The Syndicate

Nice work [mention]sabie12[/mention]! You won us the game.

Well played [mention]Dom[/mention]. Had you not killed me, I’d have probably gone along with a Long Con lynch. There was still a nagging suspicion of you in the back of my mind, but I don’t think it was more than auto-sus after years of seeing you be devious. I can see in hindsight where you might have been hoping for others to latch onto your faux-sus of me, but it hadn’t tripped my BS alarm yet. You walked that tightrope well.

Thanks to [mention]MacDougall[/mention] for the game and thanks to you all for making it fun. I’ve been out of action for months but it was pretty easy to jump back into the thick of it. Job searching and interviews got hectic the last week or so. I wish I could have been more in-the-moment with the rest of the game but such is life.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Tue Nov 26, 2019 12:10 am Civilians have two chances to get this right. No reason to panic.

No panic here yet. Just disappointment. I was hoping the delay was for a flavorful game-ending post.

Nuts. RIP DF, and screw Occam and his razor.

Now, if DFaraday is the last baddie, it has to be B or A+B. It’s possible that nutella found it less awkward to not mention DF than to try to fit him in somewhere. Both A and B are plausible scenarios on their own. A+B is a bit more complex but it combines mutually exclusive events.

To me, D is the most plausible scenario if Long Con is a baddie, but it’s a Statue of Liberty play. It’s only worth trying when victory is somewhat doubtful. These small games are the best venue to pull it off, but it feels like it’s a day too soon to swallow that pill. Nutella’s suspicion felt a tad desperate at the end.

C is your Hail Mary that’s all but doomed. When was the last time any of us saw this sort of gambit pay off?

I know that I had some choice words before about Occam’s Razor, but DFarady as the last baddie is the easier scenario for me to believe in.

[VOTE: DFaraday] aubergine

Nutella defended DFaraday against Jack because Jack went at DF for a bad reason (he's usually a low-poster and that's problematic). It was poor form on Jack's part and nutella was able to defend DF without looking chummy. There was no case built on thread content- it was all external. After the Jack-DF situation diffused, his name or abbreviation dropped out of nutella's ISO for good early on Day 2.

You can argue that DF dropped off of a lot of peoples' radars. He dropped off of mine for a little while. While DF and Long Con have both played a similar style of game, nutella only seemed to find LC increasingly suspicious as the game progressed. DF still has that damning early vote for sabie on Day 2, just like Long Con. But whom does nutella find suspicious? Long Con. The guy she has an extensive playing history with and can use that to her advantage.

On the flip side, nutella and Long Con start the game on good terms. They both go after Jack a little to defend DF. They both feel somewhat civ about each other. Then things turn. As the pressure heats up on the Michelle-nutella connection and nutella alone, she becomes increasingly suspicious of Long Con. Nutella had him up three votes to one over Quin, LLD, and herself. She needs an out. She ties Long Con to Quin in her if/then scenario answers. She knows it's only a matter of time before the casual play style falls under the microscope.

Is she going after Long Con to set up for the mother of all WIOM chalices? She could be trying to either sell out her only remaining teammate when it would be insane to do so in an attempt for WIFOM-infused cred. She could also be working hard to attack her only remaining teammate in the hopes that it will make it harder to believe LC is badde after she is lynched.

Here are the scenarios:

a) Baddie takes advantage of defending a teammate (DFaraday) from non-game-related accusations, only to fall into the trap of ignoring her teammate for too long afterwards to the point that it stands out.

b) Baddie under pressure tries to fuel suspicion of a civvie (Long Con) with a similar playstyle to her teammate (DFaraday) in order to misdirect suspicion away from her final teammate.

c) Baddie under pressure tries to sell out her last teammate (Long Con) for WIFOM cred that might help her stick around until the end of the game.

d) Baddie under pressure presents a real case against her last teammate (Long Con) to set up a WIFOM screen to protect him from suspicion long enough to win the game.


Answer these questions:

1) Which is a baddie most likely to do?

2) Which is baddie nutella most likely to do?

Nice succinct ISO for sabie. I see a player who got frustrated early on and came more into her own Days 3 and 4. She made some good points along the way about both DF and LC. If she's the baddie, then I will make a point to never let her skate by on the innocent struggling player bit again. She and Epi are my civ reads.

Now for Long Con...

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:55 am DF plays that way enough of the time that pinging him to play is fake because you already know from experience that he'll play how he plays pings or not. Filler content not real content. Flush Out Fillers, as they say. Done. "Answered" Wolf motivation: early seemingly useful but no really content.

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:59 am nutella's ISO looks fine to me. Jack's freaking out about a couple of votes compounds my suspicion.

Both of these posts provide soft Day 1 defenses for players that he used to support his vote for Jack. The second one has no elaboration on why nutella's ISO looked fine. Granted, it was an early Day 1 ISO, but you have to back up your opinions.

Long Con wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 10:43 pm

sabie12 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:39 pm Hmmm the plot thickens. Jack and tony both felt pretty confidently that nutella was bad and now they both have flipped civ. I've been iffy on nutella from the beginning and am inclined to believe maybe tony and jack were right about her. Putting my vote there for now.[VOTE: nutella] aubergine

Sounds like it was you. [VOTE: sabie] aubergine

This post comes after Michelle picked up early votes from BatSloon and Robinosis. It started the push against sabie, and Long Con supported Sloonei's investigation of sabie. Long Con pushed the issue though, rather than let others run with it. What bugs me is the repeat defense of nutella with no substance behind it.

He says his early game is weak. That's an excuse to not try very hard. It attempts to lower peoples' expectations of him.

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:56 am The big words were alllll right. I also suspected nutella for her vicious attack on me earlier.

This feels hollow to me. Why, LC?

Long Con wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:53 am Maybe LLD is too inactive to be considered? I don't see the votes going her way until much later at this level of activity.

This post came after LLD appeared at on a list of four players Epi recommended lynching Day 3. It gives me an odd feeling. Almost like wishful thinking? If the baddies still had two players left, I bet we'd be talking about LLD more. But they don't. Hindsight is funny like that.

Long Con wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 11:38 pm I was once caught by a dubious LP member named Aldo for avoidance. I had not mentioned or interacted with a single member of my beleaguered baddie team and he nailed it, I was lynched, and everyone pointed and laughed.

