The Syndicate

sig wrote:What do you think of Zebra with her info sharing, then after getting heat claiming it was a trap?
Why should we look into the map people more?
Also I've never been proven wrong in this context since I've never lead a lynch successfully on a civ before, but there is a first time for everything. I'll ISO and do a quick read over of your past two games and see what I see, but I think I'm right and that you are anti town this game.

Turnip Head wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Frankly if anyone thinks I'm the best choice for lynching, our team is in BIG trouble...

That's a strong statement. Do you think your civieness should be obvious to everyone?

sig wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:If you'd prefer I will use the term "main person" instead. I wasn't using it in a negative connotation.

Okay ringleader is fine then it sounds cooler.


@Floyd have a fun catch up when your done please tell me what you think of the three who voted for you, as well as the tied lynch, who you would have voted for, and any theories on Wilgy's death. Thanks in advance.

linki: @Scotty Yes as I said earlier Glorf is always nice and carefully words things etc. However, as mafia he tries to act the same way and usually his posts just come out as slightly off. He is unable to keep up the nice Glorfindel act without well sounding off. I've had gut pings of him all of day 1 and I'm convinced he isn't pro civ. I will say this I'm usually 100% right on Glorfindel if he is a civ you can tell, however I've got the same vibe as I did in Star Wars some of his posts seemed like his usually self others seemed like he was trying to be his regular self, I was right in Star Wars, but never pushed him to hard mainly since I was trying to turn to the Dark Side and thought he might be a future teammate. :P

If he is mafia then he is the second team, if not mafia then he is an inmate. Either way it would be in our best interest to vote for him imo. However, I'll wait and see what else comes up.


linki 2: They are my words yes, but it is mainly me you are addressing, at least that is how I see it. Seeing how I was the leading player defending map sharing. Okay why should we look closer at them? I also would like your opinion on Zebra info sharing which you have yet to give? I'm also not agitated at all, I'm just pumped and in the mood to catch some baddies.

You haven't really answered either of my two questions, you've kinda gone around them your also trying to make it seem like I'm mad or only going after you since you mentioned looking at map players which isn't true. You are whether if you admit it or not targeting me and painting me in an unfriendly light with your posts. Saying I'm aggressive, have something to hide, am loosing my cool, etc

sig wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Scotty wrote:The thing that's been bugging me about Glorf is how, as I've been reading his posts, he is careful not to upset the masses. The only notable person I've seen him offer up on the table is sig, and his civ labeling is even longer. Everything about him seems like he is attempting to appear nice, and, to borrow SVS' term, appease everyone.

Anyone else notice that?

Don't know how to break this to you Scotty but I AM nice! Go take a look at my previous games here and especially Pikmin - I was Town there (quasi-power role) and my behaviour there wouldn't be any different to this game.

You don't seem as genuine in your niceness this game. Also using your niceness meta as an excuse for being town is untrue. If they read over your baddie game here (star wars) they will see you where nice there to.

Scotty wrote:The thing that's been bugging me about Glorf is how, as I've been reading his posts, he is careful not to upset the masses. The only notable person I've seen him offer up on the table is sig, and his civ labeling is even longer. Everything about him seems like he is attempting to appear nice, and, to borrow SVS' term, appease everyone.

Anyone else notice that?

sig wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

sig wrote:Glorfindel I'm almost convinced your a baddie at this point. Gordon a player with no additional information said to not share evidence okay cool, NOT we should look at the players who where for it. Which was mainly me, Zebra, and Dfraday. This seems like your trying to start the wheels of my lynch especially since the only argument used against me yesterday to justify my lynch was me advocating for us to share map information. If he wanted us to look more closely at certain players I'd think he'd have said it. He is going along with the general thoughts in the thread no map sharing, and Team Bat are good.
I'm also curious you seemed to have ignored zebra sharing information in an attempt to "trap" me?

Could wilgy's death have anything to do with him being on the right track about a player? He didn't have many posts, but I agree with MP he seemed like a random choice for the first NK, unless they thought he was the other mafia team and so far in my experience here on TS the mafia don't gun for each other this early. Thoughts?

