The Syndicate

I think this was the first game i've ever played as baddie that I didn't loathe myself. Also kinda salty that I got 2/3rds a baddie team and Dom pinned as mafia when I died first time around :/


Oh speaking of my death first time around: I thought I had two lynch pardons, mean I Could be lynched twice with no consequence. I was wrong

I was the other bad team btw.

Mongoose wrote:ENDGAME:



The Hacks have won the game!

Congratulations to Ricochet, Metalmarsh & TurnipHead 2.0!

Well played everyone. GGs all round.

Long Con wrote:Just do me a favour and remember this for future games. Remember all of this. When we find out who the baddies are, study their behaviour this game, and remember it. It would be nice to try and prevent this Civvie debacle of a game from repeating itself, we have to become better Civvies and get a few wins this year.

IF you honestly believe that you are the last civvie left, and this lynch is hopeless, then who are you talking to?

Long Con wrote:Rico, if you're a baddie then just vote with your teammate Made. If you are actually a Civvie, and you want to lynch a baddie before the baddies win, then vote for Made. I don't know why a baddie would continue messing with me like this.

What do you mean I wouldn't vote for Made?? I have said several times that I think he's a baddie. I would love to vote for Made. I really don't know where you got that impression.

Here's where I'm at: LC seems to be playing to his own "civvie" perspective without thinking about what other civvies (or the other civvie, however it might be at this point) are thinking.
If LC were a civvie, and thought Rico and I were on the same team, then convincing both of us to vote each other wouldn't make sense, as under his previous theory only one of us could be civvie..
I think the idea that each of us are the last civvie is bogus. If it's true, I've already lost, but since the chance exist that it's not true, we should keep playing, instead of just giving up. LC, shouldn't of given up, and if he did, he just lost me the game.


Basically, the combination of aggressiveness( by setting up this ridiculous ultimatum in the first place, bullying votes) and passive/despair("like really REALLY doesn't matter") that LC is putting on doesn't add up to me. Voting him now.

Damn it, LC. I had a question i was just about to ask you that's now irrlevant....before we waterfall, let me get a post out.

Turnip Head wrote:Made was vehemently against a tie yesterday... why? Trying to win the war of attrition?

While there's the chance we lynch a civve, town can't possibly lynch a baddie if we tie, so we can't tie. Not sure what you meant by the second question.

Or LC and TH miss the vote and we tie canuck v TH.

Ricochet wrote:Would a tie be bad because of no death, you mean?

Yeah

Basically at this point TH has to vote Canuck. IF you, rico don't vote Canuck, TH dies. IF TH is the last to vote, and LC votes TH, we end in a tie. IF TH isn't the last to vote, and he established the majority on canuck, then either last voter saves her or she's dead.

Voted Canuck to avoid the tie.

I'm still most comfortable with a--shit just figured something. let's say I, Th and rico vote LC. If Lc then votes to save himself, we have a tie, which is, you know, bad..... think i might have to vote Canuck t-- even then that's kinda shitty to because i doubt LC would vote Canuck over TH.

LC, with a tie being very possible, who would you are you considering tonight?

Let's try this one:
LC, why shouldn't I vote you?

Turnip Head wrote:Made, what do you think of Canuck? I think she's more likely to be bad than LC. What's got LC at the top of your list in any case?

She's reading really fucking genuine, which is throwing me off. LC lack of reasoning for his opinions ( or at least lack of a willingness to explained them)

Ricochet wrote:It is.

I must say, very impressive game you're playing,especially for a first one.

Canucklehead wrote: Where you voting, Made?

Still looking LC, but in the mean time, Rico, this is your first game correct?

Rereading Rico and Th. This late in the game, i don't think we avoid blind spots decision. Everyone else should do the same (same as in analyze blind spots and see if anything is there. whomever that be.)

Long Con wrote:That's not how it is, TH. It's hard to judge whether you're a Civvie who feels that way, or a lone Hack. The way your last post reads... it feels a bit Hackish. My main point is, I'm really, truly, not a Brotherhood member. I think, were I a baddie, I wouldn't be saying this now. I have already said it, and I could just say nothing and the point would still be out there. But the reality is that I'm a Civvie, and this is not a Brotherhood ploy. It's becoming more and more likely that Dom and/or Canuck are Brotherhood members as the Civvie numbers dwindle, but I'm just a longtime Chump of this game. I think the longest-lived Civvie in a game like this must be the crappiest one, and that may just be me.