However, I'm not Michelle's teammate.

Here he states that he knows better than to avoid interacting with teammates as baddies. I believe that, but it's not always easy to work in those fake interactions to throw people off. I remember Aldo- what a hoot!

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 11:48 am

Dom wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 am Nutella-- why LLD? Why LC??

LC-- why LLD? Why nutella?

LLD-- why nutella? Why LC?

This posts kind of reeks. I don't find it all that genuine, some manufactured triad of callouts that requires no thought, just throws it all at three other players to deal with. Like, where does LLD suspect nutella??

I've stated why I suspect nutella in a couple of posts. LLD because she's so super-sketchy and interesting.

Dom doesn't feel real to me, I believe he's a baddie trying to put in legwork to feign towniness. [VOTE: Dom] aubergine

I can understand not being happy with the way Dom constructed the pairings, but I don't see the logical flow into voting for Dom. It's like a preemptive 'No U.'

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 5:31 pm

G-Man wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 11:01 am3) What convinced Dom to leave his vote on Michelle? How did that progression take place. The post containing his vote for her said "for now" but it ended up being for good. That might help me clear my Dom sus.

It could be a bus. His vote followed the strong Michelle-lynch start from Epi and Sloonei, so he wasn't the one pushing the hardest for Michelle. Then those two voted off and Dom stayed. Perfect bus-without-lynching possibility. Dom didn't really give a lot of reasons for others to vote there, just that Michelle was a common thread in the possibilities, along with a couple of other players. The votes swung back, Dom then had to choose whether to change his vote and risk looking like a teammate, or swallow it and try to look good.

His vote's in the perfect place for a bus. Looks a lot like my style of bussing, actually.

It's like he used my question about Dom to back into a justification for his vote on Dom. Let's remember that LLD started the Dom train almost out of thin air. Long Con sure jumped to 'yep, suspicious' on Dom quickly.

Long Con wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:35 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:27 am I can't read half of Quin's posts. Probably civilian.

Players who do a shtick... more often Civ or baddie?

Also, I had an idea that LLD was the cop, and that she had red-peeked Dom and that's why she was trying to make that death-pact with him. That's the main reason I started focusing on Dom.

Oh, is that so? Then why wait so long to drop this? Could have fooled me.


I'm going to re-read Faraday's case against LC and see how that feels. It's possible that Long Con's fast-and-loose style just caught up to him in a bad way here or he knows he can get away with be a little cavalier. As we tighten the bolts down on the game, that style looks worse.

I also feel like there was a weird dynamic between nutella and LC. I'll have to go through her ISO and look for it. There used to be a strategy as a baddie where you protect some of your teammates but work on cases against others. It got played out after a while, but I can see Long Con and nutella being inclined to fall back on such old tricks. Where DF feels more desperate, LC feels kind of sloppy. DF feels worse still but we'll see what the nutella ISO has to say about it.

Nostalgia seems appropriate for this one...

WALDORF: Well, they say all good things come to an end.

STATLER: What's that got to do with Lady LambdaDelta's ISO?

BOTH: *laughter*

Seriously though, I have no idea what to make of her. It bothers me that anyone is a null read on Day 4 in a game this small. I can't make heads or tails out of her. If she is the remaining baddie, then I award her zero points and may God have mercy on our souls.

Nothing much for me to say about Epi. He was phoning it in due to RL but also threw down in ways that I cannot interpret as baddie. Again, his "don't get cute" mantra either falls apart if he's bad here, or else he's consistent. In my history playing with and against him, Epi is consistent. He's smart enough to fake us all out, but he'd be giving up a lot in doing so. I want to see him do a hard read on Long Con in the same way he did for DFaraday though. Just to be sure.

If you've fleeced me, Epi, kudos to you.

Natural suspicion won't let me let go of Dom very easily. Some votes feel half-hearted to me, and there's one post that made me pause:

Dom wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 1:14 am Nutella's post on epi/LC felt very authentic and makes a lot of sense.

I'd like some more analysis from her going forward.

Sloonei, since Epi is going to be a total dud in terms of any useful interaction with me, what do you think of the reads I gave?

Is this nutella's post you reference?

Dom's post comes from Day 2. I might be reading too much into it, but I'll wait for Dom to comment on the reference post before saying more.

Overall, Dom is wily enough to thread this needle. By my estimation, most of his content works in his favor though. He's poking and prodding, while not latching onto the ideas of others and running with them. He's being shrewd and analytical. I like the lack of pouncing, though I expect to see Dom pounce at some point. Maybe this game is too short or has progressed too quickly for Dom to have an a-ha moment that leads to a pounce. If I still played video games, though, I'd be distracted by Star Wars too.

Not to diminish Epi's work, but I noticed a few other things in reading DFaraday...

DFaraday wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:02 am

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:04 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:58 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:28 pm @DFaraday

You have a history of missing day phases and ending games with under 10 posts. I understand that irl stuff happens but It has become a pattern.

I would absolutely love to play a mafia game with you but that’s going to require you to play a mafia game with me as well.

Please post.

You're mafia.

No you.

If I was mafia, I wouldn’t start the game with a push on a guy who tends to get himself lynched all on his own.

Why wouldn't you? In a game with so few players, nearly all of which are vanilla, every town vote is significant. The usual approach of leaving me for late game won't fly here, since in a few phases I could conceivably pop back in after a hiatus and cast a deciding vote. It might be a better approach for the Mafia to go for a softball right out of the gate to get a jump on the numbers without really putting themselves on the line in the way they might in trying to fabricate a case on a more prominent player.

The pink part has been gnawing at me since an earlier ISO. Baddies like to have players who are perceived as unreliable votes in the game. You take out the threats and let the civvies worry about eliminating a partial participator. DF's line of reasoning defies baddie logic because baddies seldom have to try very hard for a mislynch on Day 1.