Keep your shirt on Sig! I'm not trying to "trap" you at all. What I said was hat given the information in Gordon's message (and Epi's remark at the start of the game that has already been discussed previously on this topic) it appears to me sharing any information we individually receive is imprudent. Clearly (to me at least) we are better not sharing the information we find. Yes, I did say that I thought it worth looking again more critically at those who advocated sharing such information. I NEVER mentioned your name and yet, you've taken what I said as some kind of blatant accusation. Why so sensitive? If I didn't know better, I'd think you had something to hide...

Well I'm hiding my chest since you told me to keep my shirt on but besides that nothing else. I'm NOT arguing for info sharing today. You didn't need to mention me by name seeing how I was the main person arguing the pros of map sharing, not to mention two players voted for me based around me wanting to share our info. So you didn't say my name but it was directed at me to say otherwise would mean you aren't paying much attention to why I got two votes or that whole discussion as a whole. Why should we look critically at the three players who where pro info sharing? The fact that you are trying to redirect discussion onto the map argument again is just very pingy. Also you didn't answer me about Zebra please do.

Note I'm not saying you aren't paying attention, I'm saying your mafia/Inmate trying to set up my lynch.

linki: I wasn't the ringleader I just argued that it was more beneficial to the civs then the mafia. Saying ringleader makes me sound bad imo, which I dislike.

sig wrote:Glorfindel I'm almost convinced your a baddie at this point. Gordon a player with no additional information said to not share evidence okay cool, NOT we should look at the players who where for it. Which was mainly me, Zebra, and Dfraday. This seems like your trying to start the wheels of my lynch especially since the only argument used against me yesterday to justify my lynch was me advocating for us to share map information. If he wanted us to look more closely at certain players I'd think he'd have said it. He is going along with the general thoughts in the thread no map sharing, and Team Bat are good.
I'm also curious you seemed to have ignored zebra sharing information in an attempt to "trap" me?

Could wilgy's death have anything to do with him being on the right track about a player? He didn't have many posts, but I agree with MP he seemed like a random choice for the first NK, unless they thought he was the other mafia team and so far in my experience here on TS the mafia don't gun for each other this early. Thoughts?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Controversial opinion (maybe): I feel pretty good about S~V~S based on what I'm reading (EoD).

MovingPictures07 wrote:Would anyone who was around for Day 1, particularly EoD, say that Wilgy had a relatively high or higher propensity to be a lynch candidate for d2?

Epignosis wrote:Good morning.

I understand we're all on edge.
In our line of work, it is not unusual to work privately in pockets, to take leads as you get them, only to regroup at the station with information gleaned from the day.

I would now advise strongly against that.

Our department has been breached. I found a crumpled fax receipt in the waste bin this morning to one Salvatore Maroni, whom we all know is the head of Maroni crime organization.

To the one that sent this fax, I urge you strongly to reconsider the implications of your actions. I know not all of you may trust my judgment, but this is not a fight you want to fight. You will receive your comeuppance one way or another, rest assured.

In lieu of the myriad of high-profile criminals running amok, and some of our own willing to jump ship, I am patently urging all of you to hold your information close to your chest; be careful placing trust in those around you. This is not the Gotham I envisioned for my kids, and it is not the Gotham I intend for them to inherit. We must remain strong and apprehend these crime families and super villains- even if that means allying with The Bat vigilante once again.

Last night, I went with several other investigators to the scene of the crime. Catfoot Regan, the jewel thief, was adamant that the Bat was seen just 15 minutes after the recent breakout, heading north. That's the only lead I have, I'm afraid.

Keep your heads down. Be smart. Hopefully tomorrow I'll have some good news.

-Gordon

sig wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

sig wrote:Okay, but here is what I don't understand everyone knew who she was going to vote for, she said she would have voted for him. Why is it suspicious that she failed to vote for him? If it was a player who already had three votes causing a three way tie then maybe or if she was planning to vote for one of the players who did tie for first maybe, but that wasn't the case?

linki: I NEVER said I didn't know there was a tie in fact I addressed that in my post. I didn't like either case so I didn't vote for either player if I had I'd be under even more suspicion no matter what they flipped as

I do find it odd you are going with the line of attack that I didn't see there was a tie when I talked about it in my latest post.

My point is though (and you seem to have missed this) that you came on, saw the votes were tied and not knowing whether or not that would potentially result in a no lynch at all, chose not to break the tie but to vote for someone else? And no, had you voted for one of the lead wagons on the basis that you felt it was incumbent on you to break the tie and avoid the possibility of a non-lynching, I certainly wouldn't have considered too suspicious - in fact after the number of times I've seen players do that it wouldn't have surprised me at all irrespective of the outcome.

