Indepth read of MP:
He's too on point. Everything he's said so far follows logic, and makes sense. Everything that he says that could possibly benifit mafia he acknowledges. He's "scum hutting" or w/e. I honestly don''t get votes against him anymore....

He is either a very helpful civvie, or maybe an independant role? Regardless, he should be watched. He's playing how i like to, and i find that terrifying.

Also I'm now calling my play style "Suicidal Civvie"-

OMG I CALLLED IT!!!!!!!!
INDY ROLLLL
WHERE YOUUUUU ATT??!?!?!?!?!?!

Epignosis wrote:
Made wrote:
Made wrote: 2.As for accountiblity, Nah, bascially what i'm saying is that instead of voting MP like everyone else (I still think you have a stronger arguement against you than he does), if you do eventually die, and flip civvie, I should be scrutinized.
holy fragment, before anyone misinterprets that, Instead of voting MP and having multiple people on my said saying "Well how could we of know" that kinda stuff....I'm going in with less suport. If you do eventually die, and filp civvie, i should be scrutinized.
I think you've had quite enough scrutiny. God.

The Trick to avoiding scrutiny:
1. Say someone's arguement is stupid and has no bases
2. Refute a single point
3. Ignoring the accusing player for the remainder of the day
4. Repeat 1-3 with other as need be.

Made wrote: 2.As for accountiblity, Nah, bascially what i'm saying is that instead of voting MP like everyone else (I still think you have a stronger arguement against you than he does), if you do eventually die, and flip civvie, I should be scrutinized.

holy fragment, before anyone misinterprets that, Instead of voting MP and having multiple people on my said saying "Well how could we of know" that kinda stuff....I'm going in with less suport. If you do eventually die, and filp civvie, i should be scrutinized.

juliets wrote:
Made wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Made wrote:Voted Juliet because I suspect her and want to persue this later.
Accountiblity and all that shit.
If we're going based off of "accountability", how do you feel about MR supposedly refusing to participate in the challenge?
pretty sure i missed that actually. I remember coming in with juliets saying Juliets was at work or something, but that's about all i remember.
linki
What do you mean accountability? Accountability for what?
Just want to make sure it's known to those who'll eventually read over this poll days from now that I, at this point of the game, found you most suspicious. It's pretty clear my vote really doesn't matter at this point.

linki- baller, go participation...explains the number of pages actually...
Well as for the first answer, Juliets doesnt work so that is not what you heard when you came into the chat.

And for the second answer, you seem to be saying accountability doesn't mean anything. So you're voting me for no reason. In other words, you don't like that I vouched for llama so you are retaliating by voting for me. Maybe I am mistaken in my vote

1.My bad, Meant to say you said MR was working
2.As for accountiblity, Nah, bascially what i'm saying is that instead of voting MP like everyone else (I still think you have a stronger arguement against you than he does), if you do eventually die, and flip civvie, I should be scrutinized.
3.You can still change your vote

juliets wrote:and you really are bad.

Yes I am

ignoring linkis, need to post this....

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Made wrote:Voted Juliet because I suspect her and want to persue this later.
Accountiblity and all that shit.
If we're going based off of "accountability", how do you feel about MR supposedly refusing to participate in the challenge?

pretty sure i missed that actually. I remember coming in with juliets saying Juliets was at work or something, but that's about all i remember.
linki

What do you mean accountability? Accountability for what?

Just want to make sure it's known to those who'll eventually read over this poll days from now that I, at this point of the game, found you most suspicious. It's pretty clear my vote really doesn't matter at this point.

linki- baller, go participation...explains the number of pages actually...

Bullzeye wrote:I do like that almost everybody has voted. Hopefully the others show up too!

Yeah, the only people who haven't voted yet are dana, lizzy, and squid.

Voted Juliet because I suspect her and want to persue this later.
Accountiblity and all that shit.

S~V~S wrote:
Made wrote:Then again.... people who would be most intrested in the game would be those with important roles, and the irresponcible....

(also, pure speculation, is that a reoccuring pattern? those talking most towards the beginng of the game being the ones that are bad, or things like that)
thirdly SVS, should we then just ignore the challege (save from things that are really suspicious of course)
No we can't ignore it, but trying to lynch people based solely on the challenge has zero to do with who is bad and who is good. When I played Roxys previous game with a very similar challenge, I was very participatory, and so were ALL of my teammates. And we manipulated the civvies hard into turning on each other for false loyalties.