DFaraday wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:55 am

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 9:04 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:49 pm

sabie12 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:39 pm Hmmm the plot thickens. Jack and tony both felt pretty confidently that nutella was bad and now they both have flipped civ. I've been iffy on nutella from the beginning and am inclined to believe maybe tony and jack were right about her. Putting my vote there for now.[VOTE: nutella] aubergine

I do not follow. Nutella did not vote for Tony, and I find it a bit of a stretch to assume that Jack was killed for the purpose of silencing his criticism of nutella. Plus, we now know that Jack would have been a perfectly viable counterwagon yesterday if nutella was bad and the mafia team wanted to save her. There wouldn’t have been a need for any of them to push to Tony (and no reason not to. My point is that I don’t see how this pair of deaths reflects poorly on nutella specifically). Is there more to this suspicion?

So you don't think the kill was a frame of me? That was my first thought, and that sabie either bought it or is promoting the narrative that I'm scum.

I think it's the second option. I actually began thinking there might be a Sabie/Michelle connection yesterday, but didn't want to say anything explicit during the night. My theory is that Michelle forced suspicion on Tony, then had to double down on it as their interaction continued, and Sabie just parroted her teammate's suspicion. Sabie's post today makes me feel even less warm towards her, since it's basically shouting, "WOW HOW SUSPICIOUS DOES THIS KILL MAKE NUTELLA LOOK, RIGHT GUYS?"

Here he leans in on the "sabie looks bad for thinking nutella looks bad after Jack got killed" theory. That kind of setup might be economical in a game this small, but nutella looked suspicious for reasons that did not involve Jack. I said around that time that a baddie trying to set someone up to look bad and being the person to lead that charge is an elementary tactic that most of us grew out of very quickly. Nutella's team may have done it for the WIFOM for that exact reason. They got someone to bite on it and tried to make them look bad for taking 'such obvious bait.'

DFaraday wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 3:11 am Looking over the votes from Day 2 leave me feeling extremely confident in Dom and Epi. If Sabie is not a teammate of Michelle then it would make no sense for her teammates to vote her at that juncture, and if Sabie was also part of the team, they could have prodded/stuck with the Quin wagon that almost took off.

I'm feeling less confident in Nutella than I have for much of the game, but it seems unlikely she's on a team with either Quin or Sabie given the voting results as well as the suspicions cast between them.

I still don't have a good reason for ruling Quin out, though. And there's not a strong reason LC should be considered town, which (even though we're bros) means he's not cleared. My guess is that the remaining baddies at this point are one of the following combinations:

Quin/Sabie
LC/Sabie
Nutella/LLD
LLD/Any of the above

Here he takes the successful Michelle lynch and tries to spin it back onto sabie, even though a number of people expressed a stronger connection between Michelle and nutella given my scenario questions. In Day 2, he expressed suspicion of sabie and Michelle, hoped people would go for sabie but was fine with Michelle votes too. He set himself up here by trying to connect the two. Had sabie been lynched, he could have either said "Oops, we should have lynched Michelle" or "Boy, with sabie flipping civvie, that gives me pause about how I read Michelle too."

DFaraday wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:34 pm Be safe, Sabie!

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 5:31 pm

G-Man wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 11:01 am3) What convinced Dom to leave his vote on Michelle? How did that progression take place. The post containing his vote for her said "for now" but it ended up being for good. That might help me clear my Dom sus.

It could be a bus. His vote followed the strong Michelle-lynch start from Epi and Sloonei, so he wasn't the one pushing the hardest for Michelle. Then those two voted off and Dom stayed. Perfect bus-without-lynching possibility. Dom didn't really give a lot of reasons for others to vote there, just that Michelle was a common thread in the possibilities, along with a couple of other players. The votes swung back, Dom then had to choose whether to change his vote and risk looking like a teammate, or swallow it and try to look good.

His vote's in the perfect place for a bus. Looks a lot like my style of bussing, actually.

The thing is Sabie would have been such a safe place to hide. Dom could have just made a post about the Sabie suspicions and moved his vote there, and probably wouldn’t have even garnered attention with all the vote switching that goes on (besides if Sabie had been lynched we wouldn’t know Michelle was bad anyway). In a game with one bad team and tight numbers to begin with I don’t think bussing on Day 2 is the most likely option.

Here he takes LC's suspicion on Dom and does something cute with it. His explanation of how Dom could have just voted for sabie if he was bad because it wouldn't have garnered much attention is exactly what he did. Is this post a little too knowing for a civvie to make?

He also does this to defend Dom, so he gets on another player's good side. He says he voted for nutella to save Dom. How very noble of him to vote for someone that has a lot of evidence against her in order to save someone who doesn't have a strong case against him.



Here (too long to bother with multi-quotes) he condemns LC for going after sabie for voting for nutella because Jack died. But, DF voted for sabie for the same reason. How does LC look bad for this and DF doesn't? Because LC voted first.

Funny thing about that. If sabie looked bad for voting first for nutella Day 2 after Jack died, and LC looks bad for voting for sabie for that same reason two days later, then DF must be wary of first-voters, right? But no. He voted second on the Jack train (after LC) Day 1 and second on the sabie train (again after LC) on Day 2. In both cases, he voted early on and walked away. That's good baddie strategy in small games like this. The less you engage, the harder it is to parse out your evil intentions. He was willing to follow the votes of others and build on their suspicions. After one baddie was caught, DF put more effort into finding dirt that might stick to people. He's my first ISO, but I'm comfortable with voting for him today.

Nutella and Michelle were the tandem that my spreadsheet made most apparent to me. For some reason I struggle with identifying the third in these games. I like Epi’s case on DF, and I hope that it is as simple as that. I’m going to ISO every living player between now and the deadline just to satisfy my own mind. This is the time when paranoia and tin foil get the better of me, I’m trying to change that.

Sorry for disappearing. It’s been a busy weekend.

Now that's what I call a good result!

Here are my revised spreadsheet screenshots. Make of them what you will.


All Player Votes

Day 1 Vote Order

Day 2 Vote Order

Day 3 Vote Order

Not only do I recognize that my tendency to play from behind is frustrating to those of you who play in the moment, but I admit that it’s frustrating to me too. My tendency to only put in half the effort I aspire to is one of the reasons I don’t play often. I thought I could make it work this time, but surprise surprise surprise- wrong age.

Long day, which I’ll post about in the OT section of the site. Nutella gives my spreadsheet the heebie-jeebies and my spreadsheet was right about Michelle. I’m not going to overthink this one. Dom as a baddie requires too much tin foil to buy into right now, and I am exhausted. Lynch nutella today folks. My vote stays put.