No you specifically said this. I would have been suspicious of anyone who voted last minute for one of the two leading wagons without agreeing with or even knowing fully the case for either. It is also not my responsibility alone to break a tie, especially if I don't like either wagon, that seems like mafia logic to me.

Glorfindel wrote: Your argument here doesn't make sense to me Sig. You have ALWAYS been one of those "Must lynch Day 1' Types. Despite having only two minutes to vote when you came on, are you seriously telling me that you didn't check to see the status of the votes and wasn't aware that there was a tie? With no certainty about what the result of a tie might be, you chose to go for someone else leaving live the possibility that it may result in a no lynch? REALLY???

So you basically did say that I didn't check/know there was a tie, which I did. Also no I haven't always been a lynch day 1 in case of a tie that is completely different from me being against voting for a no lynch imo.

sig wrote:Okay, but here is what I don't understand everyone knew who she was going to vote for, she said she would have voted for him. Why is it suspicious that she failed to vote for him? If it was a player who already had three votes causing a three way tie then maybe or if she was planning to vote for one of the players who did tie for first maybe, but that wasn't the case?

linki: I NEVER said I didn't know there was a tie in fact I addressed that in my post. I didn't like either case so I didn't vote for either player if I had I'd be under even more suspicion no matter what they flipped as

I do find it odd you are going with the line of attack that I didn't see there was a tie when I talked about it in my latest post.

sig wrote:

juliets wrote:linki, it was sig

I didn't break the tie between Wilgy and Scott. When I left for scouts I think Scott had one vote and then a few scattered votes. I had less then two minutes before the deadline and not enough time to read the cases before casting my vote. So I voted for the player I found most suspicious. I didn't then and I still don't see the case on Wilgy or Scott and would still not vote for either if they got tied again.

I had prior to going out said I'd be on very close to EOD to cast my vote so I don't see why it is strange? Especially since I never mentioned being suspicious of the two leading wagons. If it was a tie between someone I thought was a civ and someone who I found pingy it would have been different, but the sudden amounts of votes on Wilgy made no sense, he wasn't as active as civ Wilgy? I also think lynching scotty for being "shifty" and voting for a low poster wasn't good at all.


Glorfindel your reason for lynching Floyd is weird. Voting a player because he isn't as much as an asset when he isn't around to defend himself, seems rather strange for you. Are you and Zebra on the same team?


I seem to remember SVS missing votes as a baddie in Frisky Dingo however she had a triple vote ability in that game and I believe she actually missed those votes. The only reason that she might purposely avoid voting would be if she had a quadruple vote ability and that is really unlikely. I agree with many others that this wouldn't be something SVS would do and I think it is pingy that DH is pursuing this.

Typhoony wrote:

Glorfindel wrote: Frankly, if it was someone that would be considered experienced then yes, I would. The thing is, I feel that any analysis of that is hampered simply by the way the site is set up. I should think a list of the voting sequence over the last hour/half hour or so before the EoD may be an interesting read...

Here you go my friend. Enjoy analyzing!

Day 1 Voting graph

juliets wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:Are you guys sure about that? She might have broken her meta and is trying a new strategy. Just because it´s traditional to do something doesn´t make it true.

Rubs me the wrong way that you don´t consider that option.

Yeah, Magnus - I think you need to explain this... I think for someone to be online at the very EoD with a tie in play and not vote and then subsequently claim they'd have voted for a player who was not one of those tied is suspicious - especially as it seems there was no rule or precedent to determine the consequence of a tied vote. I'd have presumed that someone with as much experience as SVS apparently has would have used their vote to break the tie one way or the other. Yes, certainly subsequent votes could have restored the tie, but one can only work with what one has to work with at the time.

What do you think of someone who is not SVS voting last with the tie in place but not voting for one of the tied players? Would you consider that suspicious? Because it happened but I dont see you pointing that out.

Nerolunar wrote:Are you guys sure about that? She might have broken her meta and is trying a new strategy. Just because it´s traditional to do something doesn´t make it true.

Rubs me the wrong way that you don´t consider that option.

sig wrote:@Glorfindel, okay thanks what do you think of me right know? Also who do you plan to vote for?