Missed this post when reading the thread, and think it might be relevant to who we'll end up voting tomorrow, so reposting it.


10!

S~V~S wrote:

Made wrote:

A Person wrote:

Ricochet wrote:What does that mean?

YOU'RE A NUT, YOU'RE CRAZY IN THE COCONUT

What does that mean?

SOMETIMES YOU FEEL LIKE A NUT, SOMETIMES YOU DON'T

A Person wrote:

Ricochet wrote:What does that mean?

YOU'RE A NUT, YOU'RE CRAZY IN THE COCONUT

What does that mean?

Vompatti wrote:I voted Turnip so we can maybe end the day early.

1

Oh hey, this pinged me actually, but for a possibly stupid reason. Maybe among the voters for Th, there's a civvie, which lead Vompetti to bandwagon, because his vote felt like to me, a bandwagon.

9

Mongoose wrote:It means if you have won more than one +1 vote for the various contests and events, you can use them in the same lynch vote.

The event will last until 10:30 PM EST.

In the interest of lynching LC, everyone with +1s should do that

Mongoose wrote:I know you all have voted but I'm going to let the day run a little bit longer so that those who want to get to 10 may do so.

So just me...k...... alright bout this

Made wrote:

Made wrote:

Made wrote:

Long Con wrote:So, Made as a baddie... he could have voted AP and given Canuck the ability to lynch AP, but he didn't. If he believed Canuck and I are both Civ, then the lynch was already cool whether it was two or three necks on the line. I'm assuming that since no one mentioned it, no one active at the end remembered Mongoose's tied-lynch ruling. SO, he didn't want to see AP in the mix for this lynch.

I'm not sure how i'm suppose to respond to this? With the amount of post and votes available to draw from, iunno, this just feel like a backwards approach. More like you want me to be rather than genuinely thinking I might be.

This might sound like a weird question, but with the above in my LC, what are you opinions on me?

Still waiting for a response to this. to add to it, What are your opinions on everyone this game?


7

Dom wrote:

Made wrote:Hello friends, sorry for my absence. School is very quickly becoming "a bitch" as the kid say. That said, I made a commitment to play and i plan to keep it. Starting here:

Turnip Head wrote:TurnipHead 2.0
3
Dom (6), Long Con (7), Canucklehead (8) 38%

Ladies and gentlemen, The Brotherhood? They seem awfully quick to get this over with. Maybe they're about to win. Oh well. I don't care anymore. Get me outta here.

Pretty much where i am at this point. I don't like this little team/possy that seems to be forming, especially this late in the game, especially considering i don't trust any of them, especially since they all voted together. Like let's put i this way: we have yet to lynch a baddie since MM, and you all, especially Canuck and LC, trust each other this much? This does not sit right with me in the slightest. And i feel all other players should look at this also.


and 1

Considering I voted Canuck a few days ago and it almost resulted in her dying... what the hell?

Because you voted with her two days in a row after the fact.
6?

I disagree, Pink!

Canucklehead wrote:

Made wrote:

Canucklehead wrote: But I have chosen to trust him at this late stage in the game, and it may very well be my downfall, but sometimes you gotta take a risk, and at this point I'm more comfortable with the unknown quantity that is LC than the REALLY unknown quantity that is Lizzie/Made.

This is my 5th day back, That was enough to feel like there was enough information to get me voted the first time. What make me more mysterious this time around?
4

Huh? This is a very odd comparison you're trying to set up.
LC has been active and playing since day 1, due to his being a participant and also not dying.
I'd argue his participation has been more off topic-topic than my post have been. Expressing suspicion very lacking in reasons. For example. Please point out the post where he suggest that Rico is bad, then post his reasoning.
Made 1.0 is not relevant to this question so far as I can see, and I'm pretty sure I didn't vote for you then, but regardless, at that point everyone was 5 days old, so you were equally as knowable as everyone else.
If you're argument is that by day 11, the bar has risen, I'd argue that the most recent stuff is the most relevant. I mean no one is looking at llama's lynch anymore are they? I was readded to the game so early on that my status as a 2.0 is irrelevant at this point. It's not we're looking back on votes to see who voted with or against baddies
Made 2.0 is an unknown quantity because his predecesor in the role posted maybe once the entire game. So while everyone else has 11 full and busy game days worth of stuff to judge on, Made 2.0 has 5....and those 5 aren't particularly revealing, given that they're mostly loooong pages of quotes and little engagement in back and forths.

the stuff between the quotes is what's relevant. But if you choose to ignore it, so be it I guess. As for conversational post vs. mass catch up post/cases . nothing i can really say to that
5

Canucklehead wrote: But I have chosen to trust him at this late stage in the game, and it may very well be my downfall, but sometimes you gotta take a risk, and at this point I'm more comfortable with the unknown quantity that is LC than the REALLY unknown quantity that is Lizzie/Made.