No we can't ignore them. But I intend to watch for that sort of manipulation, for sure. It works. Ask Juliets

first thing that pinged me, fuunny enough it. more for Juliet rather than SVS

S~V~S wrote: The bolded part makes no sense at all. Of course I believe it. He got my eye on Day Zero for the No Lynch thing to start, but then for saying he was tempted to do the maths re odds. How? With one number? He would have to have some additional knowledge of the composition of the roles to do that, and indeed, at some later point he speculated about how many baddies were split between teams.

note to self, SVS does not like when you weight odds based on nothing.

Hmm.. intresting thing is , while actions seem to make me think SVS is the way to go, the reasoning behind these actions make sense.
I can easily follow her train of thought, reasoning and suspicion(something i could never do last game). I hate when people use this word in mafia, but she seems genuine. I have a feeling that as a new player it's very possible that with knowledge of the moves/choices i made last game, and now along with reasoning she's intentionally psyching me out. I'm not very sus of her in a textbook way anyways.

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.

Also,sorry bout that, too many M's (btw Mr Moustache isn't MM, it's the other MM right?)

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.

Hedgeowl wrote:[ He is a new player and people were convinced he was bad in misfits, because he played how they expect a baddie to play. Expand your horizons, open your minds.

Nobody do this, it's a trap, trust me. Go back to sleep Sheeple.
Ok catching up.

S~V~S wrote:
Enrique wrote:No, I'm saying I don't like early bandwagoning like that.
You would rather have the votes spread? That opens thing up to manips, if there are any, and generally favors the baddies in general.

How so? Personally I perfer that over 2-3 candiates because
1. More leads means more people (being critical of others opens you to suspicion imo) actively playing, by that logic more civvies.
2. Theories have a weird way of tying into each other, giving civvies the best possible chance of a good lynch
3. Less of a chance everyone'll gang up on me.
People in this color i plan to reread before the vote
The Hedgeowl Hedging, and now Llama arguing that Enri's hedging... pretty sure one of them's bad...
With everything I just read here's a list of who i would suspect. At this point...
SVS (For accusing me harder than llama, this poisition specifcally could change radically depending on my reread) > Juliet( Lack of talking on issues not directly related to them/ adding nothing to conversation) > MP (Same as juliet but to a lesser extent.) > Hedgeowl (Hedging) > Dana + Canuck (Just gut..they haven't pinged me, but the fact that they've been around for so long and haven't slightly is off putting.)

linki- The MP V. Juliet comment....that's probably the biggest thing of suspect i've noticed this game.
linkie x2
Linkies rule everything around me L.R.E.A.M (x3)
dolla dolla dolla linki y'all (x4)

Tomorrow, I'm going to start tldring things on a document on my Signature. of course, it'll be nothing like reading the whole thread, but it'd be a great way to get context to make skimming more effective. For the sake of bias and stuff/keeping it objective I'll list all who endorse my summarry, and allow for a space where those who disagree can voice there disagreements.

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.

Dana wrote:And don't forget about DP!

not for vote tonight.

Ok Indepth read of MP:
He's too on point. Everything he's said so far follows logic, and makes sense. Everything that he says that could possibly benifit mafia he acknowledges. He's "scum hutting" or w/e. I honestly don''t get votes against him anymore....

He is either a very helpful civvie, or maybe an independant role? Regardless, he should be watched. He's playing how i like to, and i find that terrifying.

Also I'm now calling my play style "Suicidal Civvie"-

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!

Dana wrote:
Mongoose wrote: linki - Dana - We are an accepting bunch - don't be intimidated
Everyone here has been so nice! It's just intimidating because many people have masters and grad school and PhD super-smarts. It's a bit scary in a game like mafia where a whole lot of it or probably most of it is mind games and thinking things through.

keep in mind, a lack of experience does make you unpredictable in a very strangely predictable way. Just play what makes sense, and don't play by other's rules (beside roxy's).

Gonna try to find something intresting on Juliets....

thellama73 wrote:
Dana wrote:I'm trying to figure out what Llama's personality is like but it's very confusing.
Witty, with a hint of troll. Occasionally caustic. I love jokes. I love to amuse myself. I find weird things very funny. I have a quiet intensity, and am prone to overenthusiasm and mild obsession. Generally very optimistic. Erudite, logical, analytical, but also creative. Easily irritated by people I find irritating. Passionate. Definitely a romantic (as opposed to a cynic or a realist). Literary, musical, and fond of films. Eclectic in taste and interests. Opinionated. Introverted. Moral, honest, and whatever the adjective version of integrity is. Integral? Skeptical of modernity and fads, but credulous in terms of the mystical. An anarchist who loves moustaches.

linki: we love you, BWT, and hope you will stay.