Is Floyd usually this silent as a civ or is he more silent as mafia? I can only recall playing two games with him THM and Tree, he posted a bit more in Tree then in THM?

I'm not feeling the Scotty lynch today. I see the case on Matt, but I don't really see a case against him. I've still got a bad gut feeling of Glorfindel, but not much else for the time.

@Typhoony who are you thinking of voting for?

sig wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:I voted City Hall for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I've no idea at all what the hell I'm doing in this game and being the 'outsider' I always seem to be, it seems appropriate for me to select such a location. At 13 pages, this game has gotten so far away from me now... I just can't...

Again Glorfidnel was I believe the only person to go to City Hall yet he doesn't want to share what he found out. This seems scummy to me and I know other people disagree however, my opinion on that won't change. Nothing much else here, I think him using the term outsider is strange, though I'm assuming he means from a lore point of view.

Glorfindel wrote:And I had such high hopes for this game... I'm sorry guys...

What instigated you to make this post Glorfindel? I'm just interested since you had the same sort of defeatist posts in Star Wars a game that you where mafia in. Also meta wise I know you hate to be mafia so this was an eyebrow raiser.

Glorfindel wrote:Well, 20 pages in and I'm not much the wiser. I don't know a lot of the players here (well, not well anyway) but from the time I have spent here, I'd draw one conclusion. I played with Zebra in Star Wars and I saw a really slick performance from a very confident operator who always seemed in control. In Pikmin, I saw Zebra as a very transparent Townie who was picked off early by the twin forces of evil and ignorance. This game, I'm getting Pikmin vibes from her again. She's playing demonstrably differently to how she did in Star Wars and while it's possible that she is simply using her extraordinary ability to pull the wool over my eyes, I'm inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. I'm simply not getting bad vibes from her at this stage.

a2thezebra wrote:Like, I don't articulate myself very well very often. Fine. But I fucking try. I try to get people to understand and if anyone has a concern no matter how many or how much, I try to address them, even if I feel like it's something I've already addressed and explained as many times in as many different ways as I can conceive of. But when I feel like the same isn't being done for me, it kills my motivation to keep putting in this effort. Because where is it getting me?

I don't understand how someone can spend an hour and a half writing a post addressed to someone to explain their suspicion of them and not only have it not acknowledged but then that person has the nerve to demand that the person that put in that effort start answering their questions as if they haven't already done that, while constantly misrepresenting that person.

I know this is probably a stupid thing to say but you sound really frustrated here Zebra. I understand why and try not to worry - not everyone is oblivious to your efforts. Whilst it'd be a disaster if you were Mafia, I think you're a huge asset to us if you're not and I for one would like to give you the the chance to help us win this

Some defense of Zebra here not much to go on otherwise. Seems like regular Glorfindel to me.

Glorfindel wrote: Yes. I'm sorry, so very sorry. The last few days haven't been good for me personally but it's amazing what a good night's sleep and som straight-talking can do. And thank you for your support I said I'd try and I don't want to let you guys down any more than I already have.

There seems to be a number of players (not unlike myself) that don't seem to have made much of an impression yet so I'd like to hear some more from them. The one person I'm looking closely at right now is Matt. Please don't get me wrong - he's a really lovely guy and I do respect him and his opinions a lot. I am concerned though - based on my (admittedly limited) experience of him in previous games, his performance this game appears uncharacteristicly rattled. I can accept that his judgement may be way off again like it was in Pikmin but his behaviour seems noticeably more 'hostile' than I've seen from him before...

I don't think you've let the players down Glor so no need to apologize.

I can't say off the top of my head if civ Glor is as likely to minimize how much he knows of a player, but the way he is doing it this game seems like an out in case said player gets lynched and flips civ, this might just be me nitpicking though.

Glorfindel wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Well, 20 pages in and I'm not much the wiser. I don't know a lot of the players here (well, not well anyway) but from the time I have spent here, I'd draw one conclusion. I played with Zebra in Star Wars and I saw a really slick performance from a very confident operator who always seemed in control. In Pikmin, I saw Zebra as a very transparent Townie who was picked off early by the twin forces of evil and ignorance. This game, I'm getting Pikmin vibes from her again. She's playing demonstrably differently to how she did in Star Wars and while it's possible that she is simply using her extraordinary ability to pull the wool over my eyes, I'm inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. I'm simply not getting bad vibes from her at this stage.

a2thezebra wrote:Like, I don't articulate myself very well very often. Fine. But I fucking try. I try to get people to understand and if anyone has a concern no matter how many or how much, I try to address them, even if I feel like it's something I've already addressed and explained as many times in as many different ways as I can conceive of. But when I feel like the same isn't being done for me, it kills my motivation to keep putting in this effort. Because where is it getting me?