This is my 5th day back, That was enough to feel like there was enough information to get me voted the first time. What make me more mysterious this time around?
4

Long Con wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Would the baddies like to purchase my vote today?

Nice, we have a volunteer for the next lynch! Thanks, Rico, we can have a nice short day.

10!

Also this, what even is this?


And this post

Long Con wrote:Yo Made, sing me a song!

Screams cocky baddie who thinks he's already won.

3

pink responses are pink

Canucklehead wrote:

Made wrote:Hello friends, sorry for my absence. School is very quickly becoming "a bitch" as the kid say. That said, I made a commitment to play and i plan to keep it. Starting here:

Turnip Head wrote:TurnipHead 2.0
3
Dom (6), Long Con (7), Canucklehead (8) 38%

Ladies and gentlemen, The Brotherhood? They seem awfully quick to get this over with. Maybe they're about to win. Oh well. I don't care anymore. Get me outta here.

Pretty much where i am at this point. I don't like this little team/possy that seems to be forming, especially this late in the game, especially considering i don't trust any of them, especially since they all voted together. Like let's put i this way: we have yet to lynch a baddie since MM, and you all, especially Canuck and LC, trust each other this much? This does not sit right with me in the slightest. And i feel all other players should look at this also.


and 1

Who are you putting this show on for, Made? Rico is probably your teamie, Vomps isn't likely to be swayed by reason other than his own whim, TH is dead meat, and the rest of us have voted. Just setting up for tomorrow? Trying to sow dissension so that we don't lynch you next.
What? To start it wasn't hopeless when i sent that message. 3 votes in, 4 we were still waiting for.
Here's the game i'm currently seeing btw

Mongoose wrote: Listen all y'all, it's a sabotage.

Poll ended at Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:57:56 pm


A Person 2.0
5
Dom (6), Long Con (7), Canucklehead (11), Turnip Head (12), Ricochet (13) 36%
Canucklehead
1
Vompatti (10) 7%
Dom
0
No votes
Made 2.0
0
No votes
Long Con
1
Made (14) 7%
Ricochet
0
No votes
TurnipHead 2.0
0
No votes
Vompatti 2.0
0
No votes
By Being John Malkovich (Host/Mod/Deadie/NP/etc)
7
Mongoose (1), Metalmarsh89 (2), MovingPictures07 (3), zeek (4), Epignosis (5), timmer (8), Black Rock (9) 50%
Total votes : 14

and



My "trust" for Dom and LC is provisional at best. Currently, they seem the most interested in finding baddies, and the least likely to be baddies. The latter also holds true for Vomps. I am by no means certain of my instincts here, but at this point in the game with the numbers breaking down how they are, one has to choose allies and choose to trust. It's a risk that has to be taken, and I've thrown my lot in with these two. We'll see how it all plays out. 10!!
Even if the trust is provisional, why would you trust them when you were wrong with them just the night before? No of this seems right to me. Does this make sense to anyone else?

Voting LC.
2

Hello friends, sorry for my absence. School is very quickly becoming "a bitch" as the kid say. That said, I made a commitment to play and i plan to keep it. Starting here:

Turnip Head wrote:TurnipHead 2.0
3
Dom (6), Long Con (7), Canucklehead (8) 38%

Ladies and gentlemen, The Brotherhood? They seem awfully quick to get this over with. Maybe they're about to win. Oh well. I don't care anymore. Get me outta here.

Pretty much where i am at this point. I don't like this little team/possy that seems to be forming, especially this late in the game, especially considering i don't trust any of them, especially since they all voted together. Like let's put i this way: we have yet to lynch a baddie since MM, and you all, especially Canuck and LC, trust each other this much? This does not sit right with me in the slightest. And i feel all other players should look at this also.


and 1

The Longest Con?
I guess it's fitting that i start with the first post that pinged me.

Long Con wrote:I cast my vote for DFaraday, who now has tried to introduce thread actions resulting from baddie moves (the Llama kill, the Uwe Boll thing)... I think he's a baddie who wants certain results from those actions.

I dismissed this previously because of how crazy ballzy Long con hypothetically would be by setting himself up, but at this point, iunno.