New looks at old data. Here is the revised Day 1 vote tracking:


And here is the Day 2 vote tracking:

Day 2 saw the following:
-Votes 1-4 were in the first hour of the day.
-Votes 5, 6, and 7 came over the next three hours.
-Vote 8 came in hour 6, and then there was an eight-hour gap before vote 9.
-A six-hour gap falls between votes 9 & 10. These were the last votes cast during the first 24 hours of the day phase.
-The remaining nine votes all happened between hours 40 and the deadline.

Analysis:
-The first five votes are spread across five different players. Vote 6 (Epi for Michelle) replaces Vote 4 (Epi for Sloonei- so he could see the poll). That makes it two for Michelle and one for each of Epi, nutella, and Quin.

-Vote 7 (Long Con) and Vote 8 (DFaraday) both land on sabie, making it two for both Michelle and sabie, and one for Epi, nutella, and Quin.

-Several hours later, Vote 9 (nutella) replaces Vote 2, washing away nutella's vote on Epi and pushing sabie into the lead by one.

-A few hours later, Dom casts Vote 10 on Michelle, bringing the poll to a two-way tie at three votes between Michelle and sabie. Both nutella and Quin remain with one vote apiece on them.

-A 17-hour gap, and a lot of discussion, ensues.

-In hour 40, Quin drops in and casts Vote 11 for nutella. In hour 41, sabie changes her vote to Michelle (Vote 12) out of self-preservation. It is now four votes for Michelle, 3 for sabie, and one for both nutella and Quin.

-BatSloon and Robinosis call Quin to task and move their votes off of Michelle in favor of Quin (Votes 13 & 14). This puts Quin and sabie in a two-way tie for the lead with three votes each, with Michelle now at 2 votes, and nutella with one vote.

-Nutella breaks the tie with Vote 15 in the 44th hour of the phase. Moving her vote makes it four for Quin, two for sabie, and Michelle, and one for nutella.

-Vote 16 comes from Michelle in the 46th hour. Rather than nudging Quin further into the lead, she votes for sabie (Vote 16). This makes it four votes Quin, three votes sabie, two votes Michelle, and one vote nutella.

-In the final hour of the phase, BatSloon and Robinosis switch again. This time they vote for Michelle (Votes 17 & 18), making it four votes Michelle, three votes sabie, two votes Quin, and one vote nutella.

-My vote changed at the last minute and it move to Michelle (Vote 19). That made it five votes Michelle, three for sabie, and one each for nutella and Quin.




Things I'm going to go back and look at today:

1) Anything post-vote from LC and DF. Both of them voted early in the phase and never moved their vote as new information was discussed. They both did the same thing Day 1. That's radar-riding behavior.

2) Why did nutella change her vote from Epi to sabie? It's convenient that her vote put sabie ahead of Michelle, who flipped mafia.

3) What convinced Dom to leave his vote on Michelle? How did that progression take place. The post containing his vote for her said "for now" but it ended up being for good. That might help me clear my Dom sus.

4) What direction the discussion too during long 17-hour gap between votes. I want to know that better so I can see if the late votes (BatSloon & Robinosis excluded) lack integrity.

5) Is there any indication why Michelle voted for sabie rather than pushing Quin further out into the lead?

nutella wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 1:15 am I feel like G-man's iso looks like it contains a lot of effort but not a lot of actual gameplay...

...and he's actually gone pretty quiet since Michelle's flip.

I think he's a plausible baddie. Someone tell me what I'm missing here.

[VOTE: g-man] aubergine

G-Man wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:49 am Nursing a sick four-year-old kept me from being more active today.

Now I'm pretty good at deciphering the whimpering yammerings of a distraught preschooler.

The rest of the time since Michelle's flip I've been caught up in a whirlwind of job applications and phone interviews. Sorry. RL > mafia. Falling behind means catching up. I'd rather play catch-up and know what's going on than try to interact in the middle of something I may be missing context for.

And now sleep > mafia. Good night.

Nursing a sick four-year-old kept me from being more active today. I did the same kind of re-read and vote tracking for Day 2 that I did for Day 1. I'm still looking at the vote timing (for what it's worth). A few things that still stump me:

-My vote-tracking still suggests to me that Quin and nutella are incompatible as teammates. Has anyone dug anything up in the thread that suggests they could be teammate compatible?

-Epi's behavior is hard to read, but I think the way he went after Michelle Day 2 makes it hard for me to view the two as teammates. One of Epi's recurring mottos is "Don't get cute," and I think that the circumstances of his play would violate that if he were Michelle's teammate. Being Robin to Sloonei's Batman? Yeah, someone could fake that as a baddie. Busing a teammate hard for cred? Yeah, a someone could fake that as a baddie. But the combination of the two requires an awful lot of cuteness that Epi tends to avoid. Does anyone disagree?

-I feel like I'm softening on sabie. My notes suggested nutella could be connected to Michelle or sabie, but I hadn't gone so far as to connect trios together. Perhaps it the improbability that the three active female players in the game (up to now) are teammates. Am I being duped? I see some of you saying how she can be slippery and downplay her skills at this game.

Nice to meet you [mention]Lady LambdaDelta[/mention]. May I bother you for a read on each of the living players other than yourself? I already gather that you’re not impressed with Dom at the moment, nor Long Con earlier.

Now’s your chance to be Batman, [mention]Epignosis[/mention]

RIP Sloonei.

[VOTE: nutella] aubergine

...but I intend to review things and not just let this be a wasted day. I encourage you all to do the same.

Nice try. You can’t scare me. I have daughters.

Dom wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:18 pm

G-Man wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:19 pm

Dom wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:11 pm I have to go tutor.

I'll be back later.

Nonchalant, considering the deadline is imminent.

What was your aim with this post?

I asked people to vote for Michelle. I have to go get paid. You fell asleep on the couch and didn't vote last time. Where was your urgency?

Or is this just a made up criticism?

Neither here nor there. I was just surprised to see you leave so soon to the deadline after being active for a streetch. But I understand the pull of the Almighty Dollar.

Neato burrito.

Notes from my ISO seem stronger against Michelle.

[VOTE: Michelle] aubergine

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:18 pm

G-Man wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:13 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:12 pm @G-Man Would you rather lynch Michelle or sabie?