I don't understand how someone can spend an hour and a half writing a post addressed to someone to explain their suspicion of them and not only have it not acknowledged but then that person has the nerve to demand that the person that put in that effort start answering their questions as if they haven't already done that, while constantly misrepresenting that person.

I know this is probably a stupid thing to say but you sound really frustrated here Zebra. I understand why and try not to worry - not everyone is oblivious to your efforts. Whilst it'd be a disaster if you were Mafia, I think you're a huge asset to us if you're not and I for one would like to give you the the chance to help us win this

So you read the whole thread? Awesome

Fresh eyes are a good thing. I see you have strong opinions on this one situation; do you have any thoughts on Enrique vs Golden? Golden played Star Wars. What about Mac & TH? Did it read like a slip to you? All of these things took over the thread for a time. You have commented fairly in depth on one; I would appreciate your thoughts on the others.

While I am still waffled on Zebra, I feel pretty much the opposite to you regarding Matt. Having just hosted him bad, I will say that him jumping out the gate and speaking his mind is very par for the course for civ Matt. He knows he may frustrate people, but he dowesn't just speak his piece, he OWNS his piece. He takes that piece andhe does the cha cha on it. Bad Matt was a bitmore cautious about going full out until endgame. Not seeing that here.

I was also fairly involved in that situation, at least at the beginning. Any opinion on me? My thoughts on Zebra were pretty much really similar to Matts. Since your one towen read, Zebra, and your one bad read, Matt, come from the same situation, I would be interested in hearing your opinion as well.

Taking a break was good, and the second half of Day Zero with my unchangeable vote already made seemed like a good time [/hissy]

I did not and do not find anything odd about THs word choices. I have seen people lambasted for "trying too hard" by saying "we", and also seen them attacked for saying "they", like, "Oh aren't you a civ, that you talk about 'them' in the third person?". And his reaction was more inline with what I would expect from him as a civ. He would have been smoother & shrugged it off more had he been bad, I think.

That said, I trust Macs tone reads, in the games I have played with him, I have seen him to have a good gut. So not particularly suspecting TH, but will keep more of an eye on him than I may have done. I am not one to discuss who I trust, but if I did have oneof those lists, while TH would not be the top name, hewould be very far from the bottom. Mac, too, really.

Now that you have done so, Glorfindel, I need to reread the thread some today to clear out my preconceived notions.

Thank you for replying to my post my friend . I acknowledge your opinion on Matt and that it appears to be different to mine. You may indeed be in a better position to judge than I but I can only speak from my experience. I agree with you on one point though, he DOES own his piece - even when he's wrong, which I feel at this point he is about Zebra.

As for Mac and TH, I really don't know. From the little I've seen of TH I think he's too experienced and capable to have made that kind of silly mistake. From my experience in these games on other sites (and I speak from first hand experience) I know precisely what it's like to be so convinced that someone is Mafia based on a 'slip' like that only on the vast majority of occasions to be proven wrong. Like the King of Siam in the King and I, I find myself second guessing myself a lot more these days. I may have missed the Golden/Enrique confrontation of which you speak and will go back and have a look. I'll admit I kinda like Golden (from my experience of them in Star Wars and so far here) but again, I need to review this matter. Please don't think I'm clearing people here with some kind of gay abandon - because I'm not. I'm not familiar with the playstyles of most of you and am not stupid enough to do that. My approach in these games is usually cautious as it is right now. I trust you can appreciate that.

He is usually cautious, but he seems more so this game then usually, not sure if it is an alignment indicator or not. Two things though
@Glorfindel WHat do you mean by TH is too experienced? Do you think it was a fake slip or something else?
Also have you reviewed the Golden vs Enrique argument if so what are your thoughts on it.

Bullzeye wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:

S~V~S wrote:And guys, is that really how you all see me? As an appeaser?