Long Con wrote: Ok, so Sabie had no real on-topic posts, and then was replaced by A Person, who has had basically one on-topic post, plus two more discussing how he doesn't know how the Uwe Boll lock works. His one post is "I had wanted to vote MM but the thread was locked I've felt he was fishy all game."

So that's a likely place to put my vote.

Lizzy had a handful of on-topics, casting some suspicion at Llama, and voting Metalmarsh with no real reasons stated. Made has been much more active, with some real analytical posts on DFaraday.

Made, why did you look at the votes on Days 5 and 6, and call out S~V~S and Roxy, but not Ricochet or Canuck?

Caught this on a re-read, and noticed that LC never responded to this

Ricochet wrote:
LC, by the way, is looking bad to me. Back-seat-taking for days now, yet sturdy to lynch DF throughout the same period. His comments also add up, because some of them can be really red in a baddie light. For instance, his latest

Long Con wrote:Sorry DF, the baddies' trick worked like a charm on this sucker.

He shouted that DF is framing him and supported his lynch for two consecutive days, yet now he sees him as a "sucker" who was lynched because of "baddies' trick". What?

He also never responded to this

Made wrote:

Long Con wrote:So, Made as a baddie... he could have voted AP and given Canuck the ability to lynch AP, but he didn't. If he believed Canuck and I are both Civ, then the lynch was already cool whether it was two or three necks on the line. I'm assuming that since no one mentioned it, no one active at the end remembered Mongoose's tied-lynch ruling. SO, he didn't want to see AP in the mix for this lynch.

I'm not sure how i'm suppose to respond to this? With the amount of post and votes available to draw from, iunno, this just feel like a backwards approach. More like you want me to be rather than genuinely thinking I might be.
As it stands, I suspect you and Canuck more than I suspect AP. That said, AP hasn't said very many words, especially of substance of recent aside from his suspicions of you, which while i agree with, I was taken back that he didn't want to share them till asked.

or this

Made wrote:

Made wrote:

Long Con wrote:So, Made as a baddie... he could have voted AP and given Canuck the ability to lynch AP, but he didn't. If he believed Canuck and I are both Civ, then the lynch was already cool whether it was two or three necks on the line. I'm assuming that since no one mentioned it, no one active at the end remembered Mongoose's tied-lynch ruling. SO, he didn't want to see AP in the mix for this lynch.

I'm not sure how i'm suppose to respond to this? With the amount of post and votes available to draw from, iunno, this just feel like a backwards approach. More like you want me to be rather than genuinely thinking I might be.

This might sound like a weird question, but with the above in my LC, what are you opinions on me?

actually, wait no. He did reply to that one:

Long Con wrote:Yo Made, sing me a song!

Am i just missing something?
TH, Canuck, you've said it for a while now: Why do you trust LC?

My vote's irrelevant. Voting LC to hopefully bring more discussion to him.

I really want AP to come back before I vote for him... going to start a case on LC by the hour. stand by.

AP, what say you?

Ricochet wrote:

Made wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Thanks for clarifying, LC. In that case, I really don't understand either why Made did nothing all game long. Probably because Made.

wait, time out.... how did you know what kind of play I'm know for?

I didn't say I "know". Where have I expressed such certainty?

You hadn't said know, but my question still stand. If this is your first game with me, how are you able to justify my behavior with "Because made". Correct me if i'm wrong, but i'm pretty sure it was the first reference to my play in that light this game.

Turnip Head wrote:

Dom wrote: I think Bass has good insight into his mom's play. I think he brought some good points up. I don't think TH has done anything to dispel this suspicion.

How would I even go about dispelling your suspicion of Roxy? The only way would be playing my own game and giving you things to consider about TH2.0 as a player, but we're running out of time and I can see I'm not going to get the benefit of the doubt here, so... I guess it is what it is.

pretty much where i am at this point in relation to you. Just playing it by ear i guess...

Made wrote:

Long Con wrote:So, Made as a baddie... he could have voted AP and given Canuck the ability to lynch AP, but he didn't. If he believed Canuck and I are both Civ, then the lynch was already cool whether it was two or three necks on the line. I'm assuming that since no one mentioned it, no one active at the end remembered Mongoose's tied-lynch ruling. SO, he didn't want to see AP in the mix for this lynch.

I'm not sure how i'm suppose to respond to this? With the amount of post and votes available to draw from, iunno, this just feel like a backwards approach. More like you want me to be rather than genuinely thinking I might be.

This might sound like a weird question, but with the above in my LC, what are you opinions on me?