Neither helps me much. I’ll be right back to pondering nutella tomorrow. Nutella points me to them. It’s not quite reciprocal.

Forget what you think their lynches will tell you. Which player do you think would be more likely to flip bad?

Nerves of steel time.

Michelle’s posts could be interpreted to suggest her soft supports of Jack suggest she already knew he was civ. But the also have a history.

Sabie is guilty of being agreeable to the thoughts of others too much.

Michelle broke the tie and sabie added to the lead. It’s a coin flip.

Linki: I see you didn’t wait around for my thoughts.

Dom wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:11 pm I have to go tutor.

I'll be back later.

Nonchalant, considering the deadline is imminent.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:12 pm @G-Man Would you rather lynch Michelle or sabie?

Neither helps me much. I’ll be right back to pondering nutella tomorrow. Nutella points me to them. It’s not quite reciprocal.

nutella wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 6:59 pm Quin is bad: Long Con

Quin is good: sabie

sabie is bad: Michelle, Sloonei or Dom

sabie is good: Quin or Michelle

Michelle is bad: sabie

Michelle is good: Dom or Epi

(Skipping the me part )

Now, now. Why don’t you want to tell us who to focus on if you flip civ?

nutella's lynch advances my scenarios the best. I want to honor that with my vote, but there's a conundrum afoot.

nutella's lynch would tell me the most (or at least I think it would), but I'm just one person.

Who are you most suspicious of, why, and where does that lead you?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:52 pm

G-Man wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:26 pm Quin is bad: Long Con or DFaraday

Quin is good: nutella

sabie is bad: nutella

sabie is good: Michelle

Michelle is bad: nutella

Michelle is good: nutella and either Dom or sabie

nutella is bad: Michelle

nutella is good: Quin or Long Con

Care to walk us through any of these, G-man? I'm particularly interested that nutella appears in both occasions if we lynch michelle. nutella's all over this in general. Do you think that points to her as a stronger suspect overall, or do you attribute her prevalence to her simply being more vocal than most players? What exempts Epi and I from appearing anywhere in your answers?

nutella is prevalent because she's my strongest suspicion right now. (I'm leaving my vote where it is for now because in my mind, if not nutella, then Quin.) In my re-read, I think I noticed some of the inconsistencies Jack spoke of. This is counter-balanced by some people stating that nutella tends to be wishy-washy as a civvie. I think that some of what she says doesn't feel like it has a firm foundation.

Here's the rundown:

Quin & nutella- Based on the vote timing (which I admit isn't the best thing to roll out on Day 2- but it's a tiny game!), I no longer feel comfortable with Quin being bad and voting for his teammate nutella the way the votes came in. It's reckless, which works in small games, but it's unnecessary. So, if Quin, then not nutella. If Quin is bad then my whole theory against nutella gets put on ice. Quin's vote wasn't as reckless if nutella is not a teammate. If Quin, then I start to suspect that nutella is a civvie and the baddies phoned it in on Day 1. That makes me look at the casual votes. LC and DF had more casual votes because they never changed despite being cast so early. They were comfortable leaving those votes on Jack and letting the rest of us screw things up on our own. If we mislynch a civvie nutella, then we know that the baddies were under no pressure during Day 1, which really makes me take a hard look at those people who are operating just at radar level (Quin, LC, DF). If nutella flips baddie, then I look to Michelle first, because she still reads the worst out of the later Tony voters. Time zones can screw things up for baddies and make them vote late. It's an avenue worth exploring if nutella is a baddie.

Michelle and sabie aren't as satisfying as primary targets for me. That is because most of my theorizing is founded on whether or not nutella is bad. If sabie is bad, it may well point to a sort of nutella save Day 1. If sabie is good, then "nutella or Quin?" is still my main quandary, but Michelle becomes my strong second. If Michelle is lynched and flips civ, then Dom and sabie become my strong seconds on the nutella side because of their later votes for Tony.

The reason you (Sloonei) and Epi are not on my list anywhere is because I'm only looking for the first two right now. You said you don't try to figure out association until you find one. I try to think of a primary and a strong second. Upon finding one of them, then I focus on the third wheel. You and Epi could very well be potential thirds under the right circumstances, but I'm not that far down the rabbit hole yet.

nutella and Quin feel incompatible as teammates to me. Agree or disagree?

I don't think that lynching either Michelle or sabie clarifies as much as a Quin or nutella lynch would. Agree or disagree?

Now for my answers:

G-Man wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:22 pm 1) If we lynch Quin and he flips baddie, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

2) If we lynch Quin and he flips civ, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

-----------------------------------------------

3) If we lynch sabie and she flips baddie, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

4) If we lynch sabie and she flips civ, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

-----------------------------------------------

5) If we lynch Michelle and she flips baddie, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

6) If we lynch Michelle and she flips civ, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

-----------------------------------------------

7) If we lynch nutella and she flips baddie, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

8) If we lynch nutella and she flips civ, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

1) Long Con or DFaraday

2) nutella

3) nutella

4) Michelle

5) nutella

6) nutella and either Dom or sabie

7) Michelle

8) Quin or Long Con

nutella has been the focus of my lynch train theorizing up to now, but I see we are sending votes elsewhere (myself included as of yet).

Please everyone answer these questions in the thread. Considering the four people who have votes right now...


1) If we lynch Quin and he flips baddie, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

2) If we lynch Quin and he flips civ, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

-----------------------------------------------

3) If we lynch sabie and she flips baddie, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

4) If we lynch sabie and she flips civ, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

-----------------------------------------------

5) If we lynch Michelle and she flips baddie, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

6) If we lynch Michelle and she flips civ, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

-----------------------------------------------

7) If we lynch nutella and she flips baddie, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

8) If we lynch nutella and she flips civ, to whom does that steer your focus toward in Day 3?

Now that I have a minute (sorry, job-hunting is a serious chore), I can post this from my spreadsheet. Pic spoiler tagged for those of you on phones with data to worry about.


All the votes are put in order as best I can track them through the thread. If someone didn't either use the vote tag or make a strong enough suggestion in the thread about when they voted, then I missed it. For instance, the timing of Tony's vote is up in the air. He didn't use the tag, and I estimated it based on when he was speaking strongest about nutella. If anyone remembers that vote appearing earlier in the order, please correct me.