Not my initial impression.

Thank You! I like you already

End of Day is shown in the poll. It is 8:30 PM eastern. You are in Europe, I believe? Western Europe is a 6 hour shift, so 2:30 AM your time I believe. Do you have theboard set to your time zone?

If I may? I seem to have a problem with my time zone. I have it set to AEST in the Board Preferences (which is correct) but the timing on the posts on the thread appear to be on AEDT

You probably need to change your daylight saving time settings.

S~V~S wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:

S~V~S wrote:And guys, is that really how you all see me? As an appeaser?

Not my initial impression.

Thank You! I like you already

End of Day is shown in the poll. It is 8:30 PM eastern. You are in Europe, I believe? Western Europe is a 6 hour shift, so 2:30 AM your time I believe. Do you have theboard set to your time zone?

Sorsha wrote:Glorfindel- is that normal for nerolunar? To be around but not posting?

Golden wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Typhoony wrote:Are you suspicious of Glorfindel SVS?

I am not sure, tbh. I was just intrigued by his reaction to having read the thread. There was alot of tunnel type stuff and some quite a bit of tension at some points going on, and he only noted one thing, and his opinion on that seemed a bit one dimensional.

His reply was very well crafted; and tbh, it felt kind of *crafted* to me, if you get my feeling~ designed to appease. I can't be anywhere near sure at this point; he is unfailingly polite and I don't know him well, so have no basis of comparison. SO my initial thought, intrigued, best fits my feelings at this time, I think.

Do you have an opinion?

Glorfindel was much the same in Star Wars. Unfailingly polite. He felt frustrated being suspected for being, essentially, nice (at least, that was my take on his frustration). He was replaced by Daisy, who I think turned out to be bad. But I have the sense that the nice, polite Glorfindel will be seen in all affiliations.

sig wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:It's hard to talk about it explicitly because part of my playing ball with sig involves him not knowing what I'm doing. Anyway, I'm going to go walk my dogs and purchase some potato wedges. I will return later.

You should play ball with it to (the dog). Also I call into question her buying potato wedges who actually buys those things.

@Scotty I'd disagree with lynching lovedelic they simply might not be aware the game has started, so lynching them day 1 would be kind off mean?

@Glorfindel two questions. What do you think of zebra and what do you think of map discussion?

sig wrote:I'm null on Glorfindel right now, but have been pinged by him.

a2thezebra wrote:I see Glorfindel and TheFloyd are here. Any current thoughts, gentlemen?

S~V~S wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Well, 20 pages in and I'm not much the wiser. I don't know a lot of the players here (well, not well anyway) but from the time I have spent here, I'd draw one conclusion. I played with Zebra in Star Wars and I saw a really slick performance from a very confident operator who always seemed in control. In Pikmin, I saw Zebra as a very transparent Townie who was picked off early by the twin forces of evil and ignorance. This game, I'm getting Pikmin vibes from her again. She's playing demonstrably differently to how she did in Star Wars and while it's possible that she is simply using her extraordinary ability to pull the wool over my eyes, I'm inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. I'm simply not getting bad vibes from her at this stage.

a2thezebra wrote:Like, I don't articulate myself very well very often. Fine. But I fucking try. I try to get people to understand and if anyone has a concern no matter how many or how much, I try to address them, even if I feel like it's something I've already addressed and explained as many times in as many different ways as I can conceive of. But when I feel like the same isn't being done for me, it kills my motivation to keep putting in this effort. Because where is it getting me?

I don't understand how someone can spend an hour and a half writing a post addressed to someone to explain their suspicion of them and not only have it not acknowledged but then that person has the nerve to demand that the person that put in that effort start answering their questions as if they haven't already done that, while constantly misrepresenting that person.

I know this is probably a stupid thing to say but you sound really frustrated here Zebra. I understand why and try not to worry - not everyone is oblivious to your efforts. Whilst it'd be a disaster if you were Mafia, I think you're a huge asset to us if you're not and I for one would like to give you the the chance to help us win this

So you read the whole thread? Awesome

Fresh eyes are a good thing. I see you have strong opinions on this one situation; do you have any thoughts on Enrique vs Golden? Golden played Star Wars. What about Mac & TH? Did it read like a slip to you? All of these things took over the thread for a time. You have commented fairly in depth on one; I would appreciate your thoughts on the others.