Dom the Don?
This think is a fun place to start, and make for a good transition from my last post.

Dom wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

Dom wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:I think Rixy, or maybe LC, or maybemaybe old sabie/lizzy would be good for lynching today.

Why LC?

Why not?

I'm curious.
I had a theory earlier in the game that proved to be wrong, I think. Very early theory just thinking about who might be on a team together--

LC was one of those people.
So, why LC? Why should I vote LC instead of you?

Canucklehead wrote:

Long Con wrote:Because I'm not bad, and several of you are.

I'm not bad, either, but the problem is I really don't know who is. I've been so wrong about everyone I suspected, that maybe it's time to start suspecting the people I've trusted. Maybe you? Mate Dom, who has done little but ask deflecting questions all game? Maybe the players who were replaced because their baddie teammates were desperate to drop the dead weight of no-shows? I dunno. I'm lost.


I know my head is on the chopping block today, but I'm a civ and ice played like a civ (i.e. blindly and without success) the entire game.

That is a statement that is very misrepresentative of my game.

How would you describe your play this game then? We butt heads. A lot, which has over time has biased me to second guess suspicion, but typically it's us not seeing eye to eye. In this game on the contrary, I've found myself agreeing with the train of thought behind your post, but i'm curious if the reasoning is the same.

Quiz show time!

Dom wrote:

Long Con wrote:Baddies have been laying very low.

Ok, so Sabie had no real on-topic posts, and then was replaced by A Person, who has had basically one on-topic post, plus two more discussing how he doesn't know how the Uwe Boll lock works. His one post is "I had wanted to vote MM but the thread was locked I've felt he was fishy all game."

So that's a likely place to put my vote.

Lizzy had a handful of on-topics, casting some suspicion at Llama, and voting Metalmarsh with no real reasons stated. Made has been much more active, with some real analytical posts on DFaraday.

Made, why did you look at the votes on Days 5 and 6, and call out S~V~S and Roxy, but not Ricochet or Canuck?

So we should look at low liers?


Interesting.

I agree, but why do you feel that we shouldn't go after the low-liers?

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Sorry everybody. I got sucked in by puzzle solving in Death Note. I'm not even good at it, but I caught the bug as soon as I saw a few things I could solve.

I'm open to more reasoning on the inactives being potentially bad, because I do acknowledge this is way beyond worrying now that we are so few left. For one, the baddies eliminating active, significant players one by one is likely telling, but in hindsight we probably shouldn't have let those players fly by either. But I'd like all the replacements to be discussed, with both views on the past player and whether you find the current players has made himself suspicious with or may try to conceal. I promise to come with thoughts on them and others tomorrow.

Do you have thoughts on Roxy/TH?

What are your thoughts on Roxy/TH?

I might vote Dom, depending the answers to these questions


It's getting late.... I really want to finish this tonight, so i might start tonight post tomorrow? till then..... yo LC....

The Canuck

gonna start in the middle and work my way in both direction cuz I can.

Canucklehead wrote:Fuckpants. I definitely had Bass as a civ.


So. Today's question, boys and girls, is whether I stick with my gut (and Bass's) and vote RoxNip, move forward with my Team MM + AWOL hypothesis and vote Made or AP, or vote Dom for being cheeky and trying to get me lynched yesterday.

Thoughts?

when I read this initially, I thought that it was a reference to this post

Long Con wrote:So, Made as a baddie... he could have voted AP and given Canuck the ability to lynch AP, but he didn't. If he believed Canuck and I are both Civ, then the lynch was already cool whether it was two or three necks on the line. I'm assuming that since no one mentioned it, no one active at the end remembered Mongoose's tied-lynch ruling. SO, he didn't want to see AP in the mix for this lynch.

Could be a baddie connection between AP and Made.

which makes far less sense than

Canucklehead wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Can you give me the case on AP one more time please?

Sabie/AP has been AWOL all game. I have a theory that MM's teammates were not around to help him out during the multiple times that he was under serious fire, nearly lynched, and then finally successfully lynched. I think the poor rodent got stuck with a no-show on his team, and was therefore kinda hung out to dry, resulting in me being the only person not willing to vote for him on his fatal day.....


......that's kinda it, lol.

So that's one large strike back from you.

Canucklehead wrote:I keep vacillating back and forth with Dom. I know he has objected that it's a gross mischaracterization of him, but it really seems to me that his play this game has been 95% composed of glib oneortwo word questions meant to provoke and needle.