The number appearing after someone's name indicates the order their vote was cast or changed in. Votes in gray italics are votes that were cast but later changed.

The first six votes came in during the first 24 hours of the phase. Only two of those votes stayed put- [mention]Long Con[/mention] and [mention]DFaraday[/mention]. After 24 hours, Jack had two votes. The momentum on Jack seemed to die somewhere around or after the time nutella and Epignosis voted for him.

The Tony train started when nutella only had one vote. Votes 7 through 13 came during the first 16 hours of the second day of the phase. Votes 14-20 all came within the last eight hours of the phase. What I found here is that Tony wasn't brought up as a third choice aside from Jack v. nutella because Jack v. nutella never really existed in earnest. The momentum was really a nutella v. Tony thing.

Epi followed Sloonei on Tony but then changed to nutella to humor Jack. Quin pops in to add to nutella's tally, tying things up between Jack and nutella (I think this is where I got my perception that it was a Jack v. nutella thing). Quin's vote is soft, with a loose suggestion that nutella set up Jack over the DF thing.

Epi then switches back to Tony because he's done humoring Jack. From this point on, Tony collects three more votes with just a few hours to go. I don't know that Tony's lynch feels like a surefire nutella save anymore. If Quin is bad and busing teammate nutella, then I would expect more detail and meat in his vote justification. His vote would have tied nutella and Jack, with Tony momentum building. Nutella wasn't moving her vote on Jack at that point out of self-preservation, so there was a need for Tony's total to at least equal Jack's total to force a tie.

Unless Quin thought that he had no choice but to vote elsewhere without looking suspicious, then I struggle to see him and nutella as teammate compatible. Tony had to vote for nutella because he civ read Jack. If nutella is bad, then I don't think I can rule out Dom from suspicion because his vote tied things up with Jack (and nutella if I goofed on Tony's vote timing).

So, if nutella is bad, then Dom, Michelle, and sabie are all possible teammates if a save was involved. Michelle still reads like the worst of the three to me. I am also concerned with Long Con and DFaraday parking votes so early on in the phase and just leaving them there. Did they just never come back or did they just not care? Early votes like that are fine for baddies to make in small games like this. It fits the M.O. of letting civvies fall over themselves and mislynch without much help from the baddies.

Does anyone see Quin and nutella as teammate compatible considering how the voting occurred? Up to now, most of my theorizing has centered on nutella being bad post-re-read. That's been shaken some in my mind when I take the votes into consideration. Quin still looks shady to me but I don't know that I can reconcile him and nutella as teammates. If nutella, then things fall a little into place. If Quin, then I'm not sure where to go next.

I've worked myself into paralysis by analysis and I need to step away for a little. (I also have to figure out how to set up and execute a video interview- )

Now that I have re-read all of Day 1, I can see a nutella save in the works based on the timing of votes. Michelle looks worse at the close of Day 1 than sabie.

That brings me back to this:

G-Man wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2019 8:31 am Both Tony and Jack were civvie, leaving nutella as the only unknown from Day 1. Here are some scenarios:

1. Nutella is civvie. The baddies don’t need to offer a third option when the two lead trains are mislynches. Work smarter, not harder. The Tony train was a civvie concoction with one or two baddies following the civvies’ leads.

2. Nutella is a civvie. The baddies launch the Tony train because Jack v. nutella grew stale. Not necessary, but the Jack kill could steer us toward a Day 2 mislynch by focusing on nutella.

3. Nutella is a baddie. The Tony train was started by civvies, and one or two baddies were willing to pad the poll to avoid a randomized tie-breaker after momentum against Jack stalled.

4. Nutella is a baddie. Sensing the pressure on Jack lightening, the baddies launch the Tony train in the hopes of creating a late-phase mislynch at best, and a messy situation involving last-minute vote-hopping at worst.

I think #3 comes the closest to how I read Day 1. I need to sleep on it. I think I have the vote timing down (assuming everyone used the vote tag or confirmed it in-thread). I'll share that pic in the morning too. The momentum on Jack stalled early in the second half of Day 1. It became a Tony v. nutella affair after that. More tomorrow.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2019 6:56 pm @G-Man what has been your mindset while compiling these ISOs? What are you looking for or hoping to achieve?

Nosing around to see what looks bad in isolation and then seeing if reading it all in context changes any of my perceptions.

Dom wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:41 pm G-Man-- do you have any current takes?

I think the 'sabie killed Jack to frame nutella' narrative is naive and too simple to be right. I think that anyone who has played a few games anywhere has matured beyond such a setup. That doesn't excuse her from suspicion, but sometimes Occam can stick his razor where the Sun doesn't shine.

Also, I am surprised that sabie and Sloonei are the only players so far to have anything close to a strong reaction to my ISO's.

Now for the last living player ISO-

SLOONEI:
-This is his first substantive post of the game, which troubles me. He was pretty chatty early but it was a lot of fluff. Maybe this is Sloonei hitting his stride not quite halfway through the day phase. It just seems like there was a lot of useless chatter before this. I don't disagree with his mindset on Jack at the time though.

-Here he questions nutella on why she thinks Jack's posts on DF are not a good look. He proceeds to vote for Long Con because he only has one post and it happens to be bland. Twelve hours later, Sloonei drops this with no explanation. When asked for an explanation, her replies with this. I'll have to see where this its into the larger narrative of Day 1, but it's a striking shift in perception. If adverbs are the devil, then Sloonei is possessed. He then votes for Epi for his vote on Jack. But Epi gives no justification for his vote on Jack and Slooeni doesn't prod him for one. The equation feels incomplete.

-Five hours later, he votes for Tony (which is where his vote stays) with no explanation. Jack asked Slooeni why he voted for Tony and gets no response. Sloonei asks sabie what she thinks of me and Tony. It isn't until hours later that he lays more details on Tony out. By then there's momentum building on Tony. He makes sure to mention that another player called Tony out on something and then goes into a wordy explanation. His Tony-Dom bit seems hollow to me as well.

-Here, Sloonei takes a stance against lynching Jack or nutella, leaving Tony as the most viable option of the people with votes at the time. After a soft positive plug for Michelle, he says he doesn't have strong feelings about anyone else. He intends to leave his vote on Tony and hopes that Tony and others can elaborate and elucidate everyone else to provide a sense of direction in the final hours.