Also, you very quickly established rapport with me in this post, and i don't like that.

thellama73 wrote: Also, people who misrepresent or misread what I write. 90% of my annoyance in the back and forth with Enrique was because of him misquoting/misrepresenting things and I said and me having to correct him.

And suddently I'm certain Enrique is civ. At least assuming he plays Civvie how i interact with him in irc.

thellama73 wrote:
Dana wrote: Did someone imply Made and BWT were teammates or did he say it all by himself?
If BTW is a good guy and Made is a good guy then technically we are all on BTW's Team, I think.
Made said he was "throwing BWT under the bus" a phrase usually reserved for teammates. I asked him if he was on a team with BWT and he said "I am not on BWT's team" which implies that BWT has a team.

Regarding your second point, if the civvies are a team, then Made implied that either BWT or himself is not civ when he said "I am not on BWT's team."

You see?

Dana, for all intent and purposes, read llama like you would read things hotkeys would say...

Said this in a public IRC Channel then realized it's totally BTSC as there are others in the channel also playing... my bad

<Jeremiah> hey Hotkeys
<Hotkeys>(none player) hi
<Jeremiah> wanna sub for me in a game of mafia?
<Jeremiah> ....if i live.....

I'll say this, Juliet hasn't posted much, so i want to hear from her. Right now she seems like the most solid lead
as for reeds on all others

Mp- off my radar, super hard. No clue what he's doing
SVS- in my head( and i guess now outloud) i'm weighing the possiblity that Llama and SVS are teammates on a none civvie team as SVS defended Llama, then agreed that dropping this arguement in more concrete leads was more logical (which she said before she agreed with llama that what i was saying was sus.
llama- see above. I don't think he lied. probably just memory, he acknowled the possiblity of doubt early on so i want to let it slide
Spacedasiy- Doesn't exist
BWT- Basically, they were there during the game, and as it has been pointed out, contributed during the challenge, destroying any points/objections i'd have against him
Long Con- Doesn't exist
Lizzy- doesn't exist
MR- Exist, no read
Canuck- her sense of humor is hard to get a concrete reliable read on. Maybe the no solid Made v Llama arguement applies to her?
Dana- since she knows how i attmepted to read her last game, I set new qualification for what in my head would be considered civvie or otherwise. Hf with D

That's all I got. Going to do my homework for real this time....

thellama73 wrote:Made didn't answer my question, so I'll ask BWT.

BWT, are you on a team with Made? I asked him and he didn't say no. A lot like the Bagpipe Who Didn't Say No.

sorry, just figured it was the kind i could just brush off

I am not on BWT's team.

Made wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Made wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
S~V~S wrote: Linki~ I bet BWT doesn't like what Made says about him
Out of curiosity, what are you referring to here? Because I'm lost.
I all but threw you under the bus when MP asked me if i had any suspects or anyone who seemed off.
Okay. That's what I was thinking, but I thought SVS was referring to something else that happened in addition to that. Nevermind then.
People who play BWT, would you expect this from civvie BWT?

To specify, I was expecting a larger responce about the points against him rather than just an oh ok. iunnno

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Made wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
S~V~S wrote: Linki~ I bet BWT doesn't like what Made says about him
Out of curiosity, what are you referring to here? Because I'm lost.
I all but threw you under the bus when MP asked me if i had any suspects or anyone who seemed off.
Okay. That's what I was thinking, but I thought SVS was referring to something else that happened in addition to that. Nevermind then.

People who play BWT, would you expect this from civvie BWT?

Basically, I'm not good at making friends.

It sucks. Ik that burden of proof for another compelling arguement is on me, but I just don't have the time to read through the entire thread again. Not before the next vote anyways....

And since I like my goats to be front and center, to address arguements against Juliet, the arguement is strong. It didn't ping me, but in retrospect it was strange.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
S~V~S wrote: Linki~ I bet BWT doesn't like what Made says about him
Out of curiosity, what are you referring to here? Because I'm lost.

I all but threw you under the bus when MP asked me if i had any suspects or anyone who seemed off.

thellama73 wrote:I am intrigued by Dana. I agree with SVS's assessment. Her behavior seems strange to me. Not necessarily suspicious, but strange. Possibly New Person Syndrome, where I can't read her. But she intrigues me and I want to hear more from her.

I'm not sure yet on her either. like not the suspicious not sure, just no clue yet.

also my goats are GOAT so there's that.

Search found 340 matches