This is how i've been reading his most recent post. When I think Dom i think either aggressive af, or on point af and i'm seeing neither this game. That said this is a read on Canuck, so i'll return to this.

After re-reading, I'm more and more thinking by attempting to not let your genuineness get to me, I let it. Every genuine sounding post is pinging me to hell and back because i feel like your trying to get over on me. That said I don't think I'm going to be voting you today.

Canuck, why do you trust LC?

Ricochet wrote:Thanks for clarifying, LC. In that case, I really don't understand either why Made did nothing all game long. Probably because Made.

wait, time out.... how did you know what kind of play I'm know for?

Turnip Head wrote: Made, can you explain the thought process behind your vote for Canuck yesterday? I'm still a bit confused about what you were trying to convey there.

Ok context. The reason I felt I had to commit to a Canuck vote is because this(from misfits): http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 214#p77214 Canuck( as well as svs, bloops, and dh) are players who i've been grossly wrong about, so i'm hesitant to release a theory i have just because their pathos is on point.
I hinted at the reason I voted for canuck here, but it's pretty vague so i'll explain further

Made wrote:Ok....I've caught up, and as of now, I want to vote Canuck just because it makes sense, but i'm trigger shy.

A thought exercise:
For sake of argument, If Canuck isn't bad and connected to MM, then who is? In the case of DF's death, I anyways, Immediately thought Roxy or Canuck when he flipped civvie, but--and this definitely tainted by the fact I can't vote for TH-- Canuck isn't the same way. If she isn't bad I have no clue what direction to go in, which is terrifying.

Also going to reply to post and things.

She's the only person alive that had a link to MM that i could find (aside from Roxy (Speaking of which who replaced her?)). Sure it could had been an unlucky civvie, but i didn't want to abandon in the link because of the chance it was just a coincidence, especially since DF's connect to MM was an actual coincidence.

TH wrote: Who's got your eye for today?

LC and canuck again, especially in light of Ap's most recent post, as well as Dom
Going to do a post by post on LC, Canuck, Dom next.
I would like to hear where Vomp plans on doing today only because he's the only player alive who's not on my radar atm.

Canucklehead wrote: For some reason Made 2.0 felt civ to me when he first jumped back in (maybe its just because he was actually participating/posting?), but his whirlwind of extensive reading and quoting and such yesterday (and then voting for none of the people he spent the day reading and building suspicions on) was odd....even for Made.

Not true?

Long Con wrote:So, Made as a baddie... he could have voted AP and given Canuck the ability to lynch AP, but he didn't. If he believed Canuck and I are both Civ, then the lynch was already cool whether it was two or three necks on the line. I'm assuming that since no one mentioned it, no one active at the end remembered Mongoose's tied-lynch ruling. SO, he didn't want to see AP in the mix for this lynch.

I'm not sure how i'm suppose to respond to this? With the amount of post and votes available to draw from, iunno, this just feel like a backwards approach. More like you want me to be rather than genuinely thinking I might be.
As it stands, I suspect you and Canuck more than I suspect AP. That said, AP hasn't said very many words, especially of substance of recent aside from his suspicions of you, which while i agree with, I was taken back that he didn't want to share them till asked.

Long Con wrote:Well, that was lucky. I do recall someone saying that they make no one die when the lynch poll is tied. I thought Roxy said it, but was it Mongoose?

Let's ask! Yo Mongoose, what happens in case of a tie?

typed that like ~20 minutes ago, meant to post it then, figured nothing changed. but that last interaction between LC and Canuck is weird af....I really don't know...
I stand by behind my vote, but i'm nervous

Ok this might be stupid, but i think i'm right (also, I thought i had another hour to think about it...) Canuck seems incredibly genuine to me, so i'm going to vote there. The biggest memory I have of canuck as a cornered baddie playing hard to sympathy card, and i fell for it. Hard.

I really hope i right....

Made wrote: NOTE TO SELF: COME BACK TO THIS THOUGHT

figured a baddie would want to vote option number 3 to avoid suspicion in close votes like that. No one did in either of the locked poll votes

Long Con wrote:

Made wrote:

Mongoose wrote:And now a word from Fritz Lang:

Reading back it is obvious to me now that few of the civilian lynches so far have been accidents. There is a malicious group of individuals functioning behind the scenes controlling and manipulating the votes, and when you examine the pattern there is little to no doubt as to who they are. Pay particular attention to what happened on days 5 and 6 and the night between and you shall discover the truth.

._. rip
Alright so (based on votes anyways) Fritz thinks it SVS and Roxy. Thoughts?