-I think it's also the work of an opportunistic baddie to re-interpret the intent of a civvie that you spared from the lynch only to kill him at night to make yourself seem reasonable in hindsight. On my re-read I intend to determine if anyone thought Jack was pushing for a DF lynch. I just thought he was out of bounds for broadcasting to everyone that DF can't be trusted before DF even got into the game. That's also how I thought others viewed it.

-Interesting about-face on Michelle after giving her a soft plug earlier.

And I'm going to stop here because I want to get to that re-read. I don't think Sloonei is super-sleuthing like I think I remember him. With Jack out of the way, Sloonei is one to dominate the discussion. I was worried that Jack was trying to make the game run through him. I'm concerned that Sloonei may be looking to do the same thing.

Now back to your regularly-scheduled ISO's...

SABIE12:
-Here she cays she is suspicious of both Jack and nutella. Both had votes by this point I think, so saying you're suspicious of the leading trains isn't that original. Her suspicion of Jack isn't rooted in anything from this game, and her suspicion of nutella is soft at best.

-Player reads that don't reveal much. Mentions Tony's past behaviors but also that she could go either way on him. She also likes my effort but doesn't take a stance on it, just that I hadn't said anything sketchy yet.

-Possibly her worst looking post. She says she's suspicious of Jack, nutella, and Tony. This doubles down on the "I'm suspicious of everyone you all are voting for" cop-out and diminishes the amount of original thought she needs to add to the mix. She says she already stated her suspicion of Jack early, but it wasn't based on in-game content. Her suspicion of nutella seems to stem from nutella's responses not giving off civvie vibes. Just because someone isn't giving off civvie vibes doesn't mean they're giving off baddie vibes. Saying "I think she might be bad because I can't civ read her" isn't enough. What makes her feel bad about nutella? Finally, her Tony content in this post is wordy and over-explained a bit, as if she's hoping that writing a lot justifies her vote to people. She closes it out with saying others have raised good points, giving her an excuse in a mislynch.

-Here she defends her Tony vote some more. It doesn't read well to me in part because her logic is very different from my own on discussing game mechanics.

-A little too quick to trust the dead here.

-Defending her quick vote on nutella. She also mentions that others have some good points on Michelle and that she is another that she intends to look into.

Overall, she needs to be more proactive than reactive with voicing suspicions. Agreeing with other cases is participatory, but providing more original viewpoints in engaged behavior. This could go either way, but I'm not a fan of what I see so far.

Not caught up yet, but here’s a thought: why did the Tony train develop?

Both Tony and Jack were civvie, leaving nutella as the only unknown from Day 1. Here are some scenarios:

1. Nutella is civvie. The baddies don’t need to offer a third option when the two lead trains are mislynches. Work smarter, not harder. The Tony train was a civvie concoction with one or two baddies following the civvies’ leads.

2. Nutella is a civvie. The baddies launch the Tony train because Jack v. nutella grew stale. Not necessary, but the Jack kill could steer us toward a Day 2 mislynch by focusing on nutella.

3. Nutella is a baddie. The Tony train was started by civvies, and one or two baddies were willing to pad the poll to avoid a randomized tie-breaker after momentum against Jack stalled.

4. Nutella is a baddie. Sensing the pressure on Jack lightening, the baddies launch the Tony train in the hopes of creating a late-phase mislynch at best, and a messy situation involving last-minute vote-hopping at worst.

Consider each scenario. Who are your three baddies in each one?

sabie12 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:39 pm Hmmm the plot thickens. Jack and tony both felt pretty confidently that nutella was bad and now they both have flipped civ. I've been iffy on nutella from the beginning and am inclined to believe maybe tony and jack were right about her. Putting my vote there for now.[VOTE: nutella] aubergine

Nah. I suspect Jack was killed less for strategy and more because he was being loud and obnoxious. Jack’s death doesn’t move the needle for me on nutella yet, but we’ll see what I think after my re-read tomorrow.

G-Man wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:58 pm Never fear, G-Man (and his spreadsheet) is here:

JACK: DFaraday, Long Con, nutella

NUTELLA: Jack, Quin, Tony

TONY: Dom, Epignosis, Michelle, sabie, Sloonei

NO VOTE: G-Man, Lady LambdaDelta

Not sure about vote order. I just listed them alphabetically per my spreadsheet.

Never fear, G-Man (and his spreadsheet) is here:

JACK: DFaraday, Long Con, nutella

NUTELLA: Jack, Quin, Tony

TONY: Dom, Epignosis, Michelle, sabie, Sloonei

NO VOTE: G-Man, Lady LambdaDelta

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 7:57 pm

G-Man wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 7:54 pm Nice kill choice baddies. It gives me a sense of direction to start my day with.

[VOTE: Quin] aubergine

Why Quin?

Nutella’s Day 1 train had three voters on it. Two of them are now dead. If the baddies were spread out across each train, then Quin is the nutella train baddie.

It’s flimsy logic, but it’s what I have to start the day with. We’ll see where my vote ends up after those last ISO’s and a re-read.

Nice kill choice baddies. It gives me a sense of direction to start my day with.

[VOTE: Quin] aubergine

Not such a good look right now for...

QUIN:

-Several posts of vacant fluff.

-Here he says Jack is good. Just a gut read? We never find out more.

-Here he speculates that nutella is bad for starting the focus on Jack due to the DF aggression. But nutella didn’t start that focus. Sure, she sparred with him about it, but Quin is either wrong in his interpretation here or else he’s pinning it on her long after the fact.

Quin is cheeky son of a gun (my kids run around the house saying ‘shucky darn’ because of him) but I am left wanting so much more from his content. He fits that radar rider I’m looking out for.

NUTELLA:
-Was there ever an explanation about why she thought Tony's entrance was less than favorable? Was it Tony's first post? The combination of his first few posts? There's never any harm in keeping it loose when you walk into a game.

-She never acknowledged Sloonei's response to this question.

-[mention]nutella[/mention]: You posted this. How are you reading Michelle now? Any sign of this yet?