While I am still waffled on Zebra, I feel pretty much the opposite to you regarding Matt. Having just hosted him bad, I will say that him jumping out the gate and speaking his mind is very par for the course for civ Matt. He knows he may frustrate people, but he dowesn't just speak his piece, he OWNS his piece. He takes that piece andhe does the cha cha on it. Bad Matt was a bitmore cautious about going full out until endgame. Not seeing that here.

I was also fairly involved in that situation, at least at the beginning. Any opinion on me? My thoughts on Zebra were pretty much really similar to Matts. Since your one towen read, Zebra, and your one bad read, Matt, come from the same situation, I would be interested in hearing your opinion as well.

Taking a break was good, and the second half of Day Zero with my unchangeable vote already made seemed like a good time [/hissy]

I did not and do not find anything odd about THs word choices. I have seen people lambasted for "trying too hard" by saying "we", and also seen them attacked for saying "they", like, "Oh aren't you a civ, that you talk about 'them' in the third person?". And his reaction was more inline with what I would expect from him as a civ. He would have been smoother & shrugged it off more had he been bad, I think.

That said, I trust Macs tone reads, in the games I have played with him, I have seen him to have a good gut. So not particularly suspecting TH, but will keep more of an eye on him than I may have done. I am not one to discuss who I trust, but if I did have oneof those lists, while TH would not be the top name, hewould be very far from the bottom. Mac, too, really.

Now that you have done so, Glorfindel, I need to reread the thread some today to clear out my preconceived notions.

Scotty wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Well, 20 pages in and I'm not much the wiser. I don't know a lot of the players here (well, not well anyway) but from the time I have spent here, I'd draw one conclusion. I played with Zebra in Star Wars and I saw a really slick performance from a very confident operator who always seemed in control. In Pikmin, I saw Zebra as a very transparent Townie who was picked off early by the twin forces of evil and ignorance. This game, I'm getting Pikmin vibes from her again. She's playing demonstrably differently to how she did in Star Wars and while it's possible that she is simply using her extraordinary ability to pull the wool over my eyes, I'm inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. I'm simply not getting bad vibes from her at this stage.

a2thezebra wrote:Like, I don't articulate myself very well very often. Fine. But I fucking try. I try to get people to understand and if anyone has a concern no matter how many or how much, I try to address them, even if I feel like it's something I've already addressed and explained as many times in as many different ways as I can conceive of. But when I feel like the same isn't being done for me, it kills my motivation to keep putting in this effort. Because where is it getting me?

I don't understand how someone can spend an hour and a half writing a post addressed to someone to explain their suspicion of them and not only have it not acknowledged but then that person has the nerve to demand that the person that put in that effort start answering their questions as if they haven't already done that, while constantly misrepresenting that person.

I know this is probably a stupid thing to say but you sound really frustrated here Zebra. I understand why and try not to worry - not everyone is oblivious to your efforts. Whilst it'd be a disaster if you were Mafia, I think you're a huge asset to us if you're not and I for one would like to give you the the chance to help us win this

Man, you bounced back from your down day yesterday:

Glorfindel wrote:I voted City Hall for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I've no idea at all what the hell I'm doing in this game and being the 'outsider' I always seem to be, it seems appropriate for me to select such a location. At 13 pages, this game has gotten so far away from me now... I just can't...

Glorfindel wrote:And I had such high hopes for this game... I'm sorry guys...

Glad to see you're back and encouraging others to fight the good fight!

So you see Zebra as good. Anyone here you see as bad-read yet?

a2thezebra wrote:Like, I don't articulate myself very well very often. Fine. But I fucking try. I try to get people to understand and if anyone has a concern no matter how many or how much, I try to address them, even if I feel like it's something I've already addressed and explained as many times in as many different ways as I can conceive of. But when I feel like the same isn't being done for me, it kills my motivation to keep putting in this effort. Because where is it getting me?

I don't understand how someone can spend an hour and a half writing a post addressed to someone to explain their suspicion of them and not only have it not acknowledged but then that person has the nerve to demand that the person that put in that effort start answering their questions as if they haven't already done that, while constantly misrepresenting that person.

Golden wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:And I had such high hopes for this game... I'm sorry guys...

Keep your high hopes, glorfindel. I find these days things start very loud early but tend to slow down significantly after about day one.