What is it that happened days 5-6?

and

Svs and Roxy were the common denominators...not sure what that means now that SVS is dead tho.

Ricochet wrote:SVS's death now stands as something we should treat either as an obvious kill, after her gunning for Canuck as MM's teammate, or as a diversion.

Just like, as I've said, we should revisit Llama's death, in light of DF not actually having tried to push it and frame LC for it. Same reasoning: either an obvious kill or a kill to shut him up, after announcing he'll go for LC, or a diversion.

My feeling is that both teams want us to treat these as diversions, considering that we were completely wrong the first time, when we lynched Vomps1.0 for thinking FZ's death was an obvious kill.

I'm starting to think along these lines. Maybe mafia is playing so far out of left field because of the reasoning for most of the lynches this game: not airtight, but solid. Suddenly I'm considering a LC vote, but i'll need to look further into that.

Canucklehead wrote: I think Sabie/Ap is my most likely vote today. I will NOT be voting for Bass, myself, SD/Vomps, or RoxNip (but only because I can't). All the rest of y'all are fair game.

You know, even after the switch, I've kinda forgotten AP was in the game.
Spot read of AP as genuine as she agrees with me, but iunno...

Turnip Head wrote:Canuck and LC were the two players who voted alongside MM on his lynch, before MM locked the thread. All that taken together, it doesn't seem like a beneficial series of events, if either of them were his teammates.

NOTE TO SELF: COME BACK TO THIS THOUGHT

Turnip Head wrote:How does everyone feel about Dom?

I've been watching him closely because his word choice seems stiff to me, but i got nothing which is suspicious in of itself knowing dom. Will reread.

and cool. More reading!

Ok....I've caught up, and as of now, I want to vote Canuck just because it makes sense, but i'm trigger shy.

A thought exercise:
For sake of argument, If Canuck isn't bad and connected to MM, then who is? In the case of DF's death, I anyways, Immediately thought Roxy or Canuck when he flipped civvie, but--and this definitely tainted by the fact I can't vote for TH-- Canuck isn't the same way. If she isn't bad I have no clue what direction to go in, which is terrifying.

Also going to reply to post and things.

Mongoose wrote:And now a word from Fritz Lang:

Reading back it is obvious to me now that few of the civilian lynches so far have been accidents. There is a malicious group of individuals functioning behind the scenes controlling and manipulating the votes, and when you examine the pattern there is little to no doubt as to who they are. Pay particular attention to what happened on days 5 and 6 and the night between and you shall discover the truth.

._. rip
Alright so (based on votes anyways) Fritz thinks it SVS and Roxy. Thoughts?

Dom wrote:Made, do you think this might be typical of civvie DFaraday?

Not really? I'm pretty sure this is the first game where i've read DF as bad, so I think at least something is up.

I don't think MM And Canuck were teamed because if MM by locking the thread essentially giving up, wouldn't his teammates distance?

This isn't a typical lynch scenario. I know that If I were to arrive in the thread before it was locked, I would of voted DF, so i'd hesitate to say that the lynch was a lost cause for MM. With that in mind, I think it's likely that MM and DF were on the same team.

In order to distance more effectively, DF voted for MM, whom he knew was bad then gave MM the high sign to lock the thread.

It's worth noting that both DF and MM had yet to vote when the thread was locked to kill Made 1.0, serving to allow them a way to avoid suspicion for the coming day.

DF's opinions on MM are quite fun to read i might add.

DFaraday wrote:And I'm not clear on why SVS thinks there is a connection between AP and MM.

DFaraday wrote: I'm leaning civ on MP, and MM I'm really not sure. I do agree that Rico seems to be catching on awfully quick, perhaps a little too much. I will *vote Rico* today.

DFaraday wrote: Finally, he has begun looking more closely at MM, noting that MM has contributed to civvie lynches (although that's pretty much all we've had)
I need to look over Dom, MM, and Roxy to see how this all comes together.

And then a possible slip in bold

DFaraday wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:Yeah, I have a feeling MM is a done deal at this point, but I'm going to vote for DF, too. I think he's trying waaaay to hard to stir shit up ("Hey guys! Isn't this thing weird? We should totally look closer at it because it's likely baddie behaviour but I'm being very careful not to say anything definitive or come down hard on one side or the other so that I can always backpedal if my pot stirring doesn't work out. I'm also not interested in providing thoughts on anything else that's going on or conversations that are happening, I really just want everyone to notice that I'm here and pointing out really suspicious things but not things that I'm personally willing to vote based on"....is totally how virtually all his posts read to me this game).