-[mention]nutella[/mention]- Can you clarify this post for me? Is the 'push' and the 'overly friendly invitation to play' referring to Jack's post against DF or something else? The second sentence lacks clarity to me as well.

-I don't see how Jack could be construed as buddying DF at all and yet you suggest it here. Yet, nutella does throw shade at him at the same time.

-Here is part of the lynch pressure confusion on Jack's DF post. She says Jack is suspicious for the initial post and how he tried to play it off afterwards, but I think nutella's interpretation of how he tried to play it off is wrong. She's running with the "Jack is suspicious" angle, but she's running the wrong direction with it. I never saw Jack as pushing for a DF lynch. I saw him as inviting people to be concerned about DF's participation issues in the past before he even got into the game.

-Huh?

-Good attempt to coax more information about Jack's intentions. It was the topic of the moment, so she's generating interactions here.

-Demanding too much of Sloonei too early? She was lacking in spice and takes at this point as well. This could be either encouragement of Sloonei to do his Sloon thang, but it could be slight shade to suggest that something seems off about him just 24 hours into the game.

-Hey, a Tony interaction. Did this escalate as anyone's justification for voting Tony in the end?

-Good point.

-After some poo flinging with Jack, she votes for him. It's done sort of in jest, or so it seems.

-She goes on to spar with Jack some more. All the talk of wishy-washy nutella being her meta seemed off to me earlier. For some reason, this feisty, headstrong nutella is what I remember, but it's been a while.

-You should always look at the poll before you vote. Why wouldn't you? Or am I just weird like that?

-Here she just kind of takes Slooeni's interpretation of things without comment.

-Here she speculates that either Jack or Tony are bad. [mention]nutella[/mention]- given that Tony was civvie, how do you feel about Jack now?

-And here she ponders a potential connection between Jack and Sloonei. But is it a serious one? It comes across as a casual aside (note the lol), but it could be picked up on in re-reads if one or the other flips baddie.

-Civ read on Dom.

-Soft suggestion of WIFOM from Tony.

-Late(ish) phase interaction with Tony. Her vote stayed on Jack. Did this happen just because Tony and nutella were around, or was the lynch poll a factor? (When I re-read the full thread, I'll answer that question for myself) Either way, it was part of a back-and-forth that wasn't helpful to Tony.

-Challenging the authenticity of Sloonei's reads. Fun stuff so late in the phase.

-Civ read on LC and slight civ lean for me. But how am I anything but neutral at this point? Was it the ISO's or am I more transparent than I realize?

-This is a critical post to me. It provides mindset and alternative choice.

I feel like I have a natural suspicion of nutella and that comes from playing with and against her for the best part of a decade. I think my thread re-read will put her into context better. For now, I see enough to be wary but not certain.

Next up-

MICHELLE:
-I understand that my request was odd, but I also think that someone deferring another person for clarification is odd. I wasn't asking for meta, but I can see how the ask was interpreted as such.

-Asking about my habits is fair game.

-Some fluff for a stretch and then this. It's a soft-ish defense of Jack. Here we find out that the most optimistic interpretation of Jack's slam on DF looks fine from another culture's point of view. But the original act was not as innocent as its being accepted here. That muddies the waters for me.

-Here she questions Tony for running the odds on the game. It's only notable because Tony ended up getting lynched. I'll have to look to see if this line of reasoning was baked into anyone else's justifications for voting Tony.

-Agreement with Jack.

-Some of her reasoning here seems shaky to me.

-Suggesting Tony has it out for her, justifying her vote for him. (In fairness, I haven't read Tony's ISO yet)

She's active at the tail end of a mislynch, but I have to see where she falls in line with all the Tony votes. Was she part of the momentum or just late on the train and tried to head off Tony working a counter-train on her? She's 100% new to me, so my confidence level cannot be high after just one day.

Need to make an ebwop:

"I do agree with LC that this example of Sloonei re-interpreting Jack's misstep on DF is notable."

New ISO!

LONG CON:
-Here he sort of plays along with the LC v. nutella discussion going on in the thread. It's his first stand-out post to me, but it's not outside his character. He does dodge explaining why he thinks Jack is suspicious for his slam on DFaraday. But in LC's defense, he never made that a case or reason for voting for Jack.

-This is a strong, sound post. It's one of the reasons why Jack looked sketchy to me.

-I don't like that LC just brushes off nutella's ISO in this post without any details. However, this is the first time LC expressed bona fide suspicion of Jack, so I don't see how his suspicion of Jack could be compounding.

-His next few posts are interactions with Jack, which seem to ramp up and solidify LC's suspicion of him. I can't tell if this is LC just f**king around with a player who was easy to f**k around with at that point, or if he's f**king around with Jack to help give LC a reason to leave his vote on Jack.

-Soft defense of Tony. This happened hours before the apparent railroading and mislynch. It's the kind of nonchalant response that looks a little murky in hindsight.

-Then things get weird. Here he seems to attaboy Sloonei's case on Tony, lending vocal support for suspicion of Tony despite his vote staying on Jack in the end. I do agree with LC that this example of Sloonei re-interpreting Jack's misstep on DF is notable. I don't know that Jack's agreement with Sloonei's yarn reveals anything about a connection though. Then it all winds up here, and I feel a strong need to digest this specific post further.

In a nutshell, LC waited until the last few hours to really come into his own. Up to that point, he seems more on the jokey side of the spectrum. I know he can be like that, so I have to mull over the whole lot of his ISO. I see room for suspicion on LC than I did on DF, Dom, or Epi at first glance.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:24 pm

G-Man wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:22 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:49 pm @G-Man why did you not vote?

Nodded off on the couch after company left late last night, and I didn’t set an alarm to wake me up before the deadline. I hadn’t ISO’d everyone by the time I had to start making dinner, so I held my vote until later. Later just never came.

I believe this.
Who do you think you would have voted for based on the ISOs you did do?

Nobody that I ISO’d left me feeling civvie vibes. DF, Dom, and Epi are all still neutrals with at least one avenue for badness. Lady LambdaDelta added one post since my ISO’s but she still registers as an unknown rather than a neutral.

If I would have had to vote from those ISO’s, it would have been for Jack because he had the sketchiest content among those that I ISO’d. Some of that is by virtue of him generating the most content. I still need to ISO everyone else though, in order to give everyone a fair shake in context against each other.