I voted MM, didn't I? Yes, in part to save myself, but I am more and more convinced that he is a Hack.

And yes, I'm not very committal. I never am. You two don't play much with me, but I'm not Llama or MP or Epig. I never just throw myself in 100% to something unless I'm absolutely positive I'm right.

It's important to realize that all the post above are all the post-- in order-- that DF has made on MM. If he felt that MM was a hack or even was confused and thought MM for reasons x or y, he hadn't brought it up until after he voted... and multiple other people voted for MM.

This hasn't anything to do with Df's opinion of MM, but it's interesting when you consider DF being a Hack, and my above theory, as well as DF bringing up Llama's kill as a reason to look at LC.

DFaraday wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:Today I'm likely voting for Bass, DF, SD, or (outside chance) Dom. Bass, DF, and SD for being extreme low-liers, Dom 'cuz a have a gut feeling (but those have sucked this game, so I'm not too inclined to follow that again).

Still don't understand why MM is on everyone's lists. I've re-read him already, but I guess I'll give a re-read to his main suspector/accuser SVS and see if I can figure out why you all feel so unsure of him.

I wouldn't say I'm an extremely low lier these days. It just takes me a while to warm up in most games.

Anyway, since we have had no success yet, today I'm going to work off of a theory. Uwe Boll apparently locked the thread when there were 3 votes, so presumably none of those players are Hacks. My belief is that he probably locked the thread because he or one of his teammates had been under suspicion, and he didn't want them to take votes. I'm going to go back and see who was being discussed during the day and night prior to the thread lock.

Doing the opposite and checking MM for connections to DF, but we'll see how that goes.

Will post second half soonish.

S~V~S wrote:Wow, how obvious and heavy handed. I congratulate you baddies for your total lack of subtlety

SVS was the first to sort of hint at it, but no one touched it, as BWT immediately dropped his case after she pointed it out. I'd double argue that SVS is in the clear here because of this post

S~V~S wrote:When LC is bad, he has this faux hearty, hail fellow well met kinda feel to his posts, which is totally absent here.

I think of it as LOST Season 1 baddie Sawyer vs. Season 5 upstanding Sawyer. They sound different because they have different motivations. Even if they are saying the same thing. Does that make sense to you?

No reference to the obvious set up, but solid defense of LC.
So with her out of the way, the next reference to LC and Llama being

DFaraday wrote:I haven't gone over the case on TH just yet (I'm about to), but is everyone just ignoring that Llama said he intended to vote for LC today and then gets killed that very night? I doubt LC would be that unsubtle, but I think it strengthens the need to look into his posts/votes more closely.

Which honestly sets off a mariette of alarm bell in my head. To doubt that LC would be that subtle, then to double take on that and say it strengthens arguments against him just seems off.
Posted immediately after was this

Long Con wrote:

DFaraday wrote:I haven't gone over the case on TH just yet (I'm about to), but is everyone just ignoring that Llama said he intended to vote for LC today and then gets killed that very night? I doubt LC would be that unsubtle, but I think it strengthens the need to look into his posts/votes more closely.

So you're the one.

Again, if this were LC setting himself up, this would be incredibly heavy handed to say immediately after someone brings it up.
Then it kinda crashindos from there

Ricochet wrote: Not ignoring, but it's something to be careful about, since we've been fooled before the same way (FZ's night kill).

Except if you intentionally want us to pursue this.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Certainly not. And I'm glad I didn't discuss it last night because that may well have been why llama met his fate. I know this doesn't clear llama as civ, but the odds are much higher, even than before.

I also don't trust you one bit DF. You were speculating on whether we should trust BWT several days ago for dying and coming back twice, and now I get the feeling you are diverting attention from his case on TH. You also never answered my question from a couple days ago.

I feel this interaction is also interesting

DFaraday wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:You may have concluded that, but I could find no such statement that said what you thought of him. Your post that you mention was a summary of his gameplay up until now. Thanks for answering. What changed your mind from indifferent to civ?

His posts feel sincere to me, and the more I think about the thing with Dom, the more it feels like just a random squabble than something shady.

Here's how i'm feeling (having not yet gone back, and read DF)
I think we should either throw out LC and Llama as WIFOM or pursue one of the above mentioned. Personally I'm leaning DF as it stands with everything laid out in front of us, but throwing it out might be a wiser decision.

Linki- MM, Canuck, thoughts on the mudslinging surrounding Llama's NK?